  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Testing of Certain High Production Volume
Chemicals; Second Group of Chemicals

(Exposure Findings Supporting Information)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

Economics, Exposure and Technology Division

July 2008Table of Contents

PREFACE

  TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc175984749"  1.0	Data Source
Descriptions	  PAGEREF _Toc175984749 \h  3

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc175984750"  2.0	Summary of HPV2 Chemicals and
Findings	  PAGEREF _Toc175984750 \h  4

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc175984751"  Attachment A - NLM Printouts	A-1

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc175984753"  Attachment B – NOES Printouts	B-2

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc175984755"  Attachment C – TRI Printout	C-3

 Preface

	This findings document was prepared to support EPA’s Proposed TSCA
Section 4 Test Rule for Certain High Production Volume Chemicals; Second
Group of Chemicals.  Prior to promulgating a test rule under section 4
of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. §§2601 et seq,
EPA is required to make certain findings identified in section 4(a) of
TSCA relating to the chemical’s risk and potential exposure, the
sufficiency of data to allow EPA to determine the human health or
environmental effects of the chemical, and the need to conduct testing.

	Under TSCA section 4(a)(1)(B), EPA must make the following findings to
support a test rule based on concerns for exposure: (1) that a chemical
substance is or will be produced in substantial quantities and that it
enters or may reasonably be anticipated to enter the environment in
substantial quantities and/or that there is or may be substantial and/or
significant human exposure to such substance; (2) that there are
insufficient data and experience upon which the effects of the
manufacture, distribution in commerce, processing, use or disposal of
such substance or mixture or of any combination of such activities on
health or the environment can reasonably be determined or predicted; and
(3) that testing of the substance or mixture with respect to such
effects is necessary to develop such data.  The criteria and standards
used by EPA for evaluating the terms “substantial production,”
“substantial release,” and “substantial or significant human
exposure” as used in TSCA section 4(a)(1)(B)(i) are explained in
EPA’s Final Statement of Policy; Criteria for Evaluating Substantial
Production, Substantial Release, and Substantial or Significant Human
Exposure set forth at 58 FR 28736 (May 14, 1993) (hereinafter referred
to as the “B Policy”).

	This document provides a detailed discussion of EPA’s evaluation of
each of the chemical substances identified in the proposed test rule to
determine that preliminary TSCA section 4(a)(1)(B) findings concerning
“substantial production,” “substantial release,” and
“substantial or significant human exposure” can be made. Data
Source Descriptions

TSCA Inventory Update Reporting Rule: In 1986, EPA promulgated the
Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) regulations, under TSCA section 8(a),
to facilitate the periodic updating of the TSCA Inventory database and
to otherwise support activities associated with implementing TSCA. As
originally promulgated, the IUR required chemical manufacturers
(including importers) to report to EPA every 4 years the identity of
chemical substances manufactured (including imported) annually in
quantities of 10,000 pounds or more at each plant site they owned or
controlled. In 2003 EPA adjusted the universe of chemicals and plant
sites that are required to report, and the type of information reported.
In 2005, EPA changed the reporting frequency to once every 5 years,
revised the manner in which amounts of a chemical substance manufactured
or imported must be reported, and changed the submission period for
reporting after 2006.

To protect the claims of confidential business information (CBI)
asserted by some IUR submitters on the amount of the chemical substance
manufactured (including imported) at a specific site, all production
volumes reported by IUR submitters (i.e., CBI and non-CBI) for each
chemical are combined by EPA for an aggregate total.  Confidential
business information claims are further protected by using eight ranges
to identify the total for any specific chemical and then making
available to the public the range that corresponds to the aggregate
production volume. Publicly-available information from the 1986, 1990,
1994, 1998, and 2002 (and 2006) IUR reporting cycles are available
on-line at:   HYPERLINK http://www.epa.gov/oppt/iur/index.htm
http://www.epa.gov/oppt/iur/index.htm

The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) contains information about releases
of certain chemicals and management of wastes at a wide variety of
sources, including manufacturing operations, certain service businesses,
and federal facilities.  Publicly-available information from the 2005
TRI reporting cycle is available on-line at:   HYPERLINK
http://www.epa.gov/triexplorer/ http://www.epa.gov/triexplorer/

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
conducted the National Occupational Exposure Survey (NOES) that
collected data on potential occupational exposures to chemical,
physical, and biological agents from 1981 to 1983.  The survey involved
on-site visits to 4,490 establishments in 522 industry types employing
approximately 1,800,000 workers in 377 occupational categories.
Publicly-available information from the NOES is available on-line at:
HYPERLINK http://www.cdc.gov/noes/default.html
http://www.cdc.gov/noes/default.html

The National Library of Medicine Household Products Database provides
information on the chemical ingredients and their percentage in specific
brands of household products.  Information in the database is from a
variety of publicly available sources including brand-specific labels
and Material Safety Data Sheets when available from manufacturers and
manufacturers' web sites.  Publicly-available information from the
database is available on-line at:   HYPERLINK
http://householdproducts.nlm.nih.gov/
http://householdproducts.nlm.nih.gov/

Summary of HPV2 Chemicals and Findings

	Table 2-1 below presents a summary of the high production volume (HPV)
chemicals and data collected to support an exposure-based finding. Table
2-2 presents a chemical-by-chemical explanation of the supporting
findings information.

Table 2-1

Summary of Data Searched for Exposure Based Findings

CAS#	Chemical Name

IUR Number of Workers Information 	NOES	NLM Household Chemicals Database
2005 TRI Data(Total On- and Off-site Disposal or Other Releases, lbs)
2006 IUR Production Volume

[Million lbs]

Meet Exposure Based Criteria

For Workers	Meet Exposure Based Criteria for Consumers

Meet Exposure Based Criteria for Release	Non-CBI Commercial/ Consumer
Code Description

75-07-0

Acetaldehyde

> 1,000

216,533

3 hobby/craft glues; 1 home maintenance product

13,567,452

> 100 - 500

Yes

Yes

Yes

	78-11-5	1,3-Propanediol, 2,2-bis[(nitrooxy)methyl]-, dinitrate (ester)

> 1,000	2,650	no

> 1   - 10	Yes	Yes

C20 - Other

84-65-1	9,10-Anthracenedione

> 1,000	6,187	no	 	> 10 - 50	Yes	Yes

C13-Paper Products

89-32-7	1H,3H-Benzo[1,2-c:4,5-c']difuran-1,3,5,7-tetrone

> 1,000	1,926	no

> 1   - 10	Yes

	110-44-1	2,4-Hexadienoic acid, (E,E)-

> 1,000	69,243	yes, 13 personal care products

> 1   - 10	Yes	Yes

C16-Rubber & Plastic Products, C20-Other

118-82-1	Phenol, 4,4'-methylenebis[2,6-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-

> 1,000	120,009	no

> 1   - 10	Yes	Yes

C10-Lubricants, Greases & Fuel Additives

119-61-9	Methanone, diphenyl-

> 1,000	41,516	5 personal care products; 1 auto product

> 1   - 10	Yes	Yes

C05-Electtrical & Electronic Products, C12-Paints & Coatings,C13-Paper
Products, C20 - Other

144-62-7	Ethanedioic acid

> 1,000	142,000	4 auto products; 1 brass polish; 1 cleanser; 2 wood
brighteners; 1 bathroom cleanser

> 1   - 10	Yes	Yes

     Yes	C06-Fabrics, Textiles, & Apparel, C07-Glass & Ceramic
Products,C13-Paper Products, C15-Polishes & Sanitation Goods, C17-Soaps
& Detergents, C20-Other

149-44-0	Methanesulfunic acid, hydroxyl-, monosodium salt

> 1,000	239,465	no

> 1   - 10	Yes	Yes

C01-Adhesives & Sealants, C16-Rubber & Plastics Goods

2524-04-1	Phosphorochloridothioic acid, O,O-diethyl ester

> 1,000	1,088	no

> 10 - 50	Yes

	4719-04-4	1,3,5-Triazine-1,3,5(2H,4H,6H)-triethanol

> 1,000	225,251	yes, 7 reported uses of Grotan BK (a disinfectant) in 4
laundry detergents, 1 dishwashing detergent, 1 all purpose cleaner, and
1 glass & surface cleaner	 	> 10 - 50	Yes	Yes

Yes	C20-Other

6381-77-7	D-erythro-Hex-2-enonic acid, .gamma.-lactone, monosodium salt

> 1,000	19,468	no

> 1   - 10	Yes

	31138-65-5	D-gluco-Heptonic acid, monosodium salt, (2.xi.)-

> 1,000	74,165	no

> 1   - 10	Yes	Yes

CBI

66241-11-0	C.I. Leuco Sulphur Black 1

> 1,000	38,555	no	 	> 1   - 10	Yes	Yes

C06-Fabrics, Textiles & Apparel

68187-76-8	Castor oil, sulfated, sodium salt

> 1,000	11,164	no

> 1   - 10	Yes	Yes

C17-Soaps & Detergents

68187-84-8	Castor oil, oxidized

> 1,000	36,381	1 auto product; 1 oil-based primer/sealer; 14 personal
care products; 1 insect repellent	 	> 1   - 10	Yes	Yes

C20-Other

68479-98-1	Benzenediamine, ar,ar-diethyl-ar-methyl-

> 1,000	4,121	no

> 10 - 50	Yes

	68527-02-6	Alkenes, C12-24, chloro

> 1,000	84,192	no	 	> 1   - 10	Yes

	68647-60-9	Hydrocarbons, C>4

> 1,000	1,257	no	 	> 1Billion lbs	Yes

	Table 2-2

Chemical-by-Chemical Explanation of Findings

CAS#	Chemical Name	Summary of Findings

75-07-0	Acetaldehyde

	This chemical reports >1 million lb release to TRI.  The total number
of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 based on reported IUR data.
This chemical exceeds 1,000 workers based on NOES data.   Additionally,
the number of potentially exposed consumers is estimated to be very
large based on the uses (hobby/craft glues; home maintenance product)
cited in the NLM Household Chemicals Database.  It is expected that
hobby or craft glues and home maintenance products will be widely used
by consumers (including children) and hence, may likely exceed 10,000
people.  Based on this information, this chemical would meet the
exposure based findings criteria of "substantial or significant human
exposure.”  The production volume data for the 2006 IUR data
collection was compared to the production volume data for the 1986 IUR
data collection for this chemical to see if the production volume stayed
the same or increased, thereby indicating that the usage of these
chemicals is no less than when NOES data were gathered. The 1986
reported IUR production volume range was 500 million -1 billion lbs. The
2006 IUR production volume range is 100 million – 500 million lbs.

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (100 million -500 million lb)

- Substantial Release (Greater than 13.5  million lb reported to TRI)

- Total workers exceeding 1,000 based on IUR data

- Total workers exceeding 1,000 based on NOES data (217,000 workers)

- Consumers potentially exceeding 10,000 people.

78-11-5	1,3-Propanediol,2,2-bis[(nitrooxy)methyl],dinitrate (ester)

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 workers
based on NOES data. Additionally, the IUR commercial/consumer product
category C20-Other (chemicals contained in commercial and consumer
products not elsewhere classified) was reported for this chemical. This
indicates that this chemical is present in an unknown number of
commercial and consumer products that may potentially have a high number
of exposures. Based on this information, this chemical would meet the
exposure based findings criteria of "substantial or significant human
exposure.” The production volume data for the 2006 IUR data collection
was compared to the production volume data for the 1986 IUR data
collection for this chemical to see if the production volume stayed the
same or increased, thereby indicating that the usage of these chemicals
is no less than when NOES data were gathered.  The 1986 reported IUR
production volume range was 1 million -10 million lbs. The 2006 IUR
production volume range is 1 million -10 million lbs. (All stated IUR
commercial/consumer product categories are non-CBI)

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (1 million -10 million lb)

- Total workers exceeding 1,000 based NOES data

  (2,650 workers)

84-65-1	9,10-Anthracenedione

	The total number of potentially exposed workers is likely to exceed
1,000 based on reported IUR data.   The number of potentially exposed
total workers exceeds 1,000 based on NOES data.  Additionally, the
number of potentially exposed consumers is estimated to be very large
based on the reported IUR commercial/consumer product category for this
chemical (C13 – paper products). Chemicals reporting in this category
are contained in commercial and consumer paper products. It is expected
that paper products will be widely used by commercial workers and
consumers (including children) and hence, may likely exceed 1,000
commercial workers and 10,000 consumers.  Based on this information,
this chemical would meet the exposure based findings criteria of
"substantial or significant human exposure.”  The production volume
data for the 2006 IUR data collection was compared to the production
volume data for the 1986 IUR data collection for this chemical to see if
the production volume stayed the same or increased, thereby indicating
that the usage of these chemicals is no less than when NOES data were
gathered.  The 1986 reported IUR production volume range was 500
thousand – 1 million lbs. The 2006 IUR production volume range is 10
million – 50 million lbs. (All stated IUR  commercial/consumer product
categories are non-CBI)

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (10 million -50 million lb)

- Total workers exceeding 1,000 based NOES data  (6,187 workers)

 - Total workers potentially exceeding 1,000 based on  IUR
commercial/consumer product category (C13)

- Consumers potentially exceeding 10,000 people.

89-32-7	1H,3H-Benzo[1,2-c:4,5-c']difuran-1,3,5,7-tetrone

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 based on
NOES data.  Based on this information, this chemical would meet the
exposure based findings criteria of "substantial or significant human
exposure.” The production volume data for the 2006 IUR data collection
was compared to the production volume data for the 1986 IUR data
collection for this chemical to see if the production volume stayed the
same or increased, thereby indicating that the usage of these chemicals
is no less than when NOES data were gathered. The 1986 reported IUR
production volume range was 1 million – 10 million lbs. The 2006 IUR
production volume range is 1 million – 10 million lbs.

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (1 million -10 million lb)

- Total workers exceeding 1,000 based NOES data (1,926 workers).

110-44-1	2,4-Hexadienoic acid, (E,E)-

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 based on
NOES data.  Additionally, the number of potentially exposed consumers is
estimated to be very large based on the uses cited in the NLM Household
Chemicals Database (personal care products) and the reported IUR
commercial/consumer product categories for this chemical (C16 – rubber
and plastic products and C20 - other). Chemicals reporting in these
categories are contained in such products as tires, footwear, flooring,
bottles, sporting equipment, games, and toys. It is expected that these
products will be widely used by consumers (including children) and
hence, may likely exceed 10,000 people.  Additionally, products such as
tires and flooring are also used in a commercial setting, which may lead
to exposures of >1,000 commercial workers.  Based on this information,
this chemical would meet the exposure based findings criteria of
"substantial or significant human exposure.”  The production volume
data for the 2006 IUR data collection was compared to the production
volume data for the 1986 IUR data collection for this chemical to see if
the production volume stayed the same or increased, thereby indicating
that the usage of these chemicals is no less than when NOES data were
gathered.  The 1986 reported IUR production volume range was 1 million
– 10 million lbs. The 2006 IUR production volume range is 1 million
– 10 million lbs. (All stated IUR  commercial/consumer product
categories are non-CBI)

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (1 million -10 million lb)

- Total workers exceeding 1,000 based on NOES data  (69,243 workers)

- Total  workers potentially exceeding 1,000 based on the IUR
commercial/consumer product categories (C16 )

- Consumers potentially exceeding 10,000 people.

118-82-1	Phenol,4,4'-methylenebis[2,6-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds1,000 based on
NOES data. Additionally, the number of potentially exposed consumers is
estimated to be very large based on the reported IUR commercial/consumer
product category for this chemical (C10 – lubricants, greases, & fuel
additives).  Chemicals reporting in this category are contained in
gasoline, kerosene, and distillate fuel oil after refining.  These are
generally commercial or consumer additives to enhance performance or
clean components of combustion devices.  It is expected that these
products will be widely used by commercial workers and consumers and
hence, may likely exceed 1,000 commercial workers and 10,000 consumers.
Based on this information, this chemical would meet the exposure based
findings criteria of "substantial or significant human exposure.” The
production volume data for the 2006 IUR data collection was compared to
the production volume data for the 1986 IUR data collection for this
chemical to see if the production volume stayed the same or increased,
thereby indicating that the usage of these chemicals is no less than
when NOES data were gathered.  The 1986 reported IUR production volume
range was 1 million – 10 million lbs. The 2006 IUR production volume
range is 1 million – 10 million lbs. (All stated IUR
commercial/consumer product categories are non-CBI)

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (1 million -10 million lb)

- Total workers exceeding 1,000 based on NOES data  (120,009 workers)

- Total workers potentially exceeding 1,000 based on  and the IUR
commercial/consumer product category (C10)

- Consumers potentially exceeding 10,000 people.

119-61-9	Methanone, diphenyl-

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 based on
NOES data.  Additionally, the number of potentially exposed consumers is
estimated to be very large based on the uses cited in the NLM Household
Chemicals Database (personal care products and auto products) and the
reported IUR commercial/consumer product categories for this chemical
(C05 – electrical and electronic products, C12 – paints and
coatings, C13 – paper products, and C20 - other). Chemicals reporting
in these IUR product categories are contained in computers, office
equipment, household appliances, electric lighting and wiring, video and
audio recording and communication equipment; commercial and consumer
paints (paste or ready-mix) including artists’ paints, varnishes,
lacquers, enamels and shellac, paint and varnish removers and cleaners
and commercial and consumer paper products.  It is expected that these
products will be widely used by commercial workers and consumers
(including children) and hence, may likely exceed 1,000 commercial
workers and 10,000 consumers.  Based on this information, this chemical
would meet the exposure based findings criteria of "substantial or
significant human exposure.”  The production volume data for the 2006
IUR data collection was compared to the production volume data for the
1986 IUR data collection for this chemical to see if the production
volume stayed the same or increased, thereby indicating that the usage
of these chemicals is no less than when NOES data were gathered.  The
1986 reported IUR production volume range was 1 million – 10 million
lbs. The 2006 IUR production volume range is 1 million – 10 million
lbs. (All stated IUR  commercial/consumer product categories are
non-CBI)

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (1 million -10 million lb)

- Total workers exceeding 1,000 based on NOES data  (41,516 workers)

- Total workers potentially exceeding 1,000  based on the IUR
commercial/consumer product categories (C05, C12, C13 )

- Consumers potentially exceeding 10,000 people.

144-62-7	Ethanedioic acid

	The total number of potentially exposed workers is likely to exceed
1,000 based on reported IUR data.  The total number of potentially
exposed workers exceeds 1,000 based on NOES data. The number of
potentially exposed consumers is estimated to be very large based on the
uses cited in the NLM Household Chemicals Database (auto products,
cleansers, wood brighteners, and polishes) and the reported IUR
commercial/consumer product categories for this chemical (C06 –
fabrics, textiles, & apparel, C07 – glass & ceramic products, C13 –
paper products, C15 – polishes & sanitation goods, C17 – soaps &
detergents).  Additionally, the IUR commercial/consumer product category
C20-Other (chemicals contained in commercial and consumer products not
elsewhere classified) was reported for this chemical. This indicates
that this chemical is present in an unknown number of commercial and
consumer products that may potentially have a high number of exposures.
Chemicals reporting in these IUR product categories are contained in
commercial and consumer products made of cotton, silk, wool, or manmade
fibers; commercial and consumer glass and ceramic products; commercial
and consumer paper products; furniture, metal, glass, and other polishes
and cleaners; waxes and dressings for leather and other materials;
household and industrial disinfectants and bleaches; liquid, granulated,
caked, and flaked washing detergents and personal soaps; dishwashing
compounds; presoaks and scouring compounds for commercial and consumer
use; and sporting equipment, games and toys. It is expected that these
products will be widely used by commercial workers and consumers
(including children) and hence, may likely exceed 1,000 commercial
workers and 10,000 consumers.   It is also expected that based on the
nature of the C17 use that over 90 % of the soaps & detergent products
that contain this chemical will be released into the environment
(exceeding the significant release threshold of 10% of the production
volume).  Based on this information, this chemical would likely meet the
exposure based findings criteria of "substantial or significant human
exposure" and “substantial or significant release.”  The production
volume data for the 2006 IUR data collection was compared to the
production volume data for the 1986 IUR data collection for this
chemical to see if the production volume stayed the same or increased,
thereby indicating that the usage of these chemicals is no less than
when NOES data were gathered. The 1986 reported IUR production volume
range was 1 million – 10 million lbs. The 2006 IUR production volume
range is 1 million – 10 million lbs. (All stated IUR
commercial/consumer product categories are non-CBI)

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (1 million -10 million lb)

- Substantial Release based on IUR commercial/consumer product category
(C17 – soaps & detergents)

- Total workers potentially exceeding 1,000 based on IUR data

- Total workers exceeding 1,000 based on NOES data (142,000 workers)

- Consumers potentially exceeding 10,000 people.

149-44-0	Methanesulfunic acid, hydroxyl-monosodium salt

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 based on
NOES data.  Additionally, the number of potentially exposed consumers is
estimated to be very large based on the reported IUR commercial/consumer
product categories for this chemical (C01 – adhesives & sealants and
C16 – rubber and plastics goods).  Chemicals reporting in these
product categories are contained in industrial and household adhesives;
glues; caulking compounds; sealants; linoleum, tile, and rubber cements;
tires; footwear; flooring; and bottles.  It is expected that these
products will be widely used by commercial workers and consumers and
hence, may likely exceed 1,000 commercial workers and 10,000 consumers.
Based on this information, this chemical would meet the exposure based
findings criteria of "substantial or significant human exposure.”  The
production volume data for the 2006 IUR data collection was compared to
the production volume data for the 1986 IUR data collection for this
chemical to see if the production volume stayed the same or increased,
thereby indicating that the usage of these chemicals is no less than
when NOES data were gathered.  The 1986 reported IUR production volume
range was 1 million – 10 million lbs. The 2006 IUR production volume
range is 1 million – 10 million lbs. (All stated IUR
commercial/consumer product categories are non-CBI)

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (1 million -10 million lb)

- Total workers exceeding 1,000 based on NOES data (239,465 workers)

- Total workers potentially exceeding 1,000 based on  and the IUR
commercial/consumer product categories (C01 and C16)

- Consumers potentially exceeding 10,000 people.

2524-04-1	Phosphorochloridthioic acid, O,O-diethyl ester

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 based on
NOES data.  Based on this information, this chemical would meet the
exposure based findings criteria of "substantial or significant human
exposure.”  The production volume data for the 2006 IUR data
collection was compared to the production volume data for the 1986 IUR
data collection for this chemical to see if the production volume stayed
the same or increased, thereby indicating that the usage of these
chemicals is no less than when NOES data were gathered. The 1986
reported IUR production volume range was 10 million – 50 million lbs.
The 2006 IUR production volume range is 10 million – 50 million lbs.

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (10 million -50 million lb)

- Total workers exceeding 1,000 based NOES data (1,088 workers).

4719-04-4	1,3,5-Triazine-1,3,5(2H,4H,6H)-triethanol

	The total number of potentially exposed workers is likely to exceed
1,000 based on reported IUR data. The number of workers exceeds 1,000
based on NOES data. Additionally, the number of potentially exposed
consumers is estimated to be very large based on the uses cited in the
NLM Household Chemicals Database (laundry and dishwashing detergents;
and all-purpose and surface cleaners). Additionally, the IUR
commercial/consumer product category C20-Other (chemicals contained in
commercial and consumer products not elsewhere classified) was reported
for this chemical. This indicates that this chemical is present in an
unknown number of commercial and consumer products that may potentially
have a high number of exposures. It is expected that these products will
be widely used by consumers (including children) and hence, may likely
exceed 10,000 people.  Additionally, products such as laundry detergents
and all-purpose surface cleaners may be used by commercial enterprises
that may lead to exposures of >1,000 commercial workers.   It is also
expected that based on the nature of the laundry and dishwashing
detergents use described in the NLM   Household Chemicals Database that
over 90 % of the production volume of the soaps & detergent products
that contain this chemical will be released into the environment
(exceeding the significant release threshold of 10% of the production
volume). Based on this information, this chemical would meet the
exposure based findings criteria of "substantial or significant human
exposure" and “significant or substantial release.”  The production
volume data for the 2006 IUR data collection was compared to the
production volume data for the 1986 IUR data collection for this
chemical to see if the production volume stayed the same or increased,
thereby indicating that the usage of these chemicals is no less than
when NOES data were gathered. The 1986 reported IUR production volume
range was 1 million – 10 million lbs. The 2006 IUR production volume
range is 10 million – 50 million lbs. (All stated IUR
commercial/consumer product categories are non-CBI)

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (10 million -50 million lb)

- Substantial Release (Greater than 10% of production volume released)

- Total  workers potentially exceeding 1,000 based on  NLM Household
Chemicals Database information

 - Total workers exceeds 1,000 based on  NOES data (225,251 workers)

- Consumers potentially exceeding 10,000 people.

6381-77-7	D-erythro-Hex-2-enonic acid,.gamma.-lactone, monosodium salt

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 based on
NOES data.  Based on this information, this chemical would meet the
exposure based findings criteria of "substantial or significant human
exposure.” The production volume data for the 2006 IUR data collection
was compared to the production volume data for the 1986 IUR data
collection for this chemical to see if the production volume stayed the
same or increased, thereby indicating that the usage of these chemicals
is no less than when NOES data were gathered.  The 1986 reported IUR
production volume range was 10 thousand – 500 thousand lbs. The 2006
IUR production volume range is 1 million – 10 million lbs.

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (1 million -10 million lb)

- Total workers exceeds 1,000 based NOES data (19,468 workers).

31138-65-5	D-gluco-Heptonic acid, monosodium salt, (2.xi.)-

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 based on
NOES data.  Based on this information, this chemical would meet the
exposure based findings criteria of "substantial or significant human
exposure.”  The production volume data for the 2006 IUR data
collection was compared to the production volume data for the 1986 IUR
data collection for this chemical to see if the production volume stayed
the same or increased, thereby indicating that the usage of these
chemicals is no less than when NOES data were gathered. The 1986
reported IUR production volume range was 1 million – 10 million lbs.
The 2006 IUR production volume range is 1 million – 10 million lbs.

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (1 million -10 million lb)

- Total workers exceeding 1,000 based NOES data (74,165 workers).

66241-11-0	C.I. Leuco Sulphur Black 1

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 based on
NOES data.  Additionally, the number of potentially exposed consumers is
estimated to be very large based on the reported IUR commercial/consumer
product category for this chemical (C06 – fabrics, textiles &apparel).
 Chemicals reporting in this category are contained in commercial and
consumer products made of cotton, silk, wool, or manmade fibers. It is
expected that these products will be widely used by commercial workers
and consumers (including children) and hence, may likely exceed 1,000
commercial workers and 10,000 consumers.  Based on this information,
this chemical would meet the exposure based findings criteria of
"substantial or significant human exposure.”  The production volume
data for the 2006 IUR data collection was compared to the production
volume data for the 1986 IUR data collection for this chemical to see if
the production volume stayed the same or increased, thereby indicating
that the usage of these chemicals is no less than when NOES data were
gathered. The 1986 reported IUR production volume range was 1 million
– 10 million lbs. The 2006 IUR production volume range is 1 million
– 10 million lbs. (All stated IUR  commercial/consumer product
categories are non-CBI)

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (1 million -10 million lb)

- Total  workers exceeding 1,000 based on NOES data (38,555 workers)

- Total workers potentially exceeding 1,000 based on  reported IUR
commercial/consumer product category (C06 – fabrics & textiles)

- Consumers potentially exceeding 10,000 people.

68187-76-8	Castor oil, sulfated, sodium salt

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 based on
NOES data. Additionally, the number of potentially exposed consumers is
estimated to be very large based on the reported IUR commercial/consumer
product category for this chemical (C17 – soaps & detergents).
Chemicals reporting in this category are contained in liquid,
granulated, caked, and flaked washing detergents and personal soaps;
dishwashing compounds; and presoaks and scouring compounds for
commercial and consumer use.  It is expected that these products will be
widely used by commercial workers and consumers and hence, may likely
exceed 1,000 commercial workers and 10,000 consumers.  The production
volume data for the 2006 IUR data collection was compared to the
production volume data for the 1986 IUR data collection for this
chemical to see if the production volume stayed the same or increased,
thereby indicating that the usage of these chemicals is no less than
when NOES data were gathered.  The 1986 reported IUR production volume
range was 1 million – 10 million lbs. The 2006 IUR production volume
range is 1 million – 10 million lbs. (All stated IUR
commercial/consumer product categories are non-CBI)

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (1 million -10 million lb)

- Total workers exceeding 1,000 based on NOES data (11164 workers)

- Total workers potentially exceeding 1,000 based on  IUR
commercial/consumer product category (C17 -  soaps & detergents)

 - Consumers potentially exceeding 10,000 people.

68187-84-8	Castor oil, oxidized

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 based on
NOES data.  Additionally, the number of potentially exposed consumers is
estimated to be very large based on the uses cited in the NLM Household
Chemicals Database (auto care products and personal care products).
Additionally, the IUR commercial/consumer product category C20-Other
(chemicals contained in commercial and consumer products not elsewhere
classified) was reported for this chemical. This indicates that this
chemical is present in an unknown number of commercial and consumer
products that may potentially have a high number of exposures. It is
expected that these products will be widely used by consumers (including
children) and hence, may likely exceed 10,000 people.  Additionally,
products such as auto care products may be used by commercial
enterprises that may lead to exposures of >1,000 commercial workers.
Based on this information, this chemical would meet the exposure based
findings criteria of "substantial or significant human exposure.” The
production volume data for the 2006 IUR data collection was compared to
the production volume data for the 1986 IUR data collection for this
chemical to see if the production volume stayed the same or increased,
thereby indicating that the usage of these chemicals is no less than
when NOES data were gathered. There were no reports for this chemical
for the 1986 IUR data collection. The 2006 IUR production volume range
is 1 million – 10 million lbs. (All stated IUR  commercial/consumer
product categories are non-CBI)

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (1 million -10 million lb)

-  Total workers exceeds 1,000 based on NOES data (36,381workers)

- Total workers potentially exceeds 1,000 based on NLM Household
Chemicals Database information

- Consumers potentially exceeding 10,000 people.

68479-98-1	Benzenediamine, ar,ar-diethyl-ar-methyl-

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds1,000 based on
NOES data.  Based on this information, this chemical would meet the
exposure based findings criteria of "substantial or significant human
exposure.”  The production volume data for the 2006 IUR data
collection was compared to the production volume data for the 1986 IUR
data collection for this chemical to see if the production volume stayed
the same or increased, thereby indicating that the usage of these
chemicals is no less than when NOES data were gathered. The 1986
reported IUR production volume range was 10 million – 50 million lbs.
The 2006 IUR production volume range is 10 million – 50 million lbs.

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (10 million -50 million lb)

- Total workers exceeds 1,000 based NOES data (4,121 workers).

68527-02-6	Alkenes, C12-24, chloro

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 workers
based on NOES data.  Based on this information, this chemical would meet
the exposure based findings criteria of "substantial or significant
human exposure.”   The production volume data for the 2006 IUR data
collection was compared to the production volume data for the 1986 IUR
data collection for this chemical to see if the production volume stayed
the same or increased, thereby indicating that the usage of these
chemicals is no less than when NOES data were gathered.  There were no
IUR reports for this chemical in 1986. The 2006 IUR production volume
range for this chemical is 1 million -10 million lbs.

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (1 million -10 million lb)

- Total workers exceeds 1,000 based NOES data (84,192 workers).

68647-60-9	Hydrocarbons, C>4

	The total number of potentially exposed workers exceeds 1,000 based on
NOES data.  Based on this information, this chemical would meet the
exposure based findings criteria of "substantial or significant human
exposure.”  The production volume data for the 2006 IUR data
collection was compared to the production volume data for the 1986 IUR
data collection for this chemical to see if the production volume stayed
the same or increased, thereby indicating that the usage of these
chemicals is no less than when NOES data were gathered.  The 1986
reported IUR production volume range was 100 million -500 million lbs.
The 2006 IUR production volume range is > 1 billion lb.

This chemical met exposure based findings criteria based on:

- 2006 IUR Production Volume Range (>1billion lb)

- Total workers exceeds 1,000 based NOES data (1,257 workers).

Attachment AAttachment B

Attachment C

  PAGE  2

  PAGE  ii

Table 2-1 (Continued)

  PAGE  13

  PAGE  6

			Table 2-1 (Continued)

			Table 2-2 (Continued)


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 18 (Friday, January 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3784-3789]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01353]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82537; File No. SR-MRX-2018-01]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
Schedule of Fees To Introduce a New Pricing Model

January 19, 2018.
    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 4, 2018, Nasdaq MRX, LLC (``MRX'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Schedule of Fees to introduce a
new pricing model on MRX that is designed to reward members that bring
order flow to the Exchange and thereby increase liquidity and trading
opportunities for all members.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://nasdaqmrx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal office
of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange 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. The Exchange 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
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Schedule of
Fees to introduce a new pricing model on MRX that is designed to reward
members that bring order flow to the Exchange and thereby increase
liquidity and trading opportunities for all members. The Exchange
believes that the proposed pricing model will encourage additional
order flow to be sent to the Exchange, and contribute to a more active
and quality market in MRX-listed options to the benefit of all market
participants that trade on the Exchange.
I. Member Volume Program
    Currently, the Exchange operates using a pricing schedule that
rewards members that execute a higher average

daily volume (``ADV'') of order flow on the Exchange by providing
tiered rebates and fee discounts to market participants. Specifically,
under the Member Volume Program (``MVP''), members can qualify for
higher tiers based on Total Affiliated \3\ and/or Appointed \4\
Priority Customer \5\ ADV as follows: 0 to 19,999 contracts (Tier 1),
20,000 to 39,999 contracts (Tier 2), 40,000 to 59,999 contracts (Tier
3), 60,000 to 79,999 contracts (Tier 4), and 80,000 or more contracts
(Tier 5).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Total Affiliated Priority Customer ADV category includes
all Priority Customer volume executed on the Exchange in all symbols
and order types, including volume executed in the PIM, Facilitation,
and QCC mechanisms. All eligible volume from affiliated Members will
be aggregated in determining applicable tiers, provided there is at
least 75% common ownership between the Members as reflected on the
Member's Form BD, Schedule A.
    \4\ A Nasdaq MRX Appointed Market Maker is eligible to receive
and aggregate volume credit from both their affiliated Members and
their Nasdaq MRX Appointed Order Flow Provider. A Nasdaq MRX
Appointed Order Flow Provider will not receive volume credit from
its Nasdaq MRX Appointed Market Maker or the Nasdaq MRX Appointed
Market Maker's affiliates in determining its applicable tiers.
Designating a Nasdaq MRX Appointed Market Maker/Appointed Order Flow
Provider: An Nasdaq MRX Market Maker appoints an Electronic Access
Member as its Appointed Order Flow Provider and an Electronic Access
Member appoints an Nasdaq MRX Market Maker as its Appointed Market
Maker, for the purposes of the Fee Schedule, by each sending an
email to [email protected]. These corresponding emails will be viewed
as acceptance of the appointment. The Exchange will recognize one
such designation for each party. A party may make a designation not
more than once every 6 months, which designation shall remain in
effect until the Exchange receives an email from either party
indicating that the appointment has been terminated.
    \5\ A ``Priority Customer'' is a person or entity that is not a
broker/dealer in securities, and does not place more than 390 orders
in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its
own beneficial account(s), as defined in Nasdaq MRX Rule
100(a)(37A).
    \6\ The highest tier threshold attained applies retroactively in
a given month to all eligible traded contracts and applies to all
eligible market participants. Any day that the market is not open
for the entire trading day or the Exchange instructs Members in
writing to route their orders to other markets may be excluded from
the ADV calculation; provided that the Exchange will only remove the
day for members that would have a lower ADV with the day included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the tier achieved, the Exchange provides tiered rebates to
Priority Customer orders and tiered fee discounts to Market Maker \7\
orders. In particular, in both Penny Symbols and Non-Penny Symbols,
Priority Customer orders are provided a rebate that is $0.05 per
contract (Tier 1), $0.10 per contract (Tier 2), $0.15 per contract
(Tier 3), $0.21 per contract (Tier 4), and $0.24 per contract (Tier 5);
and Market Maker orders are charged a fee that is $0.25 per contract
(Tier 1), $0.22 per contract (Tier 2), $0.18 per contract (Tier 3),
$0.15 per contract (Tier 4), and $0.10 per contract (Tier 5).\8\
Regardless of the tier achieved, Non-Nasdaq MRX Market Makers,\9\ Firm
Proprietary,\10\ Broker-Dealer,\11\ and Professional Customer \12\
orders pay a flat fee that is $0.47 per contract in Penny Symbols and
$0.90 per contract in Non-Penny Symbols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The term Market Makers refers to ``Competitive Market
Makers'' and ``Primary Market Makers'' collectively.
    \8\ This fee also applies to Nasdaq MRX Market Maker orders sent
to the Exchange by Electronic Access Members. Market Makers will
receive a $0.05 per contract discount when trading against a non-
Priority Customer.
    \9\ A ``Non-Nasdaq MRX Market Maker'' is a market maker as
defined in Section 3(a)(38) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, registered in the same options class on another options
exchange.
    \10\ A ``Firm Proprietary'' order is an order submitted by a
member for its own proprietary account.
    \11\ A ``Broker-Dealer'' order is an order submitted by a member
for a broker-dealer account that is not its own proprietary account.
    \12\ A ``Professional Customer'' is a person or entity that is
not a broker/dealer and is not a Priority Customer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to eliminate the MVP structure \13\ and
introduce a new pricing model that the Exchange believes will encourage
members to bring more order flow to the Exchange. Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to adopt a maker/taker fee model where all market
participants are charged a fee (or are eligible for free executions)
with potentially discounted fees based on ADV, whether the market
participant is adding or removing liquidity, and whether both sides of
the transaction belong to a member and its affiliated or appointed
members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Although the Exchange proposes to adopt a new structure it
will keep the footnotes in the Qualifying Tier Threshold section as
these will still apply to the calculation of ADV under the proposed
structure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With the proposed changes to the pricing model, the Exchange
proposes to replace the current MVP tiers with a simple two tier
structure based on Total Affiliated and/or Appointed Member ADV.
Specifically, members would be able to qualify for higher tiers based
on Total Affiliated and/or Appointed Member ADV as follows: 0 to 49,999
contracts (Tier 1), and 50,000 or more contracts (Tier 2). In order to
attract order flow from all market participants, the Total Affiliated
Member ADV category includes all volume executed on the Exchange in all
symbols and order types, rather than only Priority Customer volume.\14\
The Exchange will also continue to permit members to designate Nasdaq
MRX Appointed Market Makers and Nasdaq MRX Appointed Order Flow
Providers, and will aggregate order flow based on that designation in
determining the member's tier. The Exchange already has language in its
Schedule of Fees about designating Nasdaq MRX Appointed Market Makers
and Nasdaq MRX Appointed Order Flow Providers and this language will
remain a part of the Schedule of Fees.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The Exchange proposes to add a definition of Total
Affiliated Member ADV to the Schedule of Fees to describe how this
is calculated. The other footnotes to the Qualifying Tier Threshold
language will remain as discussed above, and will be in addition to
this proposed footnote.
    \15\ Currently, the footnotes describing the process for
designating a Nasdaq MRX Appointed Market Maker or Appointed Order
Flow Provider indicate that members should email [email protected]. The
Exchange proposes to change this to the appropriate Nasdaq email
address, which is [email protected]. The language describing the
aggregation of eligible volume also contains an outdated reference
to the Exchange's previous name, which the Exchange proposes to
update to reflect its current name--i.e., Nasdaq MRX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to pricing, Market Maker orders would be charged a
maker fee that is $0.20 per contract for Tier 1 and $0.00 per contract
for Tier 2 in both Penny and Non-Penny Symbols, and a taker fee that is
$0.50 per contract for Penny Symbols and $0.90 per contract for Non-
Penny Symbols, regardless of the tier achieved.\16\ In addition, as an
incentive for bringing order flow to the Exchange, Market Maker orders
that take liquidity would also be eligible for ADV-based fee discounts
in both Penny and Non-Penny Symbols when trading with Priority Customer
orders entered by an affiliated or appointed member. The discounted fee
would be $0.05 per contract if the member has a Total Affiliated and/or
Appointed Priority Customer ADV of 5,000 contracts or more, or $0.00
per contract if the member has a Total Affiliated and/or Appointed
Priority Customer ADV of 50,000 contracts or more. Regardless of the
member's tier, Non-Nasdaq MRX Market Maker, Firm Proprietary, Broker-
Dealer, and Professional Customer orders would pay a fee in Penny
Symbols that is $0.47 per contract for maker transactions and $0.50 per
contract for taker transactions, and both a maker and taker fee of
$0.90 per contract in Non-Penny Symbols. Priority Customer orders would
not be charged a fee for regular executions in either Penny or Non-
Penny Symbols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The fees charged to Market Makers will apply to Nasdaq MRX
Market Maker orders sent to the Exchange by Electronic Access
Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Marketing Fees
    Currently, Market Makers are charged a marketing fee of $0.25 per
contract in Penny Symbols and $0.70 per contract in Non-Penny Symbols
for each regular

Priority Customer contract executed.\17\ This marketing fee is waived
for Flash Order Responses. In connection with the fee changes described
in Section I above, the Exchange also proposes to waive marketing fees
for Market Maker orders that take liquidity from the order book. The
Exchange believes that this change will ensure that Market Makers can
benefit from the proposed fee incentives described above for taking
liquidity, without the benefits provided thereunder being eroded by
charging a marketing fee, which may or may not go into the marketing
fee pool administered by the executing Market Maker. Furthermore, in
connection with the changes to Crossing Order fees described in Section
IV below, the Exchange proposes to waive marketing fees for Crossing
Orders and Responses to Crossing Orders, which will ensure that the
total fee paid by Market Makers that trade with this order flow will
remain at a level the Exchange believes is appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The marketing fee will be rebated proportionately to the
members that paid the fee such that on a monthly basis the marketing
fee fund balance administered by a Primary Market Maker for a Group
of options established under Rule 802(b) does not exceed $100,000
and the marketing fee fund balance administered by a preferenced
Competitive Market Maker for such a Group does not exceed $100,000.
A preferenced Competitive Market Maker that elects not to administer
a fund will not be charged the marketing fee. The Exchange assesses
an administrative fee of .45% on the total amount of the funds
collected each month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Flash Orders
    With the introduction of a maker/taker fee structure, the Exchange
also proposes to introduce language clarifying how Flash Orders will be
charged. A ``Flash Order'' is an order that is exposed at the National
Best Bid or Offer by the Exchange to all members for execution, as
provided under Supplementary Material .02 to Nasdaq MRX Rule 1901.
Because a Flash Order being exposed to the market is entered prior to
Responses to that order, the Exchange proposes to charge the applicable
maker fee to all Flash Orders, which is similar to how pricing would be
determined had the order rested on the order book. Similarly, because
Responses that trade with a Flash Order are benefiting from the
execution of a prior order, the Exchange proposes to charge the
applicable taker fee for all Responses that trade against a Flash
Order.
IV. Crossing Orders
    Currently, the Exchange charges a fee for Crossing Orders (except
PIM orders of 500 or fewer contracts) \18\ in Penny and Non-Penny
Symbols that is $0.20 per contract for Market Maker,\19\ Non-Nasdaq MRX
Market Maker, Firm Proprietary, Broker-Dealer, and Professional
Customer orders, and $0.00 per contract for Priority Customer
Orders.\20\ The Exchange also charges a fee in all symbols for PIM
orders of 500 or fewer contracts that is $0.05 per contract for Market
Maker, Non-Nasdaq MRX Market Maker, Firm Proprietary, Broker-Dealer,
and Professional Customer orders. Priority Customers receive a rebate
for PIM orders of 500 or fewer contracts that is tiered based on the
MVP tiers described above. Specifically, Priority Customer orders
receive a rebate of $0.11 per contract for Tiers 1-2 and $0.13 per
contract for Tiers 3-5. Priority Customer orders on the contra-side of
a PIM auction for 500 or fewer contracts pay no fee and receive no
rebate. The Exchange now proposes to eliminate the special fees
described above for PIM orders of 500 contracts or fewer and apply the
fee for Crossing Orders described above to all Crossing Orders,
including PIM orders of 500 contracts or fewer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ PIM orders of more than 500 contracts will pay the Fee for
Crossing Orders.
    \19\ Market Maker fees discussed in this section also apply to
Market Maker orders sent to the Exchange by Electronic Access
Members.
    \20\ Except as otherwise noted herein, the fees described in
this paragraph apply to the originating and contra orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange charges a fee for Responses to Crossing
Orders that is $0.50 per contract for Non-Nasdaq MRX Market Maker, Firm
Proprietary, Broker-Dealer, Professional Customer, and Priority
Customer orders in Penny Symbols, and $0.95 per contract for the above
market participant types in Non-Penny Symbols. Market Makers are
charged a fee for Responses to Crossing Orders in Penny and Non-Penny
Symbols that is $0.25 per contract, subject to a discount whereby
Market Makers that achieve Tier 2 or higher under the MVP are charged
the discounted fee charged to regular executions for the tier reached--
i.e., from $0.22 per contract for Tier 2 to $0.10 per contract for Tier
5, as discussed in more detail in the MVP section above. The Exchange
now proposes to charge Market Makers the same fee for Responses to
Crossing Orders as is currently charged to other market participants.
As such, Market Maker orders will be charged a fee for Responses to
Crossing Orders that is $0.50 per contract in Penny Symbols and $0.95
per contract in Non-Penny Symbols, similar to the other market
participants described above. Market Makers would not be eligible for
any fee discounts based on the MVP tiers that are being discontinued.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\21\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\22\ in
particular, in that it provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among members and issuers and
other persons using any facility, and is not designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. The
Exchange is adopting a new pricing model for MRX and believes that the
proposed changes will be attractive to market participants, and will
encourage additional liquidity and trading opportunities on the
Exchange to the benefit of all members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Member Volume Program
    The Exchange believes that the proposed fee change is reasonable,
equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory as it is designed to
increase liquidity and opportunities for all members to trade on the
Exchange. The proposed fee structure being adopted represents a
substantial change in the fee model for MRX that the Exchange believes
will be attractive to market participants, and will assist the Exchange
in competing in today's competitive environment. Generally, the
proposed fee change would eliminate the current MVP structure and adopt
a new maker/taker fee structure where market participants other than
Priority Customers are charged a fee based on whether the market
participant adds or removes liquidity. Priority Customer orders,
meanwhile, would be eligible for free executions, and Market Makers
would be eligible to qualify for substantially lower or no fees based
on their contribution to the market. Qualifying tier thresholds for
members would be based on Total Affiliated and/or Appointed Member ADV
in two tiers that are designed to encourage members to bring order flow
to the Exchange to qualify for higher tiers. For the reasons described
in the following paragraphs, the Exchange believes that the proposed
fee structure will be beneficial to market participants and will
encourage an active and liquid market on MRX.
    With respect to the proposed qualifying tier thresholds, the
Exchange believes that the proposed ADV requirements are reasonable and
equitable because they are set at levels that the Exchange believes
will encourage market participants, and, in particular, Market Makers
to execute

more volume on the Exchange. As proposed, the qualifying tier
thresholds would also reference Total Affiliated and/or Appointed
Member ADV instead of Total Affiliated and/or Appointed Priority
Customer ADV, which the Exchange believes will benefit firms that bring
a wider range of order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange is also
proposing to introduce new fee incentives (described in the paragraphs
below) that specifically target Priority Customer order flow, thereby
retaining the ability to attract those orders to the Exchange. The
Exchange believes that the proposed changes will be attractive to
market participants that trade on MRX. Furthermore, the Exchange
believes that the qualifying tier thresholds are equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory as all market participants can qualify for a
higher tier by executing the required volume of contracts, either
through the member, its affiliates, or an appointed member, as is the
case today.
    Under the proposed pricing structure, Priority Customer orders
would be eligible for free executions. Although the Exchange will no
longer provide rebates to Priority Customer orders, the Exchange
believes that increased Market Maker participation would increase the
opportunities for these orders to trade and therefore encourage members
to bring this order flow to the Exchange. In addition, by receiving
free executions Priority Customer orders would continue to be provided
the most favorable rates on the Exchange. Only one other market
participant type (i.e., Market Makers) would be eligible to trade for
free and only in specified circumstances. The Exchange believes that it
is appropriate and not unfairly discriminatory to provide free
executions to Priority Customer orders as the Exchange is seeking to
attract this order flow. The Exchange believes that attracting more
volume from Priority Customers will benefit all market participants
that trade on MRX. In addition, the Exchange believes that it is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to charge a lower fee for
Priority Customer orders as a Priority Customer is by definition not a
broker or dealer in securities, and does not place more than 390 orders
in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its
own beneficial account(s). This limitation does not apply to market
participants whose behavior is substantially similar to that of market
professionals, and who will generally submit a higher number of orders
than Priority Customers.
    Market Makers would also benefit from a strong mix of incentives
that are designed to create an active and liquid market for MRX-listed
options. First, Market Makers would pay a base fee that is equal to or
lower than that charged to all market participants other than Priority
Customers, with the potential to further lower those fees by qualifying
for additional pricing incentives. The Exchange believes that charging
lower fees to Market Maker orders is reasonable and equitable as doing
so increases Market Maker activity and thereby creates additional
opportunities for other market participants to trade. Furthermore, the
Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
to charge lower fees to Market Makers because Market Makers have
different requirements and obligations to the Exchange that other
market participants do not (such as quoting requirements). For this
reason, the Exchange also believes that the other incentives described
below, which may further decrease execution costs for Market Makers,
are also equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. These incentives
are designed to increase Market Maker participation and reward Market
Makers for the unique role that they play in ensuring a robust market.
    Second, Market Makers would be rewarded for providing liquidity
with a lower base rate for adding liquidity as opposed to taking
liquidity, and the possibility for free executions if the Market Maker
achieves a higher tier based on Total Affiliated and/or Appointed
Member ADV. The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and equitable
to charge a lower base rate for Market Maker orders that add liquidity
because Market Makers provide an important function to the market when
they provide liquidity to other market participants through their
displayed quotes. The Exchange believes that incentivizing Market
Makers to provide liquidity through lower maker fees will create
additional displayed liquidity and opportunities for market
participants to trade. Furthermore, providing an additional discount
when the Market Maker meets the qualifying tier threshold for a higher
ADV tier will encourage the member to transact additional business on
the Exchange, and thereby create a more active market. The Exchange
also believes that tying execution fees to whether the Market Maker is
adding or removing liquidity, and based on ADV, is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory as all Market Makers will be treated uniformly
based on these factors.
    Third, although Market Makers would pay the same base rate for
removing liquidity as other market participants, Market Makers would be
eligible for a discounted taker fee when trading with Priority Customer
orders entered by an affiliated or appointed member. Market Makers
would qualify for this discounted taker fee if the member has reached a
threshold level of Total Affiliated and/or Appointed Priority Customer
ADV, and would be eligible for free executions if the member executes a
higher volume of contracts. The Exchange believes that it is reasonable
and equitable to charge a lower fee to Market Makers when trading
against Priority Customer orders that originate from affiliated or
appointed members as this incentive is designed to encourage firms to
bring additional Priority Customer order flow to the Exchange. For the
same reason, the proposed ADV requirements are also based on ADV in
Priority Customer contracts executed by affiliated or appointed
members.
    This discounted fee structure is similar to one in place on the
Exchange's affiliate, the Nasdaq Options Market (``NOM''), where
participants that meet specified volume requirements can qualify for
discounted fees if the participant is: (i) Both the buyer and the
seller or (ii) the participant removes liquidity from another
participant under common ownership.\23\ Similar to NOM, the Exchange
believes that this structure will encourage additional order flow both
from Market Makers and their affiliated and/or appointed members. This
will benefit those members through reduced fees, and will also benefit
other market participants that will have an opportunity to trade with
the order flow that these firms bring to the market. When a Priority
Customer order is entered on the Exchange, a Market Maker that wishes
to interact with that order flow does not typically know whether that
order originated from one of its affiliated or appointed members. The
Exchange therefore believes that Market Makers would continue to
aggressively pursue order flow in order to receive the benefit of the
fee discount. Discounting fees in this manner will reward firms that
bring more order flow to the Exchange. This is the case both because
sending additional order flow would increase the chances of a firm
qualifying for a reduced fee (i.e., because it increases the chances
that a contra-side order is entered by an affiliated or appointed
member), and because a higher ADV is required to

qualify for free executions under the proposed pricing structure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See NOM Rules, Chapter XV Options Pricing, Sec. 2 Nasdaq
Options Market--Fees and Rebates, (1) Fees for Execution of
Contracts on The Nasdaq Options Market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed fee discount described
above is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. As mentioned
before, Market Makers have special obligations to the market that other
market participants do not. The Exchange therefore believes that it is
appropriate to reward those members with potentially lower fees.
Furthermore, providing an incentive specifically to Market Makers whose
affiliated and/or appointed members bring Priority Customer order flow
to the Exchange encourages firms to bring more of this order flow to
the Exchange. All Market Makers can benefit from this incentive either
by interacting with order flow sent to the Exchange by its affiliates
or by designating a Nasdaq MRX Appointed Order Flow Provider, who would
be treated similar to an affiliate. Moreover, rewarding members that
bring a more substantial investment of order flow is beneficial to all
market participants, who are free to interact with such order flow.
    Finally, Non-Nasdaq MRX Market Maker, Firm Proprietary, Broker-
Dealer, and Professional Customer orders would be subject to maker/
taker fees at rates that are similar to those currently charged on the
Exchange. In Penny Symbols, these market participants would pay a maker
fee that is the same as the fee charged today, and a taker fee that is
modestly higher. For the reasons discussed above with respect to Market
Maker orders, the Exchange believes that it is appropriate to charge
higher fees for executions that remove liquidity than those that
provide liquidity to other market participants--i.e., because this
encourages more displayed liquidity and opportunities for market
participants to trade on the Exchange. In Non-Penny Symbols, these
market participants will be charged the same fee as today, regardless
of whether the order is executed as maker or taker. Although these
market participants would continue to be charged fees that are higher
than the fees charged to Priority Customer and Market Maker orders, the
Exchange believes that this is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory for the reasons discussed in the paragraphs above on
Priority Customer and Market Maker fees. Furthermore, although these
market participants would be charged a modestly increased fee in the
one instance described above, the Exchange believes that the effect of
this fee increase is justified by the potential for the new fee
structure to encourage additional liquidity and opportunities for
trading due to the incentives being provided to Market Maker and
Priority Customer orders.
II. Marketing Fees
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and equitable to
eliminate the marketing fees charged to Market Maker orders that take
liquidity from the order book as charging a marketing fee in these
instances would frustrate the Exchange's incentives for firms that
bring Priority Customer orders to the Exchange and receive a fee
discount (including potentially free executions) when trading with that
order flow. Furthermore, the marketing fee is designed to assist Market
Makers in establishing marketing fee arrangements with Electronic
Access Members in exchange for those members routing some or all of
their order flow to such Market Makers. This purpose is not advanced
when the Priority Customer order on the other side of the transaction
is providing liquidity and is not routed to access displayed liquidity
being provided by a Market Maker quoting on the Exchange. Furthermore,
the Exchange has proposed changes to its Crossing Order fees that would
result in Market Makers paying a higher Response fee that is the same
as the fee charged to other market participants. The Exchange believes
that it is reasonable and equitable to eliminate the marketing fee
charged for Crossing Orders and Responses to Crossing Orders as this
change will keep total execution costs down when Market Makers trade
with Crossing Order flow. The Exchange also believes that both of the
proposed changes to the marketing fee described above are not unfairly
discriminatory as no Market Makers would be charged a marketing fee
when removing liquidity or when executing Crossing Orders or Responses
to Crossing Orders.
III. Flash Orders
    The Exchange believes that the proposed pricing for Flash Orders is
reasonable and equitable as the proposed changes clarify how the
Exchange will charge members for Flash Orders with the introduction of
maker/taker pricing. Without this change members would not be aware of
how Flash Orders are charged because Flash Orders do not rest on the
book and therefore could be treated as either maker or taker for
purposes of pricing. The Exchange is proposing to charge the applicable
maker fee for Flash Orders, and the applicable taker rebate for
Responses that trade against a Flash Order. The Exchange believes that
it is reasonable and equitable to charge the applicable maker fee to a
Flash Order as the order being exposed is entered first, and maker
pricing would therefore apply the same as it would had that order
rested on the order book. Similarly, the Exchange believes that it is
reasonable and equitable to charge the applicable taker fee to
Responses as these Responses are benefiting from the execution of a
prior order. Furthermore, the Exchange believes the proposed Flash
Order language is not unfairly discriminatory because Flash Orders
entered by all market participants will be treated as maker and all
Responses that trade against a Flash Order will be treated as taker.
IV. Crossing Order Fees
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable, equitable, and not
unfairly discriminatory to eliminate the special incentive for PIM
orders of 500 or fewer contracts as the proposed fees charged would now
be consistent for all Crossing Orders. The Exchange currently has in
place a fee structure that was implemented to encourage PIM orders for
500 or fewer contracts by charging lower fees to the originating and
contra-side of those orders. The Exchange no longer believes that this
incentive is necessary and is therefore removing it. With this change,
members will be charged the same fees for all Crossing Orders,
regardless of whether the order is executed in the PIM or another
crossing mechanism, and regardless of the size of the order. The
Exchange also believes that it is reasonable and equitable to increase
the fees charged to Market Maker Responses to Crossing Orders as with
this change Market Makers would be charged the same fees as other
market participants.
    The Exchange also believes that the Crossing Order changes are
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as the proposed fees would be
more standardized across the various Crossing Order mechanisms, and
across market participant types, with the exception that Priority
Customer orders would continue to not be charged a fee for Crossing
Orders.\24\ As explained earlier in this proposed rule change, a
Priority Customer is by definition not a broker or dealer in
securities, and does not place more than 390 orders in listed options
per day on average during a calendar month for its own beneficial
account(s). This limitation does not apply to participants whose
behavior is substantially similar to that of market

professionals who will generally submit a higher number of orders than
Priority Customers. The Exchange therefore believes that it is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to provide more favorable
pricing to Priority Customer orders in the one instance described
above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Priority Customer orders would continue to pay a fee for
Responses to Crossing Orders that is the same as the fee charged to
other market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed fee change is an
overhaul of the Exchange's pricing model that is designed to
incentivize members to bring additional order flow to the Exchange, and
create a more active and quality market in MRX-listed options. The
Exchange therefore believes that the proposed rule change is a product
of the competitive environment in the options industry. The Exchange
operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants
can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities available at
other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange
must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with other
exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own fees in
response, and because market participants may readily adjust their
order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which
fee changes in this market may impose any burden on competition is
extremely limited.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\25\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \26\ thereunder.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change,
the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or
appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of
investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall
institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be
approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-MRX-2018-01 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MRX-2018-01. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email 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 website (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 website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-MRX-2018-01 and should be submitted on
or before February 16, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-01353 Filed 1-25-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 183 (Friday, September 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44408-44409]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20279]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0719; FRL-9968-04-OEI]

Information Collection Request (ICR) Submitted to OMB for Review
and Approval; Comment Request; ICR Supporting Statement Information
Collection Request for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Program (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``ICR Supporting Statement
Information Collection Request for National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Program (Renewal)'' (EPA ICR No. 0229.23,
OMB Control No. 2040-0004) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This is a proposed extension of the ICR,
which is currently approved through December 31, 2017. Public comments
were previously requested via the Federal Register (82FR29549) on June
29, 2017 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an
additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR
is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public.
An 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.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before October 23,
2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OW-2008-0719, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Weiss, State and Regional
Branch, Water Permits Division, OWM Mail Code: 4203M, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: This ICR estimates the burden and costs associated with
the information collection requirements of the NPDES program,
identifies the types of activities regulated under the NPDES program,
describes the roles and responsibilities of state governments and the
Agency, and presents the program areas that address the various types
of regulated activities. This renewal also incorporates the burden and
costs for seven more NPDES programs, which were previously contained in
separate ICRs, including: Consolidated Animal Sectors (OMB Control No.
2040-0250; EPA ICR Number 1989.09); Pesticide Applicators (OMB Control
No. 2040-0284; EPA ICR Number 2397.02); National Pretreatment Program
(OMB Control No. 2040-0009; EPA ICR Number 0002.15); Cooling Water
Intake Structures Phase I--New Facilities (OMB Control No. 2040-0241;
EPA ICR Number 1973.06); Cooling Water Intake Structures at Phase III
Facilities (OMB Control No. 2040-0268, EPA ICR No. 2169.05); Cooling
Water Intake Structures Existing Facilities (OMB Control No. 2040-0257;
EPA ICR No. 2060.07); and NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule (OMB Control
No. 2020-0035; EPA ICR No. 2468.02).
    Permit applications and other respondent reports may contain
confidential business information. If a respondent does consider this
information to be of a confidential nature, the respondent may request
that such information be treated as confidential. All confidential data
will be handled in accordance with 40 CFR 122.7, 40 CFR part 2, and
EPA's Security Manual part III, chapter 9, dated August 9, 1976.
    Respondents/affected entities: Any industrial point source
discharger of pollutants, including but not limited to publicly owned
and privately owned treatment works (POTWs and PrOTWs), industrial
dischargers to POTWs and PrOTWs, sewage sludge management and disposal
operations, small and large vessels, airports with deicing operations,
dischargers of stormwater, construction sites, municipalities,
pesticide applicators, local and state goverments.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory. Sections 301, 302,
304, 306, 307, 308, 316(b), 401, 402, 403, 405, and 510 of the CWA; the
1987 Water Quality Act (WQA) revisions to CWA section

402(p); 40 (CFR) Parts 122, 123, 124, and 125 (and Parts 501 and 503
for Biosolids); and the Great Lakes Critical Programs Act (CPA).
    Estimated number of respondents: 935,020 total (934,383 permittees
and 637 States/Tribes/Territories).
    Frequency of response: Varies depending on the specific response
activity and can range from ongoing and monthly to once every 5 years.
    Total estimated burden: 28,239,262 hours (per year). Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $1,476,244,044 (per year), includes
$43,659,009 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the estimates: There is a net increase of 836,289 (3%)
hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the
combined burden of the component ICRs currently approved by OMB. This
change in the total is primarily due to a combination of both burden
increases and decreases in the component ICRs. Minor changes in the
estimated burden occurred for five of the eight component ICRs (NPDES
ICR, Pesticide Applicators ICR, National Pretreatment Program ICR,
Cooling Water Intake Structures Phase I New Facilities ICR, and the
Cooling Water Intake Structures Phase III Facilities ICR). Significant
changes occurred for three of the eight component ICRs (Consolidated
Animal Sectors ICR, Cooling Water Intake Structures Existing Facility
ICR, and Electronic Reporting Rule ICR). These significant changes
included: (1) A decrease of 12 percent in the animal sector labor
burden due to revised EPA estimates based on changes in industry
practice, adherence to USDA guidelines, and industry consolidation (OMB
Control No. 2040-0250); (2) an increase of 140 percent in the cooling
water intake structures existing facilities labor burden due to the
coincidence of the period of greatest implementation burden with the
three year ICR period (OMB Control No. 2040-0257); and (3) a decrease
of 164 percent in the electronic reporting rule labor burden due to the
reduced need for data input due to increased participation in
electronic filing of forms and reports as the rule is implemented (OMB
Control No. 2020-0035).

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2017-20279 Filed 9-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


From: Reeves, David Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 10: 27 AM To: ' Farmer, Mark' Subject: RE: Enclosure in Word Good morning. The EPA folks have finally had time to run some of the initial mo dels using the TRI emissions data, as well as the information you provided earli er. They came back with some questions about the reported cobalt emissions. Ca n you tell me anything about the types of cobalt compounds you are using in your process ( Is it a salt? How is it processed/ incorporated into the coating? How and where are the misc. fugitive emissions generated?)

Please let me know when you will be able to provide any additional information. We are not looking for lots of details and I am hoping that you can respond wit h what you know off the top of your head. Thanks for your help ( again).

Regards  Dave Reeves