[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 40 (Monday, March 2, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11106-11107]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04294]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 73

[Docket No. FAA-2015-0265; Airspace Docket No. 14-ASW-11]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Restricted Areas R-3801A, R-3801B, and R-3801C; Camp
Claiborne, LA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This action updates using agency information for restricted
areas R-3801A, R-3801B, and R-3801C, Camp Claiborne, LA. This is an
administrative change to reflect an organizational transfer of using
agency responsibilities within the United States Air Force. It does not
affect the boundaries, designated altitudes, time of designation or
activities conducted within the restricted areas.

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, April 30, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy and
Regulations Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On January 6, 1994, the FAA amended restricted areas R-3801A, R-
3801B, and R-3801C to reflect ``U.S. Air Force, 917 Fighter Wing,
Barksdale AFB, LA'' as the using agency. Due to multiple U.S. Air Force
organizational initiatives since 1994, the 917th Fighter Wing changed
to the 917th Wing and then to the 917th Fighter Group. As a result of
the 917th Fighter Group deactivating in 2013, the using agency
responsibilities were transferred within the U.S. Air Force to the
307th Bomb Wing at Barksdale AFB, where they remain today.
    The organizational changes listed above did not alter the location,
size, or use of the restricted areas from the current parameters.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 73 by updating the using agency name for restricted areas R-3801A,
R-3801B, and R-3801C, Camp Claiborne, LA. The name change is due to an
organizational transfer of restricted area using agency
responsibilities within the U.S. Air Force. This is an administrative
change that does not affect the boundaries, designated altitudes, or
activities conducted within the restricted areas; therefore, notice and
public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary.
    The FAA has determined that this action only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it modifies the technical descriptions of restricted areas to ensure
that accurate information is available to the flying public for the
Camp Claiborne, LA, area.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,
paragraph 311d. This airspace action is an administrative change to the
description of restricted areas R-3801A, R-3801B, and R-3801C to update
the using agency name. It does not alter the dimensions, altitudes,
time of designation, or use of the airspace; therefore, it is not
expected to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts,
and no extraordinary circumstances exists that warrant preparation of
an environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73

    Airspace, Prohibited areas, Restricted areas.

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 73, as follows:

PART 73--SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE

0
1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  73.38  [Amended]

0
2. Section 73.38 is amended as follows:
* * * * *

R-3801A Camp Claiborne, LA [Amended]

* * * * *
    By removing the words ``Using agency. U.S. Air Force, 917 Fighter
Wing, Barksdale AFB, LA,'' and inserting in their place ``Using agency.
U.S. Air Force, 307th Bomb Wing, Barksdale Air Force Base, LA.''

R-3801B Camp Claiborne, LA [Amended]

* * * * *
    By removing the words ``Using agency. U.S. Air Force, 917 Fighter
Wing, Barksdale AFB, LA,'' and inserting in their place ``Using agency.
U.S. Air Force, 307th Bomb Wing, Barksdale Air Force Base, LA.''

R-3801C Camp Claiborne, LA [Amended]

* * * * *
    By removing the words ``Using agency. U.S. Air Force, 917 Fighter
Wing, Barksdale AFB, LA,'' and inserting in their place ``Using agency.
U.S. Air Force, 307th Bomb Wing, Barksdale Air Force Base, LA.''
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 24, 2015.
Gary A. Norek,
Manager, Airspace Policy and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2015-04294 Filed 2-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 205 (Monday, October 24, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65721-65722]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27438]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0085; FRL-9482-6]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; Protection of Stratospheric
Ozone: Critical Use Exemption From the Phaseout of Methyl Bromide
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that an Information
Collection Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an
existing approved collection. The ICR, which is abstracted below,
describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated
burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before November 23,
2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2011-0085, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation
Docket, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC
20460, and (2) OMB by mail to: Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer
for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeremy Arling, Stratospheric
Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs (6205J),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 343-2338; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may also
visit the Ozone Depletion Web site of EPA's Stratospheric Protection
Division at http://www.epa.gov/ozone/strathome.html for further
information about EPA's Stratospheric Ozone Protection regulations, the
science of ozone layer depletion, and related topics.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On March 2, 2011 (76 FR 11447), EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received one comment during the
comment period, which is addressed in the ICR. Any additional comments
on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days of this
notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0085, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Air Docket in
the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC 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<PHONE_NUMBER>,
and the telephone number for Air Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, confidential business information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further information about the electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
    Title: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Critical Use Exemption
from the Phaseout of Methyl Bromide (Renewal).
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2031.06, OMB Control No. 2060-0482.
    ICR status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on October 31, 2011.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
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. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: EPA is seeking to renew this ICR, which allows EPA to
collect methyl bromide Critical Use Exemption (CUE) applications from
regulated entities on an annual basis, and which requires the
submission of data from regulated industries to the EPA and
recordkeeping of key documents to ensure compliance with the Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Protocol) and the
CAA.
    Entities applying for this exemption are asked to submit to EPA
applications with necessary data to evaluate the need for a critical
use exemption. This information collection is conducted to

meet U.S. obligations under Article 2H of the Montreal Protocol on
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Protocol). The information
collection request is required to obtain a benefit under Section
604(d)(6) of the CAA, added by Section 764 of the 1999 Omnibus
Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act (Pub. L.
105-277; October 21, 1998).
    Since 2002, entities have applied to EPA for a critical use
exemption that would allow for the continued production and import of
methyl bromide after the phaseout in January 2005. These exemptions are
for consumption only in those agricultural sectors that have
demonstrated that there are no technically or economically feasible
alternatives to methyl bromide. The applications are rigorously
assessed and analyzed by EPA staff, including experts from the Office
of Pesticide Programs. On an annual basis, EPA uses the data submitted
by end users to create a nomination of critical uses, which the U.S.
Government submits to the Protocol's Ozone Secretariat for review by an
international panel of experts and advisory bodies. These advisory
bodies include the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC)
and the Technical and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP). The uses
authorized internationally by the Parties to the Protocol are made
available in the U.S. on an annual basis.
    The applications will enable EPA to: (1) Maintain consistency with
the Protocol by supporting critical use nominations to the Parties to
the Protocol, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Decision IX/6 of the
Protocol; (2) ensure that critical use exemptions comply with Section
604(d)(6); and (3) provide EPA with necessary data to evaluate the
technical and economic feasibility of methyl bromide alternatives in
the circumstance of the specific use, as presented in an application
for a critical use exemption.
    The reported data will enable EPA to: (1) Ensure that critical use
exemptions comply with Section 604(d)(6); (2) maintain compliance with
the Protocol requirements for annual data submission on the production
of ozone depleting substances; and (3) analyze technical use data to
ensure that exemptions are used in accordance with requirements
included in the annual allocation rulemakings.
    EPA informs respondents that they may assert claims of business
confidentiality for any of the information they submit. Information
claimed to be confidential will be treated in accordance with the
procedures for handling information claimed as confidential under 40
CFR part 2, subpart b, and will be disclosed only if EPA determines
that the information is not entitled to confidential treatment. If no
claim of confidentiality is asserted when the information is received
by EPA, it may be made available to the public without further notice
to the respondents (40 CFR 2.203). Individual reporting data may be
claimed as sensitive and will be treated as confidential information in
accordance with procedures outlined in 40 CFR part 2.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1
hour per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; 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.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Producers, importers, distributors,
and custom applicators of methyl bromide, organizations, consortia, and
associations of methyl bromide users, as well as individual methyl
bromide users.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,919.
    Frequency of Response: Quarterly, Annually, Occasionally.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 3,258.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $988,840 in labor costs.
    Change in Estimates: There is a decrease of 1,660 hours in the
total estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of
Approved ICR Burdens. The primary reason for the decrease in burden
hours is a decrease in the number of applicants and a related decline
in the number of end users. Stakeholders are also more familiar with
the critical use exemption program and have already organized
associations to apply on behalf of multiple growers. Other reasons for
burden reduction include the encouragement of electronic submission of
applications and other data and frequent EPA communication with methyl
bromide stakeholders.

    Dated: October 18, 2011.
John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2011-27438 Filed 10-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 61 (Wednesday, March 30, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18414-18416]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06704]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-604, OMB Control No. 3235-0657]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Extension: Form N-MFP and
Rule 30b1-7

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget (``OMB'') for extension and approval.
    Section 30(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (``Investment
Company Act'') \1\ provides that ``[e]very registered investment
company shall file with the Commission . . . such information,
documents, and reports (other than financial statements), as the
Commission may require to keep reasonably current the information and
documents contained in the registration statement of such company. . .
.'' \2\ Rule 30b1-7 under the Investment Company Act, entitled
``Monthly Report for Money Market Funds,'' provides that every
registered investment company, or series thereof, that is regulated as
a money market funds under rule 2a-7 \3\ must file with the Commission
a monthly report of portfolio holdings on Form N-MFP \4\ no later than
the fifth business day of each month.\5\ Form N-

MFP sets forth the specific disclosure items that money market funds
must provide. Filers must submit this report electronically using the
Commission's electronic filing system (``EDGAR'') in Extensible Markup
Language (``XML'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq.
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 80a-29(b).
    \3\ 17 CFR 270.2a-7.
    \4\ 17 CFR 274.201.
    \5\ 17 CFR 270.30b1-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Compliance with rule 30b1-7 is mandatory for any fund that holds
itself out as a money market fund in reliance on rule 2a-7. Responses
to the disclosure requirements will not be kept confidential. 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.
    The following estimates of average burden hours and costs are made
solely for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act and are not derived
from a comprehensive or even representative survey or study of the cost
of Commission rules and forms.
    The Commission calculates there are currently 353 \6\ money market
funds that report information on Form N-MFP, with approximately 8 \7\
of them being new money market funds that are filing reports on Form N-
MFP for the first time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ This estimate is based on staff review of reports on Form N-
MFP filed with the Commission for the month ended December 31, 2021
and includes both feeder and non-feeder money market funds.
    \7\ This calculation is based on staff review of reports on Form
N-MFP filed with the Commission for 2019 (16 new funds), 2020 (5 new
funds) and 2021 (2 new funds). Averaging those numbers over three
years provides an estimate of 8 new funds per year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate that 35% of money market funds (or 124 money market
funds, broken down into 121 existing funds and 3 new funds) \8\ license
a software solution and file reports on Form N-MFP in house; we further
estimate that each fund that files reports on Form N-MFP in house
requires an average of approximately 47 burden hours to compile
(including review of the information), tag, and electronically file the
Form N-MFP for the first time and an average of approximately 13 burden
hours for subsequent filings.\9\ Therefore, we estimate the per fund
average annual hour burden is 156 hours \10\ for existing funds and 190
hours \11\ for new money market funds. Based on an estimate of 121
existing funds and 3 new funds each year, we estimate that filing
reports on Form N-MFP in house takes 19,446 hours and costs funds, in
aggregate, $6,319,950 per year.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The estimate is based on the following calculation: (353
money market funds x 35% = 124 money market funds. Of that amount,
we estimate that 3 are new money market funds (8 new money market
funds each year x 35% = 2.8 funds, rounded to 3). Therefore, 124
money market funds-3 new money market funds = 121 existing money
market funds.
    \9\ We understand that the required information is currently
maintained by money market funds pursuant to other regulatory
requirements or in the ordinary course of business. Accordingly, for
the purposes of our analysis, we do not ascribe any time to
producing the required information.
    \10\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: 12
filings per year x 13 burden hours per filing = 156 burden hours per
year.
    \11\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: (First
month's initial filing x 47 burden hours) + (11 subsequent monthly
filings x 13 burden hours per filing) = 190 burden hours per year.
    \12\ These estimates are based on the following calculations:
Existing funds: (156 hours x blended hourly rate of $325 for a
financial reporting manager ($318 per hour), senior accountant ($237
per hour), senior database administrator ($373 per hour), senior
portfolio manager ($360 per hour) and compliance manager ($339 per
hour)) = $44,772. The blended hourly rate was calculated as ($318 +
$237 + $373 + $360 + $339/5 = $325. There are 121 existing money
market funds that use in house solutions x 156 hours with an
internal time cost of $50,700 per fund = 18,876 hours with an
internal time cost of $6,134,700.
    New money market funds: (190 hours x blended hourly rate of $325
for a financial reporting manager ($318 per hour), senior accountant
($237 per hour), senior database administrator ($373 per hour),
senior portfolio manager ($360 per hour) and compliance manager
($339 per hour)) = $61,750. The blended hourly rate was calculated
as ($318 + $237 + $373 + $360 + $339/5 = $325. Three new money
market funds x 190 hours with an internal time cost of $61,750 per
fund = 570 hours with an internal time cost of $185,250.
    Aggregate annual hourly burden for all funds filing reports on
Form N-MFP in house: 18,876 hours + 570 hours = 19,446 hours.
    Aggregate annual costs for all funds filing reports on Form N-
MFP in house: $6,134,700 + $185,250 = $6,319,950.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate that 65% of money market funds (or 229 money market
funds, broken down into 224 existing funds and 5 new funds) \13\ retain
the services of a third party to provide data aggregation and
validation services as part of the preparation and filing of reports on
Form N-MFP on the fund's behalf; we further estimate that each fund
requires an average of approximately 26 burden hours to compile and
review the information with the service provider prior to
electronically filing the report for the first time and an average of
approximately 9 burden hours for subsequent filings. Therefore, we
estimate the per fund average annual hour burden is 108 hours \14\ for
existing funds and 125 hours \15\ for new money market funds. Based on
an estimate of 224 existing funds and 5 new funds each year, we
estimate that filing reports on Form N-MFP using a service provider
takes 24,817 hours and costs funds, in aggregate, $8,065,525 per
year.\16\ In sum, we estimate that filing reports on Form N-MFP imposes
a total annual hour burden of 44,263 hours,\17\ at an aggregate cost of
$14,385,475 on all money market funds.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The estimate is based on the following calculation: (353
money market funds x 65% = 229 money market funds. Of that amount,
we estimate that 5 are new money market funds (8 new money market
funds each year x 65% = 5.2 funds, rounded to 5). Therefore, 229
money market funds--5 new money market funds = 224 existing money
market funds.
    \14\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: 12
filings per year x 9 burden hours per filing = 108 burden hours per
year.
    \15\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: (First
month's initial filing x 26 burden hours) + (11 subsequent month
filings x 9 burden hours per filing) = 125 burden hours per year.
    \16\ These estimates are based on the following calculations:
existing funds: (108 hours x blended hourly rate of $325 for a
financial reporting manager ($318 per hour), senior accountant ($237
per hour), senior database administrator ($373 per hour), senior
portfolio manager ($360 per hour) and compliance manager ($339 per
hour)) = $35,000. The blended hourly rate was calculated as ($318 +
$237 + $373 + $360 + $339)/5 = $325. There are 224 existing money
market funds who use a third-party service provider x 108 hours with
an internal time cost of $35,100 per fund = 24,192 hours with an
internal time cost of $7,862,400.
    New money market funds: (125 hours x blended hourly rate of $325
for a financial reporting manager ($318 per hour), fund senior
accountant ($237 per hour), senior database administrator ($373 per
hour), senior portfolio manager ($360 per hour) and compliance
manager ($339 per hour)) = $40,625. The blended hourly rate was
calculated as ($318 + $237 + $373 + $360 + $339)/5 = $325. Five new
money market funds x 125 hours with an internal cost of $40,625 per
fund = 625 hours with an internal time cost of $203,125.
    Aggregate annual hourly burden for all funds filing reports on
Form N-MFP using a third party service provider: 24,192 6 hours +
625 hours = 24,817 hours.
    Aggregate annual costs for all funds filing reports on Form N-
MFP using a third party service provider: $7,862,400 + $203,125 =
$8,065,525.
    \17\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: 19,446
hours for filers licensing a software solution and filing in-house +
24,817 hours for filers using a third-party service provider =
44,263 hours in total.
    \18\ This estimate is based on the following calculation:
$6,319,950 (in-house filers) + $8,065,525 (filers using a service
provider) = $14,385,475.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Cost burden is the cost of goods and services purchased in
connection with complying with the collection of information
requirements of rule 30b1-7 and Form N-MFP. The cost burden does not
include the cost of the hour burden discussed above.
    Based on discussions with industry participants, we estimate that
money market funds that file reports on Form N-MFP in house license a
third-party software solution to assist in filing their reports at an
average cost of $3,900 per fund per year. In addition, we estimate that
money market funds that use a service provider to prepare and file
reports on Form N-MFP pay an average fee of $9,300 per fund per year.
In sum, we estimate that all money market funds

incur on average, in the aggregate, external annual costs of
$2,613,300.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: (124
money market funds (121 existing funds + 3 new funds) that file
reports on Form N-MFP in house x $3,900 per fund, per year) + (229
money market funds (224 existing funds + 5 new funds) that file
reports on Form N-MFP using a service provider x $9,300 per fund,
per year) = $2,613,300.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication by May 31, 2022.
    Please direct your written comments to David Bottom, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O John
Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549; or send an email to:
[email protected].

    Dated: March 25, 2022.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-06704 Filed 3-29-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P