        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [Docket No. 080627793-8795-01]
        RIN 0648-AW81
        Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Monkfish Fishery

          AGENCY:
          National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS is proposing to implement a new management measure for the monkfish fishery recommended in Framework Adjustment 6 (Framework 6) to the Monkfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP), which has been submitted jointly by the New England and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Councils (Councils). This action would eliminate the backstop provision adopted in Framework Adjustment 4 (Framework 4) to the FMP, which was implemented in October 2007. This provision would have adjusted, and possibly closed, the directed monkfish fishery in fishing year (FY) 2009 if the landings in FY 2007 exceeded the target total allowable catch (TTAC). Given the most recent information on the status of monkfish stocks, the backstop provision is no longer deemed necessary.

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received no later than 5 p.m. eastern standard time, on August 11, 2008.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by RIN number 0648-AW81, by any of the following methods:

          • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking portal http://www.regulations.gov.
          • Fax: (978) 281-9135, Attn: Emily Bryant.
          • Mail: Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional Administrator, NMFS, Northeast Regional Office, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope: “Comments on Monkfish Framework 6.”

          Instructions: All comments received are part of the public record and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

          NMFS will accept anonymous comments. Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted via Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only. Copies of the Environmental Assessment (EA), including the Regulatory Impact Review (RIR) and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), prepared for Framework 6 are available upon request from Paul Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC), 50 Water Street, Newburyport, MA, 01950. The document is also available online at www.nefmc.org.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Emily Bryant, Fishery Management Specialist, phone (978) 281-9244, fax (978) 281-9135.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background
        The monkfish fishery is jointly managed by the Councils, with the New England Council having the administrative lead. The fishery extends from Maine to North Carolina, and is divided into two management units: The Northern Fishery Management Area (NFMA) and the Southern Fishery Management Area (SFMA).
        Framework 4 included a “backstop” provision that would adjust, and possibly close, the directed monkfish fishery in FY 2009 if the landings in FY 2007 exceeded the TTAC. This provision would adjust the days-at-sea (DAS) allocations for either or both management areas in FY 2009 if the TTACs are exceeded by between 10 and 30 percent during FY 2007, or close the directed fishery in FY 2009 if the TTACs are exceeded by more than 30 percent. Because of scientific uncertainty concerning the status of the monkfish resource, NMFS deferred implementing Framework 4 and conducted a new stock assessment. The Northeast Data Poor Stocks Working Group (DPWG) completed and accepted the new assessment in July 2007. The results of this assessment indicated that neither monkfish stock is overfished, overfishing is no longer occurring, and both stocks are rebuilt based on the new modeling approach and the newly recommended biomass reference points. The July 2007 assessment report emphasized, however, that in addition to the fact that this assessment was the first to use the new analytical model, there was a high degree of uncertainty in the analyses due to the dependence on assumptions about natural mortality, growth rates, and other model inputs. In light of this counsel, NMFS approved and implemented Framework 4 measures, which became effective on October 22, 2007 (72 FR 53942, September 21, 2007).
        Framework Adjustment 5 (Framework 5), implemented on May 1, 2008 (73 FR 22831, April 28, 2008), adopted the revised reference points recommended by the DPWG, and implemented other measures that will reduce the likelihood of TTAC overages in FY 2008 and beyond. Under the revised biomass reference points in Framework 5, both monkfish stocks are no longer considered overfished, and are considered to be rebuilt. Therefore, there is no longer a stock rebuilding program for the monkfish fishery.
        In support of the recent adjustments to the FMP, consistent with the results of the DPWG assessment, Framework 6 would eliminate the backstop provision adopted in Framework 4. Available landings information for FY 2007 indicate that the TTAC was exceeded by more than 30 percent in the SFMA. Given the most recent information on the status of monkfish stocks, including the revised reference points established through Framework 5 and the expected minimal biological impact of a 30-percent TTAC overage on stock status, the backstop provision is no longer deemed necessary. In addition, as noted above, Framework 5 included measures aimed at keeping landings within the TTACs.
        Technical Correction to Monkfish FMP Regulations
        This rule proposes to correct the regulations implementing the FMP. The final rule implementing the Standardized Bycatch Recording Methodology (SBRM) Omnibus Amendment (73 FR 4736, January 28, 2008) inadvertently revised § 648.96(b)(5), thereby deleting the regulations pertaining to the backstop provision introduced by Framework 4. As a result, the text referencing the annual review process at § 648.96(a) is redundant with the existing text under § 648.96 (b)(5). Therefore, this action would remove the redundant text under § 648.96 (b)(5) referencing the annual review process and would simultaneously remove and reserve paragraph (b)(5) for the purpose of removing the reference to the TTAC overage backstop provision that was added through the final rule implementing Framework 4.
        Classification
        NMFS has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the FMP and has preliminarily determined it is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and other applicable laws.
        This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

        An IRFA was prepared for Framework 6, as required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA consists of the discussion in the preamble of the proposed rule and this section, and the analysis of impacts in Framework 6. The IRFA describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this action are contained in the preamble and in the SUMMARY of this proposed rule. A copy of this analysis is available from the NEFMC (see ADDRESSES). A summary of the analysis follows:
        This action would remove an existing measure (TTAC overage backstop provision) that was implemented when there were concerns regarding potential overfishing of monkfish as the FMP neared the end of its rebuilding period. Changes in the biological reference points under Framework 5 showed that monkfish are no longer overfished, and overfishing is not occurring. In addition, current population modeling indicates that TTAC overage levels of 30 percent would not change the monkfish stock status. Consequently, retaining the existing effort reduction measures for FY 2009, under the no action alternative, would have a negative economic impact on the fishery, without materially aiding in the rebuilding of the stock. No other alternatives were considered because the purpose of the action is to remove a measure deemed unnecessary based upon best scientific information available.
        The regulations implementing the FMP, found at 50 CFR part 648, authorize the Council to adjust management measures as needed to achieve FMP goals. The objective of this action is to achieve the goals of the FMP while minimizing adverse economic impacts. Thus, the proposed action is consistent with the goals of the FMP and its implementing regulations.
        All of the entities (fishing vessels) affected by this action are considered small entities under the Small Business Administration size standards for small fishing businesses ($4.0 million in gross sales). As of March 14, 2008, there were 765 limited access monkfish permit holders and 2,211 vessels holding an open access Category E permit. Based on vessel trip report records in FY 2006, 615 limited access permit holders participated in the monkfish fishery. During the same period, 567 incidental permit holders reported landing monkfish.
        This action would affect limited access monkfish permit holders that fished, at some time, in the SFMA. Based on vessel activity reports from FY 2006 (the most recent fishing year for which complete information is available) this action could affect 462 limited access monkfish vessels, including 229 vessels that fishing only in the SFMA, and the 233 vessels that fished in both the NFMA and SFMA.

        This action does not introduce any new reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements. This proposed rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with other Federal rules.

        Economic Impacts of the Proposed Framework 6 Measure
        The proposed action is a single measure that would only affect limited access monkfish vessels that fish in the SFMA. In the absence of this measure, it is assumed that the directed monkfish fishery would close in the SFMA in FY 2009, based upon preliminary landings in FY 2007 indicating that the TTAC was exceeded by more than 30 percent. Conversely, under the proposed action, restrictions on effort would not be required in FY 2009. Using a trip model, it was estimated that the proposed measure would result in positive or neutral changes in vessel net revenues, crew payments, and monkfish revenues in FY 2009, compared to the status quo.

          List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648

        Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Dated: July 2, 2008.
          John Oliver,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator For Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service.

        For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is proposed to be amended as follows:

          PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES

        1. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
          16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

        2. In § 648.96, paragraph (b)(5) is removed and reserved, and paragraph (b)(6) is revised to read as follows:

          § 648.96
          Monkfish annual adjustment process and framework specifications.
          (b) * * *
          (6) Management measures for FY 2010 and beyond. If a regulatory action is not implemented to establish management measures for the monkfish fishery for FY 2010 or subsequent years, the management measures in effect during FY 2009 (i.e., trip limits and DAS allocations) shall remain in effect.

      [FR Doc. E8-15613 Filed 7-9-08; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
        Fish and Wildlife Service
        50 CFR Part 17
        [FWS-R1-ES-2008-0096; MO 922105083-B2]
        RIN 1018-AW34
        Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Plant Lepidium papilliferum (Slickspot Peppergrass) as Endangered

          AGENCY:
          Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; reopening of comment period and notice of document availability.

          SUMMARY:

          We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the availability of new information relevant to our consideration of the status of
            Lepidium papilliferum (slickspot peppergrass), proposed for listing as endangered, under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We, therefore, announce the reopening of the comment period on the proposed listing and invite interested members of the public to submit comments on this new information as it applies to the status and proposed listing of L. papilliferum. Information previously submitted for this proposed listing need not be resubmitted, as all information already received regarding this proposed listing will be incorporated into the public record and fully considered in our evaluation.

          DATES:
          To allow adequate time for consideration of your comments, all information should be submitted to us by April 16, 2009.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal:  http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
          • U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: Docket FWS-R1-ES-2008-0096; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.

          We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section below for more information).

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Jeffery L. Foss, State Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office, by mail at 1387 S. Vinnell Way, Room 368, Boise, ID 83709; by telephone at 208-378-5243; by facsimile at 208/378-5262; or by electronic mail at: fw1srbocomment@fws.gov. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Background
        For a detailed description of Federal actions concerning Lepidium papilliferum, please refer to the September 19, 2008, Notice Reopening the Comment Period on the Proposed Rule to List Lepidium papilliferum as Endangered (73 FR 54345) and the January 12, 2007, Withdrawal Notice published in the Federal Register (72 FR 1621). A summary of the most recent Federal actions concerning the species is provided here.

        The notice that published on January 12, 2007 (72 FR 1621), served to withdraw our July 15, 2002, proposed rule (67 FR 46441) to list Lepidium papilliferum as endangered under the Act. The withdrawal of the proposed rule was based on our conclusion that, while the best available information indicated that certain threat factors were degrading the species' sagebrush-steppe matrix habitat, there was little evidence that these threats were negatively affecting the abundance of L. papilliferum, which inhabits slickspot microsites within the sagebrush-steppe ecosystem. In addition, we concluded that annual abundance of the plant was strongly correlated with spring precipitation, and therefore the high degree of variability observed in plant abundance over time was to be expected. Information on the plant's overall population trend was inconsistent, as it appeared to be decreasing in recent years in a subset of the species' range, but appeared to be increasing over those same years on a rangewide scale as expected in response to increased rainfall. Finding no consistent evidence of a rangewide negative population trend for the species, we concluded that L. papilliferum did not meet the definition of a threatened or endangered species under the Act.

        On June 4, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho vacated the Service's January 2007 withdrawal notice and remanded the decision to the Service for further consideration consistent with the Court's opinion (Western Watersheds Project v. Jeffery Foss et al., Case No. 07-161-E-MHW). In response to the Court's decision, the Service notified the public on September 19, 2008, of the reinstatement of the July 15, 2002, proposed rule to list Lepidium papilliferum as endangered and opened a public comment period for 30 days through October 20, 2008. We received a total of seven comments during that comment period.

        Since the closure of the last comment period, new information has become available that is relevant to our evaluation of the proposed listing of Lepidium papilliferum. To ensure that our review of the species' status is complete and based on the best available scientific and commercial information, we are soliciting comments on this new information as it relates to the status and proposed listing of L. papilliferum. We have also specifically requested peer review of this new information and its relevance to the status of L. papilliferum from experts familiar with the species or its habitat; these reviews will also be accepted during this comment period.
        New Information Available for Review

        Information received, developed, or analyzed since the last comment period ended on October 20, 2008, is available for review by accessing the Web site http://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID FWS-R1-ES-2008-0096) or by contacting the State Supervisor (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT above). This information includes, but is not limited to, the following documents:
        (1) Analysis of Slickspot Peppergrass (Lepidium papilliferum) Population Trends on Orchard Training Area and Rangewide Implications (Sullivan and Nations 2009);
        (2) Lepidium papilliferum (Slickspot peppergrass) Evaluation of Trends 2004-2007 (Unnasch 2008);
        (3) Analysis of Lepidium papilliferum monitoring data collected on the Inside Desert (Owyhee Plateau) (2000-2002) (Wells and Popovich 2009);

        (4) GIS Analysis for the 2009 Status Review of Slickspot Peppergrass (Lepidium papilliferum) (Stoner 2009).

        The public comments received during the most recent public comment period, which closed on October 20, 2008, are also accessible for viewing at http://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID FWS-R1-ES-2008-0096), or by contacting the State Supervisor (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT above).
        Public Comments
        We will base any final action resulting from the proposed rule on the best scientific and commercial data available and intend to be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request comments or suggestions on the proposed rule from the public, other concerned governmental agencies, the scientific community, industry, and any other interested parties.

        We ask for comments concerning the new information contained in the analyses of Lepidium papilliferum population trends on the Orchard Training Area in southwest Idaho (Sullivan and Nations 2009), on the rangewide Habitat Integrity and Population (HIP) monitoring (Unnasch 2008), a recent analysis of L. papilliferum data collected on the Inside Desert (Owyhee Plateau) from 2000 to 2002 (Wells and Popovich 2009), and GIS analysis of Lepidium papilliferum (Stoner 2009). In particular, comments are sought regarding the relevance of the new information to the proposed listing status of L. papilliferum, as it pertains to the following:

        (1) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning threats (or lack thereof) to Lepidium papilliferum;

        (2) Additional information concerning the range, distribution, and population size of Lepidium papilliferum, including the locations of any additional populations of the species;

        (3) Any information on the biological or ecological requirements of Lepidium papilliferum;

        (4) Current or planned activities in the areas occupied by Lepidium papilliferum and their possible impacts on the species.

        If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments and materials concerning this new information by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section.
        If you submit information via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission—including your personal identifying information—will be posted on the Web site. If your submission is made via a hardcopy that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov.

        All comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation used, will be available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment during normal business hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

        At this time, we are soliciting new information on the status of Lepidium papilliferum. We will base our determination as to whether listing is warranted on a review of the best scientific and commercial information available, including all such information received as a result of this notice.
        Authors
        The primary authors of this notice are staff of the Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
        Authority

        The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

          Dated: March 4, 2009.
          Elizabeth H. Stevens,
          Acting Deputy Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

      [FR Doc. E9-5697 Filed 3-16-09; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4310-55-P


        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 52
        [EPA-R04-OAR-2007-0085; FRL-9967-12-Region 4]
        Air Plan Approval; NC; Open Burning and Miscellaneous Revisions

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; reopening of public comment period.

          SUMMARY:

          The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reopening the comment period for a proposed rulemaking notice published in the Federal Register on July 18, 2017, which accompanied a direct final rulemaking published on the same date. In the July 18, 2017, action, EPA proposed to approve several revisions to the North Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of North Carolina through the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (formerly the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources), Division of Air Quality, on October 14, 2004, March 24, 2006, and January 31, 2008. The revisions include changes to several regulations and the addition of a new section to the Exclusionary Rules of the North Carolina SIP. It was brought to EPA's attention that it inadvertently did not include the October 14, 2004, and January 31, 2008, state submittals and related materials in the electronic docket at the time of the publication of the proposed rulemaking notice, and the agency was asked to extend the comment period. The materials have been added to the docket, and EPA is reopening the comment period for an additional 15 days.

          DATES:
          Comments on the proposed rule published July 18, 2017 (82 FR 32782) must be received on or before September 21, 2017.

          ADDRESSES:

          Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2007-0085 at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Sean Lakeman or Nacosta C. Ward, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Lakeman can be reached via telephone at (404) 562-9043 or via electronic mail at lakeman.sean@epa.gov. Ms. Ward can be reached via telephone at (404) 562-9140, or via electronic mail at ward.nacosta@epa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        EPA published a proposed rulemaking on July 18, 2017 (82 FR 32782), which accompanied a direct final rulemaking published on the same date (82 FR 32767). The proposed revisions include changes to several regulations and the addition of a new section to the Exclusionary Rules of the North Carolina SIP. It was brought to EPA's attention that it inadvertently did not include the October 14, 2004 and January 31, 2008, state submittals and related materials in the electronic docket at the time of the publication of the proposed rulemaking action, and the agency was asked to extend the comment period. The materials have been added to the docket, and EPA is reopening the comment period for an additional 15 days.

          Dated: August 21, 2017.
          V. Anne Heard,
          Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

      [FR Doc. 2017-18767 Filed 9-5-17; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
        49 CFR Part 391
        Federal Railroad Administration
        49 CFR Parts 240 and 242
        [Docket Numbers FMCSA-2015-0419 and FRA-2015-0111]
        RIN 2126-AB88 and 2130-AC52
        Evaluation of Safety Sensitive Personnel for Moderate-to-Severe Obstructive Sleep Apnea

          ACTION:
          Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; withdrawal.

          SUMMARY:
          The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) (collectively, the Agencies) withdraw the March 10, 2016, advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) concerning the prevalence of moderate-to-severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) among individuals occupying safety sensitive positions in highway and rail transportation, and its potential consequences for the safety of highway and rail transportation. The Agencies have determined not to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking at this time.

          DATES:
          As of August 8, 2017 the ANPRM published on March 10, 2016, at 81 FR 12642 is withdrawn.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

            FMCSA: Ms. Christine Hydock, Chief of the Medical Programs Division, FMCSA, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001, by telephone at 202-366-4001, or by email at fmcsamedical@dot.gov.

            FRA: Dr. Amanda Emo, Fatigue Program Manager, Risk Reduction Program Division, Office of Safety Analysis, FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001, by telephone at 202-281-0695, or by email at amanda.emo@dot.gov.

          If you have questions about viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone 202-493-0402.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Background
        Based on the potential severity of OSA-related transportation incidents and crashes/accidents, and the varied, non-regulatory, OSA-related actions the Department's Operating Administrations have taken to date, the Agencies issued a joint ANPRM to consider regulatory action to ensure consistency in addressing the risk of OSA among transportation workers with safety sensitive duties (81 FR 12642, March 10, 2016). The Agencies sought information from interested parties regarding OSA to better inform their decision on whether to take regulatory action and, if so, how to craft the most effective and efficient regulations to address the potential safety risks associated with untreated OSA.
        The information requested in the ANPRM seemed to be necessary to help the Agencies quantify the potential economic benefits and costs of adopting standards to assess risks associated with motor carrier and rail transportation workers in safety sensitive positions diagnosed with OSA. To gather relevant data, the Agencies posed a series of questions addressing the following matters:
        • Whether OSA is a problem among individuals occupying safety sensitive positions in highway and rail transportation;
        • Cost and benefits of regulatory actions that address the safety risks associated with motor carrier and rail transportation workers in safety sensitive positions who have OSA;
        • Qualifications and restrictions for medical personnel; and
        • Treatment effectiveness.

        The Agencies also sought information at three listening sessions in May 2016, and extended the comment period by thirty days to review the results from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI) Commercial Driver Survey on Sleep Apnea Issues (http://atri-online.org/2016/04/14/atri-launches-commercial-driver-survey-on-sleep-apnea-issues/). The Agencies received more than 700 comments from individuals, medical professionals, labor groups, and transportation industry stakeholders. The Agencies also received comments from the National Transportation Safety Board and three members of Congress, the Honorable Anna Eshoo, the Honorable Sam Farr, and the Honorable Michael M. Honda.
        The Agencies' Decision

        OSA remains an on-going concern for the Agencies and the motor carrier and railroad industries because it can cause unintended sleep episodes and resulting deficits in attention, concentration, situational awareness, and memory, thus reducing the capacity to safely respond to hazards when performing safety sensitive duties. The Agencies received valuable information in response to the ANPRM and a series of public listening sessions in May 2016. The Agencies believe that current safety programs and FRA's rulemaking addressing fatigue risk management are the appropriate avenues to address OSA.
        FMCSA will consider an update to its January 2015 “Bulletin to Medical Examiners and Training Organizations Regarding Obstructive Sleep Apnea” regarding the physical qualifications standard and related advisory criteria concerning respiratory dysfunction, specifically how the standard applies to drivers who may have OSA. The Agency would use the updated August 2016 Medical Review Board 1

           recommendations as a basis for updating the bulletin. On August 22-23, 2016, the MRB met in public meetings to deliberate on Medical Review Board Task 16-1 regarding public comments from medical professionals and associations on the FMCSA's and FRA's ANPRM on obstructive sleep apnea. FMCSA tasked the MRB with reviewing and analyzing all ANPRM comments from medical professionals and associations and to identify factors the Agency should consider regarding making decisions about the next step in the OSA rulemaking. FMCSA also requested that the MRB review its previous February 2012 report on OSA from the MRB and Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee (MCSAC). The MRB's February 2012 recommendations formed the basis of their August 2016 recommendations. In scenarios where medical examiners may inappropriately screen and refer drivers for diagnostic testing based on single criteria, the MRB's 2016 recommendations provide objective criteria for identifying drivers who may be at greater risk for OSA. And, as was the case with the 2015 bulletin, the purpose of any action updating the bulletin is to ensure that medical examiners fully understand their role in screening drivers for OSA, identifying drivers at the greatest risk of having OSA, and refer only those individuals to a sleep specialist for testing. The Agency reminds medical examiners that there are no FMCSA rules or other regulatory guidance beyond what is referenced in this paragraph above with guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and treatment of OSA in CMV drivers. Medical certification determinations for such drivers are made by the examiners based on the examiner's medical judgment rather than a Federal regulation or requirement.

            1 https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/advisory-committees/mcsac/mrb-task-16-01-letter-report. A copy of the MRB recommendations is included in this rulemaking docket.

        In addition, FMCSA will continue to recommend that drivers and their employers use the North American Fatigue Management Program (NAFMP) (http://www.nafmp.org/index.php?lang=en). The NAFMP is a voluntary, fully interactive web-based educational and training program developed to provide both truck and bus commercial vehicle drivers and carriers and others in the supply chain with an awareness of the factors contributing to fatigue and its impact on performance. Guidance on health and wellness, time management, vehicle technologies and scheduling best-practices provide effective mitigation strategies to address fatigue while maintaining a healthy and productive work/life balance. Module 8 of the program, Driver Sleep Disorders Management, includes an extensive discussion of OSA. [The training materials may be downloaded at http://www.nafmp.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=14:downloads&catid=26&lang=en&Itemid=115.]

        On September 21, 2004, FRA issued Safety Advisory 2004-04 to alert the railroad industry, and especially those employees with safety sensitive duties, to the danger associated with degradation of performance resulting from undiagnosed or unsuccessfully treated sleep disorders (69 FR 58995, Oct. 1, 2004). That Safety Advisory set forth recommended actions regarding OSA, which FRA reiterated in Safety Advisory 2016-03 (81 FR 87649, Dec. 5, 2016). Additionally, FRA is aware several railroads are implementing OSA identification and treatment programs. FRA anticipates these programs will identify best practices for OSA screening, diagnosis, treatment, and mitigation. These programs will help identify the current and future needs of the industry, potential costs, and help define FRA's role in addressing OSA in the railroad industry. In addition, under the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA), railroads must establish a fatigue management plan as part of their Risk Reduction Program (RRP) or System Safety Program (SSP) (49 U.S.C. 20156(f)). RSIA requires a railroad to consider the need to include in its fatigue management plan “opportunities for identification, diagnosis, and treatment of any medical condition that may affect alertness or fatigue, including sleep disorders.” (Id. at section 20156(f)(3)(B).) While RSIA does not address OSA by name, FRA believes railroads will consider OSA when addressing medical conditions that affect alertness under a railroad's fatigue risk management plan as part of an RRP or SSP. FRA will continue to monitor railroads' voluntary OSA programs, as well as the implementation of fatigue risk management plans, as part of an RRP or SSP.
        Based on the foregoing reasons, the Agencies withdraw the March 2016 ANPRM entitled “Evaluation of Safety Sensitive Personnel for Moderate-to-Severe Obstructive Sleep Apnea.” If FRA or FMCSA determines further action to be necessary, it will consider regulatory action.

          Issued under the authority of delegations in 49 CFR 1.87(f) and (i) and 49 CFR 1.89(a), respectively: July 31, 2017.
          Daphne Y. Jefferson,
          Deputy Administrator, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.
          Heath Hall,
          Acting Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration.

      [FR Doc. 2017-16451 Filed 8-4-17; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 54
        [WC Docket Nos. 11-42, 09-197 and 10-90; Report No. 3046]
        Petitions for Reconsideration and Clarification of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Petitions for reconsideration and clarification.

          SUMMARY:
          Petitions for Reconsideration and Clarification (Petitions) have been filed in the Commission's rulemaking proceeding by Thomas C. Power on behalf of CTIA, Kevin G. Rupy on behalf of United States Telecom Association, Colin W. Scott on behalf of Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, John J. Heitmann on behalf of Joint Lifeline ETC Petitioners, John T. Nakahata on behalf of General Communication, Inc., Michael R. Romano on behalf of NTCA & WTA, Mitchell F. Brecher on behalf of TracFone Wireless, Inc., and David Springe on behalf of NASUCA.

          DATES:

          Oppositions to the Petitions must be filed on or before July 29, 2016. Replies to an opposition must be filed on or before August 8, 2016.

          ADDRESSES:
          Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Christian Hoefly, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418-3607, email: christian.hoefly@fcc.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        This is a summary of Commission's document, Report No. 3046, released June 30, 2016. The full text of the Petitions is available for viewing and copying at the FCC Reference Information Center, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554 or may be accessed online via the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System at http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. The Commission will not send a copy of this Notice pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because this Notice does not have an impact on any rules of particular applicability.

          Subject: Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization, Telecommunications Carriers Eligible for Universal Service Support, Connect America Fund, FCC 16-38, published at 81 FR 33026, May 24, 2016, in WC Docket Nos. 11-42, 09-197 and 10-90. This Notice is being published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e). See also 47 CFR 1.4(b)(1) and 1.429(f), (g).

          Number of Petitions Filed: 8.

          Federal Communications Commission.
          Marlene H. Dortch,
          Secretary.

      [FR Doc. 2016-16619 Filed 7-13-16; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 6712-01-P