17050 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 64 / Monday, April 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

community change it may be necessary 

for the FAA to again revise its policy. 

The FAA special-issuance policy will 

include consideration for depression 

treated with certain antidepressant 

medication under the guidance set forth 

as follows: 

CONSIDERATION FOR SPECIAL ISSUANCE OF A MEDICAL CERTIFICATE WITH REGARD TO DEPRESSION TREATED WITH

MEDICATION

This protocol applies to considerations for special-issuance medical certification for airmen requesting first-, second-, and third-class specialissuance medical certificates, for the exercise of privilege under 14 CFR parts 121, 135, or 91, who are being treated with certain 

antidepressant medications. 

Criteria To Be Considered 

Diagnoses 

Mild to moderate depressive disorders, such as: 

Required Reports and Consultations 

(Initial Consideration) 

1. Major Depressive Disorder (mild to moderate) either single episode or recurrent episode 

2. Dysthymic Disorder 

3. Adjustment disorder with depressed mood 

Pharmacologic Agents Considered 

(Single-Agent Use Only) 

1. Fluoxetine (Prozac); 

2. Sertraline (Zoloft); 

3. Citalopram (Celexa); or 

4. Escitalopram (Lexapro) 

Specifically Unacceptable Diagnoses and or Symptoms 

1. Psychosis 

2. Suicidal ideation 

3. History of electro convulsive therapy (ECT) 

4. Treatment with multiple antidepressant medications concurrently 

5. History of multi-agent drug protocol use (prior use of other psychiatric drugs in conjunction with antidepressant medications) 

Psychiatric Status 

1. All symptoms of the psychiatric condition for which treatment is indicated must be ameliorated by the single medication and the condition must be stable with no change in or exacerbation of symptoms 

for 12 months prior to certification; 

2. Airman must be on a stable dosage of medication for a minimum of 

12 months prior to certification; and 

3. Airman must have no aeromedically significant side effects of prescribed medication. 

1. A consultation status report (and follow-up reports as required) from 

a treating psychiatrist attesting to and describing the applicant’s diagnosis, length and course of treatment, dosage of the antidepressant 

medication taken, and presence of any side effects from the 

antidepressant the applicant takes or has taken in the past; 

2. A written statement prepared by the applicant describing his or her 

history of antidepressant usage and mental health status; 

3. A report of the results of neurocognitive psychological tests with provision of the raw test data, including, but not limited to: 

COGSCREEN AE, Trails A/B; Stroop Test; CCPT, PASSAT, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test; 

4. An evaluation and a written report from a HIMS-trained AME who 

has reviewed items 1., 2., and 3. above and who makes a recommendation for a special-issuance medical certificate; and 

5. Any additional information the Federal Air Surgeon may require to 

make a determination. 

Issued in Washington, DC on March 26, 

2010. 

Frederick E. Tilton, 

Federal Air Surgeon. 

[FR Doc. 2010–7527 Filed 4–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Office of the Secretary 

14 CFR Part 234 

[Docket No. DOT–OST–2010–0039] 

RIN No. 2105–AE00 

Enhancing Airline Passenger 

Protections: Extension of Compliance 

Date for Posting of Flight Delay Data 

on Web Sites 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule; extension of 

compliance date. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Transportation is extending by 60 days, 

i.e., until June 29, 2010, the compliance 

date of the provision in its final rule 

entitled ‘‘Enhancing Airline Passenger 

Protections’’ that requires airlines to 

publish flight delay information on their 

Web sites. This extension is in response 

to requests by several carrier 

associations for an additional 90 days 

time for airlines to comply with the 

requirement to display flight delay data 

on Web sites in view of the extensive 

changes to carriers’ reporting systems 

that are necessitated by the rule and 

their contention that completion of 

these tasks is not possible by April 29, 

2010, the current effective date of the 

requirement. The Department agrees 

that additional time to comply with the 

posting of flight delay information on 

the carriers’ Web sites is warranted to 

ensure the posting of complete and 

accurate information but has 

determined that 60 days is enough time 

for the carriers to do so. Therefore, this 

final rule extends the compliance date 

for the provision in question for an 

additional 60 days, from April 29, 2010, 

to June 29, 2010. 

DATES: This amendment further 

amending the final rule published 

December 30, 2009 (74 FR 69002) is 

effective April 29, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Blane A. Workie or Daeleen M. Chesley, 

Office of the Assistant General Counsel 

for Aviation Enforcement and 

Proceedings, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave., 

SE., Washington, DC 20590, 202–366– 

9342 (phone), 202–366–7152 (fax), 

blane.workie@dot.gov or 

daeleen.chesley@dot.gov (e-mail). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 

10, 2010, the Department of 

Transportation published a notice of 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 64 / Monday, April 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 17051 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the 

Federal Register (75 FR 11075) 

proposing to extend for 45 days the 

compliance date of the provision in its 

final rule entitled ‘‘Enhancing Airline 

Passenger Protections,’’ issued December 

30, 2009, that requires certificated air 

carriers that account for at least 1 

percent of domestic scheduled 

passenger revenues (reporting carriers) 

to provide certain flight delay data on 

their Web sites. Under that provision, a 

reporting carrier must display on its 

Web site flight delay information for 

each flight it operates and for each flight 

its U.S. code-share partners operate for 

which schedule information is 

available. More specifically, the 

provision requires that reporting carriers 

provide on their Web sites the following 

on-time performance information: (1) 

Percentage of arrivals that were on 

time—i.e., within 15 minutes of 

scheduled arrival time; (2) the 

percentage of arrivals that were more 

than 30 minutes late (including special 

highlighting if the flight was late more 

than 50 percent of the time); and (3) the 

percentage of flight cancellations if 5 

percent or more of the flight’s 

operations were canceled in the month 

covered. As published, the effective date 

of the rule is April 29, 2010. 

The Department proposed this 

extension of time in response to 

requests by the Air Transport 

Association of America (ATA), the 

Regional Airline Association (RAA) and 

the Air Carrier Association of America 

(ACAA) that the Department of 

Transportation extend the compliance 

date for publishing flight delay 

information on airlines’ Web sites by 90 

days. The carrier associations stated that 

an additional 90 days time is needed for 

airlines to reprogram their computerized 

reporting systems and displays. 

Interested parties can read the carrier 

associations’ requests to extend the 

compliance date in their entirety at 

DOT–OST–2010–0039. In the NPRM, 

the Department tentatively agreed that 

some extension of time in the 

compliance date for publishing flight 

delay data on airlines’ Web sites may be 

warranted but was not persuaded that a 

90-day extension is justified. 

Comments and DOT’s Response 

The Department received a total of 

five comments on the NPRM. Two were 

from members of industry and the 

others came from consumers and 

consumer associations. On the 

consumer side, Flyersrights.org, a 

consumer advocacy organization, filed 

comments, as did two individuals. As 

for industry commenters, Flights Stats, 

a business that provides flight statistics 

data, and the Air Transport Association 

filed comments. 

Of the individual comments, one 

states generally that the Department 

should not delay the implementation of 

any of the provisions in the passenger 

protection final rule. The second 

individual notes that carriers have 

developed and implemented more 

complex computer systems in shorter 

periods of time, and urges the 

Department to reject the ‘‘wholesale 

request of ATA’’ for an extension while 

supporting the consideration of 

individual airlines applying for an 

extension. Flyersrights.org, on the other 

hand, does not oppose the Department 

granting the requested extension and 

states that ‘‘airline passenger and their 

airlines share the objective of wanting 

accurate, verified information about the 

timeliness or cancellation rate of flight 

operations to be available to 

passengers.’’ The organization notes that 

airlines should provide the required 

information on their Web sites as soon 

as accurate information is available to 

them, even if that is prior to any new 

compliance date granted by the 

Department. 

It is not clear whether or not 

FlightStats supports the carrier 

associations’ requests for an extension 

of the compliance date. It states that it 

is ready and able to help carriers fulfill 

the intention of the rule as it concerns 

flight performance data collection, 

processing and publishing, and can 

serve as a third party entity through 

which carrier and codeshare data can be 

secured. FlightStats also asserts that it 

can provide flight performance 

information to carriers in a form that 

enables them to easily display the 

required data on their Web sites but 

explains that it cannot assume the 

liability associated with data errors or 

omissions. 

ATA states appreciation for the 

Department’s recognition that carriers 

need additional time to comply with 

this requirement and also renews its 

request for a 90-day extension. ATA 

reiterates its concern that 45 days is not 

enough time for carriers to make the 

changes necessary to ensure compliance 

with the additional flight time 

disclosure requirements and again notes 

that compliance with this new 

regulation will require work in several 

company disciplines that must be 

completed in succession. Finally, ATA 

reminds the Department that it 

recognized the difficulty in modifying 

carrier reporting systems and the 

importance of ensuring data integrity in 

allowing longer periods of time for a 

carrier to comply with past changes to 

14 CFR part 234. 

After fully considering the comments 

received, the Department has 

determined that some extension of time 

in the compliance date for publishing 

flight delay data on airlines’ Web sites 

is warranted. The Department is also 

persuaded that carriers need more than 

a 45-day extension. As such, the 

Department is revising 14 CFR 234.11 to 

extend the compliance date of sections 

234.11(b) and (c) by an additional 60 

days until June 29, 2010. We believe 

this revised compliance date, which 

affords carriers a total of 180 days time 

after issuance of the rule, provides the 

airlines adequate time to comply with 

the requirement to provide certain flight 

delay data on their Web sites. As noted 

in the NPRM, this extension of time is 

limited to the portion of our ‘‘Enhancing 

Airline Passenger Protections’’ rule 

described above dealing with 

publication on carrier Web sites of flight 

delay data and the compliance date for 

the other provisions is April 29, 2010. 

We took a number of factors into 

consideration in deciding to extend 

until June 29, 2010, the compliance date 

for the requirements pertaining to 

publishing delay data on carriers’ Web 

sites. We agree with Flyersrights.org, a 

major proponent of passengers’ rights, 

that it is important that sufficient time 

be provided to carriers to enable them 

to post accurate information on their 

Web sites. The posting of flight delay 

data would not be beneficial to 

consumers if the carriers are not able to 

implement and design their systems to 

reflect accurate information. With 

respect to ATA’s assertion that carriers 

need a 90-day extension in which to 

comply with this provision, the 

Department notes that at least one 

company, Flightstats, appears to have 

much of the required flight delay data 

available and states that the data can be 

made available to the carriers. Further, 

by extending the compliance date for 

the provision in the rule that requires 

airlines to publish detailed flight delay 

information on their Web site until June 

29, 2010, carriers will have more than 

80 days time after the original effective 

date of the rule to load the required 

flight delay information into their 

internal reservation systems. This is 

because the rule requires carriers to 

upload information into their internal 

reservation system between the 20th 

and 23rd day of the month after the 

month for which the information is 

being provided. By granting the carriers 

a 60-day extension in the compliance 

date of the provision in question (i.e., 

until June 29, 2010), carriers will have 

until between July 20 and 23, 2010, or 

at least 81 days after April 29, 2010, to 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
17052 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 64 / Monday, April 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

ensure compliance with the flight time 

disclosure requirements in the rule. 

Taking into consideration all the 

comments, including the fact that there 

are limited objections to ATA’s request 

for an extension of time, the Department 

believes this timeline adequately 

balances the benefit of having accurate 

and complete flight delay data available 

to consumers with the capability of 

airlines to comply with the additional 

requirements being imposed upon them 

in a reasonable timeframe. 

Regulatory Analyses and Notices 

A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review) and DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

This final rule is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866 and the Department of 

Transportation’s Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures. Accordingly, this final rule 

has not been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Pursuant to section 605 of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 

U.S.C. 605(b), as amended by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement and 

Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), DOT 

certifies that this final rule does not 

have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The final rule does not impose any 

duties or obligations on small entities. 

C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

This Final Rule does not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, and therefore does 

not have federalism implications. 

D. Executive Order 13084 

This Final Rule has been analyzed in 

accordance with the principles and 

criteria contained in Executive Order 

13084 (‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments’’). 

Because the rule does not significantly 

or uniquely affect the communities of 

the Indian tribal governments or impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

them, the funding and consultation 

requirements of Executive Order 13084 

do not apply. 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) requires 

that DOT consider the impact of 

paperwork and other information 

collection burdens imposed on the 

public and, under the provisions of PRA 

section 3507(d), obtain approval from 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for each collection of 

information it conducts, sponsors, or 

requires through regulations. DOT has 

determined that there are no new 

information collection requirements 

associated with this final rule. The final 

rule allows an additional 60 days to 

comply with a regulatory provision 

whose paperwork impact has already 

been analyzed by the Department. 

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Department has determined that 

the requirements of Title II of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

do not apply to this Final Rule. 

Issued this March 30, 2010, in Washington, 

DC. 

Ray LaHood, 

Secretary of Transportation. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 234 

Air carriers, Consumer protection, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Department further 

amends 14 CFR part 234 as amended in 

the final rule published December 30, 

2009 (74 FR 69002), effective April 29, 

2010, as follows: 

PART 234—AIRLINE SERVICE 

QUALITY PERFORMANCE REPORTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 234 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 329 and chapters 401 

and 417. 

■ 2. In § 234.11, as amended in the final 

rule published December 30, 2009 (74 

FR 69002), effective April 29, 2010, add 

paragraph (d) to read as follows: 

§ 234.11 Disclosure to consumers. 

* * * * * 

(d) A reporting carrier must meet the 

requirements of paragraphs (b) and (c) of 

this section by June 29, 2010. 

[FR Doc. 2010–7627 Filed 4–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

15 CFR Parts 740, 748, 750, and 762 

[Docket No. 0907201151–0114–02] 

RIN 0694–AE66 

Issuance of Electronic Documents and 

Related Recordkeeping Requirements 

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule enables BIS to 

eliminate the paper versions of most 

export and reexport licenses, notices of 

denial of license applications, notices of 

return of a license application without 

action, notices of results of classification 

requests, License Exception AGR 

notification results, and encryption 

review request results. This rule also 

changes certain recordkeeping 

requirements associated with the 

elimination of paper documents. BIS is 

making these changes to reduce mailing 

costs and to free up staff time currently 

devoted to mailing these documents for 

use in other tasks. 

DATES: This rule is effective May 5, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas Andrukonis, Office of Exporter 

Services, Bureau of Industry and 

Security, U.S. Department of Commerce 

at 202 482 6393 or e-mail 

tandrukoi@bis.doc.gov 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Bureau of Industry and Security 

administers an export licensing program 

pursuant to the Export Administration 

Regulations. As part of this program, 

BIS issues various documents in 

response to applications and 

notifications submitted to BIS by the 

public. Those documents include export 

licenses, reexport licenses, notices that 

an export or reexport license application 

has been denied, notices that an export 

or reexport license application is being 

returned to the applicant without 

action, responses to License Exception 

AGR notifications, notices of the results 

of classification requests, and notices of 

the results of encryption review 

requests. Collectively, these documents 

are referred to in this preamble as 

‘‘license related documents.’’ 

Currently, BIS issues license related 

documents in two ways: Electronically 

in BIS’s Simplified Network 

Application Processing Redesign system 

(SNAP–R) and on paper. Most license 

related documents are issued in both 

electronic and paper form. However, a 

few such documents are issued only on 

paper. On December 4, 2009, BIS issued 

a proposed rule that would allow it to 

eliminate the paper version of the 

license related documents that it 

currently issues both electronically in 

SNAP–R and on paper (74 FR 63685, 

December 4, 2009). The last day of the 

comment period for that proposed rule 

was February 2, 2010. BIS received no 

public comments on that proposed rule. 

Accordingly, this final rule adopts the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES