[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 104 (Thursday, June 1, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25378-25379]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11255]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80777; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2017-30]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving a
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto, To Amend
Commentary .01 and Commentary .02 to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3)
To Provide for the Inclusion of Cash in an Index Underlying a Series of
Investment Company Units

May 25, 2017.

I. Introduction

    On March 29, 2017, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``NYSE Arca'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'' or ``Exchange Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ a
proposed rule change to amend Commentary .01 and Commentary .02 to NYSE
Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3) to provide for the inclusion of cash in an
index underlying a series of Investment Company Units. The proposed
rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on April
14, 2017.\4\ On May 10, 2017, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change.\5\ The Commission received no comments on the
proposed rule change. This order approves the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1 thereto.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80415 (April 10,
2017), 82 FR 18067.
    \5\ In Amendment No. 1, which amended and replaced the proposed
rule change in its entirety, the Exchange made a technical change to
the proposed rule text. Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change
is available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2017-30/nysearca201730-1749397-151677.pdf. Amendment No. 1 is not subject to
notice and comment because it is a technical amendment that does not
materially alter the described substance of the proposed rule change
or raise any novel regulatory issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    Commentary .01(a)(A), Commentary .01 (a)(B), and Commentary .02 to
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3) permit the Exchange to generically
list Investment Company Units (``Units'') that overlie an index or
portfolio of US Component Stocks,\6\ Non-US Component Stocks,\7\ US
Component Stocks and Non-US Component Stocks, and Fixed Income
Securities \8\ that meets specified criteria. While ``Investment
Companies,'' \9\ like mutual funds, may hold cash, currently, the
generic listing criteria of NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3) do not
contemplate the generic listing Units overlying an index or portfolio
with a cash component.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ``US Component Stock'' is defined in NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(3) as an equity security that is registered under Sections
12(b) or 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or an American
Depositary Receipt, the underlying equity security of which is
registered under Sections 12(b) or 12(g) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934.
    \7\ ``Non-US Component Stock'' is defined in NYSE Arca Equities
Rule 5.2(j)(3) as an equity security that is not registered under
Sections 12(b) or 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that is issued by an entity that (a) is not organized, domiciled or
incorporated in the United States, and (b) is an operating company
(including Real Estate Investment Trusts and income trusts, but
excluding investment trusts, unit trusts, mutual funds, and
derivatives).
    \8\ Commentary .02 to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3) defines
Fixed Income Securities as debt securities that are notes, bonds,
debentures or evidence of indebtedness that include, but are not
limited to, U.S. Department of Treasury securities, government-
sponsored entity securities, municipal securities, trust preferred
securities, supranational debt and debt of a foreign country or a
subdivision thereof.
    \9\ The term ``Investment Company'' is defined in NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend Commentary .01 and Commentary .02 to
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3) to permit the generic listing and
trading of Units overlying an index or portfolio of cash and: (1) US
Component Stocks; (2) Non-US Component Stocks; (3) US Component Stocks
and Non-US Component Stocks; and (4) Fixed Income Securities.
Additionally, the Exchange is not proposing to otherwise amend the
applicable generic listing criteria, except to specify that the
following generic listing criteria will not apply to the cash portion
of the index or portfolio:
     Under proposed Commentary .01(a)(A)(1) through (4) to NYSE
Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3), the percentage weighting requirements
would apply only to the US Component Stocks portion of the underlying
index or portfolio.
     Under proposed Commentary .01 (a)(B)(1) through (4) to
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3), the percentage weighting
requirements would not apply to the cash component of the underlying
index or portfolio.
     Under proposed Commentary .02(a)(2), (a)(4), and (a)(6) to
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3) the percentage weighting requirements
would apply only to the Fixed Income Securities portion of the
underlying index or portfolio.

The Exchange does not propose any limit to the weighting of cash in an
index or portfolio underlying a series of Units.\10\ The Commission
notes that, under a provision of its current rule, the Exchange may
generically list Units overlying a combination of indexes so long as
each index satisfies the generic listing criteria.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Amendment No. 1, supra note 5, at 6.
    \11\ See Commentary .03 to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities exchange.\12\ In particular, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ which requires, among other things,
that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that permitting the Exchange to generically
list Units that overlie an index or portfolio with a cash component may
enhance competition among generically listed Units, to the benefit of
investors and the marketplace. Additionally, the Commission believes
that the generic listing criteria referenced above, applicable only to
the non-cash portion(s) of the index or portfolio will neither dilute
the generic listing criteria nor render the indexes or portfolios
underlying generically listed Units more susceptible to
manipulation.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The Commission also notes that the Exchange represents that
it has in place surveillance procedures that are adequate to
properly monitor trading in Units in all trading sessions and to
deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and applicable federal
securities laws. See Amendment No. 1, supra note 5, at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment

No. 1 thereto, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \15\ and
the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act,\16\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2017-30),
as modified by Amendment No. 1 thereto, be, and it hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-11255 Filed 5-31-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR ECOS Survey of State Performance Measure July 27, 2004 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Compliance TABLE OF CONTENTS Part A 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 1( a) Title of the Information Collection 1( b) Short Characterization/ Abstract 2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection 2( b) Practical Utility/ Users of the Data 3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 3( a) Nonduplication 3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB 3( c) Consultations 3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Data Collection 3( e) General Guidelines 3( f) Confidentiality 3( g) Sensitive Questions 4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 4( a) Respondents/ SIC Codes 4( b) Information Requested 5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED: AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5( a) Agency Activities 5( b) Collection Methodology and Management 5( c) Small Entity Flexibility 5( d) Collection Schedule 6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden 6( b) Estimating Government Burden 6( c) Bottom Line Burden and Cost Table 6( d) Reasons for Change of Burden 6( e) Burden Statement Part A 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 1( a) Title of the Information Collection ICR: ECOS Survey of State Performance Measure ( EPA ICR Number 2143.01) OMB Control Number:

" ECOS Survey of State Performance Measure"

1( b) Short Characterization/ Abstract The survey in question asks state environmental commissioners to report on their contribution to enforcement and compliance assistance for 2000 2003. They are asked to refer to their own records and account for the number of inspections, reviews, complaints etc. that have taken shape during this time. They are also asked to give the number and type of mechanisms and fines applied and collected. It also questions if and how the states feel they have been effective using these methods. There is a section of the survey asking the states to rate how important and useful they feel the statistics and reports required by the EPA are in conveying the current conditions within their borders. Importantly, the survey also aims to capture information about state activity in outcome measurement. In particular, it asks states about their experiences with compliance rate measurement and with calculating the environmental benefits of enforcement actions and compliance assistance. The survey is designed to capture compliance rates and activities directly from state records. This will provide a means in which the states' efforts to promote the EPA's philosophy on enforcement and compliance can be more readily monitored. The responses to this collection of information are voluntary. 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 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. This survey will provide information that will assist in the creation of a report. This will show if there is a discrepancy in the data found in the states databases and EPA's database. In addition to providing the EPA with the information it needs to more successfully function in the way it was designed to, this survey is also keeping the states burden at a minimum. This is being done by the use of electronic responses.

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection The purpose of this collection is to identify by survey environmental compliance measures ( especially compliance rates measures) currently in existence and use by state governments. As part of the cooperative agreement with U. S. EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, the Environmental Council of States ( ECOS) will provide a report of the measures used which would be distributed to all States, use this collection to facilitate discussion groups, and ultimately produce a report based on the collection and the discussion groups detailing the agreed upon measures.

The data requested by these surveys is not currently in EPA's or ECOS's databases.

The Agency is permitted to collect the information under the following statutes:

The Clean Air Act. The Act refers to activities involving the discharge of hazardous air pollutants and criteria pollutants from emission sources. At § 114, the Agency may require any person who owns or operates any emission source to establish and maintain such records, ... make such reports, ... install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment or methods, ... sample such emissions, ... and provide such other information as he/ she may reasonably require. ( Note that no additional monitoring or sampling will be required by this ICR).

The Solid Waste Disposal Act. The Act refers to activities at companies that generate hazardous waste. At § 3007, the Agency is permitted to have access to and request records regarding hazardous waste generating activities.

The Clean Water Act. The Act refers to activities involving the discharge of materials into waters of the United States. At § 308, the Agency is permitted to review records to determine compliance with effluent limitations or treatment performance standards.

The information collected through this ICR will aid the Agency in achieving EPA's Strategic Plan goal of focusing on results rather than activities within organizational units to increase compliance and environmental stewardship. This goal was developed in response to the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act and is described in EPA's 2000 Strategic Plan, Goal 5, " Compliance and Environmental Stewardship.".

2( b) Practical Utility/ Users of the Data The main users of the data collected will be ECOS. ECOS will use the data firsthand to facilitate the outcome measures discussion groups and to create the report detailing the newly agreed upon outcome measures. However, as part of the agreed upon cooperative plan between ECOS and OECA, states and the EPA will benefit from the new agreed upon measures. These measures will allow for more concise and standardized reporting of activities.

3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 3( a) Nonduplication The information to be obtained under this ICR has not been collected by EPA or any other federal agency.

3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission On April 30, 2004, EPA published a pre ICR Federal Register Notice announcing its intent to submit an ICR to OMB regarding the ECOS Survey of State Performance Measure survey. Attachment A includes a copy of this Federal Register Notice. EPA and ECOS received comments from Shelley Metzenbaum of the Environmental Compliance Consortium, University of Maryland College Park.. The comments have been considered and responded to.

Below are survey sub titles, comments, and our responses to the comments:

II. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Agency Information Comment 1: Suggested formatting bullets and numbering. Response 1: Accepted and also in the revised survey combined State Name, State Code, and Agency Name into one question and created a drop down list in the web based survey to allow States to conveniently select their agency name from the list.

B. Respondent Contact Information Comment 2: Suggested formatting numbering. Response 2: Accepted.

III. ENFORCEMENT DATA A. Enforcement Statistics Comment 3: Suggested that the title " Enforcement Statistics" changed to " Compliance and Enforcement Statistics." Response 3: Accepted and in the revised survey reorganized this part into three sub parts: size of regulated universe, types of surveillance, and number of facility sites with violation.

Comment 4: Suggested that the survey ask once if state reports by calendar or fiscal year. Response 4: Accepted and in the revised web based survey created a simple choice question to allow States to choose calendar year or fiscal year.

Comment 5: Suggested that States report for the full year, not just a snap shot, and then allow States who are not able to do that to note prominently that they are providing a snap shot, not full year statistics. Response 5: Accepted and in the Part II of the revised survey states that the survey asks for a full year of the statistics.

Comment 6: Suggested that " Site/ Incidents/ Facilities" changed to " Facility Site" and also suggested all other terms to be as consistent as possible with data standards. Response 6: Accepted and reviewed all terms in the revised survey to make sure that they are consistent with data standards where they are available.

Comment 7: Suggested that " Compliance Inspection Type" and " Compliance Inspection" are repeated each other. Response 7: Accepted and in the revised survey created two questions: the number of compliance inspections and number of facility sites with violation. There are four types of compliance inspections according to data standards: Compliance Evaluation Inspection, Compliance Sampling Inspection, Reconnaissance or Screening Inspection, and Case Development Inspection. And there are two types of violations: Significant or High Priority Violation, and Other. The revised survey asks States to record the number of four types of compliance inspections and number of facility sites with two types of violations. If States cannot provide these numbers, they can only record the total number of compliance inspections and the total number of facility sites with violation.

Comment 8: Suggested that the survey in both Parts A and B ( about thirteen sub questions) ask about the number of facility sites where inspections, enforcement, etc. occur. Response 8: We will not be incorporating this suggestion into the revised survey. The compliance committee, advisors for the survey, indicated that this data is not readily available.

Comment 9: Suggested that the survey add a question whether or not state agency notifies regulated entities before conducting an on site inspection. Response 9: We will not be incorporating this suggestion into the revised survey because States sometimes notify facilities to assure that it is operating, has pertinent records, and etc and the question cannot be constructed to provide meaningful data.

B. Enforcement Mechanisms Comment 10: Suggested formatting numbering. Response 10: Accepted.

Comment 11: Suggested that the survey ask about the time ( average or duration) that it takes a facility to return to compliance as well as the method used to count or estimate return to compliance. Response 11: We will not be incorporating this suggestion into the revised survey. The compliance committee, advisors for the survey, indicated that this data is not readily available.

Comment 12: Suggested that the survey add one question on " Voluntary Compliance Agreement." Response 12: Accepted.

Comment 13: Suggested that the survey add one question on " compliance assistance provided to specific facility after violation found." Response 13: We will not be incorporating this suggestion into the revised survey. The compliance committee, advisors for the survey, indicated that this data is not readily available.

C. Penalties and Files Collected Comment 14: Suggested formatting numbering. Response 14: Accepted.

Comment 15: Suggested that the survey ask questions whether or not state agency tracks the effectiveness/ benefits of enforcement efforts on a case specific basis or on a program basis Response 15: Accepted and created two questions in the revised survey.

D. Compliance Rates Comment 16: Identified some typos; Response 16: Accepted.

Comment 17: Suggested that the survey ask States to describe their experiences with using a compliance rate measure and how they have used these data. Response 17: Accepted and created the question in the revised survey.

Comment 18: Suggested that the survey ask questions whether or not States report this compliance rate to the public and also explain what medium they use and how often they use. Response 18: Accepted and created the question in the revised survey.

E. State Perspectives on Enforcement Data Comment 19: Suggested that States select three to five from a list of choices. Response 19: We will not be incorporating this suggestion into the revised survey because three is an adequate response.

Comment 20: Suggested more choices be added to the list. Response 20: Accepted those that the US EPA or States EPA uses or suggests. We will not be incorporating those that the US EPA or States EPA does not use or suggest.

IV. COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE Comment 21: Suggested formatting numbering. Response 21: Accepted.

Comment 22: Suggested that the survey ask questions whether or not States compliance assistance activities include workbooks or other written material that describe regulatory obligations and how to comply. Response 22: Accepted and in the revised web based survey created a simple choice question to allow states to choose yes or no.

Comment 23: Suggested that if States compliance assistance activities include education seminars the survey also ask information about specific industrial sectors states serve. Response 23: We will not be incorporating this suggestion into the revised survey because this data is not readily available.

Comment 24: Suggested that the survey ask about loans and grants as well as revolving state loans. Response 24: Accepted and in the web based revised survey created a multiple choice question to allow states to choose.

Comment 25: Suggested that the survey first ask if States calculate the Environmental Benefits resulting from Compliance Assistance Activities and then asks the method they use and the benefits they calculate. Response 25: Accepted and in the revised survey created two questions. Comment 26: Suggested that the survey ask States to describe their experiences with using an environmental benefit measure and how they have used these data. Response 26: Accepted and in the revised survey created the question.

Comment 27: Suggested that the survey ask questions whether or not States report this rate to the public and also explain what medium they use and how often they use. Response 27: Accepted and in the revised survey created the question.

EPA and ECOS also received comments from the state of Massachusetts after the comment deadline. These comments were reviewed and responded to.

Below are comments, and our responses to the comments:

Comment 1: Page 1. The descriptions of program areas currently include both federally delegated programs as well as state only programs. This should be noted, as data standards and practices for state only programs will have no federal reporting component and therefore no consistent data standards across states. Response 1: Accepted and reflected in the revised survey.

Comment 2: Section III A. Enforcement Statistics: The definition of " sites/ incidents/ facilities" has no date limitation. Massachusetts advocates narrowing this question to mean facilities/ sites/ incidents being regulated as " open/ active" for the year in question. This would eliminate the facilities that were once regulated, are now closed and no longer in business or are no longer responsible for the regulated activity ( eliminated discharges for example) including facilities that reduced the levels of their activities to below regulatory thresholds.

Response 2: We recognize that the question is not clearly documented and thus in the revised survey we ask total number of facility sites regulated During the Reporting Period. If a regulated facility site was open/ active in any single day during the reporting period, it should be counted.

Comment 3: Section IIIA, page 4 5. The subcategories listed of the types of inspections are something Mass. DEP does not currently track. For example, we do not track whether a sample was taken during an inspection to count it as either a Compliance Sampling Inspection or a Compliance Evaluation Inspection. In Massachusetts, activities that are not obviously in person " on site" inspections are counted as inspections for our annual compliance and enforcement accomplishment report.

Response 3: We recognize that the question is not clearly documented and thus in the revised survey we clarify that if States do not know the number of specific compliance inspections they can only record the total number of compliance inspections.

Comment 4: Section III A, page 4. Enforcement Statistics Section: Massachusetts tracks activity categories and events by our state fiscal year ( July 1 to June 30). The federal fiscal year covers a different time period ( Oct 1 to Sept 30). There should be one reporting period chosen so comparisons are possible state to state.

Response 4: We will not be incorporating this suggestion into the revised survey because we will not planning to compare States. The survey does let States choose either calendar year or fiscal year as their reporting period and also asks States to specify the start and end dates including the month and day if they use fiscal year to report data.

Comment 5: Page 5 6. We do not have complete information on the number of self disclosed violations, or the number of violations self disclosed for which the entity also seeks penalty relief under our self audit policy. We are designing a case management system that will include this component but it is not yet able to compile statewide numbers.

Response 5: If you do not have complete information in such a question, please skip it or just explain in " Comments."

Comment 6: Page 6. We do not have complete data on the number of complaints received, or the number of complaints for which some compliance monitoring action was taken. Perhaps a definition of " compliance monitoring action" would also be helpful, and might include referrals to other regulatory boards, investigations of records, or other information as well as on site inspections.

Response 6: If you do not have complete information in such a question, please skip it or just explain in " Comments."

Comment 7: Page 6. The definition of " Compliance Monitoring Inspection" seems potentially duplicative of Compliance Evaluation Inspections, Compliance Sampling Inspections and Case Development Inspections. See our comment above on the subcategories of inspections. Should this include report reviews, of which Massachusetts completes thousands per year?

Response 7: Accepted and in the revised survey created two seperate questions.

Comment 8: Page 6. The survey also requests a number of sites/ facilities/ incidents in " significant" non compliance. Will you leave the determination of significance to each responding state? Guidance in this area would be helpful to gather data that would have the same meaning from state to state.

Response 8: Accepted and in the revised survey provided the standard definition of Significant or High Priority Violation  the violation meets applicable programmatic criteria for those terms, set by the U. S. EPA.

Comment 9: Off Site Record Review Type   Page 5. Should this section asking for numbers of Self Policing Policy Submissions include disclosures that do not meet all the terms of the selfaudits self policing policy? Response 9: No. There is no data standard for this category. If you think that there should be a data standard, please raise this question to the Environmental Data Standard Council ( EDSC). Tom Lamberson is the State Co chair and can be reached at 402 471 4235 or email tom. lamberson@ NDEQ. State. NE. US. Given that you raised a number of questions on this issue, you may also want to look at the data standard on www. envdatastandards. net.

Comment 10: Section III B page 7. We do not currently count oral notifications of violations, nor are there plans to include this item for C/ E tracking at this time. What is the value of this measure on a national level?

Response 10: If you do not have complete information in such a question, please skip it. In our first Enforcement and Compliance Survey, we found that Oral notifications of violations are one of most important informal enforcement mechanisms adopted by States. A copy of this section is attached.

Comment 11: Page 7. Our field citations could involve only Notice of the Violations ( Notice of Noncompliance) but could also include an assessment of a civil penalty. This definitional concept includes a penalty component. Is there value in adding a separate category of Notices of Violation issued in the field without a penalty component? This would be similar to the existing category " written notice of violation"   but would separate out those issued in the field ( Field Notices of Noncompliance) from those letters ( Notices of Noncompliance) mailed from the office.

Response 11: We will not be incorporating this question into the revised survey because there is no data standard for it. Again, if you think there should be data standard, please raise it to the EDSC.

Comment 12: It may be useful to add a category to this section ( section III B   Enforcement mechanisms) of administrative penalties assessed ( in dollars). This information is compiled later in Section III D. Note there is no section III C.

Response 12: In the revised survey created the question about administrative penalties assessed and corrected the numbering problem.

Comment 13: This section III B requests estimates of the " percentage of each enforcement mechanism [ that] results in compliance". This is not a measurement that we track by document or mechanism used. It is important to keep in mind the time value of return to compliance period   and the length of time that some mechanisms allow by their own terms for returning to compliance.

Response 13: If you do not have complete information in such a question, please skip it.

Comment 14: Page 7. Letter to regulated Entity: MA DEP does send out compliance letters after inspection visits if a company does not have any noticed violations. Also, MA DEP sends out Return to Compliance Letters if a company has completed all the performed actions required and cited in an enforcement document. Response 14: We will not be incorporating this question into the revised survey because we only raise questions related to data standards. Compliance letter is not included in data standards. Again, if you think there should be data standard, please raise it to the EDSC.

Comment 15: Page 8. All of our " Voluntary Compliance Agreements" invoke the agency's legal enforcement authority. They are enforceable judicially as contracts, as well as through assessment of civil administrative and or judicial penalties. Occasionally we contractually bind an entity to go beyond compliance or perform activities not required   and these agreements are entirely voluntary on the part of the regulated entity.

Response 15: We will not be incorporating this question into the revised survey because there is no data standard for it. Again, if you think there should be data standard, please raise it to the EDSC.

Comment 16: Page 9 10 Judicial Referrals are defined to mean formal requests to another entity to undertake enforcement action. Not all such requests ( formal or informal) are acted upon. Should this category be narrowed at least for some enforcement entities to cases accepted by those entities for prosecution? It might also be helpful to allow states to specify the different administrative regulatory authorities to which referrals are made for example, state licensing boards, other state agencies, and local permitting authorities. Not all such referrals are for judicial sanctions.

Response 16: We will not be incorporating this question into the revised survey because there is no data standard for it. Again, if you think there should be data standard, please raise it to the EDSC.

Comment 17: Section III D Page 11. The survey asks for the amount of fines collected   that is   paid, not the value of fines assessed. We would advocate changing this to report fines assessed.

Response 17: See answer to question 12.

Comment 18: Page 11. For Supplement Environmental Projects, we presume the value requested is the estimated value of the Project, not the penalty mitigation allowed.

Response 18: Yes, you are correct and we clarify it in the revised survey.

Comment 19: Page 11. Should there be a similar question regarding the estimated value of an Environmental Management System that is agreed to be developed and implemented in the context of an enforcement action?

Response 19: This is a good idea, but we will not add this question in this survey since currently we do not have sufficient information to address this subject.

Comment 20: Page 11. This penalties and fines collected chart does not separate criminal fines, or victim compensation payment or other restitution obtained as a result of a criminal prosecution. Response 20: Accepted and in the revised survey we created a question on criminal fines.

Comment 21: Section III E. Compliance Rates. Massachusetts has determined that there are significant data limitations and caveats that should be explained as part of any compliance rate calculation. For example, in a sector where 95% of the facilities subject to regulation are not registered or permitted (" in the system") you can nevertheless have a very high compliance rate for those who are in the system. Distinguishing between kinds of noncompliance is also very important in reporting these results. Recordkeeping violations can be very different in importance and environmental impact from violations that have direct and negative impacts on the environment.

Mass. DEP has developed some generic language and principles regarding a report of compliance rates as follows:

A. All DEP compliance rate statistics should be accompanied verbally or in writing with the qualifying phrase " based on available data".

B. When compliance rates appear in print, the phrase " based on available data" will be followed by a footnote or asterisk that elaborates. The footnote will read: " Compliance data should be interpreted in light of the following: [ data source]; [ universe capture]; [ data accuracy / completeness]." Programs will develop the specific inserts for their data.

Cross state tracking of compliance rates   even within federal programs   is probably premature given the lack of a consistent methodology for their calculation. It may be more useful at this time to gather information on existing principles and current methodologies in calculating rates or outcome measures than in publishing comparisons of compliance rates from different sectors across different states.

Response 21: Thank you for sharing this. One purposes of the survey is to gather more information on this issue. The second part of this project will be a focus group that is specifically looking into this issue. We will share this information with them.

Comment 22: Section III F Page 12. This information is described as different ways to " demonstrate the extent of your enforcement efforts". Instead of the " extent" or scope of the states' efforts, we believe the goal should be to accurately describe the effectiveness or impact of enforcement actions. This phrase is repeated throughout this section.

Response 22: Accepted in the revised survey.

Comment 23: Page 12. Consider adding another option to the chart of " Improved Environmental Indicators"   of real world measures of environmental improvements effected through enforcement. These might be very targeted by programmatic emphasis and environmental needs.

Response 23: Currently we do not have sufficient information to address this subject. There will be a separate effort to look at it during the focus group to discuss performance measures. Comment 24: Page 12. Should there be a definition or detail provided of " case" or " compliance rate" to assist in evaluating the " number of cases" or " compliance rate" measure? Similarly, a definition of " informal enforcement actions" would be helpful.

Response 24: We agree that these definitions would be helpful but there is no standard definition which States would agree with each other. Again, if you think there should be data standard, please raise it to the EDSC.

3( c) Consultations The following people were consulted to determine estimates of burden and to get a baseline for the kind of questions that should be included in the survey. Their responses were helpful in determining the amount of time a state would use to answer the survey questions. In a more general sense, these consultations gave ECOS a better idea how to formulate the survey to get at the information of interest. Their responses also allowed ECOS to avoid duplicative questions.

South Carolina DHEC  Robin Stephens, Asst. to the Deputy Commissioner  stephers@ dhec. sc. gov Oklahoma DEP, Steve Thompson, Commissioner , Steve. Thompson@ deq. state. ok. us Wyoming DEQ, John Corra, Commissioner , jcorra@ state. wy. gov New Jersey DEP, Marybeth Brenner , marybeth. brenner@ dep. state. nj. us 3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Data Collection The survey and site visit program for the ECOS Survey of State Measures is a one time data gathering effort.

3( e) General Guidelines This information collection is consistent with OMB guidelines contained in 5 CFR 1320.5( d)( 2).

3( f) Confidentiality EPA does not expect any confidentiality issues to present from the ECOS Survey of State Measures. None of the information requested is confidential.

3( g) Sensitive Questions The survey in this ICR do not contain any sensitive questions.

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 4( a) Respondents and SIC Codes The respondents for this ICR will be the following:

Approximately 49 of the 50 states.

4( b) Information Requested The ECOS survey requests information to update the information on the contribution of State enforcement activities to the federally delegated programs and refine information on state compliance assistance programs.

The survey will compile information on the state's enforcement statistics, enforcement mechanisms, penalties and fines collected, compliance rates, and state perspectives on enforcement data. The survey is attached.

4( c) Respondent Activities Mail survey respondent activities include reviewing the mailed survey instructions and completing the mail survey.

5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED: AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5( a) Agency Activities The Environmental Council of the States ( ECOS) is the national non profit, non partisan association of state and territorial environmental commissioners. One of the tasks ECOS is undertaking is to send a questionnaire to their own members regarding an update of their enforcement and compliance assistance programs and activities.

ECOS will bare the burden for conducting the survey and updating their programs, there are no EPA agency activities associated with this ICR.

5( b) Collection Methodology and Management A web based survey will be hosted in a protected web server. Every State and territory can use their own password to assess and fill out the survey. Survey responses will also be stored in a protection location. ECOS staff will contact ( by e mails and phone calls) with States that do no respond.

5( c) Small Entity Flexibility N. A.  The survey will only be completed by States and territories.

5( d) Collection Schedule The survey will be posted within two weeks of ICR approval by OMB. States will then have 8 to 10 weeks to complete and submit their surveys.

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden and Costs The estimated total hour burden for response is 98 hours. For each survey, we estimate one hour of management time will be needed to answer the survey questions, and one hour of clerical time will be needed to fill out the survey and respond. This burden hour estimate translates to a cost of $ 91.91 per entity that voluntarily completes the survey resulting in the total of $ 4503.59. This number is derived based on labor rates obtained from the United States of Commerce, Bureau of Labor Statistics, December 2003, State and local government, by occupational and industry group. The total compensation figure of $ 34.21/ hour was used for the management portion of the survey and the compensation figure of $ 23.23/ hour was used for the clerical portion. These numbers were then multiplied by 1.6 to account for overhead. There is no recurring respondent burden associated with this ICR. No capital or operations and maintenance costs are incurred by respondents under this ICR.

Category Total Labor Hours Total Costs ($)

State worker management burden 49 $ 2682.26 State worker clerical burden 49 $ 1821.33 Total 98 $ 4503.59 6( b) Estimating Agency Burden Since the survey will be completed and conducted by ECOS, there is no estimated Agency burden.

6( c) Bottom Line Burden and Cost Since ECOS will be completing and conducting the survey, the bottom line burden and cost is simply the $ 4503.59 of respondent costs detailed in section 6( a).

Table 3. Summary of Burden and Costs to Respondents and EPA Category Total Labor Hours Total Costs ($)

Initial Respondent Burden 98 $ 4503.59 Initial Agency Burden 0 0 Initial Contractor Burden 0 0 Total 98 $ 4503.59 6( d) Reasons for Changes in Burden Since this is a new information collection, there is no change in burden for this collection.

6( e) Burden Statement The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average two 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; 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 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. OECA 2004 0023, which is available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is ( 202) 566 1744, and the telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center is ( 202) 566 1752. 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. ( OECA 2004 0023) and EPA ICR number 2143.01. Attachment A ICR First Federal Register Notice ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY OECA 2004 0023   Environmental Council of the States ( ECOS) Survey of State Performance Measurements Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request; ECOS Survey of State Performance Measures, EPA ICR Number 2143.01.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act ( 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq.),

this document announces that EPA is planning to submit a proposed Information Collection Request ( ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB). This is a request for a new collection. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before [ INSERT DATE 60 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number OECA 2004

0023, to EPA online using EDOCKET ( our preferred method), by email to intranet. epa. gov/ edocket , or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynn Vendinello, Office of Compliance, mail code 2222a, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: ( 202) 564 7066; fax number: ( 202) 564 0031; email address:

vendinello. lynn@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID number OECA 2004 0023, which is available for public viewing at the OECA Docket 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 OECA Docket is ( 202) 566 1514 . An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. Use EDOCKET to obtain a copy of the draft collection of information, 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.

Any comments related to this ICR should be submitted to EPA within 60 days of this notice. EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in EDOCKET as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in EDOCKET. The entire printed comment,

including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket. Although identified as an item in the official docket, information claimed as CBI, or whose disclosure is otherwise restricted by statute, is not included in the official public docket,

and will not be available for public viewing in EDOCKET. For further information about the electronic docket, see EPA's Federal Register notice describing the electronic docket at 67 FR 38102 ( May 31, 2002), or go to www. epa. gov./ edocket.

Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are the state environmental commissioners.

Title: ECOS Survey of State Performance Measures Abstract: The survey in question asks state environmental commissioners to report on their contribution to enforcement and compliance assistance for 2000 2003. They are asked to refer to their own records and account for the number of inspections, reviews, complaints etc. that have taken shape during this time. They are also asked to give the number and type of mechanisms and fines applied and collected. It also questions if and how the states feel they have been effective using these methods. There is a section of the survey asking the states to rate how important and useful they feel the statistics and reports required by the EPA are in conveying the current conditions within their borders. Importantly, the survey also aims to capture information about state activity in outcome measurement. In particular, it asks states about their experiences with compliance rate measurement and with calculating the environmental benefits of enforcement actions and compliance assistance. The survey is designed to capture compliance rates and activities directly from state records. This will provide a means in which the states' efforts to promote the EPA's philosophy on enforcement and compliance can be more readily monitored.

The responses to this collection of information are voluntary. The information obtained by this survey is completely confidential unless a state wants their information to be publicized. 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 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. This survey will provide information that will assist in the creation of a report. This will show if there is a discrepancy in the data found in the states databases and EPA's database. In addition to providing the EPA with the information it needs to more successfully function in the way it was designed to, this survey is also keeping the states burden at a minimum. This is being done by the use of electronic responses.

The EPA would like to solicit comments to:

( i) evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

( ii) evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

( iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ( iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic,

mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e. g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Burden Statement: The survey will be distributed to one representative from each state.

An estimated 49 voluntary responses will be retrieved. EPA estimates that participating entities may need to spend between one to two hours completing this survey. A total of 98 hours may be spent to provide EPA and ECOS with this data. This burden hour estimate translates to a cost of $ 75/ 39 per entity that voluntarily completes the survey resulting in the total of $ 3,694.21 ( based on labor rates obtained from the United States of Commerce, Bureau of Labor Statistics,

December 2003, State and local government, by occupational and industry group). There should be no additional capital or other non labor costs.

Affected Entities: 50 Estimated Number of Respondents: 49 Frequency of Response: one time Estimated Total Hour Burden: 98 hours Estimated Total Capital and Other Non labor Costs: $ 0 Estimated Total Labor Costs: $ 3,694.21 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.

Dated: ________________

______________________ Michael M. Stahl Office Director Office of Compliance, OECA Attachment B ECOS Survey of State Measures OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx Survey Instrument I. OVERVIEW This is the Environmental Council of the States's ( ECOS) second survey of State Enforcement and Compliance Assistance Data ( The first survey was conducted in 2000 and collected data for the years 1995 to 1999).

The primary purpose of this survey is to:

Present as a complete and accurate picture of what States are doing to enforce environmental laws and help people comply with them for the period 2000 to 2003;

Refine information on State compliance assistance programs.

The Enforcement and Compliance section of the survey instrument essentially replicates the questions used in the 2000 survey, but uses standard terms and definitions ( collaboratively developed by States and the U. S. EPA in 2001), where they are available.

The secondary purpose of the survey is to have States begin using the data standards as a way of exchanging information and communicating in a common language.

The mapping or cross walking of State data to data standards is the first step in completing the survey;

This is also the first step in using the technical tools to share data on the Environmental Information Exchange Network ( in web based survey the website link will be added here).

ECOS will publish a final report from the results of this survey effort after States have reviewed their data and a draft report. ECOS will provide a copy of the final report to States and the U. S. EPA and post it on the ECOS web site.

Survey Design and Schedule:

ECOS recognizes that not all States collect and keep data in the same way. Many states keep compliance and enforcement data in program specific databases ( e. g. air) and a few have integrated systems that provide summary of all state actions. Some states have multi media compliance assistance programs, some don not have them at all. ECOS also recognizes that States must expend significant time and efforts to complete this survey. Therefore, ECOS has designed a survey instrument that:

Allows a State to submit:

' One form if it is submitting consolidated data for all programs; or ' Separate forms if it is submittiing data for an individal program ( e. g., air, drinking water, surface and groundwater, hazardous waste, etc.)

Provides flexibiltiy for each response that allows a State to submit data for:

' Enforcement and Compliance Data Only ' Compliance Assistance Data Only ' Both

Provides flexibilty within individual questions that allow States to submit summary or detailed data.

ECOS has also designed a schedule that provides flexibility for a State to respond in phases ( These Timeframes are not final. Final timeframes will be based on the result of pilot submissions): OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx

Phase I   States submitting separtate forms for air, drinking water, surface and groundwater, and hazardous waste programs   Due 5 weeks after the States have the final survey.

Phase II   States submitting a single form for all its programs   Due 7 weeks after the States have the final survey.

Phase III   States submitting separate forms for solid waste, remediation, underground storage tanks, pollution prevention, and other programs   Due 8 weeks after the States have the final survey.

BURDEN The public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average two per response. Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( 2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D. C. 20460. Include the OMB control number in any correspondence. Do not send the completed survey to this address. OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx II. GENERAL INFORMATION Please answer all questions in this section.

A. Agency Name Please identify your agency name from the list below ( in web based survey it is a dropdown box):

 AK DEC  AL DEM  AR DEQ  AZ DEQ  CA EPA  CO DPHE  CT DEP  DE DNREC  FL DEP  GA DNR  HI DH  IA DNR  ID DEQ  IL EPA  IN DEM  KS DHE  LA DEQ  MA DEP  MD DE  ME DEP  MI DEQ  MN PCA  MO DNR  MS DEQ  MT DEQ  NC DENR  ND EHS  NE DEQ  NH DES  NJ DEP  NM ED  NV DEP  NY DEC  OH EPA  OK DEQ  OR DEQ  PA DEP  PR EQB  RI DEM  SC DHEC  SD DENR  TN DEC  TX CEQ  UT DEQ  VA DEQ  VT ANR OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx  WA DE  WI DNR  WV DEP  WY DEQ B. Respondent Contact Information Please provide at least one respondent's contact information ( up to three):

Name Respondent 1 ___________________________________ Respondent 2 ___________________________________ Respondent 3 ___________________________________

Telephone # Respondent 1 ___________________________________ Respondent 2 ___________________________________ Respondent 3 ___________________________________

Fax # Respondent 1 ___________________________________ Respondent 2 ___________________________________ Respondent 3 ___________________________________

Email Respondent 1 ___________________________________ Respondent 2 ___________________________________ Respondent 3 ___________________________________

C. Reporting Time Period Please choose either calendar year or fiscal year that your program uses to record a full year of the enforcement statistics. If your office compiles fiscal year figures, please indicate the start and end dates, including the month and day.

 Calendar Year  Fiscal Year ( specify) ___________________________________

D. Environmental Program or Interest The survey is interested in the following Environmental Program or Interest, including both federally delegated programs and state only programs:

A. Air  programs that regulate or monitor air emissions from area, stationary, and mobile sources, as required by the Clean Air Act. B. Drinking water  environmental programs that protect the quality of drinking water in the United States, as required by the Safe Drinking Water act. C. Surface and ground water  environmental programs designed to ( 1) regulate discharges of pollutants to waters of the United States, as required by the Clean Water Act; or ( 2) improve the quality of, and seek the protection of lakes, rivers, and streams; or ( 3) improve the quality of coastal and marine ecosystems and protect beaches, coastal, and ocean resources from pollution; or ( 4) protect ground water. D. Hazardous waste  environmental programs that regulate hazardous waste, including the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste, as required by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA). OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx E. Solid waste  environmental programs that regulate solid wastes ( e. g., compost sites, landfills, and transfer stations). F. Remediation  environmental programs aimed at cleaning up uncontrolled or abandoned places where hazardous waste is located, possibly affecting local ecosystems or people. G. Underground storage tanks  environmental programs that regulate or monitor underground storage tanks. H. Pollution prevention  an environmental protection approach that reduces pollution at the source through regulatory and non regulatory programs. J. Other  this category includes all programs or interests that are not included above.

D. What Environmental Program or Interest you are reporting? ( please choose only one)

All Programs  All state enforcement, compliance and complance assistance activities Individal Program  Air  Drinking Water  Surface and Ground Water  Hazardous Waste  Remediation  Underground Storage Tanks  Pollution Prevention  Other ( Please specify) ___________________________________

E. Are you reporting Enforcement and Compliance Data, Compliance Assistance Data, or both? ( please choose only one)

 Enforcement and Compliance Data only  Compliance Assistance Data only  Both ( Note: In web based survey, if states choose " Compliance Assistance Data Only" in the above question, they will skip part III and continue with part IV) OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx III. ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE DATA INSTRUCTION: This section contains 7 sets of questions from A to G on the following topics: size of regulated universe, types of surveillance, number of facility sites with violations, enforcement mechanisms, compliance rates, penalties and fines collected, states' perspectives on enforcement data.

Questions in this section use the Environmental Data Standard Council ( EDSC) data standards ( TERMS and DEFINITIONS) ( in web based survey the link for data standards will be added here). Please READ and USE the DEFINTIONS to guide your response since your TERM may differ from the EDSC data standard.

IIIA. SIZE OF THE REGULATED UNIVERSE A. Total Number of Facility Sites Regulated During the Reporting Period TERM: Facility Sites DEFINITION: A place where regulatory activities of interest to the agency occur or have occurred in the past.

Year 2000 Total Number ___________________________________

Year 2001 Total Number ___________________________________

Year 2002 Total Number ___________________________________

Year 2003 Total Number ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the space below to comment or explain your response if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx IIIB. TYPES OF SURVEILLANCE 1). Number of Compliance Inspections TERM: Compliance Inspection DEFINITION: A visit to a facility or site for the purpose of gathering information to determine compliance including direct observations of facility operations. The types of compliance inspection include Compliance Evaluation Inspection, Compliance Sampling Inspection, Reconnaissance or Screening Inspection, and Case Development Inspection.

TERM: Compliance Evaluation Inspection DEFINITION: An inspection designed to determine compliance with legal requirements, which does not involve sampling.

TERM: Compliance Sampling Inspection DEFINITION: An inspection designed to determine compliance with applicable statutes and regulations, which involves collection of physical samples of air, water, waste, etc.

TERM: Reconnaissance or Screening Inspection DEFINITION: An abbreviated, initial inspection designed to obtain a preliminary overview of a facility's compliance program and status.

TERM: Case Development Inspection DEFINITION: An inspection designed to collect specific information to support an ongoing or planned enforcement action.

INSTRUCTION: If you do not keep data on the above four types of specific compliance inspection, please only record the total number of compliance inspections.

Year 2000 Compliance Evaluation Inspection ___________________________________ Compliance Sampling Inspection ___________________________________ Reconnaissance or Screening Inspection ___________________________________ Case Development Inspection ___________________________________ Total ___________________________________

Year 2001 Compliance Evaluation Inspection ___________________________________ Compliance Sampling Inspection ___________________________________ Reconnaissance or Screening Inspection ___________________________________ Case Development Inspection ___________________________________ Total ___________________________________

Year 2002 Compliance Evaluation Inspection ___________________________________ Compliance Sampling Inspection ___________________________________ Reconnaissance or Screening Inspection ___________________________________ Case Development Inspection ___________________________________ Total ___________________________________

Year 2003 Compliance Evaluation Inspection ___________________________________ Compliance Sampling Inspection ___________________________________ Reconnaissance or Screening Inspection ___________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx Case Development Inspection ___________________________________ Total ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ 2). Number of Off Site Record Reviews ( e. g. evaluations or assessments)

TERM: Off Site Record Review DEFINITION: A review of records, conducted at the government agency's offices, for the purpose of reviewing information to determine compliance of a regulated entity. The types of off site record review include Required, Self Policing Policy Submission, and Voluntary offsite record reviews.

TERM: Required Off Site Record Review DEFINITION: The regulated entity was legally required to submit the records.

TERM: Self Policing Policy Submissions DEFINITION: The records reviewed were self reported information submitted by a regulated entity under EPA's self policing policies ( i. e., the U. S EPA's Audit Policy or Small Business Compliance Policy) or under State, Tribal, or Local analogs)

TERM: Voluntary Off Site Record Review DEFINITION: The records were self reported information submitted voluntarily by a regulated entity, but not pursuant to the U. S. EPA's self policing policies or State, Tribal, or Local analogs.

INSTRUCTION: If you do not keep data on the above three types of reviews, please only record the total number of Off Site Record Reviews.

Year 2000 Required Off Site Record Review ___________________________________ Self Policing Policy Submissions ___________________________________ Voluntary Off Site Record Review ___________________________________ Total ___________________________________

Year 2001 Required Off Site Record Review ___________________________________ Self Policing Policy Submissions ___________________________________ Voluntary Off Site Record Review ___________________________________ Total ___________________________________

Year 2002 Required Off Site Record Review ___________________________________ Self Policing Policy Submissions ___________________________________ Voluntary Off Site Record Review ___________________________________ Total ___________________________________

Year 2003 Required Off Site Record Review ___________________________________ Self Policing Policy Submissions ___________________________________ Voluntary Off Site Record Review ___________________________________ Total ___________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx 3). Number of Citizens' Complaints Received TERM: Citizen Complaint DEFINITION: Includes tips or other information received from individuals, community groups, environmental groups, other facilities or regulated entities, etc.

Year 2000 Total Number ___________________________________

Year 2001 Total Number ___________________________________

Year 2002 Total Number ___________________________________

Year 2003 Total Number ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx IIIC. NUMBER OF FACILITY SITES WITH VIOLATIONS TERM: Violation DEFINITION: Noncompliance with one or more legally enforceable obligations by a regulated entity, as determined by a responsible authority. The types of violation include Significant or High Priority Violation and Other Violation.

TERM: Significant or High Priority Violation DEFINITION: The violation meets applicable programmatic criteria for those terms, set by the U. S. EPA.

TERM: Other Violation DEFINITION: The violation does not meet applicable programmatic criteria for " Significant" or " High Priority" violations.

INSTRUCTION: If you do not keep data on the above two types of violations, please only record the total number of facility sites with violations.

Year 2000 Significant or High Priority Violations ___________________________________ Other Violations ___________________________________ Total ___________________________________

Year 2001 Significant or High Priority Violations ___________________________________ Other Violations ___________________________________ Total ___________________________________

Year 2002 Significant or High Priority Violations ___________________________________ Other Violations ___________________________________ Total ___________________________________

Year 2003 Significant or High Priority Violations ___________________________________ Other Violations ___________________________________ Total ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx IIID. ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS Instruction: Please document the number of times the listed enforcement mechanisms below were applied to companies and/ or individuals violating the regulations enforced for this environmental program or interest, AND report or estimate the percentage of times that each enforcement mechanism resulted in compliance.

1). Oral Notification of Violation DEFINITION: An oral notification to the regulated entity of violation( s) of applicable laws, where no further action is contemplated assuming the entity achieves compliance in a timely manner.

Year 2000 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2001 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2002 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2003 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

2). Field Citation DEFINITION: A legal instrument issued by an inspector in the field; it provides the Respondent a chance to certify a return to compliance and pay a reduced penalty, without further discussion with the Regulatory Authority and without further litigation.

Year 2000 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2001 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2002 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2003 Number ___________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx Percentage ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

3). Letter to Regulated Entity DEFINITION: A written notification to the regulated entity of violation( s) of applicable laws, such as a warning letter, where no further action is contemplated, assuming the entity timely achieves compliance.

Year 2000 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2001 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2002 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2003 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

4). Voluntary Compliance Agreement DEFINITION: A consent agreement in which a regulated entity agrees to come into compliance, but which does not invoke the legal enforcement authority of the government. i. e., the agreement is enforceable only as a contract.

Year 2000 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2001 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2002 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx Year 2003 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

5). Written Notice of Violation DEFINITION: A written notice sent to a regulated entity, initiating the enforcement process by informing the entity of violation( s) of the applicable law( s), and requesting that the regulated entity take action to come into compliance, with the expectation of further follow up action by the regulatory agency.

Year 2000 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2001 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2002 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2003 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

6). Complaint/ Proposed Order DEFINITION: A legal instrument that formally initiates a " two step" legal procedure ( in which the Respondent has the right to a specified further process such as a hearing or trial), the objective of which is to secure an independently enforceable Final Order. This type of Enforcement Action can be either administrative or judicial.

Year 2000 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2001 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx Year 2002 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2003 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

7). Final Order DEFINITION: An administrative or judicial legal instrument that formally concludes an enforcement action, and which imposes on the recipient independently enforceable obligations.

Year 2000 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2001 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2002 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2003 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

8). Demand for Stipulated Penalties DEFINITION: A written demand that a regulated entity, which is subject to a previous Final Order, pays stipulated penalties specified therein for violation( s) of its terms.

Year 2000 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2001 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx Year 2002 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2003 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

9). Judicial Referral DEFINITION: A formal written request to another agency or unit of government to proceed with judicial enforcement ( e. g., criminal or civil judicial action) relating to the violation( s) in question.

Year 2000 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2001 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2002 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Year 2003 Number ___________________________________ Percentage ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

IIIE. COMPLIANCE RATES Please use the most recent data to complete the following three questions for your environmental program or interest.

1). What method do you use to calculate compliance rate? OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx ___________________________________

2). Please enter the compliance rate calculated: ___________________________________

3). Please describe your experiences with using the above compliance rate method. How have you used these data? ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

4). Do you report this compliance rate to the public?

Yes ( please explain what medium you use and how often you use below)

No Comments on how this is done: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx IIIF. PENALTIES ASSESSED/ COLLECTED This section contains 4 questions. Please answer questions for which you have information.

1). Penalties Assessed/ Collected Instruction: Please specify the penalties ( A monetary sanction for failure to comply with requirements) assessed AND/ OR collected for the enforcement mechanisms used by your agency. If penalties are paid in installments, please estimate the interests and only record the total money.

Penalties Assessed:

Year 2000 Administrative ___________________________________ Civil ___________________________________ Supplemental Environmental Projects ___________________________________ Criminal ___________________________________

Year 2001 Administrative ___________________________________ Civil ___________________________________ Supplemental Environmental Projects ___________________________________ Criminal ___________________________________

Year 2002 Administrative ___________________________________ Civil ___________________________________ Supplemental Environmental Projects ___________________________________ Criminal ___________________________________

Year 2003 Administrative ___________________________________ Civil ___________________________________ Supplemental Environmental Projects ___________________________________ Criminal ___________________________________

Penalties Collected:

Year 2000 Administrative ___________________________________ Civil ___________________________________ Supplemental Environmental Projects ___________________________________ Criminal ___________________________________

Year 2001 Administrative ___________________________________ Civil ___________________________________ Supplemental Environmental Projects ___________________________________ Criminal ___________________________________

Year 2002 Administrative ___________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx Civil ___________________________________ Supplemental Environmental Projects ___________________________________ Criminal ___________________________________

Year 2003 Administrative ___________________________________ Civil ___________________________________ Supplemental Environmental Projects ___________________________________ Criminal ___________________________________

Comments: Please use the below space to comment on or explain your data if needed ( e. g., dollar amount listed represents the result of a final settlement) ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

2). Does your office track the effectiveness/ benefits of enforcement efforts on a case specific basis ( e. g. pounds of pollution prevented, remediation costs saved)? ? Yes ( please explain how this is done below) ? No Comments on how this is done: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

3). Does your office track the effectiveness/ benefits of regulatory action on a program basis ( e. g., discharge or emissions trends)? ? Yes ( please explain how this is done below) ? No Comments on how this is done: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

4). Does your program or interest have administrative penalty authority? ? Yes ? No OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx IIIG. State Perspectives on Enforcement Data This section contains 5 questions. Please answer questions for which you have information.

1). Preferred Enforcement Reporting Measures If your environmental program or interest had a choice of statistics to report to the U. S. EPA to best demonstrate the extent of your enforcement efforts and/ or describe the effectiveness of your enforcement actions, which statistics do you feel would most accurately represent your work ( Please select your top three from the list below)?

 Compliance Rate  Amount of Pollutants Removed by Enforcement Actions  Number of Cases  Facilities Regulated vs. Facilities Found in Violation  Number of Inspections  Notices of Violations ( NOVs)

 Compliance Assistance  Informal Enforcement Actions  Departmental Annual Reports  Inspection ( coverage) Rates  Other( Please specify) ___________________________________

2). What data do you currently report to the U. S. EPA that you believe has the most value in demonstrating the extent of your enforcement efforts and/ or describing the effectiveness of your enforcement actions? ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

3). What data do you currently report to the U. S. EPA that you believe has least value in demonstrating the extent of your enforcement efforts and/ or describing the effectiveness of your enforcement actions? ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

4). Please use the space below to make any additional comments relative to your office's enforcement efforts and/ or ways that you believe current reporting practices to the U. S. EPA could be changed. ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

5). Please use the space below to make any additional comments about any element of this document and/ or your responses. Include any matter that you believe to be important that we have not asked about. ______________________________________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx IV. COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE The following questions address about state compliance assistance activities and how they measure success. There are no EDSC data standards for these activities since State Compliance Assistance Programs are not uniform. The data in this survey will assist in ascertaining common elements across states.

Compliance Assistance   Compliance Assistance includes activities, tools, or technical assistance that provides clear and consistent information for helping the regulated community understand and meet its regulatory obligations, or helping other compliance assistance providers ( including government agencies, contractors and grantees) to aid the regulated community in complying with environmental regulations. Compliance assistance may also help the regulated community find cost effective ways to comply with regulations and improve environmental performance through the use of pollution prevention, environmental management practices, and innovative technologies. However, at least one objective of compliance assistance must be related to achieving or advancing regulatory compliance.

Does your program conduct any compliance assistance activity?

Yes

No ( Note: In web based survey, if states choose " No" in the above question, they will skip the following questions and the survey is completed) OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx IVB. COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE ACTIVITIES This section contains 16 questions. Please answer questions for which you have information.

1). Do your compliance assistance activities include on site assistance inspection visits?

Yes

No 2). Do your compliance assistance activities include workbooks or other written material that describe regulatory obligations and how to comply?

Yes

No 3). Do your compliance assistance activities include education seminars?

Yes

No If you select Yes, please indentify your target audience and enter the number of people who participate on an annual basis in the adjacent space:

Big business ___________________________________

Small Business ___________________________________

Both ___________________________________

4). Do your compliance assistance activities include 800 hotline number?

Yes

No If you select Yes, please indentify who staffs your Hot Lines ( please choose one or more):

 Full time State Employees  Part time State Employees  Contractors 5). Do your compliance assistance activities include a web site?

Yes

No If you selected Yes, please identify: URL for the web site ___________________________________ Number of hits per year ___________________________________

6). Do your compliance assistance activities include Permits?

Yes

No If you selected Yes, please identify type and method( s) ( please choose all that apply): Type

Single media Permits

Multi media Permits Methods  Electronic Application  Electronic Issuance  Paper Application  Paper Issuance OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx 7). Do your compliance assistance activities report pollution prevention results?

Yes

No 8). Do your compliance assistance activities include materials accounting/ chemical use reporting efforts?

Yes

No 9). Do your compliance assistance activities include pollution prevention and facility planning laws and programs?

Yes ( please list the laws and programs below)

No ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

10). Do your compliance assistance activities include ISO 14001 and other environmental management systems efforts?

Yes

No 11). Do your compliance assistance activities include Grants or Loans?

Yes

No If you select Yes, please identify type and enter annual total value in the adjacent space:

 Grants ___________________________________

 Loans ___________________________________

 State Revolving loans ___________________________________

12). Do your compliance assistance activities include state tax incentive environmental assistance programs?

Yes

No 13). Do you have pollution prevention and compliance assistance personnel?

Yes ( please describe resources and staffing below)

No ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

14). Do you have a budget for compliance assistance/ pollution prevention activities?

Yes ( please provide annual budget amount) ___________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx

No 15). Do you have other regulatory compliance assistance activities?

Yes ( please describe below)

No ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

16). Do you have other non regulatory compliance assistance activities?

Yes ( please describe below)

No ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx IVC. COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS Please use the most recent data to complete the questions below.

Does your program calculate Environmental Benefits resulting from Compliance Assistance Activities?

Yes

No ( Note: In web based survey, if states choose " No" in the above question, they will skip the following questions and the survey is completed)

IVC. COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS This section contains 4 questions. Please answer as many as you have information.

1). Please enter the method used to calculate the Environmental Benefits resulting from Compliance Assistance Activities: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

2). Please enter the environmental benefits calculated: ___________________________________

3) Please describe your experiences with using the above environmental benefit measure? How have you used these data? ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

4) Do you report this rate to the public?

Yes ( please specify what medium you use and how often you use below)

No ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________

IVD. STATE PERSPECTIVES 1). Please use the space below to make any additional comments relative to Compliance Assistance program( s). ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ OMB Control Number 2020 xxxx Expiration Date xx/ xx/ xxxx 2). Please use the space below to make any additional comments about any element of this document and/ or your responses. Include any matter that you believe to be important and we have not asked about. ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

My name is Lucas Marshall I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I might want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes as they have not only allowed me not smoke combustible cigarettes for now almost three years. Not only has this effected my health in a positive manner it has effect everyone around me in a positive manner too. Quite simply, I firmly believe that they saved my life. I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.