# + 2

(,1 1/,1(

Citation: 73 Fed. Reg. 63026 2008

Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Mon Mar 5 15:07:55 2012

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

ofthe Code ofFederal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.92, this means that operation ofthe facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would
not (1) Involve a significant increase in. the probability or consequences ofan accident previously evaluated; or (2)
create the possibility ofa new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction ina margin ofsafety. As requiredby 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis ofthe issue ofno significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

1. [Do] the proposed change[s] involve a significant inctease in theprobability or consequences of anaccident previously evaluated?

Response:No. Overall protection system performance will remain within thebounds ofthepreviously performed accident analyses since there are
no design changes. All design, material, and construction standards that were applicable prior tothis amendmentrequest willbe maintained. There willbe no changes tothe design andoperating temperature and pressurelimits placed on the reactor coolant system.

The proposed changes willnot adversely affect accident initiators orprecursors nor alterthe design assumptions, conditions, and configuration ofthe facility orthe manner in which theplant is operated and maintained. The proposed changes willnot alter or prevent theability ofstructures, systems, and components (SSCs)fromperforming their intended functions tomitigate the consequences ofan initiating eventwithin the assumed acceptance limits.

The proposed changes do notphysically alter safety-related systemsnor affect the way inwhich safety-related systems perform their functions.

All accident analysis acceptance criteria will continue to be metwith theproposed changes. The proposed changes will not affect the source term, containment isolation,

orradiological release assumptions used in evaluating the radiological consequences of

an accident previously evaluated. The proposed changes will not alter any assumptions or change any mitigation actions in theradiological consequence evaluations in theFSAR [Final Safety Analysis Report for the plant]. The applicable radiological dose acceptance criteria will continue tobemet.

. Therefore, theproposed changes do not involve a significant increase inthe probability orconsequences ofan accident previously evaluated.

2. [Do] theproposed changels] create the possibility ofa new ordifferent kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

Response:No. There are noproposed design changes nor are there any changes inthe methodby which any safety-related plant SSCperforms itssafety function. The proposed changes will not affect the normal methodofplant operation orchange any operating parameters. No equipment performance requirements will be affected. The proposed changes will not alter any assumptions made in the safety analyses.

No new accident scenarios, transient precursors, failure mechanisms, or limiting single failures will beintroduced as aresult of this amendment. There will beno adverse effect orchallenges imposed on any safetyrelated system as aresult ofthis amendment.

The proposed amendment will not-alter the design orperformance ofthe 7300Process Protection System, Nuclear Instrumentation System, or Solid State Protection System used in the plantprotection systems.

Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility ofa new ordifferent accident from any accident previously evaluated.

3. [Do] the proposed change[s] involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

Response:No. There will beno effect on those plant systems necessary to assure the accomplishment ofprotection functions. There will be no impact on the overpower limit, departure from nucleate boiling ratio (DNBR) limits, heat flux hot channel factor (FQ), nuclear enthalpy rise hot channel factor (FAH), loss ofcoolant accident peak cladding temperature (LOCAPCT), peak local power density, or any othermargin ofsafety. The applicable radiological dose consequence acceptance criteria will continue to bemet. The proposed changes do not eliminate any surveillances or alter the frequency of surveillances required by the Technical Specifications. None of the acceptance

- criteria for any accident analysis will be changed.

The proposed changes will have no impact

on the radiological consequences ofa design basis accident.

Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

The NRC staff hasreviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that thethree standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

The Commission is seeking public'
comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication ofthis notice will be considered in making any final determination.

Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of60 days after the date of publication ofthis notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration ofthe 60- day period provided thatits final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration ofthe 30-day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown ofthe facility. Should the Commission take action prior to theexpiration ofeither the
comment period orthe notice period, it will publish inthe Federal Register a notice ofissuance. Should the Commission make afinal No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.

Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief,Rulemaking, Directives and Editing Branch, Division ofAdministrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555- 0001, and should cite the publication date and page number ofthis Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30

a.m. to 4:15 p.m.Federal workdays. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (firstfloor), Rockville, Maryland.

The filing'ofrequests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below.

Within 60 days after the date of publication ofthisnotice, the person(s) may file a request fora hearing with respect to issuance ofthe amendment to the subject facility operating license and any person(s) whose interest maybe affected by this proceeding and who wishes toparticipate as a party in the proceeding must file awritten request via electronic submission through the NRC E-filing system fora hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petition forleave to intervene shallbe filed in accordance with the Commission's "Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested person(s) should consult a current copy of 10CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (firstfloor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room onthe Internet atthe NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/ reading-rmldoc-collectionslcfr/. If a request fora hearing orpetition for 

### 63026Federal RegiSter/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

leave to intervene is filed by the above date,the Commission ora presiding officer designated bythe Commission or by the ChiefAdministrative Judge ofthe Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary orthe Chief Administrative Judge ofthe Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice ofa hearing oran appropriate order.

As required by 10CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forthwith particularity the interest of the petitioner inthe proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results ofthe proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The
name, address and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature ofthe requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent ofthe requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect ofany decision or order which may be entered inthe proceeding onthe requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/ requestor seeks to have litigated atthe proceeding.

Each contention must consist ofa specific statement ofthe issue oflaw or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner/requestor shall provide a briefexplanation ofthe bases for the contention and aconcise statement ofthe alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely inproving the contention atthe .hearing. The petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific

sources and documents ofwhich the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue oflaw or fact. Contentions shallbe limited to matters within the scope ofthe amendment under consideration. The contention
mustbe onewhich, ifproven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will notbe permitted to participate as a party.

Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations inthe ordergranting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully inthe conduct ofthe hearing.

If ahearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination onthe issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. Ifthe final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment. Ifthe final determination is that the amendment request involves asignificant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance ofany amendment.

Arequest forhearing or a petition for leave tointervene mustbe filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, which the NRC promulgated on August 28, 2007 (72 FR49139). TheE-Filing process-requires participants to submit and serve documents over the internet

or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies oftheir filings unless they seek a waiver in accordance with the procedures described below.

To comply withthe procedural requirements ofE-Filing, at leastten (10) days prior to the filing deadline, the petitioner/requestor must contact the Office ofthe Secretary by e-mail at hearing.docket@nrc.gov, orby calling (301) 415-1677, to request (1) a digital ID certificate, which allows the participant (orits counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal

server for anyproceeding in which it is participating; and/or (2) creation ofan electronic docket forthe proceeding (even in instances in which the petitioner/requestor (or its counsel or representative) alreadyholds an NRCissued digital IDcertificate). Each petitioner/requestor will need to download the Workplace Forms ViewerTM to access the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component ofthe E-Filing system. The Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and is available athttp://www.nrc.gov/sitehelp/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. Information about applying for adigital ID certificate is available on NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-helple-submittals/applycertificates.html.

Once a petitioner/requestor has obtained a digital ID certificate, had a docket created, and downloaded the EIE viewer, it can then submit a request for hearing orpetition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF)in accordance with NRCguidance available onthe NRC public Web site at http://wwwnrc.gov/site-help/e-" submittals.html.A filing is considered complete at the time the filersubmits its documents through EIE. To be timely,

an electronic filingmustbe submitted to the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt ofa transmission, theE-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt ofthe document. The EIE system also distributes an e-:mail notice that provides access to the document to the NRC Office. ofthe General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office ofthe Secretary that they wish to participate inthe proceeding, so that the filer need not

serve the documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel orrepresentative) must apply for and receive adigital ID certificate before a hearing request/ petition to intervene is filed so that they

can obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system.

A person filing electronically may seekassistance through the "Contact Us" link located on the NRC Web site athttp://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.htmlor by calling the NRC technical help line, which is available between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. The help line number is (800) 397-4209

orlocally, (301) 415-4737.

Participants who believe that they have a goodcause fornot submitting documents electronically must file a motion, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings mustbe submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary ofthe Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, orexpedited delivery service to the Office ofthe Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document inthis

manner areresponsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by firstclass mail asof the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon 

### 63027Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

depositing the document with the provider ofthe service.

Non-timely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding officer, or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition and/or request should begranted and/or the contentions should be admitted, based on a balancing ofthe factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). To be timely, filings mustbe submitted no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.

Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public athttp:// ehd.nrc.gov/ehdproceeding/home.asp, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, or aPresiding Officer. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers in theirfilings. With respect .tocopyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that

serve the purpose ofthe adjudicatory filings and would constitute aFair Use application, Participants are requested notto include copyrighted materials in their submissions.

For further details with respect to this license amendment application, see the application for amendment dated November 29, 2007 (ADAMS Accession No. ML073460060), which is available forpublic inspection atthe Commission's PDR, located atOne White Flint North, File Public Area 01 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (firstfloor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records willbe accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room onthe Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/ reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems inaccessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staffby telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301- 415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day ofOctober 2008.

Forthe NuclearRegulatory Commission. JackDonohew, SeniorProject Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV,Divisionof Operating Reactor Licensing,Officeof Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FRDoc. E8-25150 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting ofthe ACRS Subcommittee on US-APWR; Notice of Meeting

The ACRS Subcommittee onthe USAPWR will hold a meeting on November 4-5, 2008, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.

The meeting will be open to public attendance, with the exception of a portion that may be closed to protect information that is proprietary to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., and its contractors pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4).

The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Tuesday, November 4, 2008-8 a.m.- 5 p.m. Wednesday, November 5, 2008-8 a.m.- 12 noon

The Subcommittee will review four topical reports, as noted below, related to the U.S. Advanced Pressurized Water Reactor (US-APWR) Design 1- Certification Application. These topical reports include: Safety Instrumentation and Control (I&C) System Description and DesignProcess, Human System Interface System Description and Human Factors Engineering Process, Safety System Digital Platform (MELTAC), andDefense-in-Depth and Diversity. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives ofthe NRC staff, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., and otherinterested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the Full Committee.

Members ofthe public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Neil Coleman, (Telephone: 301-415-7656) five days prior to the meeting, ifpossible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted. Detailed procedures for theconduct of and participation inACRS meetings

were published in the Federal Register

on October 6, 2008 (73 FR 58268- 58269).

Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting theDesignated Federal Official between 8 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (ET). Persons planningto attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised ofany potential changes to the agenda.

Dated: October 15, 2008. Antonio Dias, Chief, ReactorSafetyBranchB,Advisory CommitteeonReactorSafeguards. [FR Doc.E8-25145 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS); Subcommittee Meeting on Planning and Procedures; Noticeof Meeting

The ACRS Subcommittee on Planning and Procedures will hold a meeting on November 5, 2008, Room T-2B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.

The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the exception of

a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to the internal personnel rules and practices ofthe ACRS, and information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion ofpersonal privacy.

The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Wednesday, November 5, 2008, 12 p.m. Until 1p.m.

The Subcommittee will discuss proposed ACRS activities and related matters. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.

Members ofthe public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Officer, Mr. Sam Duraiswamy (telephone: 301-415-7364) between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. (ET) five days prior to the meeting, ifpossible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions ofthe meeting that are open to the public. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings

were published inthe FederalRegister

on October 6, 2008 (73 FR 58268- 58269).

Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Officer between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days

- 1 

### 63028

### Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

prior to the meeting to be advised ofany potential changes in the agenda.

Dated: October 15, 2008. Cayetano Santos, BranchChief, ACRS. [FR Doc.E8-25147 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILUNG CODE 7590-01-P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
AdvisoryCommittee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the Subcommittee on Plant License Renewal; Notice of Meeting

The ACRS Subcommittee on Plant License Renewal will hold ameeting on November 5, 2008, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.

The entire meeting will be open to public attendance.

The agenda forthe subject meeting shall be as follows: Wednesday,November5, 2008-1:30
p.m. until5p.m.

The Subcommittee will discuss the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Unit 1 and 2 license renewal application and the associated Safely Evaluation Report (SER). The Subcommittee 

### wilt hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives ofthe NRC staff, VEGP, Southern Nuclear Company, and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the Full Committee.

Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written
comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Christopher Brown (telephone 301-415-7111) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can bemade. Electronic recordings willbe permitted. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and participation inACRS meetings

were published in the Federal Register

on October 6, 2008 (73 FR 58268- 58269).

Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 6:45 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior tothe meeting to be advised ofany potential changes to the agenda. Dated: October 16, 2008. Cayetano Santos, BranchChief, ACRS. [FR Doc. E8-25149 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILUNG CODE 7590-01-P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 63-001; CLI-08-25]

In the Matter of U.S. Department of Energy (High Level Waste Repository); Notice of Hearing and OpportunityTo Petitionfor Leave To Intervene on an ApplicationforAuthorityTo Construct

aGeologic Repository at a Geologic Repository Operations Area at Yucca Mountain

COMMISSIONERS: Dale E. Klein, Chairman; Gregory B. Jaczko, Peter B. Lyons, Kristinie L. Svinicki.
I. Notice ofHearing

By letter dated June 3,2008, the Department of Energy (DOE) submitted

an application seeking authorization to construct a geologic repository at a geologic repository operations area at Yucca Mountain in Nye County, Nevada. The NRC published a notice of receipt and availability of this application in the Federal Register (73 FR 34348, corrected in 73 FR40883 (June 17, 2008)). Notice is hereby given that a hearing on the application will be held at a time and place to be setin the future by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board).

The hearing will consider the application for construction authorization filedby DOE pursuant to Section 114 ofthe Nuclear Waste Policy Act of1982 (NWPA), 42 U.S.C. 10134, and pursuant to 10 CFR Parts 2 and 63. The NRC Staff accepted the DOE application for docketing on September 8, 2008 (73 FR 53284 (September 15, 2008)), and the docket number established for this application is 63- 001.

The NRC Staffdetermined that it is practicable'to adopt, with further supplementation, the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)and supplements prepared by DOE. The Staffconcluded that neither the 2002 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) nor the 2008 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Repository Supplemental EIS) adequately address all the impacts on groundwater, or from surface discharges ofgroundwater, from the proposed action.The Stafftherefore found that additional supplementation is needed to ensure that the 2002 FEIS and 2008 Repository Supplemental EIS are adequate. The basis for the Staff's position is presented inthe "U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staffs Adoption Determination Report for the U.S. Department ofEnergy's Environmental Impact Statements for the Proposed Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain," which is available in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) online document system at http://www.nrc.gov/ reading-rm/adams/web-based.html, at accession number ML082420342.

The NRC Staffwill complete a detailed technical review oftheDOE application, and will document its findings in a safety evaluation report. If the Commission finds that the DOE application meets the applicable standards ofthe Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA), the NWPA, and the-Commission's regulations, then the Commission will issue a construction authorization, in the form and containing such conditions and limitations, ifany, as the Commission finds appropriate and necessary.
II. Opportunity To Petition for Leave To Intervene

Ahearing onDOE's construction authorization application will be held in the public interest pursuant to 10 CFR 2.101(e)(8). The hearing willbe governed by the rules ofprocedure in 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart C, "Rules ofGeneral Applicability: Hearing Requests, Petitions to Intervene, Availability of Documents, Selection ofSpecific Hearing Procedures, Presiding Officer Powers, and General Hearing Management forNRC Adjudicatory Hearings"; Subpart J, "Procedures Applicable to Proceedings for the Issuance ofLicenses for the Receipt of High-Level Radioactive Waste at a Geologic Repository"; and Subpart G, "Rules for Formal Adjudications." The matters offact and law to be considered

are whether the application satisfies the applicable safety, security, and technical standards ofthe AEA and NWPA and the NRC's standards in 10 CFR Part 63 for a construction authorization for a high-level waste geologic repository, and also whether the applicable requirements ofthe National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and NRC's NEPAregulations, 10 CFRPart 51, have been met.

Any person whose interest may be affected bythis proceeding and who desires to participate as aparty mustfile

a written petition forleave to intervene in accordance with the requirements in 10 CFR 2.309, including contentions -thatsatisfy the admissibility standards 

### 63029Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

in §2.309. Petitioners seeking to intervene asparties must also comply with the procedural case management requirements set forth in the Advisory Pre-License Application Presiding Officer (PAPO)Board's Memorandum and Order, LBP-08-10 (Case Management Order Concerning Petitions to Intervene, Contentions, Responses, Replies, Standing Arguments, and Referencing or Attaching Supporting Materials), dated June 20, 2008, available at ADAMS accession numberML081720154, and the Advisory PAPO Board's Order (Regarding Contention Formatting and Tables ofContents), dated September 29, 2008, available at ADAMS accession number ML082730764. In addition, as outlined further below, the regulations in 10CFR Part 2, Subpart 

### Jrequire electronic production, filing and service of all documents inthis proceeding.

In ruling on a petition to intervene in this proceeding, the presiding officer shall consider any failure ofthe petitioner to participate as a potential party in the pre-license application phaseunder 10 CFR Part 2, SubpartJ, in addition to the factors on standing to intervene outlined in 10 CFR 2.309(d).

A petition for leave to intervene must be filed nolater than 60 days afterthe date ofpublication ofthis notice in the ,Federal Register. A non-timely petition

or contention will not be entertained unless the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, ora presiding officer designated to rule on the petition determines that the late petition or contention meets the latefiled requirements of10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii).

Certain hearing schedule milestones in.Appendix Dto 10 CFR Part 2, as well

as the 30-day hearing petition and contention-filing deadlines set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(b)(2) and 51.109(a)(2) are superseded by this notice. Arevised hearing schedule with new milestones for actions through the First Prehearing Conference Order appears in Section VI ofthisnotice.

Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and will have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct ofthe hearing.

The regulations in 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart 

### Jrequire electronic document production (via the Licensing Support Network) and electronic filing and service ofadjudicatory documents via the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE). This requirement applies to all documents filed in the proceeding,. including a petition forleave to intervene, and any motion or other document filed inthe proceeding prior to the submission ofapetition to intervene. Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.1012(b)(1), a petitioner, including a potential party given access tothe Licensing Support Network, may not be granted party status under 10CFR 2.309, or status as an interested governmental participant under 10 CFR 2.315, ifthe petitioner cannot demonstrate substantial and timely compliance with the requirements in 10 CFR 2.1003 atthe time ofthe request for participation inthe high-level waste proceeding.' In addition, apetitioner will notbe found to be in substantial and timely compliance unless the petitioner complies with all orders of the Pre-License Application Presiding Officer (PAPO)regarding electronic availability ofdocuments. PAPO orders

are available onthe NRC's high-level waste electronic hearing docket at:http://hlwehd.nrc.gov/PublicHLWEHD/home.asp,-under HLW-EHD, foldertitled PAPO HLW, subfolder titled OrdersPAPO.

A petition for leave to intervene, and all filings inthe adjudicatory proceeding, mustbe filed electronically in accordance with 10 CFR 2.1013(c)(1). At least.30 days prior to the filing deadline for apetition to intervene, the petitioner must contact the Office ofthe Secretary (SECY)by e-mail at: HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOVorby calling (301) 415-1677, to request (1) a digital ID certificate, which allows the participant (orits counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal

server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and/or (2) creation of an electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances in which the petitioner, or its counsel or* representative, already holds an NRCissued digital certificate). Each petitioner will need to download the Workplace Forms ViewerT m to access theEIE, a component ofthe E-Filing system. The Workplace Forms ViewerT M is free and is available at http:// www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/ install-viewer.html.Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available onthe NRC'spublic Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals/apply-certificates.html.

IAperson denied partyorinterested governmental participant statusunder 10 CFR 2.1012(b)(1) may request suchstatusupon a showing ofsubsequent compliance with the requirements of10CFR 2.1003. The subsequent admission ofsuch aparty or interested governmental participant shall be conditioned on accepting the statusofthe proceeding atthetime ofadmission. Once a petitioner has obtained a digital ID certificate, has had a docket created, and has downloaded the EIE viewer, the petitioner can then submit a petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF)in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC public Web site athttp://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. Guidance forElectronic Submissionsto theNRCis a consolidated guidance document that sets forth the technical standards for electronic transmission and formatting electronic documents, and provides instructions onhow to obtain and use the agency-provided digital ID certificate. A person who holds a current digital IDcertificate foruse in the proceedings before the PAPO or the Advisory PAPO need not obtain anew certificate. Thatcertificate will remain valid forthis proceeding.

Section 2.1013(c) defines service as completed whenthe filer/sender receives electronic acknowledgement ("delivery receipt") that the electronic submission has been placed inthe recipient's electronic mailbox. To be timely, an electronic filing mustbe submitted to the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m.Eastern Time on the due date.

U.7onreceipt ofa transmission, the EFiling system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt ofthe document. The
EIE system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to the document to the NRC Office ofGeneral Counsel and any others who have advised the Office ofthe Secretary that they wish to participate inthe proceeding, so that the filer need not
serve the documents on those participants separately. Therefore, the applicant and any other participant (or their counsel orrepresentative) must apply for and receive adigital ID certificate before a petition to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document viathe E-Filing system.

A person filing electronically may seek assistance through the "Contact Us" link located under the heading "Additional Information" on theNRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/sitehelp/e-submittals.htmlor by calling the NRC technical help line, which is available between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. The help line number is (800) 397-4209 or locally (301) 415-4737.

Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's high-level waste electronic hearing docket at http://hlwehd.nrc.govl Public_HLW-EHD/home.asp

, unless 63030Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

excluded pursuant to an order ofthe Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, ora presiding officer. Paiticipants are requested notto include personal privacy infonation, such as social security numbers, home addresses, orhome phone numbers in the filing. With respect to copyrighted -works,except for limited excerpts that

serve the purpose ofthe adjudicatory filing and would constitute aFair Use application, participants are requested notto include copyrighted materials in their submission.

Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, atthe NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White-Flint North, Public File Area 01 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (firstfloor), Rockville, Maryland, and will be accessible electronically through the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room link atthe NRCWeb site http:// www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.h tml. TheADAMS accession number for the ADAMS package containing the DOE application is ML081560400. The ADAMS accession number for the ADAMS package containing DOE's Final Environmental Impact Statement is ML032690321, and the accession number for the ADAMS package containing DOE's Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement is ML081750191. The ADAMS accession number for the ADAMS package containing DOE's Final Rail Corridor Supplemental EIS and Rail Alignment EIS is ML082460227. The application is also available at http://www.nrc.gov/ waste/hlw-disposal/yucca-lic-app.html. Persons who donot have access to ADAMS orwho encounter problems in accessing documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, orby e-mail to pdrnrc.gov.

Hm. Additional Matters Pertaining to the Hearing andInterventionRequests
A. Standingasof Right
Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.309(d)(2)(iii), the Commission shall permit intervention bythe State and local governmental body (county, municipality or other subdivision) in which the geologic repository operations area is located, and by any affected Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, as defined in 10CFR Part 63, if the contention requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(f) are satisfied With respect to at least one contention. Section 2.309(d)(2) specifies that such State, affected Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, and local governmental bodyheed not address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d).

InLBP-08-10, the Advisory PAPO Board requested that the Commission clarify whether an "affected unit oflocal government" (AULG), as defined in section 2 ofthe NWPA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10101), also need not address the standing requirements ofsection 2.309(d). Any AULG seeking party status shallbe considered aparty to this proceeding, provided that it files at least

one admissible contention in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309. An AULG need not address the standing requirements -underthat section.

B. EnvironmentalContentions

In addition to meeting NRC's regular contention admissibility requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(f), environmental contentions addressing any DOE environmental impact statement or supplement must also conform to the requirements and address the applicable factors outlined in 10 CFR 51.109 governing NRC's adoption ofDOE's environmental impact statements. The requirements ofsection 51.109 should be applied consistent with Nuclear EnergyInstitute,Inc.v.EPA, 373 F.3d 1251, 1313-14 (D.C.Cir. 2004), a court decision discussing section 51.109, and consistent with the Commission's denial ofthe State ofNevada's petition to amend section 51.109 (73 FR 5762; January 31, 2008), and the Office ofthe General Counsel's subsequent letter clarifying the Commission's denial (Letter from Bradley W. Jones, Assistant General Counsel to Martin G. Malsch, dated March 20, 2008, ADAMS accession number ML080810175). Under 10 CFR 51.109(c), the presiding officer should treat as acognizable "new consideration" an attack onthe Yucca Mountain environmental impact statements based on significant and substantial information that, iftrue, would render the statements inadequate. Under 10 CFR 51.109(a)(2),

a presiding officer considering environmental contentions should apply NRC "reopening" procedures and standards in 10CFR 2.326 "to the extent possible."
C.Hearing Procedures
The construction authorization hearing will be conducted by one or
more presiding officers (licensing boards) that willbe designated by the ChiefJudge ofthe Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel. The Commission anticipates and authorizes the establishment ofmultiple licensing boards throughout the proceeding. Notice asto the membership ofthe board(s) willbe published at alater date.

In 1991, the Commission suggested that it woulduse the notice ofhearing fora high-level waste (HLW) proceeding to announce detailed case management procedures (56FR 7787, 7793-94 (February 26, 1991)). Inthe intervening years, however, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel has engaged in extensive case management planning for this proceeding. The Commission therefore believes that the presiding officer(s) inthis proceeding will be in the best position to establish and efficiently resolve case management issues, some ofwhich the CommissionauthorizedAdvisory PAPO Board resolved in LBP-08-10.
D.Scope oftheHearing
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.1027, in any initial decision on the application forconstruction authorization, the presiding officer shall make findings of fact and conclusions oflaw on, and otherwise give consideration to, only material issues put into controversy by the parties and determined to be litigable inthe proceeding. The Commission has determined thatthe scope ofthe adjudicatory proceeding on safety, security, ortechnical issues is limitedto litigable contested issues. See State ofNevada; Denial ofPetition for Rulemaking, Docket No. PRM-2-14, available at ADAMS accession number ML082900618. The presiding officer has

no authority or dutyto resolve uncontested issues inthose areas. See 10 CFR2.1023(c)(2) and 10 CFR 2.1027.

Notwithstanding the provisions in 2.1023(c)(2) and 10 CFR 2.1027, the presiding officer shall make the environmental findings required by 10 CFR 51.109(e), even on uncontested, issues, "to the extent it is not practicable to adopt the environmental impact statement prepared by the Secretary ofEnergy."

E.Participation by aNon-Party A person who is not a party may be permitted to make alimited appearance statement by making an oral or written
statement ofhis orher position on the issues at any session ofthe hearing or any pre-hearing conference within the limits and conditions fixed by the presiding officer, but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding.
IV. Access to Non-public information

Those petitioners who seek access to non-public information must follow the

access requirements contained in the PAPO Board's Third Case Management Order (August30, 2007), available at ADAMS accession number 

### 63031

### Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205 /Wednesday, October-22, 2008/Notices

ML072420327. This and other case management orders issued bythe PAPO Board govern protection ofvarious categories ofprotected and privileged information. The Board's case management orders are available onthe high-level waste electronic hearing docket, Docket No. PAPO-00, at http:// hlwehd.nrc.gov/Public_HLW-EHD/ home.asp, under HLW-EHD, folder titled PAPO.HLW, subfolder titled OrdersPAPO.
V. Motions

To avoid unnecessary disputes and filings, a party who files a motion must certify, pursuant to 10CFR 2.323, that he or she has made a reasonable effort to consult with counsel for the applicant and counsel for the NRC staff, as well

as other interested counsel or litigants, in an effort to resolve the matter in advance of filing the motion.Motions must also meet all other section 2.323 requirements.
VI. Revised Hearing Schedule Milestones

In CLI-08-18 (August 13, 2008), available at ADAMS accession number ML082261241, the Commission granted the State ofNevada, as well as any other petitioner, an additional thirty (30) days in which to file a petition to intervene,

ora petition for status as an interested government participant, inthis proceeding. In addition, the Commission proposed further modifications to the schedule codified in 10 CFR Part 2,Appendix D.

The Commission invited any party or potential party participating in the matters before the PAPO Board to provide comments on certain additional proposed extensions oftime. The Commission also sought the views of the Atomic Safety andLicensing Board Panel on the reasonableness ofcurrent and proposed time frames. The Commission has considered the
comments received, and has determined that the revised schedule below will replace certain hearing milestones set forth in Appendix D to 10CFR Part 2.

The Commission hereby doubles the time permitted to file answers and replies, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1) and (2), respectively, to fifty (50) and fourteen (14) days, respectively. The Commission also extends the period for the First Prehearing Conference from eight (81 to sixteen (16) days after the deadline for filing replies, and extends the period for issuance of the First Prehearing Conference Orderfrom thirty (30) to sixty (60) days after the First Prehearing Conference. The revised Appendix D schedule, reflected in the table below, replaces only the milestones up to, and including, the First Prehearing Conference Order. The presiding officer retains authority to grant extensions oftime ofno more than fifteen days, and the Commission retains authority to grant extensions of longer than fifteen days, but in either

case the litigant seeking the extension must follow therequirements of 10 CFR 2.1026.

PARTIALLY REVISED APPENDIX D SCHEDULE

Day Action

0
........ Federal Register Notice of Hearing. 60

...... Petition to intervene/request for

hearing, w/contentions. 110

.... Answers to intervention and interested government participant Petitions. 124

.... Petitioner's response to answers. 140

....First Prehearing Conference. 200

.... First Prehearing Conference Order

identifying participants in proceeding, admitted contentions, and setting discovery and other schedules.

The regulatory requirements governing the balance ofthe Appendix D schedule remain unchanged.
VII. September 9, 2008, Petition

On September 9, 2008, the State of Nevada submitted to the Commission a "petition" directed to the content of this hearing notice.2 In this petition, Nevada argues that the Commission cannot issue a notice ofhearing unless it first resolves "at least three important legal and procedural issues." 3

Nevada's first issue, now partially mooted, is the lack of final Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards and implementing NRC rules for the post-10,000 yearperiod. The EPA has now established post-10,000 year standards, and the Staffis developing implementing regulations.4

2Petition toPublishaFair andReasonableNotice ofHearingonDOE's Yucca MountainApplication (Sept. 9, 2008), available at ADAMS accession number ML082550289 (September 9 Petition). The procedural identity ofNevada's "petition" is not obvious. The Commission addresses the issues Nevada raises as part ofthisnotice ofhearing solely

as a matter ofexpedience since they touch on topics the Commission alreadyaddresses independently.

Both DOE andthe NRC Staffresponded to the September 9 Petition. See U.S.Departmentof EnergyResponse toStateof Nevada "Petitionto PublishaFair and ReasonableNotice of Hearingon DOE's Yucca MountainApplication"(Sept. 19, 2008); NRC StaffsResponse tothe Stateof Nevada'sPetitionto Publisha Fair andReasonable NoticeofHearingonDOE's YuccaMountain Application(Sept. 19, 2008).

*September 9 Petition at 3. 4Final Rule, Public Health and Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Yucca Mountain, Nevada 73 FR 61.256 (October 15, 2008). Nevada argued that potential parties cannot draft contentions based upon standards that have notbeen finalized. As a possible remedy, Nevada proposed that today's notice ofhearing include a delay-essentially a bifurcation of contention-filing deadlines-with respect to all issues related to the EPA standards and the NRC's implementing rules until some date to be determined after the standards and rules are issued. Nevada argued alternatively that this delay could be avoided ifthe Commission declined to bebound by its Staffs decision to docket the application.

The Commission recognizes Nevada's

concern but does notbelieve Nevada's extraordinary remedies are necessary, especially since the EPA has now issued the relevant standards, andthe NRC's regulations are inpreparation. Under the NRC's ordinary practice, Nevada and other hearing petitioners are free to file contentions arguing that the Commission may not authorize construction in the absence-of implementing NRCrules. And they are also free to file contentions maintaining that DOE's application does not meet EPA's standards. Such contentions would require no change in the contention-filing schedule set out in CLI-08-18. Nevada orother hearing petitioners may amend their "EPA standards'"-related contentions later, after the NRC's implementing rules are issued, ifthe new NRC rules establish fresh grounds for contentions. Under the unusual circumstances ofthis case, where controlling agency rules have been delayed, and to ensure thatno one is prejudiced, any contentions so amended-on EPA standards-related issues only-will be deemed timely for admissibility purposes iffiled within sixty days after the Federal Register publication of theNRC rules implementing the new EPA standards. 5

The second issue Nevada raises in its September 9 Petition concerns a petition forrulemaking it filedregarding the specification ofissues for the mandatory hearing portion ofthis proceeding. 6

5NRC rules ordinarily call on licensing boards to balance several factors in deciding whether to allow late-filed (oramended) contentions. See 10 CFR 2.309(c)(i)-(viii). In the case ofthe yet-to-issue NRC rules, however, the Commission is dispensing in advance with all "late-filed" factors except the "good cause" factor. It is obvious even now that promptly-filed and well-pled contentions based on new, previously unavailable NRC rules--rules that will govern important aspects ofNRC's safety review-must be admitted for hearing. There plainly would be "good cause" forfiling such contentions late, and no conceivable justification forrejecting them atthe threshold.

r Petition bythe State ofNevada for Rulemaking
toSpecify Issues forthe Yucca Mountain Mandatory Hearing (June 19, 2007). 63032

### Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

That petition has now been ruled on, and the Commission's rulemaking decision is reflected in the discussion of the scope ofthe hearing addressed in Section HI.D, above. 7

Finally, the third issueNevada raises in its September 9 Petition concerns the
-status ofsecurity clearances and access to classified information inthe Yucca Mountain construction authorization application.-Nevadaargues that its representatives have notbeen informed ofdecisions on their security clearances and on access to classified information, "notwithstanding timely applications,"

so no contentions based on classified information can be prepared.8 To remedy this, Nevada again asks fora bifurcation ofcontention-filing deadlines.

It-is the Commission's understanding that, as ofthe end ofJuly, one of Nevada's security clearance applications

was complete and was being processed, another application was incomplete, and two applications had been withdrawn. 9 From this, the Commission concludes that the timeliness of Nevada's security clearance applications is factually ambiguous. Moreover, it is
notimmediately clear that the perceived problem could notbe remedied by the provision ofredacted versions of classified documents that could provide

abasis forthe formulation of contentions before the security clearance application reviews are completed. The Commission directs the PAPO Board toresolve both ofthese questions.

It issoordered.
Dated atRockville, Maryland, this 17th day ofOctober, 2008.

Forthe Commission. Annette L.Vietti-Cook, Secretaryof theCommission. [FR Doc. E8-25293 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

ISee State ofNevada; Deniil ofPetition for Rulemaking, DocketNo. PRM-2-14, available at ADAMS accession number ML082900618.

8September 9 Petition at6. 9See Letter from Aby Mobseni, Deputy Director, Licensing and Inspection Directorate, Division of High-Level Waste Repository Safety, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards to Robert R. Loux, Executive Director, Agency for Nuclear Projects, Office ofthe Governor, State ofNevada (July31, 2008), available atADAMS accession
number ML081910097. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
AdvisoryCommittee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Economic Simplified BoilingWater Reactor (ESBWR); Corrected Notice ofMeeting (Corrected To Note New Meeting Times)

The ACRS Subcommittee on the ESBWRwill hold a meeting on October 21-22, 2008, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.

The meeting will be open to public attendance, withthe exception ofa portion that may be closed to protect information that is proprietary to General Electric-Hitachi (GEH) Nuclear Energy and its contractors pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4).

The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Tuesday, October 21, 2008-1 p.m.-5 p.m Wednesday, October 22, 2008-8:30 a.m.-12 noon.

The Subcommittee will review Chapter 14 ofthe Safety Evaluation Report with Open Items associated with the ESBWR Design Certification Application. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions withrepresentatives ofthe NRC staff, GEH, and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, fordeliberation by the full Committee.

Members ofthe public desiringto provide oral statements and/or written
comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Dr. Harold J. Vandermolen, (Telephone: 301-415- 6236) five days prior to the ineeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted. Detailed procedures for the conduct ofand participation inACRS meetings were published inthe Federal Register on September 26, 2007 (72 FR 54695).

Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at leasttwo working days prior to the meeting tobe advised ofany potential changes to the agenda. Dated: October 14, 2008. Cayetano Santos, BranchChief. [FR Doc. E8-25141 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILUNG CODE 7590-01-P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 70-7001, 70-7002]

Noticeof Renewal of Certificates of Compliance GDP-1 and GDP-2 for the U.S. Enrichment Corporation, Paducah and Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plants, Paducah, KY and Portsmouth, OH

ACTION: Notice and issuance ofa Director's Decision renewing the Certificates of Compliance for the United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC) allowiig continued operation of the gaseous diffusion plants (GDPs), at Paducah, KY, and Portsmouth, OH.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Raddatz, Enrichment and Conversion Branch, Division ofFuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.' Telephone: (301) 492-3108; Fax: (301) 492-3363; orby e-mail: Michael.Raddatz@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is hereby issuing a director's decision authorizing the renewal ofthe certificates ofcompliance for the two GDPs located near Paducah, KY, and Portsmouth, OH, for the USEC, allowing continued operation ofthese plants. The renewal ofthese certificates for the GDPs covers a 5-yearperiod. USEC submitted individual renewal requests forboth the Paducah and Portsmouth GDPs on April 10, 2008, pursuant to Title 10 ofthe Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 76.31.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 76.53, the NRC consulted with and requested written comments onthe renewal application from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Energy (DOE). EPA responded in aletter dated September 15, 2008, (ML082840196) stating that it had thoroughly reviewed the USEC application to ensure that USEC had provided an accurate environmental compliance overview. The EPA found thatboth the local and regional EPA regulators had adequately inspected the 

### 63033Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

facilities andtook appropriate action when identifying violations, and supported the recertification ofthe GDPs. In an e-mail dated September 23, 2008, (ML082840080) DOE reported that its Portsmouth and Paducah Project Office continued to discharge its regulatory and oversight responsibilities at the PGDP and PORTS. DOE conducted its activities in a manner to enhance and improve the environmental health and safety conditions, and achieve compliancewith allapplicable Federal and State laws and regulations. In those instances where potential violations of these laws .andregulations

were identified, actions were taken to notify appropriate authorities, identify the cause, and institute corrective

measures.

The NRC staffreviewed the certificate renewal applications for the GDPs located near Paducah, KY, and Portsmouth, OH. USEC's applications forcertificate renewal, received April 10, 2008, did not propose any changes to the current safety basis or , requirements. As required by 10CFR 76.36, "Annual Renewals," USEC has incorporated, into the renewal application by reference, previous applications, statements, andreports. The documents that USEC isrelying upon as the basis for recertification include the previously approved Technical Safety Requirements, Safety Analysis Report, Compliance Plan, Quality Assurance Program, Emergency Plan, Security and Safeguards Plans, Waste Management Program, and Decommissioning Funding Program, as well as changes made pursuant to 10 CFR 76.68, "Plant Changes." The staff reviews (aspart ofrecertification) all 10 CFR 76.68 changes submitted during the past 5 years to ensure that the cumulative effect ofthe changes, when taken as a whole, and in consideration ofthe changes approved by the NRC staffunder 10 CFR 76.45, have not degraded the safety basisfor the GDPs.

Based on its review ofthe certificate renewal applications, the NRC staffhas concluded that in combination with existing certificate conditions, USEC provides reasonable assurance of adequate safety, safeguards, and security, and compliance with NRC requirements. The NRC staffprepared compliance evaluation reports (CERs) to provide details ofthe staff's safety evaluations. These CERs (PortsmouthML082820425,PaducahML082820197) contain reference to the review performed by headquarters staff, in consultation with the regional inspectors, of the 10 CFR 76.68 changes made since issuance ofthe 2003 certificates. Because approvals ofthe certificate renewal applications are covered by a categorical exclusion (10 CFR 51.22(c)(19)), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment needs to be prepared for these-actions.

As a result ofthe staffreviews, the NRC finds that USEC has met, and will continue to meet, the 10 CFR 76 certification requirements. Accordingly, the NRC will renew the certificates of compliance for GDP-1 and GDP-2, following submission ofthe Report to Congress as required by Sec. 1701(b)(1) ofthe Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA).
II. Opportunity To File a Petition

Under 10 CFR 76.62(c), USEC or any person whose interest may be affected may file a petition requesting the Commission's review ofthis renewal decision. A petition requesting the Commission's review may not exceed 30 pages and mustbe filed within 30 days after the publication of this notice inthe Federal Register. Within 15 days of filing a petition requesting the Commission's review, pursuant to 10 CFR 76.62(c), any other person whose interest may be affected may file a response, notto exceed 30 pages, to the petition forreview. Petitions requesting the Commission's-review orresponses
are to befiled and served inaccordance with 10 CFR 2.302(a) and (c), and the other procedures referenced in 10 CFR 76.72(a).

Additionally, any petition must be filed in accordance with the NRC EFiling rule, promulgated in 72 FR49139 (Aug. 28, 2007). The E-Filing rule requires participants to submit and

serve documents over the internet or in

some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies oftheir filings unless they seek a waiver inaccordance with the procedures described below.

To comply with theprocedural requirements ofE-Filing, at least ten (10) days prior to the filing deadline, the petitioner/requester must contact the Office ofthe Secretary by e-mail at HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV,or by calling (301) 4'15-1677, to request (1) a digital ID certificate, which allows the participant (orits counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal

server for anyproceeding inwhich it is participating; and/or (2) creation ofan electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances in which the petitioner/requester (or its counsel or representative) already holds an NRCissued digital IDcertificate). Each petitioner/requester will need to download the Workplace Forms ViewerTM to access the Electronic .Information Exchange (EIE), a component ofthe E-Filing system.the Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and is available athttp://www.nrc.gov/site help/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.govsitehelple-submittals/applycertificates.html.

Once a petitioner/requester has obtained a digital ID certificate, had a docket created, and downloaded the EIE viewer, it can then submit apetition. Submissions should bein Portable Document Format (PDF)in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html.A filing is considered complete at the time the filer submits its documents through EIE. To be timely,

an electronic filing mustbe submitted to the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.Upon receipt ofa transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt ofthe document. The EIE system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to the document to the NRC Office ofthe General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office ofthe Secretary that they wish to participate inthe proceeding, so that the filer need not

serve the documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for andreceive adigital ID certificate before apetition is filed so that they can obtain access to the document viathe E-Filing system.

A person filing electronically may seek assistance throughthe "Contact Us" linklocated onthe NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-helplesubmittals.htmlorby calling the NRC technical help line, which is available between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. The help line number is (800) 397-4209

or locally, (301) 415-4737.

Participants who believe that they have a good cause fornot submitting documents electronically must file a motion, inaccordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings mustbe submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office ofthe Secretary ofthe Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited 

### 63034Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008 /Notices

delivery service to the Office ofthe Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, OneWhite FlintNorth, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adocument in this

manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by firstz class mail as ofthe time ofdeposit in the mail, orby courier, express mail, or expedited delivery,service upon depositing the document with the provider ofthe service.

Non-timely petitions will notbe entertained absent adetermination by the Commission that the petition should be granted. To be timely, filings mustbe submitted no laterthan 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.

Participants are requested notto include social security numbers or copyrighted materials intheir filings. The formal requirements for documents contained in 10 CFR 2.304(c)-(e) must be met. Ifthe NRC grants an electronic document exemption inaccordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g)(3), then the requirements for paper documents, set forth in 10 CFR 2.304(b) mustbe met.

III. Further Information

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules ofPractice," details with respect to this action, including the applications forrenewal Portsmouth and Paducah GDPs (ML081070220 and ML081070229, respectively) are available electronically forpublic inspection and copying from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component ofNRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http:// www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. These documents (except for classified and proprietary portions which are withheld inaccordance with 10 CFR 2.390, "Availability ofPublic Records")

are also available forpublic inspection
atthe Commission's Public Document Room, at One White FlintNorth, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.

Dated atRockville, MD, this loth day of October 2008.

FortheNuclear Regulatory Commission. Michael F.Weber, Director, OfficeofNuclear MaferialSafety andSafegUards. [FRDoc. E8-25151 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILUNG CODE 7590-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Proposed Collection;Comment Request

Extension:

Rule 12d2-1; OMB ControlNo. 3235-0081;

SECFile No. 270-98.
Notice is hereby given thatpursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") is soliciting comments

onthe collections ofinformation summarized below. The Commission plans to submitthese existing collections ofinformation to the Office ofManagement and Budget for extension and approval.

9 Rule 12d2-1 (17 CFR 240.12d2-1) Suspension ofTrading.

On February 12, 1935, the Commission adopted Rule 12d2-1,1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78b etseq.) ("Act"), to establish the procedures by which a national securities exchange may suspend from trading a security that is listed and registered onthe exchange under section 12(d) ofthe Act.2 Under Rule 12d2-1, an exchange is permitted
to suspend from trading a listed security in accordance with its rules, and must promptly notify the Commission ofany such suspension, along with the effective date and the reasons for the suspension.

Any such suspension may be continued until such time as the Commission may determine that the suspension is designed to evade the provisions ofsection 12(d) ofthe Act and Rule 12d2-2 thereunder. 3 During the continuance ofsuch suspension under Rule 12d2-1, the exchange is required to notify the Commission promptly of any change inthe reasons for the suspension. Upon the restoration to trading ofany security suspended under Rule 12d2-1, the exchange must notify the Commission promptly of the effective date ofsuch restoration..

The trading suspension notices serve
anumber ofpurposes. First, they inform the Commission that an exchange has suspended from trading a listed security

orreintroduced trading in apreviously suspended security. They also provide the Commission with information

ISeeSecuities Exchange Act Release No. 98 (February 12, 1935).

2SeeSecurities Exchange Act Release No. 7011 (February 5, 1963), 28 FR 1506 (February 16, 1963).

3Rule 12d2-2 prescribes thecircumstances under which a securitymay be delisted from an exchange andwithdrawn fromregistration under section 12(b) ofthe Act, and provides theprocedures for taking such action. ' necessary forit to determine that the suspension has been accomplished in accordance with the rules ofthe exchange, and to verify that the exchange has not evaded the requirements ofsection 12(d) ofthe Act and Rule 12d2-2 thereunder by improperly employing atrading suspension. Without Rule 12d2-1, the Commission would be unable to fully implement these statutory responsibilities.

There are ten national securities xchanges that are subject to Rule 12d2- 1.The burden ofcomplying with Rule 12d2-1 is not evenly distributed among the exchanges, however, sincethere are many more securities listed onthe New York Stock Exchange, Inc., the NASDAQ Stock Market, and the American StockExchange LLC than on the other exchanges. 4 However, for purposes ofthis filing, the Commission staffhas assumed thatthe number of responses is evenly divided among the exchanges. There are approximately 1,500 responses under Rule 12d2-1 for the purpose ofsuspension oftrading from the national securities exchanges each year, the resultant aggregate annual reporting hour burden wouldbe, assuming on average one-halfreporting hourperresponse, 750 annual burden hours for all exchanges. The related
costs associated with these burden hours are $41,625.00.

Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance ofthe functions ofthe agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy ofthe agency's estimate ofthe burden ofthe collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity ofthe information collected; and (d)ways to minimize the burden ofthe collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques orother forms ofinformation technology. Consideration will be given
to comments and suggestions,submitted in writing within 60 days ofthis publication.

Comments should be directed to: Lewis W. Walker, Acting Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312 or send an email to:PRAMailbox@sec.gov.

4In fact, someexchanges do notfile anytrading suspension reports in a given year. 63035Federal Register

### /Vol. 73, No. 205 /Wednesday, October 22, 2008 /Notices

Dated: October 15, 200&: Florence E. Harmon, ActingSecretary. [FR Doc. E8-25029 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58794; File No. SR-ISE2008-77] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filingand Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Fee Changes

October 15, 2008.

Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Act"), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on October 10, 2008, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (the "Exchange" or the "ISE") filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission the proposed rule change, as described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments onthe proposed rule change from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement ofthe Terms ofSubstance of the Proposed Rule Change

The ISE is proposing to amend its Schedule ofFees to establish fees for transactions in options on 4 Premium Products. 3 The text ofthe proposed rule change is available on the ISE's Web site (http://www.ise.com), atthe principal office of the ISE, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
H. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement ofthe Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included
statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received

on the proposed rule change. The text ofthese statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B and C below, ofthe most significant aspects of such statements.

115 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 217 CFR 240.19b-4.

3Premium Products is defined in the Schedule of Fees asthe products enumerated therein. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statementofthe Purposeof,and StatutoryBasis for,theProposed Rule Change

1.Purpose-TheExchange is proposing to amend its Schedule ofFees to establish fees fortransactions in options on the Claymore/BNY BRIC ETF ("EEB"),4 the iShares DowJones U.S. Home Construction Index Fund ("ITB"),5 the Market Vectors Steel ETF ("SLX") 6 and the Short Dow 30 s M

4The "BNY BRIC Index" is a trademark ofThe Bank ofNew York ("BNY") and has been licensed for use forcertain purposes byClaymore Advisors, LLC ("Claymore"). All other trademarks and service marks are theproperty oftheir respective owners. Claymore is the investment adviser to EEB. The Claymore/BNY BRIC ETF ("EEB")is not sponsored, endorsed, or promoted byBNY and BNYmakes no representation regarding the advisability of investing in EEB. Claymore and BNY have not licensed or authorized ISE to (i) engage in the creation, listing, provision ofa market fortrading, marketing, and promotion ofoptions on EEB or (ii)
to use and refer to any oftheir trademarks or service marks in connection with the listing, provision of

a market for trading, marketing, and promotion of options on EEB or with making disclosures concerning options onEEB under any applicable federal or state laws, rules orregulations. Claymore and BNY do not sponsor, endorse, orpromote such activity by ISE, and are not affiliated in any manner with ISE.

5iShares®is a registered trademark ofBarclays Global Investors, N.A. ("BGI'l, a wholly owned subsidiary ofBarclays BankPLC. "Dow Jones" and "Dow Jones U.S. Home Construction Index" are trademarks and service marks ofDow Jones & Company, Inc. ("Dow )ones") and havebeen licensed foruse for certain purposes by BGI. All other trademarks and service marks are theproperty oftheirrespective owners. The iShares DowJones U.S. Home Construction Index Fund ("ITB")is not sponsored, endorsed, or promoted byDow Jones. BGI and Dow ]ones havenot licensed or authorized ISE to (i) engage in the creation, listing, provision ofa market for trading, marketing, and promotion ofoptions on ITB or (ii) to use and refer toany of their trademarks or service marks in connection with the listing,provision ofa market fortrading, marketing, andpromotion ofoptions on ITB or with making disclosures concerning options on ITB under any applicable federal or state laws, rules or regulations. BGI and DowJones do not sponsor, endorse, orpromote such activityby ISE, and are not affiliated in any manner with ISE.

'The Market Vectors Steel ETF ("SLX") is distributed byVan Eck Securities Corporation ("VESC")and tracks the AMEX Steel Index. Van Eck Associates Corporation ("VEAC') is the investment adviser to SLX. VEAC has entered into

a licensing agreement with the American Stock Exchange ("AMEX") to use theAMEX Steel Index in connection with SLX. The AMEX' only relationship with VEAC is thelicensing of certain trademarks, service marks andtrade names ofthe AMEX Steel Index. The AMEX does not sponsor, endorse, orpromote SLX and makes no representation regarding the advisability of investing in SLX.Neither VESC norVEAC has licensed or authorized ISE to (i) engage in the creation, listing, provision ofa market fortrading, marketing, and promotion ofoptions on SLX or (ii) to use and refer to anyoftheir trademarks or service marks in connection with thelisting, provision of

amarket fortrading, marketing, and promotion of options on SLX or with making disclosures concerning options on SLX under any applicable federal or state laws, rules orregulations. Neither VESCnor VEAC sponsors, endorses, or promotes ProShares ("DOG"). 7 The Exchange represents that EEB, ITB, SLX and DOG

are eligible for options trading because they constitute "Exchange-Traded Fund Shares," as defined by ISE Rule 502(h).

All ofthe applicable fees covered by this filing are identical to fees charged by theExchange for all other Premium Products. Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to adopt an execution fee for all transactions in options on EEB, ITB, •SLX and DOG.e The amount ofthe execution fee for products covered by this filing shall be $0.18 percontract for all Public Customer Orders 9and $0.20 per contract for all Firm Proprietary orders. The amount ofthe execution fee for allISE Market Maker transactions shall be equal to the execution fee currently charged by the Exchange for ISE Market Maker transactions in equity options. 10Finally, the amount ofthe execution fee for all non-ISE Market Maker transactions shall be $0.45 per contract."1 Further, since options on EEB, ITB, SLX and DOG are multiplylisted, the Exchange's Payment for Order Flow fee shall apply to all these products. The Exchange believes the

such activity by ISE, and are not affiliated in any
manner with ISE.

7"Dew Jones," "The Dow 30SM," "DJIA," andthe "DowJones Industrial AverageTM" are service marks ofDow Jones &Company, Inc. ("Dow Jones") and have been licensed for use for certain purposes by ProFunds Trust.All other trademarks and service marks are the property oftheirrespective

owners. The Short Dow 30SM ProShares ("DOG") is
not sponsored, endorsed, orpromoted by Dow Jones. ProFunds Trust and Dow Jones has not licensed or authorized ISE to (i) engage in the creation, listing, provision ofa.market for trading, marketing, and promotion ofoptions on DOG or (ii) to use and refer to any oftheirtrademarks or service marks in connection with the listing, provision of

a market for trading, marketing, and promotion of options on DOG or with making disclosures concerning options on DOG under any applicable federal or state laws, rules orregulations. ProFunds Trust and Dow Jonesdoes not sponsor,endorse, or promote such activity by ISEand is not affiliated in any manner with ISE.

8These fees will be charged only toExchange members. Under a pilot program that is set to expire

on July 31, 2009, these fees will also be charged to Linkage Principal Orders ("LinkageP Orders") and Linkage Principal Acting as Agent Orders ("Linkage P/A Orders"). The amount ofthe execution fee charged bythe Exchange for Linkage P Orders and Linkage P/A Orders is $0.24 per contract side and $0,15 per contract side,respectively. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58143 (July 11, 2008), 73 FR 41388 (July 18,2008) (SR-ISE-2008-52).

9Public Customer Order is defined in Exchange Rule 100(a)(39) as an orderfor the account ofa Public Customer. Public Customer is defined in Exchange Rule 100(a)(38) as a person or entity that is not a broker or dealer in securities.

laThe Exchange applies a sliding scale, between $0.01 and $0.18 per contract side, based on the number ofcontracts an ISE market maker trades in

a month.

11The amount ofthe execution fee for non-ISE Market Maker transactions executed in the Exchange's Facilitation and Solicitation Mechanisms is $0.19 percontract. 

### 63036Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

proposed rule change will further the Exchange's goal ofintroducing new products to the marketplace that are competitively priced.

2. Basis-TheExchange believes that the'proposed rule change is consistent with the objectives ofSection 6 ofthe Act,' 2 ingeneral, and furthers the objectives ofSection 6(b)(4), 13 in particular, inthat it is designed to provide forthe equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among its members and other persons using its facilities.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's StatementonBurden on Competition

The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition that is notnecessary or appropriate in. furtherance of the purposes ofthe Act.

C.Self-RegulatoryOrganization's Statementon Comments on the Proposed Rule ChangeReceivedFrom Members,Participants orOthers
The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested parties.
iI. Date ofEffectiveness ofthe Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

The foregoing rule change hasbecome effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3) of the Act 14 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 15 thereunder. At any time within 60 days ofthe filing ofsuch proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change ifit appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, forthe protection ofinvestors,

or otherwise in furtherance ofthe purposes ofthe Act.
IV. Solicitation ofComments

Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submittedby any of the following methods:
ElectronicComments
* Use the Commission's Internet
comment form http://www.sec.govrules/sro.shtml);or

e Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov.Please include File

1215 U.S.C. 78f(b).
1315 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

1415 U.S.C. 78s(b](3}(AI. 1517 CFR 19b-4(f)(2) [sic).- No. SR-ISE-2008-77 onthe subject line. Paper Comments

* Send paper comments intriplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 10( F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2008-77. This.file number should be-included on the subject line ife-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post allcomments on the Commissions Internet Web site (http://www.sec.govl rules/sro.shtm1).Copies ofthe submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating t6 the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance withthe provisions of5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of10 a.m. and 3p.m. Copies ofsuch filing also willbe available forinspection and copying at the principal office ofthe ISE. All
comments received willbe posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2008-77 and shouldbe submittedby November 12, 2008.

. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 1 6
FlorenceE. Harmon, ActingSecretary. [FR Doc. E8-25164 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P

1617 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58772; File No. SR-Phlx2008-72]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filingand Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1Thereto by the NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. Relating to a Surcharge Fee

October 10,2008.

Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Act"),' and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on October 1, 2008, NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. ("Phbx" or "Exchange") filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC" or "Commission") the proposed rule change as described inItems I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. On October 7, 2008, the Exchange filedAmendment No. 1to the proposal.3 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change,

as amended, from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement ofthe Terms ofSubstance of the Proposed Rule Change

The Exchange, pursuant to section 19(b)(1) ofthe Act4 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,5 proposes to assess a surcharge fee 6 of$0.10 per contract side

on firm/proprietary, firm/proprietary facilitation, Registered Option Trader (on-floor), specialist, and broker/dealer (AUTOM and non-AUTOM delivered) equity option transactions in the following products: (1) Options on the one-tenth of thevalue ofthe Nasdaq 100 Index (the "MiniNasdaq100 Index" or "MNX"); (2) options an the full value of the Nasdaq 100 Index 7 (the "Full-size Nasdaq 100 Index" or "NDX"); (3) options on the Russell 2000®Index (the "Full Value Russell Index" or "RUT"), and (4) options on the one-tenth value

115U.S.C.78s(b)(1). 217 CFR 240.19b-4.

3Amendment No. I fixed typographical errors in therule text ofthe original filing that were not being changed in this proposed rule change to match the current rule text.

415US.C. 7as(b)(1).

517 CFR 240.19b-4. 6The Exchange now proposes to refer to "license fees" as "surcharge fees" on its fee schedule.

7NASDAQr, NASDAQ-1000 and NASDAQ-100 Index®are registered trademarks ofThe NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc. (which with its affiliates are the "Corporations") and are licensed foruse bythe NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. in connection withthe trading ofoptions products based on the NASDAQ100 IndexO. 

### 63037Federal Register

### /Vo.l. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008

### /Notices

Russell 2000®Index 8 (the "Reduced Value Russell Index" or "RMN"). 9 A surcharge fee will not apply to customer transactions. 10

The surcharge fees would be assessed

on the applicable equity option transactions, regardless ofwhether any fee caps relating to comparison or transaction charges are imposed.

The Exchange also proposes to credit equity option specialist units any applicable surcharge fee that is assessed in connection with customer orders that

are delivered to the limit orderbook via Phlx XL11 or viathe Exchange's Options Floor Broker Management System ("FBMS") 12 and subsequently executed via the Intermarket Option Linkage '3 as



## aRussell 20000'is atrademark and service mark ofthe Frank Russell Company, usedunder license. NeitherFrank Russell Company's publication ofthe Russell Indexes norits licensing ofits trademarks foruse in connection with securities orother financial products derived from aRussell Index in any way suggests or implies a representation or opinionby Frank Russell Company as tothe attractiveness ofinvestment in any securities or other financial products based upon or derived from any Russell Index. Frank Russell Company is not the issuer ofany such securities or other financial products and makes no express or implied warranties ofmerchantability or fitness forany particular purpose with respect to any Russell Index or any data included orreflected therein, nor
as to results to be obtained byany person or any entity from the use ofthe Russell Index or any data included orreflected therein.

9Currently, a $0.10 per contrat side license fee is assessed onMNX and NDX products and a$0.15 per contract side surcharge fee is assessed on'RUT andRMN products afterthe $60,000 "Firm Related" EquityOption and Index Option Cap fee cap is reached. (Equityoption and index option "firm" transactions are comprised ofequity option firm/ proprietary comparison transactions, equity option firm/proprietary transactions, equity option firm/ proprietary facilitation transactions, indexoption firm (proprietary and customerexecutions) comparison transactions, index option firm/ proprietary transactions and index option firm/ proprietary facilitation transaction charges (collectively "firm-related charges")). See e.g. Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 54981 (December 20,2006), 71 FR 78251 (December 28, 2006); and 53287 (February 14,2006), 71 FR 9186 (February 22, 2006).

10Currently theExchange does not charge equity option transaction charges forcustomer executions, but charges a $0.12 per contract equity option transaction charge for customer executions in MNX and NDX.

11PhIx XL, formerly referred to as AUTOM, is the Exchange's electronic trading platform. See Exchange Rule 1080.

12FBMS is designed to enable Floor Brokers and/

or their employees to enter, route and report transactions stemming from options orders received

on the Exchange. FBMS also is designed to establish

an electronic audit trailfor options orders represented and executed by Floor Brokers on the Exchange, such that the audit trail provides an accurate, time-sequenced record ofelectronic and other orders, quotations and transactions on the Exchange, beginning with the receipt ofan order by the Exchange, and further documenting the life of the order through the process ofexecution, partial execution, or cancellation ofthat order. See Exchange Rule 1080. Commentary.06.

13Linkage is governed by theOptions Linkage Authority under the conditions set forth under the a Principal Acting as Agent ("P/A") order.14

In addition,the Exchange proposes to delete certain license fees from its fee schedule.

The text ofthe proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at http://www.phlx.com/regulatoryl regjrulefilings.aspx.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement ofthe Purpose of,and Statutory Basisfor, the Proposed Rule Change

In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose ofand basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments itreceived onthe proposed rule change. The text ofthese statements may be examined atthe places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forthin sections A, B, and Cbelow, of themost significant aspects ofsuch statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's StatementofthePurposeof,and StatutoryBasis for,theProposed Rule Change

1. Purpose

The purpose of assessing a surcharge fee of$0.10 percontract side as set forth inthis proposal is to remain ,competitive' 5 and to help offset the
costs associated with the license fees that are incurred in connection with the trading ofthe RUT, RMN, MNX and NDX products. Dueto competitive pressures inthe industry, theExchange proposes to continue excluding equity option customer transactions from the surcharge fee.

The surcharge fees would be assessed

on the applicable equity option transactions,' 6 regardless ofwhether

Plan for the Purpose ofCreating and Operating an Intermarket Option Linkage (the "Plan") approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). The registered U.S. options markets are linked together on a real-time basis through a network capable oftransporting orders and messages to and fromeach market.

14

A P/A order is anorder for the principal
account ofa specialist (or equivalent entity on anotherparticipant exchange that is authorized to represent public customer orders), reflectingthe terms ofa related unexecuted public customer order for which the specialist is acting as agent. See Linkage Plan section 2(16)(a) and Exchange Rule 1083.

1S

See e.g. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57128 (anuary 10, 2008), 73 FR 2969 (January 16, 2008).

16Although they are index options, RUT, RMN, MNX andNDX are assessed fees pursuant to the Exchange's equity option charges feeschedule. See the Exchange's Summary ofEquity Option, and MNX, NDX, RUT and RMN Charges fee schedule and Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 58049 (June27, 2008), 73 FR 38286 (July 3. 2008); and any fee caps relating to comparison or transaction charges are imposed.17 The MNX, NDX, RUT and RMN surcharge fees that are assessed would not count towards the calculation ofthe $60,000 "Firm Related" Equity Option and Index Option cap. Additionally, consistent with current practice, the proposed $0.10 per contract surcharge fees would not be subject to the $1,000 daily or $25,000 monthly dividend, merger and short stock interest strategies transaction caps, nor would they count towards reaching the daily or monthly caps. 18

The purpose ofproviding a $0.10 per contract surcharge fee creditto equity option specialist units is to help alleviate the potential economic burden ofthe surcharge fee imposed on Exchange specialist units in connection with routing Linkage charges, as described above.' 9 The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to assist specialist units in offsetting some of the costs thatthey incur in routing orders to other options exchanges in order to obtain the National Best Bid and Offer.

Additionally, the Exchange is deleting the current license fee onthe KSX, KIX and HAIproducts because it no longer offers these products for trading. Additionally, the Exchange is deleting the current license fee onthe BKX KRX, MFX products, whichmay, inturn, help to promote trading in these products.
2. Statutory Basis

The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its schedule offees is consistent with section 6(b) ofthe Act 2 0 ingeneral, and furthers the objectives ofsection 6(b)(4) ofthe Act 21 in particular, in that it is an equitable allocation ofreasonable fees and other charges among Exchange members. The

55473 (March 14, 2007), 72 FR 13338 (March 21, 2007).

17For example, the surcharge fee of$0.10 per contract side would be assessed on the MNX, NDX, RUT and RMN products, regardless ofwhether: (1) The ROT (on-floor) and specialist 4.5 million
contract monthly cap; or (2) the 14,000 daily contract cap ROT transaction and comparison charges and specialist transaction charges when contra-party to non-AUTOM delivered customer orders is reached. The surcharge fee of$0.10 per contract sidewould alsobe assessed regardless of whether the $60,000 "Firm Related" Equity Option and Index Option Cap fee is reached.

18As a result ofthis proposal, thereference to the $0.05 per contract side license fee for dividend strategies and shortstock interest strategies would be deleted as itis no longer necessary because a $0.10 per contract side surcharge feewill applyand appear separately on thefee schedule.

29This is similar to an option transaction charge credit given to specialist units in connection with Linkage orders. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57434 (March 5, 2008), 73 FR 13269 (March 12, 2008).

2e 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
21 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 

### 63038Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

Exchange believes that it is equitable for members who trade these products to pay the surcharge fee as the Exchange pays a license fee to trade these products. Additionally, the Exchange, due to competitive pressures in the industry,believes that itis equitable to continue to exclude equity option customer transactions from the surcharge fee. The Exchange also believes that it is equitable to provide a surcharge fee credit to assist specialist unitsin offsetting some ofthe costs that theyincur in routing orders to other options exchanges in order to obtain the National Best Bid and Offer.

B.Self-Regulatory Organization's Statementon Burdenon Competition

The Exchange doesnot believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance ofthe purposes ofthe Act.

C. Self-RegulatoryOrganization's Statementon Comments on the Proposed Rule ChangeReceivedFrom Members,Participants, orOthers

No written comments were either solicited orreceived.

II. Date ofEffectiveness ofthe Proposed Rule Change andTiming for Commission Action

The foregoing rulechange has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) ofthe Act 2 2 and paragraph (f)(2) ofRule 19b-4 23 thereunder. At any time within 60 days ofthe filing ofthe proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change ifit appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection ofinvestors,

or otherwise infurtherance ofthe purposes ofthe Act.24

IV. Solicitation ofComments

Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

2215 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 2317 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 24Forpurposes ofcalculating the 60-day period within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change under section 19(b1(3)(C) ofthe Act, the Commission considers theperiod to commence on October 7,2008, the dateon which Phlx submitted AmendmentNo. 1.
See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). ElectronicComments

* Usethe Commission's Internet
comment form (http://www.sec.govl rules/sro.shtml);or

* Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov.Please include File Number SR-Phlx-2008-72 onthe subject line. PaperComments

* Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2008-72.'This file number should be included-on the subject line ife-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your

comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments onthe Commission's InternetWeb site (http://www.sec.govrules/sro.shtml).Copies ofthe submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room on official business days between the hours of10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies ofsuch filing also willbe available for inspection and copying atthe principal office ofthe Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wishto-make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx2008-72 and should be submitted on or before November 12, 2008.

Forthe Commission, by the Division of Trading andMarkets, pursuant to delegated authority.2 5
FlorenceE.Harmon, ActingSecretary. [FR Doc.E8-25030 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILUNG CODE 8011-01-P DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION

Officeof the Secretary

Notice ofApplicationsforCertificates of Public Convenience and Necessity and Foreign AirCarrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B (Formerly Subpart 0) During theWeek Ending October 10, 2008

The following Applications for Certificates ofPublic Convenience and Necessity and Foreign AirCarrier Permits were filed under Subpart B (formerly Subpart 03 ofthe Department ofTransportation's Procedural Regulations (See 14 CFR301.201 et seq.). The due date for Answers, Conforming Applications, orMotions to Modify Scope are set forth below for each application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist ofthe adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order,

or in appropriate cases a final order without further proceedings.

DocketNumber:DOT-OST-2008- 0301.

DateFiled:October 10, 2008.
DueDate forAnswers, Conforming Applications,orMotion toModify Scope:October 31, 2008.

Description: Application ofOrbest S.A. ("Orbest") requesting issuance ofa foreign air carrier permit to the full
extent authorized bythe Air Transport Agreement between the United States and the European Community and the Member States ofthe European Community to enable Orbest to engage in: (i) Foreign scheduled and charter air transportation ofpersons, -propertyand mail between any point orpoints in a Member State ofthe European Union and any point or points in the United States andbeyond orbehind coextensive with the rights provided under the US-EC Agreement; (ii)foreign scheduled and charter air transportation ofpersons, property and mail between any point or points inthe United States and any point or points in any member ofthe European Common Aviation Area; (iii)other charter pursuant to prior approval requirements; and (iv) transportation authorized by any additional route rights made available to European Community carriers in the future. Orbest also requests exemption authority tothe extent necessary to enable it to hold out and provide the

2517 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). 

### 63039Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

service described above pending issuance of a foreign air carrier permit.

Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, DocketOperations, Federal Register Liaison. [FR Doc.E8-25146 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Inspection, Repair, and Maintenance; Periodic Inspection of Commercial Motor Vehicles
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. ACTION: Notice on State periodic inspection programs.
SUMMARY: The FMCSA announces its acceptance ofthe State of Massachusetts' periodic inspection (PI) program for commercial motor vehicles (CMVs). The Agency has reviewed the State's inspection program for CMVs and determined that it should be added to the list ofprograms which havebeen determined to be comparable to, oras effective as, the Federal.PI requirements contained in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). The State ,requires CMVs to be inspected annually

or within 7 days ofregistration for newly acquired vehicles. The agency has published a list of such programs in the Federal Register previously, and this list has been revised occasionally. Including Massachusetts, 22 States, the-. Alabama Liquefied Petroleum Gas Board, the District ofColumbia, 10 Canadian Provinces, and one Canadian Territory have PI programs which have been determined to be comparable to, or
as effective as, the Federal PI requirements. DATES: This action is effective on October 22, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Huntley, Chiefof the Vehicle and Roadside Operations Division, MCPSV, (202) 366-5370, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Office hours are from 7:45

a.m.to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

Section 210 ofthe Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 (49 U.S.C. 31142) (the Act) requires the Secretary of Transportation to prescribe standards for annual or more frequent inspection ofCMVs unless the Secretary finds another inspection system is-as effective

as an annual or more frequent inspection. On December 7, 1988, in response to the Act, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the agency within the Department of Transportation responsible for motor carrier safety until 1999, published a final rule amending part 396 of the FMCSRs (53 FR 49402). The final rule requires CMVs operated in interstate

commerce to be inspected at least once

ayear. The inspection is to bebased on Federal inspection standards, ora State inspection program determined by the FHWA to be comparable to, or as effective as, the Federal standards. Accordingly, ifthe agency determines a State's PI program is comparable to, or

as effective as, the requirements ofpart 396, then amotor carrier must ensure all ofits CMVs which are required by that State to be inspected through the State's inspection program are so inspected. If

a State does nothave such a program, the motor carrier is responsible for ensuring its CMVs are inspected using

one ofthe alternatives included inthe final rule.

On March 16, 1989, the FHWA published anotice in the Federal Register that requested States and other interested parties to identify and provide information onthe CMV inspection programs in theirrespective jurisdictions (54 FR 11020). Upon review ofthe information submitted, the FHWA published alist ofState inspection programs that were determined to be comparable to the Federal PI requirements (54 FR 50726, December 8, 1989). This initial list included 15 States and the District of Columbia. The list was revised on September 23, 1991, to include the inspection programs ofthe Alabama Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG)Board, California, Hawaii, Louisiana, Minnesota, all ofthe Canadian Provinces, and the Yukon Territory (56 FR 47982). OnNovember 27, 1992, the list was revised to include the Wisconsin bus inspection program (57 FR 56400). On April 14, 1994, the list

was revised to include the Texas CMV inspection program (59 FR 17829). The list was revised on November 7, 1995, to include the Connecticut bus inspection program (60 FR 56183). The
most recent revision was made on February 19, 1998 to include the Ohio inspection program forchurch buses (63 FR 8516), and a notice announcing FMCSA's acceptance ofcertain enhancements to theprogram onJune 18, 2001 (66FR 32863). Determination: State ofMassachusetts Inspection Program

The State ofMassachusetts (the State) has implemented a mandatory annual inspection requirement for all buses (vehicles designed to transport 16 or
more passengers, including the driver) and trucks as part ofits program to improve the safety ofoperation of CMVs. As ofOctober 1,2008, the State prohibits any person from operating CMVs that are designed to transport 16

ormore passengers, including the driver, orthat have a gross vehicle weightrating of4,536 kilograms (10,001 pounds) ormore, unless the vehicle displays a valid safety inspection decal (540 Code ofMassachusetts Regulations [CMR] 4.00 and 310 CMR 60.02).

The FMCSA has determined that the Massachusetts inspection program in effect as ofOctober 1,2008, is comparable to, or as effective as, the Federal PIrequirements. Therefore, motor carriers operating CMVs which

are subject to the State's program and which are subject to the FMCSRs must

use the State's program to satisfy the Federal PIrequirements.

It should be noted that in accepting the State's PI program, FMCSA also accepts the recordkeeping requirements associated with the inspection program. Upo successful completion ofthe Massachusetts Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Inspection a comprehensive Vehicle Inspection Report (VIR) is created which identifies the vehicle, inspector, and the status of the inspection. In addition to the VIR,

a program inspection sticker indicating the vehicle has passed or failed the inspection willbe affixed to the vehicle's windshield. For trailers, the required proofofinspection will be the VIR.

Massachusetts will also have a database ofall vehicle inspections performed. The vehicle inspection information willbe captured at the end ofthe inspection and stored for a period offive years. State officials can query the database to capture a specific inspection report, orto summarize and analyze a subset or all CMV safety inspecfion records.
StatesWith Equivalent Periodic Inspection Programs

The following is a complete list of States with inspection programs that FMCSA has determined are comparable to, or as effective as, the Federal PI requirements. Alabama (LPG Board), California, Connecticut, District ofColumbia, 

### 63040

### Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, NewHampshire, NewJersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin.

Please notethat two States have been removed from the previous list of approved programs. Arkansas no longer has a periodic inspection program for buses comparable to, or as effective, as the Federal PI program. Oklahoma has repealed its inspection requirements. Both States have therefore been delisted.As required by 49 CFR 396.23(b)(2), eachmotor carrier in Arkansas and Oklahoma must ensure thatthe periodic inspection required by 49 CFR 396.17 is performed on all CMVs under its control.

In addition to the States listed above, the FMCSA accepts the inspection programs ofthe 10 Canadian Provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Quebec and Saskatchewan) and the Yukon Territory are comparable to, or as effective as, the Federal PI requirements. All other States eitherhave no PI programs for CMVs ortheir PI programs have not been determined by the FMCSA to be comparable to, or as effective as, the Federal PI requirements. Should any ofthese Stateswish to establish a program or modify their programs in order to make them comparable to the Federal requirements, the State should contact the appropriate FMCSA division office.
List ofSubjects

Highway safety, Highways and roads, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle maintenance, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31132, 31136, 31142, 31502, and31504; 49 CFR 1.73.

Issued on: October 14, 2008. John H.Hill, Administrator. [FR Doc. E8-25174 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am] BILUNG CODE 4910-EX-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA-2008-0267]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. ACTION: Notice offinal disposition.

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt thirty-nine individuals from its ruleprohibiting persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) from operating commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce. The exemptions will enable these individuals to operate CMVs-in interstate commerce. DATES: The exemptions are effective October 22, 2008. The exemptions expire on October 22, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical Programs, (202) 366-4001, fmcsamedical@dot.gov,FMCSA, Room W64-224, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590- 0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access

You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at: http:!! www.regulations.gov.

Docket:For access tothe docket to read background documents or comments, goto http:// www.regulations.govand/or Room W12-140 on the ground level ofthe West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form ofall comments received into any ofDOT's dockets by the name ofthe individual submitting the comment (or ofthe person signing the comment, ifsubmitted onbehalfof

an association, business, labor union, or other entity). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement inthe Federal Register (65 FR 19476, Apr. 11, 2000). This statement is also available at http://Docketsinfo.dot.gov. Background

On September 9, 2008, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt ofapplications for exemption from the Federal diabetes standard from thirtynine individuals, and requested
comments fromthe public (73 FR 52451). The public commentperiod closed on October 9, 2008, and no comments were received.

FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility ofthe thirty-nine applicants and determined that granting the exemptions to these individuals would achieve a level ofsafety equivalent to,

or greater than, the level thatwould be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3).
Diabetes Mellitus andDriving Experience ofthe Applicants

The Agency established the current standard for diabetes in 1970 because several risk studies indicated that diabetic drivers had a higher rate of crash involvement than the general population. The diabetes rule provides that "A person is physically qualified to drive a commercial motor vehicle ifthat person has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring insulin for control" (49 CFR 391.41(b)(3)).

FMCSA established its diabetes exemption program, based on the Agency's July 2000 study entitled "A Report to Congress on the Feasibility of

a Program to Qualify Individuals with Insulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus to Operate in Interstate Commerce as Directed by the Transportation Act for the 21st Century." The report concluded that a safe and practicable protocol to allow some drivers with ITDM to operate CMVs is feasible. The 2003 Notice (68 FR 52442) in conjunction with the November 8, 2005 (70 FR 67777) Federal Register Notice provides the current protocol for allowing such drivers to operate CMVs in interstate

commerce.

These thirty-nine applicants have had ITDM overa range of1 to 24 years. These applicants report no hypoglycemic reaction thatresulted in loss ofconsciousness or seizure, that required the assistance of another person, or that resulted in impaired cognitive function without warning symptoms in thepast 5 years (withone year ofstability following any such episode). In eachcase, an endocrinologist has verified that the driver has demonstrated willingness to properly monitor and manage his or her diabetes, received education related to diabetes management, and is on a stable insulin regimen. Each driverreports no other disqualifying conditions, including diabetes-related complications. Each meets the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). 63041Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

The qualifications andmedical condition ofeach applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the September 9, 2008, Federal Register Notice (73 FR 52451). Therefore, they will notbe repeated inthis notice.

Basis forExemption Determination

Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption from the diabetes standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) ifthe exemption is likely to achieve an equivalent orgreater level of safety than wouldbe achieved without the exemption. The exemption allows the applicants to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

To evaluate the effect ofthese exemptions on safety, FMCSA considered medical reports about the applicants' ITDM and vision and reviewed the treating endocrinologist's medical opinion related to the ability of the driver to safely operate a CMV while using insulin.

Consequently, FMCSA finds that exempting these applicants from the diabetes standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) is likely to achieve a level ofsafety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Conditions and Requirements

The terms and conditions ofthe exemption will beprovided to the applicants in the exemption document and they.include the following: (1) That each individual submits to FMCSA a quarterly monitoring checklist completed by the treating endocrinologist as well as an annual checklist with a comprehensive medical evaluation; (2) that each individual reports to FMCSA within 2 business days ofoccurrence, all episodes of

severe hypoglycemia, significant complications, orinability to manage diabetes; also, any involvement in an accident or any other adverse event in

a CMV or personal vehicle, whether or fiot they are related to an episode of hypoglycemia; (3) that each individual provide a copy ofthe ophthalmologist's

or optometrist's report to the medical examiner atthe time of the annual medical examination; and (4)that each individual provide a copy ofthe annual medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, orkeep a copy in his/her driver's qualification file ifhe/she is selfemployed. The driver mustalso have a copy ofthe certification when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official.. Discussion ofComments FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.
Conclusion

After considering the comments to the docket, and based upon its evaluation of thethirty-nine exemption applications, FMCSA exempts, Joseph L. Bartolomei, Michael B. Bennington, Sr., Keith A. Callahan, John E. Coppedge, Roland D. Demers, Gary 

### J.Drackert, Larry J. Eischens, James L. Erviti, Richard C. Frost, Charles W. Garrison, Timothy W. Goforth, Chad C. Gittings, David J. Hanzl, John A. Hayes, Thomas R. Jones, DavidH. Keawe, James G. Keesling, Chadwick A.Lang, Barry D. Langley, John M. Lyon, Douglas S. Morical, Robert L. O'Neill, Barry S. Neukum, Mark E. Peters, Brian M. Rossiter, Roger M. Russell, John G. Schaible, Jr., Rory J. Seleman, Thomas P. Shergold, Kristopher R. Soto, Frank L. Tomlinson, Eric D. Travland, Ralph E. Vindittie, James E. Waller, III,Chase M. Wells, Laurie E. White, Robert E. Williams, Craig E. Wolf, and Stephanie D. Wright from the ITDM standard in49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), subject tothe conditions listed under "Conditions and Requirements" above.

In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 each exemption will be valid for two years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions ofthe exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in alower level ofsafety than

was maintained before it was granted; or (3) continuation ofthe exemption would notbe consistent with the goals and objectives of49 U.S.C. 31136(e).and 31315. Ifthe exemption is still effective at the end ofthe 2-year period, the person may apply to FMCSA for a renewal under procedures in effect at thattime.

Issued on October 14, 2008. Larry W. Minor, AssociateAdministratorfor Policyand Program Development. [FR Doc. E8-25172 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]
BILUNG CODE 4910-EX-P

DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [Docket ID.FMCSA-2008-0293]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). ACTION: Notice ofapplications for exemptions from the diabetes standard; request forcomments.
SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 39 individuals for exemptions from the prohibition against persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) operating commercial
motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate

commerce. If granted, the exemptions would enable these individuals with ITDM to operate commercial motor vehicles in interstate commerce. DATES: Comments mustbe received on
orbefore November 21, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA20078-0293 using any ofthe following methods:

* Federal eRulemakingPortal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

a Mail:Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department ofTransportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

* HandDelivery West Building GroundFloor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

* Fax: 1-202-493-2251. Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket ID for this Notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including anypersonal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.

Docket:For access to the docket to readbackground documents or comments, go to http:// www.regulations.govat anytime or Room W12-140 onthe ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC,between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, exceptFederal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365 days eachyear. If you want acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a selfaddressed, stamped envelope or postcard orprintthe acknowledgement page that appears after submitting comments on-line.

Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments received into any ofour dockets by the

name ofthe individual submitting the comment (orofthe person signing the comment, ifsubmitted on behalfofan association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review theDOT's complete 

### 63042Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

Privacy Act Statement inthe Federal Register published onApril 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476). This information is also available at http://Docketinfo.dot.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical Programs, (202) 366-4001, fmcsamedical@dot.gov,FMCSA, Department of Transportation, 1200 NewJersey Avenue, SE.; Room W64- 224, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption for a 2- yearperiod ifit finds "such exemption would likely achieve alevel of safety that is equivalent to, orgreater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption." The statutes also allow the Agency to renew exemptions at the end ofthe 2-year period. The 39 individuals listed inthis notice have recently requested an exemption from the diabetes prohibition in 49 CFR 391;41(b)(3), which applies to drivers of CMVs ininterstate commerce. Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate the qualifications ofeach applicant to determine whether granting the exemption will achieve the required level ofsafety mandated by the statutes. Qualifications ofApplicants
Charles1.Berg

Mr. Berg, age 58, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist examined him in2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive aCMV safely. Mr. Berg meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has stable proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A Commercial Driver's License (CDL) from North Dakota.

Donavan A. Bloomfield
Mr. Bloomfield, age 46, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had nohypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance of another person, orresulting in impaired cognitivb function that occurred without warning inthe past 5years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Bloomfield meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does nothave diabetic retinopathy. Heholds a Class D operator's license from Massachusetts.
RonaldG. Breunig

Mr. Breunig, 64, has had ITDM since 2003. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified thathe has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred withoutwarning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Breunig meets the requirements of thevision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. Heholds a Class A CDL from Oregon. Gary H. Cooper
Mr. Cooper, 46,has had ITDM since 1995. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Cooper meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does nothave diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Ohio. DouglasM. Crafton

Mr. Crafton, 57, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist examined him in2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Crafton meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Virginia.
Herschel J.Crawford

Mr. Crawford, 51, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past.5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Crawford meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds aClass B CDL from Alaska.

ErnestA. Emery

Mr. Emery, 57, has had ITDM since 2000. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely.Mr. Emery meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDLfrom Rhode Island.

DavidL.Farran

Mr. Farran, 51, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has hadno hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Farran meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds aClass A CDL from Oregon. 6304-3Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

Christopher S. Fox
Mr. Fox,42, has.had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive aCMV safely. Mr.Fox meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does nothave diabetic retinopathy. He holds

a Class A CDL from Ohio.

JamesE. Gaines

Mr. Gaines, 53, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gaines meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from NewJersey. TerryD. Garner

Mr. Garner, 37, has hadITDM since 1988. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Garner meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from Maryland.

MitchellP.Gibson

Mr. Gibson, 32, has had ITDM since 1981. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is ableto drive a CMV safely.Mr. Gibson meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he doesnot have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Michigan.

AllanD. Gralapp

Mr. Gralapp, 66, hashad ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions.resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother persoh, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive aCMV safely. Mr. Gralapp meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined himin 2008 and certified that he does nothave diabetic retinopathy. Heholds a Class A CDL from Iowa.

.ScottL. Halm
Mr. Hahm, 51, hashad ITDM since 2003. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Halm meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified thathe does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds

a Class A CDL from Ohio. JosephM.Hengel

Mr. Hengel, 43, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is ableto drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hengel meets the requirements of thevision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from New Jersey.
ClintonJ.Herrold

Mr. Herrold, 44, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Herrold meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. Heholds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

BrentL. Kreder

Mr. Kreder, 39, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Kreder meets the requirements ofthe vision-standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does nothave diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class E operator's license from Missouri.

Reid T.Massey

Mr. Massey, 47, has had iTDM since 1993. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting inloss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive aCMV safely. Mr. Massey meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does nothave diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Maine. I

I 63044

### Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

AaronR.Matkowski

Mr. Matkowski, 37, has had ITDM since 1987. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had nohypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Matkowski meets the requiremients of thevision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds aClass E operator's license from Missouri. LarryE. Mellinger
Mr. Mellinger, 49, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had nohypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Mellinger meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(1G). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. Heholds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.
MarkP.Moots

Mr. Moots, 51, has hadITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he hashad no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive aCMV safely. Mr. Moots meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does nothave diabetidretinopathy. Heholds a Class A CDL from Colorado. DarrylW. Nelson

Mr. Nelson, 55, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he hashad no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Nelson meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds aClass B CDL from California. BarryL.Paul

Mr. Paul, 48,has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist examined him in2008 and certified that he has hadno hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother.person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has

- stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Paul meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds aClass A CDL from Missouri.

ThomasP.Quinlivan

Mr. Quinlivan, 53, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, orresulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is ableto drive a CMV safely. Mr. Quinlivan meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. Heholds aClass A CDL from North Carolina.
MarkL.Rigby

Mr. Rigby, 54, has had ITDM since 1989. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified thathe has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance of another person, or resulting inimpaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive aCMV safely. Mr. Rigby meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Utah.

Dale A. Roberts

Mr. Roberts, 56, has had ITDM since 1960. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss. ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Roberts meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. Heholds a Class B CDL from Iowa.
Rhonda G.Sandersfeld

Ms. Sandersfeld, 36, has hadITDM since 1980. Her endocrinologist examined her in 2008 and certified that she has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance of another person,'or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5years; understands diabetes management.and monitoring; andhas stable control ofher diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Sandersfeld meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her ophthalmologist examined her in 2008 and certified that she has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class C operator's license from Iowa.
RobertM.Schulz

Mr. Schulz, 59, has had ITDM since 1974. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and dertified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting inloss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Schulz meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him.in 2008 and certified that he does not have 

### 63045Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/ Notices

diabetic retinopathy. He holds aClass D operator's license from Wisconsin.

JasonP. Smith
Mr. Smith, 33, has had ITDM since 1999. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management ahd monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Smith meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does.not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from Georgia.
JoelC.Smith

Mr. Smith, 55, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has hadno hypoglycemic reactions resulting inloss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management andmonitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive aCMV safely. Mr. Smith meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Tennessee.
DeanA. Sullivan
Mr. Sullivan, 50, has had ITDM since 1973. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has hadno hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive functionthat occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management andmonitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sullivanmeets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does nothave diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Kentucky.

James0. Teague

Mr. Teague, 52, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has hadno hypoglycemic reactions resulting inloss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Teague meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds aClass A CDL from Indiana.

Lawrence W. Thomas

Mr.Thomas, 48, has hadITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring, and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is ableto drive a CMV safely. Mr. Thomas meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does nothave diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from Arkansas.
JackD. Thorpe

Mr. Thorpe, 65, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and isable to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Thorpe meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does nothave diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from Arizona.
RobertJ. Vance

Mr. Vance, 53, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management andmonitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive aCMV safely. Mr. Vance meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. Heholds a Class D operator's license from Wisconsin.

JohnR. Watson

Mr. Watson, 55, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; andhas stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Watson meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. Heholds a Class C operator's license from California.
JohnA. Witt

Mr. Witt, 45, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; andhas stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Witt meets the requirements ofthe vision standard at49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds

a Class A CDL fromPennsylvania.
JohnJ. Wojcik,Jr.

Mr. Wojcik, 45, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning inthe past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Wojcik meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. 63046Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

He holds a Class A CDL from Connecticut. RaymondW. Zimmerman,Jr.

Mr. Zimmerman, 51, has had ITDM since 1988. His endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions resulting inloss ofconsciousness, requiring the assistance ofanother person, orresulting inimpaired cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years;understands diabetes management and monitoring; andhas stable control ofhis diabetes using insulin, and is ableto drive a CMV safely. Mr. Zimmerman meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does nothave diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Florida. Request for Comments

Inaccordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA requests public comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions described in this notice. We will consider all
comments received before the close of business on the closing date indicated inthe dates section ofthe Notice.

FMCSA notes that Section 4129 ofthe Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) requires the Secretary to revise its diabetes exemption program established

on September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441).1 The revision must provide for individual assessment of drivers with diabetes mellitus, and be consistent with the criteria described in section 4018 ofthe Transportation EquityAct for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 31305).

Section 4129 requires: (1) The elimination ofthe requirement for 3 years ofexperience operating CMVs while being treated with insulin; and (2) the establishment ofa specified minimum period of insulin use to demonstrate stable control ofdiabetes before being allowed to operate a CMV.

In response to section 4129, FMCSA made immediate revisions to the diabetes exemption program established by the September 3, 2003 Notice. FMCSA discontinued use ofthe 3-year driving experience and fulfilled the requirements ofsection 4129 while continuing to ensure that operation of CMVs by drivers with ITDM will Achieve the requisite level ofsafety

'Section 4129(a) refers to the 2003 Notice asa "final rule." However, the 2003Notice did notissue

a "final rule" but did establish theprocedures and standards forissuing exemptions for drivers with ITDM. required ofall exemptions granted under 49 U.S.C. 31136 (e).

Section 4129(d) also directed FMCSA
to ensure that drivers ofCMVs with ITDM are notheld to a higher standard than other drivers, with the exception of limited operating, monitoring and medical requirements that are deemed medically necessary.

FMCSA concluded that all ofthe operating, monitoring and medical requirements set outin the September 3, 2003 Notice, except as modified, were in compliance with section 4129(d). Therefore, all ofthe requirements set out in the September 3, 2003 Notice, except as modified by the Notice inthe Federal Register onNovember 8, 2005 (70FR 67777), remain in effect.

Issued on: October 14, 2008. Larry W.Minor, AssociateAdministrator forPolicy and Program Development. [FRDoc. E8-25173 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P

DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration [Docket No. FMCSA-2008-0266]

Qualificationof Drivers; Exemption Applications;Vision
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

- ACTION: Notice offinal disposition.
SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 26 individuals from the vision requirement inthe Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). The exemptions will enable these individuals to operate commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate

commerce without meeting the prescribed vision standard. The Agency has concluded that granting these exemptions will provide a level ofsafety that is equivalent to, orgreater than, the level ofsafety maintained without the exemptions forthese CMV drivers. DATES: The exemptions are effective October 22, 2008. The exemptions expire on October 22, 2010. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical Programs, (202) 366-4001, fmcsamedical@dot.gov,FMCSA, Department ofTransportation, 1200 NewJersey Avenue, SE., Room W64- 224, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, exceptFederal holidays. • SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Electronic Access
You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at http:// www.regulations.gov.

Docket:For access to the docket to read background documents or comments, go to http:// www.regulations.govat any time or Room W12-140 onthe ground level of theWest Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. Ifyou want acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a selfaddressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting comments on-line.

Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form ofall comments received into any ofourdockets by the

name ofthe individual submitting the
comment (or ofthe person signing the comment, ifsubmitted onbehalfof an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published onApril 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476). This information is also available at http://Docketsinfo.dot.gov. Background

On September 4, 2008, FMCSA published a notice ofreceipt of exemption applications from certain individuals, and requested comments from the public (73 FR 51689). That notice listed 25 applicants' case histories. The 25 individuals applied for exemptions from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), for drivers who operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

-Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption for a 2- year period ifit finds "such exemption would likely achieve a level ofsafety that is equivalent to, or greater than,the levelthat would be achieved absent such exemption." The statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions atthe end ofthe 2-year period. Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated the 25 applications on their merits and made a determination to grant exemptions to all ofthem. The comment period closed onOctober 6, 2008.

In a previous notice (73 FR48273), the Agency noted that apublic comment

was received challenging the validity of

some information that Mr. JamesW. Lappan submitted in his application. At this time, FMCSA has concluded investigations regarding Mr. James W. Lappan and has determined thathe 

### 63047 'Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

meets FMCSA's criteria for a Federal vision exemption.
Vision and Driving Experience ofthe Applicants

The vision requirement inthe FMCSRs provides: A person is physically qualified to drive a commercial motorvehicle ifthat person has distant visual acuity ofat least 20/ 40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen)

orbetter with corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity ofa least 20/40 (Snellen) inboth eyes with or without corrective lenses, field ofvision'ofat least 70' inthe horizontal meridian in each eye, andthe ability to recognize the colors oftraffic signals and devices showing standard red, green, and amber (49 CFR 391.41(b)(10)).

FMCSA recognizes that some drivers do notmeet the vision standard, but have adapted their driving to accommodate their vision limitation and demonstrated their ability to drive safely.

The 26 exemption applicants listed in this notice are inthis category. They are unable to meet the vision standard in

one eye for various reasons, including amblyopia, prosthesis, opticnerve defect, glaucoma, exotropia, and loss of vision due to trauma. In most cases, their eye conditions were not recently developed. All but five ofthe applicants

were eitherborn with their vision impairments orhave had them since childhood. The five individuals who sustained theirvision conditions as adults have had them for periods ranging from 3 to 27 years.

Although each applicant has one eye which does not meet the vision standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), each has at least 20/40 corrected vision inthe other eye, and ina doctor's opinion, has 'sufficient vision to perform all the tasks necessary to operate a CMV. Doctors' opinions are supported by the applicants' possession of valid commercial driver's licenses (CDLs)or non-CDLs to operate CMVs. Before issuing CDLs, States subject drivers to knowledge and skills tests designed to evaluate their qualifications to operate a CMV. All these applicants satisfied the testing standards for their State of residence. By meeting State licensing requirements, the applicants demonstrated their ability to operate a commercial vehicle, with their limited vision, to the satisfaction ofthe State.

While possessing a valid CDL or nonCDL,these 26 drivers have been authorized to drive aCMV inintrastate
commerce, even though theirvision disqualified them from driving in interstate commerce. They have driven CMVs with their limited vision for

careers ranging from 3 to 35 years. In the past 3 years, two ofthe drivers had convictions for traffic violations and three ofthemwere involvedin crashes.

The qualifications, experience, and medical condition ofeach applicant

were stated and discussed in detail in the September 4, 2008'notice (73 FR 51689).
Basis forExenption Determination

Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption from the vision standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) ifthe exemption is likely to achieve an equivalent orgreater level ofsafety than would be achieved without the exemption. Without the exemption, applicants will continue to be restricted to intrastate driving. With the exemption, applicants can drive in interstate commerce. Thus, our analysis focuses on whether an equal or greater level ofsafety is likely to be achieved by permitting each ofthese drivers to drive ininterstate commerce as opposed to restricting him or herto drivingin intrastate commerce.

To evaluate the effect ofthese exemptions on safety, FMCSA considered not only the medical reports about the applicants' vision,but also their driving records and experience with the vision deficiency.

To qualify for an exemption from the vision standard, FMCSA requires a person to present verifiable evidence that he/she has driven a commercial vehicle safely with the vision deficiency for the past 3 years. Recent driving performance is especially important in evaluating future safety, according to several research studies designed to correlate past and future driving performance. Results ofthese studies support the principle that the best predictor of future performance by a driver is his/her past record ofcrashes and traffic violations. Copies ofthe studies may be found at docket number FMCSA-98-3637.

We believe we can properly apply the principle to monocular drivers, because data from the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) former waiver study program clearly demonstrate the driving performance ofexperienced " monocular drivers inthe program is better than that ofall CMV drivers collectively. (See 61 FR 13338, 13345, March 26, 1996). The fact that experienced monocular drivers demonstrated safe driving records inthe waiver program supports aconclusion thatother monocular drivers, meeting thesame qualifying conditions as those required by the waiver program, are also likely to have adapted to their vision deficiency and will continue to operate safely.

The first major research correlating past and future performance was done inEngland by Greenwood and Yulb in 1920.

Subsequent studies, building on that model, concluded that crash rates for the'same individual exposed to certain risks for two different time periods vary only slightly. (See Bates and Neyman, University ofCalifornia Publications in Statistics,April 1952.) Other studies demonstrated theories ofpredicting crash proneness from crash history coupled with other factors. These factors-such as age, sex, geographic location, mileage driven and conviction history-are used every dayby insurance companies andmotor vehicle bureaus to predict the probability ofan individual experiencing future crashes. (See Weber, Donald C., "Accident Rate Potential: An Application ofMultiple Regression Analysis ofa Poisson Process," Journal ofAmerican Statistical Association, June 1971) A 1964 California Driver Record Study prepared by the California Department ofMotor Vehicles concluded that the best overall crash predictor forboth concurrent and nonconcurrent events is the number of single convictions. This study used 3 consecutive years of data, comparing the experiences ofdrivers inthe first 2 years with their experiences in the final year.

Applying principles from these studies to the past 3-year record ofthe 26 applicants, two ofthe applicants had

atraffic violation for speeding, and three ofthe applicants were involved in crashes. The applicants achieved this record ofsafety while driving withtheir vision impairment, demonstrating the likelihood that they have adapted their driving skills to accommodate their condition. As the applicants' ample driving histories with their vision deficiencies are good predictors of future performance. FMCSA concludes their ability to drive safely can be projected into the future.

We believe the applicants' intrastate driving experience and historyprovide

an adequate basis for predicting their ability to drive safely ininterstate

commerce. Intrastate driving, like interstate operations, involves substantial driving onhighways on the interstate system and on other roads built to interstate standards. Moreover, driving incongested urban areas exposes the driver to more pedestrian and vehicular traffic than exists on interstate highways. Faster reaction to traffic and traffic signals is generally required because distances between them are more compact. These 

### 63048

### Federal Register/ Vol. 73, No. 205 /.W6desda ,:October 22,;'2008/Notices

conditions tax visual capacity and driver response just as intensely as interstate driving conditions. The veteran drivers in this proceeding have operated CMVs safely under those conditions for at least 3years, most for much longer. Their experience and driving records lead us to believe that each applicant is capable ofoperating in interstate commerce as safely as he/she has been performing in intrastate

commerce. Consequently, FMCSA finds that exempting these applicants from the vision standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve alevel ofsafety equal to that existing without the exemption. For this reason, the Agency is granting the exemptions for the 2-year period allowed by 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to the 25 applicants listed inthe notice ofSeptember 4, 2008 (73 FR 51689).

We recognize that the vision ofan applicant may change and affect his/her ability to operate a CMV as safely as in the past. As acondition ofthe exemption, therefore, FMCSA will impose requirements on the 26 individuals consistent with the grandfathering provisions applied to drivers-who participated in the Agency's vision waiver program.

Those requirements are found at 49 CFR 391.64(b) and include the following:

(1) That each individual be physically examined every year (a)by an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the standard in49

- CFR 391.41(b)(10), and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2)that each individual provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's

or optometrist's report to the medical examiner at the time ofthe annual medical examination; and (3)that each individual provide a copy ofthe annual medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, or keep a copy in his/her driver's qualification file if he/she is selfemployed.

The driver must also have a copy of the certification when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official.
Discussion of Comments

FMCSA received three comments in this proceeding. The comments were considered and discussed below.

One ofthe comments was a recommendation in favor ofgranting the Federal vision exemption to Kevin Quastad, the second was a recommendation in favor ofgranting the Federal vision exemption to all applicants.

Advocates forHighway and Auto Safety (Advocates) expressed opposition to FMCSA's policy to grant exemptions from the FMCSRs, including the driver qualification standards. Specifically, Advocates: (1)Objects to the manner in which FMCSA presents driver information to the public and makes safety determinations; (2)objects to the Agency's reliance on conclusions drawn from the vision waiver program; (3) claims the Agency has misinterpreted statutory language onthe granting of exemptions (49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315); and finally (4) suggests that a 1999 Supreme Court decision affects the legal validity ofvision exemptions.

-The issues raised byAdvocates were addressed atlength in 64 FR 51568 (September 23, 1999), 64 FR 66962 (November 30, 1999), 64 FR 69586 (December 13, 1999), 65 FR 159 (January 3, 2000), 65 FR 57230 (September 21, 2000), and 66 FR 13825 (March 7,2001). We will not address these points again here, but refer interested parties to those earlier discussions.
Conclusion

Based upon its evaluation ofthe 26 exemption applications, FMCSA exempts, Larry W.Barnes, RickA. Benevides, Jack E. Benjamin, Allen S. Bush, Todd A. Chapman, Delone W. Dudley, Irvin L. Eaddy, Herman Hicks, James W. Lappan, Ralph Landers, Jeromy W. Leatherman, ErnestB. Martin, Mark L. McWhorter, Charles D, Messier, Raymond C:Miller, Dennis E. Palmer, Jr., Gary W. Phelps, Kevin L. Quastad, John E. Rains, James D. St. Peter, Michael Sutton, Sylvester Silver, Sylvester Silver, William R. Thomas, Terrence L. Trautman, and David Vallier, from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above (49 CFR 391.64(b)).

In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption willbe valid for 2 years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if: (1)The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions ofthe exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in alower level ofsafety than

was maintained before it was granted; or (3) continuation ofthe exemption would notbe consistent with the goals and objectives of49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.

Ifthe exemption is still effective at the end ofthe 2-year period, the person may apply to FMCSA for a renewal under procedures in effect at that time. Issued on: October 14, 2008. Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator forPolicyand Program Development. [FR Doc. E8-25176 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [U.S. DOT Docket Number NHTSA-2008- 0162]
Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), United States Department ofTransportation. ACTION: Request forpublic comment on proposed collection ofinformation.
SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from the public, it must receive approval from the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB). Under procedures established bythe Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before sebking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit public comment on proposed collections of information, including extensions and reinstatement ofpreviously approved collections. This document describes

one collection ofinformation forwhich NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval. DATES: Comments mustbe received on
or before December 22, 2008. ADDRESSES: Comments mustrefer to the docket notice numbers cited atthe beginning ofthis notice and be submitted to Docket Management Facility, West Building, Room W12- 140, 1200 NewJersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Management office is open on weekdays, exceptFederal holidays, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. You may call the office at 202-647-5527. You may also submit comments electronically at http://www.regulations.gov. Please identify the proposed collection of information for which a comment is provided, by referencing its OMB clearance Number. It is requested, but not required, that 2 copies ofthe
comment be provided. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Complete copies ofeach request for collection ofinformation may be obtained at no charge from Mr. Santiago Navarro, Office ofCrash Avoidance Standards, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Mr. Navarro's telephone number is (202) 493-0248. His FAX number is (202) 

### 63049Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

493-2739. Please identify the relevant collection ofinformation by referring to its OMB Control Number. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before an agency submits a proposed collection ofinformation to OMB for approval, it must first publish a document in the Federal Register providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise consult with members ofthe public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection ofinformation. The OMB has promulgated regulations describing what mustbe included in such a document. Under OMB's regulation (at5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must ask forpublic comment on the following: (i) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for theproper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(ii) The accuracy ofthe agency's estimate ofthe burden ofthe proposed collection of information, including thd validity ofthe methodology and assumptions used;

(iii)How to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity ofthe information to be collected; (iv) How to minimize the burden of the collection ofinformation on those who areto respond, including the use ofappropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g. permitting electronic submission ofresponses.

In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks forpublic comments on the following proposed collections ofinformation: Title:Tires and Rims Labeling. OMB ControlNumber:2127-0503. RequestedExpirationDateof Approval:Three years from the approval date. Type of Request:Extension ofa currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Tire and rim manufacturers.

FormNumber:This collection of

- information uses no standard forms.

Abstract:Each tire manufacturer and rim manufacturer mustlabel their tire or rim with the applicable safety information. These labeling requirements ensure that tires are mounted onthe appropriate rims; and thatthe rims and tires are mounted on the vehicles for which they are intended.

Estimated AnnualBurden:265,647 hours.

EstimatedNumberof Respondents: 2,274. Comments are invited on: whether the proposed collection ofinformation is necessary forthe proper performance of the functions ofthe Department, including whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of theDepartment's estimate ofthe burden ofthe proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity ofthe information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden ofthe collection ofinformation

on respondents, includingthe use of automated collection techniques or - other forms ofinformation technology.

Issued on: October 16, 2008. Stephen R. Kratzke AssociateAdministrator forRulemaking. [FR Doc. E8-25158 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION National Highway TrafficSafety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0103; Notice 2] Chrysler, LLC, Grant of Petitionfor Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

Chrysler, LLC (Chrysler) has determined that certain vehicles that it manufactured during the period of March 14, 2006 through March 20, 2008, do not fully comply with paragraph S4.3 of49 CFR 571.110 (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)No. 110 TireSelection andRimsforMotor Vehicles With a GVWR of4,536 Kilograms(10, 000Peunds)orLess). Chrysler has filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defectand NoncomplianceResponsibilityand Reports.

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, Chrysler has petitioned for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Notice of receipt of the petition was published, with a 30- day public comment period', onJune 5, 2008 in the Federal Register (73 FR 32076). No comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/.Then follow the online search instructions to locate docket number "NHTSA-2008- 0103."

For further information on this decision, contact Mr. John Finneran, Office ofVehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-0645, facsimile (202) 366- 7097.

Affected are approximately 1,886 model year 2007-2008 Jeep Wrangler right-hand drive (RHD) multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPV).

Paragraph 84.3 of49 CFR 571.110 requires in pertinent part that:

S4.3Placard. Eachvehicle, except for a trailer orincomplete vehicle, shall show the information specified in S4.3 (a) through (g), and may show, at the manufacturer's option, the information specified in S4.3 (h) and (i),

on aplacard permanently affixed to the driver's side B-pillar. Ineach vehicle without

a driver's sideB-pillar andwith two doors on the driver's side ofthe vehicle opening in opposite directions, theplacard shallobe affixed on the forward edgeofthe rear side door. Iftheabove locations do not permit the affixing ofa placard that is legible, visible and prominent,the placard shallbe permanently affixed to the rear edge ofthe driver's side door. Ifthis location does not permit theaffixing ofa placard that is legible, visible andprominent, the placard shallbe affixed to the inward facing surface ofthe vehicle next to thedriver's seating position. This information shallbein theEnglish language and conform in color and format, not includingtheborder surrounding the entire placard, as shown in theexample set forth in Figure 1in thisstandard. At the manufacturer's option, the information specified in S4.3 (c), (d), and, as appropriate, (h) and (i) maybe shown, alternatively to beingshown on the placard, on atire inflationpressure label which must conform in color and format, not includingthe border surrounding theentire label, as shownin the example set forth inFigure 2 inthis standard. The label shall be permanently affixedand proximate to the placard required by this paragraph. The information specified in S4.3 (e)

shallbe shown on both thevehicle placard and on the tire inflation pressure label (ifsuch a label is affixed to providethe information specified inS4.3 (c), (d), and,as appropriate, (h) and (i))and maybe shown inthe format andcolor scheme set forth in Figures 1 and 2.

Chrysler stated that the noncompliance is that the required placard was installed on the passenger's side (left side) dooron each ofthe subject RHD vehicles, rather than on the driver's side (right side) door.

Chrysler explains that the subject vehicles were sold primarily foruse by rural postal carriers, since RHD makes it easier forthe carriers to access mailboxes located along the right side of the roadway. The relevant portion of S4.3 ofFMVSS No. 110, entitled "Placard," provides as follows: "Each vehicle, except for a trailer or incomplete vehicle, shall show the information specified in S4.3(a) through (g) * * * on a placard permanently 

### 63050Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/W dhesday;
" October 22; 2008 /Notices

affixed to the driver's side B-pillar. In each vehicle without a driver's side Bpillar and with two doors on the driver's side ofthe vehicle openingin opposite directions, the placard shallbe affixed

onthe forward edge of therear side door. Ifthe above locations do not permit the affixing ofa placard that is legible, visible and prominent, the placard shall be permanently affixed to the rear edge ofthe driver's side door."

Chrysler further explained thatthe subject vehicles haveplacards that contain all ofthe tire and vehicle loading information required by the various subsections of S4.3. However, because ofan inadvertent failure ofthe assembly plant work instructions to differentiate between RHD and left hand drive (LHD) vehicles inthis respect, the placards were inadvertently affixedto the rear edge ofthe door on the left (passenger) side ofthe subject vehicles, as opposed to the driver's side door. (Chrysler notes that the subject vehicles do nothave aB-pillar with aflat surface that would permit the affixing ofa placard that is "legible, visible, and prominent.")

Chrysler states its beliefthat the fact that the placard required by paragraph S4.3 ofthe standard was affixed to the left hand door ofthese RHD vehiclesas opposed to the driver's side doorcreates absolutely no riskto motor vehicle safety. All oftherelevant tire and loading information is set forthon the placard, and therefore it is readily available to vehicle operators. Moreover, the placard is located at the place where United States drivers are used to looking for it.

Chrysler also states its beliefthat the operators of the subject vehicles will have almost certainly owned and driven conventional LHDvehicles, so theywill have had experience in locating the tire and load information on the left side of their vehicles. And in the extremely unlikely event that an owner has difficulty locating the placard, the owner's manual provided with the subject vehicles shows the location of the placard onthe left side door.

Chrysleralso makes reference to several previous inconsequential noncompliance grant decisions, involving the omission ofrim data on tire labels, which in its opinion, are similar to the instant one.

Chrysler also notes thatit has not received anyconsumer complaints regarding an inability to locate the placard or an unawareness ofthe relevant tire and loading information.

In addition, Chrysler states that ithas corrected the problem that caused these

errors so that they will not be repeated in future production andthat itbelieves that because the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety that no corrective action is warranted.
NHTSA Decision

By way ofbackground, the Transportation Recall, Enhancement, Accountability, andDocumentation (TREAD) Act (Pub.L. 106-414) required, among other things, that the agency initiate rulemaking to improve

consumer awareness oftire inflation pressure and load limit information. In 2001, aspart ofa proposed update to FMVSS No. 110, NHTSA proposed in a Notice ofProposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that "A standard location fortire information placards would contribute
to consumer awareness ofrecommended tire inflation pressure and load limits by providing a consistent and predictable place for this information."' In the subsequent final rule, the location required for the consistent and predictable location of thelabeling information is one ofthree locations allowed on the driver's-side of the vehicle.

NHTSA agmees with Chrysler that this noncompliance will nothave an adverse effect on vehicle safety. In the agency's judgment, most consumers in the United States are accustomed to lefthand drive (LHD) vehicles, with tire inflation pressure and load limit information labeling located on the lefthand side ofthe vehicle. Not locating the labeling on the driver's-side (righthand side) for the subject RHD vehicles will not appreciably interfere with
customer awareness ofrecommended tire inflation pressures and load limits. The agency agrees with Chrysler's statement that it is extremely unlikely

an owner willhave difficulty locating the placard inthis case.

In consideration ofthe foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Chrysler has
met itsburden ofpersuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 110 labeling noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Chrysler's petition is granted and the petitioner is exempted from the obligation ofproviding notification of, and aremedy for, the subject noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegati6ns ofauthority at 49 CFR 1.50and 501.8.

Issued on: October 16, 2008. Daniel C.Smith, Associate Administrator forEnforcement. [FRDoc.E8-25138 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

1See 66 FR6555, December 19, 2001. DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION

National Highway TrafficSafety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0088; Notice 2]

Ford MotorCompany, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

Ford Motor Company (Ford), on behalfofJaguar and Land Rover, has determined that an unknownnumber of
seat beltreplacement assemblies for model year 1981 through 2008 Jaguar and Land Rover make passenger cars andmulti-purpose vehicles did not comply with paragraphs S4.1(k) and S4.1(1) of49 CFR 571.209, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 209, SeatBeltAssemblies.The assemblies were sold through January 24, 2008. Ford has filed an appropriate report pursuant to49 CFR Part 573, DefectandNoncompliance ResponsibilityandReports.

Pursuant to49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule implementing those provisions at49 CFRPart 556, Fordhas petitioned for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of49 U.S.C. Chapter 301

on the basis that this noncompliance is .inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Notice ofreceipt ofthe petitionwas published, with a 30-day public
comment period, onMay 14, 2008 in the Federal Register (73 FR27889). No
comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site
at: http://www.regulations.gov/.Then follow the online search instructions to locate docket number "NHTSA-2008- 0088."

For further information onthis decision, contact Ms. Claudia Covell, Office ofVehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety -Administration(NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5293, facsimile (202) 366- 7002.

Paragraphs S4.1(k) and S4.1(1) of FMVSS No. 209require:

(k)Installation instructiens. A seatbelt assembly, other than a seat belt assembly' installed in a motorvehicle by an automobile manufacturer, shall beaccompanied by an instruction sheetproviding sufficient information for installing the assembly ina motorvehicle. The installation instructions shall state whether theassembly isfor universal installation or forinstallation only in specifically stated motor vehicles, and shallinclude at leastthose items specified in SAE Recommended Practice J800c, "Motor Vehicle Seat BeltInstallations," November 1973. Ifthe assembly is for use only in specifically stated motor vehicles, the 63051Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

assembly shall either bepermanently and legibly marked orlabeled withthe following statement, or the instruction sheet shall include the following statement:

This seat belt assembly is for use only in [insert specific seating position(s), e.g., "front right"] in [insert specific vehicle make(s) and model(s)].

(1)Usage and maintenance instructions. A
seat belt assembly or retractor shall be accompanied by written instructions for the proper use ofthe assembly, stressing particularly the importance ofwearing the assembly snugly andproperly located on the body, and on the maintenance ofthe assembly and periodic inspection ofall components. The instructions shall show the proper manner ofthreading webbing inthe hardware of seatbelt assemblies in which the webbing is not permanently fastened. Instructions for a nonlocking retractor shall include a caution that the webbing mustbe fully extended from the retractor during use of the seat belt assembly unless the retractor is attached to the free end ofwebbing which is not subjected to any tension during restraint ofan occupant by the assembly. Instructions for Type 2a shoulder belt shall include a warning that the shoulderbelt is not to be used without a lap belt.

Ford's Data, Views, and Arguments

Ford explains that service seat belt assemblies were sold for use in the following vehicles in the United States and federalized territories without the installation, usage, and maintenance instructions required by paragraphs in $4.1(k) and 4.1(1) ofFMVSS No. 209.

The model years that are affected are: 2001-2008 Model Year Jaguar X-Type. 1999-2008 Model Year Jaguar S-Type. 1982-2008 Model Year JaguarXJ. 1997-2008 Model year Jaguar XK. 1981-1996 Model Year Jaguar XJS. 2002-2005 Model Year Land Rover Freelander. 2008 Model Year Land Rover LR2. 1993-1997 Model Year Land Rover Defender. 1994-1999 Model Year Land Rover Discovery Series I. 1999-2004 Model Year Land Rover Discovery Series II. 2005-2008 Model Year Land Rover LR3. 1987-2008 Model Year Land Rover Range Rover. 2006-2008 Model Year Land Rover Range Rover Sport.
Ford makes the argument that the service seatbelt assemblies in question

are only made available to Jaguar and Land Rover authorized dealerships for their use or subsequent resale and that the Jaguar and Land Rover parts ordering process used by its dealers clearly identifies the correct service part required by model year, model, and seating position. By way ofexample, Ford further explains that an order for

a driver's-side front buckle assembly for

a 2002 model year Range Rover would be filled by the components specifically designed to be installed in that particular position in that specific vehicle. Furthermore, Ford states that Jaguar's and Land Rover's service seat belt assemblies are designed to be installed properly only intheir intended application.

Ford additionally states that technicians at Jaguar and Land Rover dealerships that replace seat belts have

access to the installation instruction information available in workshop manuals. Installers other than Jaguar and Land Rover dealership technicians also have seat beltinstallation information available because most workshop manual information, including seat belt replacement information, is made available to the general public on the Jaguar and Land Rover Global Technical Reference (GTR) Web sites (http:// www.jaguartechinfo.comand http:// www.landrovertechinfo.com).

. Ford additionally argues that a significant portion ofparagraph S4.1(k) appears to address a concern with proper installation ofaftermarket seat belts into vehicles thatwere not originally *equipped with these restraints. Ford also notes that SAE J800c which is cited inthe regulation involves installation of"universal type seat belt assemblies," particularly where

no seat belthad previously been installed, and that these concerns do not apply to the service seat belts. The vehicles involved inthis petition have uniquely designed seat beltcomponents and replacement seatbelt assemblies are installed into the identical location from which the original parts wereremoved.

Ford also states that proper seatbelt usage instructions are clearly explained inthe Owner Handbook that is included with each new vehicle. Information concerning maintenance, periodic inspection forwear and function ofthe seatbelts, as well as for theirproper usage is included inthe Owner Handbook and this information equally applies to replacement seat belt assemblies. Many Jaguar and Land Rover Owner Handbooks are also available to the public, free ofcharge on the Jaguar and Land Rover GTR Web sites.

.Ford is not aware of any customer or field reports ofservice seatbelt assemblies being incorrectly installed in the subject applications as aresult of installation instructions not accompanying the service part. Ford also is not aware ofany reports requesting installation instructions.

Ford also informed NHTSA that ithas corrected the problem that caused these

errors so that they will notbe repeated in future production. In summation, Ford states that it has corrected the problem that caused these

errors so that they will notbe repeated in future production and that itbelieves that because the noncompliances are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety that no corrective action is warranted.
NHTSA Decision

To help ensure proper selection, installation, usage, and maintenance of seat belt assemblies, paragraph S4.1(k) of FMVSS No. 209 requires that installation, usage, and maintenance instructions be provided with seatbelt assemblies, other than those installed by

an automobile manufacturer.

First, we notethat the subject seatbelt assemblies are only made available to Jaguar and Land Rover authorized dealerships for theiruse or subsequent resale. Because the parts ordering process used by Ford authorized dealerships clearly identifies the correct service partrequired by model year, model, and seating position, NHTSA believes that there is little likelihood that an inappropriate seat belt assembly will be provided for a specific seating position within aFord vehicle. Second, we note that technicians at Jaguar and Land Rover dealerships have

access to the seatbelt assembly installation instruction information in workshop manuals. In addition, installers other than Jaguar and Land Rover dealership technicians can access the installation instructions onthe Jaguar andLand Rover GTR Web sites and through other aftermarket service information compilers. We also believe that Ford is correct in stating that the seatbelt assemblies are designed to be installed properly only intheir intended application. Thus, we conclude that sufficient safeguards are inplace to prevent the installation ofan improper seatbelt assembly.

NHTSA recognizes the importance of having installation instructions available to installers and use and maintenance instructions available to

consumers. The riskcreated by this noncompliance isthat someone who purchased an assembly is unable to obtain the necessary installation information resulting in an incorrectly installed seat belt assembly. However, because the seat beltassemblies are designed to be installed properly only in their intended application and the installation information is widely available tothe public, it appears that there is little likelihood that installers will not be ableto access the installation instructions. Furthermore, we note that Ford has stated that they are notaware ofany customer field reports ofservice seatbelt assemblies being incorrectly 

### 63052Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

installed in the subject applications, nor
aware ofany reports requesting installation instructions. These findings suggest that it is unlikely that seat belts have been improperly installed.

.

In addition, although 49 CFR 571.209 paragraph S4.1(k) requires certain instructions specified in SAE Recommended Practjce J800c be included in seatbelt replacement instructions, that requirement applies to seat belts intended to be installed in seating positions where seat belts do not already exist. The subject seat belt assemblies are only intended to be used for replacement of original equipment seat belts, therefore the instructions do not apply to the subject seat belt assemblies. 1

With respect to seat beltusage and inspection instructions, we note that this information is available inthe Owner Handbooks that are included with each new vehicle as well as free of charge on the Jaguar and Land Rover GTR Web sites and apply to the replacement seat belt assemblies installed inthese vehicles. Thus, with respect to usage and maintenance instructions, it appears that Ford has metthe intent of84.1(1) ofFMVSS No. 209 for the subject vehicles using alternate methods for notification.

NHTSA has granted similarpetitions for noncompliance with seatbelt assembly installation and usage instruction standards. Refer to Subaru of America, Inc. (65 FR 67471, November 9, 2000); Bombardier MotorCorporation ofAmerica, Inc. (65 FR 60238, October 10, 2000); TRW, Inc. (58 FR 7171, February 4, 1993); and Chrysler Corporation, (57 FR 45865, October 5, 1992). In all of these cases, the petitioners demonstrated that the noncompliant seat beltassemblies were properly installed, and due to their respective replacement parts ordering systems, improper replacement seat belt assembly selection and installation would notbe likely to occur.

In consideration ofthe foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Ford has met 'its burden ofpersuasion that the seatbelt installation and usage instruction noncompliances described are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Ford's application is granted, and it is exempted from providing the notification of noncompliance that is required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and from remedying the noncompliance, asrequired by 49 U.S.C. 30120. All products manufactured or sold on and after

1Subaruof America,Inc.; Grantof Application forDecisionofInconsequential Non-Compliance (65 FR 67472). January 24, 2008, must comply fully with the requirements ofFMVSS No. 209.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations ofauthority at 49CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

Issued on: October 16, 2008. Daniel C.Smith,

Associate Administrator forEnforcement. [FR Doc. E8-25133 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILUNG CODE 4910-59-P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board [STB Docket No. AB-290 (Sub-No. 305X)]

NorfolkSouthern Railway CompanyAbandonment Exemption-in Somerset County, PA

On October 2,2008, Norfolk Southern Railway Company (NSR) filed with the Surface Transportation Board a petition under 49 U.S.C. 10502 for exemption from the provisions of49 U.S.C. 10903 to abandon a 1.80-mile line ofrailroad known as the South Fork Industrial Track, extending between milepost QS 14.40 and milepost QS 16.20 in Somerset County, PA. The line traverses U.S. Postal Service Zip Code 15963 and includes the stations of Scalp Level, Shade Creek, and Windber Jct.

In addition to an exemption from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 10903, NSR seeks exemption from 49 U.S.C. 10904 [offer offinancial assistance procedures] and 49 U.S.C. 10905 [public use conditions]. In support, NSR states that, following abandonment, it proposes to convey the line intactto Rosebud Mining Company for continued use in its coal mining operations as a private track. This request willbe addressed inthe final decision.

The line does not contain federally granted rights-of-way. Any documentation inNSR's possession will be made available promptly to those requesting it.

The interest ofrailroad employees will beprotected by the conditions set forth in OregonShortLineR. Co.- Abandonment-Goshen,360 I.C.C. 91 (1979).

By issuing this notice, the Board is instituting an exemption proceeding pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(b). A final decision will be issued byJanuary 16,. 2009.

Any offer offinancial assistance -(OFA)under 49 CFR 1152.27(b)(2) will be due no later than 10 days after service ofa decision granting the petition for exemption. Each OFA must be accompanied by a$1,500 filingfee. See49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25).1

All interested persons should be

aware that, following abandonment of rail service and salvage ofthe line, the line may be suitable for other public
use, including interimtrail use. Any request for a public use condition under 49 CFR 1152.28 orfor trail use/rail banking under 49 CFR 1152.29 will be due no laterthan November 12, 2008. Each trail use request must be accompanied by a $200 filingfee. See49 CFR 1002.2(f)(27).

All filings in response to this notice
must refer to STB Docket No. AB-290 (Sub-No. 305X), and mustbe sentto: (1) Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20423- 0001; and (2) John M. Scheib, General Attorney, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Three Commercial Place, Norfolk, VA 23510. Replies to NSR's petition are due

on orbefore November 12, 2008.

Persons seeking further information concerning abandonment procedures may contact the Board's Office ofPublic Assistance, Governmental Affairs, and Compliance at (202) 245-0238 orrefer to the full abandonment or discontinuance regulations at 49 CFR part 1152. Questions concerning environmental issues may be directed to the Board's Section ofEnvironmental Analysis (SEA) at (202) 245-0305. Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through theFederal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1- 800-877-8339.

An environmental assessment (EA) (or environmental impact statement (EIS), if necessary) prepared by SEA will be served upon all parties ofrecord and upon any agencies orother persons who commented during its preparation. Other interested persons may contact SEA to obtain a copy ofthe EA (orEIS). EAs in these abandonment proceedings normally will be made available within 60 days ofthe filing ofthe petition. The deadline for submission ofcomments on the EA will generally be within 30 days ofits service.

Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site athttp:// www.stb.dot.gov.

Decided: October 14, 2008.

IEffective July 18, 2008, the filing fee for anOFA increased to$1,500. See RegulationsGoverning Fees forServicesPerformed in Connectionwith LicensingandRelatedServices-2008 update,STB Ex Parte No. 542 (Sub-No. 15) (STB served June 18, 2008). 

### 63053Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008 /Notices

By the Board,David M. Konschnik, Director, Office ofProceedings. Anne K. Quinlan, ActingSecretary. [FRDoc. E8-25025 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915-01-P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of ThriftSupervision Voluntary Dissolution

AGENCY: Office ofThrift Supervision (OTS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and requestfor comment.
SUMMARY: The Department ofthe Treasury, as part ofits continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed and continuing information collections, asrequired by the Paperwork Reduction Act of1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507. The Office ofThrift Supervision within the Department of the Treasury will submit the proposed information collection requirement described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, asrequired bythe Paperwork Reduction Act. Today, OTS is soliciting public comments on its proposal to extend this information collection. DATES: Submitwritten comments on or before December 22, 2008. ADDRESSES: Send comments, referring to the collection bytitle ofthe proposal or by OMB approval number, to Information Collection Comments, Chief Counsel's Office, Office ofThrift Supervision, 1700 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20552; send a facsimile transmission to (202) 906-6518; or send

an e-mail to infocollection.comments@ots.treas.gov. OTS will post comments andthe related index on the OTS Internet site at http:// www.ots.treas.gov.In addition, interested persons may inspect comments at the Public Reading Room, 1700 G Street, NW., by appointment. To make an appointment, call (202) 906- 5922, send an e-mail to public.info@ots.treas.gov, or send a fadsimile transmission to (202) 906- 7755.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You

can request additional information about this proposed information collection from Patricia D. Goings (202) 906-5668, Office ofThrift Supervision, 1700 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20552. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OTS may not conduct or sponsor an information collection, and respondents are not required to respond to an information collection, unless the information collection displays acurrently valid OMB control number. As part ofthe approval process, we invite comments

on the following information collection.

Comments should address one or
more ofthe following points:

a. Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance ofthe functions ofOTS;

b.The accuracy ofOTS's estimate of the burden ofthe proposed information collection;

c. Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity ofthe information to be collected;

d. Ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of information technology.

We will summarize the comments that we receive and include them in the OTS request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. In this notice, OTS is soliciting comments concerning the following information collection.

Title ofProposal: Voluntary Dissolution.

OMBNumber: 1550-0066. FormNumbers:N/A. RegulationRequirement:12 CFRpart 546.

Description: Pursuant to 12 CFR 546.4, aFederal savings association's board ofdirectors may propose a plan for dissolution ofthe association by submitting a statement listing the

reasons and aplan ofdissolution to the OTS. A plan ofdissolution may be denied orrecommendations to the plan may be madeby OTS ifitbelieves the plan is inadvisable and not inthe best interests ofall concerned.

Notice letters are sent to each depositor ofthe institution's intent to dissolve. Type of Review: Extension ofa currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Businesses orother for-profit..

Estimated Numberof Respondents:3. Estimated Numberof Responses:3. Estimated Frequencyof Response: Other; as applied for.

EstimatedTotalBurden:3,350 hours. C ClearanceOfficer:Ira L. Mills, (202) 906-6531, Office ofThrift Supervision, 1700 GStreet, NW., Washington, DC 20552. Dated: October 16, 2008. Deborah Dakin, SeniorDeputyChief Counsel,Regulationsand Legislation Division. [FR Doc. E8-25092 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6720-01-P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Thrift Supervision
Recordkeeplng and Confirmation Requirements for Securities Transactions
AGENCY: Office ofThrift Supervision (OTS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comment. SUMMARY: The proposed information collection request (ICR)described below has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review-and approval, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of1995. OTS is solicitingpublic comments onthe proposal. DATES: Submit written comments on or before November 21, 2008. A copy of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, can be obtained from Reglnfo.gov at http://www.reginfo.govl public/do/PRAMain. ADDRESSES: Send comments, referring to the collection by title ofthe proposal or by OMB approval number, to OMB and OTS atthese addresses: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer for OTS, U.S. Office ofManagement and Budget, 725-17th Street, NW., Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, orby fax to (202) 395-6974; and Information Collection Comments, ChiefCounsel's Office, Office ofThrift Supervision, 1700 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20552, by fax to (202) 906-6518, orby e-mail to infocollection.comments@ots.treas.gov. OTS will post comments and the related index on the OTS Internet site at http://www.ots.treas.gov. In addition, interested persons may inspect comments at the Public Reading Room, 1700 GStreet, NW., by appointment. To make an-appointment, call (202) 906- 5922, send an e-mail to public.info@ots.treas.gov,orsend a facsimile transmission to (202) 906- 7755.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

- further information orto obtain a copy of the submission to OMB, please contact Ira L. Mills at ira.mills@ots.treas.gov, (202) 906-6531,

or facsimile number (202) 906-6518, Regulations and Legislation Division, ChiefCounsel's Office, Office of Thrift 

### 63054Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Notices

Supervision, 1700 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20552. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OTS may not conduct or sponsor an information collection, and respondents are not required to respond to an information collection, unless the information collection displays acurrently valid OMB control number. As part of the approval process, we invite comments

on the following information collection. TitleofProposal: Recordkeeping and Confirmation Requirements for Securities Transactions.

OMBNumber: 1550-0109. FormNumber:N/A. Description: The regulation found at 12 CFRPart 551 imposes recordkeeping and confirmation requirements for savings associations that effect securities transactions. The recordkeeping and confirmation regulation ensures that savings association customers receive the same protections and disclosures proVided to brokerage customers; ensures savings associations effect secuiities transactions safely and soundly; and provides savings associations with formal guidance when they effect securities transactions.

Type of Review:Extension ofa currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit.

EstimatedNumberof Responses:829. EstimatedBurdenHoursper Response: 1hour each for recordkeeping, confirmation and reports by officers and employees; 2hours for updating policies; and 10hours fornew written policies.

EstimatedFrequencyof Response:On occasion.

EstimatedTotalBurden:4,235 hours. ClearanceOfficer:Ira L. Mills, (202) 906-6531, Office ofThrift Supervision, 1700 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20552.

Dated: October 16, 2008. Deborah Dakin, SeniorDeputyChiefCounsel, Regulationsand LegislationDivision. [FR Doc. E8-25093 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6720-01-P 

### 63055

# Reader Aids Federal Register

Vol. 73, No. 205 Wednesday, October 22, 2008

CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION

Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations General Information, indexes and other finding 202-741-6000

aids Laws 741-6000 Presidential Documents Executive orders and proclamations 741-6000 The United States Government Manual 741-6000 Other Services Electronic and on-line services (voice) 741-6020 Privacy Act Compilation 741-6064 Public Laws Update Service (numbers,dates, etc.) 741-6043 TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 741-6086

ELECTRONIC RESEARCH World Wide Web

Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications is located at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html
Federal Register information and research tools, including Public Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access are located at: http://www.archives.gov/federal register E-mail
FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table ofContents LISTSERV) is

an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital form ofthe Federal Register Table ofContents. The digital form of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and PDF links to the full text of each document.
To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailinglistarchives,FEDREGTOC-L,Joinorleave the list (orchangesettings);then follow the instructions. PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail service that notifies subscribers ofrecently enacted laws.
To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html and select Joinorleave thelist (orchangesettings);then follow the instructions.
FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot respond to specific inquiries. Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the Federal Register system to: fedreg.info@nara.gov
The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or regulations.

FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, OCTOBER

56935-57234

...................... 1 57235-57474

...................... 2 57475-58018

......................... a 58019-58434

...................... 6 58435-58866

...................... 7 58867-59478

...................... 8 59479-60094

...................... 9 60095-60602

.................... 10 60603-60934

.................... 14 60935-61324

.................... 15 61325-61648

.................... 16 61649-62186

.................... 17 62187-62434

.................... 20 62435-62846

.................... 21 62847-63056

.................... 22 CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING OCTOBER

At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Register publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which lists parts and sections affected by documents published since the revision date of each title.

3 CFR Proclamations: 8294

................................. 57223 8295

................................. 57233 8296

..................... 57475,60609 8297

................................. 58429 8298

................................ 58431 8299

................................. 58433 8300

................................. 58861 8301

................................. 58863 8302

................................. 58867 8303

................................. 60603 8304

................................. 61649 8305

................................. 61651 8306

................................. 61653 8307

................................. 61655 8308

................................. 62435 8309

................................. 62437 Executive Orders: 12962 (amended by

13474)

.......................... 57229 13176 (Superseded by

13476)
.......................... 60605 13474

............................... 57229 EO 12139 (amended

by EO 13475)
............... 60095 EO 12949 (amended

by EO 13475)

............... 60095 EO 13475
........................ 60095 13476
............................... 60605 Administrative Orders: Memorandums: Memorandum of April

17,2006 (superseded by Memorandum of October 17, 2008)

........ 62845 Memorandum of

October 3, 2008 (supersedes Memorandum of December 20, 2005)

............................ 58869 Memorandum of

October 17, 2008

......... 62845 Notices: Notice of October 16,

2008

............................. 62433 Presidential

Determinations: PD 2008-29 of

September 30, 2008

............................. 58865 2009-1

.............................. 60935 2009-2

.............................. 60937 Presidential

Determination No. 2009-3 of October 9, 2008

............................. 62847 Presidential

Determination No. 2009-4 of October 15,2008

....................... 62849

4 CFR
22

..................................... 60609
5 CFR
295

................................... 58019 315

................................... 60611 316

................................... 60611 9701

................................. 58435 9901

................................. 58435 Proposed Rules: 532

................................... 58506
6 CFR Proposed Rules: 5
....................................... 62214
7 CFR
205
................................... 59479 331
................................... 61325 984

................................... 57485 1260

................................. 60097 Proposed Rules: 340

................................... 60008 800

................................... 62446 810

................................... 62446 946

................................... 62215 966

.................. *

................ 62218 1703

................................ 61198 1780

................................. 61198 3570

................................. 61198 4280

................................. 61198 4284

................................. 61198 5002

................................. 61198

8 CFR
100

................. 58023 212

.................................. 58023 214

................. 61332 248

................. 61332

9 CFR

77
.................................. 60099 121

.................. : ................ 61325 149

................. 60464 160
................................... 60464 161
................................... 60464 201

................................... 62439
10 CFR
50

......................... 57235,60612 431

.................................. 58772 Proposed Rules: 2
....................................... 62931 35

............... :

..................... 58063 50

..................................... 62220 51

............ 59540,59547,59551 430

........... 62034,62134 431

.................62034

11 CFR Proposed Rules: 100
................................... 62224

## ii Federal Register/ Vol. 73, No,. 205 /Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Reader Aids

101
................................... 62224 71
........... 58512,58513,61749, .20CFR 210

................................... 58875 102

................. 62224 61750,61752,62940 501

................. 62190 260

................. 58467 104

.................................. 62224 91

.................. 57270 938

................. 60944 110
................................... 62224 93

..................................... 60996 21 CFR 950.................................. 57538 113
................................... 62224 203
................................... 59496 116
................................... 62224 15 CFR 205
................................... 59496 400

................................... 62224 303
................................... 62880 522

....... ......58871, 58872 30
..................................... 62205 9001

................................. 62224 730
................................... 56964 558

................................... 58873 9003

................... 62224 732
....................... 56964,57495 801

................................... 58874 32 CFR 9031

................................. 62224 734

....................... 56964, 57495 112

................................... 59501 9033

................................. 62224 736
................................... 56964 22 CFR 199

................................... 59504 9035

................................. 62224 738

................................... 57495 7

................... ...... . 62196 212

................................... 59505 740

....................... 57495,60910 40

..................................... 62197 706
................................... 60947 12 CFR 742

....................... 57495,58033 50
..................................... 62196 750

................................... 60948
201

................................... 61657 744

....................... 57495,58033 126
................................... 58041 751
................................... 60949 204

....................... 57488,59482 746

................................... 57495 756

.............................. 60949 225
................................... 62851 748

................................... 57495 23 CFR 757
................. 60950 263
................................... 58031 750
................................... 57495 -Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 330
................................... 61658 762
....................... 56964,57495 620
.............. : .................... 58908 288

................................... 59579 721
................................... 62854 770
................................... 57495 635

.................. 58908 325
................................... 59582 740

....................... 56935,62856 772
....................... 57495,60910 636

...... *

. .......... ...... 58908 553



### .......... .. 57017 745

....................... 60616,62856 774
......... 56964, 57495,58033, 710
................................... 58908 1702.........
. .. 61771 792

................................... 56936 60910 1703
................................. 61772 951

................................... 61660 Proposed Rules: 24 CFR 1703

................61772 1291

................................. 61660 740

................................... 57554 25
..................................... 60538 33 CFR Proposed Rules: 772

................. 57554 990

.......... ...................... 61350 100
...........57242,60629 327
................................... 61560 16 CFR 4001

................................ 58418 105

....................... 60951 701
................................... 57013 Proposed Rules: 110

....................... 57244,60629 740

................................... 62935 1610

............... 62187 30

................. 61754 117. 58473,60629,60952, 742

.................................. 57013 Proposed Rules: 570

................. 61757 609,60954 1202
................................. 60192 3
....................................... 58832 60953,60954

1250
................................. 60198 4
....................................... 58832 25 CFR 147
................................... 60629

1773
................................. 60198 1500
................................. 58063 542
................................... 60492 165
.......... 59509,59511,60629
543
................................... 60492 Proposed Rules: 13 CFR 17 CIFIR 547
................................... 60508 117
....................... 58070,62450
101
.................................. 61665 30

................. 60625 ProposeSl Rules: 165

................. 62235
121.:

..................... 56940,61336 143

................................... 57512 502
................................... 60490 34 CFR 124

................................... 57490 190

................................... 57235 546

................................... 60490 125
....................... 56940,61336 229
................................... 57237 5b

..................................... 61354
127
....................... 56940,61336 230
....................... 58300,60050 26 CFR 36 CFR 134

....................... 56940,61336 231
................................... 60050 1
............. 58438,59501, 62199, 300
................................... 62858 232
................................... 60050 62203,62204 211
................................... 62443 301
................................... 62858 239

....................... 58300,60050 54

.................................... 62410 294

................................... 61456 302

.................62858 240

......... 58300,60050,61666, 801

................................... 60627 1228

................................. 57245 303
................................... 62858 61678 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 305
................................... 62858 241

........... 60050,1

.............. 58514,59575,61770 7

.............................. . 59585 242

.......... 61690,61690,61706 54

..................................... 60208 307

................................... 62858 249

.......... 58300,60050,61678 37 CFR 308

......................... 62858 P o o e u e 310

................................... 62858 Proposed Rules: 27 CFR 10

..................................... 59513 314

................................... 62858 230

................................... 61753 447

................................... 57239 Proposed Rules: 315

................................... 62858 240

................................... 61753 478

................................... 57239 201

....................... 58073,60658 Proposed Rules: 18 CFR 479

................................... 57239 385

.............................. 57033 121

....................... 57014,61369 35
..................................... 57515 38

............. ...... 57239 125
....................... 57014,61369 41

..................................... 58720 28 CFR 38CFR 127
....................... 57014,61369 131
................................... 57515 58

..................................... 58438 17

......................... 58875,58877 134

....................... 57014,61369 141

................................... 58720 570
................................... 62440 17............ 58877
14 CFR 154

................................... 57515 59

................. 58877 157
................................... 57515 29 CFR Proposed Rules: 33
..................................... 57235 250
................................... 57515 403
................................... 57412 5
....................................... 62004 36
..................................... 62871 281

................. 57515 2509

........ 58445,61731, 61734 39CFR 39

........... 56956,56958,56960, 284

................................... 57515 2550
........ 58447,58450,58459 58032,58436,59486,59488, 300
................................... 57515 2578............... 58549 111
................................... 61355 59491, 59493,60102,61336, 301
................................... 60105 2590

................................. 62410 3020
........ 59514,62184,62886 61342,61343,61346,62872 341

................................... 57515 4022

................................. 61352 40 CFR 71
........... 58871,60622,60939, 344

................ 57515 4044

................ 61352 60940,62876,62878,62879 346

................................... 57515 Proposed Rules: 3
....................................... 61737 91

..................................... 62871 347
................................... 57515 3
....................................... 62229 9

....................................... 59034 93

............60544,60574 348

................................... 57515 5........................62229 49

..................................... 61740 97

........... 59494,60623,60942, 375

................ 57515 1910....

............................ 62942 50

........................ 58042 61348 385

....................... 57515,62881 1926

..................... 59714,62942 52
........... 56970,57246,58475, Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 2550
................................. 60657 59518,60955,60957,61357, 39

........... 58507,58509,58901, 40

..................................... 62229 2590

................................. 60208 62889,62891,62893,62897, .58903,58906,59571,59573, 806

................................... 57271 2700
................................. 62449 62902 60201,60203,60206,60657, 55
..................................... 62907 61369,61372,61375,61378, 19 CFR 30 CFR 59

..................................... 58481 61747,62447,62937 4

.................. 60943 203

................. 58467 60

................. 59034

### Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday? October 22, 2008 /Reader Aids

-

### iii

62
...................................... 56981 80

............ 57248,59034,61358 81....

................................ 56983 85

..................................... 59034 86

..................................... 59034 89

..................................... 59034 90

..................................... 59034 91

..................................... 59034 92

..................................... 59034 94

. ................. 59034 180

......... 56995,58880,60151,
60963,60969 197

................................... 61256 261

................................... 59523 1027

................................ 59034 1033

................................. 59034 1039

................................. 59034 1042

................................. 59034 1045

.......... :

...................... 59034 1048

................................. 59034 1051

..................... 59034,62444 1054

................................. 59034 1060

................................. 59034 1065

................................. 59034 1068

................ 59034 1074

........ :

........................ 59034 Proposed Rules: 3

.................. 61773 50
..................................... 58080 51
..................................... 58080 52
........... 57272,58084,58515, 58913,59586,60996,61381, 62945 60................................... 59956 61

..................................... 59956 63

........... 58352,59956,60432, 62384 80

.................................... 57274 158

....................... 59382,60211 161

....................... 59382,60211 180

................................... 57040 228

................................... 60662 262

................................... 58388 264

................. 58388 265

................................... 58388 266

................................... 58388 12

..................................... 59537 176

................................... 57001 271

................. 58388 25

.................. 56999 178

................. 57001 52

..................................... 60172 179..

........... .... 57001 42 CFR 64

..................................... 60172 180

................. 57001 9

.................. 60410 73
........... 56999,57268,57551, 192

.............................. 62148 34

....................... 58047,62210 57552,60631, 60974,60975, 232

....... .......... 61512 73
..................................... 61363 60976 541
....... ......................... 60633 100
................................... 59528 76
..................................... 61742 571...............

....

58887,62744 411

................................... 57541 90

..................................... 60631 412
................................... 57541 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules:
413

........... 56998,57541 Ch.1

............... 59586 109

................. 57281
422
................................... 575 1................... 60997 571
................................... 57297 441
................................... 57854 27
..................................... 57750 830

................................... 58520 447

................................... 58491 43

..................................... 60997 489

................................... 57541 73
........... 57280,60670,60671, 50 CFR 62237,62238,62239 43CFR 90

..................................... 57750 17............ 61936, 62816 11
..................................... 57259 400

................................... 57567 21

..................................... 59448 46

..................................... 61292 22

....... .............. 59448 Proposed Rules: 48 CFR 216
................................... 60976 403

................................... 58085 215
................................... 62211 222

....................... 57010,60638 2300
................................. 60212 252
................................... 62211 223
....................... 57010,60638 8360

................................. 57564 Proposed Rules: 224

....................... 60173,62919 204

................. 62239 229

............................... 60640 44CFR 217
................................... 62239 300
................................... 62444 64

..................................... 60158 501
................................... 57580 622

....................... 58058,58059 65
..................................... 60159 504

................................... 59589 648

......... 58497,58498, 58898, 67
..................................... 60162 511
................................... 59590 60986,62445 Proposed Rules: 514

................................... 60224 660
......... 58499,60191,60642, 67
..................................... 60216 515
................................... 57580 60987 45 532

................................... 58515 679

......... 57011,57553,58061, CFR 552
......... 57580,58515,59589, 58503,58504,58899,59538, 144

................................... 62410 59590,60224 60994,61366,61367,62212 146

................................... 62410 553

................................... 60224 697

.................................. 58059 148

................................... 62410 1633

................................. 58886 Proposed Rules: 2133

................................. 58886 Proposed Rules: 144

...................... ... 60208 17.......57314, 58922, 61007, 146

................................... 60208 49 CFR 62450,62592

148

................................... 60208 1
........................... 57268,59538 216........... 60754, 60836 40
..................................... 62910 226
....................... 57583,58527 46 CFR 89

..................................... 57268 224

................................... 62459 393

................. 59530 171

................. 57001 226
...... :

............................ 62459 172
....................... 57001, 57008 622
................................... 61015 47 CFR 173
................................... 57001 679

....................... 57585,62241 0
....................................... 57543 175
................................... 57001 697

................................... 58099

### iv Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Reader Aids

REMINDERS The items in this listwere editorially compiled as an aid to Federal Register users. Inclusion or exclusion from this list has no legal significance.

RULES GOING INTO EFFECT OCTOBER 22, 2008

COMMERCE DEPARTMENT Economic Development Administration Revisions to the EDA

Regulations; published 10- 22-08
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Commercial Mobile Alert

System; published 9-22-08 NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION Display of Official Sign:

Temporary Increase in

Standard Maximum Share Insurance Amount; Coverage for Custodial Loan Accounts; published 10-22-08 POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION Administrative Practice and

Procedure: Postal Service; published

10-22-08 TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT Federal Aviation Administration Airworthiness Directives:

Hawker Beechcraft

Corporation Model BAe.125 Series 800A (including C 29A and U125) Airplanes, and Hawker Beechcraft Model Hawker 800XP Airplanes; published 10-7-08 TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTMENT National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Federal Motor Vehicle Safety

Standards: Electronic Stability Control

Systems; Controls and Displays; published 9-22- 08

COMMENTS DUE NEXT WEEK

AGRICULTURE
DEPARTMENT Agricultural Marketing Service Domestic Dates Produced or

Packed in Riverside County, CA; Decreased Assessment Rate; comments doe by 10- 27-08; published 8-26-08 [FR E8-19697] Dried Prunes Produced in

California; Decreased Assessment Rate; comments due by 10-27-08; published 8-26-08 IFR E8- 19695] AGRICULTURE
DEPARTMENT Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Importation of Grapes from

Chile Under a Systems Approach; comments due by 10-27-08; published 8-27-08 [FR E8-19875] Importation of Sweet Oranges

and Grapefruit from Chile; comments due by 10-27-08; published 8-28-08 [FR E8- 19871] AGRICULTURE
DEPARTMENT Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service Competitive and

Noncompetitive Non-formula Grant Programs: General Grant Administrative

Provisions and ProgramSpecific Administrative Provisions for the Specialty Crop Research Initiative; Correction; comments due by 10-30- 08; published 9-5-08 [FR E8-20562] Meetings:

Solicitation of Input from

Stakeholders Regarding Programs for HispanicServing Agricultural Colleges and Universities; comments due by 10-27- 08; published 9-24-08 [FR E8-2241 8] AGRICULTURE
DEPARTMENT Revision of Delegation of

Authority; comments due by 10-30-08; published .9-30-08 [FR E8-22959] COMMERCE DEPARTMENT Industry and Security Bureau National Defense Stockpile

Market Impact Committee; Request for Public Comments: Potential Market Impact of

Proposed Stockpile Disposals for Fiscal Year 2010; comments due by 10-30-08; published 9-30- 08 [FR E8-22734] COMMERCE DEPARTMENT National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Characterization of the West

Coast Deep-set Longline Fishery Operating Outside of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone; comments due by 10-29-08; published 9-29-08 [FR E8-22818] Conducting Consultations

Pursuant to Section 304(d) of the National Marine Sanctuaries Act; comments due by 10-31-08; published 8-26-08 [FR E8-19662] Fisheries of the Exclusive

Economic Zone Off Alaska: Atka Mackerel in the Bering

Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area; comments due by 10-31- 08; published 10-16-08 [FR E8-24585] Pollock in Statistical Area

610 of the Gulf of Alaska; comments due by 10-31- 08; published 10-16-08 [FR E8-24584] Small Takes of Marine

Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Seabird and Pinniped Research Activities in Central California; comments due by 10-29-08; published 9-29-08 [FR E8-22819] ENERGY DEPARTMENT Energy Conservation Program:

Test Procedures for Battery

Chargers and External Power Supplies and for Multiple-Voltage External Power Supplies; comments due by 10-29- 08; published 8-15-08 [FR E8-18576] ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Antimicrobial Registration

Review Final Work Plans and Proposed Registration Review Decisions; Availability: Sodium Hydroxide (Mineral

Bases, Strong) and Capric (Decanoic) Acid; comments due by 10-28- 08; published 8-29-08 [FR E8-20152] Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans: Vehicle Inspection and

Maintenance Program, Nevada; comments due by 10-27-08; published 9- 25-08 [FR E8-22557] Cyprodinil; Pesticide

Tolerances; comments due by 10-27-08; published 8- 27-08 [FR E8-19747] Environmental Statements;

Notice of Intent: Coastal Nonpoint Pollution

Control Programs; States and TerritoriesFlorida and South

Carolina; Open for comments until further notice; published 2-11- 08 [FR 08-00596] Exemption from the

Requirement of a Tolerance: Bacillus subtilis GB03;

comments due by 10-27- 08; published 8-27-08 [FR E8-19860] Pesticide Tolerances:

Dichlobenil; comments due

by 10-27-08; published 8- 27-08 [FR E8-19859] Fenbuconazole; comments

due by 10-27-08; published 8-27-08 [FR E8- 19858] State Hazardous Waste

Management Program Revision: Idaho; comments due by

10-30-08; published 9-30- 08 [FR E8-22800]

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Agency Information Collection

Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals; comments due by 10-27-08; published 8-28-08 [FR E8- 2001-1] FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Minimum Capital Ratios;

Capital Adequacy Guidelines; Capital Maintenance; Capital: Special.Committee 215

Aeronautical Mobile -Satellite (Route) Services Next Generation Satellite Services -and Equipment; comments due by 10-30- 08; published 9-30-08 [FR E8-22741 ] Risk-Based Capital Guidelines;

Capital Adequacy Guidelines: Standardized Framework;

comments due by 10-27- 08; published7-29-08 [FR E8-16262] FEDERAL HOUSING. FINANCING AGENCY .Golden Parachute Payments

and Indemnification Payments; comments due by 10-31-08; published 9- 16-08 [FR E8-21650] FEDERAL RESERVE
SYSTEM Minimum Capital Ratios;

Capital Adequacy Guidelines; Capital Maintenance; Capital: Special Committee 215

Aeronautical Mobile Satellite (Route) Services Next Generation Satellite Services and Equipment; comments due by 10-30-

### Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 205/Wednesday, October 22, 2008/Reader Aids V

08; published 9-30-08 [FR E8-22741] Risk-Based Capital Guidelines;

.Capital Adequacy Guidelines: Standardized Framework;

comments due by 10-27- 08; published 7-29-08 [FR E8-16262] Risk-Based Capital Guidelines;

Leverage Capital Guidelines; comments due by 10-31-08; published 9-26-08 [FR E8- 22702] Transactions Between Member

Banks and Their Affiliates: Exemption for Certain

Purchases of AssetBacked Commercial Paper by a Member Bank from
an Affiliate; comments due by 10-31-08; published 9-26-08 [FR E8- 227011 HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Food and Drug Administration New Animal Drugs;

Cephalosporin Drugs; Extralabel Animal Drug Use: Order of Prohibition;

Extension of Comment Period; Delay of Effective Date of Final Rule; comments due by 11-1- 08; published 8-18-08 [FR E8-18967] HOMELAND SECURITY DEPARTMENT Coast Guard Drawbridge Operation

Regulations: Shrewsbury River, Route 36

Bridge, Highlands, NJ,- Schedule Change; comments due by 11-1- 08; published 8-8-08 [FR E8-18312] Special Local Regulations for

Marine Events: Spa Creek, Annapolis, MD;

comments due by 10-29- 08; published 9-29-08 [FR E8-22442] INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Land Management Bureau Land Withdrawals; Removal of

Regulations Covering Emergency Withdrawals; comments due by 10-27-08; published 10-10-08 [FR E8- 238231 INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Fish and Wildlife Service Endangered and Threatened

Wildlife and Plants: Designation of Critical

Habitat for the Peninsular Ranges Population of Desert Bighom Sheep; comments due by 10-27- 08; published 8-26-08 [FR E8-19465] LABOR DEPARTMENT Mine Safety and Health Administration Alcohol- and Drug-Free Mines;

Policy, Prohibitions, Testing, Training, and Assistance; comments due by 10-29-08; published 9-26-08 [FR E8- 22679] LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Copyright Royalty Board, Library of Congress Mechanical and Digital

Phonorecord Delivery Rate Determination Proceeding; comments due by 10-31-08; published 10-1-08 [FR E8- 23184] OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET Management and Budget Office Guidance for Drug Free

Workplace Requirements (Financial Assistance); comments due by 10-27-08; published 9-26-08 [FR E8- 22717] PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT OFFICE Determining Rate of Basic.

Pay; Collection by Offset From Indebted Government Employees; comments due

- by 10-27-08; published 8- 27-08 [FR E8-19819] SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Women-Owned Small

Business Federal Contract Assistance Procedures; comments due by 10-31-08; published 10-1-08 [FR E8- 23139] TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTMENT Federal Aviation Administration Airworthiness Directives:

328 Support Services GmbH

Domier Model 328 100 Airplanes; comments due by 10-30-08; published 9- 30-08 [FR E8-22907] Dowty Propellers R175/4-30;

R184/4-30-4; R193/4-30-4; R.209/4-40-4.5 et al. Model Propellers; comments due by 10-28- 08; published 8-29-08 [FR E8-20081] Saab Model SAAB Fairchild

SF340A (SAAB/SF340A) and SAAB 340B Airplanes; comments due by 10-30-08; published 9- 30-08 [FR E8-22915] Vulcanair S.p.A. Model P68

Series Airplanes; comments due by 10-27- 08; published 9-26-08 [FR E8-22338] TREASURY DEPARTMENT Comptroller of the Currency Minimum Capital Ratios;

Capital Adequacy Guidelines; Capital Maintenance; Capital: Special Committee 215

Aeronautical Mobile Satellite (Route) Services Next Generation Satellite Services and Equipment; comments due by 10-30- 08; published 9-30-08 [FR E8-22741] Risk-Based Capital Guidelines;

Capital Adequacy Guidelines: Standardized Framework;

comments due by 10-27- 08; published 7-29-08 [FR E8-16262] Risk-Based Capital Guidelines;

Money Market Mutual Funds; comments due by 10-31-08; published 9-26-08 [FR E8-22720] TREASURY DEPARTMENT Internal Revenue Service Alcohol Fuel and Biodiesel;

Renewable Diesel; Alternative Fuel; DieselWater Fuel Emulsion; Taxable Fuel Definitions; Excise Tax Returns; comments due by 10-27-08; published 7-29-08 [FR E8- 17270] TREASURY DEPARTMENT Terrorism Risk Insurance

Programs: Cap on Annual Liability;

comments due by 10-30- 08; published 9-30-08 [FR E8-22940] TREASURY DEPARTMENT Thrift Supervision Office Minimum Capital Ratios;

Capital Adequacy Guidelines; Capital Maintenance; Capital: Special Committee 215

Aeronautical Mobile Satellite (Route) Services Next Generation Satellite Services and Equipment; comments due by 10-30- 08; published 9-30-08 [FR E8-22741] Risk-Based Capital Guidelines;

Capital Adequacy Guidelines: Standardized Framework; comments due by 10-27- 08; published 7-29-08 [FR E8-16262]

LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS

This is a continuing list of public bills from the current session of Congress which have become Federal laws. It may be used in conjunction with "P LUS" (Public Laws Update Service) on 202-741- 6043. This list is also available online at http://www.archives.gov/federalregister/laws.html.

The text of laws is not published in the Federal Register but may be ordered in "slip law" (individual pamphlet) form from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 (phone, 202-512-1808). The text will also be made available on the Internet from GPO Access at http:// www.gpoaccess.gov/plaws/ index.html. Some laws may not yet be available.

H.R. 5159/P.L. 110-437 Capitol Visitor Center Act of 2008 (Oct. 20, 2008; 122 Stat. 4983)

S. 31971P.L. 110-438

National Guard and Reservists Debt Relief Act of 2008 (Oct. 20, 2008; 122 Stat. 5000)

Last List October 21, 2008

Public Laws Electronic Notification Service (PENS)

PENS is a free electronic mail notification service of newly enacted public laws. To subscribe, go to http:// listserv.gsa.gov/archives/ publaws-l.html

Note: This service is strictly for E-mail notification of new laws. The text of laws is not available through this service. PENS cannot respond to specific inquiries sent to this address.

# Now Available -Online
through 

# GPOAccess

A Service ofthe U.S. GovernmentPrintingOffice 

# FederalRegister

UpdatedDaily by 6 a.m. ET 

# Easy, Convenient, FREE

Free public connections to the online KeepingAmerica Federal Register are available-throughthe Informed GPO Access service.

To connect over the World Wide Web,

... electronically! go to the Superintendent of Documents' homepage at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara

For further information, contact the GPO Access User Support Team:

Voice: (202) 512-1530 (7 a.m. to 5 p.m.Eastern time). Fax: (202) 512-1262 (24 hours aday, 7 days a week). Internet E-Mail: gpoaccess@gpo.gov

I Re

. 7104)