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

.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 andsubject 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


### 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 arecurrently 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


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

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;