Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 166 / Friday, August 27, 2010 / Notices 52807 

.pdf file format. Please reference in the 

proposal if the maps are available. 

9. Describe a measurement plan to 

determine whether or not the project 

achieved its intended results. The 

measurement plan should continue for 

3 years beyond the completion date of 

the project. After the 3-year period, a 

final report quantifying the results of the 

project should be submitted to the 

FHWA. 

10. Proposals should not exceed 20 

pages in length. 

Special Note: A description of the project 

management approach that will guide 

advancement of the project must be included 

for project applications proposing ITS or 

other technology based truck parking 

solutions. The FHWA encourages in the 

project management approach a minimum of 

a communications plan, a risk management 

plan and a work breakdown structure. 

V. Application Review Information 

Grant applications that contain the 

elements detailed in this notice will be 

scored competitively according to the 

soundness of their methodology and 

subject to the criteria listed below. Subfactors listed under each factor are of 

equal importance unless otherwise 

noted. 

A. Scoring Criteria 

1. Demonstration of severe shortage 

(number of spaces, access to existing 

spaces or information/knowledge of 

space availability) of commercial motor 

vehicle parking capacity/utilization in 

the corridor. (Multi-State highway 

corridors are the focus of these projects. 

Consider the business requirements of 

getting the goods to market, while also 

considering the government regulations 

associated with hours of service.) (20 

percent) 

Examples used to demonstrate severe 

shortage may include: 

Æ ADTT in proposal area. 

Æ Average daily shortfall of truck 

parking in proposal area. 

Æ Ratio of ADTT to average daily 

shortfall of truck parking in proposal 

area. 

Æ Proximity to NHS. 

2. The extent to which the proposed 

solution resolves the described shortage. 

(35 percent) 

Examples should include: 

Æ Number of truck parking spaces per 

day that will be used as a result of the 

proposed solution. 

Æ The effect on highway safety, 

economic competitiveness and 

sustainability, traffic congestion, and/or 

air quality. 

3. Cost effectiveness of proposal. (25 

percent) 

Examples should include: 

Æ How many truck parking spaces 

will be used per day per dollar 

expended. 

Æ Total cost of project, including all 

non-Federal funds that will be 

contributed to the project. 

4. Scope of proposal. (20 percent) 

Examples should include: 

Æ Evidence of a wide range of input 

from affected parties, including State 

and local governments, community 

groups, private providers of commercial 

motor vehicle parking, and motorist and 

trucking organizations. 

Æ For projects that are ITS-based, the 

project management plan presented in 

the application should demonstrate the 

project will successfully be delivered. 

Æ Whether the principles outlined in 

the proposal can be applied to other 

locations/projects and possibly serve as 

a model for other locations. 

B. Review Standards 

1. All applications for grants should 

be submitted to the e-mail address or 

mailing address provided in this Notice 

by the date specified in this notice. 

2. Applicants should ensure that the 

project proposal is compatible with or 

documented on their planning 

documents (TIP and STIP). They should 

also validate, to the extent they can, any 

analytic data. 

3. Each application will be reviewed 

for conformance with the provisions in 

this notice. 

4. Applications lacking any of the 

mandatory elements or arriving after the 

deadline for submission will not be 

considered. To assure full 

consideration, proposals should not 

exceed 20 pages in length. 

5. Applicants may be contacted for 

additional information or clarification. 

6. Applications complying with the 

requirements outlined in this notice will 

be evaluated competitively by a review 

panel, and will be scored as described 

in the scoring criteria. 

7. If the FHWA determines that the 

project is technically or financially 

unfeasible, FHWA will notify the 

applicant, in writing. 

8. The FHWA reserves the right to 

partially fund or request modification of 

projects. 

9. All information described in the 

submitter’s proposal elements should be 

quantifiable and sourced. 

VI. Award Administration Information 

The Secretary recognizes that each 

funded project is unique, and therefore 

may attach conditions to project award 

documents. The FHWA will send an 

award letter with a grant agreement that 

contains all the terms and conditions for 

the grant. These successful applicants 

must execute and return the grant 

agreement, accompanied by any 

additional items required by the grant 

agreement. 

Authority: Section 1305, Pub. L. 109–59, 

119 Stat. 1214, Aug. 10, 2005; Section 411, 

Pub. L. 111–147, 124 Stat. 78. 

Issued on: August 17, 2010. 

Victor M. Mendez, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21323 Filed 8–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory 

Committee; Transport Airplane and 

Engine Issues—New Task 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of new task assignment 

for the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory 

Committee (ARAC). 

SUMMARY: The FAA assigned the 

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory 

Committee a new task to review and 

submit recommendations in response to 

the Federal Aviation Administration’s 

approach to update, reorganize and 

improve the level of safety of 

requirements for flammability of 

materials. This notice is to inform the 

public of this ARAC activity. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff 

Gardlin, Airframe/Cabin Safety Branch, 

ANM–115, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue, 

SW., Renton, Washington 98057, 

telephone (425) 227–2194, facsimile 

(425) 227–1149; e-mail jeff.gardlin@faa.

gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The FAA established the Aviation 

Rulemaking Advisory Committee to 

provide advice and recommendations to 

the FAA Administrator on the FAA’s 

rulemaking activities with respect to 

aviation-related issues. This includes 

obtaining advice and recommendations 

on flammability requirements for 

interior materials on transport category 

airplanes. The committee will address 

the task under ARAC’s Transport 

Airplane and Engine Issues and has 

established a new Materials 

Flammability Working Group to support 

this task. 

The flammability requirements for 

interior materials on transport category 

airplanes have evolved significantly 

over the years, and have become more 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES

52808 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 166 / Friday, August 27, 2010 / Notices 

threat-based. That is, a realistic test 

method based on the type of fire hazard 

most critical for the components in 

question. Historically, these 

requirements were based on a mix of 

threat, usage (e.g., sidewall), and 

material type (e.g., elastomeric 

materials). This has led to multiple 

requirements applying to the same 

component; conflicting requirements for 

the same component depending on what 

material it is made from; and ambiguous 

requirements for components not 

explicitly listed in § 25.853 or Appendix 

F, part I. This last aspect results in the 

requirements of § 25.853 or Appendix F, 

part I, being obsolete whenever 

materials change or incomplete because 

components that have been developed 

since the regulation and Appendix F 

were issued are not specifically 

identified. 

The FAA has drafted an approach that 

would simplify compliance 

demonstrations, and upgrade the level 

of safety for flammability throughout the 

airplane. The objective of the proposed 

approach is to completely revisit the 

flammability requirements and take 

advantage of the wealth of data available 

from FAA research and advances in 

material fire safety to provide a simpler 

regulation that provides a higher level of 

safety for transport category airplanes. 

This initiative originated in response 

to a request by aviation industry 

organizations who participate in the 

International Aircraft Materials Fire Test 

Working Group. The working group is 

sponsored by the FAA’s William J. 

Hughes Technical Center and is not 

affiliated with the ARAC. 

The proposed approach would clearly 

delineate threat-based requirements, 

primarily based on a component’s 

function and location in the airplane. 

Appendix F to part 25 could be 

organized based on these threats, and 

the current part I, in particular, could be 

greatly simplified. In addition, this 

approach could include new 

requirements pertaining to inaccessible 

areas of the airplane, where in-flight fire 

is the greatest risk, by expanding the 

requirements to include air ducts and 

electrical wiring systems, as well as 

other high volume materials. This could 

include § 25.855 for materials in cargo 

compartments. The approach would 

also generalize the requirements for heat 

release and smoke emissions to include 

all exposed large surface areas in the 

passenger cabin. This would eliminate 

the need for special conditions that are 

currently required for seats with nontraditional, large, non-metallic panels. 

Because this task could result in a 

significant change to the type 

certification requirements, the FAA is 

very interested in obtaining 

international harmonization. Therefore, 

the FAA specifically invites the 

participation of other regulatory 

authorities in developing the responses 

to the below task. 

The Task 

The ARAC is asked to consider the 

merits of the FAA’s proposed approach 

for a threat-based structure for part 25, 

Appendix F, and make 

recommendations for improvement, 

classification of the various parts of 

Appendix F, and advisory material 

necessary for implementation. 

FAA will provide ARAC with the 

proposed approach. The ARAC working 

group is expected to produce a report 

within 18 months from publication of 

the tasking statement in the Federal 

Register. The report should address the 

following questions for the proposed 

approach, including the rationale for the 

responses. 

1. Is the proposed threat-based 

approach for § 25.853 and Appendix F, 

parts II through VII organized correctly? 

2. Is Appendix F, part I, necessary for 

items covered in parts II through VII? 

3. Are there regions of the airplane 

not currently covered by flammability 

requirements that should be? 

4. Can the flammability requirements 

be further simplified while maintaining 

or improving the existing level of safety? 

5. How should non-metallic structure 

(e.g., airframe and seats) be addressed? 

6. What advisory material is needed to 

implement the new structure? 

Schedule: Required Completion date 

is 18 months after the FAA publishes 

the task in the Federal Register. 

ARAC Acceptance of Task 

ARAC accepted the task and assigned 

the task to the newly formed Materials 

Flammability Working Group, Transport 

Airplane and Engine Issues. The 

working group serves as staff to ARAC 

and assists in the analysis of assigned 

tasks. ARAC must review and approve 

the working group’s recommendations. 

If ARAC accepts the working group’s 

recommendations, it will forward them 

to the FAA. 

Working Group Activity 

The Materials Flammability Working 

Group must comply with the procedures 

adopted by ARAC. As part of the 

procedures, the working group must: 

1. Recommend a work plan for 

completion of the task, including the 

rationale supporting such a plan for 

consideration at the next meeting of the 

ARAC on Transport Airplane and 

Engine Issues held following 

publication of this notice. 

2. Give a detailed conceptual 

presentation of the proposed 

recommendations prior to proceeding 

with the work stated in item 3 below. 

3. Draft the appropriate documents 

and required analyses and/or any other 

related materials or documents. 

4. Provide a status report at each 

meeting of the ARAC held to consider 

Transport Airplane and Engine Issues. 

Participation in the Working Group 

The Materials Flammability Working 

Group will be composed of technical 

experts having an interest in the 

assigned task. A working group member 

need not be a member, or a 

representative of a member, of the full 

committee. 

If you have expertise in the subject 

matter and wish to become a member of 

the working group, write to the person 

listed under the caption FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT expressing that 

desire. Describe your interest in the task 

and state the expertise you would bring 

to the working group. We must receive 

all requests by September 16, 2010. The 

assistant chair and the assistant 

executive director will review the 

requests and advise you whether or not 

your request is approved. 

If you are chosen for membership on 

the working group, you must represent 

your aviation community segment and 

actively participate in the working 

group by attending all meetings, and 

providing written comments when 

requested to do so. You must devote the 

resources necessary to support the 

working group in meeting any assigned 

deadlines. You must keep your 

management chain and those you 

represent advised of working group 

activities and decisions to ensure that 

the proposed technical solutions don’t 

conflict with your sponsoring 

organization’s position when the subject 

being considered is presented to ARAC 

for approval. Once the working group 

has begun deliberations, members will 

not be added or substituted without the 

approval of the assistant chair, the 

assistant executive director and the 

working group chair. 

The Secretary of Transportation 

determined that the formation and use 

of the ARAC is necessary and in the 

public interest in connection with the 

performance of duties imposed on the 

FAA by law. 

Meetings of the ARAC are open to the 

public. Meetings of the Materials 

Flammability Working Group will not 

be open to the public, except to the 

extent individuals with an interest and 

expertise are selected to participate. The 

FAA will make no public 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 166 / Friday, August 27, 2010 / Notices 52809 

announcement of working group 

meetings. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 23, 

2010. 

Pamela Hamilton-Powell, 

Executive Director, Aviation Rulemaking 

Advisory Committee. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21333 Filed 8–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. FMCSA-2010–0202] 

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption 

Applications; Diabetes Mellitus 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA). 

ACTION: Notice of applications for 

exemption from the diabetes mellitus 

standard; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of 

applications from 39 individuals for 

exemption 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 CMVs in interstate 

commerce. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 27, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

bearing the Federal Docket Management 

System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA– 

2010–0202 using any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: West Building 

Ground Floor, 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. 

Instructions: Each submission must 

include the Agency name and the 

docket numbers for this Notice. Note 

that all comments received will be 

posted without change to http://www.

regulations.gov, including any personal 

information provided. Please see the 

Privacy Act heading below for further 

information. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov at any time or 

Room W12–140 on the ground level 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. The 

Federal Docket Management System is 

available 24 hours each day, 365 days 

each year. If you want acknowledgment 

that we received your comments, please 

include a self-addressed, stamped 

envelope or postcard or print the 

acknowledgement page that appears 

after submitting comments on-line. 

Privacy Act: Anyone may search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or of the person signing the 

comment, if submitted on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

You may review DOT’s Privacy Act 

Statement for the FDMS published in 

the Federal Register on January 17, 

2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit 

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/

E8–785.pdf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical 

Programs, (202) 366–4001, 

fmcsamedical@dot.gov, FMCSA, 

Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey 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. 

Background 

Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, 

FMCSA may grant an exemption from 

the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Regulations for a 2-year period if it finds 

‘‘such exemption would likely achieve a 

level of safety that is equivalent to, or 

greater than, the level that would be 

achieved absent such exemption.’’ The 

statute also allows the Agency to renew 

exemptions at the end of the 2-year 

period. The 39 individuals listed in this 

notice have recently requested such an 

exemption from the diabetes prohibition 

in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), which applies to 

drivers of CMV in interstate commerce. 

Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate 

the qualifications of each applicant to 

determine whether granting the 

exemption will achieve the required 

level of safety mandated by the statutes. 

Qualifications of Applicants 

Angel Bergendale 

Mr. Bergendale, age 30, has had ITDM 

since 2010. His endocrinologist 

examined him in 2010 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 in the past 5 years; understands 

diabetes management and monitoring; 

has stable control of his diabetes using 

insulin; and is able to drive a CMV 

safely. Mr. Bergendale meets the 

requirements of the vision standard at 

49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist 

examined him in 2010 and certified that 

he does not have diabetic retinopathy. 

He holds a Class D operator’s license 

from Massachusetts. 

Charles K. Bond 

Mr. Bond, 45, has had ITDM since 

2009. His endocrinologist examined him 

in 2010 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 in the 

past 5 years; understands diabetes 

management and monitoring; has stable 

control of his diabetes using insulin; 

and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. 

Bond meets the requirements of the 

vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). 

His ophthalmologist examined him in 

2010 and certified that he has stable 

nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. 

He holds a Class A Commercial Driver’s 

License (CDL) from Pennsylvania. 

Dennis J. Callanan 

Mr. Callanan, 56, has had ITDM since 

2008. His endocrinologist examined him 

in 2010 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 in the 

past 5 years; understands diabetes 

management and monitoring; has stable 

control of his diabetes using insulin; 

and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. 

Callanan meets the requirements of the 

vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). 

His ophthalmologist examined him in 

2010 and certified that he does not have 

diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D 

operator’s license from Massachusetts. 

Philip F. Carpenter 

Mr. Carpenter, 50, has had ITDM 

since 2009. His endocrinologist 

examined him in 2010 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 in the past 5 years; understands 

diabetes management and monitoring; 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES