            Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under
                          the Paperwork Reduction Act

1	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

	1(a)	Title and Number of the Information Collection

		Title:	Notification of Chemical Exports - TSCA Section 12(b)

		EPA ICR No.:  0795.14	OMB Control No.:  2070-0030

	1(b)	Short Characterization

	Section 12(b) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) states, in part, that any person who exports or intends to export to a foreign country a chemical substance or mixture for which submission of data is required under TSCA section 4 or 5(b), or for which a rule, action or order has been proposed or promulgated under TSCA section 5, 6, or 7, shall notify the EPA Administrator of such export or intent to export.  The Administrator in turn will notify the government of the importing country the notice and of EPA's regulatory action with respect to the substance.

	On December 16, 1980, EPA promulgated a rule implementing TSCA section 12(b) (45 FR 82844).  This final rule requires exporters to submit an annual notice for each country to which a chemical subject to TSCA section 12(b) requirements is exported.  EPA amended the regulations in July 1993 and November 2006 to reduce the overall burden of the statutory mandate on exporters (58 FR 40242, July 27, 1993; 71 FR 66324, Nov. 14, 2006). Among other things, the amendments reduced the notification requirements for exporters of chemicals subject to certain actions under TSCA sections 4 and 5 from an annual notification to a one-time notification for the first export to a particular country. Exports of chemicals subject to TSCA sections 5(f), 6, and 7 actions still require submission of annual export notifications to EPA, however. The 2006 amendments also set de minimus concentration levels below which notification would not be required and clarified that a single export notification may refer to more than one section of TSCA where the exported chemical is the subject of multiple TSCA actions. These rules are codified at 40 CFR Part 707, Subpart D.

	The export notice must include five easily ascertainable items: the name and address of the exporter, the name of the chemical, the country of import, the date of export or intended export, and the section of TSCA under which EPA has taken action (section 4, 5, 6 or 7).  There are currently over 1,000 substances or categories of substances that have been regulated or proposed to be regulated under the applicable sections of TSCA.

	In an effort to further reduce the information collection burden for TSCA section 12(b) export notification, EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) developed and made available to the public on its website in 2001 a list of chemical substances subject to TSCA section 12(b) export notification requirements (see "Current List of Chemical Substances Subject to TSCA Section12(b) Export Notification Requirements" at: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/import-export/pubs/12_b_listFinal_08-21-2012.pdf).  In addition, OPPT made available in 2001 a comprehensive listing of the "sunset" dates for chemical substances subject to TSCA section 4 actions (i.e., the dates on which the TSCA section 4 testing, reimbursement, and reporting requirements and/or TSCA section 4-triggered TSCA section 12(b) export notification requirements have terminated ("sunset") or have been calculated to sunset) (see "Sunset Date/Status of TSCA Section 4 Testing, Reimbursement, and Reporting Requirements and TSCA Section 4-Triggered TSCA Section 12(b) Export Notification Requirements" at: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/chemtest/pubs/sunsettable.html).  EPA believes that these lists, long recommended by industry, serve as useful tools to assist industry in complying with TSCA and have resulted in an overall reduction of the information collection burden.

	Finally, this paragraph identifies EPA actions that are anticipated to occur during the collection period that could affect the information requirements and burden.  During the collection period covered by this ICR renewal, a number of actions under TSCA sections 4, 5, and 6 are anticipated that will trigger export notification under TSCA section 12(b).  Of course, should any of these anticipated actions impact this ICR, EPA will follow appropriate procedures to amend this ICR, as appropriate.

2	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

	2(a)	Need/Authority for the Collection

	TSCA section 12(b) requires exporters to submit a notice for each country to which a chemical subject to TSCA section 12(b) requirements is exported.  Specifically, TSCA section 12(b) states, in part, that any person who exports or intends to export to a foreign country a chemical substance or mixture for which submission of data is required under TSCA section 4 or 5(b), or for which a rule, action or order has been proposed or promulgated under TSCA section 5, 6, or 7, shall notify the EPA Administrator of such export or intent to export.  The Administrator in turn will notify the government of the importing country of the notice and of EPA's regulatory action with respect to the substance.  See Attachment 1 for exact language of TSCA section 12(b), 15 U.S.C. 2611(b).

	Regulations implementing the statutory mandate in TSCA section 12(b) appear in 40 CFR Part 707, Subpart D, and include the following additional provisions:

(a) No notice of export will be required for articles, except PCB articles, unless the Agency so requires in the context of individual TSCA section 5, 6, or 7 actions.

(a) Any person who exports or intends to export polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) or PCB articles, for any purpose other than disposal, shall notify EPA of such intent or exportation under TSCA section 12(b).  PCBs and PCB articles have the definitions published in 40 CFR 761.3.

(a) Any person who would be prohibited by a TSCA section 5 or 6 regulation from exporting a chemical substance or mixture, but who is granted an exemption by EPA to export that chemical substance or mixture, shall notify EPA under TSCA section 12(b) of such intent to export or exportation.
(b) An exporter will be subject to possible enforcement action (including penalties) for not complying with the applicable provisions of TSCA section 12(b).

 	The full text of 40 CFR part 707 is provided in Attachment 2.

 	2(b)	Use/Users of the Data

 	As required by TSCA section 12(b), the Administrator will use the information collected under this ICR to furnish the required notice to the government of the importing country.  The importing country typically uses the information provided to ensure that chemicals imported into their country comply with their laws and regulations.

 3	NON-DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

       3(a)	Non-Duplication

 	The exporter submits one notice to EPA.  There is no duplication of this mandate or collection activity, and there are no viable alternate sources for the Agency to obtain the information necessary to satisfy the statutory mandate.

 	The Agency carefully considered alternatives to imposing a notification requirement on the chemical exporters, but no viable alternate sources were identified that would accomplish what the statue requires or provide the required information as specified in the statute.  Prior to promulgating the TSCA section 12(b) rule, EPA considered the possibility of using export data gathered by the Bureau of the Census in lieu of imposing notification requirements in a TSCA section 12(b) rule.  However, several problems with the Census data continue to make such an approach impractical.  These problems include, among others, the fact that Census data are often not chemical-specific; Census exempts certain shipments and exporters that are not exempt from TSCA section 12(b) notifications; and Census data would not be available for up to eight weeks following export, a delay that would prevent EPA from providing an importing government the timely notice required by TSCA section 12(b).

 	In addition, the Agency's activities are not duplicative of any other agency's actions.  Importing countries do not receive such notifications from any other sources.

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

 	 In proposing to renew this ICR, EPA provided a 60-day public notice and comment period that ended on July 6, 2012 (77 FR 26750, May 7, 2012).  EPA received one comment, from the American Petroleum Institute (API). EPA has addressed API's comment in a memorandum that is attached to this ICR as Attachment 3.

       3(c)	Consultations

 	Prior to proposing the original 1980 guidance for the submission of TSCA section 12(b) notices, EPA held informal meetings with the Manufacturing Chemists Association (now the American Chemistry Council), and with representatives of the Swedish, Canadian and British governments.  Comments were also received from exporters, environmental groups and foreign governments during the public comment period for the proposal.  Prior to issuance of the final amendments to the export notification requirements in 1993, EPA also met with stakeholders to discuss TSCA section 12(b) requirements and the possible need for some changes to the 1980 rule.  EPA also received and considered comments from exporters, environmental groups and foreign governments during the public comment period for the proposed amendments.  Finally, EPA considered comments received on an amendment to the TSCA section 12(b) export notification requirements proposed in 2006.

 	 Additionally, under 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), OMB requires agencies to consult with potential ICR respondents and data users about specific aspects of ICRs before submitting an ICR to OMB for review and approval.  In accordance with this regulation, EPA submitted questions to nine parties via e-mail.  The individuals and/or organizations contacted were:

Dan Newton, Manager
Government Relations
Society of Chemical Manufacturers & Affiliates (SOCMA)
1850 M Street NW, Suite 700
Washington, DC 20036
Tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER>
Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>
Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
 Terry L. Medley, J.D., Global Director
 Corporate Regulatory Affairs
 DuPont Environment and Sustainable Growth Center
 Wilmington, DE 19898
 Tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER>
 Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>
 Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Sylvia Palmer, Director, Regulatory and Technical Affairs
American Chemistry Council
700 2nd Street, NE
Washington, D.C. 20002
Tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> (main)
 Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> (main)
 Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Ernie Rosenberg, President and CEO
American Cleaning Institute
1331 L Street, N.W., Suite 650
Washington, D.C. 20005
Tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER>
Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>
E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Douglas Fratz, Vice President
Scientific and Technical Affairs
Consumer Specialty Products Association
900 17th Street, NW, Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20006
Tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER>
E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
 Howard Feldman, Director
 Regulatory and Scientific Affairs
 American Petroleum Institute
 1220 L Street, NW
 Washington, DC 20005-4070
 Tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> (main)
 Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
William McLin, President and CEO
Asthma & Allergy Foundation of America
8201 Corporate Drive, Suite 1000
Landover, MD  20785
Tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER>, ext. 273
Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Nsedu Witherspoon, Executive Director
Children's Environmental Health Network
110 Maryland Avenue, NE, Suite 505
Washington, DC  20002
Tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> (main)
Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Ken Cook, President
Environmental Working Group
1436 U St., N.W., Suite 100
Washington, D.C. 20009
Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>
E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
      EPA did not receive any direct responses to its solicitation for consultations. The American Petroleum Institute, however, did submit a comment to the docket during the public comment period described in the preceding section. A copy of EPA's consultation e-mail to the above nine potential respondents is included in Attachment 4.

	3(d)	Effects of Less Frequent Collection
 	In 1993 and 2006, EPA amended the regulations to reduce the notification requirement for exporters of chemicals subject to actions under TSCA sections 4 and 5 from an annual notification to a one-time notification for the first export to a particular country. (58 FR 40242, July 27, 1993; 71 FR 66324, Nov. 14, 2006.) If the collection of information was conducted less frequently, the regulatory requirements would not be met.

       3(e)	General Guidelines

 	This information collection is necessary to implement statutory requirements of section 12(b) of TSCA and is consistent with the requirements of 5 CFR 1320.6.

 	3(f)	Confidentiality

 	The respondent may claim all or part of a notice confidential. EPA will disclose information that is covered by a claim of confidentiality only to the extent permitted by, and in accordance with, the procedures in TSCA and 40 CFR part 2. In 2010, EPA initiated a broad effort to increase transparency and provide more valuable information to the public by identifying data collections under TSCA where information may have been claimed and treated as confidential in the past but is not in fact entitled to confidentiality under TSCA. (75 FR 3462, Jan. 21, 2010; 75 FR 29754, May 27, 2010.) Information submitted under specific reporting requirements of TSCA, or in support of TSCA, is subject to the provisions of section 14 of TSCA and to EPA's Regulations on the Confidentiality of Business Information (see 40 CFR part 2). Failure to follow these procedures fully at the time of document submission to EPA is interpreted by the Agency as a waiver of confidentiality claims. Submitters may claim confidentiality for proprietary information, but should submit a detailed written explanation to substantiate all confidential business information (CBI) claims. Detailed written responses to 14 specific substantiation questions should be provided to substantiate confidentiality claim(s). Responses should be as specific as possible, with examples as appropriate, and should provide substantiation arguments for all types of information (e.g., sales, production/ importation volumes, chemical identity, company identity) claimed as confidential. However, notwithstanding any claim of confidentiality, the foreign government of the importing country will be notified of the export of the substance(s) in question.

 	3(g)	Sensitive Questions

 	This section is not applicable.  The information requested is not sensitive in nature.

 4	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED--AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

 	4(a)	Agency Activities

 	The activities routinely conducted by EPA related to the receipt and processing of TSCA section 12(b) export notices include the following:

 	o	review export notices for compliance;
 	o	respond to follow-up inquiries from foreign governments;
 	o	consult with companies on complying with the TSCA section 12(b) rule;
 	o	act as liaison between foreign governments and companies to seek additional information on exports;
 	o	log in notices for tracking/reporting;
 	o	prepare letters with supporting documents to foreign governments.

       4(b)	Collection Methodology and Management

 	The collection methodology is event-based, i.e., the respondent's decision to export a chemical subject to TSCA section 12(b).  With the exception of TSCA section 4 chemicals, an exporter must submit, on an annual basis, one TSCA section 12(b) notice for each country to which a chemical subject to TSCA section 12(b) is exported.  For TSCA section 4 chemicals, an exporter must only submit a TSCA section 12(b) notice for the first export or intended export to a particular country. The TSCA section 12(b) notice must be postmarked within seven days after the respondent accepts a definite contractual obligation or no later than the date of export.

 	TSCA section 12(b) export notifications are received by EPA's Information Management Division (IMD) in OPPT.  IMD notifies appropriate foreign governments of the export of the specific TSCA-regulated chemicals to their country in accordance with the mandate in TSCA section 12(b) and the regulations at 40 CFR part 707, Subpart D.

 	The following is a brief overview of the Agency's handling and tracking process for these notices:

1) All incoming notices are received in OPPT's Confidential Business Information Center (CBIC), which is managed by OPPT's Information Management Division (IMD).

1) The CBIC sends the information to appropriate IMD staff to determine if the information is Confidential Business Information (CBI) or not.  IMD then sends the information with the CBI determination back to the CBIC.

1) The CBIC sends all notifications (CBI or non-CBI) to TAIS for processing.

1) The contractor-run TSCA Assistance and Information Service (TAIS) records the company and chemical information, enters it into the database, and prepares the notification letter and explanatory materials (e.g., Federal Register notice, TSCA section 5(e) consent order).  For CBI packages, TAIS sends the CBI packages back to the CBIC and the CBIC then sends the notification and explanatory information to the embassy/foreign authority of the country to which the subject chemical is being exported.  For non-CBI packages, TAIS sends the notification and explanatory information to the embassy/foreign authority.

1) If the receiving country requests further information, the request comes directly to IMD.  IMD sends the request to TAIS.  TAIS obtains and/or generates the needed information, and sends the package back to IMD for formal signature and transmittal to the requesting country's embassy or authority.

 	The Export Notification Tracking System (ENTS), which is maintained by TAIS, currently houses approximately 162,000 records, dating back to 1989.  The ENTS database is modified daily with new, incoming records of chemical exports to foreign countries.  Updates also incorporate regulatory changes affecting the chemicals that are subject to EPA's TSCA section 12(b) export notification rule at 40 CFR 707.

 	EPA is continuing to explore the feasibility of developing and implementing an optional electronic data reporting system for the ease of respondents, which could result in a significant burden reduction.  The projected reporting system is designed to be a user-friendly interface for parties engaged in reporting under TSCA sections 4, 5, 8, and 12(b).  Thus, the submission of information to EPA will be less expensive, faster, and more efficient once this technology is fully applied.

       4(c)	Small Entity Flexibility

 	TSCA section 12(b) does not exempt small businesses.  However, most reporting has been by large companies, because they do most of the exporting.  In any case, the burden on any exporter is minimal, because it should take no more than one-half hour to prepare a TSCA section 12(b) notice and mailing costs are minimal.

 	4(d)	Collection Schedule

 	In general, there are basically two collection schedules related to the TSCA section 12(b) export notification requirements, i.e., a one-time collection and an annual collection.  On an annual basis, excluding TSCA section 4 chemicals, an exporter must submit only one TSCA section 12(b) notice for each country to which a chemical subject to TSCA section 12(b) is exported.  For TSCA section 4 chemicals, an exporter must only submit one TSCA section 12(b) notice for the first export or intended export to a particular country.

 	If the collection of information was conducted less frequently, the statutory requirements would not be met.

 5	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

 	5(a)	Respondents/NAICS Codes

 	Respondents to this collection are exporters of chemical substances, which are mostly chemicals companies classified under NAICS Codes 325 and 32411.

 	5(b)	Information Requested

       	(i) Data Items

 	Respondents are required to include the following information in their export notification:

   * the name and address of the exporter;
   * the name of the chemical;
   * the country of import;
   * the date of export or intended export; and
   * the TSCA section 4, 5, 6 or 7 action that triggers the notice.

 		(ii) Respondent Activities

 	In providing the required TSCA section 12(b) export notification, the respondent (exporter) is likely to engage in the following activities:

   * Compile and maintain a list of chemical products manufactured by the company that are also subject to a TSCA section 4, 5, 6 or 7 action (e.g., compare list of their chemicals with EPA's list of TSCA section 12(b) chemicals);
   * Check this list against outgoing orders to determine if a product/chemical on the list is expected to be exported to a customer outside of the U.S.;
   * If it is, identify whether a TSCA section 12(b) notice is required (e.g., is it the first shipment to that country this year?); and
   * If product/chemical is on the list and a TSCA section 12(b) notice is required, complete the required export notice and forward it to EPA within the required time period.

6          ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

       The purpose of this analysis is to determine the incremental cost to industry and to the EPA associated with export reports that are submitted to the Agency under the TSCA section 12(b) reporting requirements.

       6(a)	Estimating the Respondent Burden

 	The burden to respondents of this information collection activity comprises the time required to perform the steps outlined in section 3 of this document.

      For the purpose of this section, a notification is a package received by the EPA by one company. One company may submit more than one notification per year. Each notification may contain several chemicals and/or countries.

      Ever since a change in reporting requirements published on November 14, 2006, there is a one-time notification requirement for exporters of chemical substances or mixtures. In addition, the change required the Agency to notify foreign governments once after it receives the first export notification from an exporter. The shift to one-time-only export notification in the amendments will affect almost all notifications received under TSCA section 5 (EPAB 2006). EPA also promulgated de minimis concentration levels below which notification will not be required for the export of any chemical for which export notification under TSCA section 12(b) is otherwise required.

      For the purposes of this ICR, the EPA used the average number of submitters and notifications from FY 2009, 2010, and 2011 as estimates for the number of submitters and notifications for FY 2012-2014.

 	Compile List.  Since this information collection activity has been in place for twenty years, most respondents will have already developed a list of their products subject to TSCA section 12(b) reporting.  Respondents need only check for new regulations promulgated and any new products exported by the company.  Updating the list is estimated to take an average of one hour of technical time (which may also include some proportion of legal time).  This could vary depending on the number of products from two hours per year up to two hours per month of technical time (which may also include some proportion of legal time).  This will vary depending on the number of products exported by the company and the number of their products subject to TSCA section 12(b).

 	The number of submitters per year who report under TSCA section 12(b) has varied over time, rising from around 160 in 1991 to over 460 in 2000, and declining since.  EPA estimates that there will be a decrease in the number of submitters to around 240 in the near-future years (average of FY 2009, 2010, and 2011).  This is a decrease from the previous ICR estimate of 300 submitters.  Of these 240 submitters, EPA estimates that 160 companies are near the lower estimate of 2 hours per year, and 80 companies are near the upper estimate of 24 hours per year. EPA conservatively retains the estimate that 80 exporters are near the upper estimate of 24 hours per year, as it is likely that lower-volume submitters will be the ones exempted by these amendments because they will be filing notices under TSCA section 12(b) for the first time. The previous ICR estimated 200 firms near the two-hour estimate.  Compiling the list for all respondents is estimated to take 2,240 hours (2 hours x 160 firms plus 24 hours x 80 firms), or an average of 9.3 hours per firm per year.

 	Write or Revise Letter.  Companies that export chemicals subject to TSCA section 12(b) reporting must prepare an export notification to send to EPA.  Time for initial preparation of the export notice probably varies depending on whether the company has prior experience with this program, but this step is estimated to take an average of one hour of technical time (which may also include some proportion of legal time) per year for each company subject to TSCA section 12(b) reporting.  EPA estimates a total of 240 hours (1 hour x 240 firms) per year in letter writing or revising.

 	Check Orders and Send Notices.  The 240 companies that export chemicals subject to TSCA section 12(b) reporting must check outgoing shipments against the list of their products described above.  A form letter notifying EPA is printed out detailing where the shipment is going for a TSCA section 12(b) chemical if it is the first shipment to the importing country.  This whole process is estimated to take an average one half hour of clerical time per notice.

 	The annual number of submitted notices has varied substantially over time, but without any obvious trend.  The number has been consistently in the range of 3,000 to 12,000 submissions, with a peak of over 11,600 in 2000, and with more recent years being slightly lower.  EPA therefore estimates that the number of notices in near-future years will average about 3,090 (average of FY 2009, 2010 and 2011).  This is a decrease from the previous ICR estimate of 3,500 notices.  For 240 firms, that indicates an average of roughly 13 notices per year per firm.  Total time for this task will be 1,545 hours (3,090 x 0.5 hours each).

 TABLE 1: ANNUAL AVERAGE BURDEN PER RESPONDENT FACILITY

                                  BURDEN HOURS
                                    ACTIVITY
                                   TECHNICAL
                                    CLERICAL
                                     TOTAL
 Compile list
                                      9.3
                                       -
                                      9.3
 Write letter
                                       1
                                       -
                                        1
 Check order and send notice
                                       -
                                      6.5
                                      6.5
 Total
                                      10.3
                                      6.5
                                      16.8

 TABLE 2: ANNUAL AGGREGATE BURDEN

                                  BURDEN HOURS
                                    ACTIVITY
                                   TECHNICAL
                                    CLERICAL
                                     TOTAL
 Compile list
                                     2,240
                                       -
                                     2,240
 Write letter
                                        240
                                       -
                                       240
 Check order and send notice
                                       -
                                     1,545
                                     1,545
 Total
                                     2,480
                                     1,545
                                     4,025
 Average burden hours per notice
                                      0.80
                                      0.5
                                      1.30

 	It is estimated that the annual number of notices to be submitted for FY 2012-2014 will be 3,090.  Estimating that the number of respondents will be 240, the average number of notices submitted per respondent will be roughly 13.  The previous ICR estimated 12 notices per respondent (3,500/300).

       6(b)	Estimating the Respondent Cost

 	The costs to respondents is based on the time needed to complete the tasks listed in section 3, the hourly cost of labor at appropriate levels (labor rates), the number of facilities affected, and the number of reports generated.  There are also costs for mailing. There are no specific capital or overhead costs associated directly with this information collection activity.

 	Loaded labor rates, including fringe costs, are $69.14 for management time, $61.71 for technical time, and $28.98 for clerical time.  These labor rates are higher than previous estimates used and result from increased wages indicated in the BLS data.1
 	Companies will also incur a cost of $15.35 per export notice to send the letter to EPA via registered mail ($10.95 for registered mail, $3.95 for a return receipt, and $0.45 postage).  Aggregate annual costs for mailing will be $47,432 ($15.35 x 3,090).

 TABLE 3: ANNUAL COST PER RESPONDENT FACILITY (WITH 13 NOTICES)

                                  ANNUAL COST
 ACTIVITY
                                   TECHNICAL
                                    CLERICAL
                                     TOTAL
 Compile list
                                    $573.90
                                       -
                                    $573.90
 Write letter
                                     $61.71
                                       -
                                     $61.71
 Check order and send notice
                                       -
                                    $188.37
                                    $188.37
 Mailing cost
                                       -
                                       -
                                    $199.55
 Total
                                    $635.61
                                    $188.37
                                   $1,023.53

 TABLE 4: ANNUAL AGGREGATE RESPONDENT COST

                                  ANNUAL COST
 ACTIVITY
                                   TECHNICAL
                                   $61.71/hr
                                    CLERICAL
                                   $28.98/hr
                                     TOTAL
 Compile list
                                    $138,230
                                       -
                                    $138,230
 Write letter
                                    $14,810
                                       -
                                    $14,810
 Check order and send notice
                                       -
                                    $44,774
                                    $44,774
 Mailing cost
                                       -
                                       -
                                    $47,432
 Total
                                    $153,040
                                    $44,774
                                    $245,246

 	6(c)	Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

 	Agency unit costs are based on past TSCA section 12(b) analyses, including the previous ICR, and on contacts with the Environmental Assistance Division (EAD), which administered the 12b notification process before IMD.  EPA's cost estimates are based on past experience with these activities.  The Agency cost can be divided into three parts: receiving and processing incoming notices, preparing and mailing notifications to importing countries, and responding to requests for information and clarification from companies and importing countries.  The allocation of burden hours and costs among these three parts is not exact, but the analysis below is reasonably accurate in terms of the overall burden estimate and the approximate allocation of that burden among these tasks.

 	In the first task, notices are received from firms that intend to export a product covered by this rule, the forms are checked for completeness, and the submissions are logged into a document control system.  Based on conversations with the workers responsible for this task, about ten notifications can be processed per hour.  EPA projects that an average of 3,090 notifications will be received per year over the period covered by this ICR, requiring approximately 309 hours of support.  This work is currently done by technical EPA staff with a fully-loaded labor rate of $77.62 per hour (December 2010) and thus is projected to cost $23,985 per year over the period of this ICR.

      In the second task, workers prepare letters of notice which are subsequently reviewed and sent out to importing countries.  Not all notifications submitted require that a notice be sent out.  This work averages approximately 30 minutes per notice.  EPA estimates that the reduction in notices sent to foreign governments will be proportional to the reduction in notifications received under that section.  EPA projects an average of 22 notification letters mailed each year (average of FY 2009, 2010, and 2011 notification letters mailed).  This yields a burden of approximately 11 hours annually.  This work is currently done by technical EPA staff with a fully-loaded labor rate of $77.62 per hour and thus is projected to cost $854 yearly.

 	The cost of mailing a notification can vary from $15.35 to $31.85, depending on whether it is sent to an embassy in the US or to an overseas destination and assuming the notice is registered with a return receipt ($10.95 for registered mail, $3.95 for a return receipt, and $0.45 - $16.95 (international) postage). The average mailing cost of $23.60 and a total annual mailing cost of $519 ($23.60*22).

 	The burden described above covers the routine tasks of handing both incoming notices and outgoing notifications.  The totals above also include a certain amount of time spent responding to routine requests for information, since data are not available to separate this out from the other tasks.  Based on conversations with EAD staff, the work of responding to non-routine requests for information and clarification from industry and importing countries, assisting the contractor staff in handling non-routine issues, and handling other tasks associated with the TSCA section 12(b) program can be expected to require about 20% of the time of a GS-13 Step 5 EPA employee, or roughly 400 hours per year.  Following the 2010 federal employee wage scale and assuming an additional 60% to cover fringe benefits, that represents an annual cost of approximately $31,048 ($77.62*400) (OPM, 2010).

 TABLE 5: ESTIMATED BURDEN AND COSTS FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

                                     BURDEN
                                      COST
 Processing of notices from companies
                                   309 hours
                                    $23,985
 Processing of notifications to importing countries
                                    11 hours
                                      $854
 EPA staff time, responding to information requests, etc.
                                   400 hours
                                    $31,048
 Mailing cost of notifications

                                      $519
 Total
                                   720 hours
                                  (0.35 FTEs)
                                    $56,406

 	6(d)	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

       Respondent Burden and Costs

       Total respondent annual burden hours = 4,025 hours
       Total respondent annual costs = $245,246

 		Agency Burden and Costs

 		Agency burden hours: 0.35 FTEs = 720 hours
 		Agency annual costs = $56,406

 	6(e)	Reasons for Change in Burden

	There is a decrease of 825 hours (from 4,850 hours to 4,025 hours) in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the information collection most recently approved by OMB.  This decrease represents the net effect of a decrease in the estimated number of notices sent to EPA and a decrease in the number of firms sending notices, based on EPA's recent experience with TSCA section 12(b) notices.

      On November 14, 2006, EPA made amendments to the Toxic Substances Control Act section 12(b) export notification rule at Subpart D of 40 CFR Part 707.  There was a change to the reporting requirements. The first amendment changed the annual notification requirement for exporters of chemicals for which certain actions have been taken under TSCA.  Previously, the TSCA section 12(b) rule required exporters to notify EPA of the first export or intended export to a particular country in a calendar year for chemical substances subject certain actions under TSCA sections 5, 6, or 7.  For chemicals subject to a final TSCA section 4 action, exporters were required to submit an export notification only for the first export or intended export to a particular country.  The amendments changed the annual notification requirement to a one-time export notification requirement per each destination country for each exporter of a chemical substance subject to TSCA sections 5(a)(2), 5(b), 5(e)(1), and 5(e)(2).  For exports of chemical substances subject to TSCA sections 5(f), 6 or 7 actions, however, the exporter will continue to submit an annual notification for each chemical exported to each country of destination. EPA is also establishing de minimis concentration levels below which notification will not be required for the export of any chemical that is the subject of an action under TSCA sections 4, 5, 6, or 7 of TSCA.  For these reasons, the number of submitters, number of notifications and notification letters decreased since the last ICR.

      With these changes in reporting requirements, the costs are predicted to change as a result of the number of notifications and submitters declining. According to a prior analysis on the 2006 amendments to TSCA section 12(b), it was estimated that the reduction in the number of notifications and submitters due to TSCA section 5 reporting would be 50% in each year after the amendments go into effect (EPAB 2006). Based on average numbers of TSCA section 12(b) notifications from 1996-2004, TSCA section 5 notifications comprised approximately 25% of the total notifications (EPAB 2006). Therefore, the reduction in TSCA section 5 notifications should be about 13% of the total TSCA section 12(b) notifications. In addition, due to the de minimis exemption EPA conservatively estimates a 20% reduction for all TSCA sections (EPAB 2006).

      Prior to the TSCA section 12(b) amendments, the 2006 data showed about 5,100 notifications and 330 submitters. After applying the reductions outlined in the TSCA section 12(b) economic analysis (EPAB 2006), a 50% reduction in section 5 notifications and a 20% total reduction in notifications due to the de minimis exemption, the estimated number of notifications were 3,550 and 230 submitters. The predictions from this ICR, which were generated from the averages of FY 2009, 2010 and 2011 data, were 3,090 notifications and 240 submitters.

 	6(f)	Burden Statement

 	The annual public burden for this collection of information, which is approved under OMB Control No. 2070-0030, is estimated to be 1.3 hours per response.  Burden is defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b).  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 number for this information collection appears above.  In addition, the OMB control numbers for EPA's regulation, after initial display in the final rule, are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

 	The Agency has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0258, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 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<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  You may submit comments regarding 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.

       Submit your comments referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0258 and OMB Control No. 2070-0030, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by mail to: Document Control Office (DCO), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code: 7407T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW,  Washington, D.C. 20460, and (2) OMB by mail to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503.

 Sources

 40 CFR Parts 707 and 799. Federal Register: November 14, 2006. Volume 71, Number 219 Rules and Regulations 66234-66245. January 2009 <wais.access.gpo.gov>.

"Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Supplementary Tables: December 2007." US Bureau of Labor Statistics. January 2009.

"Final Economic Analysis of the Amendments to TSCA Section 12(b) Export Notification Requirements." Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. August 2006.

"Office of Personnel Management, Salary Table 2007-DCB, Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-PA-VA-WV." January 2009 <http://www.opm.gov/oca/07tables/html/dcb.asp>.


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 194 (Friday, October 5, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 61048]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24629]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Distracted Driving Grant Program

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century
Act (MAP-21), the Department of Transportation (DOT) announced the
availability of funding authorized for distracted driving grants on
August 24, 2012. In this notice, DOT is extending the application
submission deadline announced in the notice of availability of funding
to February 28, 2013.

DATES: This notice is effective October 5, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Associate
Administrator, Regional Operations and Program Delivery, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 6, 2012, the President signed into
law the ``Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act'' (MAP-21),
Public Law 112-141, which created a new distracted driving grant
program. DOT recently published a notice of funding availability (NOFA)
for the distracted driving grant program, 77 FR 51610 (Aug. 24, 2012),
which established an application deadline of October 9, 2012 for FY
2013 grants. Today's notice extends that application deadline to
February 28, 2013. Applications for FY 2013 distracted driving grants
must now be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on February 28, 2013.

    Authority:  Pub. L. 112-141, Section 31105; 23 U.S.C. 405(e) (as
set forth in MAP-21); delegation of authority at 49 CFR Sec. Sec.
1.94 and 1.95.

    Issued on: October 1, 2012.
Ronald L. Medford,
Deputy Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-24629 Filed 10-4-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 28, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22445-22446]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08784]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2021-0044]

Collection of Information Under Review by Office of Management
and Budget; OMB Control Number 1625-0085

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Thirty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an Information Collection Request (ICR),
abstracted below, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension
of its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0085,
Streamlined Inspection Program; without change.
    Our ICR describes the information we seek to collect from the
public. Review and comments by OIRA ensure we only impose paperwork
burdens commensurate with our performance of duties.

DATES: You may submit comments to the Coast Guard and OIRA on or before
May 28, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Comments to the Coast Guard should be submitted using the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Search for
docket number [USCG-2021-0044]. Written comments and recommendations to
OIRA for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30
days of publication of this notice to https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
    Find this particular information collection by selecting
``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using
the search function.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the internet
at https://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available
from: Commandant (CG-6P), ATTN: Paperwork Reduction Act Manager, U.S.
Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE, STOP 7710,
Washington, DC 20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A.L. Craig, Office of Privacy
Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for questions
on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be
granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. These comments
will help OIRA determine whether to approve the ICR referred to in this
Notice.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments to Coast Guard or OIRA must contain the
OMB Control Number of the ICR. They must also contain the docket number
of this request, [USCG-2021-0044], and must be received by May 28,
2021.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public
comments, are in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that website's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments to the Coast Guard will
be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will
include any personal information you have provided. For more about
privacy and submissions to the Coast Guard in response to this
document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020). For more about privacy and submissions to OIRA in
response to this document, see the https://www.reginfo.gov, comment-
submission web page. OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs online at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain after the comment period for each
ICR. An OMB Notice of Action on each ICR will become available via a
hyperlink in the OMB Control Number: 1625-0085.

Previous Request for Comments

    This request provides a 30-day comment period required by OIRA. The
Coast Guard published the 60-day notice (86 FR 10125, February 18,
2021) required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That notice elicited no
comments. Accordingly, no changes have been made to the Collection.

Information Collection Request

    Title: Streamlined Inspection Program.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0085.
    Summary: The Coast Guard established an optional Streamlined
Inspection Program (SIP) to provide owners and operators of U.S.
vessels an alternative method of complying with inspection requirements
of the Coast Guard.
    Need: The SIP regulations under 46 CFR part 8, subpart E, offer
owners and operators of inspected vessels an alternative to traditional
Coast Guard inspection procedures. Title 46 U.S.C. 3306 of authorizes
the Coast Guard to prescribe regulations necessary to carry out the
inspections of vessels required to be inspected under 46 U.S.C. 3301,
and 46 U.S.C. 3103 allows the Coast Guard to rely on reports,
documents, and records of other persons who have been determined to be
reliable, and other methods that have been determined to be reliable to
ensure compliance with vessels and seamen requirements under 46 U.S.C.
subtitle II.
    Forms: Not applicable.
    Respondents: Owners and operators of vessels.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has increased from 8,254
hours to 13,298 hours a year, due to an increase in the number of SIP
participants (i.e., companies and vessels).

    Authority:  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: April 22, 2021.
Kathleen Claffie,
Chief, Office of Privacy Management, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2021-08784 Filed 4-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 165 (Thursday, August 25, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53051-53054]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21699]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0755]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; ISAF Nations Cup Grand Final Fireworks Display,
Sheboygan, WI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
waters of Lake Michigan in Sheboygan, Wisconsin. This zone is intended
to restrict vessels from a portion of Sheboygan Harbor during a
fireworks display on September 13, 2011. This temporary safety zone is
necessary to protect spectators and vessels from the hazards associated
with this fireworks display.

DATES: This rule is effective from 7:45 until 8:45 p.m. on September
13, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2011-0755 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0755 in the
Docket ID box, pressing Enter, and then clicking ``search.'' They are
also available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management
Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary

rule, contact or e-mail BM1 Adam Kraft, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Lake
Michigan, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable and
contrary to the public interest. Notice of this fireworks display was
not received in sufficient time for the Coast Guard to solicit public
comments before the start of the event. Thus, waiting for a notice and
comment period to run would be impracticable and contrary to the public
interest because it would inhibit the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake
Michigan, from protecting the public and vessels from the hazards
associated with this maritime display.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For the same reasons discussed in
the preceding paragraph, waiting for the 30-day notice period to run
would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

Background and Purpose

    The ISAF Nations Cup Grand Final fireworks are a City permitted
fireworks display that occurs over Sheboygan's Harbor in Sheboygan,
Wisconsin. The fireworks for this event will be launched from 8 to 8:30
p.m. on September 13, 2011. The Captain of the Port, Sector Lake
Michigan has determined that fireworks launched proximate to watercraft
pose a significant risk to public safety and property. Such hazards
include premature detonations, dangerous detonations, dangerous
projectiles, and falling or burning debris.

Discussion of Rule

    Because of the aforesaid hazards, the Captain of the Port, Sector
Lake Michigan, has determined that a temporary safety zone is necessary
to ensure the safety of spectators and vessels during the setup,
loading, and launching of the fireworks display. Accordingly, this
temporary safety zone will encompass all waters of Lake Michigan and
Sheboygan Harbor in the vicinity of the south pier in Sheboygan,
Wisconsin within a 500 foot radius from the fireworks launch site
located on land in position 43[deg]44'55'' N, 087[deg]41'51'' W.
(DATUM: NAD 83).
    All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her
designated representative. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within
the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated representative.
The Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated
representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    It is not ``significant'' under the regulatory policies and
procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We conclude
that this rule is not a significant regulatory action because we
anticipate that during the short time this zone will be in effect, it
will have minimal impact on the economy, will not interfere with other
agencies, will not adversely alter the budget of any grant or loan
recipients, and will not raise any novel legal or policy issues.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
or anchor in the affected portion of Lake Michigan and Sheboygan Harbor
near the south pier in Sheboygan, Wisconsin, between 7:45 and 8:45 p.m.
on September 13, 2011.
    This temporary safety zone will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following
reasons: During the display, the zone in this regulation will only be
in effect for 60 minutes, and vessel traffic can safely pass outside
the safety zone during the event. In the event that this temporary
safety zone affects shipping, commercial vessels may request permission
from the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, to transit through
the safety zone. The Coast Guard will give notice to the public via a
Broadcast to Mariners that the regulation is in effect.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34) (g),
of the Instruction. This rule involves the establishment of a temporary
safety zone which is anticipated to have minimal impact to the
environment. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapters 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0755 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0755  Safety Zone; ISAF Nations Cup Grand Final Fireworks
Display, Sheboygan, Wisconsin.

    (a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone: All
waters of Lake Michigan and Sheboygan Harbor, in the vicinity of the
south pier in Sheboygan Wisconsin, within a 500 foot radius from the
fireworks launch site located on land in position 43[deg]44'55'' N,
087[deg]41'51'' W.
    (b) Effective and Enforcement period. This rule will be effective
and enforced from 7:45 to 8:45 p.m. on September 13, 2011.
    (c) Regulations.
    (1) In accordance with the general regulations in section 165.23 of
this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone
is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake
Michigan, or his or her designated representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his
or her designated representative.
    (3) The ``designated representative'' of the Captain of the Port,
Sector Lake Michigan, is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty
officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake
Michigan, to act on his or her behalf. The designated representative of
the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, will be aboard either a
Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone shall contact the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or
his or her designated representative to obtain permission to do so. The
Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated
representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.
    (5) Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the
safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the
Captain of the Port, Sector

Lake Michigan, or his or her designated representative.

    Dated: August 10, 2011.
M.W. Sibley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan.
[FR Doc. 2011-21699 Filed 8-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P