23300 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 81 / Monday, April 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

and make available for public comment 

an initial regulatory flexibility analysis 

that describes the impact of a proposed 

rule on small entities. However, the 

regulatory flexibility analysis otherwise 

required under the RFA is not required 

if an agency certifies that the rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

(defined in regulations promulgated by 

the Small Business Administration 

(SBA) to include banking organizations 

with total assets of less than or equal to 

$500 million) and publishes its 

certification and a brief explanatory 

statement in the Federal Register 

together with the rule. 

As of December 31, 2013, the OCC 

supervised 1,760 banks (1,153 

commercial banks, 62 trust companies, 

497 Federal savings associations, and 48 

branches or agencies of foreign banks). 

Approximately 1,195 of OCC-supervised 

banks are small entities based on the 

SBA’s definition of small entities for 

RFA purposes. As discussed in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION above, the 

proposed increase in assessments will 

only affect institutions with more than 

$40 billion in total assets. As such, 

pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, 

the OCC certifies that this proposal 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. Accordingly, an initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis is not 

required. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The OCC has analyzed the proposed 

rule under the factors in the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 

(2 U.S.C. 1532). Under this analysis, the 

OCC considered whether the proposed 

rule includes a Federal mandate that 

may result in the expenditure by State, 

local, and tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more in any one year 

(adjusted annually for inflation). The 

OCC has determined that this proposed 

rule will not result in expenditures by 

State, local, and tribal governments, or 

the private sector, of $100 million or 

more in any one year. Accordingly, this 

proposal is not subject to section 202 of 

the Unfunded Mandates Act. 

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 8 

Assessments, National banks, Savings 

associations, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Department of the Treasury 

Office of the Comptroller of the 

Currency 

Authority and Issuance 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the OCC proposes to amend 

12 CFR part 8 as follows: 

PART 8—ASSESSMENT OF FEES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 8 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 12 U.S.C. 16, 93a, 481, 482, 

1467, 1831c, 1867, 3102, 3108, and 

5412(b)(1)(B); and 15 U.S.C. 78c and 78l. 

■ 2. Section 8.2 is amended by revising 

paragraphs (a) introductory text and 

(a)(4) to read as follows: 

§ 8.2 Semiannual assessment. 

(a) Each national bank and each 

Federal savings association shall pay to 

the Comptroller of the Currency a 

semiannual assessment fee, due by 

March 31 and September 30 of each 

year, for the six-month period beginning 

on January 1 and July 1 before each 

payment date. The Comptroller of the 

Currency will calculate the amount due 

under this section and provide a notice 

of assessments to each national bank 

and each Federal savings association no 

later than 7 business days prior to 

collection on March 31 and September 

30 of each year. In setting assessments, 

the Comptroller of the Currency may 

take into account the nature and scope 

of the activities of a national bank or 

Federal savings association, the amount 

and type of assets that the entity holds, 

the financial and managerial condition 

of the entity, and any other factor the 

Comptroller of the Currency determines 

is appropriate, as provided by 12 U.S.C. 

16. The semiannual assessment will be 

calculated as follows: 

* * * * * 

(4) Each year, the OCC may index the 

marginal rates in Column D to adjust for 

the percent change in the level of prices, 

as measured by changes in the Gross 

Domestic Product Implicit Price Deflator 

(GDPIPD) for each June-to-June period. 

The OCC may at its discretion adjust 

marginal rates by amounts other than 

the percentage change in the GDPIPD. 

The OCC will also adjust the amounts 

in Column C to reflect any change made 

to the marginal rate. 

■ 3. Section 8.8 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 8.8 Notice of Office of the Comptroller of 

the Currency fees and assessments. 

(a) December notice of fees and 

assessments. A notice of ‘‘Office of the 

Comptroller of the Currency Fees and 

Assessments’’ shall be published no 

later than the first business day in 

December of each year for fees to be 

charged by the Office during the 

upcoming year. These fees will be 

effective January 1 of that upcoming 

year. 

(b) Interim notice of fees and 

assessments. The OCC may issue an 

‘‘Interim Office of the Comptroller of the 

Currency Fees and Assessments’’ or an 

‘‘Amended Office of the Comptroller of 

the Currency Fees and Assessments’’ 

from time to time throughout the year as 

necessary. Interim or amended notices 

will be effective 30 days after issuance. 

Dated: April 18, 2014. 

Thomas J. Curry, 

Comptroller of the Currency. 

[FR Doc. 2014–09296 Filed 4–25–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–33–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 77 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0134] 

RIN 2120–AF90 

Proposal To Consider the Impact of 

One Engine Inoperative Procedures in 

Obstruction Evaluation Aeronautical 

Studies 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, Department of 

Transportation. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed policy; 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to 

establish a new policy that would 

consider the impact of one engine out 

procedures in the aeronautical study 

process conducted under existing 14 

CFR part 77 criteria when the airport 

operations potentially affected by a 

determination of no hazard are able to 

use a dedicated one engine out flight 

path. Additionally, this proposed policy 

statement notes that the FAA has the 

authority to consider the cumulative 

effects of construction in concentrated 

areas when evaluating the potential for 

a hazard to navigation. 

DATES: Send your comments on or 

before June 27, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 

[identified by Docket Number FAA– 

2014–0134] using any of the following 

methods: 

• Government-wide rulemaking Web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov 

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Operations, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, West 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 81 / Monday, April 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 23301 

Building, Ground Floor, Room W12– 

140, Routing Symbol M–30, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 

20590. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: To Docket 

Operations, Room W12–140 on the 

ground floor of the West Building, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

For more information on the notice 

and comment process, see the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Privacy: We will post all comments 

we receive, without change, to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. For 

more information, see the Privacy Act 

discussion in the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this document. 

Docket: To read background 

documents or comments received, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov at any time 

or to Room W12–140 on the ground 

floor of the West Building, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Speckin, Airport Obstruction Standards 

Committee, Region and Center 

Operations, Office of Finance and 

Management, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (816) 329–3053; email: 7– 

ACE-Federal-Registry-Notice@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

The FAA invites interested persons to 

join in this notice and comment process 

by filing written comments, data, or 

views. The most helpful comments 

reference a specific portion of the 

proposal, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. We ask that you send 

us two copies of written comments. 

We will file in the docket all 

comments we receive, as well as a 

report summarizing each substantive 

public contact with FAA personnel 

about this proposal. The docket is 

available for public inspection before 

and after the comment closing date. If 

you wish to review the docket in 

person, go to the address in the 

ADDRESSES section of this preamble 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

You may also review the docket using 

the Internet at the web address in the 

ADDRESSES section. 

Privacy Act: Using the search function 

of our docket Web site, anyone can find 

and read the comments received into 

any of our dockets. This includes the 

name of the individual sending the 

comment (or signing the comment for an 

association, business, labor union). You 

may review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78) or you may visit http://

regulations.gov. 

Before acting on this proposal, we 

will consider all comments we receive 

on or before the closing date for 

comments. We will consider comments 

filed late if it is possible to do so 

without incurring expense or delay. We 

may change this proposal because of the 

comments we receive. 

If you want the FAA to acknowledge 

receipt of your comments on this 

proposal, include with your comments 

a preaddressed, stamped postcard on 

which the docket number appears. We 

will stamp the date on the postcard and 

mail it to you. 

Proprietary or Confidential Business 

Information 

Do not file in the docket information 

that you consider to be proprietary or 

confidential business information. Send 

or deliver this information directly to 

the person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

document. You must mark the 

information that you consider 

proprietary or confidential. If you send 

the information on a disk or CD–ROM, 

mark the outside of the disk or CD–ROM 

and also identify electronically within 

the disk or CD–ROM the specific 

information that is proprietary or 

confidential. 

Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), when we are 

aware of proprietary information filed 

with a comment, we do not place it in 

the docket. We hold it in a separate file 

to which the public does not have 

access and place a note in the docket 

that we have received it. If we receive 

a request to examine or copy this 

information, we treat it as any other 

request under the Freedom of 

Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). We 

process such a request under the DOT 

procedures found in 49 CFR Part 7. 

Availability of Documents 

You can get an electronic copy using 

the Internet by: 

(1) Searching the Federal 

eRulemaking portal (http://

www.regulations.gov/search); 

(2) Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http://

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies; or 

(3) Accessing the Government 

Printing Office’s Web page at http://

www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/

aces140.html. 

Authority for This Proceeding 

Under Section 40103(a), the 

Administrator has broad authority to 

regulate the safe and efficient use of the 

navigable airspace. The Administrator is 

also authorized to issue air traffic rules 

and regulations to govern the flight, 

navigation, protection, and 

identification of aircraft for the 

protections of persons and property on 

the ground and for the efficient use of 

the navigable airspace (49 U.S.C. 

40103(b)). The Administrator may also 

conduct investigations and prescribe 

regulations, standards, and procedures 

in carrying out the authority under this 

part (49 U.S.C. 40113). The 

Administrator is authorized to protect 

civil aircraft in air commerce (49 U.S.C. 

44701(a)(5)). 

Under Section 44701(a)(5), the 

Administrator promotes safe flight of 

civil aircraft in air commerce by 

prescribing regulations and minimum 

standards for other practices, methods, 

and procedures necessary for safety in 

air commerce and national security. 

Also, Section 44718 provides that under 

regulations issued by the Administrator, 

notice to the agency is required for any 

construction, alteration, establishment, 

or expansion of a structure or sanitary 

landfill, when notice will promote 

safety in air commerce and the efficient 

use and preservation of the navigable 

airspace and airport traffic capacity at 

public use airports. This statutory 

provision also provides that, under 

regulations issued by the Administrator, 

the agency determines whether such 

construction or alteration is an 

obstruction of the navigable airspace, or 

an interference with air navigation 

facilities and equipment or the 

navigable airspace. If a determination is 

made that the construction or alteration 

creates an obstruction or otherwise 

interferes, the agency then conducts an 

aeronautical study. The study evaluates 

the adverse impacts on the safe and 

efficient use of the airspace, facilities or 

equipment, as well as the cumulative 

impact resulting from the proposed 

construction or alteration of a structure 

when combined with the impact of 

other existing or proposed structures. 

Proposed Policy Statement 

Navigable airspace is being 

encroached around the country with the 

net effect of decreasing access for 

aviation operations. Structures as 

diverse as microwave towers to office 

buildings and wind turbines are being 

built in ever-increasing numbers near 

many airports. While developers may 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
23302 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 81 / Monday, April 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

1 Indeed, the increased concentration of 

structures could significantly impact the ability of 

the FAA to mitigate the risk to safety and capacity 

for any reason. Title 49 U.S.C. 44718 specifically 

requires the FAA to consider the cumulative impact 

resulting from the proposed construction or 

alteration of a structure when combined with the 

impact of other existing or proposed structures. 

erect these structures, the FAA must 

consider the impact of the structures on 

the safe operation of flight and their 

impact on the safe, efficient use and 

preservation of the navigable airspace 

and airport capacity and efficiency. 

Additionally, aircraft operators must 

plan for the potential of an engine 

failure (one engine inoperative, or OEI) 

during take-off in accordance with 14 

CFR parts 25, 121, and 135. An engine 

failure could prevent the aircraft from 

climbing at the normal climb rate and 

structures near an airport could, under 

such circumstances, create a safety risk. 

Thus, the agency interest in studying 

the potential impact of these structures 

is not limited solely to whether aircraft 

could avoid the proposed structures 

under normal circumstances. The 

agency should also consider the impact 

of OEI. 

The potential impact of a structure is 

particularly significant at airports where 

existing development or other factors 

effectively limit operator options in an 

OEI situation. At these airports, 

increasing encroachment of the airspace 

may effectively reduce the amount of 

usable runway because of OEI 

procedures.1

The FAA is tasked with multiple 

mandates. Assuring aviation safety is 

the FAA’s primary mission, including 

safety of navigable airspace, aircraft 

safety and airport safety, and 

responsibility for assuring that safety is 

shared by the agency’s air traffic 

organization and aviation safety 

organization. Additionally, the Office of 

Airports is tasked with assuring the 

safety and the continued viability of 

public airports, and with maintaining 

and expanding aviation capacity at 

those airports. To that end, the FAA 

routinely supports significant 

investments at these airports to increase 

airport capacity and efficiency through 

the approval of new runways and 

extension of existing runways. This 

proposed policy statement addresses the 

different mandates of the FAA, while 

recognizing the right of developers to 

erect structures near airports and air 

navigation facilities. 

The FAA is not authorized to grant or 

deny construction projects. Rather, Part 

77 defines a number of obstruction 

standards that are used to identify 

obstacles that may have an adverse 

impact on the navigable airspace. Even 

upon the issuance of a Determination of 

Hazard, the developer is free to continue 

construction. However, zoning 

authorities and private insurers may be 

reluctant to permit construction of the 

structure, given the FAA’s 

determination that it poses a hazard to 

navigation. Should the developer 

proceed with construction, the FAA, 

through its air traffic organization, takes 

action to mitigate the impact of the 

obstruction by altering procedures (e.g., 

departure routes, climb gradients) to 

ensure that safety is maintained. In 

making a hazard determination under 

part 77, the FAA has historically only 

considered aircraft operations under 

normal circumstances. OEI procedures 

have been considered emergency 

procedures and have not been 

considered by the FAA when 

conducting an aeronautical study under 

Part 77. 

As long as the aircraft could operate 

with altered flight tracks, the FAA has 

not considered other potentially costly 

impacts to the carriers. These include, 

for example, greater fuel burn, reduced 

payload, or reduced numbers of 

passengers. As a result, aviation 

flexibility may be compromised, and the 

carriers have noted they are 

experiencing a growing erosion of 

capacity because of the encroachment 

from obstructions near airports. To keep 

up with this situation, the FAA is now 

planning to evaluate a broader 

definition of capacity when evaluating 

new obstacles in a defined OEI 

departure area with the intent to 

preserve the usable runway length at 

federally obligated airports. 

The responsibility to consider all 

obstructions beyond the runway end 

and make the necessary adjustments to 

OEI departure procedures falls upon the 

aircraft operator to ensure safe 

clearance. Every air carrier takeoff 

operation must plan for an engine 

failure. OEI procedures may force an 

operator to reduce the takeoff weight of 

the aircraft, either by reducing the 

number of passengers or the amount of 

cargo or fuel when circumstances 

mandate. 

Historically, the FAA has held that 

this is an economic issue rather than a 

capacity issue largely based on the 

premise that airports are not incurring 

serious encroachment from multiple 

obstructions near the airport. However, 

the last forty years have shown 

economic activity and structures only 

accelerating around airports—creating 

an ever increasing risk. To address this, 

the FAA is planning to integrate the OEI 

requirements within its Part 77 analysis. 

Air carriers believe that the FAA 

should include OEI requirements in its 

Part 77 determinations to help ensure an 

unobstructed departure path in the 

event of an emergency engine-out 

situation. Simply accommodating the 

multiple OEI procedures of all operators 

at an airport is not possible. The OEI 

procedures could be so diverse as to 

effectively create a zone around the 

entire airport where hazard 

determinations would be made at a 

height and distance that the FAA has 

consistently determined no hazard 

exists. Another solution is merited. 

In May of 2008, the FAA initiated and 

sponsored the National OEI Pilot Project 

to develop OEI surface policy guidance. 

It engaged the airport owners/sponsors 

in developing an OEI surface and 

depicting it on the Airport Layout Plan 

(ALP). The OEI Pilot Project utilized the 

specific knowledge, expertise, and 

operational experience of airport 

management, local government/

community, and air carriers to develop 

policy guidance for OEI surfaces that 

would satisfy the needs of the majority 

of airports and air carriers. 

Based on this pilot program, the FAA 

has determined that it is desirable for 

airport owners, with input from users/ 

operators and communities, to define an 

OEI departure area for each runway end 

supporting commercial service 

operations in coordination with the 

FAA. Developing OEI surfaces is a 

voluntary decision the airport owner 

makes in coordination with the FAA, 

with input from the users/operators and 

local community. Once the surface is 

defined for each critical runway end 

and agreed to by all stakeholders, it is 

the intention of the FAA to consider a 

consolidated OEI surface(s) and the 

effects of new structures encroaching 

them under its existing Part 77 

authority. 

Consideration of the dedicated OEI 

surfaces would extend to the full scope 

of existing Part 77 requirements. The 

FAA does not need to amend Part 77 to 

implement this change. Accordingly, 

while the FAA is willing to consider the 

impact of the proposed structure, it 

would not require notification of 

structures solely for the purpose to 

study for possible impact to an OEI 

surface. If a structure does not require 

filing under Part 77 or does not exceed 

an obstruction standard under § 77.17, 

then it will not be studied for possible 

impact to an OEI surface. While aircraft 

operators can choose to develop an OEI 

procedure that is outside of the areas 

covered by Part 77 notice criteria, the 

FAA would not consider those 

procedures when evaluating the 

potential impact of the proposed 

structure on the safety and capacity of 

the navigable airspace or airport. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 81 / Monday, April 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 23303 

2Existing structures within the OEI surface would 

be grandfathered and not subject to this proposed 

policy; however, this proposal would apply to 

modifications to such structures. 

Under this proposed policy, if notice 

of a proposed structure is filed with the 

FAA and the structure would exceed an 

obstruction standard, the structure 

would be a hazard to air navigation if it 

exceed the OEI surface for that runway 

and it was not shielded in accordance 

with paragraph 6–3–13 of FAA Order 

7400.2,2 Procedures for Handling 

Airspace Matters. The FAA invites 

comment on whether additional 

exceptions are warranted to this finding 

of a hazard determination for these 

obstructions. 

The FAA believes any airport and 

experiencing encroachment should 

work with its users during the Master 

Planning process and propose to depict 

a dedicated OEI surface on the Airport 

Layout Plan (ALP). If this results in a 

large number of pending proposals, then 

the FAA will give top priority to those 

submitted by the core airports. Core 

airports are those with more than 1% of 

total enplanements, defined as large 

hubs, or airports with 0.75% or more of 

total non-military itinerant operations. 

These core airports are the most likely 

to have a near-term need to define OEI 

departure areas. FAA will then process 

requests from non-core airports on a 

first come, first served basis, consistent 

with available FAA resources. FAA 

approval of proposed changes to the 

ALP will require consideration of 

potential environmental impacts under 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA). As part of the NEPA review, the 

FAA will identify and appropriately 

address any disproportionately high and 

adverse impacts on minority and low 

income populations in accordance with 

the Executive Order on Environmental 

Justice. 

The FAA intends to amend agency 

guidance and directives to encourage 

airports to collaborate with stakeholders 

to proactively identify OEI departure 

tracks and consider potential impacts of 

land use development upon airport 

capacity. The FAA is seeking input on 

the negative or positive impact from all 

parties that could result from this policy 

change, including developers, airport 

owners, aircraft operators, local 

governments, and any other group that 

feels they will be impacted. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on April 21, 

2014. 

Raymond Towles, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regions 

and Center Operations, Office of Finance and 

Management, Federal Aviation 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2014–09337 Filed 4–24–14; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

20 CFR Part 404 

[Docket No. SSA–2006–0140] 

RIN 0960–AF35 

Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating 

Neurological Disorders 

AGENCY: Social Security Administration. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of 

teleconference. 

SUMMARY: We propose to revise the 

criteria in the Listing of Impairments 

(listings) that we use to evaluate 

disability claims involving neurological 

disorders in adults and children under 

titles II and XVI of the Social Security 

Act (Act). The proposed revisions reflect 

our program experience; advances in 

medical knowledge, treatment, and 

methods of evaluating neurological 

disorders; comments we received from 

medical experts and the public at an 

outreach policy conference; and 

responses to an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking (ANPRM). On 

Monday, May 12, 2014 at 1:00 p.m., 

EDT, we will conduct an informational 

teleconference on certain proposed 

changes to the medical criteria for 

evaluating neurological disorders in the 

Listing of Impairments (listings). The 

teleconference is open to the public and 

will be strictly informational. 

Date and Time: The teleconference 

will take place on Monday, May 12, 

2014 at 1:00 p.m., EDT. 

Teleconference: To join us by 

teleconference, dial phone number 1– 

800–930–7709 and use passcode 

number 112683. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information about this 

teleconference, please contact Cheryl 

Williams, Office of Medical Policy, 

Office of Disability Policy, Social 

Security Administration, 6401 Security 

Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235– 

6401, (410) 965–1020. 

For information on eligibility or filing 

for benefits, call our national toll-free 

number, 1–800–772–1213, or TTY 1– 

800–325–0778, or visit our Internet site, 

Social Security Online, at http://

www.socialsecurity.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

Monday, May 12, 2014 at 1:00 p.m., 

EDT, we will conduct an informational 

teleconference on certain proposed 

changes to the medical criteria for 

evaluating neurological disorders in the 

Listing of Impairments (listings), as 

described in our recent Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking we published in 

the Federal Register on February 25, 

2014 (79 FR 10636). We use the criteria 

in the listings to evaluate the effects of 

neurological disorders in adults and 

children under titles II and XVI of the 

Social Security Act. 

The teleconference is open to the 

public and we invite interested 

individuals to join us. 

• To join the teleconference, dial 

phone number 1–800–930–7709 and use 

passcode number 112683. 

The teleconference will be strictly 

informational. The public comment 

period for the notice of proposed 

rulemaking will be extended through 

May 28, 2014. The presenter will be 

Shirleeta Stanton, Deputy Associate 

Commissioner for Disability Policy. 

Agenda 

1. General background on the 

disability program. 

2. How we revise the listings. 

3. Information we considered when 

we drafted the proposed functional 

criteria in the listings. 

4. Overview of the proposed 

functional criteria in the listings to 

evaluate a person’s neurological 

condition. 

We will post a summary of the 

teleconference in the rulemaking record 

at http://www.regulations.gov. Use the 

Search function of the Web page to find 

docket number SSA–2006–0140 and 

look under Supporting & Related 

Material. 

Dated: April 22, 2014. 

Shirleeta Stanton, 

Deputy Associate Commissioner, Office of 

Disability Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2014–09480 Filed 4–25–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4191–02–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2011–0609; FRL–9909–97– 

OAR] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Alaska: 

Interstate Transport of Pollution 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1