  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 SUPPORTING STATEMENT

NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS (NESHAP) FOR
AREA SOURCES:  POLYVINYL CHLORIDE AND COPOLYMER PRODUCTION, PRIMARY
COPPER SMELTING, SECONDARY COPPER SMELTING, AND PRIMARY NONFERROUS
METALS--ZINC, CADMIUM, AND BERYLLIUM

PART A

1.0  Identification of the Information Collection

(a) Title and Number of the Information Collection.

	“NESHAP for Area Sources:  Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymer
Production, Primary Copper Smelting, Secondary Copper Smelting, and
Primary Nonferrous Metals—Zinc, Cadmium, and Beryllium.”  This is a
new information collection request (ICR) and the EPA tracking number is
2240.01.

 (b) Short Characterization.

	This ICR covers information collection requirements in the proposed
area source rules for primary copper smelting (40 CFR part 63, Subpart
EEEEEE), secondary copper smelting (40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFFFF), and
primary zinc production facilities (part of the primary nonferrous
metals category) in §§63.11162 through 11164 of 40 CFR part 63,
Subpart  GGGGGG.  The proposed area source rules for polyvinyl chloride
and copolymer production in 40 CFR part 63, Subpart DDDDDD and primary
beryllium production facilities (part of the primary nonferrous metals
category) in §§63.11165 and 11166 of 40 CFR part 63, Subpart GGGGGG do
not impose any new information collection burden.  New and existing
polyvinyl chloride and copolymer plants that are area sources would be
required to comply with the same testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements as those in the National Emission Standard for
Vinyl Chloride (40 CFR part 61, Subpart F).  The OMB has previously
approved the information collection requirements in 40 CFR Part 61,
Subpart F (OMB control number 2060-0071, EPA ICR no. 186.10).   New and
existing primary beryllium production facilities that are area sources
would be required to comply with the same testing, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements as those in the National
Emission Standard for Beryllium (40 CFR part 61, Subpart C).  The OMB
has previously approved the information collection requirements in 40
CFR Part 61, Subpart C (OMB control number 2060-0092, EPA ICR number
0193.08).

Potential respondents are owners or operators of a new or existing
primary copper smelter, a new secondary copper smelter, or a new or
existing primary zinc production facility that is an area source of
hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emissions.   For existing facilities, the
proposed NESHAP adopt the same emissions limits, work practice
standards, and compliance provisions that are currently required in the
facility’s Title V permits for the control of particulate matter (PM).
  An existing primary copper smelting area source would be subject to a
facility-wide PM emissions limit; proposed compliance requirements
include a continuous PM sampler, monthly monitoring reports, reports of
deviations, semiannual monitoring reports, and recordkeeping
requirements.  An existing primary zinc production facility would be
subject to equipment/work practice standards for the control of roaster
exhaust gases and PM emissions limits for different types of furnaces.
Proposed compliance provisions include baghouse monitoring and
maintenance requirements, reports of deviations, semiannual monitoring
reports, and recordkeeping requirements.   The proposed NESHAP also
requires repeat PM performance tests (once every 5 years)  for regulated
emissions sources.  Any sintering machine at a primary zinc production
area source would be subject to the PM and opacity limits in the new
source performance standard (NSPS) for primary zinc smelters (40 CFR
part 60, subpart Q) and associated monitoring requirements.  The NSPS
requires a continuous opacity monitoring system (COMS) for sintering
machines.

The proposed requirements for new primary copper smelters include a
facility-wide PM emissions limit with a continuous emissions monitoring
system (CEMS) to measure and record the PM concentration and gas flow
rate of the regulated emissions sources and a device to measure and
record the weight of copper concentrate feed.   Monthly monitoring
reports would also be required.  EPA Performance Specification 11 (40
CFR part 60, appendix B) would apply to the CEMS.  The owner or operator
of a new secondary copper smelter would be required to meet a PM
emissions limit, operate bag leak detection systems, and conduct repeat
PM performance tests.  A proposed work practice standard requires a
written plan for the selection, inspection, and pretreatment of copper
scrap to minimize the amount of oil and plastics in the scrap that are
charged to furnaces.  A new primary zinc production facility would be
subject to PM emissions limits for regulated emissions sources and the
equipment/work practice standard for roasters.  Bag leak detection
systems and repeat PM performance tests would also be required.  Any
sintering machine would be subject to the NSPS requirements; EPA
Performance Specification 1 (40 CFR Part 60, Appendix B) would apply to
a COMS.

	New and existing area sources would be subject to requirements in the
General Provisions  (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A).  An existing affected
source would be required to submit an initial notification of
applicability and a notification of compliance status.  The owner or
operator of an existing affected source would be allowed to certify
initial compliance with PM limits based on previous performance test
results;  performance tests would be required to demonstrate initial
compliance for a new affected source   The owner or operator of an
existing affected source would also be required to comply with the
requirements for startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) plans and
reports in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3).  All requirements in the General
Provisions would apply to the owner or operator of a new affected
source.

The proposed information collection requirements for existing and new
area sources are listed in Attachments 1A and 1B.

2.  Need For and Use of the Collection

(a)	Need/Authority for the Collection.

	Section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires EPA to establish NESHAP
for both major and area sources of HAP that are listed for regulation
under CAA section 112(c).  An area source is a stationary source that is
not a major source (i.e., an area source does not emit and does not have
the potential to emit more than 10 tons per year of any single HAP or
more than 25 tons per year of any combination of HAP).  Requirements for
area sources in CAA sections 112(c)(3) and 112(k) direct EPA to (1)
identify at least 30 air toxics that present the greatest potential
health threat in the largest number of urban areas and (2) to identify
sufficient area source categories to ensure that sources representing 90
percent or more of the of the emissions of the 30 “listed” HAP are
subject to regulation.  EPA implements these requirements through the
Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy (64 FR 38715, July 19, 1999).  Each
of the source categories included in the proposed NESHAP are on the
Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy Area Source Category List.

Under  CAA section 112(d)(5), we may elect to promulgate HAP standards
for area sources based on the use of generally available control
technology (GACT) or management practices used by the sources.  We can
consider costs and economic impacts in determining GACT, which is
particularly important when developing regulations for source categories
that may have few establishments and many small businesses, or when
determining whether additional control is needed for sources that are
already well-controlled as a result of other air emissions standards.

 Facilities in these source categories are current well control as a
result of State and national standards and permitting requirements for
criteria pollutants that obtain co-control of HAP.  Therefore, we have
developed the proposed standards to reflect the application of GACT.
Except for new secondary copper smelters, GACT is equivalent to the
levels of control that are currently required for these sources.  We are
proposing these standards at this time in response to a court-ordered
deadline that requires promulgation of four area source categories by
December 15, 2006 (Sierra Club v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
no. 01-1537, DC Cir.).

	Certain records and reports are necessary for the Administrator to
confirm the compliance status of area sources, identify any new or
reconstructed sources subject to the standards, and confirm that the
GACT standards are being achieved on a continuous basis.  These
recordkeeping and reporting requirements are specifically authorized by
section 114 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7414) and set out in the
part 63 NESHAP General Provisions.  The recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for Title V permits are contained in 40 CFR 70.6 and 40 CFR
71.6.   Under parts 63 and 70 or 71, the owner or operator must keep
each record for 5 years following the date of each occurrence,
measurement, maintenance, corrective action, report, or record.

 (b)	Use/Users of the Data.

	The information will be used by the delegated authority (State agency
or Regional Administrator if there is no delegated State agency) to
ensure that the emissions limits and other requirements are being
achieved.  Based on review of the recorded information at the site and
the reported information, the delegated permitting authority can
identify facilities that may not be in compliance and decide which
plants, records, or processes may need inspection.

3.	Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

(a)	Nonduplication.

	Primary copper smelters and primary zinc production facilities are
subject to the NSPS in 40 CFR part 60, subparts Q and R, respectively.
NESHAP for major sources of HAP also apply to primary copper smelters
(40 CFR Part 63, Subpart QQQ).  Existing facilities have title V
operating permits that incorporate the information collection
requirements of the permitting regulations in 40 CFR Parts 70 or 71, the
NSPS, National Ambient Air Quality Standards, and other requirements.
The proposed NESHAP prevent duplication of similar information requests
by adopting the same information collection requirements established in
the title V permit.  By codifying the current requirements, the proposed
NESHAP do not require existing facilities to change the testing,
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements that are already
in place.  New area sources would be required to comply with the
notification, testing, monitoring, operation and maintenance,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the part 63 General
Provisions.

The last secondary copper smelter closed in 2001.  A computer search of
the Federal Information Locator System indicated that there are no
similar information requests for secondary copper smelters being carried
out by the Federal government; and a similar search of EPA's ongoing
ICR's revealed no duplication of information-gathering efforts.

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

	This section is not applicable because this is a rule-related ICR.

(c)	Consultations.

The proposed rules were developed in consultation with individual plants
and a trade association.  The non-EPA persons consulted on the
information collection activities are identified in Table 1.

TABLE 1.  PERSONS CONSULTED ON THE INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITIES

Contact	Organization	Telephone Number

James Mallory	Non-Ferrous Founders’ Society<PHONE_NUMBER>

Jedd Griffin	Zinifex<PHONE_NUMBER>

Mike Altepeter	Big River Zinc<PHONE_NUMBER>

Steve Sands	Kennecott Copper<PHONE_NUMBER>

(d)	Effects of Less Frequent Collection.

	If the relevant information were collected less frequently, the
delegated permitting authority (State or EPA) would not be reasonably
assured that a plant is in compliance with the standards.

(e)	General Guidelines.

	None of the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.6 are being exceeded.

(f)	Confidentiality.

	All information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of
confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency
policies set forth in Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 2, Subpart B --
Confidentiality of Business Information (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902,
September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 39999, September 28, 1978; 43 FR
42251, September 28, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

(g)  Sensitive Questions.

	This section is not applicable because this ICR does not involve
matters of a sensitive nature.

4.	The Respondents and the Information Requested

(a)	Respondents/NAIC Codes.

	Potential respondents under proposed Subpart EEEEEE are owners or
operators of new and existing primary copper smelters that are area
sources of HAP.  The NAICS code for primary copper smelters is 331411.
We estimate that one primary copper smelter would be subject to the
proposed NESHAP; no new area sources are projected during the 3 year
period of this ICR.

Potential respondents under proposed subpart FFFFFF are owners or
operators of new secondary copper smelters that are area sources of HAP.
 Secondary copper smelters are part of the broad NAICS code 331423,
which also includes copper, brass, and bronze ingot makers.  The section
112(k) listing for secondary copper smelters was based on a small subset
of this NAICS  code and does not include ingot makers.  There are no
existing secondary copper smelters in the U.S., and no new secondary
copper smelting area sources are expected during the 3-year period of
this ICR.

 Potential respondents under proposed subpart GGGGGG are owners of
operators of new and existing primary zinc smelters that are area
sources of HAP.  The NAICS code for primary zinc smelters is 331419.  We
estimate that two primary zinc smelters would be subject to the proposed
NESHAP; no new area sources are expected during the 3 year period of
this ICR.

(b) Information Requested.

	(i)  Data Items, Including Recordkeeping Requirements.  Attachments 1A
and 1B, Source Data and Information Requirements, summarizes the
proposed data items, including recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

	(ii)  Respondent Activities.  The respondent activities required by the
proposed rules are identified in Tables 2A and 2B and introduced in
section 6(a).

5.	The Information Collected–Agency Activities, Collection
Methodology, and Information Management

(a)	Agency Activities.

	A list of Agency activities is provided in Tables 3A and 3B and
introduced in section 6(c).

(b)	Collection Methodology and Management.

	Data and records maintained by the respondents are tabulated and
published for use in compliance and enforcement programs of the
delegated permitting authority.  The monitoring reports submitted to the
permitting authority are used for problem identification, as a check on
source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations.
EPA is the permitting authority until the State agency is delegated
authority to implement the final rule.  Therefore, information contained
in the reports submitted to the Regional Administrator will be entered
into the Air Facility System (AFS), which is operated and maintained by
EPA's Office of Compliance.  AFS is EPA’s database for the collection,
maintenance, and retrieval of compliance data for approximately 125,000
industrial and government-owned facilities.  EPA uses the AFS for
tracking air pollution compliance and enforcement by local and state
regulatory agencies, EPA regional offices and EPA headquarters.  EPA and
its delegated authorities can edit, store, retrieve and analyze the
data.

(c)  Small Entity Flexibility.

	The Small Business Administration defines a small entity as a firm
having no more than 1,000 employees (for the primary copper smelting
industry) or 750 employees (for the secondary copper smelting or primary
zinc smelting industries).   One of the area source facilities that
would be subject to the proposed NESHAP is considered a small entity.
However, the proposed NESHAP would not impose any significant compliance
costs on that entity or any of the other area source facilities because
each facility is already meeting the proposed emissions limits and
compliance requirements.  The only cost of the proposed NESHAP for
existing area sources is for a startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan
and one-time notifications.

(d)  Collection Schedule.

	The specific frequency for each information collection activity within
this request is shown in Tables 2A and 2B.

6.   Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

(a)  Estimating Respondent Burden.

	The annual burden estimates for the proposed NESHAP are shown in Tables
2A (for subpart EEEEEE) and 2B (for subpart GGGGGG).    These numbers
were derived from estimates based on EPA’s experience with other
standards.  No burden estimates are provided for new primary copper or
primary zinc area sources because no new facilities are expected during
the 3-year period of this ICR.  No burden estimates are provided for
secondary copper smelters because there are no existing facilities and
no new facilities are expected during the 3-year period of this ICR.

(b)	 Estimating Respondent Costs.

	The information collection activities for the proposed NESHAP are
presented in Tables 2A and 2B.  Because the data are already collected
by respondents as required by the existing permit requirements for PM,
no respondent development costs are associated with the information
collection activities.

(i)  Estimating Labor Costs.  Labor rates and associated costs are based
on Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data.  Technical, management, and
clerical average hourly rates for private industry workers were taken
from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
December 2005, “Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational and
industry group” available at   HYPERLINK
"http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t02.htm"
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t02.htm .  Wages for occupational
groups are used as the basis for the labor rates with a total
compensation of $41.89/hour for technical, $48.09/hour for managerial,
and $20.86/hour for clerical.  These rates represent salaries plus
fringe benefits and do not include the cost of overhead.  An overhead
rate of 110 percent is used to account for these costs.  The
fully-burdened hourly wage rates used to represent respondent labor
costs are:  technical at $87.98, management at $100.98, and clerical at
$43.80.

	(ii)  Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.
The proposed NESHAP does not require the installation of any new control
devices or monitoring systems at existing facilities.  Capital and O&M
costs are not estimated for new sources because no new sources are
expected during the next 3-year period.  Therefore, no (zero) capital
and O&M costs are associated with the proposed NESHAP during the 3-year
period of this ICR.

	(iii)  Capital/Startup vs. O&M Costs.  Capital/startup costs are not
estimated for existing area sources because the proposed NESHAP do not
require the installation of any new control devices or monitoring
systems or new performance test to demonstrate initial compliance with
the emission limits (i.e., assumes sources will use the results of
performance tests conducted within the past 5 years to demonstrate
initial compliance).   Capital/startup costs are not estimated for new
sources because no new sources are expected during the next 3-year
period.  Therefore, no (zero) capital/startup are associated with the
proposed NESHAP during the 3-year period of this ICR.

	(iv)  Annualizing Capital Costs.  No capital costs are associated with
the proposed NESHAP.  Therefore, no (zero) annualized costs are
associated with the proposed NESHAP during the 3-year period of this
ICR.

(c)  Estimating Agency Burden and Cost.

	Because the information collection requirements were developed as an
incidental part of standards development, no costs can be attributed to
the development of the information collection requirements.  Because
reporting and recordkeeping requirements on the part of the respondents
are required under the operating permits rules in 40 CFR part 70 or part
71 and the part 63 NESHAP General Provisions, no operational costs would
be incurred by the Federal Government.  Publication and distribution of
the information are part of the Compliance Data System, with the result
that no Federal costs can be directly attributed to the ICR.
Examination of records to be maintained by the respondents will occur
incidentally as part of the periodic inspection of sources that is part
of EPA's overall compliance and enforcement program, and, therefore, is
not attributable to the ICR.  The only costs that the Federal government
would incur are user costs associated with the analysis of the reported
information, as presented in Tables 3A and 3B.

	The Agency labor rates are from the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM) 2006 General Schedule which excludes locality rates of pay.  These
rates can be obtained from Salary Table 2006-GS available on the OPM
website,   HYPERLINK "http://www.opm.gov/oca/06tables/html/gs_h.asp"
http://www.opm.gov/oca/06tables/html/gs_h.asp . The government employee
labor rates are $14.35/hour for clerical (GS-6, Step 3), $26.53 for
technical (GS-12, Step 1), and $35.75/hr for management (GS-13, Step 5).
 These rates were increased by 60 percent to include fringe benefits and
overhead.  The fully-burdened wage rates used to represent Agency labor
costs are:  clerical at $22.96; technical at $42.45, and management at
$57.20.

(d)  Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs.

There is one existing primary copper smelting area source.  No new
sources are expected during the next 3 years.  Consequently, the average
number of respondents during the 3 year period of this ICR is 0.33.
There are two existing primary zinc smelting area sources.  No new
sources are expected during the next 3 years.  Consequently, the average
number of respondents during the 3 year period of this ICR is 0.67.
The total average number of respondents for all source categories is 1.

The only components of the total annual responses attributable to this
ICR are a startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan and two one-time
initial notifications for each existing facility.  The proposed
requirement for repeat PM performance tests would not occur during the
3-year term of this ICR. Therefore, the number of total annual responses
for proposed subpart EEEEEE (primary copper smelting area sources) is
estimated as:  (0.33 annual average respondents × 1 notification) +
(0.33 annual average respondents × 1 notification) + (0.33 annual
average respondents × 1 written plan).   Therefore, the number of total
annual responses for proposed subpart EEEEEE is 0.99 (rounded to 1).
The number of total annual responses for subpart GGGG (primary zinc
smelters) is estimated as:  (0.67 annual average respondents × 1
notification) + (0.67 annual average respondents × 1 notification) +
(0.67 annual average respondents × 1 written plan).  Therefore, the
number of total annual responses for subpart GGGGGG is 2.01 (rounded to
2).  The total number of responses for the combined sources categories
is 3

 (e)	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables.

	(i)  Respondent tally.  The bottom line respondent burden hours and
costs, presented in Tables 2A and 2B, are calculated by adding
person-hours per year down each column for technical, managerial, and
clerical staff, and by adding down the cost column.

The average annual burden for the monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements in proposed subpart EEEEEE for the one existing
primary copper smelting area source is 9 person hours with an annual
average cost of $771 with no annual capital and O&M costs.

The average annual burden for the monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements in proposed subpart GGGGGG for the two existing
primary zinc smelting area sources is 18.5 person hours with an annual
average cost of $1,566 with no annual capital and O&M costs.

The total annual burden for all source categories is 27.5 hours at $2337
with no annual capital and O&M costs.

	(ii)  The Agency tally.  The average annual Federal Government cost is
$286 for 7 total annual hours.  The bottom line Agency burden hours and
costs presented in Tables 3A and 3B are calculated by adding
person-hours per year down each column for technical, managerial, and
clerical staff, and by adding down the cost column.

	(iii)  Variations in the annual bottom line.   This section does not
apply since no significant variation is anticipated.

(f)	Reasons for Change in Burden.

	This section does not apply because this is a new ICR.

 (g)  Burden Statement

	The average annual respondent burden for the proposed NESHAP for
primary copper smelting area sources is estimated at 9 hours.  The
average annual respondent burden for the proposed NESHAP for primary
zinc smelting area sources is estimated at 18.5 hours. 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
in 40 CFR part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

	To comment on the Agency’s need for this information the accuracy of
the provided burden estimates, and any suggestions for minimizing
respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection
techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0510, which is available for online
viewing at   HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov
, or in person viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information
Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B-102, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC.  The EPA Docket Center Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202)
566-1927.  An electronic version of the public docket is available at
HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov."  http://www.regulations.gov.
This site can be used 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.  When
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 Officer for EPA.
Please include the EPA Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0510 in any
correspondence.

NOTE:  The EPA Docket Center suffered damage due to flooding during the
last week of June 2006.  The Docket Center is continuing to operate.
However, during the cleanup, there will be temporary changes to Docket
Center telephone numbers, addresses, and hours of operation for people
who wish to visit the Public Reading Room to view documents.  Consult
EPA's Federal Register notice at 71 FR 38147 (July 5, 2006) or the EPA
website at   HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm"
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm  for current information on docket
status, locations and telephone numbers.

PART B

	This section is not applicable because statistical methods are not used
in data collection associated with the proposed rules.TABLE 2A.  ANNUAL
RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST:  NESHAP FOR PRIMARY COPPER SMELTING AREA
SOURCES

Burden item	(A) Person-hours per occurrence	(B)  No. of occurrences per
respondent	(C) Person-hours per respondent (C=A*B)	(D) Respondents per
yeara	(E) Technical person-hours per year (E=C*D)	(F) Management
person-hours per year

 (E*0.05)	(G) Clerical person-hours per year (E*0.1)	(H) Costb, $

1.  Applications	N/A

	2.  Surveys and Studies	N/A

	3.  Acquisition, Installation, and Utilization of Technology

     and Systemsc	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

4.  Reporting Requirements

A.  Read instructions	8	1	8	0.33	2.64	0.13	0.26	$256.79

B.  Required activities

      Monitor per Title V permitc	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

      Initial/repeat performance testsd	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

     Prepare startup, shutdown, malfunction plan	4	1	4	0.33	1.32	0.07
0.13	$128.89

     Initial notification of applicability	4	1	4	0.33	1.32	0.07	0.13
$128.89

     Initial notification of compliance status	8	1	8	0.33	2.64	0.13	0.26
$256.79

     Reports per  Title V permitc	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

C.  Create information	See 4B

	D.  Gather existing information	See 4B

	E.  Write report	See 4B

	5.  Recordkeeping Requirements

A.  Read instructions	See 4A

	B.  Plan activities	See 4A

	C.  Implement activities	See 4A

	D.  Record all data required by title V permitc	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

E. Time to transmit or disclose informationc	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

F.  Time to train personnelc	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

G.  Time for audits	N/A

	TOTAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST

9 hrs/yr	$771.36

a  There is one existing primary copper smelter that is an area source.
No new sources are projected during the 3-year term of this ICR.
Therefore, the average number of respondents per year is 0.33
(1÷3=0.33).

b  This ICR uses the following labor rates: $100.98 for managerial
labor, $87.98 for technical labor, and $43.80 for clerical labor.  These
rates are from the U.S. s Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, December 2005, (Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational
and industry group.(  The rates are from

column 1, (Total compensation.(  The rates have been increased by 110%
to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by
private industry.

c   No hours or costs are associated with this burden item because
existing plants are already complying with the requirement in their
Title V permit.

d  An existing facility may certify initial compliance based on previous
PM tests; no new test is required.  Repeat tests would not occur during
the 3-year period of this ICR.

TABLE 2B.  ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST:  NESHAP FOR PRIMARY ZINC
PRODUCTION AREA SOURCES

Burden item	(A) Person-hours per occurrence	(B)  No. of occurrences per
respondent	(C) Person-hours per respondent (C=A*B)	(D) Respondents per
yeara	(E) Technical person-hours per year (E=C*D)	(F) Management
person-hours per year

 (E*0.05)	(G) Clerical person-hours per year (E*0.1)	(H) Costb, $

1.  Applications	N/A

	2.  Surveys and Studies	N/A

	3.  Acquisition, Installation, and Utilization of Technology

     and Systemsc	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

4.  Reporting Requirements

A.  Read instructions	8	1	8	0.67	5.36	0.27	0.54	$522.28

B.  Required activities

     Monitor per Title V permitc	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

     Initial./Repeat performance testsd	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

     Prepare startup, shutdown, malfunction plan	4	1	4	0.67	2.68	0.13
0.27	$260.75

     Initial notification of applicability	4	1	4	0.67	2.68	0.13	0.27
$260.75

     Initial notification of compliance status	8	1	8	0.67	5.36	0.27	0.54
$522.28

     Reports per Title V permitc	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

C.  Create information	See 4B

	D.  Gather existing information	See 4B

	E.  Write report	See 4B

	5.  Recordkeeping Requirements

A.  Read instructions	See 4A

	B.  Plan activities	See 4A

	C.  Implement activities	See 4A

	D.  Record all data required by title V permitc	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

E. Time to transmit or disclose informationc	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

F.  Time to train personnelc	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

G.  Time for audits	N/A

	TOTAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST

18.5 hrs/yr	$1,566.06

a  There is one existing primary zinc smelter area source.  No new
sources are projected during the 3-year term of this ICR.  Therefore,
the average number of respondents per year is 0.33 (1÷3=0.33).

b  This ICR uses the following labor rates: $100.98 for managerial
labor, $87.98 for technical labor, and $43.80 for clerical labor.  These
rates are from the U.S. s Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, December 2005, (Table 2.  The rates are from column 1,
(Total compensation.(  The rates have been increased by 110% to account
for the benefit packages available to those employed by private
industry.

c   No hours or costs are associated with this burden item because
existing plants are already complying with the requirement in their
Title V operating permit.

d  An existing facility may certify initial compliance based on previous
PM tests; no new test is required.  Repeat tests would not occur during
the 3-year period of this ICR.

TABLE 3A.  ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST TO THE AGENCY: NESHAP FOR PRIMARY
COPPER SMELTING AREA SOURCES

Burden Item	(A) Person hours per occurrence	(B) Occurrences per plant
per year	(C) Plants per year a	(D) Technical hours/year (D=A*B*C)	(E)
Management   hours/year (E=0.05*D)	(F) Clerical-hours/year (F=0.1*D)
(G) Costb, $

Report Review:

	  Initial notification of applicability 	2	1	0.33	0.66	0.03	0.07	$31.35

  Initial notification of compliance status	4	1	0.33	1.32	0.07	0.13
$63.01

TOTAL BURDEN AND COST

2.28  hours 	$94.36

Footnotes:

a  There is one existing primary copper smelter that is area source.  No
new sources are projected during the next 3-year period..  Therefore,
the average number of plants per year is 0.33 (1÷3=0.33).No travel is
expected.

b  This ICR uses the following average hourly labor rates: 57.20 for
managerial (GS-13, Step 5, $35.75 x 1.6), $42.45 (GS-12, Step 1, $26.53
x 1.6) for technical and $22.96 (GS-6, Step 3, $14.35 x 1.6) for
clerical.  These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
(2006 General Schedule( which excludes locality rates of pay.

TABLE 3B.  ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST TO THE AGENCY:  NESHAP FOR PRIMARY
ZINC SMELTING AREA SOURCES

Burden Item	(A) Person hours per occurrence	(B) Occurrences per plant
per year	(C) Plants per year a	(D) Technical hours/year (D=A*B*C)	(E)
Management   hours/year (E=0.05*D)	(F) Clerical-hours/year (F=0.1*D)
(G) Costb, $

Report Review:

	  Initial notification of applicability 	2	1	0.67	1.34	0.07	0.13	$63.86

  Initial notification of compliance status	4	1	0.67	2.68	0.13	0.27
$127.41

TOTAL BURDEN AND COST

4.62  hours 	$191.27

Footnotes:

a  There are 2 existing primary zinc smelters that are area sources.  No
new sources are projected during the next 3-year period.. Therefore, the
average number of plants per year is 0.67 (2÷3=0.67).  No travel is
expected.

b  This ICR uses the following average hourly labor rates: 57.20 for
managerial (GS-13, Step 5, $35.75 x 1.6), $42.45 (GS-12, Step 1, $26.53
x 1.6) for technical and $22.96 (GS-6, Step 3, $14.35 x 1.6) for
clerical.  These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
(2006 General Schedule( which excludes locality rates of pay.

ATTACHMENT 1A.  INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS-- NESHAP FOR PRIMARY COPPER
SMELTING AREA SOURCES

Requirement	Citation for existing sources	Citation for new sources
General Provisions citation

Monitoring

	Continuous PM sampler or PM CEMS and calculations of daily average
emissions	§63.11148(d)	§63.11149(d), (e)	NA

Notifications

	Notification of applicability	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE	Table 1 to
subpart EEEEEE	40 CFR 63.9(a)(2)

Notification of construction/ reconstruction 	NA	Table 1 to subpart
EEEEEE	40 CFR 63.9(b)(5)

Notification of special compliance requirements 	NA	Table 1 to subpart
EEEEEE	40 CFR 63.9(d)

Notification of performance test	NA	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE	40 CFR
63.9(c)

Notification of opacity/VE observations	NA	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE	40
CFR 63.9(f)

Additional CMS notifications	NA	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE	40 CFR 63.9(g)

Notification of compliance status	Table 1 to subpart EEEEE/
§63.11150(a)	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE/ §63.11150(b) 	40 CFR 63.9(h)

Notification of changes in information	Table 1 to subpart EEEEE	Table 1
to subpart EEEEEE	40 CFR 63.9(j)

Plans

	SSM plan	Table 1 to subpart EEEEE	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE	40 CFR
63.6(e)(3)

Performance test plan	NA	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE	40 CFR 63.7(c)(2)

CMS quality control plan	NA	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE	40 CFR 63.8(d)

CMS performance evaluation test plan	NA	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE	40 CFR
63.8(e)(3)

Records

	Information to demonstrate compliance 	§63.11148(i)	Table 1 to subpart
EEEEE/§63.11149(e)	40 CFR 63.10

Reports

	Monthly summary of monitoring data	§63.11148(f) 	§63.11149(g)	NA

Report of deviation	§63.11148(g) 	NA	NA

Semiannual monitoring report	§63.11148(h) 	NA	NA

Initial performance test	§63.1148(e)	§63.11149(f)	40 CFR 63.7(e)(1)

Quality assurance test plan	NA	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE	40 CFR 63.7(c)

CMS performance evaluations/report	NA	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE	40 CFR
63.8(e)(5)

SSM reports	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE	40 CFR
63.6(e)(3)

Excess emissions reports	NA	Table 1 to subpart EEEEEE	40 CFR 63.10(e)(3)

ATTACHMENT 1B.  INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS--NESHAP FOR PRIMARY ZINC
PRODUCTION AREA SOURCES

Requirement	Citation for existing sources	Citation for new sources
General Provisions citation

Monitoring

	Baghouse	§63.11162(c)	§63.11163(c)	NA

COMS for sintering machine	§63.11162(e)	§63.1163(e)	NA

Notifications

	Notification of applicability	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	Table 1 to
subpart GGGGGG	40 CFR 63.9(a)(2)

Notification of construction/ reconstruction 	NA	Table 1 to subpart
GGGGGG	40 CFR 63.9(b)(5)

Notification of special compliance requirements 	NA	Table 1 to subpart
GGGGGG	40 CFR 63.9(d)

Notification of performance test	NA	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	40 CFR
63.9(c)

Notification of opacity/VE observations	NA	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	40
CFR 63.9(f)

Additional CMS notifications	NA	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	40 CFR 63.9(g)

Notification of compliance status	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG/
§63.11164(a)	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG/ §63.11164(b) 	40 CFR 63.9(h)

Notification of changes in information	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	Table 1
to subpart GGGGGG	40 CFR 63.9(j)

Plans

	SSM plan	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	40 CFR
63.6(e)(3)

Performance test plan	NA	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	40 CFR 63.7(c)(2)

CMS quality control plan	NA	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	40 CFR 63.8(d)

CMS performance evaluation test plan	NA	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	40 CFR
63.8(e)(3)

Records

	Baghouse and monitoring information	§63.11162(c), (j)	Table 1 to
subpart GGGGGG/§63.11163(d)	40 CFR 63.10

Reports

	Reports of deviation	§63.11162(h)	NA	NA

Semiannual monitoring reports	§63.11162(i)	NA	NA

Initial /repeat performance tests 	§63.11162(f), (g)	§63.11163(g), (h)
40 CFR 63.7(e)(1)

40 CFR 63.6(h)(7)

Quality assurance test plan	NA	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	40 CFR 63.7(c)

CMS performance evaluation/report	NA	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	40 CFR
63.8(e)(5)

 SSM reports	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	40 CFR
63.6(e)(3)

Excess emissions reports	NA	Table 1 to subpart GGGGGG	40 CFR 63.10(e)(3)

   The Secondary Copper Smelting and Cadmium Refining and Cadmium Oxide
Production source categories were added to the area source category list
on June 26, 2002 (67 FR 43112).  The listing of secondary copper
smelting was based on HAP emissions of cadmium, lead, and dioxin.  On
November 22, 2002 (67 FR 70427), we added Primary  Copper Smelters to
the area source category list based on HAP metal emissions (arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, lead, and nickel),  changed the name of the Cadmium
Refining and Cadmium Oxide Production source category to Primary
Nonferrous Metals-Zinc, Cadmium and Beryllium, and expanded the scope of
the Primary Nonferrous Metals source category.  The listing of primary
nonferrous metals was based on HAP metal emissions of arsenic, cadmium,
lead, manganese, and nickel.

 PAGE

 PAGE  1

  PAGE  16

  PAGE   20


[Federal Register: April 16, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 72)]
[Notices]
[Page 18969-18970]
[DOCID:fr16ap07-54]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP97-81-032]

Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC; Notice of
Compliance Filing

April 10, 2007.
    Take notice that on April 5, 2007 Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas
Transmission LLC (KMIGT) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas
Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume No. 1-A, the following tariff sheet, to
be effective April 6, 2007:

Eighth Revised Sheet No. 4G.01
Fourth Revised Sheet No. 4K
First Revised Sheet No. 4K.01
First Revised Sheet No. 4K.02

    KMIGT states that the tariff sheets are being filed in compliance
with the Commission's December 31, 1996 ``Order Accepting Tariff Filing
Subject to Conditions'' in Docket No. RP97-81 (77 FERC ] 61,350) and
the Commission's Letter Orders dated March 28, 1997 and November 30,
2000 in Docket Nos. RP97-81-001 and RP01-70-000, respectively.
    KMIGT states that a copy of this filing has been served upon all
parties to this proceeding, KMIGT's customers and affected state
commissions.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests
must be filed in

accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's
regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy
of that document on all the parties to the proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-7170 Filed 4-13-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 218 (Thursday, November 12, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70000-70002]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28687]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76367; File No. SR-BOX-2015-35]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To
Adopt Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Plans (``BC/DR plans'')
Testing Requirements for Certain Options Participants in Connection
With Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity (``Regulation SCI'')

November 5, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on October 26, 2015, BOX Options Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to adopt business continuity and disaster
recovery plans (``BC/DR plans'') testing requirements for certain
Options Participants in connection with Regulation SCI. The text of the
proposed rule change is available from the principal office of the
Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference Room and also on the
Exchange's Internet Web site at http://boxexchange.com.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the
most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to adopt BOX Rule 2100 (Mandatory
Participation in Testing of Backup Systems) to establish business
continuity and disaster recovery plans (``BC/DR plans'') testing
requirements for certain Options Participants in connection with
Regulation SCI.
    As adopted by the Commission, Regulation SCI applies to certain
self-regulatory organizations (including the Exchange), alternative
trading systems (``ATSs''), plan processors, and exempt clearing
agencies (collectively, ``SCI entities''), and will require these SCI
entities to comply with requirements with respect to the automated
systems central to the performance of their regulated activities. Among
the requirements of Regulation SCI is Rule 1001(a)(2)(v), which
requires the Exchange and other SCI entities to maintain ``[b]usiness
continuity and disaster recovery plans that include maintaining backup
and recovery capabilities sufficiently resilient and geographically
diverse and that are reasonably designed to achieve next business day
resumption of trading and two-hour resumption of critical SCI systems
following a wide-scale disruption.'' \3\ The Exchange takes pride in
the reliability and availability of its systems. Historically, Exchange
systems have been up and available more than 99.9% of the time; yet as
a precaution, the Exchange has put extensive time and resources toward
planning for system failures and already maintains robust BC/DR plans
consistent with the Rule. As set forth below, in connection with
Regulation SCI, the Exchange is proposing to require certain Members to
participate in testing of the operation of the Exchange's BC/DR plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 17 CFR 242.1001(a)(2)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to an SCI entity's BC/DR plans, including its backup
systems, paragraph (a) of Rule 1004 of Regulation SCI requires each SCI
entity to: ``[e]stablish standards for the designation of those members
or participants that the SCI entity reasonably determines are, taken as
a whole, the minimum necessary for the maintenance of fair and orderly
markets in the event of the activation of such plans.'' \4\ Paragraph
(b) of Rule 1004 further requires each SCI entity to ``[d]esignate
members or participants pursuant to the standards established in
paragraph (a) of [Rule 1004] and require participation by such
designated members or participants in scheduled functional and
performance testing of the operation of such plans, in the manner and
frequency specified by the SCI entity, provided that such frequency
shall not be less than once every 12 months.'' \5\ In order to comply
with Rule 1004 of Regulation SCI, the Exchange proposes to adopt Rule
2100, governing mandatory participation in testing of Exchange backup
systems, as described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 17 CFR 242.1004(a).
    \5\ 17 CFR 242.1004(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, in paragraph (a) of Rule 2100, the Exchange proposes to
include language from paragraph (a) of Rule 1004 of Regulation SCI to
summarize the Exchange's obligation pursuant to such rule.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to state that ``[p]ursuant to
Regulation SCI and with respect to the Exchange's business continuity
and disaster recovery plans, including its backup systems, the Exchange
is required to establish standards for the designation of Members that
the Exchange reasonably determines are, taken as a whole, the minimum
necessary for the maintenance of fair and orderly markets in the event
of the activation of such plans.'' The Exchange further proposes that
paragraph (a) indicate that the ``Exchange has established standards
and will designate Participants according to those standards'' as set
forth in the proposed Rule. In addition, the Exchange proposes to make
clear that all Members are permitted to connect to the Exchange's
backup systems as well as to participate in testing of such systems.
Proposed paragraph (a) is consistent with the Commission's adoption of
Regulation SCI, which encouraged ``SCI entities to permit non-
designated members or participants to participate in the testing of the
SCI entity's BC/DR plans if they request to do so.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See SCI Adopting Release, supra note 4[sic] at 72350.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, in paragraph (b) of Rule 2100, the Exchange proposes to
specify that it shall designate those BOX Participants that the
Exchange reasonably determines are, taken as a whole, the minimum
necessary for the maintenance of fair and orderly markets in the event
of the activation of the Exchange's business continuity and disaster
recovery plans (``Designated BCP/DR Participants''). Designated BCP/DR
Participants will be identified based on criteria determined by the
Exchange and announced via Regulatory Circular, which may include the
amount of volume transacted by the Participant in

a class or on the Exchange in general, operational capacity, trading
experience, and historical contribution to fair and orderly markets on
the Exchange. Designated BCP/DR Participants will participate in
functional and performance testing in the manner and frequency
specified by the Exchange, which shall not be less than once every 12
months.
    The Exchange notes that it encourages all Participants to connect
to the Exchange's backup systems and to participate in testing of such
systems. In fact, the Exchange provides connectivity free of charge to
all Participants that connect to Exchange backup systems in order to
help reduce the economic burden of maintaining connectivity to Exchange
backup systems. However, in adopting the requirements of Rule 2100(b)
the Exchange intends to subject to the Rule only those Participants
that the Exchange believes are necessary to maintain fair and orderly
markets at the Exchange.
    In addition to paragraphs (a) and (b) described above, the Exchange
also proposes to adopt Interpretive Material IM-2100-1, which would
provide additional detail regarding the notice that will be provided to
Participants that have been designated pursuant to subparagraph (b). As
proposed, IM-2100-1 would state that Designated BCP/DR Participants
will be identified based on criteria determined by the Exchange,
consistent with proposed paragraph (b)(1), and announced via Regulatory
Circular. Any changes to the standards by which a market participant
might be determined to be a Designated BCP/DR Participant would be
applied prospectively with reasonable advance notice as announced via
Regulatory Circular. The Exchange would first announce the criteria by
which market participants would be determined to be Designated BCP/DR
Participants by November 3, 2015. The Exchange believes the proposed
notice requirements are necessary to provide Participants with proper
advance notice in the event they become subject to proposed Rule
2100(b). The proposed timeframes would also provide Participants with
adequate time to become compliant with such Rule due to the necessary
infrastructure changes it may take to connect to the Exchange's backup
systems for a Participant that is not already connected.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\7\ in general, and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ in
particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, 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. In particular, the proposal will ensure that the
Participants necessary to ensure the maintenance of a fair an orderly
market are properly designated consistent with Rule 1004 of Regulation
SCI. Specifically, the proposal will adopt criteria with respect to the
designation of Participants that are required to participate in the
testing of the Exchange's BC/DR plans, as well as appropriate
notification regarding such designation. As set forth in the SCI
Adopting Release, ``SROs have the authority, and legal responsibility,
under Section 6 of the Exchange Act, to adopt and enforce rules
(including rules to comply with Regulation SCI's requirements relating
to BC/DR testing) applicable to their members or participants that are
designed to, among other things, foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, 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.'' \9\ The Exchange believes
that this proposal is consistent with such authority and legal
responsibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \9\ See SCI Adopting Release, supra note 4 at 72350.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In this regard and as indicated
above, the Exchange notes that the proposal is not a competitive
proposal but rather is necessary for the Exchange's compliance with
Regulation SCI, and is also consistent with a recent filings submitted
by BATS and the CBOE.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 76162 (October 15,
2015), 80 FR 63849 (October 21, 2015) (SR-BATS-2015-86); 76203
(October 20, 2015), 80 FR 65263 (October 20, 2015) (SR-CBOE-2015-
088).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\12\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\13\ A proposed rule change filed under Rule
19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \14\ normally does not become operative prior to 30
days after the date of the filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii),\15\ the Commission may designate a shorter time if such
action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \13\ In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory
organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to
file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to
the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time
as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this
requirement.
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon
filing. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
as it will allow the Exchange to incorporate changes required under
Regulation SCI, such as establishing standards for designating BC/DR
participants, prior to the November 3, 2015 compliance date.
Accordingly, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be
operative upon filing.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).

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

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BOX-2015-35 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2015-35. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method.
    The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet
Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with
respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission,
and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change
between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be
withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C.
552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the
Commission's Public Reference Room, on official business days between
the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., located at 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2015-35 and should be
submitted on or before December 3, 2015.

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

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

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-28687 Filed 11-10-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 51 (Thursday, March 15, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11511-11512]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05231]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD18-5-000]

Review of Cost Submittals by Other Federal Agencies for
Administering Part I of the Federal Power Act; Notice of Technical
Conference

    In an order issued on October 8, 2004, the Commission set forth a
guideline for Other Federal Agencies (OFAs) to submit their costs
related to Administering Part I of the Federal Power Act.\1\ The
Commission required OFAs to submit their costs using the OFA Cost
Submission Form. The October 8 Order also announced that a technical
conference would be held for the purpose of reviewing the submitted
cost forms and detailed supporting documentation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Order On Rehearing Consolidating Administrative Annual
Charges Bill Appeals And Modifying Annual Charges Billing
Procedures, 109 FERC 61,040 (2004) (October 8 Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission will hold a technical conference for reviewing the
submitted OFA costs. The purpose of the conference will be for OFAs and
licensees to discuss costs reported in the forms and any other
supporting documentation or analyses.
    The technical conference will be held on March 29, 2018, in
Conference Room 3M-3 at the Commission's headquarters, 888 First Street
NE, Washington, DC. The technical conference will begin at 2:00 p.m.
(EST).
    The technical conference will also be transcribed. Those interested
in obtaining a copy of the transcript immediately for a fee should
contact the Ace-Federal Reporters, Inc., at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or 1-800-336-
6646. Two weeks after the post-forum meeting, the transcript will be
available for free on the Commission's e-library system. Anyone without
access to the Commission's website or who has questions about the
technical conference should contact Raven A. Rodriguez at (202) 502-
6276 or via email at [email protected].
    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an email to [email protected] or call toll free

(866) 208-3372 (voice),<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a FAX to 202-208-
2106 with the required accommodations.

    Dated: March 9, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-05231 Filed 3-14-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 171 (Tuesday, September 4, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 53878]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21665]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC12-17-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-714); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 USC 3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is soliciting public comment on the
currently approved information collection, Annual Electric Balancing
Authority Area and Planning Area Report.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due November 5,
2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by Docket No. [IC12-17-
000]) by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web Site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at (202)
273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-714: Annual Electric Balancing Authority Area and
Planning Area Report.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0140.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-714 information
collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting
requirements.
    Abstract: The Federal Power Act authorizes the Commission to
collect information from electric utility balancing authorities and
planning areas in the United States. 18 CFR 141.51 mandates the data
collection.
    The Commission uses the collected data to analyze power system
operations along with its regulatory functions. These analyses estimate
the effect of changes in power system operations resulting from the
installation of a new generating unit or plant, transmission
facilities, energy transfers between systems, and/or new points of
interconnections. Also, these analyses serve to correlate rates and
charges, assess reliability and other operating attributes in
regulatory proceedings, monitor market trends and behaviors, and
determine the competitive impacts of proposed mergers, acquisitions,
and dispositions.
    Type of Respondents: Electric utilities operating balancing
authority areas and planning areas with annual peak demand over 200 MW.
    Estimate of Annual Burden \1\: The Commission estimates the total
Public Reporting Burden for this information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Commission defines burden as 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. For further explanation of what is included in the
information collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal
Regulations 1320.3.

           FERC--714 (IC12-17-000)--Annual Electric Balancing Authority Area and Planning Area Report
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Number of        Total number of     Average burden      Estimated total
    Number of respondents (A)        responses per      responses (A) x        hours per      annual  burden (C)
                                    respondent (B)         (B) = (C)         response (D)            x (D)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
219.............................                  1                 219                  87              19,053
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The total estimated annual cost burden to respondents is
$1,314,839.32 [19,053 hours / 2080 hours/year \2\ = 9.16009 * $143,540/
year \3\ = $1,314,839.32]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 2080 hours = 52 weeks * 40 hours per week (i.e. 1 year of
full-time employment).
    \3\ Average salary plus benefits per full-time equivalent
employee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: August 28, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-21665 Filed 8-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P