[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 50 (Friday, March 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 14506]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05674]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9013-9]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice Of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements
Filed 03/03/2014 Through 03/07/2014
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice:

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/eisdata.html.

EIS No. 20140062, Final EIS, NPS, CA, Tuolumne Wild and Scenic River
Final Comprehensive Management Plan, Review Period Ends: 04/14/2014,
Contact: Kathleen Morse<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20140063, Draft EIS, BLM, NM, San Juan Basin Energy Connect
Project, Comment Period Ends: 04/28/2014, Contact: Marcy Romero 505-
564-7600.
EIS No. 20140064, Draft Supplement, USFS, MT, Beaverhead-Deerlodge
National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan to Comply with a
District of Montana Court Order (Temporary Roads), Comment Period Ends:
06/12/2014, Contact: Jan Bowey<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20140065, Draft EIS, USFS, OR, Proposed Revised Land Management
Plans for the Malheur, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests,
Comment Period Ends: 06/16/2014, Contact: Sabrina Stadler<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20140066, Final EIS, BLM, NV, Arturo Mine Project, Review
Period Ends:04/14/2014, Contact: John Daniel<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20140067, Final EIS, USFS, ND, North Billings County Range
Allotment Management Plan Revision, Review Period Ends: 04/28/2014,
Contact: Nickole Dahl<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20140068, Draft Supplement, USFS, UT, Leasing and Underground
Mining of the Greens Hollow Federal Coal Lease Tract UTU-102, Comment
Period Ends: 04/28/2014, Contact: Marianne Orton<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20140069, Draft EIS, USFS, MT, Divide Travel Plan, Helena
National Forest, Comment Period Ends: 04/28/2014, Contact: Heather
DeGeest<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20140070, Final EIS, NASA, CA, Proposed Demolition and
Environmental Cleanup Activities at Santa Susana Field Laboratory,
Review Period Ends: 04/14/2014, Contact: Allen Elliott<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20140071, Draft EIS, NRCS, UT, Green River Diversion
Rehabilitation Project, Comment Period Ends: 04/30/2014, Contact:
Bronson Smart<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20140072, Final EIS, NPS, NC, Fort Raleigh National Historic
Site, General Management Plan, Review Period Ends: 04/14/2014, Contact:
David Libman<PHONE_NUMBER>.

 Amended Notices

EIS No. 20140054, Revised Draft EIS, USFS, CA, Harris Vegetation
Management Project, Comment Period Ends: 04/21/2014, Contact: Emelia H.
Barnum<PHONE_NUMBER> ext. 1600.
    Revision to FR Notice Published 03/07/2014; Correcting Comment
Period from 4/25/2014 to 4/21/2014.

    Dated: March 11, 2014.
Dawn Roberts,
Management Analyst, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2014-05674 Filed 3-13-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: January 19, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 12)]
[Notices]
[Page 2568-2573]
[DOCID:fr19ja07-98]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55101; File No. SR-NASD-2007-002]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change to Make Conforming Changes to the NASD/Nasdaq Trade
Reporting Facility Rules Consistent With the New Requirements of
Regulation NMS

January 12, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 8, 2007, the National Association of Securities Dealers,
Inc. (``NASD'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by NASD.
NASD has filed the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    NASD proposes to make conforming changes to the transaction
reporting rules relating to the NASD/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility
(``NASD/Nasdaq TRF'') consistent with the new requirements of
Regulation NMS under the Act.\5\ Below is the text of the proposed rule
change. Proposed new language is italicized and proposed deletions are
in [brackets].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release''). The Commission has approved proposed rule changes to
establish Trade Reporting Facilities in conjunction with the
National Stock Exchange, Inc. and the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.
See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 54715 (November 6, 2006),
71 FR 66354 (November 14, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-108) (``NASD/NSX
TRF'') and 54931 (December 13, 2006), 71 FR 76409 (December 20,
2006) (SR-NASD-2006-115) (``NASD/BSE TRF''). NASD intends to file a
separate proposed rule change to align the transaction reporting
rules for the NASD/NSX TRF and the NASD/BSE TRF, and any additional
Trade Reporting Facilities approved by the Commission, with
Regulation NMS.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4632. Transaction Reporting

(a) When and How Transactions are Reported

    (1) Trade Reporting Facility Participants shall, within 90 seconds
after execution, transmit to the NASD/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility
or if the NASD/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility is unavailable due to
system or transmission failure, by telephone to the Operations
Department, last sale reports of transactions in designated securities
executed during normal market hours. Transactions not reported within
90 seconds after execution shall be designated as late.
    (2) Transaction Reporting to the NASD/Nasdaq Trade Reporting
Facility Outside Normal Market Hours
    (A) Last sale reports of transactions in designated securities
executed between 8:00 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time shall be reported
within 90 seconds after execution and shall be designated [as ``.T''
trades] with the unique trade report modifier, as specified by NASD, to
denote their execution outside normal market hours. [Transactions not
reported within 90 seconds also shall be designated as .T trades.] Such
[T]transactions not reported before 9:30 a.m. shall be reported after
4:00 p.m. and before 8:00 p.m. [as .T trades] with the appropriate
trade report modifier as specified by NASD.
    (B) Last sale reports of transactions in designated securities
executed between the hours of 4:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time
shall be reported within 90 seconds after execution and be designated
[as ``.T'' trades] with the unique trade report modifier, as specified
by NASD, to denote their execution outside normal market hours.
[Transactions not reported within 90 seconds also shall be designated
as .T trades.] Such [T]transactions not reported before 8:00 p.m. shall
be reported on an ``as/of'' basis the following day between 8:00 a.m.
and 8:00 p.m.
    (C) Last sale reports of transactions executed between midnight and
8:00 a.m. Eastern Time shall be reported between 8:00 a.m. and 9:30
a.m. Eastern Time on trade date [as ``.T'' trades] with the unique
trade report modifier, as specified by NASD, to denote their execution
outside normal market hours. Such [T]transactions not reported before
9:30 a.m. shall be reported after 4:00 p.m. and before 8:00 p.m. [as .T
trades] with the appropriate trade report modifier as specified by
NASD.
    (D) Last sale reports of transactions executed between 8:00 p.m.
and midnight Eastern Time shall be reported on the next business day
(T+1) between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time and be designated
``as/of'' trades.
    [(3) All members shall report as soon as practicable to the Market
Regulation Department on Form T, last sale reports of transactions in
designated securities for which electronic submission to the Trade
Reporting Facility is not possible (e.g., the ticker symbol for the
security is no longer available or a market participant identifier is
no longer active). Transactions that can be reported to the Trade
Reporting Facility, whether on trade date or on a subsequent date on an
``as of'' basis (T+N), shall not be reported on Form T.]
    [(4) All members shall append the ``.W'' trade report modifier to
transaction reports occurring at prices based on average-weighting, or
other special pricing formulae.]
    [(5) All trade tickets for transactions in designated securities
shall be time-stamped at the time of execution.]
    (3) Members shall time-stamp all trade tickets at the time of
execution for transactions in designated securities. Execution time
shall be reported to NASD on all last sale reports and shall be
expressed in hours, minutes and seconds based on Eastern Time in
military format, unless another provision of NASD rules requires that a
different time be included on the report.
    [(6)] (4) Transactions not reported within 90 seconds after
execution shall be designated as late. A pattern or practice of late
reporting without exceptional circumstances may be considered conduct
inconsistent with high standards of commercial honor and just and
equitable principles of trade in violation of Rule 2110.
    [(7) All members shall append the .PRP trade report modifier to
transaction reports that reflect a price different from the current
market when the execution price is based on a prior reference point in
time. The transaction report shall include the prior reference time in
lieu of the actual time the trade was executed. The .PRP modifier shall
not be appended to a report of a transaction whose price is based on a
prior reference point in time if the trade is executed and reported
within 90 seconds from the prior reference point in time.]
    [(8) The Trade Reporting Facility will append the .T modifier or
the .SLD modifier, as appropriate, to those reports submitted to the
Trade Reporting Facility that contain the time of execution, but that
do not contain the appropriate modifier.]
    [(9) Members shall append the .W trade report modifier to reports
of Stop Stock Transactions (as such term is defined in Rule 4200) and
include the time at which the member and the other party agreed to the
Stop Stock Price in lieu of including the time of execution on the
trade report. The .W modifier shall not be appended to a report of a
Stop Stock Transaction if the Stop Stock Transaction is executed and
reported within 90 seconds of the time the member and the other party
agree to the Stop Price.]
    [(10) To identify pre-opening and after-hours trades reported late,
the Trade Reporting Facility will convert the .T modifier to .ST for
any report submitted to the Trade Reporting Facility more than 90
seconds after execution.]
    (5) Members also shall append the applicable trade report modifiers
as specified by NASD to all last sale reports, including reports of
``as/of'' trades:
    (A) if the trade is executed during normal market hours and it is
reported later than 90 seconds after execution;
    (B) if the trade is a Seller's Option Trade, denoting the number of
days for delivery;
    (C) if the trade is a Cash Trade;
    (D) if the trade is a Next Day Trade;
    (E) if the trade occurs at a price based on an average weighting or
another special pricing formula;
    (F) if the trade is a Stop Stock Transaction (as defined in Rule
4200) (Note: the time at which the member and the other party agreed to
the Stop Stock Price must be given in lieu of including the time of
execution on the trade report and the designated modifier shall not be
appended to a report of a Stop Stock Transaction if the Stop Stock
Transaction is executed and reported within 90 seconds of the time the
member and the other party agree to the Stop Stock Price);
    (G) if the transaction report reflects a price different from the
current market when the execution price is based on a prior reference
point in time (Note: the transaction report shall include the prior
reference time in lieu of the actual time the trade was executed and
the designated modifier shall not be appended to a report of a
transaction whose price is based on a prior reference point in time if
the trade is executed and reported within 90 seconds from the prior
reference point in time);
    (H) to identify pre-opening and after-hours trades (executed
between 8:00 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. Eastern time or between 4:00 p.m. and
8:00 p.m. Eastern time) reported more than 90 seconds after execution;
    (I) if the trade would be a trade-through of a protected quotation,
but for the trade being qualified for an

exception or exemption from Rule 611 of Regulation NMS under the Act
(Note: to ensure consistency in the usage of Rule 611 related modifiers
by registered broker-dealers, this modifier will be used in conformity
with the specifications approved by the Operating Committee of the
relevant National Market System Plans to identify trades executed
pursuant to an exception or exemption from Rule 611);
    (J) if the trade would be a trade-through of a protected quotation,
but for the trade being qualified for an exception or exemption from
Rule 611 of Regulation NMS under the Act, members must, in addition to
the modifier required in paragraph (I) above, append an appropriate
unique modifier, specified by NASD, that identifies the specific
applicable exception or exemption from Rule 611 that a member is
relying upon (Note: to ensure consistency in the usage of Rule 611
related modifiers by registered broker-dealers, these modifiers will be
used in conformity with the specifications approved by the Operating
Committee of the relevant National Market System Plans to identify
trades executed pursuant to an exception or exemption from Rule 611);
and
    (K) any other modifier as specified by NASD or the Securities and
Exchange Commission.
    To the extent that any of the modifiers required by this rule
conflict, NASD shall provide guidance regarding the priorities among
modifiers and members shall report in accordance with such guidance, as
applicable.
    (6) The NASD/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility will append the
appropriate modifier to indicate that a trade was executed outside
normal market hours or that a report was submitted late to the NASD/
Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility, where such report contains the time of
execution, but does not contain the appropriate modifier.
    (7) To identify pre-opening and after-hours trades reported late,
the NASD/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility will convert the late
modifier, as applicable, on any pre-opening or after-hours report
submitted to the NASD/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility more than 90
seconds after execution.
    (8) All members shall report as soon as practicable to the Market
Regulation Department on Form T, last sale reports of transactions in
designated securities for which electronic submission to the NASD/
Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility is not possible (e.g., the ticker
symbol for the security is no longer available or a market participant
identifier is no longer active). Transactions that can be reported to
the NASD/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility, whether on trade date or on a
subsequent date on an ``as of'' basis (T+N), shall not be reported on
Form T.
    (b) through (e) No Change.
    (f) Prohibition on Aggregation of Transaction Reports
    Individual executions of orders in a security at the same price may
not be aggregated, for purposes of transaction reporting to the NASD/
Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility, into a single transaction report.
    [(1) Under the following conditions, individual executions of
orders in a security at the same price may be aggregated, for
transaction reporting purposes, into a single transaction report.
Individual transactions in convertible debt securities cannot be
aggregated pursuant to this paragraph.]
    [(A) Orders received prior to the opening of the reporting member's
market in the security and simultaneously executed at the opening.
Also, orders received during a trading or quotation halt in the
security and executed simultaneously when trading or quotations resume.
In no event shall a member delay its opening or resumption of
quotations for the purpose of aggregating transactions.]
    [Example:]
    [A firm receives, prior to its market opening, several market
orders to sell which total 10,000 shares. All such orders are
simultaneously executed at the opening at a reported price of 40.]
    [REPORT 10,000 shares at 40.]
    [(B) Simultaneous executions by the member of customer transactions
at the same price, e.g., a number of limit orders being executed at the
same time when a limit price has been reached.]
    [Example:]
    [A firm has several customer limit orders to sell that total 10,000
shares at a limit price of 40. That price is reached and all such
orders are executed simultaneously.]
    [REPORT 10,000 shares at 40.]
    [(C) Orders relayed to the trading department of the reporting
member for simultaneous execution at the same price.]
    [Example:]
    [A firm purchases a block of 50,000 shares from an institution at a
reported price of 40.]
    [REPORT 50,000 at 40.]
    [Subsequently, one of the firm's branch offices transmits to the
firm's trading department for execution customer buy orders in the
security totaling 12,500 shares at a reported price of 40.]
    [REPORT 12,500 at 40.]
    [Subsequently, another branch office transmits to the firm's
trading department for execution customer buy orders totaling 15,000
shares in the security at a reported price of 40.]
    [REPORT 15,000 at 40.]
    [Example:]
    [Due to a major change in market conditions, a firm's trading
department receives from a branch office for execution customer market
orders to sell totaling 10,000 shares. All are executed at a reported
price of 40.]
    [REPORT 10,000 at 40.]
    [(D) Orders received or initiated by the reporting member that are
impractical to report individually and are executed at the same price
within 60 seconds of execution of the initial transaction; provided
however, that no individual order of 10,000 shares or more may be
aggregated in a transaction report and that the aggregated transaction
report shall be made within 90 seconds of the initial execution
reported therein. Furthermore, it is not permissible for a member to
withhold reporting a trade in anticipation of aggregating the
transaction with other transactions. The limitation on aggregating
individual orders of 10,000 shares or more for a particular security
shall not apply on the first day of secondary market trading of an IPO
for that security.]
    [Examples:]
    [A reporting member receives and executes the following orders at
the following times and desires to aggregate reports to the maximum
extent permitted under this Rule.]

    [First Example]
    [11:00 500 shares at 40]
    [11:01:05 500 shares at 40]
    [11:01:10 9,000 shares at 40]
    [11:01:15 500 shares at 40]
    [REPORT 10,500 shares at 40 within ninety seconds of 11:01.]

[Second Example]
    [11:01:00 100 shares at 40]
    [11:01:10 11,000 shares at 40]
    [11:01:30 300 shares at 40]
    [REPORT 400 shares within ninety seconds of 11:01 and 11,000 shares
within ninety seconds of 11:01:10 (individual transactions of 10,000
shares or more must be reported separately).]

[Third Example]
    [11:01:00 100 shares at 40]
    [11:01:15 500 shares at 40]
    [11:01:30 200 shares at 40]
    [11:02:30 400 shares at 40]
    [REPORT 800 shares at 40 within ninety seconds of 11:01 and 400
shares at 40 within ninety seconds of 11:02:30 (the last trade is not
within sixty seconds of the first and

must, therefore, be reported separately).]
    [(2) The reporting member shall identify aggregated transaction
reports and order tickets of aggregated trades in a manner directed by
NASD.]

    (g) No Change.
* * * * *
    6130. Trade Report Input
    (a) through (d) No Change.
    (e) Aggregation of Transaction Reports for Clearing Purposes Only.
    Individual executions of orders in a security at the same price may
and with the identical contra party be aggregated[, for System
reporting purposes,] into a single report and submitted to the System
for purposes of clearing only [if the transactions are with the
identical contra party]; provided, however, that a Reporting Party may
not withhold reporting a trade in anticipation of aggregating the
transaction with other transactions.
    (f) through (g) No Change.
* * * * *

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, NASD included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. NASD has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    Background. On June 29, 2005, the Commission published its release
adopting Regulation NMS,\6\ which established new substantive rules
designed to modernize and strengthen the regulatory structure of the
U.S. equities markets. Pursuant to Regulation NMS, the Commission,
among other things, adopted Rule 611 (``Order Protection Rule'') to
establish protection against trade-throughs for NMS stocks.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Regulation NMS Adopting Release, supra note 5.
    \7\ NMS stock is defined in Rule 600(b)(47) of Regulation NMS as
``any NMS security other than an option.'' Rule 600(b)(46) of
Regulation NMS defines NMS security as ``any security or class of
securities for which transaction reports are collected, processed,
and made available pursuant to an effective transaction reporting
plan, or an effective national market system plan for reporting
transactions in listed options.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In general, the Order Protection Rule requires a trading center
(which includes national securities exchanges, self-regulatory
organization (``SRO'') trading facilities, alternative trading systems,
OTC market makers, and block positioners) to establish, maintain, and
enforce written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to
prevent trade-throughs on that trading center of protected quotations
and, if relying on an exception, that are reasonably designed to assure
compliance with the terms of the exception.\8\ There currently are nine
exceptions and two exemptions to the Order Protection Rule.\9\ In
addition, the Order Protection Rule requires trading centers to surveil
regularly to ascertain the effectiveness of the policies and procedures
adopted pursuant to Rule 611 of Regulation NMS and take prompt action
to remedy deficiencies in such policies and procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Regulation NMS Adopting Release, supra note 5.
    \9\ See 17 CFR 242.611; Securities Exchange Act Release Nos.
54389 (August 31, 2006), 71 FR 52829 (September 7, 2006) (Order
Granting an Exemption for Qualified Contingent Trades from Rule
611(a) of Regulation NMS) and 54678 (October 31, 2006), 71 FR 65018
(November 6, 2006) (Order Exempting Certain Sub-Penny Trade-Throughs
from Rule 611 of Regulation NMS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 30, 2006, the Commission approved SR-NASD-2005-087 which,
among other things, proposed rules for reporting trades in Nasdaq-
listed securities effected otherwise than on an exchange to the NASD/
Nasdaq TRF.\10\ On November 21, 2006, the Commission approved SR-NASD-
2006-104 which, among other things, proposed to expand the scope of the
NASD/Nasdaq TRF rules to include reporting trades in non-Nasdaq
exchange-listed securities effected otherwise than on exchange.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54084 (June 30,
2006), 71 FR 38935 (July 10, 2006) (SR-NASD-2005-087).
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54798 (November 21,
2006), 71 FR 69156 (November 29, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-104). SR-NASD-
2006-104 will be effective on the date that the Nasdaq Exchange
operates as a national securities exchange for non-Nasdaq exchange-
listed securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Neither NASD, generally, nor any of the NASD Trade Reporting
Facilities, specifically, qualifies as a trading center within the
meaning of Regulation NMS. Thus, the provisions of the Order Protection
Rule requiring trading centers to establish, maintain, and enforce
written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to prevent
trade-throughs on that trading center of protected quotations in NMS
stocks are not applicable to NASD. However, NASD has a responsibility
to enforce requirements under the Act that apply to activity within its
regulatory authority. Thus, unlike exchanges that have direct
Regulation NMS obligations with respect to the SRO trading facilities,
NASD has indirect Regulation NMS obligations with respect to all over-
the-counter market activity, including post-trade regulation for
compliance with the Order Protection Rule with respect to trading
centers that trade report through the NASD/Nasdaq TRF (or any NASD
Trade Reporting Facility). Such regulation includes monitoring for
whether trading centers are reporting trades to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF (or
any NASD Trade Reporting Facility) that are trade-throughs of protected
quotes and whether such trade-throughs are permissible under one of the
specific exceptions and exemptions under the Order Protection Rule.
    Proposed Amendments to Align NASD/Nasdaq TRF Rules with Regulation
NMS. NASD proposes to amend the NASD/Nasdaq TRF transaction reporting
requirements to require reporting members to append applicable
modifiers to last sale transaction reports with respect to trades that
fall within the exceptions and exemptions from Rule 611 of Regulation
NMS. The proposed amendments are substantially similar to amendments to
the Alternative Display Facility (``ADF'') transaction reporting
requirements, which were approved by the Commission on September 28,
2006.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54537 (September
28, 2006), 71 FR 59173 (October 6, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-091). Unlike
the ADF, the NASD/Nasdaq TRF is a trade reporting mechanism only; it
does not permit quoting. As such, not all of the amendments to the
ADF rules are applicable to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, NASD proposes new Rule 4632(a)(5)(I) to require
members to append a unique modifier, specified by NASD, to indicate
whether the trade would be a trade-through of a protected quotation but
for the trade being qualified for an exception or exemption from Rule
611 of Regulation NMS. Further, NASD proposes new Rule 4632(a)(5)(J) to
require that, for any trade that would be a trade-through of a
protected quotation but for the trade being qualified for an exception
or exemption from Rule 611 of Regulation NMS, a member must append to
the transaction report, in addition to the modifier required under new
Rule 4632(a)(5)(I), a unique modifier, specified by NASD, that
identifies the specific applicable exception or exemption from Rule 611
of Regulation NMS upon which the member is

relying.\13\ As stated in the proposed rules, these modifiers will be
used in conformity with the specifications approved by the Operating
Committee of the relevant National Market System Plans to identify
trades executed pursuant to an exception or exemption from Rule 611 of
Regulation NMS. NASD provided details of the specific modifiers
required under the proposed new rules in updated Trade Reporting
Programming Specifications, which were published on October 16,
2006,\14\ and also will publish guidance in a Notice to Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ A Member using the trade report modifiers under the
proposed new rules is responsible for ensuring that the transaction
meets the criteria of the specific exemption or exception set forth
in Rule 611 of Regulation NMS.
    \14\ See Nasdaq Technical Update No. 2006-29 (October 16, 2006),
http://www.nasdaqtrader.com /Trader/News/2006/technicalupdates/

tu2006-029.stm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, NASD proposes to amend Rule 4632 to require members
reporting transactions to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF to append ``[a]ny other
modifier as specified by NASD or the Securities and Exchange
Commission.'' An identical provision in the ADF rules was subject to
notice and comment and approved by the Commission pursuant to SR-NASD-
2006-091. Pursuant to this proposed provision, NASD will have the
authority to prescribe additional trade report modifiers by updating
the Technical Specifications for the NASD/Nasdaq TRF without submitting
a further proposed rule change for approval by the Commission. For
example, such authority will be used to require additional modifiers to
designate trades that qualify under two existing exemptions from the
Order Protection Rule (qualified contingent trades and certain sub-
penny trade-throughs) \15\ as well as any other exemption that the
Commission may grant in the future. This authority may also be used to
capture additional regulatory information that NASD deems necessary
(e.g., NASD will require more specific delineation of the Intermarket
Sweep Order (``ISO'') exception than is required by the National Market
System specifications).\16\ To enable members to make the necessary
systems changes, NASD would provide at least 30 days advance written
notice relating to any new modifiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See supra note 9.
    \16\ The National Market System specifications identify both
types of ISO orders with a single modifier. NASD, however, intends
to distinguish between the ISO exceptions by requiring firms to use
a separate modifier, as defined by NASD, in instances where the
executing firm is responsible for sweeping the market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASD also proposes to amend Rule 4632 to expressly provide that, in
the event that the rules require multiple modifiers on any given trade
report, members are to report in accordance with guidance provided by
NASD regarding priorities among modifiers. A Member that reports in
accordance with such guidance would not be in violation of the trade
reporting rules for failing to use a particular modifier.
    NASD believes that the proposed rule change is necessary to ensure
that there is transparency relating to trades that are exempt from the
trade-through rule and to enhance NASD's ability to examine for
compliance with the Order Protection Rule.
    Proposed Amendments to Conform NASD/Nasdaq TRF Rules to ADF Rules.
As part of SR-NASD-2006-091, NASD reorganized the ADF reporting rules
to enhance their clarity. As part of this proposed rule change, NASD
proposes similar changes to conform the NASD/Nasdaq TRF reporting rules
to the ADF reporting rules to the extent practicable. Specifically,
NASD proposes to reorganize the NASD/Nasdaq TRF trade reporting rules
and renumber paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(6) of Rule 4632 without amending
the text of those provisions. NASD also is proposing to renumber
paragraph (a)(5) of Rule 4632 and amend the text of that provision to
conform to the text of the equivalent provision in the ADF reporting
rules.
    Additionally, NASD proposes to adopt new Rule 4632(a)(5) to require
members to use trade report modifiers designated by NASD for certain
enumerated transactions. Consistent with the ADF reporting
requirements, proposed new Rule 4632(a)(5) would clarify that members
are required to append applicable trade report modifiers to reports of
all trades, including ``as/of'' trades.\17\ The proposed amendments to
the NASD/Nasdaq TRF rules do not label the modifiers members are
required to use when reporting the enumerated transactions. Some of the
modifiers that members are required to append to trade reports may
differ depending on the system used to connect to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF.
Thus, NASD proposes amendments in Rule 4632(a) to identify the types of
transactions that must have a unique identifier associated with them;
the modifiers will be labeled in the system technical specifications
rather than in the rules.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ NASD reminds members that they should mark any ``as/of''
trade report for publication if that trade would have been for
publication had it been reported on trade date.
    \18\ Consistent with this proposed rule change, pursuant to SR-
NASD-2007-001, NASD has proposed to delete the modifier labels from
the ADF trade reporting rules. Additionally, NASD notes that the
proposed rule change does not contemplate a trade report modifier
for transactions based upon a single-priced opening, re-opening, or
closing transaction because this is an exchange function. Pursuant
to SR-NASD-2007-001, NASD has proposed to delete Rule 4632A(a)(4)(H)
from the ADF rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, consistent with changes to the ADF rules pursuant to
SR-NASD-2006-091, NASD is proposing to amend Rule 4632(f) to expressly
prohibit a member from aggregating individual executions of orders in a
security at the same price into a single transaction report for tape
purposes. NASD has determined that prohibiting the bunching of
transactions when reporting to an NASD facility helps ensure greater
transparency of individual transactions. However, for purposes of
trades that are not printed to the tape, NASD is proposing to amend
Rule 6130(e) to continue to permit members--for clearing purposes
only--to aggregate individual executions of orders in a security at the
same price with the identical contra party and submit a single report
to the System.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ ``System'' is defined in Rule 6110 to mean the NASD/Nasdaq
TRF, the OTC Reporting Facility, and the ITS/CAES System. NASD
replaced the paragraph that appeared in the original filing with the
instant paragraph. See e-mail from Lisa C. Horrigan, Assistant
General Counsel, NASD, to Theodore S. Venuti, Attorney, Division of
Market Regulation, Commission, dated January 12, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASD has filed the proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness. In accordance with the Regulation NMS compliance dates
established by the Commission,\20\ NASD proposes to make the proposed
rule change operative on the Pilot Stocks Phase Date, which is
currently anticipated to be May 21, 2007. However, the NASD/Nasdaq TRF
will begin accepting trade reports submitted in compliance with the
proposed rule change starting on the Trading Phase Date, which is
currently anticipated to be February 5, 2007. This does not, however,
change in any way a member's responsibilities under the Regulation NMS
compliance dates.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53829 (May 18,
2006), 71 FR 30038 (May 24, 2006).
    \21\ NASD notes that, although the proposed rule change will not
be operative until the Pilot Stocks Date, anticipated to be May 21,
2007, members may be required to meet the Regulation NMS message
format requirements for reporting to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF prior to
that date. Mandatory compliance with Regulation NMS message
formatting requirements is currently scheduled for the NASD/Nasdaq
TRF on April 2, 2007, and on that date, members would be required to
report in accordance with the new systems requirements, although the
specific new modifiers proposed herein would continue to be
voluntary until May 21, 2007. See Nasdaq Technical Update 2006-034
(December 19, 2006), http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader/News/2006/technicalupdates/tu2006-034.stm
.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\22\ which requires, among
other things, that NASD rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. NASD believes that the proposed rule change
facilitates the goals articulated in Regulation NMS, including
providing an effective mechanism and regulatory framework for reporting
over-the-counter transactions to NASD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing proposed rule change is subject to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \23\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder \24\
because the proposal: (i) Does not significantly affect the protection
of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) does not become operative
prior to 30 days after the date of filing or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest; provided that NASD has given the Commission
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five
business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change,
or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \25\ NASD has satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NASD-2007-002 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2007-002. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing
also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal
office of NASD. All comments received will be posted without change;
the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NASD-2007-002 and should be submitted on or before February 9, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-688 Filed 1-18-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


SF-83 SUPPORTING STATEMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NESHAP for Wet-formed Fiberglass Mat Production (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH) (Renewal)

1.  Identification of the Information Collection

	1(a)  Title of the Information Collection

	NESHAP for Wet-formed Fiberglass Mat Production (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH) (Renewal)

	1(b)  Short Characterization/Abstract

	The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Wet-formed Fiberglass Mat Production were proposed on May 26, 2000 (65 FR 34251), and promulgated on April 11, 2002 (67 FR 17823).  These standards apply to new and existing component processes at industrial facilities that manufactured wet-formed fiberglass mat including preparation of glass fibers, formation of fibers into a fiberglass mat, saturation with urea-formaldehyde binder solution, curing and drying the binder-coated fiberglass mat, cooling the mat, and trimming, cutting, and packaging.  This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH.

	The monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements outlined in these rules are similar to those required for other NESHAP regulations.  Consistent with the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), respondents are required to submit initial notifications, conduct performance tests, and submit semiannual reports.  They are also required to maintain records of applicability determinations; performance test results; exceedances; periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction; monitoring records; and all other information needed to determined compliance with the applicable standard.

	An owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part shall maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least five years following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports, and records.  Records and reports must be retained for a total of 5 years, two years on-site.  The files may be maintained on microfilm, on a computer or floppy disks, on magnetic tape disks, or on microfiche.  All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority.  In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are sent directly to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional office.

	In the development of this Information Collection Request (ICR), we reviewed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) “Terms of Clearance” (TOC) section on the active ICR.  There were no comments in the TOC section.

	The Agency has determined that there are 14 existing respondents, i.e., formed fiberglass mat production facilities which are major sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) that are currently subject to NESHAP, subpart HHHH, based on data obtained during the development of this rule.  In addition, we have determined that there is an average of one production line per facility.  Therefore, there are 14 respondents subject to this NESHAP regulation.  No net growth in this industry is expected over the three-year period.

2.  Need for and Use of the Collection

	2(a)  Need/Authority for the Collection

	EPA is charged under section 112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, to establish standards of performance for each category or subcategory of major sources and area sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAP).  These standards are applicable to new or existing sources of hazardous air pollutants and shall require the maximum degree of emission reduction.  In addition, section 114(a) states that the Administrator may require any owner/operator subject to any requirement of this Act to:

(A) Establish and maintain such records; (B) make such reports; (C) install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit procedures, or methods; (D) sample such emissions (in accordance with such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe); (E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is impractical; (F) submit compliance certifications in accordance with Section 114(a)(3); and (G) provide such other information as the Administrator may reasonably require.

	In the Administrator's judgment, metal hazardous air pollutants from component processes at industrial facilities manufacturing wet-formed fiberglass mat cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.  Therefore, the NESHAP standards were promulgated for this source category at 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH.

	2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

	The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the standard ensure compliance with the applicable regulations that were promulgated in accordance with the Clean Air Act.  The collected information is also used for targeting inspections and as evidence in legal proceedings.  Performance tests are required in order to determine an affected facility’s initial capability to comply with the emission standard.  Continuous emission monitors are used to ensure compliance with the standard at all times.  During the performance test a record of the operating parameters under which compliance was achieved may be recorded and used to determine compliance in place of a continuous emission monitor.

	The notifications required in the standard are used to inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the requirements of the regulations.  The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to check if the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated, leaks are being detected and repaired, and the standard is being met.  The performance test may also be observed.

	The required semiannual compliance certifications are used to determine periods of excess emissions, identify problems at the facility, verify operation and maintenance procedures and for compliance determinations.

3.  Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

	The requested recordkeeping and reporting are required under 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH.

	3(a) Nonduplication

	If the subject standards have not been delegated, the information is sent directly to the appropriate EPA regional office.  Otherwise, the information is sent directly to the delegated state or local agency.  If a state or local agency has adopted its own similar standards to implement the Federal standards, a copy of the report submitted to the state or local agency can be sent to the Administrator in lieu of the report required by the Federal standards.  Therefore, no duplication exists.

	3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

	An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this ICR was published in the Federal Register (70 FR 24020) on May 6, 2005.  No comments were received on the burden published in the Federal Register.

	3(c) Consultations

	Upon review of the standard, information available on the Agency databases, and consultation with the Office of Air, Quality Planning and Standards, we have determined that the recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the “Active” ICR are fully supported and necessary to fulfill the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).  Any pertinent comments received since the last ICR renewal including those submitted in response to the first federal register notice announcing the renewal of this ICR, have been reviewed, and it has been determined that no further consultations with industry are necessary to calculate the burden for this renewal.  It should be noted that the respondents, the industry trade associations including the Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry (TAPPI) and the Asphalt Roofing Manufacturers Association (ARMA), and other interested parties were provided an opportunity to comment on the burden associated with the standard as it was being developed.

	3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

	Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the standards.  Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are useful techniques to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are applied and that emission limitations are met.  If the information required by these standards was collected less frequently, the likelihood of detecting poor operation and maintenance of control equipment and noncompliance would decrease.

	3(e) General Guidelines

	None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of the regulations established by OMB at 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

	These standards require the respondents to maintain all records, including reports and notifications for at least five years.  This is consistent with the General Provisions as applied to the standards.  EPA believes that the five-year records retention requirement is consistent the part 70 permit program and the five-year statute of limitations on which the permit program is based.  Also, the retention of records for five years would allow EPA to establish the compliance history of a source and any pattern of compliance for purposes of determining the appropriate level of enforcement action.  Historically, EPA has found that the most flagrant violators frequently have violations extending beyond the five years.  EPA would be prevented from pursuing the worst violators due to the destruction or nonexistence of records if records were retained for less than five years.

	3(f) Confidentiality

	Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B - Confidentiality of Business Information (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

	3(g) Sensitive Questions

	None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contain sensitive questions.

4.  The Respondents and the Information Requested

	4(a) Respondents/SIC Codes

	The respondents to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are owners or operators of wet-formed fiberglass mat production, which provides the substrate for several roofing products.  The Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code for wet-formed fiberglass mat production is classified under SIC code 3329325, a subset of SIC code 3329, Pressed and Blown Glass, Not Elsewhere Classified, which under the new North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes would be NAIC code 327212, Non-woven Fabric Mills.

	4(b) Information Requested

		(i) Data Items

	All data in this ICR that are recorded and/or reported are required by NESHAP for Wet-formed Fiberglass Mat Production (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH).

	A source must make the following reports:

Notification Reports

Initial notification requirements	63.9(b)(1)

Notification of compliance status when a source becomes subject to the standard	63.9(h), 63.3000(b)

Notification that source is subject to special compliance requirements, if applicable	63.9(d)

Notification of performance test	63.7(b), 63.9(e)

Rescheduled of performance test	63.7(b)(2)

Demonstration of continuous monitoring system	63.9(g)

Change in information already provided	63.9(j)

Request for an extension of compliance with relevant standard	63.9(c)

Reports

Application for approval of the construction or reconstruction of a new major affected source, or reconstruction of a major affected source 63.5(6)(d)

Performance test results	63.10(d)(2),

63.3000(d)

Startup, shutdown and malfunction plan	63.6(e)(3)

Periodic startup, shutdown and malfunction reports	63.10(d)(5)(i), 63.3000(e)

Progress reports for compliance extension (if applicable)	63.6(i)

Semiannual compliance reports 	63.3000(b)

	A source must keep the following records:

Recordkeeping

Startup, shutdown and malfunction plan	63.6(e)(3)

All reports and notifications	63.10(b)(1)

Records of startup, shutdown, and malfunction of process equipment 63.10(b)(2)(i), (iv), (v)

Records of malfunctions of air pollution control equipment 63.10(b)(2)(ii)

Any applicability determination that demonstrates why owner or operator believes source is unaffected	63.10(b)(3)

Records of maintenance of air pollution control equipment 63.10(b)(2)(iii)

Records of flow monitoring system performance evaluations, malfunctions, calibrations, and adjustments	63.10(b)(2)(vi), (vii), (viii), (ix), (x), (xi), 63.10(c)

Documentation required for waiver of recordkeeping or reporting requirements (if applicable)	63.10(b)(2)(xii)

Documentation of initial notifications	63.10(b)(2)(xiv)

Five-year retention of records	63.10(b)(1), 63.2999(a)

		(ii)  Respondent Activities

Respondent Activities

Read instructions.

Write the notifications and reports listed above.

Enter information required to be recorded above.

Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of processing and maintaining information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of disclosing and providing information.

Adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements.

Train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information.

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

	Regulatory agencies, to the extent possible, are relying more on automated techniques such as electronic submissions of reports, and are improving their tracking systems and database systems to enhance the use of these techniques.  However, electronic reporting systems are still not widely used.  At this time, it is estimated that approximately 10 percent of the respondents use electronic reporting.

5.  The Information Collected: Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management

	5(a) Agency Activities

	EPA conducts the following activities in connection with the acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the required information.

Agency Activities

Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests if necessary.

Review notifications and reports, including performance test reports, and excess emissions reports, required to be submitted by industry.

Audit facility records.

Input, analyze, and maintain data in the Air Facility System (AFS).

	5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

	Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority might inspect the source to determine whether the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated.  Data and records maintained by the respondents are tabulated and published for use in compliance and enforcement programs.  The report of annual compliance tests is used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations.

	Information contained in the reports is entered into the AFS which is operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Compliance.  AFS is EPA’s database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance data for approximately 125,000 industrial and government-owned facilities.  EPA uses the AFS for tracking air pollution compliance and enforcement by local and state regulatory agencies, EPA headquarters and EPA regional offices.  EPA and its delegated Authorities can edit, store, retrieve and analyze the data.

	The records required by this regulation must be retained by the owner/operator for five years.

	5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

	Two of the 14 existing facilities subject to this NESHAP are classified as small businesses under the Small Business Administration definition (750 or fewer company employees).  However, the impact on small businesses was accounted for in the regulation development.  Because most of the monitoring and recordkeeping requirements in the final rule are necessary to insure proper operation of emission control equipment, plants will need to collect the information for their own records to show compliance with the emission standards.  Thus, EPA does not expect that any affected source, including small businesses, will experience adverse impacts due to the reporting and recordkeeping requirements of this rule.

	5(d) Collection Schedule

	The specific frequency for each information collection activity within this request is shown in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost: NESHAP for Wet-formed Fiberglass Mat Production (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH) (Renewal).

6.  Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

	Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry for the subpart included in this ICR.  The individual burdens are expressed under standardized headings believed to be consistent with the concept of burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act.  Where appropriate, specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified.  Responses to this information collection are mandatory.

	The Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

	6(a)  Estimating Respondent Burden

	The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from these recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be 1,966 hours.  These hours are based on Agency studies and background documents from the development of the regulation, Agency knowledge and experience with the NESHAP program, the previously approved ICR, and any comments received.

	6(b)  Estimating Respondent Costs

		(i)  Estimating Labor Costs

	This ICR uses the following labor rates:

		Managerial	$97.46   ($46.41 + 110%)

		Technical	$83.71   ($39.86 + 110%)

		Clerical	$42.55   ($20.26 + 110%)

	These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 19, 2005, “Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational and industry group.”  The rates are from column 1, “Total compensation.”  The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.

		(ii)  Estimating Capital/Startup and Operation and Maintenance Costs

	The only types of industry costs associated with the information collection activity in the regulations are labor costs.  There are no capital/startup or operation and maintenance costs.  The capital/startup costs are one-time costs when a facility becomes subject to the regulation.  This is based on the assumptions that all existing sources are in compliance with initial rule requirements and there will be no new lines constructed over the three-year period of this ICR.  The annual operation and maintenance costs are the ongoing costs to maintain the continuous emission monitors and other costs such as photocopying and postage.  We are not attributing to industry any O&M costs as a result of this rule because the use of flow and temperature monitors at thermal oxidizers are necessary to determine whether these are operating properly.

		(iii)  Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

	There are no average annual costs to industry for capital/startup and operation and maintenance associated with continuous monitoring equipment over the next three years of the ICR due to the assumptions discussed above.  This is shown on the OMB 83-I form in section 14 as follows: block 4(a), Total annualized capital/startup costs; block 14(b), Total annual costs (O&M); block 14(c), Total annualized cost requested.  The numbers in block 14 of the OMB 83-I form are rounded to show the cost in thousands of dollars.

	6(c)  Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

	The only costs to the Agency are labor costs associated with analysis of the reported information.  Respondents will bear the cost through permit fees, for daily performance tests conducted at the plant by a certified observer provided by the State enforcement agency.  EPA's overall compliance and enforcement program includes activities such as the examination of records maintained by the respondents, periodic inspection of sources of emissions, and the publication and distribution of collected information.

	The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is estimated to be $21,760 (rounded).  This cost is based on the average hourly labor rate as follows:

		Managerial	$56.02   (GS-13, Step 5, $35.01 x 1.6)

		Technical	$41.57   (GS-12, Step 1, $25.98 x 1.6)

		Clerical	$22.50   (GS-6, Step 3, $14.06 x 1.6)

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) “2005 General Schedule” which excludes locality rates of pay.  Details upon which this estimate is based appear in Table 2: Annual Burden and Cost to the Federal/State Government: NESHAP for Wet-formed Fiberglass Mat Production (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH) (Renewal).

	6(d)  Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

	Based on our research for this ICR, we have determined that there are approximately 14 respondents subject to the regulation.  We have further assumed that there will be no new lines constructed in the next three years; therefore, there will be no new respondents.

	The number of respondents is calculated using the following table which addresses the three years covered by this ICR.

Number of Respondents

	Respondents That Submit Reports	Respondents That Do Not Submit Any Reports

	Year	(A)

Number of New Respondents 1	(B)

Number of Existing Respondents	(C)

Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records but Do Not Submit Reports	(D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Are Also New Respondents	(E)

Number of Respondents

(E=A+B+C-D)

1	0	14	0	0	14

2	0	14	0	0	14

3	0	14	0	0	14

Average	0	14	0	0	14

	1 New respondents include sources with constructed, reconstructed and modified affected facilities.

	To avoid double-counting respondents, column D is subtracted.  As shown above, the average Number of Respondents over the three-year period of this ICR is 14.  This number appears on the OMB 83-I form in block 13(a), Number of respondents.

	The number of Total Annual Responses is 32, as described below.  This number is shown on the OMB 83-I form in block 13(b), Total annual responses.

Total Annual Responses

(A)

Information Collection Activity	(B)

Number of Respondents	(C)

Number of Responses	(D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit Reports	(E)

Total Annual Responses

E=(BxC)+D

Initial Notifications	0	5	0	0

Performance test reports	0	1	0	0

Semiannual compliance reports	14	2	0	28

Startup, shutdown and malfunction reports	2	2	0	4

Total

32

	The Total Hours Requested is shown on the OMB 83-I form in block 13(c).  The total annual labor costs are 1,966.  The annual labor costs are not shown on the OMB 83-I form.  Details regarding these estimates may be found in Table 1. Annual Respondent Burden and Cost: NESHAP for Wet-formed Fiberglass Mat Production (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH) (Renewal), attached.

	There are no annualized capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entities subject to the regulation.  This number is shown on the OMB 83-I form in block 14(c), Total annualized cost requested.  The cost calculations are detailed in Section 6(b) (iii), Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.

	The average annual Agency burden and cost over next three years is estimated to be 501 labor hours at a cost of $20,270 (rounded).  See Table 2. Annual Agency Burden and Cost: NESHAP for Wet-formed Fiberglass Mat Production (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH) (Renewal).

	6(e)  Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

	The detailed bottom line burden hours and cost calculations for the respondents and the Agency are shown in Tables 1 and 2, respectively, and summarized below.

		(i)  Respondent Tally

	The Total Hours Requested is shown on the OMB 83-I form in block 13(c).  The total annual labor costs are $158,672.  The annual labor costs are not shown on the OMB 83-I form.  Details regarding these estimates may be found in Table 1. Annual Respondent Burden and Cost: NESHAP for Wet-formed Fiberglass Mat Production (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH) (Renewal), attached.

	There are no annualized capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entities.  This number is shown on the OMB 83-I form in block 14(c), Total annualized cost requested.  The cost calculations are detailed in Section 6(b) (iii), Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.

		(ii)  The Agency Tally

	The average annual Agency burden and cost over next three years is estimated to be 501 labor hours at a cost of $20,270.  See Table 2. Annual Agency Burden and Cost: NESHAP for Wet-formed Fiberglass Mat Production (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH) (Renewal), attached.

	6(f)  Reasons for Change in Burden

	The decrease in labor burden to industry from the most recently approved ICR from 2,983 hours to 1,966 hours is due to adjustments.  The decrease in burden from the most recently approved ICR is due to the assumptions that existing sources are in compliance with the initial rule requirements, and that there will be no new lines constructed over the three-year period of this ICR.

	The total annualized capital and operations and maintenance costs decreased from $2,000 to $0 due to the lack of capital/startup costs associated with new sources purchasing continuous emission monitoring equipment.  In addition, we have determined that any operation and maintenance (O&M) costs associated with the use of flow and temperature monitors at thermal oxidizers cannot be attributed to this standard because these monitors are standard equipment in oxidizers used to determine whether these are operating properly.

	The Federal government burden significantly decreased (from 3,227 hours to 501 hours) due to the deletion of burden and costs associated with the review of initial reports, inspection activities, and litigation costs.  The inspection category includes travel costs and labor burden associated with inspections, which are activities that are exempt under the Paperwork Reduction Act.  Litigation costs are associated with the rule development processes which have been completed.

	There was also an increase in labor rates for both industry and the Federal government; however, it did not offset the reduction in labor burden due to all the assumptions stated above.

	6(g)  Burden Statement

	The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 61 (rounded) hours per response.  Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

	An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB Control Number.  The OMB Control Numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed at 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

	To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2005-0048, which is available for online viewing at   HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov  , or in person viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC.  The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov.  T+his site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically.  When in the system, select “search,” then key in the Docket ID Number identified above.  Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2005-0048 and OMB Control Number 2060-0496 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

	This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in collecting this information.

Table 1.  Annual Respondent Burden and Cost:  NESHAP for Wet-formed Fiberglass Mat Production (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH) (Renewal)

Burden item

(A)

Person-

hours per

occurrence

(B)

No.  of

occurrences

per respondent

per year

(C)

Person-

hours per

respondent

per year

(C=AxB)

(D)

Respondents

per year  a

(E)

Technical

person-

hours per

year

(E=CxD)

(F)

Management

person-hours

per year

(Ex0.05)

(G)

Clerical

person-

hours per 	year

(Ex0.1)

(H)

Cost, $  b

1.  Applications	N/A

2.  Survey and Studies	N/A

3.  Acquisition, Installation,         and Utilization of  Technology and  Systems	N/A

4.  Reporting Requirements

  A.  Read instructions	1	1	1	0	0.0	0.0	0.0	$0.00

  B.  Required activities:

    i.  Initial Performance tests:  c

200

1

200

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

$0.00

    ii.  Repeat of performance test

200

1

200

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

$0.00

    iii.  Monitoring of operations         and equipment:  d

Included in 5E

    iv.  Operation, maintenance,          monitoring plan

40

1

40

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

$0.00

    v.  Startup, shutdown,                    malfunction plan

40

1

40

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

$0.00

  D.  Gather Existing Information	Included in 4B and 5E

  E.  Write report   a, c

    i.  Notification of compliance        status

2

1

2

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

$0.00

    ii.  Notification of actual                startup

2

1

2

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

$0.00

    iii.  Notification of                         construction/ reconstruction   a

2

1

2

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

$0.00

    iv.  Notification of                         performance test

2

1

2

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

$0.00

    v.  Notification of actual                startup

2

1

2

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

$0.00

    vi.  Reports of performance           test results

4

1

4

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

$0.00

    vii.  Report of monitoring              exceedances  e

16

2

32

11.2

358.4

17.9

35.8

$33,270.18

    viii.  Report of no excess               emission  e

8

2

16

2.8

44.8

2.2

4.5

$4,155.24

    ix.  Startup, shutdown,

    malfunction report   f

8

2

16

2

32

1.6

3.2

$2,970.82

5.  Recordkeeping Requirements

  A.  Read instructions	Included in 4A

  B.  Plan activities	Included in 4B

  C.  Implement activities	Included in 4B

  D.  Develop record system

N/A

  E.  Time to enter and transmit all   information required by the rule g

1.75

52

91

14

1,274

63.7

127.4

$118,275.61

  F.  Time to train personnel

N/A

  G. Time for audits

N/A

TOTAL LABOR  BURDEN AND COST

1,709.2

85.5

170.9

$158,671.85

TOTAL LABOR HOURS (Rounded)

1,966

$158,672

Assumptions:

a  There are an estimated 14 respondents (i.e., wet-formed fiberglass mat production facilities), 13 with one production line and one with two lines, which are subject to this standard.  We have assumed that there will be no new lines constructed over the three year period of this ICR.

b This ICR uses the following labor rates: $97.46 per hour for Executive, Administrative, and Managerial labor; $83.71 per hour for Technical labor, and $42.55 per hour for Clerical labor.  These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 19, 2005, “Table 2.Civilian Workers, by occupational and industry group.”  The rates are from column 1, “Total compensation”.  The rates have been increased by 110% to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.

c We have assumed that all sources are in compliance with initial rule requirements including the initial performance test.  The rule requires a performance test every five years since the initial test was conducted; however, this requirement would not be applicable for this ICR renewal.  We have estimated that each performance test will take approximately 21 hours to complete it since sources will be using EPA Method 316 to measure formaldehyde and applicable test methods specified in the NESHAP to determine resin free-formaldehyde content and the loss-on-ignition of the fiberglass mat.  In addition, we have assumed that it will take approximately 200 hours to conduct the pretest survey, equipment calibration, and sample analysis and report preparation for a total of 221 hours per performance test.   We have further assumed that 20 percent of the performance tests fail and will have to be repeated.

d  Monitoring of operations include: 1) monitoring operating parameters for control equipment (i.e., thermal oxidizer or other control equipment); 2) urea-formaldehyde (UF) resin solids application rate; 3) resin-free formaldehyde content; 4) loss-on-ignition; 5) UF-to-latex ratio in the binder; 6) weight of the final mat product per roofing square; and 7) average nonwoven wet-formed fiberglass mat production rate (roofing square per hour).

e We have assumed that approximately 80 percent of the 14 respondents (or 11.2) will report no excess emissions twice a year and approximately 20 percent (or 2.8) will report no excess emissions twice a year.

f We have assumed that 2 of the 14 facilities will have a startup, shutdown or malfunction (SSM) that is not managed according to the SSM plan.

g We have assumed it takes each source approximately 1.75 hours per week to record and transmit the information and that a year will consist of 52 weeks.

Table 2.  Annual Agency Burden and Cost:

NESHAP for Wet-formed Fiberglass Mat Production (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH) (Renewal)

	Activity

(A)

EPA person-

hours per

occurrence

(B)

No. of

occurrences

per plant

per year

(C)

EPA person-

hours per

plant per

year

(C=AxB)

(D)

Plants

per

year  a

(E)

Technical

person-hours

per year

(E=CxD)

(F)

Management

person-hours

per year

(Ex0.05)

(G)

Clerical

person-

hours per

year

(Ex0.1)

(H)

Cost, $ b

Initial  Notifications: applicability, performance test, compliance status   a

2

3

6

0

0

0

0

$0.00

Review reports of excess emissions   c

16

2

32

11.2

358.4

17.9

35.8

 $16,692.84

Review reports of no excess

emissions   c

8

2

16

2.8

44.8

2.24

4.5

$2,086.61

Review of startup, shutdown, malfunction report  d

8

2

16

2 ADVANCE \u2 i ADVANCE \d2

32

1.60

3.2

$1,490.43

Subtotal Burden and Cost

435.2

21.8

43.5

$20,269.88

TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST (rounded)

501

$20,270

Assumptions:

a   There are an estimated 14 respondents (i.e., wet-formed fiberglass mat production facilities), 13 with one production line and one with two lines, which are subject to this standard.  We have assumed that all sources are in compliance with initial rule requirements and that there will be no new lines constructed over the three year period of this ICR. b   This cost is based on the following labor rates which incorporates a 1.6 benefits multiplication factor to account for government overhead expenses:  Managerial rate of $56.02 (GS-13, Step 5, $35.01 x 1.6), Technical rate of $41.57 (GS-12, Step 1, $25.98 x 1.6), and Clerical rate of $22.50 (GS-6, Step 3, $14.06 x 1.6).  These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) “2005 General Schedule” which excludes locality rates of pay.

c   We have assumed that approximately 80 percent of the 14 respondents (or 11.2) will report no excess emissions twice a year and approximately 20 percent (or 2.8) will report no excess emissions twice a year.

d   We have assumed that two of 14 respondents per year will have a startup, shutdown, or malfunction occurrence that is not managed according to the plan.

 PAGE   18

 PAGE   17


Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US

03/12/2008 05:26 PM

To

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> cc

Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia Wegman<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Janet Cakir/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, darryl weatherhead

Subject

updated chapter 7b: Uncertainties of Post 2020 Attainment Analysis

Heidi, here is the updated chapter on SC & SJ reflecting our conversation this am about including a fuller characterization of the uncertainties.   Let me know if you have questions.

We will be faxing change pages reflecting differences between what you have in hand and the draft we have now reflecting renumbered chapters etc.   We will start that in about a 1/2 hour or less, Janet is finishing off the changes now.   I do not expect much more than a dozen or so pages but stay tuned.

Ron


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 71 (Monday, April 14, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20841-20844]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08235]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2013-1018]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulation; Seattle Seafair Unlimited Hydroplane
Race, Lake Washington, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend the duration of the special
local regulations for the Seattle Seafair Unlimited Hydroplane Race by
extending the time frame that is

currently listed. This proposed change is necessary in order to
correctly reflect the time frame published by Seafair and to ensure the
effectiveness of the regulation for the entirety of the event as
outlined in the Seafair Notice to Boaters.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before June 13, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using
any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions
on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of
these three methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LTJG, Nathaniel P. Clinger, Coast Guard Sector Puget
Sound, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (206)
217-6045, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Barbara Hairston,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online at
http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but
please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment,
it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when
it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number [USCG-2013-1018] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG- 2013-1018) in the ``SEARCH'' box and
click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated
with this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility
in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES.
Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If
we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

B. Regulatory History and Information

    On July 2, 2001, the Coast Guard published a final rule (66 FR
34822) that established the special local regulations in 33 CFR
100.1301 for the safe execution of the Seattle Seafair Unlimited
Hydroplane races on the waters of Lake Washington.

C. Basis and Purpose

    Coast Guard District Commanders are authorized to promulgate
special local regulations necessary to insure safety of life on the
navigable waters immediately prior to, during, and immediately after
the approved regatta or marine parade. This proposed rule amends the
currently listed time in which the rule is in effect for each day of
the Seafair Unlimited Hydroplane Race event. This proposed amendment is
necessary to ensure that the regulations in 33 CFR 100.1301 are in
effect during and immediately following the marine event.

D. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    We propose to make stylistic revisions and amend the effective
times listed in 33 CFR 100.1301 by changing the effective time
currently published in the regulation from 8 a.m. until 8 p.m. to 8:00
a.m. until 11:59 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time.

E. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order

13563. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under
those Orders. The Coast Guard bases this finding on the fact that the
amendment of the effective period of the regulation is not
significantly greater in duration than the effective period currently
established in the regulation.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which may be small entities; the owners and operators of vessels
intending to operate in the waters covered by the special local
regulation while it is in effect. This proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
because the amendment of the special local regulation would increase
the duration of the rule for a minimal amount of time.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule
would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment
(see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to
what degree this rule would economically affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the proposed rule
would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate
against small entities that question or complain about this proposed
rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule will not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and
would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that
might disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule
involves the amendment of the special local regulation outlined in 33
CFR 100.1301. This proposed rule is categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant
Instruction. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist supporting
this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any
comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

    Special Local Regulations.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1233
0
2. In Sec.  100.1301 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  100.1301  Seattle seafair unlimited hydroplane race.

    (a) This section is in effect annually for one week or less during
the last week in July and the first two weeks of August. The specific
dates that this section will be in effect will be published in the
Local Notice to Mariners. This section will be in effect from 8:00 a.m.
until 11:59 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time, on the dates published in the
Local Notice to Mariners.
* * * * *

    Dated: March 5, 2014.
R.T. Gromlich,
Rear Admiral, U. S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2014-08235 Filed 4-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P