 INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST FOR 40 CFR PART 51 AND 52 PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION AND NONATTAINMENT NEW SOURCE REVIEW by Arturo Rios, Economist Innovative Strategies and Economics Group Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division and Juan Santiago Integrated Implementation Group ( C339 03) Information Transfer and Program Integration Division Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Office of Air and Radiation United States Environmental Protection Agency RTP, North Carolina 27711 August 20, 2004 i INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST FOR 40 CFR PART 51 AND 52 PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION AND NONATTAINMENT NEW SOURCE REVIEW TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1( a) TITLE OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST ( ICR) . . . . . . . 1 1( b) ABSTRACT/ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1( c) PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2( a) NEED/ AUTHORITY FOR THE COLLECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2( b) PRACTICAL UTILITY/ USERS OF THE DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 4 3( a) NONDUPLICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3( b) PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED PRIOR TO ICR SUBMISSION TO OMB . . . 4 3 ( c) CONSULTATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3( d) EFFECTS OF LESS FREQUENT COLLECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3( e) GENERAL GUIDELINES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3( f) CONFIDENTIALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3( g) SENSITIVE QUESTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4( a) RESPONDENTS/ STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION ( SIC) CODES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4( b) INFORMATION REQUESTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4( b)( 1) DATA ITEMS, INCLUDING RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4( b)( 2) RESPONDENT ACTIVITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED  AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5( a) STATE AND LOCAL AGENCY ACTIVITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5( b) COLLECTION METHODOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5( c) SMALL ENTITY FLEXIBILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5( c)( 1) METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5( c)( 2) MEASURES TO AVERT IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES . . . . . . 9 5( d) COLLECTION SCHEDULE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 ii 6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6( a) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT BURDEN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6( b) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT COSTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6( b)( i) ESTIMATING LABOR COSTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6( b)( ii) ESTIMATING CAPITAL AND OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE COSTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6( b)( iii) CAPITAL/ START UP OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE ( O& M) COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6( b)( iv) ANNUALIZING CAPITAL COSTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6( c) ESTIMATING AGENCY BURDEN AND COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6( d) ESTIMATING THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSE AND TOTAL BURDEN AND COSTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6( e) BOTTOM LINE BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6( e)( i) RESPONDENT TALLY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6( e)( ii) THE AGENCY TALLY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6( f) REASONS FOR CHANGE IN BURDEN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6( g) BURDEN STATEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Appendix A: INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 iii LIST OF TABLES Page 4 1 Primary NSR Respondents by SIC Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6 1 Industry Respondent Burden and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6 2 State and Local Agency Burden and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6 3 Agency Burden and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 6 4 NSR Program Information Collection Burden Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 1 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 1( a) TITLE OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST ( ICR)

This report is entitled Information Collection Request for 40 CFR part 51 and 52 Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Nonattainment New Source Review.

1( b) ABSTRACT/ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The analyses in this document have been performed in support of a renewal of the New Source Review ( NSR) Program Information Collection Request ( ICR) ( Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) Control Number 2060 0003; EPA Form Number 1230.10). Unless it is renewed, Program ICR will expire on October 31, 2004. The regulations covered under this ICR are contained in Parts 51 and 52 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR). These requirements govern the State and Federal programs for preconstruction review and permitting of major new and modified sources pursuant to Part C " Prevention of Significant Deterioration" ( PSD) and Part D " Program Requirements for Nonattainment Areas" of the Clean Air Act ( CAA). The types of information collection activities addressed in this ICR are those necessary for the preparation and submittal of construction permit applications and the issuance of final permits. Specific burden producing activities are listed in Appendix A. The administrative, reporting, and record keeping burden for industry respondents ( permit applicants), State and local implementing agencies and the Environmental Protection Agency are summarized in Table 6 4.

The NSR Program ICR was renewed in October, 2001. In December 2002, we finalized the NSR Reform Rule providing for several changes in the NSR program. Especifically, the changes to the major NSR program included in the NSR Reform rule are: a new method for determining baseline emissions, a new actual to projected actual methodology for determining whether a major modification will occur ( which also allows to continue to sue the historical approach of using potential emissions to estimate post change emissions), a new applicability provision for emission units designated as Clean Units and for emissions units that are part of pollution control projects ( PCPs), and changes to let major stationary sources manage facility wide air emissions through a Plant wide Applicability Limitation ( PAL) without requiring a preconstruction major NSR permit. An ICR was prepared for the reform rules and it also expires on October 31, 2004.

The 2004 renewal ICR for the NSR programs estimated the burden at approximately $ 341 million per year for 150,723 respondents. The change ( net increase) in burden estimate is partially due to use of current labor rates for the respondents and EPA (" Agency") as well as an increase in Minor NSR actions from the previous ICR. Consequently the estimated burden for the program is about 3.5 million hours to industry with a direct cost of $ 237 million and about 2.4 million hours to permitting agencies for a total respondent cost of $ 340 million per year. The costs are based on an annual average of 265 Part C major NSR permit applications ( industrial respondents), 488 Part D major NSR permit applications, and 74,609 minor NSR actions. The Agency estimates the annualized cost of NSR to States and local agencies to be approximately $ 103 million per year$ 9,800 for each Part C permit, $ 3,900 for each Part D permit, and $ 1,300 for 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 2 each minor NSR permit. The Agency expects its costs will be $ 568,000 per year. The hourly labor costs for respondents were re estimated as described in section ( 6)( b) to account for increases in the labor rates from 2000 to 2004.

Table 6 1 identifies the changes in hourly rates and total hours to estimate industry's cost per source for each type of permit. The estimated total cost to industry is over $ 237 million. On a per source ( response) basis, these costs are approximately $ 87,500 for each Part C permit, $ 37,800 for each Part D permit, and $ 2,600 for each minor NSR permit. The Part C per permit cost includes a direct cost of $ 8.6 million for 34 permit applicants who must conduct preconstruction air quality monitoring.

1( c) PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT REQUIREMENTS For any existing rule, § 3507( g) of the Paperwork Reduction Act ( PRA) limits the amount of time that a Director may approve a collection of information to three years. Consequently, the annual burden estimates are calculated for the three year period beginning October 2004 and ending October 2007.

Except for information collections in notices of proposed rules or those exempted under the emergency processing provisions of 44 U. S. C. § 3507( j), the PRA requires EPA to solicit comments on each proposed information collection, including the renewal or modification of any existing ICR. This ICR renewal and its supporting statement were publicly noticed in the Federal Register to solicit comments on the data, analyses, and conclusions. After the public notice and comment period, the supporting statement will be revised accordingly and will be submitted to OMB for approval.

The information that this ICR covers is required for the submittal of a complete permit application for the construction or modification of all major new stationary sources of pollutants in attainment and nonattainment areas, as well as for applicable minor stationary sources of pollutants. EPA certifies that the information collection is necessary for the proper performance of EPA's functions, and that it has practical utility; is not unnecessarily duplicative of information EPA otherwise can reasonably access; and reduces, to the extent practicable and appropriate, the burden on persons providing the information to or for EPA.

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 2( a) NEED/ AUTHORITY FOR THE COLLECTION Section 110 of the Clean Air Act ( CAA) requires all States to submit an implementation plan which contains a preconstruction review program for all major new or modified stationary sources, including any provisions necessary for this program to meet the specific requirements of Parts C and D of Title I of the CAA related to major construction. Section 110( a)( 2)( C) of the CAA requires that no new or modified stationary source, in conjunction with existing source emissions in the same area, can interfere with the attainment or maintenance of the National 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 3 Ambient Air Quality Standards ( NAAQS). It further requires that no source can construct without securing a permit to ensure that the objectives of Parts C and D of the CAA are met.

Part C of Title I of the CAA outlines specific construction requirements for new and modified sources constructing in areas that do not violate the NAAQS. These requirements are more commonly referred to as the prevention of significant deterioration ( PSD) rules, which require a prospective major new or modified source to: ( 1) demonstrate that the NAAQS and increments will not be exceeded, ( 2) ensure the application of best available control technology ( BACT), and ( 3) protect Federal Class I areas from adverse impacts, including adverse impacts on air quality related values ( AQRVs).

Similarly, Part D of Title I of the CAA specifies requirements for major new and modified sources constructing in areas designated as nonattainment for an NAAQS pursuant to Section 107 of the CAA. The Part D provisions also apply to major source permitting in the Northeast Ozone Transport Region as established under Section 184 of the CAA. The Part D rules generally require a prospective major construction project to: ( 1) ensure the application of controls which will achieve the lowest achievable emission rate ( LAER), ( 2) certify that all major sources in a State which are owned or controlled by the same person ( or persons) are in compliance with all air emissions regulations, and ( 3) secure reductions in existing source emissions to comply with specific statutory offset ratios and are otherwise, equal to, or greater than those reductions necessary to show attainment and maintenance of the applicable NAAQS ( offsets).

2( b) PRACTICAL UTILITY/ USERS OF THE DATA Before the owner or operator of a facility can commence construction or modification of its source, it must comply with all applicable construction permit requirements. The owner or operator of a stationary source must develop or collect all relevant information not otherwise available to the Federal, State, or local permitting authority ( PA). The PA reviews the application materials submitted by the owner or operator and either declares the permit application complete for processing or provides the owner or operator guidance on how to correct the deficiencies in the application. If the application has deficiencies, the applicant collects any additional data identified by the PA so that the permit application can be deemed " complete." Although sufficient information must be submitted by the applicant before its permit can be classified as complete, some additional clarifying information can be submitted at a later date by the applicant to assist the PA in processing the permit application.

For major sources to be constructed or modified in attainment areas, the PA uses the permit application information to determine: ( 1) whether the source will cause or contribute to a violation of the NAAQS and air quality increments, ( 2) if the technology the source is proposing is BACT, and ( 3) whether the source's emissions will adversely affect any Federal Class I areas, including AQRVs in these areas. For major sources to be constructed or modified in nonattainment areas, the permit application information is used by the PA to determine whether: ( 1) the source will apply LAER, ( 2) the source will have secured the required emissions offsets, and ( 3) the source has demonstrated that all other of its major sources in the same State are in compliance with all applicable air emissions regulations. 1 The RBLC is available on the OAQPS Technology Transfer Network. Access to the RBLC on the TTN is via a computer and communications software by dialing ( 919) 541 5742, or through Internet access B http:// www. epa. gov/ ttncatc1/ rblc/ htm/ welcome. html. or TELNET:< ttnbbs. rtpnc. epa. gov>; FTP:< ttnftp. rtpnc. epa. gov> For assistance in accessing the TTN, contact the TTN Help Desk at ( 919) 541 5384 in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1: 00 p. m. to 5: 00 p. m. Eastern Time.

40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 4 Once the application is complete, the PA makes a preliminary determination regarding the approvability of the permit application. This determination, along with the application and supporting information, is made available to the public for at least 30 days. The PA must then respond to public comments and take action on the final permit. Typically a final action must be taken on a permit by the PA within one year of receipt of a complete application.

In addition, the public and other permit applicants may use some of the data collected. EPA operates a RACT/ BACT/ LAER Clearinghouse ( RBLC) 1 which contains many BACT and LAER determinations to aid applicants and reviewers in identifying reasonable and available control technologies. The Clean Air Act Amendments require that the BACT or LAER information in each permit must be gathered by the PA and submitted for entry into the RBLC database as a reference for making future control technology determinations. Annual reports containing RBLC update information are also available to the public through the National Technical Information Service.

3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 3( a) NONDUPLICATION The information collection activities required under the NSR regulations are not routinely performed elsewhere by EPA. However, similar information may be collected during the development of certain environmental impact statements ( EIS). In such cases, regulations and policies require that information collected for EIS's and NSR programs be coordinated to the maximum extent possible so as to minimize duplicating the collection of data. Some of the required information also may already be available from States or other federal agencies. However, even when these data are available, they are not generally adequate to address completely the relevant NSR requirements.

3( b) PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED PRIOR TO ICR SUBMISSION TO OMB The first public notice of this ICR renewal was published in the August 3, 2004 ( 69 FR 46532); and the comment period ends October 4, 2004.

3( c) CONSULTATIONS This ICR is a renewal of the existing ICR for the NSR program. It incorporates the base elements of the program which have not been changed for this renewal plus the regulatory changes finalized in the NSR Reform rules of December 2002. As such, extensive consultation through public hearings and stakeholder meetings with environmental groups; industry; and state, 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 5 local, and federal agency representatives has been conducted for the rules included in this ICR renewal.

3( d) EFFECTS OF LESS FREQUENT COLLECTION The Act defines the rate of reporting by sources, states, and local entities. Consequently, less frequent collection is not possible.

3( e) GENERAL GUIDELINES OMB's general guidelines for information collections must be adhered to by all Federal Agencies for approval of any rulemaking's collection methodology. In accordance with the requirements of 5 CFR 1320.5, the Agency believes:

1. The NSR regulations do not require periodic reporting more frequently than semiannually 2. The NSR regulations do not require respondents to participate in any statistical survey. 3. Written responses to Agency inquiries are not required to be submitted in less than thirty days. 4. Special consideration has been given in the design of the NSR program to ensure that the requirements are, to the greatest extent possible, the same for Federal requirements and those reviewing authorities who already have preconstruction permitting programs in place. 5. Confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information necessary for the completeness of the respondent's permit are protected from disclosure under the requirements of § 503( e) and § 114( c) of the Act. 6. The NSR regulations do not require more that one original and two copies of the permit application, update, or revision to be submitted to the Agency. 7. Respondents do not receive remuneration for the preparation of reports required by the Act or parts 51 or 52. 8. To the greatest extent possible, the Agency has taken advantage of automated methods of reporting. 9. The Agency believes the impact of NSR regulations on small entities to be insignificant and not disproportionate.

The recordkeeping and reporting requirements contained in the current NSR program and the changes made in this rulemaking do not exceed any of the Paperwork Reduction Act guidelines contained in 5 CFR 1320.5, except for the guideline which limits retention of records by respondents to three years. The Act requires both respondents and State or local agencies to retain records for a period of five years. The justification for this exception is found in 28 U. S. C. 2462, which specifies five years as the general statute of limitations for Federal claims in response to violations by regulated entities. The decision in U. S. v. Conoco, Inc., No. 83 1916 E ( W. D. Okla., January 23, 1984) found that the five year general statute of limitations applied to the Clean Air Act.

3( f) CONFIDENTIALITY 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 6 Confidentiality is not an issue for the NSR program. In accordance with Title V, Section 503 ( e), the information that is to be submitted by sources as a part of their permit application and update, applications for revisions, and renewals is a matter of public record. To the extent that the information required for the completeness of a Federal permit is proprietary, confidential, or of a nature that it could impair the ability of the source to maintain its market position, that information is collected and handled according to EPA's policies set forth in Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 2, Subpart B Confidentiality of Business Information ( see 40 CFR 2). States typically have similar provisions.

3( g) SENSITIVE QUESTIONS The consideration of sensitive questions, ( i. e., sexual, religious, personal or other private matters), is not applicable to the NSR program. The information gathered for purposes of establishing an operating permit for a source do not include personal data on any owner or operator.

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 4( a) RESPONDENTS/ STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION ( SIC) CODES Table 4 1 lists the industrial groups the EPA expects will contain the majority of the industrial respondents affected by the NSR program. These categories were chosen because of their historic relative incidence in seeking NSR permits as established in prior ICRs and confirmed by a nationwide air pollutant emission inventory developed by the EPA in 1986 87. These industries have been used as the basis for impact analysis since that inventory. 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 7 Table 4 1. Most Numerous Industrial Respondents by Industrial Group Industry Group SIC NAICS*

Steam Electric Plants 491 221111, 22112, 22113, 221119, 221121, 221122 Petroleum Refining 291 32411 Chemical Processes 281 325181, 32512, 325131, 325182, 211112, 325998, 331311, 325188 Natural Gas Transport 492 48621, 22121, 48621 Pulp Mills 261 32211, 322121, 322122, 32213 Paper Mills 262 322121, 322122 Automobile Manufacturing 371 336111, 336112, 33612, 336211, 336992, 336322, 33633, 33634, 33635, 336399, 336212, 336213 Pharmaceuticals 283 325411, 325412, 325413, 325414 * 1997 North American Industry Classification System The respondents also include State and local air regulatory agencies. Because of the national scope of the NSR program, these governmental respondents are in all 50 States.

4( b) INFORMATION REQUESTED 4( b)( 1) DATA ITEMS, INCLUDING RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS Tables A 1 and A 2 of Appendix A summarize the respondent data and information requirements which owners or operators of major sources must include in PSD and nonattainment NSR construction permit applications. The tables also include the appropriate references in 40 CFR part 51 for the data and information requirements that govern the way States implement NSR programs. For each reference in Part 51, corresponding language will be found in part 52. In this ICR analysis, the minor source burden is for owners or operators of minor sources to submit information to demonstrate that they are exempt from the major source construction permit requirements. Once exempt from major source requirements of either PSD or Nonattainment NSR, owners or operators will not have to comply with all of the respective requirements shown in Appendix A, Tables A 1 and A 2.

4( b)( 2) RESPONDENT ACTIVITIES 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 8 Table 6 1 lists the activities, burden, and estimated costs of the NSR activities required under 40 CFR parts 51 and 52. These activities include three broad categories: Preparation and Planning; Data Collection and Analysis; and Permit Application. Within each of these categories, further subdivision of a source's activities can be found. The Agency anticipates it will take 265 Part C major sources an average of approximately 839 hours to complete each NSR application, for a total of over 222,000 hours. Each of the 488 Part D NSR sources will require an average of 557 hours, or a total of over 271,500 hours each year to complete Part D NSR applications. Each minor source will require 40 hours to complete its NSR application requirements, for a total of 2,980,000 hours.

5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED  AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5( a) STATE AND LOCAL AGENCY ACTIVITIES Table A 3 of Appendix A summarizes the data and information requirements which State and local agencies must meet. Table A 3 also shows the Part 51 references for the data and information requirements specified. The appropriate language from the CAA, 40 CFR 51 and 40 CFR 52 for State and local agencies is also included.

5( b) COLLECTION METHODOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT The owners and operators of new or modified stationary sources affected by the NSR regulations will be responsible for submitting construction permit applications to the PA. The PA will log in permit applications, store applications in a central filing location at the PA, notify the Federal Land Manager ( FLM) and provide a copy of the application ( if applicable), and transmit copies of each application to EPA. Once construction permits have been approved, the reviewing authority will submit control technology information to EPA's RBLC database. Because the construction permits and associated control technology determinations are performed on a caseby case basis, the regulations will not contain additional forms that owners or operators would have to fill out and submit to the PA. States will likely use their current permit application forms for NSR purposes.

Qualified personnel who work for the PA will perform permit reviews and check the quality of data submitted by the applicant on a case by case basis. The applicant will be required to submit information on how the data were obtained ( e. g., indicate whether emissions data were obtained through the use of emissions factors or test data) and how the calculations were performed. The PA personnel will check data quality by reviewing test data and checking engineering calculations, and by reviewing control technology determinations for similar sources. The RBLC and other sources will be reviewed for information on control technology determinations made for sources similar to the sources included in the permit application. Confidential information submitted by the applicant will be handled by the permit reviewing authority's confidential information handling procedures. The public will be provided the opportunity to review a permit application and other materials relevant to the PA's decision on issuing the permit, including FLM findings, by obtaining a copy from the permit reviewing 2 " Economic Assessment of the Impacts of Part C and D Regulatory Changes," June 2, 1994.

3 The definition for " small business" employed for all SIC categories in this analysis was any business employing fewer than 500 employees.

40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 9 authority or by attending the public hearing. The NSR regulations will not require information through any type of survey.

Table 6 2 lists the State and local agency burden and costs associated with the major NSR permitting rule, as modified by the final NSR Reform rule changes. As is the case with the respondents, State and local agencies who approve NSR permits will only have start up costs for any given permit. Consequently, while the State or local agency will approve many permits each year, the annual burden for that function is simply equal to the burden found in any 1 year.

5( c) SMALL ENTITY FLEXIBILITY The Regulatory Flexibility Act ( RFA) requires regulatory agencies, upon regulatory action, to assess that actions potential impact on small entities ( businesses, governments, and small non governmental organizations) and report the results of the assessments in ( 1) an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis ( IRFA), ( 2) a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis ( FRFA), and ( 3) a Certification. For ICR approval, the Agency must demonstrate that it " has taken all practicable steps to develop separate and simplified requirements for small businesses and other small entities" ( 5 CFR 1320.6( h)). In addition, the agencies must assure through various mechanisms that small entities are given an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking process.

A Regulatory Flexibility Act Screening Analysis ( RFASA) developed as part of a 1994 draft Regulatory Impact Analysis ( RIA) and incorporated into the September 1995 ICR renewal analysis reported an initial regulatory flexibility screening analysis showed that the changes to the NSR program due to the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments would not have an adverse impact on small entities. 2 This analysis encompassed the entire universe of applicable major sources that were likely to also be small businesses. The Agency estimates there are approximately 50 " small business" major sources. 3 Because the administrative burden of the NSR program are the primary source of the NSR program's regulatory costs, the analysis estimated a negligible " cost to sales" ( regulatory cost divided by the business category mean revenue) ratio for this source group. Currently, there is no economic basis for a different conclusion at this time.

5( c)( 1) MEASURES TO AVERT IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES The Agency may not, under any circumstances, exempt a major source of air pollution. Since the impacts of NSR regulations which may impact small entities are predominantly to major sources, little room exists for regulatory flexibility to avert the impact of the proposed rulemaking on small entities through exemption.

5( c)( 2) MEASURES TO MITIGATE IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 10 Even though the NSR program is not anticipated to have an adverse impact on a significant number of small businesses, measures are in place to assist in those incidental exceptions. Implementation of small business stationary source technical and environmental compliance assistance programs, as called for in section 507 of the Act ( at the Federal and State levels) can reduce the reporting burden of small entities which are subject to major NSR. These programs may significantly alleviate the economic burden on small sources by establishing: 1) programs to assist small businesses with determining what Act requirements apply to their sources and when they apply, and 2) guidance on alternative control technology and pollution prevention for small businesses.

5( d) COLLECTION SCHEDULE Respondents are not subjected to a collection schedule per se under NSR permitting regulations of parts 51 and 52. In general, each affected source is required to submit an application as a prerequisite to receiving a construction permit. Preparation of a construction permit application is a one time only activity for each project involving construction of a new source or modification of an existing source. The applicable SIP typically states the time period that is necessary to process a permit application and issue a permit; consequently, a prospective source would be obliged to work backward from the hopeful commencement of construction to determine the optimum submittal date for the application. The NSR permit regulations will not require periodic reporting or surveys.

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 6( a) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT BURDEN 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. The burden estimate should be composed of ( 1) a total capital and start up cost component annualized over its useful life; ( 2) a total operation, maintenance and purchases of services component. Each component should be divided into burden borne directly by the respondent and any services that are contracted out.

Although there have been regulatory changes to the NSR program since the 2001 renewal, we believe that those will generally not change the source's permit application requirements and as such, the hourly burden estimates per permit application have been retained. They are listed with the line item activities in Table 6 1.

Table 6 1 identifies the average burden by activity for the industrial respondents. Note that only 34 of the 265 Part C ( PSD) permit applications require preconstruction air quality 4 U. S., Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, DRAFT INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST FOR 40 CFR PART 51 AND 52 PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION AND NONATTAINMENT NEW SOURCE REVIEW, February 14, 2001, p. 18.

40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 11 monitoring. The average burden for preparing and submitting minor NSR permit applications reflects a range of estimated burden from 8 to 120 hours, depending on the nature of the permit action required. The average assumes the following average burdens for different types of permit actions ( percent of total actions in parentheses): 40 hours for new minor sources, new synthetic minor sources, and synthetic based modifications ( 30%); 8 hours for true minor modifications ( 30%); 120 hours for netting based minor modifications ( 20%); and 8 hours for minor/ administrative permit revisions ( 20%). Table 6 2 identifies the average burden by activity for the State and local respondents.

6( b) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT COSTS 6( b)( i) Estimating Labor Costs In this ICR, the entire burden for all respondents ( and the Agency) is treated as a labor cost. The explanation for the absence of capital and operations and maintenance costs appears below in sections 6( b)( ii) and 6( b)( iii). Consequently, there is only an annual value of the costs of the ICR burden, which is equal to the cost of the first yearly outlay. The same annual ICR burden and cost are reported for each year because the EPA projects that the yearly average number of permit applications will be constant over the term of the ICR.

In order to improve the accuracy of burden estimates, this renewal ICR uses 2004 values with the wage rate methods established in the July, 1997 renewal ICR. The 1997 renewal was the source for the extrapolated values used in the 2001 renewal ICR. The single exception is the estimate of pre construction ambient air quality costs, which were adjusted from the 2001 renewal ICR due to the lack of computational detail provided in the 1997 renewal.

The labor rate used to calculate the industrial respondents' labor cost is $ 65.50/ hr and reflects a division of labor between in house technical staff and managerial staff, and the involvement of outside consultants. Following the methodology detailed in the July 10, 1997 ICR, the labor rate is calculated by taking 70% of the 2004 in house rate, which is derived using fully loaded but weighted technical, clerical, and managerial staff wages, and adding the resulting labor rate to 30% of the 2004 fully loaded weighted consultant rate for technical, clerical, and managerial staff. The resultant rate equals $ 65.50/ hr.

Following the same assumptions as the 2001 ICR renewal, 34 of the industrial respondents submitting Part C ( PSD) permit applications will conduct pre construction ambient air quality monitoring. 4 The average cost for this activity is estimated to be $ 253,337, which is calculated using the same three year adjustment factor ( 1.16) as the previous ICR and adding an additional growth of 5.33% ( 1/ 3 of 16%) for 2004. 5 U. S., Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, DRAFT INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST FOR CHANGES TO THE 40 CFR PART 51 AND 52 PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION AND NEW SOURCE REVIEW APPLICABILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR MODIFICATIONS TO EXISTING SOURCES, November, 2002, p. 29.

40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 12 The labor rate used to calculate the State and local respondents' labor cost is $ 43.53/ hr. This rate is the result of inserting 2004 federal government pay schedule wage rates for clerical, technical, and managerial staff into the weighting system developed in the 1997 renewal ICR and described in the November 2002 parts 51 & 52 ICR update. 5 Table 6 2 presents the State and local agency respondents' burden and costs. Their annual cost is equal to the cost of the first year outlay, which recurs each year.

6( b)( ii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs Even if an applicant is a brand new company and the prospective source is a " greenfield" source ( the EPA estimates less than one percent of the combined number of major and minor industrial respondents fit that description) most, and perhaps all, of the equipment needed to prepare permit applications ( for example, the computers and basic software) will be part of the source's business operation inventory. Furthermore, much of the data and regulatory and policy information for making technology determinations and even models for performing ambient air impact analyses are available in electronic form from several different EPA bulletin boards for just the communication charges, which are typically absorbed in routine business overhead expenses.

Since the purchase of capital equipment is believed to be an insignificant factor in permit application preparation, the EPA assumes the operation, maintenance, or services for same are negligible. Further, once a permit is issued, there is no operations and maintenance cost associated with it. It remains unaltered unless the source or the permitting authority discovers specific reasons to reexamine it and change any conditions or specifications. If purely administrative, the changes are handled exclusively by the permitting authority. If changes have the potential for environmental consequences, the action may be significant enough to be counted as a separate and new application, to which a new burden and cost may be ascribed.

6( b)( iii) Capital/ Start up Operating and Maintenance ( O& M) Costs Capital/ start up and O& M costs are non labor related costs. One time capital/ start up costs are incurred with the purchase of durable goods needed to provide information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act, capital/ start up cost should include among other items, preparations for collecting information such as purchasing computers and software, monitoring, sampling, drilling, and testing equipment. As a practical matter, these costs are not typical of the costs associated with preparing a major source permit application. For the same reason, the O& M costs associated with start up capital equipment are zero for this ICR.

6( b)( iv) Annualizing Capital Costs 6 U. S., Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, DRAFT INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST FOR 40 CFR PART 51 AND 52 PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION AND NONATTAINMENT NEW SOURCE REVIEW, July 10, 1997, p. 44.

7 The annual salary for Grade 11 Step 3 in the 2000 General Schedule is $ 41,790 ( www. opm. gov/ oca/ 2000tbls/ GSannual/ html/ GSBASE. HTM). Division by 2080 hrs/ hr yields the hourly rate used in this supporting statement.

8 U. S. EPA, ICR Handbook ( February 1999), p. A 39.

40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 13 Typically annualized capital cost would be derived from a discounted net present value of the stream of costs that would occur over the life of the permit, or the ICR, whichever is shorter. However, in the case of NSR, there are only labor costs for preparing and processing permit applications. Labor costs are expensed when incurred and not amortized. Therefore, the capital costs for NSR permitting are zero.

6( c) ESTIMATING AGENCY BURDEN AND COST Staff in EPA's regional offices typically review major NSR permits. The EPA expects its review of NSR permits to comprise the tasks listed in Table 6 3. The cost estimate uses a " loaded" labor rate of $ 36.21/ hr. The rate reflects the assumption, made in the July 10, 1997 renewal ICR and the February, 2001 renewal ICR, that the staff reviewing permits are classified as Grade 11 Step 3.6 The corresponding salary is loaded with benefits at the rate of 60%. 7 This approach to determining the loaded labor rate is consistent with the ICR Handbook, which states that salary is to be multiplied by a 1.6 benefits multiplication factor. 8 6( d) ESTIMATING THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSE AND TOTAL BURDEN AND COST For the purpose of estimating burden in this ICR, the respondent universe is defined by the annual number of permit applications prepared by major and minor sources, and the annual number of permit applications processed by State and local agencies. We began with the baseline data found in the current ICR ( 320 Part C, 590 Part D, 56,500 minor NSR), from that baseline, we then made several adjustments to reflect the expected effect of the regulatory changes finalized since the last ICR renewal. Specifically, the number of major NSR permit actions was for each program element finalized under the December 2002 reform rules as follows:

1. For baseline determination it is anticipated that no more than 5 percent of the sources will avoid major NSR under this requirement. 2. For actual to future actual, it is anticipated that no more than 10 percent of the sources will avoid major NSR under this requirement. 3. For plantwide applicability limits ( PALs), it is anticipated that no more than 3 percent of the sources will avoid major NSR under this provision. 4. For the clean unit test ( CUT), it is anticipated that no more than 5 percent of the sources will avoid major NSR under this provision. 5. For the pollution control project ( PCP), it is anticiopated that no more than 3 percent of the sources will avoid major NSR under this provision. 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 14 In addition, this analysis uses the 112 reviewing authorities count used by other permitting ICRs for one time tasks ( e. g., SIP revision) and the appropriate source count for individual permit related items ( e. g., attending pre application meetings with the source). The resulting number of respondents for this ICR renewal is then estimated to be as follows:

1. 265 Part C ( PSD) permit applications prepared by industry. 2. 488 Part D ( nonattainment) permit applications prepared by industry. 3. 74,609 minor NSR permit applications prepared by industry. 4. 265 Part C ( PSD) permit applications processed by State and local agencies. 5. 488 Part D ( nonattainment) permit applications processed by State and local agencies. 6. 74,609 minor NSR permit applications processed by State and local agencies.

Therefore, for each category of permit application, the total number of respondents is twice the number of permit applications.

The total annual effort for industrial respondents submitting Part C ( PSD) permit applications is 221,943 hours, and the corresponding annual cost is $ 23,150,755. The total annual effort for industrial respondents submitting Part D ( nonattainment) permit applications is 281,422 hours, and the corresponding annual cost is $ 18,433,150. The total annual effort for industrial respondents submitting minor NSR permits is 2,984,368 hours, and the corresponding annual cost is $ 195,476,104. For industrial respondents, the overall total annual effort is 3,487,734 hours and $ 237,060,009.

The total annual effort for State and local respondents processing Part C ( PSD) permit applications is 71,953 hours, and the corresponding annual cost is $ 3,123,117. The total annual effort for State and local respondents processing Part D ( nonattainment) permit applications is 53,163 hours, and the corresponding annual cost is $ 2,314,182. The total annual effort for State and local respondents processing minor NSR permits is 2,238,276 hours, and the corresponding annual cost is $ 97,432,154. For the State and local respondents, the overall total annual effort is 2,363,392 hours and $ 102,878,454.

6( e) BOTTOM LINE BURDEN HOURS AND COST TABLES 6( e)( i) Respondent Tally Table 6 4 summarizes the estimated burden and cost to industry respondents, State and local agency respondents, and the EPA for submittal and processing of NSR permit applications and the issuance of the permits. It also includes the cost to the respective respondents and reviewing agencies for nonapplicability findings, which preclude sources from further major source requirements. For industrial and State and local agency respondents, the overall total annual burden is 5,851,126 hours and $ 339,938,463.

6( e)( ii) The Agency Tally 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 15 The total annual effort for the Agency for processing Part C ( PSD) permit applications is 3,703 hours, and the corresponding annual cost is $ 134,103. The total annual effort for the Agency for processing Part D ( nonattainment) permit applications is 6,341 hours, and the corresponding annual cost is $ 229,591. The total annual effort for the Agency for processing minor NSR permits is 5,650 hours, and the corresponding annual cost is $ 204,587. For the Agency, the overall total annual effort is 15,694 hours and $ 568,280.

6( f) REASONS FOR CHANGE IN BURDEN The burden has changed due in part to a change in the labor rates. As explained in section 6( b)( i) of this document, the labor rates for industry respondents and State and local agency respondents were not adjusted from the previous ICR as they were in the 2001 renewal ICR. Instead, in order to improve the accuracy or burden estimates, the rates were recalculated using 2004 values and following the same methodology established in the July 10, 1997 renewal ICR.

Also contributing to the increase in burden has been an increase in Minor NSR Applications. The increase in sources preparing and submitting Minor NSR Permit Applications rose by almost 18,000 from the previous ICR ( February, 2001 renewal) as a result of a revision to the number of reviewing authorities and the number of minor source actions processes by each reviewing authority.

6( g) BURDEN STATEMENT The average annual burden on an industrial respondent submitting a Part C ( PSD) permit application is 839 hours and $ 87,515; these estimates reflect the direct cost for pre application monitoring averaged for all PSD permit applications.] The average annual burden on an industrial respondent submitting a Part D ( nonattainment) permit application is 577 hours and $ 37,794. The average annual burden on an industrial respondent submitting a minor NSR permit application is 40 hours and $ 2,620.

The average annual burden on a State or local agency respondent processing a Part C ( PSD) permit application is 272 hours and $ 11,840. The average annual burden on a State or local agency respondent processing a Part D ( nonattainment) permit application is 109 hours and $ 4,745. The average annual burden on a State or local agency respondent processing a minor NSR permit application is 30 hours and $ 1,306.

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, verifying, processing, maintaining, 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 currently valid OMB 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 16 control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 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 No. OAR 2004 0081, which is available for public viewing at the Air and Radiation 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 Air Docket is ( 202) 566 1742). An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. Use EDOCKET 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. Once 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 Office for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID No. ( OAR 2003 0081) in any correspondence. 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 17 3,375$ 1,688$ 844$ 844$ 405$ 675$ 14,160$ 7,099$ 21,259$ 4,668$ 3,764$ 1,245 Table 6 1 Industrial Respondent Burden and Cost ( Annual)

Activity Units Hours per Unit Annual Hours Annual Cost ($ 1000)

I. Part C ( PSD)

A. Preparation and Planning Determination of Compliance Requirements 265 170 44,971 $ 2,946 Obtain guidance on Data Needs 265 120 31,744 $ 2,079 Preparation of BACT Engineering Analysis 265 85 22,485 $ 1,435 B. Data Collection and Analysis Air Quality Modeling 265 200 52,907 $ 3,465 Determination of Impact on Air Quality Related Values 265 100 26,453 $ 1,733 Post construction Air Quality Monitoring 265 50 13,227 $ 866 C. Permit Application Preparation and Submittal of Permit Application 265 50 13,227 $ 866 Public Hearings 265 24 6,349 $ 416 Revisions to Permit 265 40 10,581 $ 693 D. Subtotal burden 839 221,943 $ 14,537 E. Direct cost for Pre construction Air Quality Monitoring 34 $ 8,613 F. Total cost $ 23,151 II. PART D ( Nonattainment)

A. Preparation and Planning Determination of Compliance Requirements 488 150 73,160 $ 4,792 Obtain guidance on Data Needs 488 100 48,773 $ 3,195 B. Data Collection and Analysis Preparation of LAER Engineering Analysis 488 40 19,509 $ 1,278 Demonstrate Offsets 488 40 19,509 $ 1,278 Prepare Analysis of Alternative Sites, Processes, etc. 488 60 29,264 $ 1,917 Air Quality Modeling 488 100 48,773 $ 3,195 C. Permit Application Preparation and Submittal of Permit Application 488 38 18,534 $ 1,214 Public Hearings 488 25 12,193 $ 799 Revisions to Permit 488 24 11,706 $ 767 D. Total 577 281,422 $ 18,433 III. MINOR NSR A. Preparation and Submittal of Minor NSR Permit Application 74,609 40 2,984,368 $ 195,476 III. GRAND TOTAL 75,361 3,487,734 $ 237,060 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 18 Table 6 2 State And Local Respondent Burden and Cost ( Annual)

Activity Units Hours Per Unit Annual Hours Annual Cost ($ 1000)

I. PART C ( PSD)

A. Attend Preapplication Meetings 265 36 9,523 $ 415 B. Answer Respondent Questions 265 20 5,291 $ 230 C. Log In and Review Data Submissions 265 16 4,233 $ 184 D. Request Additional Information 265 8 2,116 $ 92 E. Analyze for and Provide Confidentiality Protection 265 24 6,349 $ 276 F. Prepare Completed Applications for Processing 265 32 8,465 $ 368 G. File and Transmit Copies 265 8 2,116 $ 92 H. Prepare Preliminary Determination 265 24 6,349 $ 276 I. Prepare Notices for and Attend Public Hearings 265 40 10,581 $ 461 J. Application Approval 265 40 10,581 $ 461 K. Notification of Applicant of PA Determination 265 8 2,116 $ 92 L. Submittal of Information on BACT / LAER to RBLC 265 16 4,233 $ 184 M. Total 272 71,953 $ 3,132 II. PART D ( Nonattainment)

A. Attend Preapplication Meetings 488 7 3,414 $ 149 B. Answer Respondent Questions 488 10 4,877 $ 212 C. Log In and Review Data Submissions 488 8 3,902 $ 170 D. Request Additional Information 488 4 1,951 $ 85 E. Analyze for and Provide Confidentiality Protection 488 4 1,951 $ 85 F. Prepare Completed Applications for Processing 488 12 5,853 $ 255 G. File and Transmit Copies 488 4 1,951 $ 85 H. Prepare Preliminary Determination 488 8 3,902 $ 170 I. Prepare Notices for and Attend Public Hearings 488 18 8,779 $ 382 J. Application Approval 488 16 7,804 $ 340 K. Notification of Applicant of PA Determination 488 2 975 $ 42 L. Submittal of Information on BACT / LAER to RBLC 488 16 7,804 $ 340 M. Total 109 53,163 $ 2,314 III. MINOR NSR Total for Preparation and Submittal of Minor NSR Permit Application 74,609 30 2,238,276 $ 97,432 III. GRAND TOTAL 75,361 2,363,392 $ 102,878 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 19 Table 6 3 Agency Burden and Cost ( Annual)

Activity Units Hours Per Unit Annual Hours Annual Cost ($ 1000)

I. PART C ( PSD)

A. Review and Verify Applicability Determination 265 2 529 $ 19 B. Review Control Technology Determination 265 3 794 $ 29 C. Evaluate Air Quality Monitoring 265 4 1,058 $ 38 D. Evaluate Alternative and Secondary Impact Analysis 265 2 529 $ 19 E. Evaluate Class I Area Analysis 265 2 529 $ 19 F. Administrative Tasks 265 1 265 $ 10 G. Total 14 3,703 $ 134 II. PART D ( Nonattainment)

A. Review and Verify Applicability Determination 488 2 975 $ 35 B. Review Control Technology Determination 488 3 1,463 $ 53 C. Evaluate Offsets 488 1 488 $ 18 D. Evaluate Air Quality Monitoring 488 4 1,951 $ 71 E. Evaluate Alternative and Secondary Impact Analysis 488 2 975 $ 35 F. Administrative Tasks 488 1 488 $ 18 G. Total 13 6,341 $ 230 III. MINOR NSR Review Synthetic/ Netting Based Minor NSR Permits 2,825 2 5,650 $ 205 III. GRAND TOTAL 3,577 29 15,694 $ 568 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 20 Table 6 4 NSR Program Information Collection Burden Summary Total Per Unit Part C ( PSD) Part D ( Nonattainment Minor NSR Cumulative Total Part C ( PSD) Part D ( Nonattainment Minor NSR Number of Respondentsa 529 975 149,218 150,723 [ 13. a.&. b] b Respondent Burden Hours Industry 221,943 281,422 2,984,368 3,487,734 839 577 40 State/ Local 71,953 53,163 2,238,276 2,363,392 272 109 30 Industry and State/ Local Agency Totals 293,897 334,585 5,222,644 5,851,126 [ 13. c] 1,111 686 70 Federal ( Agency) Burden 3,703 6,341 5,650 15,694 14 13 2 Program Grand Total Burden 297,600 340,926 5,228,294 5,866,820 Respondent Annual Cost ($ 1000) c Industry Labord $ 14,537 $ 18,433 $ 195,476 $ 228,447 $ 54.95 $ 37.79 $ 2.62 Other direct Coste $ 8,613 $ 0 $ 0 $ 8,613 $ 253.34 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Total Industry Costf $ 23,151 $ 18,433 $ 195,476 $ 237,060 $ 87.52 $ 37.79 $ 2.62 State / Local Cost $ 3,132 $ 2,314 $ 97,432 $ 102,878 $ 11.84 $ 4.74 $ 1.31 Industry and State/ Local Totals $ 26,283 $ 20,747 $ 292,908 $ 339,938 Federal ( Agency) Annual Cost ($ 1000) $ 134 $ 230 $ 205 $ 568 $ 0.51 $ 0.47 $ 0.00 Program Grand Total Cost ($ 1000) $ 26,417 $ 20,977 $ 293,113 $ 340,507 $ 99.86 $ 43.01 $ 3.93 ( a) Number of respondents is twice the number of permitting actions for a given category due to ( 1) the applicant preparing the application and ( 2) the permitting agency reviewing and issuing the permit. ( b) References to specific entries on OMB Form 83 I are enclosed in brackets. ( c) All costs are in thousands of current ( 2004) dollars. All costs represent one time permit application costs [ 16. c. 8.]. Operating and maintenance costs are $ 0.00 [ 14. b.]. The cost for compliance monitoring is not covered by the NSR program. Other ICRs such as that for the CAM rule and the Title V ICRs cover these burdens and costs. ( d) The EPA estimates that 30% of the in house hourly burden may be contracted, but because it is at the discretion of the applicant, the cost has not been converted to direct cost. Furthermore EPA assumes the labor rate would remain the same, in which case there is no impact on total annual costs. ( e) These direct costs are for 34 ( approximately 13%) PSD sources at $ 253,337 per source, for preapplication monitoring of air quality via contract services. This cost is not incurred by Part D permit applicants. ( f) Per unit cost for PSD permits reflects the direct cost for pre application monitoring averaged over all PSD permits. The estimated 34 sources that require preconstruction monitoring are estimated to incur a total cost of $ 308,292 per application. The others will incur $ 54,955. 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 21 APPENDIX A INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 22 TABLE A 1. INDUSTRY RESPONDENT DATA AND INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARING PART C ( PSD) CONSTRUCTION PERMITS Current Requirements Regulation Reference Description of the nature, location, design capacity, and typical operating schedule 40 CFR 51.166( n)( 2)( I)

Detailed schedule for construction 40 CFR 51.166( n)( 2)( ii)

Description of continuous emission reduction system, emission estimates, and other information needed to determine that BACT is used 40 CFR 51.166( n)( 2)( iii)

Air quality impact, meteorological, and topographical data 40 CFR 51.166( n)( 3)( I)

Nature and extent of, and air quality impacts of general commercial,

residential, industrial, and other growth in area of source 40 CFR 51.166( n)( 3)( ii)

Use of air quality models to demonstrate compliance with NAAQS and increment 40 CFR 51.166( k)&( l)

A demonstration that the benefits of the proposed source significantly outweigh the environmental and social costs imposed as a result of its location, construction, or modification Not a current requirement;, but is a 1990 Act Requirement

173( a)( 5)

Information necessary to determine impact on AQRVs in Class I areas 40 CFR 51.166( n)( 4)

Air quality monitoring data 40 CFR 51.166( m) Impairment of visibility, soils, and vegetation 40 CFR 51.166( o)( 1)

Air quality impact resulting from general commercial, residential, industrial,

and other growth associated with source 40 CFR 51.166( o)( 2)

Written notice of proposed relocation from portable source 40 CFR 51.166( I)( 4)( iii)( d)

Description of the location, design construction, and operation of building,

structure, facility, or installation 40 CFR 51.160( c)( 2)

Description of the nature and amounts of emissions to be emitted 40 CFR 51.160( c)( 1)

Description of the air quality data and dispersion or other air quality modeling used 40 CFR 51.160( f)

Sufficient information to ensure attainment and maintenance of NAAQS 40 CFR 51.160( c)( e), 40 CFR 51.161 163 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 23 Table A 2: INDUSTRY RESPONDENT DATA AND INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARING PART D ( NONATTAINMENT NSR) CONSTRUCTION PERMITS Requirements Regulation Reference Documentation that LAER is being applied 40 CFR 51.165( d)( 2) Documentation that all sources owned or operated by same person are in compliance 40 CFR 51.165( h)( 1)

Documentation that sufficient emissions reductions are occurring to comply with specific offset requirements and to ensure RFP 40 CFR 51.165( e)

Documentation that benefits of proposed source significantly outweigh the environmental and social costs imposed as a result of its location, construction, or modification CAA

173( a)( 5)

Description of the location, design construction, and operation of building, structure, facility, or installation 40 CFR 51.160( c)( 2)

Description of the nature and amounts of emissions to be emitted 40 CFR 51.160( c)( 1) Description of the air quality data and dispersion or other air quality modeling used 40 CFR 51.160( f)

Sufficient information to ensure attainment and maintenance of NAAQS 40 CFR 51.160( c)( e)

40 CFR 51.161 40 CFR 51.162 40 CFR 51.163 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 PSD and Nonattainment NSR Information Collection Request August 20, 2004 24 TABLE A 3. PERMITTING AGENCY DATA AND INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS Requirement Regulation Reference Early FLM notification and opportunity to participate in meetings 40 CFR 51.166( p)( 1)( ii) Submission of all permit applications to EPA 40 CFR 51.166( q)( 1) Submission of notice of application, preliminary determination,

degree of increment consumption, and opportunity for public comment 40 CFR 51.166( q)( 2)( iv)

Submission to FLM of permit applications 40 CFR 51.166( p)( 1)

Submission of written request to exempt sources from review 40 CFR 52.21( I)( 4)( vi) Written request for use of innovative control technology 40 CFR 51.166( s)

Establishing and operating a permitting program for all new sources 40 CFR 51.160 Provide notice to EPA of all permits 40 CFR 51.161( d) Provide for public comment for all NSR permits 40 CFR 51.161


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 126 (Wednesday, July 1, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 37644]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16242]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4222-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2015-0002]

Oklahoma; Amendment No. 6 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Oklahoma (FEMA-4222-DR), dated May 26, 2015, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: June 11, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Oklahoma is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of May 26, 2015.

    Adair, Beckham, Caddo, Creek, Garvin, Jackson, Logan, Marshall,
McIntosh, Muskogee, Pushmataha, Sequoyah, and Washita Counties for
Public Assistance.
    Comanche and McCurtain Counties for Public Assistance (already
designated for Individual Assistance).

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2015-16242 Filed 6-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 243 (Friday, December 18, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79055-79056]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31909]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2015-1050]

Cooperative Research and Development Agreement: Diesel Outboard
Engine Development

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of intent; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces its intent to enter into a
Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with Mercury
Marine (Mercury) to evaluate and test the advantages, disadvantages,
required technology enhancements, performance, costs, and other issues
associated with diesel outboard engine technology. A test schedule has
been proposed in which Mercury will provide and install two of their
diesel outboard engines onto a selected Coast Guard boat platform; the
Coast Guard Research and Development Center (R&D Center) will outfit
the platform with the necessary instrumentation to monitor power,
speed, and fuel consumption; and a Coast Guard field unit will operate
the boat for performance testing over a six-month period to collect
information on reliability, maintenance requirements, and availability
data. While the Coast Guard is currently considering partnering with
Mercury, the agency is soliciting public comment on the possible nature
of and participation of other parties in the proposed CRADA. In
addition, the Coast Guard also invites other potential non-Federal
participants to propose similar CRADAs.

DATES: Comments must be submitted to the online docket via http://www.regulations.gov, or reach the Docket Management Facility, on or
before January 19, 2016.
    Synopses of proposals regarding future CRADAs must reach the Coast
Guard (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) on or before January 19,
2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments online at http://www.regulations.gov
following Web site instructions.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice
or wish to submit proposals for future CRADAs, contact LT Keely Higbie,
Project Official, Surface Branch, U.S. Coast Guard Research and
Development Center, 1 Chelsea Street, New London, CT 06320, telephone
860-271-2815, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We request public comments on this notice. Although we do not plan
to respond to comments in the Federal Register, we will respond
directly to commenters and may modify our proposal in light of
comments.
    Comments should be marked with docket number USCG-2015-1050 and
should provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You
should provide personal contact information so that we can contact you
if we have questions regarding your comments; but please note that all
comments will be posted to the online docket without change and that
any personal information you include can be searchable online (see the
Federal Register Privacy Act notice regarding our public dockets, 73 FR
3316, Jan. 17, 2008). We also accept anonymous comments.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the Coast Guard
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Documents mentioned in this
notice, and all public comments, are in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.
    Do not submit detailed proposals for future CRADAs to the Docket
Management Facility. Instead, submit

them directly to the Coast Guard (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Discussion

    CRADAs are authorized under 15 U.S.C. 3710(a).\1\ A CRADA promotes
the transfer of technology to the private sector for commercial use, as
well as specified research or development efforts that are consistent
with the mission of the Federal parties to the CRADA. The Federal party
or parties agree with one or more non-Federal parties to share research
resources, but the Federal party does not contribute funding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The statute confers this authority on the head of each
Federal agency. The Secretary of DHS's authority is delegated to the
Coast Guard and other DHS organizational elements by DHS Delegation
No. 0160.1, para. II.B.34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CRADAs are not procurement contracts. Care is taken to ensure that
CRADAs are not used to circumvent the contracting process. CRADAs have
a specific purpose and should not be confused with procurement
contracts, grants, and other type of agreements.
    Under the proposed CRADA, the R&D Center will collaborate with one
non-Federal participant. Together, the R&D Center and the non-Federal
participant will collect information/data for performance, reliability,
maintenance requirements, and other data on diesel outboard engines.
After an initial performance test, the Coast Guard plans to operate to
test and evaluate the designated platform outfitted with the diesel
outboard engine technology for a period of six months.
    We anticipate that the Coast Guard's contributions under the
proposed CRADA will include the following:
    (1) Work with non-Federal participant to develop the test plan to
be executed under the CRADA;
    (2) Provide the test platform, test platform support, facilities,
and seek all required approvals for testing under the CRADA;
    (3) Prepare the test platform for diesel outboard engine install
and operations;
    (4) Provide fuel and test platform operators for the performance
and reliability, maintenance, and availability testing;
    (5) Collect and analyze data in accordance with the CRADA test
plan; and
    (6) Work with non-Federal participant to develop a Final Report,
which will document the methodologies, findings, conclusions, and
recommendations of this CRADA work.
    We anticipate that the non-Federal participants' contributions
under the proposed CRADA will include the following:
    (1) Work with R&D Center to develop the test plan to be executed
under the CRADA;
    (2) Provide the technical data package for all equipments,
including dimensions, weight, power requirements, and other technical
considerations for the additional components to be utilized under this
CRADA;
    (3) Provide for shipment, delivery, and install of diesel outboard
engines required for testing under this CRADA;
    (4) Provide technical oversight, technical engine, and operator
training on the engines provided for testing under this CRADA; and
    (5) Provide/pay for travel and other associated personnel costs and
other required expenses.
    The Coast Guard reserves the right to select for CRADA participants
all, some, or no proposals submitted for this CRADA. The Coast Guard
will provide no funding for reimbursement of proposal development
costs. Proposals and any other material submitted in response to this
notice will not be returned. Proposals submitted are expected to be
unclassified and have no more than five single-sided pages (excluding
cover page, DD 1494, JF-12, etc.). The Coast Guard will select
proposals at its sole discretion on the basis of:
    (1) How well they communicate an understanding of, and ability to
meet, the proposed CRADA's goal; and
    (2) How well they address the following criteria:
    (a) Technical capability to support the non-Federal party
contributions described; and
    (b) Resources available for supporting the non-Federal party
contributions described.
    Currently, the Coast Guard is considering Mercury for participation
in this CRADA. This consideration is based on the fact that Mercury has
demonstrated its technical ability as the developer and manufacturer of
diesel outboard engines. However, we do not wish to exclude other
viable participants from this or future similar CRADAs.
    This is a technology assessment effort. The goal for the Coast
Guard of this CRADA is to better understand the advantages,
disadvantages, required technology enhancements, performance, costs,
and other issues associated with diesel outboard engines. Special
consideration will be given to small business firms/consortia, and
preference will be given to business units located in the U.S. This
notice is issued under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a).

    Dated: December 2, 2015.
Dennis C. Evans,
USCG, Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Research and Development
Center.
[FR Doc. 2015-31909 Filed 12-17-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 136 (Wednesday, July 15, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42926-42927]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15290]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 33923; File No. 812-15093]

J.P. Morgan Exchange-Traded Fund Trust, et al.

July 10, 2020.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of an application for an order under section 6(c) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') for an exemption from sections
2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), and 22(d) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act,
under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption from sections
17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act, and under section 12(d)(1)(J) of the
Act for an exemption from sections 12(d)(1)(A) and 12(d)(1)(B) of the
Act.
    Applicants: J.P. Morgan Exchange-Traded Fund Trust (the ``Trust''),
J.P. Morgan Investment Management Inc. (the ``Adviser'') and JPMorgan
Distribution Services, Inc. (the ``Distributor'').
    Summary of Application: Applicants request an order (``Order'')
that permits: (a) ActiveShares ETFs (as described in the Reference
Order (as defined below)) to issue shares (``Shares'') redeemable in
large aggregations only (``creation units''); (b) secondary market
transactions in Shares to occur at negotiated market prices rather than
at net asset value; (c) certain affiliated persons of an ActiveShares
ETF to deposit securities into, and receive securities from, the
ActiveShares ETF in connection with the purchase and redemption of
creation units; and (d) certain registered management investment
companies and unit investment trusts outside of the same group of
investment companies as the ActiveShares ETFs to acquire Shares of the
ActiveShares ETFs. The Order would incorporate by reference terms and
conditions of a previous order granting the same relief sought by
applicants, as that order may be amended from time to time (``Reference
Order'').\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Precidian ETFs Trust, et al., Investment Company Act Release
Nos. 33440 (April 8, 2019) (notice) and 33477 (May 20, 2019)
(order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Filing Date: The application was filed on February 3, 2020.
    Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by emailing the Commission's
Secretary at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and serving applicants with a
copy of the request by email. Hearing requests should be received by
the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on August 4, 2020, and should be
accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the form of an
affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to Rule
0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing
on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested.
Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification
by emailing the Commission's Secretary at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Applicants: Gregory S. Samuels, J.P. Morgan
Investment Management Inc<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Elizabeth
A. Davin, J.P. Morgan Investment Management Inc.,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and Allison M. Fumai, Dechert LLP,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura J. Riegel, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-3038 or Trace W. Rakestraw, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's website by searching for the file number, or for an
applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants

    1. The Trust is a statutory trust organized under the laws of the
State of Delaware and will consist of one or more series operating as
ActiveShares ETFs. The Trust is registered as an open-end management
investment company under the Act. Applicants seek relief with respect
to one fund (the ``Initial Fund'') and Funds (as defined below). The
Funds will operate as ActiveShares ETFs as described in the Reference
Order.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ To facilitate arbitrage, an ActiveShares ETF disseminates a
``verified intraday indicative value'' or ``VIIV,'' reflecting the
value of its portfolio holdings, calculated every second during the
trading day. To protect the identity and weightings of its portfolio
holdings, an ActiveShares ETF sells and redeems its Shares in
creation units to authorized participants only through an
unaffiliated broker-dealer acting on an agency basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The Adviser, a Delaware corporation, will be the investment
adviser to the Initial Fund. An Adviser (as defined below) will serve
as investment adviser to each Fund. The Adviser is, and any other
Adviser will be, registered as an investment adviser under the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (``Advisers Act''). The Adviser may
enter into sub-advisory agreements with other investment advisers to
act as sub-advisers with respect to the Funds (each a ``Sub-Adviser'').
Any Sub-Adviser will be registered under the Advisers Act.
    3. The Distributor is a Delaware corporation and a broker-dealer
registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
will act as the principal underwriter of Shares of the Funds.
Applicants request that the requested relief apply to any distributor
of Shares, whether affiliated or unaffiliated with the Adviser and/or
Sub-Adviser (included in the term ``Distributor''). Any Distributor
will comply with the terms and conditions of the Order.

Applicants' Requested Exemptive Relief

    4. Applicants seek the requested Order under section 6(c) of the
Act for an exemption from sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), and 22(d) of the
Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act, under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the
Act for an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act,
and under section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act for an exemption from sections
12(d)(1)(A) and 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act. The requested Order would
permit applicants to offer ActiveShares ETFs. Because the relief
requested is the same as the relief granted by the Commission under the
Reference Order and because the Adviser has entered into a licensing
agreement with Precidian Funds LLC in order to offer ActiveShares
ETFs,\3\ the Order would incorporate by reference the terms and
conditions of the Reference Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Aspects of the Funds are covered by intellectual property
rights, including but not limited to those which are described in
one or more patent applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Applicants request that the Order apply to the Initial Fund and
to any other existing or future open-end

management investment company or series thereof that: (a) Is advised by
the Adviser or any entity controlling, controlled by, or under common
control with the Adviser (any such entity included in the term
``Adviser''); (b) operates as an ActiveShares ETF as described in the
Reference Order; and (c) complies with the terms and conditions of the
Order and of the Reference Order, which is incorporated by reference
into the Order (each such company or series and the Initial Fund, a
``Fund'').\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ All entities that currently intend to rely on the Order are
named as applicants. Any other entity that relies on the Order in
the future will comply with the terms and conditions of the Order
and of the Reference Order, which is incorporated by reference into
the Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt
any person, security or transaction, or any class of persons,
securities or transactions, from any provisions of the Act, if and to
the extent that such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the
purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act.
Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to exempt a proposed
transaction from section 17(a) of the Act if evidence establishes that
the terms of the transaction, including the consideration to be paid or
received, are reasonable and fair and do not involve overreaching on
the part of any person concerned, and the transaction is consistent
with the policies of the registered investment company and the general
purposes of the Act. Section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act provides that the
Commission may exempt any person, security, or transaction, or any
class of persons, securities or transactions, from any provision of
section 12(d)(1) if the exemption is consistent with the public
interest and the protection of investors. Applicants submit that for
the reasons stated in the Reference Order the requested relief meets
the exemptive standards under sections 6(c), 17(b) and 12(d)(1)(J) of
the Act.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-15290 Filed 7-14-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P