[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 58 (Monday, March 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12974-12978]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06030]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82916; File No. SR-NSCC-2018-001]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Amend the By-Laws

March 20, 2018.
    On February 2, 2018, National Securities Clearing Corporation
(``NSCC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') proposed rule change SR-NSCC-2018-001, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\2\ The proposed rule change was published
for comment in the Federal Register on February 14, 2018.\3\ The
Commission did not receive any comment letters on the proposed rule
change. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission approves the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82674 (February 8,
2018), 83 FR 6633 (February 14, 2018) (SR-NSCC-2018-001)
(``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change would amend the NSCC By-Laws (``By-Laws'')
\4\ to (1) change certain NSCC Board of Directors (``Board'') titles,
officer titles, and offices (and their respective powers and duties),
(2) update the compensation section for officers, and (3) make
technical changes and corrections, each discussed more fully below. The
proposed rule change would amend the Rules to incorporate, by
reference, the By-Laws and the Certificate of Incorporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ As discussed below, the By-Laws and NSCC's Certificate of
Incorporation (``Certificate of Incorporation'') would each be
incorporated by reference into NSCC's Rules and Procedures
(``Rules''), available at http://www.dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Changes to Certain Titles, Offices, and Related Powers and Duties

    NSCC proposes changes to the titles, offices, and related powers
and duties of

certain Board and officer personnel, as further described below.
1. Non-Executive Chairman of the Board
    NSCC proposes to replace the title of ``Chairman of the Board''
with the title of ``Non-Executive Chairman of the Board.'' \5\ NSCC
proposes to change its By-Laws to reflect that this position is held by
a non-executive.\6\ Therefore, NSCC would change relevant references in
the By-Laws from ``Chairman'' and ``Chairman of the Board'' to ``Non-
Executive Chairman of the Board.'' \7\ NSCC also would delete certain
references in the By-Laws to the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board as
a member of NSCC management because the position is no longer in
management.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Notice, 83 FR at 6634.
    \6\ Id.
    \7\ Id.
    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the proposed Section 2.8 (Non-Executive Chairman of the Board),
NSCC would identify the powers and duties of the Non-Executive Chairman
of the Board, including (1) general responsibility for carrying out the
policies of the Board, (2) general supervision of the Board and its
activities and general leadership of the Board, (3) presiding over
stockholders' meetings (when present), and (4) such other powers and
duties as the Board may designate.\9\ Proposed Section 2.8 (Non-
Executive Chairman of the Board) also would include a provision stating
that a presiding director (as elected by the Board) shall preside at
all stockholders and Board meetings when the Non-Executive Chairman of
the Board is absent.\10\ Additionally, Proposed Section 2.8 (Non-
Executive Chairman of the Board) would provide that the Non-Executive
Chairman of the Board's performance of any enumerated duty shall be
conclusive evidence of his power to act.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Id.
    \10\ Id. This provision is designed to correct an inaccuracy in
current By-Laws Section 3.3 (Powers and Duties of the President),
which gives presiding authority over stockholder meetings to the
President when the Chairman of the Board is absent. Proposed Section
2.8 (Non-Executive Chairman of the Board) would be consistent with
the Mission Statement and Charter of the Depository Trust
Corporation (``DTC''), Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC''),
NSCC, and the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (``DTCC''),
which gives presiding authority over stockholder meetings to a
presiding director when the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board is
absent. DTC, FICC, and NSCC are subsidiaries of DTCC, each having
the same Board of Directors as DTCC. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 74142 (January 27, 2015), 80 FR 5188 (January 30, 2015)
(SR-FICC-2014-810, SR-NSCC-2014-811, SR-DTC-2014-812).
    \11\ Notice, 83 FR at 6634.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal also identifies the individuals to whom the Non-
Executive Chairman may assign duties. In proposed Section 3.2 (Powers
and Duties of the President and Chief Executive Officer), the Non-
Executive Chairman of the Board would have the authority to designate
powers and duties to the President and Chief Executive Officer
(``CEO'').\12\ In proposed Section 3.2 (Powers and Duties of Managing
Directors), NSCC also would add the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board
to the list of individuals who have the ability to assign powers and
duties to Managing Directors.\13\ Finally, in proposed Section 3.4
(Powers and Duties of the Secretary), the Non-Executive Chairman of the
Board (i.e., not the President and CEO) would have the authority to
assign additional powers and duties to the Secretary.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Notice, 83 FR at 6635.
    \13\ Id.
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Office of the CEO
    NSCC proposes to revise the By-Laws to reflect that one individual
holds the office of the President and CEO. As such, the proposal would
change the By-Laws to add the office of the CEO and combine the office
of the President and the office of the CEO into one office (President
and CEO).\15\ While current Section 3.3 (Powers and Duties of the
President) provides that the President shall be the CEO, current
Section 3.1 (General Provisions) does not include CEO in the list of
designated officer positions, though President is currently included in
this list.\16\ Therefore, NSCC proposes to revise the relevant
references in the By-Laws from President to President and CEO.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Id.
    \16\ Id.
    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, NSCC proposes to make several By-Laws revisions to
reflect the responsibilities for the consolidated role of President and
CEO.\18\ First, NSCC would delete and replace current Section 3.3
(Powers and Duties of the President) with proposed Section 3.2 (Powers
and Duties of the President and CEO).\19\ Proposed Section 3.2 (Powers
and Duties of the President and CEO) would clarify the powers and
duties associated with the role of President and CEO.\20\ For example,
in proposed Section 3.2 (Powers and Duties of the President and CEO)
the President and CEO would have general supervision over the overall
business strategy, business operations, systems, customer outreach, as
well as risk management, control, and staff functions, subject to the
direction of the Board and the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board.\21\
In addition, because the office of the Chief Operating Officer
(``COO'') would be eliminated (as described further below), the current
COO responsibility of general supervision over NSCC's operations in
current Section 3.4 (Powers and Duties of the Chief Operating Officer)
would be assigned to the President and CEO.\22\ Proposed Section 3.2
(Powers and Duties of the President and CEO) would also delineate the
authority that the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board has over the
President and CEO by stating that the latter would have such other
powers and perform such other duties as the Board or the Non-Executive
Chairman of the Board may designate.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Id.
    \19\ Id.
    \20\ Id.
    \21\ Id.
    \22\ Id.
    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC also proposes to reassign or reclassify several
responsibilities currently assigned to the President.\24\ Specifically,
the responsibility for executing the Board's policies would be assigned
to the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board rather than to the President
and CEO.\25\ Additionally, NSCC would remove the statement
``performance of any such duty by the President shall be conclusive
evidence of his power to act'' in current Section 3.3 (Powers and
Duties of the President).\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Id.
    \25\ Id.
    \26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned above, NSCC would delete language from the By-Laws
stating that, in the absence of the Chairman of the Board, the
President shall preside at all meetings of shareholders and all Board
meetings (when present).\27\ Similarly, NSCC would delete language from
the By-Laws stating that the President and Board currently have the
authority to assign powers and duties to the Comptroller in current
Section 3.8 (Powers and Duties of the Comptroller), as discussed
below.\28\ In proposed Section 3.5 (Powers and Duties of the Chief
Financial Officer) the President and CEO and Board would have the
authority to assign duties to the Chief Financial Officer
(``CFO'').\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Id. As stated above, that power resides with the presiding
director who is elected annually by the Board. See supra note 20.
    \28\ Notice, 83 FR at 6642.
    \29\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal also removes certain responsibilities from the
President. In proposed Section 3.4 (Powers and

Duties of the Secretary), the power to assign additional powers and
duties to the Secretary would be removed from the President and granted
to the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Office of the CFO; Office of the Comptroller
    The proposal would add the office of the CFO and assign to the CFO
general supervision of the financial operations of NSCC.\31\ References
in the By-Laws to the Comptroller would be deleted because NSCC states
that it neither has a Comptroller nor plans to appoint one.\32\ In
proposed Section 3.5 (Powers and Duties of the Chief Financial Officer)
the CFO would be granted overall supervision authority over the
financial operations of NSCC, and upon request, the CFO would counsel
and advise other officers of NSCC and perform other duties as agreed
with the President and CEO (or as determined by the Board).\33\ The
proposal also provides that the CFO would report directly to the
President and CEO.\34\ Furthermore, because the Treasurer would
directly report to the CFO, proposed Section 3.6 (Powers and Duties of
the Treasurer) would provide that the Treasurer would have all such
powers and duties as generally are incident to the position of
Treasurer or as the CFO (in addition to the President and CEO and the
Board) may assign.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Notice, 83 FR at 6636.
    \32\ Id.
    \33\ Id.
    \34\ Id.
    \35\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Office of the COO
    In this proposal, NSCC would delete references in the By-Laws to
the COO because NSCC states that it no longer has a COO and has no
plans to appoint one.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Executive Director; Vice President
    In this proposal, NSCC would change the title of Vice President to
Executive Director, and update the Executive Director position's
related powers and duties to reflect the position's seniority
level.\37\ In NSCC's organizational structure, Executive Directors
report to Managing Directors.\38\ Due to this level of seniority, NSCC
proposes to remove provisions in the By-Laws that previously allowed
Vice Presidents (now, Executive Directors) to call special meetings of
shareholders, to sign share certificates, or to preside over
shareholder meetings unless specifically designated to do so by the
Board.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ Id.
    \38\ Id.
    \39\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. Other Changes to the Powers and Duties of the Board and Certain
Other Designated Officers
    In proposed Section 3.1 (General Provisions), NSCC proposes to add
a parenthetical phrase to clarify that the Board's power to appoint
other officers includes, but is not limited to, the power to appoint a
Vice Chairman of the Corporation and one or more Executive
Directors.\40\ Additionally, in current Section 3.1 (General
Provisions), NSCC proposes to clarify that neither the Secretary nor
any Assistant Secretary can hold the following offices (1) Vice
Chairman of the Corporation or (2) President and CEO.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Id.
    \41\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal also enumerates the responsibilities of NSCC's
Managing Directors.\42\ In proposed Section 1.8 (Presiding Officer and
Secretary), Managing Directors would be removed from the list of
officers authorized to preside over a stockholders' meeting unless
specifically authorized by the Board.\43\ Similarly, in proposed
Section 2.6 (Meetings), Managing Directors would be added to the list
of officers authorized to call special meetings of the Board.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ Id.
    \43\ Id.
    \44\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC also proposes to amend the By-Laws to remove specific powers
from the Treasurer and Assistant Treasurer.\45\ In current Section 5.1
(Certificates of Shares), NSCC proposes to delete the reference to
Treasurer and Assistant Treasurer from the list of authorized
signatories because NSCC expects the Secretary or Assistant Secretary
(who are each currently listed as authorized signatories) to sign any
share certificates.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ Notice, 83 FR at 6637.
    \46\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Compensation of the President and CEO

    Proposed Section 3.10 (Compensation of the President and CEO) would
reflect NSCC's current compensation-setting practices. Current Section
3.12 (Compensation of Officers) states that (1) the compensation, if
any, of the Chairman of the Board, and the President shall be fixed by
a majority (which shall not include the Chairman of the Board or the
President) of the entire Board of Directors, and (2) salaries of all
other officers shall be fixed by the President with the approval of the
Board and no officer shall be precluded from receiving a salary because
he is also a director.\47\ NSCC proposes to state that the Compensation
Committee of the Corporation will recommend the compensation for the
President and CEO to the Board of Directors for approval.\48\ In
addition, NSCC also proposes to delete the language stating that (1)
salaries of all other officers shall be fixed by the President with
approval of the Board, and (2) no officer shall be precluded from
receiving a salary because he is also a director.\49\ NSCC proposes to
delete compensation-related references to the Chairman of the Board
because the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board does not receive
compensation.\50\ Finally, NSCC proposes to change the title of
proposed Section 3.10 from ``Compensation of Officers'' to
``Compensation of the President and Chief Executive Officer'' because
this section would no longer address the compensation of officers other
than the President and CEO.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ Id.
    \48\ Notice, 83 FR at 6637. NSCC states that it proposes this
change for consistency with the DTCC/DTC/FICC/NSCC Compensation and
Human Resources Committee Charter. Id.
    \49\ Id.
    \50\ Id.
    \51\ Notice, 83 FR at 6644.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Technical Changes and Corrections

    NSCC proposes technical changes and/or corrections to the By-Laws
for clarity and readability, as described below.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Statutory References and Requirements
    NSCC would delete direct statutory references from the By-Laws.\53\
NSCC states that it would make this change to have the By-Laws remain
consistent and accurate despite any changes to a specifically cited
statute.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ Id.
    \54\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Audit Committee
    NSCC proposes to revise proposed Section 2.11 (Audit Committee) to
have the description of its Audit Committee conform to the description
of the Audit Committee in the by-laws of FICC.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Other Technical Changes and Corrections
    NSCC proposes to make additional technical and grammatical changes
to address (1) typographical errors, (2) section numbering, (3)
grammatical

errors, (4) heading consistency, and (5) gender references.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ Notice, 83 FR at 6637-38.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Proposed Changes to the Rules

    NSCC proposes to add an addendum (``Addendum V'') to the Rules.\57\
NSCC proposes that Addendum V would be entitled ``By-Laws and Restated
Certificate of Incorporation'' and would indicate that the By-Laws and
Certificate of Incorporation are incorporated into the Rules by
reference.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ Notice, 83 FR at 6638.
    \58\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act directs the Commission to approve a
proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that
such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the
Act and rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such
organization.\59\ The Commission believes the proposal is consistent
with Act, specifically Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act and Rules 17Ad-
22(e)(1) and, in part, (2) under the Act.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \60\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F); 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1) and (2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, in part, that the rules
of a clearing agency, such as NSCC, be designed to protect the public
interest.\61\ As discussed above, the proposed rule change would make a
number of updates to the By-Laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, NSCC proposes to revise NSCC's description of the titles and
responsibilities of its Board and senior management to match NSCC's
current corporate structure. These changes would help the Board, as
well as NSCC's management, employees, and members, understand which
officer or office is responsible for each of NSCC's executive-level
functions.
    Second, the proposal would update the compensation-setting section
of the By-Laws to reflect the Compensation Committee Charter practice,
as well as to reflect that the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board
would not receive compensation. The proposal's increased clarity around
compensation-setting would better inform NSCC stakeholders and the
general public about how NSCC sets the level of compensation for its
highest-level executive (the President and CEO) and that the Non-
Executive Chairman does not draw a salary.
    Third, NSCC's proposed technical changes and corrections to its By-
Laws would enhance the clarity, transparency, and readability of NSCC's
organizational documents. In this way, the proposal would better enable
the Board, as well as NSCC's management, employees, and members, to
understand their respective authorities, rights, and obligations
regarding NSCC's clearance and settlement of securities transactions.
    Finally, NSCC's proposed addendum would incorporate the By-Laws and
Certificate of Incorporation into the Rules. This change would increase
the clarity and transparency of NSCC's organizational documents by
integrating the By-Laws and the Certificate of Incorporation into the
Rules, to which all NSCC members are subject and have access.
    Governance arrangements are critical to the sound operation of
clearing agencies.\62\ Specifically, clear and transparent governance
documents promote accountability and reliability in the decisions,
rules, and procedures of a clearing agency.\63\ Clear and transparent
governance documents also provide interested parties, including owners,
members, and general members of the public, with information about how
a clearing agency's decisions are made and what the rules and
procedures are designed to accomplish.\64\ Further, the decisions,
rules, and procedures of a clearing agency are important, as they can
have widespread impact, affecting multiple market members, financial
institutions, markets, and jurisdictions.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71699 (May 21, 2014),
79 FR 29508 (May 22, 2014) (``Covered Clearing Agency Standards
Proposing Release'') at 29521.
    \63\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64017 (March 3, 2011),
76 FR 14472 (March 16, 2011) at 14488.
    \64\ Id.
    \65\ Covered Clearing Agency Standards Proposing Release, 79 FR
at 29521.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated above, the proposed rule change would provide NSCC
stakeholders with a better understanding of how NSCC makes decisions
that could ultimately affect the financial system. Such transparency
helps ensure that NSCC reliably makes decisions and follows clearly
articulated policies and procedures. Accordingly, the Commission finds
that the proposed rule change is designed to enhance the clarity and
transparency of NSCC's organizational documents, which would help
protect the public interest, consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of
the Act.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1) Under the Act

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1) under the Act requires a covered clearing agency
\67\ to establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies
and procedures reasonably designed to provide for a well-founded,
transparent, and enforceable legal basis for each aspect of its
activities in all relevant jurisdictions.\68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ A ``covered clearing agency'' means, among other things, a
clearing agency registered with the Commission under Section 17A of
the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78q-1 et seq.) that is designated
systemically important by the Financial Stability Oversight Counsel
(``FSOC'') pursuant to the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement
Supervision Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5461 et seq.). See 17 CFR
240.17Ad-22(a)(5)-(6). On July 18, 2012, FSOC designated NSCC as
systemically important. U.S. Department of the Treasury, ``FSOC
Makes First Designations in Effort to Protect Against Future
Financial Crises,'' available at https://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/tg1645.asp. Therefore, NSCC is a covered
clearing agency.
    \68\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the proposed rule change would update the By-
Laws by (1) updating NSCC's description of the titles and
responsibilities of its Board and senior management to match NSCC's
current corporate structure, (2) documenting NSCC's current
compensation-setting process, and (3) enacting technical corrections to
increase readability. The proposed rule change would also add an
addendum to the Rules to incorporate the By-Laws and the Certificate of
Incorporation by reference.
    The proposed changes are designed to help ensure that the By-Laws
better reflect NSCC's governance practices, as well as to organize
NSCC's organizational documents, in a clear, transparent, and
consistent manner. This increased transparency would help convey to
NSCC's stakeholders, and the public generally, a key legal basis for
the activities of the highest levels of NSCC's leadership described in
the By-Laws. Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is designed to help ensure that NSCC's organizational documents
remain well-founded, transparent, and legally enforceable in all
relevant jurisdictions, consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1) under the
Act.\69\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v) Under the Act

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v) under the Act requires that NSCC
establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to provide for governance arrangements
that, among other things, (1) are clear and

transparent and (2) specify clear and direct lines of
responsibility.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \70\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described above, NSCC proposes a number of changes that would
provide clarity and transparency. NSCC proposes to revise By-Laws
provisions that were outdated or incorrect. Specifically, the proposed
changes to the titles and offices (and their related powers and duties)
would provide clarity and transparency because they would clearly set
forth NSCC's current organizational structure, including the lines of
responsibility of various officers and the Board. The proposed changes
relating to compensation-setting would also give clarity and
transparency by (1) accurately reflecting the process that is followed
pursuant to the Compensation Committee Charter, and (2) clarifying that
the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board does not receive compensation.
Finally, the proposed technical changes and corrections would raise the
clarity and transparency of the By-Laws by removing grammatical and
typographical errors. Additionally, NSCC also proposes changes to its
Rules to provide clarity and transparency. Specifically, the proposed
changes would create clarity and transparency by integrating the By-
Laws and the Certificate of Incorporation into one document, the Rules
(to which all NSCC members are subject and have access).
    For these reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is designed to enhance clarity and transparency in NSCC's
governance arrangements, as well as to specify clear and direct lines
of responsibility for various officer positions and the Board within
NSCC's organizational structure, consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2)(i)
and (v) under the Act.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \71\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act, in particular
the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \72\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \72\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that proposed rule change SR-NSCC-2018-001 be, and hereby is,
approved.\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \73\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposals' impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \74\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-06030 Filed 3-23-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 18 (Friday, January 27, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4293-4294]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1747]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0233; FRL 9511-3]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Plating and Polishing
Area Sources (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

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

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before February 27,
2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2011-0233, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency,
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code
28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB
at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Learia Williams, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2223A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On May 9, 2011 (76 FR 26900), EPA sought comments on this ICR
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any additional
comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days
of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0233, which is available for public viewing
online at http://www.regulations.gov or in person viewing at the
Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue 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

Enforcement and Compliance Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, confidential business information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further information about the electronic docket, go to
www.regulations.gov.
    Title: NESHAP for Plating and Polishing Operations (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 2294.03, OMB Control Number 2060-0623.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on January 31, 2012.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while submission is pending at OMB. An
Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General
Provisions of the NESHAP at 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, and any changes,
or additions to the General Provisions specified at 40 CFR part 63,
subpart WWWWWW.
    Owners or operators of the affected facilities must submit initial
notification, performance tests, and periodic reports and results.
Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is inoperative. Reports, at a minimum, are required
semiannually.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 16
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Owners or operators of plating and
polishing operations.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,900.
    Frequency of Response: Initially, and annually.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 33,108.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $3,180,693, which includes $3,172,379
in labor costs, $8,314 in capital/startup costs, and no operating and
maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease in the total hours as
currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens due to a
mathematical error in determining the person hours per respondent in
the previous ICR. There is an increase in labor costs. This is not due
to any program changes. The change in the cost estimates occurred due
to adjustments in labor rates for both respondents and the Agency.

John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2012-1747 Filed 1-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 120 (Tuesday, June 23, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 35847]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15410]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2015-0393]

Safety Zones; Fireworks Events in Captain of the Port New York
Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce various safety zones within the
Captain of the Port New York Zone on the specified dates and times.
This action is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and spectators
from hazards associated with fireworks displays. During the enforcement
period, no person or vessel may enter the safety zones without
permission of the Captain of the Port (COTP).

DATES: The regulation for the safety zones described in 33 CFR 165.160
will be enforced on the dates and times listed in the table below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email Lieutenant Douglas Neumann, Coast Guard; telephone 718-
354-4154, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety
zones listed in 33 CFR 165.160 on the specified dates and times as
indicated in Table 1 below. This regulation was published in the
Federal Register on November 9, 2011 (76 FR 69614).

                                 Table 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Brooklyn Law School, Ellis Island      Launch site: A barge
 Safety Zone, 33 CFR 165.160(2.2).        located between Federal
                                          Anchorages 20-A and 20-B, in
                                          approximate position
                                          40[deg]41'45'' N.
                                          074[deg]02'09'' W. (NAD 1983)
                                          about 365 yards east of Ellis
                                          Island. This Safety Zone is a
                                          360-yard radius from the
                                          barge.
                                          Date: June 11, 2015.
                                          Time: 10:10 p.m.-11:20
                                          p.m.
2. Bronx Salutes America, Orchard         Launch site: All
 Beach, The Bronx Safety Zone, 33 CFR     waters of Long Island Sound in
 165.160(3.11).                           an area bound by the following
                                          points: 40[deg]51'43.5'' N.
                                          073[deg]47'36.3'' W.; thence
                                          to 40[deg]52'12.2'' N.
                                          073[deg]47'13.6'' W.; thence
                                          to 40[deg]52'02.5'' N.
                                          073[deg]46'47.8'' W.; thence
                                          to 40[deg]51'32.3'' N.
                                          073[deg]47'09.9'' W. (NAD
                                          1983), thence to the point of
                                          origin.
                                          Date: June 25, 2015.
                                          Time: 08:50 p.m.-10:10
                                          p.m.
3. City of Poughkeepsie Independence      Launch site: A barge
 Day Celebration, Poughkeepsie, NY,       located in approximate
 Hudson River Safety Zone, 33 CFR         position 41[deg]42'24.50'' N.
 165.160(5.13).                           073[deg]56'44.16'' W. (NAD
                                          1983), approximately 420 yards
                                          north of the Mid Hudson
                                          Bridge. This Safety Zone is a
                                          300-yard radius from the
                                          barge.
                                          Date: July 04, 2015.
                                          Time: 9:00 p.m.-10:00
                                          p.m.
4. City of Yonkers July 4th               Launch site: A barge
 Celebration, Yonkers, NY, Hudson River   located in approximate
 Safety Zone, 33 CFR 165.160(5.5).        position 40[deg]56'14.5'' N.
                                          073[deg]54'33'' W. (NAD 1983),
                                          approximately 475 yards
                                          northwest of the Yonkers
                                          Municipal Pier, New York. This
                                          Safety Zone is a 360-yard
                                          radius from the barge.
                                          Date: July 04, 2015.
                                          Time: 08:45 p.m.-10:15
                                          p.m.
5. Peekskill July 4th Celebration,        Launch site: A barge
 Peekskill Bay, Hudson River Safety       located in approximate
 Zone, 33 CFR 165.160(5.10).              position 41[deg]17'16'' N.
                                          073[deg]56'18'' W. (NAD 1983),
                                          approximately 670 yards north
                                          of Travis Point. This Safety
                                          Zone is a 360-yard radius from
                                          the barge.
                                          Date: July 04, 2015.
                                          Rain Date: July 05,
                                          2015.
                                          Time: 08:30 p.m.-10:30
                                          p.m.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.160, vessels may not enter the
safety zones unless given permission from the COTP or a designated
representative. Spectator vessels may transit outside the safety zones
but may not anchor, block, loiter in, or impede the transit of other
vessels. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, State, or
local law enforcement agencies in enforcing this regulation.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.160(a) and 5
U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the
Coast Guard will provide mariners with advanced notification of
enforcement periods via the Local Notice to Mariners and marine
information broadcasts. If the COTP determines that a safety zone need
not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice, a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be used to grant general permission to
enter the safety zone.

    Dated: May 11, 2015.
G. Loebl,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port New York.
[FR Doc. 2015-15410 Filed 6-22-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 31, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48700-48702]
[FR Doc No: 2021-18784]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2021-0303; FRL-8753-01-OCSPP]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Renewal of an
Existing Collection and Request for Comment; Methylene Chloride;
Regulation of Paint and Coating Removal for Consumer Use Under TSCA
Section 6(a)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), this
document announces the availability of and solicits public comment on
an Information Collection Request (ICR) that EPA is planning to submit
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The ICR, entitled:
``Methylene Chloride; Regulation of Paint and Coating Removal for
Consumer Use Under TSCA Section 6(a)'' and identified by EPA ICR No.
2556.03 and OMB Control No. 2070-0204, represents the renewal of an
existing ICR that is scheduled to expire on May 31, 2022. Before
submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval under the PRA, EPA is
soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information
collection summarized in this document. The ICR and accompanying
material are available in the docket for public review and comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 1, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2021-0303, using http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the
docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is
available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is closed to visitors with
limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer
service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status
information on EPA/DC and docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Niva Kramek, Existing Chemicals Risk

Management Division (7404T), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to PRA section 3506(c)(2)(A) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)),
EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility.
    2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burden of
the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used.
    3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected.
    4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ fewer than 25 individuals) on
examples of specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce
the paperwork burden for very small businesses affected by this
collection.

II. What information collection activity or ICR does this action apply
to?

    Title: Methylene Chloride; Regulation of Paint and Coating Removal
for Consumer Use Under TSCA Section 6(a).
    ICR number: EPA ICR No. 2556.03.
    OMB control number: OMB Control No. 2070-0204.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on May 31,
2022. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), after
appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR
part 9, and are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register
or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection
instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers
for certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The manufacture, processing, and distribution in commerce
of methylene chloride for consumer paint and coating removal is
prohibited under EPA regulations in 40 CFR part 751, as promulgated
under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Each person who manufactures, processes, or distributes in commerce
methylene chloride for non-prohibited uses is required to notify
companies to whom methylene chloride is shipped of the prohibitions
under 40 CFR part 751 through the Safety Data Sheet (SDS). Each person
who manufactures, processes, or distributes in commerce (except for
retailers) any methylene chloride is also required to retain in one
location at the headquarters of the company, or at the facility for
which the records were generated, documentation showing: (i) The name,
address, contact, and telephone number of companies to whom methylene
chloride was shipped; (ii) a copy of the notification provided to
companies to whom the methylene chloride was shipped; and (iii) the
amount of methylene chloride shipped. This information must be retained
for 3 years from the date of shipment.
    EPA established these requirements under section 6(a) of TSCA in
response to a final determination that the consumer use of methylene
chloride in paint and coating removal presents an unreasonable risk of
injury to health. This ICR consists of the downstream notification of
the prohibitions and the recordkeeping requirement.
    Burden statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to annual
average 0.33 hours per response. Burden is defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    The ICR supporting statement, which is available in the docket
along with other related materials, provides a detailed explanation of
the collection activities and the burden estimate that is only briefly
summarized here:
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Respondents affected by this
activity may include those that engage in the manufacture, processing
and distribution in commerce of methylene chloride for consumer paint
and coating removal. The ICR provides a list of the North American
Industrial Classification System codes that might apply to entities
that may be affected by the activities described in this ICR.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory, per 40 CFR 751.
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 14.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 1.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 6.96 hours.
    Estimated total annual costs: $298.

III. Are there changes in the estimates from the last approval?

    There is a decrease in total annual burden and costs compared with
those identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB. Burden decreased
from 69 hours to 6.96 hours and costs decreased from $3,712 to $298.
This decrease in respondent burden and costs is due to a significant
decrease in the number of estimated respondents. Most respondents need
to perform the actions required by this ICR once and responded to the
requirements during the previous ICR period. However, EPA does not
assume that the number of responses has dropped to zero. Therefore, EPA
has estimated low levels of respondents in each category to account for
new firms or new products. This change is an adjustment.
    In addition, OMB has requested that EPA move towards using the 18-
question format for ICR Supporting Statements used by other federal
agencies and departments and that is based on the submission
instructions established by OMB in 1995, replacing the alternate format
developed by EPA and OMB prior to 1995. The Agency does not expect this
change in format to result in substantive changes to the information
collection activities or related estimated burden and costs.

IV. What is the next step in the process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another
Federal Register document pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to
announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit
additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or
the approval process, please contact the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    Dated: August 26, 2021.
Michal Freedhoff,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2021-18784 Filed 8-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


staff.  In accordance with the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act (as
amended), EPA must estimate respondent and Agency burden associated with
all regulatory activities, including the petitions, variances,
exclusions, and exemptions allowed for in 40 CFR Parts 260 and 261.
Once burden estimates are developed, EPA submits an Information
Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for approval.  This document describes the methodology for updating
burden estimates for the renewal of the ICR covering the regulatory
activities cited above.

The Regional, State, and industry officials were consulted in order to
obtain data needed to update and/or verify respondent and EPA burden
estimates for these regulatory activities.  These consultations are
described below.  The consultations occurred during the months of July
and August 2007.

	Summary of Consultations

Michelle Peace, U.S. EPA Region 6<PHONE_NUMBER>), is the delisting
coordinator in Region 6.  She works in the Multimedia Permitting and
Planning Division, which handles delisting petitions and inquiries about
hazardous waste exclusions/exemptions.  According to Michelle, all the
States in Region 6 are authorized for the RCRA program, and they issue
decisions on definition of solid waste and boiler variances and
hazardous waste exclusions/exemptions.  She said that the Region
typically receives two to three complete delisting petitions each year,
and that in the past three years the Region published five final
delisting rules.  She also noted that currently there were 7 to 10
facilities at intermediate stages of the pre-petition phase (petition
development, waste sampling and analysis, or interest meetings).  By her
estimate, it takes the Region approximately 725 hours to review and
issue a final decision on a delisting petition.

Todd Ramaly, U.S. EPA Region 5<PHONE_NUMBER>), is the delisting petition
coordinator for Region 5.  He responded that the Region normally
receives three delisting petitions per year; and that six pre-petition
draft sampling and analysis plans were presently pending review and
approval.  He said that an average of about 800 hours per petition is
still a reasonable estimate for the amount of time spent by the Region
to approve the draft sampling and analysis plan, review the petition
information and data, and make a final delisting decision.

Dan Patulski<PHONE_NUMBER>) and Greg Czajkowski<PHONE_NUMBER>), U.S. EPA
Region 5, stated that all six states in Region 5 are authorized for the
RCRA program.  Therefore, those authorized States handle requests for
variances, exclusions and exemptions.  The States sometimes call the
Region for guidance, but States are the reviewing and decision-making
authority.

David Friedman, U.S. EPA Region 3<PHONE_NUMBER>), is the delisting
coordinator in Region 3.  Per David, one delisting petition has been
under review by the Region for a long while because it took a long time
for the facility to generate the requested additional information and
data.  No new delisting petition was submitted in the past two years.
He also indicated that the requests for variances, exclusions and
exemptions are handled by the States in Region 3 because they are all
authorized for the RCRA program.

Ken Herstowski, U.S. EPA Region 7<PHONE_NUMBER>), worked on one
delisting petition in the past three years, and spent about 400 hours to
process this petition.  He had no information on any variance,
exclusion, or exemption determination request.

Ed Lim, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency<PHONE_NUMBER>), provided
information on the State’s review of variance, exclusion and exemption
determination requests over the last three years.  Based on the
information he provided, the State granted per rule two requests for a
case-by-case variance from classifying as a waste, one each in 2005 and
2006.  From March 2004 to May 2007, the State also granted a number of
requests for exemptions from certain hazardous waste storage,
transportation and permitting requirements, but none seemed to be
related to waste classifications (namely, hazardous waste
exclusions/exemptions, or hazardous waste listing exemptions).  Further,
Mr. Lim indicated that variances and exemptions typically take months to
process.

Renee Hudson Goodley<PHONE_NUMBER>) and Jim McNamara<PHONE_NUMBER>),
Georgia Environmental Protection Division, said that in the last three
years, the State received 3 to 4 requests each year for definition of
solid waste variances or hazardous waste exclusion/exemptions.  They
estimated that it took their reviewing committee 3 to 6 months to
process a request, or approximately 60 to 250 hours of actual time to
review and finalize a decision on a request depending on its complexity.
 In addition, Mr. Jim Brown<PHONE_NUMBER>) of the same State agency
stated that in the past three years the State received two delisting
petitions, and that they were still under review.

Yan Li, Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management
(401-222-2797), received three solid waste variance requests in the past
three years.  It took her approximately 150 hours to review, process,
and finalize a decision on a variance request.

Victor Windle<PHONE_NUMBER>) and Dave Berrey<PHONE_NUMBER>) of the
Indiana Department of environmental Management stated that the State
processes about one request per year for variances, exclusions or
exemptions.  Over the last three years they received one definition of
solid waste variance request for using a K061 material, and one
incomplete request for definition of hazardous waste exclusion.  For the
one variance request that the State eventually denied, Mr. Berrey spent
a total of 5 days to inspect the facility, meet with the facility’s
representatives, and prepare arguments and the denial letter.

Edward Hammerberg, Maryland Department of the Environment
(410-537-3356), received about two cases per year of variance,
exclusion, or exemption determination requests over the past three
years.  He spent several days on each request – interpreting or
clarifying hazardous waste regulations, researching, and consulting with
other regulatory authorities.

Shih Chang, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
(609-292-8341), indicated that one delisting petition submitted some
years ago was still in the review phase because the facility was unable
to allocate the financial resource to pay for State’s analysis (i.e.,
to pay a user fee for reviewing the delisting petition) until recently.
He said that he had thus far spent approximately 230 hours on this
incomplete petition.  Also, he learned from other New Jersey contacts
that the State did not receive any request for variances, exclusions or
exemptions in the past three years.

Lawrence Merritt, Ford Motor Company<PHONE_NUMBER>), stated that from
2003 to 2007, Ford had five delisting approvals for F019 wastes by
EPA’s Regions 5 and 8.  Based on the information he provided, these
delisting petitions cost on average 300 hours (or $15,000 at $50 per
hour) of Ford time and $46,300 of consultant and lab cost.  In addition,
after each delisting approval, approximately $20,000 were spent by
Ford’s consultant to perform annual verification testing and Ford
spent approximately 8 hours/year to review and report the verification
testing data.

William Miller, General Motors Corporation<PHONE_NUMBER>), provided
information about their costs expended on several delistings granted by
Regions 4, 5 and 6 in the past three years.  He estimated that overall,
GM spent up to 1,000 hours on a petition.  Moreover, its contractor
spent approximately $50,000 - $70,000 on lab work and $7,000 - $8,000 on
petition preparation per petition.  As an example, he revealed that on
one particular petition GM paid a contractor $13,000 for waste sampling,
$42,800 for sample analysis and data validation, $11,400 for petition
writing, and $3,200 for post-petition follow-up.

Glenn Sabadosa, Bayer Polymers/Bayer Material Science<PHONE_NUMBER>),
said that the company submitted two delisting petitions to Region 6, and
that each took about two years to go through the petition review
process.  By his estimate, each petition cost the company approximately
800 hours and $40,000.

	Estimates of Burden

The estimates of burden associated with all regulatory activities
identified in the Identification, Listing, and Rulemaking Petitions ICR
are updated based on the information obtained from the consultations
described above.  If no information was obtained or available on an
activity, it was assumed that the burden information contained in the
previous pertinent ICRs (#1189.14, #1189.15, #1189.16, and #1189.17) did
not change for that activity.

Delisting Petitions

As a result of the consultations with Region 5 (3 petitions and several
pre-petition plans submitted each year), Region 6 (2 to 3 petitions and
several pre-petition plans submitted each year, 5 final decisions
published in the past three years), Region 3 (1 petition in the past
three years), Region 7 (one petition in the past three years), the State
of Georgia (2 petitions in the past three years) and the State of New
Jersey (1 petition in the past few years), the estimate for total number
of delisting petitions submitted and reviewed every year will remain at
20 as in the previous “base” ICR (#1189.14).  This is based on an
estimate that approximately 10 petitions/year are going to be reviewed
by Regions 5 and 6 (Regions that normally have the highest numbers of
petitions for review every year) in light that each petition takes about
2 years to review and process, and that another 10 petitions/year will
be reviewed by some other EPA Regions and States with delisting
authorization.

The estimated respondent hourly burden is based on information collected
from Larry Merritt (Ford Corp.), William Miller (General Motors), and
Glenn Sabadosa (Bayer Polymers/Bayer Material Science).  They estimated
the following hours needed to prepare a delisting petition: 300 hours,
up to 1,000 hours, and 800 hours, respectively.  This would result in an
average of 700 hours per petition.  However, they did not differentiate
such costs between the administrative requirements under section 260.20
and the information requirements under section 260.22.  Based on the
estimates in the previous “base” ICR (#1189.14), the section 260.20
administrative requirements should not take more than 20% of the total
time, or 140 hours out of a total of 700 hours.  The other 80% of the
time (or 560 hours) is used to meet the information requirements under
260.22.  The total hourly burden, however, does not change much
(estimated now to be 700 hours, compared to 788 hours estimated
previously).

The estimated Agency burden for reviewing a delisting petition is based
on information collected from Todd Ramaly (Region 5), Michelle Peace
(Region 6), and Ken Herstowski (Region 7).  They estimated that 800
hours, 725 hours, and 400 hours, respectively, were needed to review and
process a delisting petition.  This would result in an average of 642
hours (compared to 667 hours estimated previously) per petition review.

Solid Waste and Boiler Variances

Based on consultations with the Regional and State representatives,
there have not been many requests recently for variances from
classification as a solid waste.  There were no requests received for
variances for classification as a boiler.  A few State representatives
said that they had received 1 – 3 definition of solid waste variances
in the past three years, while some said they had not received any.
Therefore, as estimated in the previous “base” ICR (#1189.14), it
seems reasonable to leave the total number of sections 260.31(a),
260.31(b), and 260.31(c) variance requests from classification as a
solid waste at 10 requests each annually (totaling 30 annually), and for
classification as a boiler at one variance annually.

Consultations with the Regional and State representatives did not
result in any information on the respondent burden for preparing a solid
waste or boiler variance request.  Therefore, it seems reasonable not to
change the respondent burden hours estimated in the previous “base”
ICR (#1189.14).

The estimated Agency burden for reviewing a variance request is based on
information collected from Yan Li (Rhode Island Department of
Environmental Management), Dave Berrey (Indiana Department of
environmental Management), and Renee Hudson Goodley and Jim McNarama
(Georgia Environmental Protection Division).  They estimated that it
takes approximately 150 hours, 5 days, and 60 – 250 hours,
respectively, to review and make a final decision on a variance request.
 This would result in an average of approximately 115 hours (compared to
209 hours estimated previously) per variance review.

Hazardous Waste Exclusions/Exemptions

Based on consultations with the Regional and State representatives,
there is not much information available on facilities requesting
hazardous waste exclusions/exemptions.

Therefore, it does not make sense to change the respondent burden hour
estimates for hazardous/solid waste exclusions and exemptions included
in the previous ICRs (#1189.14, #1189.16 and #1189.17).

Hazardous Waste Listing Exemptions

Based on consultations with the Regional and State representatives,
there is no information available on facilities claiming hazardous waste
listing exemptions.  Therefore, it does not make sense to change the
respondent burden hour estimates for hazardous waste listing exemptions
included in the previous ICRs (#1189.14 and #1189.15).

  ICR #1189.15 addressed the paperwork requirements at 40 CFR
261.32(d).

  ICR #1189.16 addressed the paperwork requirements at 40 CFR 261.39(a)
and 261.41.

 ICR #1189.17 addressed the paperwork requirements at 40 CFR
261.3(a)(2)(iv).

 Note that this exclusion was originally promulgated at 40 CFR
261.4(a)(15).  EPA subsequently moved it to 40 CFR 261.4(a)(17).

  See Petitions to Delist Hazardous Wastes:  A Guidance Manual, April
1985, EPA/530-SW-85-003, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,.

 Please note that these exhibits may contain rounding errors.

  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)’s May 2006 National
Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates cross all
industry sectors, at: http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm

  This multiplier factor consists of 36.45% fringe benefits plus 12%
overhead as prescribed by OMB Circular A-76 "Figure C1. Table of
Standard A-76 Costing Factors" at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a076/a76_incl_tech_correction.ht
ml.

  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)’s May 2006 National
Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates for NAICS
999200 – State Government (OES Designation), at:   HYPERLINK
"http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_999200.htm#b17-0000"
http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_999200.htm#b17-0000

  This multiplier factor consists of 36.45% fringe benefits plus 12%
overhead as prescribed by OMB Circular A-76 "Figure C1. Table of
Standard A-76 Costing Factors" at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a076/a76_incl_tech_correction.ht
ml.

   Including 155 in ICR #1189.14, 33 in ICR #1189.15, 1,258 (annualized)
in ICR #1189.16, and 1,089 (annualized) in ICR #1189.17

  ICR #1189.15 addressed the paperwork requirements at 40 CFR
261.32(d).

  ICR #1189.16 addressed the paperwork requirements at 40 CFR 261.39(a)
and 261.41.

 ICR #1189.17 addressed the paperwork requirements at 40 CFR
261.3(a)(2)(iv).

 PAGE

1

 PAGE

 PAGE  5

 PAGE  79


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 58548]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24176]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension: Rule 17a-19; SEC File No. 270-148; OMB Control No. 3235-
0133.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (``OMB'') a request for approval of extension of
the previously approved collection of information provided for in Rule
17a-19 (17 CFR 240.17a-19) and Form X-17A-19 of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.).
    Rule 17a-19 requires national securities exchanges and registered
national securities associations to file a Form X-17A-19 with the
Commission within 5 days of the initiation, suspension or termination
of a member in order to notify the Commission that a change in
designated examining authority may be necessary.
    It is anticipated that ten national securities exchanges and
registered national securities associations collectively will make
1,200 total filings annually pursuant to Rule 17a-19 and that each
filing will take approximately 15 minutes. The total burden is
estimated to be approximately 300 total annual hours.
    The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. No
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a
collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a
valid OMB control number.
    Background documentation for this information collection may be
viewed at the following link, http://www.reginfo.gov. Comments should
be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building,
Washington, DC 20503, or by sending an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) Thomas Bayer, Director/Chief Information
Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi Pavlik-Simon,
6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an e-mail to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days
of this notice.

    September 15, 2011.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-24176 Filed 9-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 56 (Friday, March 22, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17611-17612]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06526]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part Chapter 1

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0260]

Provisions of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and
Innovation Act Related to Medical Gases; Request for Comments Regarding
Regulations

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notification; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is inviting comments
from the public on whether any potential changes to the Federal drug
regulations are necessary for medical gases.

DATES: Submit electronic or written comments by May 21, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov.
Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-
305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christine Kirk, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, rm. 6280, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
Germaine Connolly, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-116), Food and
Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., MPN2, Rockville, MD 20855, 240-
276-8331<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On July 9, 2012, President Obama signed the Food and Drug Safety
and Innovation Act (FDASIA) (Pub. L. 112-144) into law. Section 1112(a)
of FDASIA provides that not later than 18 months after its enactment,
the Secretary of Health and Human Services, after obtaining input from
medical gas manufacturers and any other interested members of the
public, shall determine whether any changes to the Federal drug
regulations are necessary for medical gases and submit a report
regarding any such changes to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions of the U.S. Senate and the Committee on Energy and
Commerce of the U.S. House of Representatives. Section 1112(c)(l)
defines ``Federal drug regulations'' to mean ``regulations in title 21
of the Code of Federal Regulations pertaining to drugs.''
    Section 1112(b) provides that if the Secretary determines that
changes to the Federal drug regulations are necessary for medical
gases, the Secretary shall issue final regulations revising the Federal
drug regulations with respect to medical gases not later than 48 months
after the enactment of FDASIA. FDA is opening this docket to provide
the public with an opportunity to submit comments on whether any
potential changes to Federal drug regulations are necessary for medical
gases.

II. Opportunities for Comment on Other Medical Gas Dockets

    FDASIA also added new sections regarding medical gases to the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (see Title XI,
Subtitle B, section 1111 of FDASIA, adding new sections 575, 576, and
577 to the FD&C Act). FDA has previously issued two other Federal
Register notices related to these new sections.
    On November 23, 2012 (77 FR 70166), FDA issued a Federal Register
notice

establishing a public docket (Docket No. FDA-2012-N-1090) for
information pertaining to FDA's implementation of the provisions of
FDASIA related to medical gases. Interested persons may submit comments
relevant to that Federal Register notice (see ADDRESSES) under Docket
No. FDA-2012-N-1090.
    On December 18, 2012 (77 FR 74852), FDA issued a notice of
availability announcing publication of a draft guidance for industry
entitled ``Certification Process for Designated Medical Gases'' (http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM332136.pdf) (Docket No. FDA-2012-D-1197). The draft
guidance describes the new certification process created by FDASIA for
certain medical gases and explains how FDA plans to implement that
process. Interested persons may submit comments regarding the draft
guidance (see ADDRESSES) under Docket No. FDA-2012-D-1197. Please note
that although comments on draft guidance may be submitted at any time,
FDA requested that comments be submitted by February 19, 2013, in order
to allow adequate time for the comments to be considered while the
Agency is preparing final guidance.

III. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: March 18, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-06526 Filed 3-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 41 (Thursday, March 1, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12524-12525]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4971]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2010-0100; FRL-9641-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Indiana; Lead Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a request submitted by the Indiana
Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) on November 24, 2010, to
revise the Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP) for lead (Pb) under
the Clean Air Act (CAA). This submittal incorporates the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Pb promulgated by EPA in
2008.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 2, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2010-0100, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance

Section (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Regional Office official hours of business are Monday
through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Final
Rules section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how
to submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andy Chang, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If we do not receive any adverse comments in response to this
rule, we do not contemplate taking any further action. If EPA receives
adverse comments, we will withdraw the direct final rule, and will
address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any
parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this
time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For
additional information, see the direct final rule, which is located in
the Final Rules section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: February 21, 2012.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2012-4971 Filed 2-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P