[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 4, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12811-12814]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04392]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88296; File No. SR-GEMX-2020-05]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq GEMX, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Options 3,
Section 7, ``Types of Orders'' To Permit the Exchange To Determine the
Availability of Order Types and Time-In-Force Provisions

February 27, 2020.
    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 February 14, 2020, Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (``GEMX'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II, below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit

comments on the proposed rule change 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 amend Options 3, Section 7, ``Types of
Orders'' to permit the Exchange to determine the availability of order
types and time-in-force provisions.
    The Exchange requests that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative delay period contained in Exchange Act Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Exchange 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 Exchange 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 amend Options 3, Section 7, ``Types of
Orders'' to provide that the Exchange may determine which order types
and times-in-force provisions are available on a class or system basis.
This proposed change is based on the rules of Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.
(``BZX Options''),\4\ Rule 21.1, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX
Options'') Rule 21.1,\5\ Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe'') Rule 5.6 \6\
and Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (``C2'') Rule 6.10(a).\7\ The Exchange
proposes to also amend the title of the rule from ``Types of Orders''
to ``Types of Orders and Order and Quote Protocols'' to reflect the
information in the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ BZX Options Rule 21.1(d), Definitions, provides ``The term
``Order Type'' shall mean the unique processing prescribed for
designated orders, subject to the restrictions set forth in
paragraph (l) below with respect to orders and bulk messages
submitted through bulk ports, that are eligible for entry into the
System. Unless otherwise specified in the Rules or the context
indicates otherwise, the Exchange determines which of the following
Order Types are available on a class or system basis.''
     BZX Options Rule 21.1(f), Definitions, provides ``The term
``Time in Force'' means the period of time that the System will hold
an order, subject to the restrictions set forth in paragraph (j)
below with respect to bulk messages submitted through bulk ports,
for potential execution. Unless otherwise specified in the Rules or
the context indicates otherwise, the Exchange determines which of
the following Times-in-Force are available on a class, system, or
trading session basis. Rule 21.20 sets forth the Times-in-Force the
Exchange may make available for complex orders.''
    \5\ EDGX Options Rule 21.1, Definitions, provides, ``The term
``Order Type'' shall mean the unique processing prescribed for
designated orders, subject to the restrictions set forth in
paragraph (j) below with respect to orders and bulk messages
submitted through bulk ports, that are eligible for entry into the
System. Unless otherwise specified in the Rules or the context
indicates otherwise, the Exchange determines which of the following
Order Types are available on a class, system, or trading session
basis. Rule 21.20 sets forth the Order Types the Exchange may make
available for complex orders.''
    \6\ Cboe Rule 5.6, Availability of Orders, provides, ``Unless
otherwise specified in the Rules or the context indicates otherwise,
the Exchange determines which of the following order types are
available on a class-by-class and system-by-system basis.''
    \7\ C2 Rule 6.10(a), Availability of Orders, provides,
``Availability. Unless otherwise specified in the Rules or the
context indicates otherwise, the Exchange determines which of the
following order types, Order Instructions, and Times-in-Force are
available on a class, system, or trading session basis. Rule 6.13
sets forth the order types, Order Instructions, and Times-in-Force
the Exchange may make available for complex orders.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to add rule text at the beginning of Options
3, Section 7 which states, ``The Exchange may determine to make certain
order types and time-in-force, respectively, available on a class or
System basis.'' The purpose of this rule change is to provide the
Exchange with appropriate flexibility to address different trading
characteristics, market models, and the investor base of each class, as
well as to handle any System issues that may arise and require the
Exchange to temporarily not accept certain order types. This rule is
consistent with BZX Options Rule 21.1, EDGX Options Rules 21.1(d) and
21.1(f), Cboe Rule 5.6 and C2 Rule 6.10(a), each of which provides
these exchanges with the same flexibility. The Exchange intends to file
rule changes to adopt this rule across all Nasdaq affiliated markets.
    This rule change will not permit the Exchange to discriminate among
market participants when determining which order types and times-in-
force provisions are available on a class or system basis. The
Exchange's proposal allows the Exchange to make certain order types and
time-in-force, respectively, available on a class or System basis
uniformly for all market participants. For example, if the Exchange
determined to make a certain order type unavailable, that order type
would not be available for any market participant.
    The Exchange would issue an Options Trader Alert to provide
notification to Participants that a change is being made to the
availability or unavailability of a certain order type or time-in-
force. The Exchange notes that in the event of System disruption, the
Exchange would notify Participants of the unavailability of any order
type and would also provide notification when that order type was
available once the disruption was resolved.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ in particular, in that it
is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general to protect
investors and the public interest. The proposed rule change would
provide the Exchange with the flexibility to determine the availability
of order types and times-in-force on a class and System basis. This
flexibility would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system by allowing the
Exchange to address the specific characteristics of different classes
and different market conditions. The Exchange believes that this
proposal serves to protect investors by ensuring that the appropriate
order types and times-in-force are tailored to the different class
characteristics and by mitigating risks associated with changing market
conditions.\10\ The Exchange would issue a notification to Participants
to provide them notice that a change is being made to the availability
or unavailability of a certain order type or time-in-force before
implementing the change. In the event of a System issue, the Exchange
believes that it is consistent with the Act to temporarily not offer a
certain order type to ensure the proper executions of transactions
within the System thereby protecting investors and the public interest.
The Exchange anticipates that exercising its ability to temporarily not
offer order types would be infrequent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \10\ The Exchange may also determine to temporarily not offer an
order type or a time-in-force based on a System issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Adding this provision on all Nasdaq affiliated markets will ensure
consistency between the Exchange rules and that of its affiliates and
would remove impediments to and perfect the

mechanism of a free and open market and promote just and equitable
principles of trade, as well as foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities. The
proposed rule change provides the Exchange with the same flexibility
currently permitted on BZX Options, EDGX Options, Cboe and C2. The
Exchange believes that this consistency promotes market participants'
understanding of the rules across the multiple affiliated exchanges and
promotes a fair and orderly national options market system. The
Exchange also notes that the proposed change is reasonable and does not
affect investor protection because the proposed change does not present
any novel or unique issues, as it has previously been filed with the
Commission.
    The Exchange's proposal is not unfairly discriminatory because the
Exchange will not discriminate among market participants when
determining which order types and times-in-force provisions are
available on a class or system basis. The Exchange's proposal allows
the Exchange to make certain order types and time-in-force,
respectively, available on a class or System basis uniformly for all
market participants. For example, if the Exchange determined to make a
certain order type unavailable, that order type would not be available
for any market participant.

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 that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not
believe the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intra-market
competition, as the proposed rule change will apply in the same manner
to all order types and/or times-in-force, as the Exchange determines,
for all Participants. The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule
change will impose any burden on inter-market competition because the
proposed change provides the Exchange with substantially the same
flexibility as the rules of other exchanges.\11\ Therefore, the
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will allow it to make
determinations regarding the availability of orders that will enable it
to remain competitive as markets and market conditions evolve.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See notes 4-6 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal does not impose an undue burden on
competition because the Exchange's proposal will uniformly make certain
order types and time-in-force, respectively, available on a class or
System basis for market participants.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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)(iii) of the Act \12\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\13\
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 for 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 \14\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \16\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\17\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposed
rule change may become operative immediately. The Exchange notes that
waiver of the operative delay will allow GEMX to exercise immediately
the same flexibility to make certain order types available or
unavailable as BZX Options, EDGX Options, Cboe, and C2. The Exchange
states that this flexibility would serve to protect investors and the
public interest by mitigating risks associated with changing market
conditions. Based on the foregoing, the Commission believes that
waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, and the Commission hereby waives the
30-day operative delay and designates the proposal operative upon
filing.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \18\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has 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 change 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-GEMX-2020-05 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-GEMX-2020-05. 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 website (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 website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal offices of the Exchange.
All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting
comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal
identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-GEMX-2020-05, and should be
submitted on or before March 25, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-04392 Filed 3-3-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 59 (Monday, March 28, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17408-17410]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06467]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. DOT-NHTSA-2022-0017]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Notice and Request for
Comment; Procedures for Participating in and Receiving Information From
the National Driver Register

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

ACTION: Notice and request for comments on the extension of a
previously approved collection of information.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation (DOT) invites public comments
about our intention to request approval from the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for an extension of a currently approved information
collection. Before a Federal agency can collect certain information
from the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies
must solicit public comment on proposed collections of information,
including extension and reinstatement of previously approved
collections. This document describes a collection of information for
which NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval titled ``National Driver
Register (NDR).''

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 27, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments [identified by Docket No. DOT-NHTSA-
2022-0017] through one of the following methods:
     Electronic submissions: Go to the Federal eRulemaking
Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments.
     Fax: 1<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail or Hand Delivery: Docket Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except on Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there
to help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> before coming.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number for this notice. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets via internet.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or access
to background documents, contact Miriam Chege, NHTSA, U.S. Department
of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W55-210, NSA-200,
Washington, DC 20590.
    Mrs. Chege's telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please identify
the

relevant collection of information by referring to its OMB Control
Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), before an agency submits a proposed
collection of information to OMB for approval, it must first publish a
document in the Federal Register providing a 60-day comment period and
otherwise consult with members of the public and affected agencies
concerning each proposed collection of information. The OMB has
promulgated regulations describing what must be included in such a
document. Under OMB's regulation (at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must
ask for public comment on the following: (a) 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; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) how to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
and (d) how to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including 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 compliance with these requirements, NHTSA
asks for public comments on the following proposed collection of
information for which the agency is seeking approval from OMB.
    Title: National Driver Register (NDR).
    OMB Control Number: 2127-0001.
    Form Number(s): This collection of information is electronically
submitted to NHTSA. There are no standard forms.
    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved information
collection.
    Type of Review Requested: Regular.
    Requested Expiration Date of Approval: 3 years from date of
approval.

Summary of the Collection of Information

    The National Driver Register Act of 1982, Title 49 U.S.C., Subtitle
VI, Part A, Chapter 303 (as amended) requires the Secretary of
Transportation (NHTSA by delegation) to maintain a National Driver
Register (NDR) to assist the State chief driver licensing officials in
the exchange of information about the motor vehicle driving records of
individuals. The chief driver licensing official of a participating
State must report to the NDR identification information regarding any
individual who is denied a motor vehicle operator's license for cause,
whose motor vehicle operator's license is withdrawn for cause, or who
is convicted of certain serious motor vehicle related offenses
(specified in the Act at 49 U.S.C. 30304) or comparable offenses. (23
U.S.C. 30304(a); 23 CFR 1327, Appendix A). Participating States are
required to submit an inquiry to the NDR on all applicants for driver's
licenses before issuing a license to the applicant. In addition, when
requested by other authorized users (e.g., the Federal Aviation
Administration), participating States are required to submit inquires
to the NDR and provide responses to the other authorized users of the
NDR for transportation safety purposes. All 50 States and the District
of Columbia participate in the NDR.
    The NDR maintains the computerized database known as the Problem
Driver Pointer System (PDPS) which contains information on individuals
whose privilege to operate a motor vehicle has been revoked, suspended,
canceled or denied or who have been convicted of serious traffic-
related offenses. The records maintained at the NDR consist of
identification information including name, date of birth, sex, driver
license number, and reporting State which is collected on a daily
basis.
    States use interactive communication for their routine transactions
with the NDR which allows them to submit the required information
automatically at the same time the individual's information is entered
into the State's system. Specifically, when an individual applies for a
driver's license, an inquiry is automatically transmitted to the NDR
when the driver's application is entered into the State's system.
Likewise, when a State records license actions that have been taken
against an individual that require reporting to the NDR, a transaction
submitting the individual's identification information is automatically
generated and transmitted to the NDR.

Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the
Information

    The purpose of the information collection is to improve traffic and
transportation safety by assisting States in keeping problem drivers
off the nation's highways. The NDR was established to serve as the
central repository of information on problem drivers to promote
information sharing among States, eliminating the need for States to
contact each of the other 50 jurisdictions, and the District of
Columbia individually. The information collected is used by State
driver licensing agencies to identify problem drivers prior to issuing
a driver's license and to develop and implement driver improvement
programs. The following groups are also authorized to receive
information upon inquiry to a State driver licensing agency for
transportation safety purposes:
    a. Employers of motor vehicle operators,
    b. Employers of locomotive operators,
    c. Federal Aviation Administration regarding applications for or
holders of airman's certificates,
    d. U.S. Coast Guard regarding applicants for or holders of
licenses, certificates of registry, or merchant mariner's documents,
and for Coast Guard crew members,
    e. National Transportation Safety Board and Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration in connection with accident investigations,
    f. Air carriers regarding individuals seeking employment as pilots,
and
    g. Individuals who have or are seeking access to national security
information for purposes under E.O. 12968 or who are being investigated
for Federal employment.
    Affected Public: Participating States.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: The number of respondents is 51--
all 50 States and the District of Columbia.
    Frequency: On a daily basis.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 14,004 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Cost: There are no annual costs.
    States use routine electronic interactive communication for
transactions with the NDR, which allows the States to submit the
required information automatically at the same time the information is
entered into the State's own system. Although States are required to
report and check for a problem driver when issuing a driver's license,
no burden hours are incurred for these queries for this information
collection because the State's computer systems automatically transmit
the information that is entered as a part of normal business practice.
Therefore, the estimated hour burden is based on the States' PDPS IT
infrastructure maintenance and States' participation in the optional
Clean File process.
    To estimate the annual maintenance and infrastructure burden to
report and check for problem drivers, NDR asked a small sample of
States for information about their annual burden. NDR received
formatted estimates from two States which included the maintenance and
infrastructure labor hours and cost used to send and maintain
information to PDPS. Together, the burden from

these two States was 530 hours and the associated labor cost was
$17,400. Using these estimates, NHTSA calculates an average of 265
hours per State, with an annual labor cost of $8,700. There are 51
respondents per year (the 50 States and the District of Columbia).
Therefore, total annual burden hours for maintenance and infrastructure
is estimated to be 13,515 hours (51 respondents x 265 hours). The total
annual maintenance and infrastructure labor cost per year is estimated
to be $443,700 ($8,700 x 51).
    To ensure that the information contained in the NDR is accurate,
States sometimes submit a ``clean file'' which is a confirmation of all
drivers of that State who should be listed in the NDR file. NHTSA
estimates that an average of 28 clean files will be submitted annually
by States. States use SFTP to submit this information, and NHTSA
estimates it takes an IT specialist 8 hours to prepare and run the
data. NHTSA estimates the cost for IT personnel burden hours using the
Bureau of Labor Statistics' mean wage estimate for Software and Web
Developers, Programmers, and Testers (Standard Occupational
Classification #15-1250, May 2020) of $52.86.\1\ The Bureau of Labor
Statistics estimates that for State and local government workers, wages
represent 61.9% of total compensation.\2\ Therefore, the total hourly
cost associated with the IT burden hours is estimated to be $85.40
($52.86 / 61.9%) per hour. The total annual burden hours to prepare and
submit clean files is 224 hours (8 x 28). The total annual clean file
labor cost per year is estimated to be $19,130 ($85.40 x 224).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ May 2020 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates
United States, Occupational Employment Statistics, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#15-0000, last accessed July 23, 2021.
    \2\ Employer Costs for Employee Compensation by ownership (Dec.
2020), available at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t01.htm
(accessed July 23, 2021).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Estimated
                    Submission type                         Annual        burden per    Average hourly   Labor cost per    Total burden     Total labor
                                                          submissions     submission      labor cost       submission          hours           costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintenance and Infrastructure........................              51             265             N/A            $8,700          13,515        $443,700
Clean files...........................................              28               8          $85.40            683.20             224          19,130
                                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.............................................              51  ..............  ..............  ................          14,004         462,830
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Public Comments Invited: You are invited to comment on any aspect
of this information collection, including whether (a) the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Department, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Department's estimated
burden of the proposed information collection; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology. The agency will summarize and/or
include your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this
information collection.
    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter
35, as amended; 49 CFR 1.49; and DOT Order 1351.29.

Chou-Lin Chen,
Associate Administrator for the National Center for Statistics and
Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2022-06467 Filed 3-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


(10) LAPSE.—In this subsection, the term ‘lapse’ means that
the conformity determination for a transportation plan or transportation
improvement program has expired, and thus there is no currently
conforming transportation plan or transportation improvement
program.’’.

Appendix B: Conformity-Related Research

Considered for This ICR

The following is the conformity research studies that were considered
for this ICR.  EPA has cited in the ICR when these studies were utilized
as appropriate.

April 2003, “Transportation/Air Quality Issues in Rural Areas,” FHWA
and Dye Management Group.

October 2003, “Rural Conformity: A Survey of Practice,” NCHRP and
ICF Consulting.

	Projects that are exempt from all or certain conformity requirements
include projects listed in 40 CFR 93.126 (e.g., safety projects,
maintenance of current roads), projects that do not impact regional
emissions in 40 CFR 93.127, and traffic signal synchronization projects
listed in 40 CFR 93.128.

 Per the transportation conformity rule, submitted SIP budgets are
appropriate to use prior to EPA’s approval of the SIP when EPA
declares them adequate for transportation conformity purposes (40 CFR
93.118(e) and (f)).

 EPA, in consultation with DOT, concluded that it would be advantageous
to join transportation conformity burden estimates for all pollutants
into one ICR.  EPA notes that the DOT ICR for Metropolitan and
State-wide Planning estimated only the reduction in cost for
transportation conformity requirements due to efficiencies resulting
from SAFETEA-LU.  DOT did not include total burden estimates for
transportation conformity in its ICR.  Based upon DOT ICR cost
estimates, EPA has determined that DOT total annual state and local
respondent transportation conformity cost associated with their ICR is
approximately $15,089,550.

 The effective date for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard was December 18,
2006.  EPA anticipates making nonattainment designations for the
standard no later than December 18, 2008, with a possible extension up
to one year (but no later than three years after the effective date of
the standard).

 MPO means the policy board of an organization created and designated to
carry out the metropolitan transportation planning process.

 In 2005, SAFETEA-LU was enacted which amended Title 23 of United States
Code and Federal Transit Laws.  In this ICR, EPA has accounted for
changes that generally made the conformity process more efficient.

 EPA promulgated a more stringent 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS on October 17,
2006 (71 FR 61144), as described later in this ICR.

 Areas may be nonattainment/maintenance for more than one pollutant;
therefore, there is some overlap in the number of areas which are
nonattainment/maintenance for a pollutant and also
nonattainment/maintenance for another pollutant.

  The 1-hour ozone standard, as well as designations and classifications
for all 1-hour ozone nonattainment and maintenance areas, have been
revoked except for the Greensboro, NC; Nashville, TN; and Denver, CO
1-hour maintenance areas, which are participating in the 8-hour ozone
Early Action Compact program.  These three areas are required to
continue to determine conformity for the 1-hour ozone standard.  They
will remain 1-hour ozone maintenance areas until one year after the
effective date of their 8-hour ozone designations.

  The PM2.5 areas referred to in this table were designated
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 air quality standards on January 5,
2005.

 The number of MPOs estimated in the following tables is based upon
information collected from EPA Regional Offices, Federal Register Vol.
67, No. 84, May 1, 2002, Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,
Qualifying Urban Areas for Census 2000 and Federal Register Vol. 67, No.
130, July 8, 2002, Department of Transportation, Federal Transit
Administration/Federal Highway Administration Designation of
Transportation Management Areas.

Per the conformity rule (§93.123(b)(1)), projects of local air quality
concern include: (i) new or expanded highway projects that have a
significant number of or significant increase in diesel vehicles; (ii)
projects affecting intersections that are at Level-of-Service D, E, or F
because of increased traffic volumes from a significant number of diesel
vehicles related to the project; (iii) new bus and rail terminals and
transfer points that have a significant number of diesel vehicles
congregating at a single location; (iv) expanded bus and rail terminals
and transfer points that significantly increase the number of diesel
vehicles congregating at a single location; and, (v) projects in or
affecting locations, areas, or categories of sites which are identified
in the PM10 or PM2.5 applicable SIP or SIP submission as appropriate, as
sites of violation or possible violation.

 EPA and FHWA have provided guidance for those areas required to do
qualitative hot-spot analyses for PM2.5 and PM10 nonattainment and
maintenance areas:  “Transportation Conformity Guidance for
Qualitative Hot-spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and
Maintenance Areas,”  EPA420-B-06-922.

		EPA estimates that seven state and local agencies participate in one
consultation meeting on each transportation project.

	Isolated rural areas are not required by federal law to develop
metropolitan transportation plans or TIPs.

	EPA estimates that four state and local agencies would participate in
one consultation meeting on each transportation project.

 In the July 2004 supporting statement, we estimated 140 or 160 hours of
start-up time (depending on number of pollutants for which the area was
nonattainment) to account for training staff people in regulations which
at that point were new.

	 For more information on CBSAs, see the U.S. Census Bureau website at:
 HYPERLINK
"http://www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/aboutmetro.html."
http://www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/aboutmetro.html.

 State and local agency representatives from many new nonattainment
areas may attend conformity training courses such as the National
Transit Institutes’ conformity training course entitled,
“Introduction to Transportation/Air Quality Conformity.”  This
three-day course offers an in-depth overview of the criteria and
procedures for implementing conformity and is designed for federal,
state, and local agencies involved in the conformity process.

	Isolated rural areas are not required by federal law to develop
metropolitan transportation plans or TIPs.

	EPA estimates that four state and local agencies would participate in
one consultation meeting on each transportation project.

	 January 2007 U.S. Office of Personal Management, Salary Table 2007-GS,
2007 General Schedule, http://www.opm.gov/oca/07tables/indexGS.asp

	 January 2007 U.S. Office of Personal Management, Salary Table 2007-GS,
2007 General Schedule ,http://www.opm.gov/oca/07tables/indexGS.asp, .

 EPA’s survey of federal field offices found that FTA spent minimal
time on conformity-related work.

 EPA’s survey of federal field offices found that FTA spent minimal
time on conformity-related work.

	 EPA will find a budget adequate if the following minimum criteria is
met: (i)The submitted SIP is endorsed by the Governor or his/her
designee and has been subject to a state public hearing; (ii)
Interagency consultation took place and any EPA stated concerns have
been addressed; (iii) The budget is clearly identified and precisely
quantified; (iv) The budget, when considered with all other emissions
sources, is consistent with applicable SIP requirements; (v) The budget
is consistent with and is clearly related to the emissions inventory and
submitted SIP control measures; and, (vi) Revisions to a previously
submitted SIP explain and document any changes to the previous budget
and control measures, impacts on point and source emissions, and any
changes to established safety margins and reasons for those changes

	 January 2007 U.S. Office of Personal Management, Salary Table 2007-GS,
2007 General Schedule, http://www.opm.gov/oca/07tables/indexGS.asp.

 EPA’s survey of federal field offices found that FTA spent minimal
time on conformity-related work

 To obtain bottom-line annual Federal agency cost associated with
conformity determinations, EPA multiplied the bottom-line Federal agency
annual burden hours by estimated hourly labor costs of $54.93 and then
added $20,650 in Federal Register notice publication costs from Table 37
to reach the bottom line Federal agency annual estimated cost of
$886,676.

 To obtain bottom-line annual cost associated with adequacy
determinations for motor vehicle emission budgets, EPA multiplied the
total burden hours in Table 37 by estimated hourly labor costs of $54.93
and then added $20,650 in Federal Register notice publication costs to
reach the bottom line annual cost of $127,764.

 To obtain bottom-line costs associated with conformity determinations
(Table 48), EPA multiplied the bottom-line burden hours in Table 47 by
estimated hourly labor costs of $54.93 and then added $20,650 in Federal
Register notice publication costs from Table 37 to reach the bottom line
annual cost of $3,759,736.

   HYPERLINK
"http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/conformity/nonattain/8hrozonepages/
index.htm"
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/conformity/nonattain/8hrozonepages/i
ndex.htm ;   HYPERLINK
"http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/conformity/nonattain/pm25pages/inde
x.htm"
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/conformity/nonattain/pm25pages/index
.htm


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 14 (Tuesday, January 22, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4306-4307]
[FR Doc No: 2013-01071]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket FAA No. FAA-2012-1253; Airspace Docket No. 12-AWP-10]

Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Twentynine Palms, CA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class D and Class E airspace at Twentynine
Palms SELF Airport, Twentynine Palms, CA. This action changes the
airport name formerly called Twentynine Palms Expeditionary Air Field
(EAF), Marine Corps Base. This action also adjusts the geographic
coordinates of the airport to enhance the safety and management of
aircraft operations at Twentynine Palms SELF Airport, Twentynine Palms,
CA. This action does not change the boundaries of the airspace.

DATES: Effective date, 0901 UTC, March 7, 2013. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR Part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    The FAA's Aeronautical Products Office requested the change to the
airport name and geographic coordinates of Twentynine Palms SELF
Airport, Twentynine Palms, CA.
    The Class D airspace and Class E airspace designations are
published in paragraphs 5000 and 6004, respectively, of FAA Order
7400.9W, dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15, 2012, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D airspace and
Class E airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

    The FAA amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part
71 by changing the airport name described in Class D airspace and Class
E airspace designated as an extension to Class D surface area at
Twentynine Palms, CA, to Twentynine Palms SELF Airport, formerly
Twentynine Palms Expeditionary Air Field (EAF), Marine Corps Base. The
geographic coordinates of the airport are also adjusted to be in
accordance with the FAA's aeronautical database. Accordingly, since
this is an administrative change and does not involve a change in the
dimensions or operation requirements of that airspace, notice and
public procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary.
    The FAA has determined this regulation only involves an established
body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments
are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this
regulation; (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority for the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends controlled airspace at Twentynine Palms SELF Airport,
Twentynine Palms, CA.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 311a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9W, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15, 2012, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D airspace.

* * * * *

AWP CA D Twentynine Palms, CA [Amended]

Twentynine Palms SELF Airport, CA
    (Lat. 34[deg]17'46'' N., long. 116[deg]09'44'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
4,600 feet MSL within a 4.3-mile radius of the Twentynine Palms SELF
Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific
dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Airport/Facility Directory.

Paragraph 6004 Class E airspace designated as an extension to a
Class D surface area.

* * * * *

AWP CA E4 Twentynine Palms, CA [Amended]

Twentynine Palms SELF Airport, CA
    (Lat. 34[deg]17'46'' N., long. 116[deg]09'44'' W.)
Twentynine Palms VORTAC
    (Lat. 34[deg]06'44'' N., long. 115[deg]46'12'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 1.8 miles
each side of the Twentynine Palms VORTAC 298[deg] radial extending
from the 4.3-mile radius of Twentynine Palms SELF Airport to 13.9
miles west of the VORTAC. This Class E airspace area is effective
during the specific dates and times established in advance by a
Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be
continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on December 19, 2012.
Clark Desing,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2013-01071 Filed 1-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P