SUPPORTING STATEMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NSPS for Nitric Acid Plants (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart G) (Renewal)

1.  Identification of the Information Collection

1(a)  Title of the Information Collection

NSPS for Nitric Acid Plants (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart G) (Renewal)

1(b)  Short Characterization/Abstract

The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for nitric acid plants were
proposed on August 17, 1971, and promulgated on June 14, 1974.  These
standards apply to nitric acid production units which commenced
construction, modification or reconstruction after the date of proposal.
 Nitrogen oxide (NOx) is the pollutant regulated under this subpart.
The standards limit nitrogen oxides, expressed as NO2, in excess of 1.5
kilograms per metric ton of acid produced (3.0 lb. per ton), and limit
opacity to 10 percent.

Owners or operators of the affected facilities described must make the
following one-time-only reports: notification of the date of
construction or reconstruction; notification of the actual dates of
startup; notification of any physical or operational change to an
existing facility which may increase the regulated pollutant emission
rate; notification of demonstration of the continuous monitoring system
(CMS); notification of the date of the initial performance test; and the
results of the initial performance test.  Owners or operators are
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.  These notifications, reports and records are required, in
general, of all sources subject to NSPS.

Monitoring requirements specific to nitric acid plants provide
information on nitrogen oxide emissions.  The owners or operators are
required to record the production rate of nitric acid produced, the
hours of operation of the source, and the levels of nitrogen oxides
emitted into the atmosphere.  Owners or operators of affected facilities
are required to install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a continuous
monitoring system for the measurement and recording of nitrogen oxides.
Recordkeeping requirements for nitric acid plants consist of the
occurrence and duration of any startup and malfunctions as described.
They include the initial performance test results including information
necessary to determine the conditions of the performance test, and
performance test measurements and results, including the emission rate
and concentration of NOx and the volumetric flow rate of the effluent
gas.  Records of startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions should be noted
as they occur.  Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this
subpart will maintain a file of all measurements, including continuous
monitoring system, monitoring device and performance testing
measurements; all continuous monitoring system performance evaluations;
all continuous monitoring system or monitoring device calibration
checks; and all other information required by this part, recorded in a
permanent form suitable for inspection.

The reporting requirements for this industry currently include the
initial notifications listed, the initial performance test results, and
semiannual reports of instances of excess emissions and a monitoring
system performance report.  Periods of excess emissions will be reported
and are defined as any three-hour period during which the average
nitrogen oxides emissions (arithmetic average of three contiguous
one-hour periods) as measured by a continuous emission monitoring system
exceed the standard.  Semiannual excess emission reports and monitoring
system performance reports will include the date and time of the
exceedence or deviation, the nature and cause of the malfunction (if
known) and corrective measures taken, and identification of the time
period during which the CMS was inoperative (this does not include zero
and span checks or typical repairs/adjustments).

All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority.  In the
event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are sent
directly to the EPA regional office.  Notifications are used to inform
the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the
standard.  The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to verify
if the standard is being met.  Performance test reports are needed as
these are the Agency's records of a source's initial capability to
comply with the emission standard, and to note the operating conditions
under which compliance was achieved.  The semiannual reports are used
for problem identification, as a check on source operation and
maintenance, and for compliance determinations.

Owners or operators subject to the provisions of this part will maintain
a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least two years
following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports, and
records.

Approximately 24 sources are currently subject to the standard, and it
is estimated that an additional one source per year will become subject
to the standard over the next three years due to the modification or
reconstruction of an existing affected facility.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved the current
Information Collection Request (ICR) without any (Terms of Clearance.(

	The burden to the “Affected Public” may be found in Table 1: Annual
Respondent Burden and Cost – NSPS for Nitric Acid Plants (40 CFR Part
60, Subpart G).  The burden to the “Federal Government” is
attributed entirely to work performed by Federal employees or government
contractors; this burden may be found in Table 2: Average Annual EPA
Burden – NSPS for Nitric Acid Plants (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart G).

2.  Need for and Use of the Collection

2(a)  Need/Authority for the Collection

The EPA is charged under section 111 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as
amended, to establish standards of performance for new stationary
sources that reflect:

. . . application of the best technological system of continuous
emissions reduction which (taking into consideration the cost of
achieving such emissions reduction, or any non-air quality health and
environmental impact and energy requirements) the Administrator
determines has been adequately demonstrated.  Section 111(a)(l).

The Agency refers to this charge as selecting the best demonstrated
technology (BDT).  Section 111 also requires that the Administrator
review and, if appropriate, revise such standards every four years.

2(b)  Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The control of emissions of NOx from nitric acid plants requires not
only the installation of properly designed equipment, but also the
operation and maintenance of that equipment.  Emissions of nitrogen
oxide from nitric acid plants are the result of operation of the
affected facilities.  The subject standards are achieved by the
reduction of pollutant emissions using control technology and leak
detection and repair procedures.  The notifications required in the
applicable regulations are used to inform the Agency or delegated
authority when a source becomes subject to the requirements of the
regulations.  The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to
ensure that the pollution control devices are properly installed and
operated, that leaks are being detected and repaired, and that the
regulations are being met.

Performance test reports are needed as these are the Agency records of a
source's initial capability to comply with the emission standards, and
serve as a record of the operating conditions under which compliance was
achieved.  The semiannual reports are used for problem identification,
as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance
determinations.  The information generated by the (monitoring,
recordkeeping and reporting) requirement described in this ICR is used
by the Agency to ensure that facilities affected by the NSPS continue to
operate the control equipment in compliance with the regulation.
Adequate monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting are necessary to
ensure compliance with the applicable regulations, as required by the
Clean Air Act.  The information collected from recordkeeping and
reporting requirements is also used for targeting inspections, and is of
sufficient quality to be used as evidence in court.

3.  Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

The requested recordkeeping and reporting are required under (40 CFR
part 60, subpart G).

3(a)  Nonduplication

If the subject standards have not been delegated, the information is
sent directly to the appropriate EPA regional office.  Otherwise, the
information is sent directly to the delegated state or local agency.  If
a state or local agency has adopted their own similar standards to
implement the Federal standards, a copy of the report submitted to the
state or local agency can be sent to the Administrator in lieu of the
report required by the Federal standards.  Therefore, no duplication
exists.

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

An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this ICR
was published in the Federal Register (74 FR 38004) on July 30, 2009.
No comments were received on the burden published in the Federal
Register.

3(c)  Consultations

While renewing the previous ICR, the preparer of the active ICR and the
most recent data available on the Air Facility System (AFS) database
were referenced.  In addition, information available from the Office of
Compliance Sector Notebook (Profile of the Agricultural Chemical,
Pesticide, and Fertilizer Industry, the United States Census Bureau via
the internet, and other websites covering nitric acid were reviewed.
The EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Information
Transfer and Program Integration Division was consulted.  The following
contacts were also made: The Fertilizer Institute (TFI), Mr. Bill Herz,
(202) 515-2706; Agrium, Mr. Robert Williams,<PHONE_NUMBER>; Costal
Chemical, Ms. Barbara Cabot,<PHONE_NUMBER>; and BP Chemicals,
Incorporated, Mr. Kevin Sprague,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

3(d)  Effects of Less Frequent Collection

Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of
assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the standards.
Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are a useful
technique to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are
applied and emission limitations are met.  If the information required
by these standards was collected less frequently, the likelihood of
detecting poor operation and maintenance of control equipment and
noncompliance would decrease.

3(e)  General Guidelines

None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of the
regulations established by OMB at 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

3(f)  Confidentiality

	Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of
confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency
policies set forth in title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B -
Confidentiality of Business Information (CBI) (see 40 CFR part 2; 41 FR
36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43
FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

3(g)  Sensitive Questions

None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contain sensitive
questions.

4.  The Respondents and the Information Requested

4(a)  Respondents/SIC and NAIC Codes

The respondents to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are
nitric acid plants.  The United States Standard Industrial
Classification (SIC) code for the respondents affected by the standard
is 2873, which corresponds to the North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) 325311 code for nitric acid.

4(b)  Information Requested

None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of the
regulations established by OMB at 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

(i)  Data Items

All data in this ICR that are recorded and/or reported are required by
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Nitric Acid Plants (40 CFR
part 60, subpart G).

A source must make the following reports:

Notifications	Standard Citation by Section

Notification of construction or modification application	60.6(a)

Initial notifications	60.7(a)(3)

Notification of actual startup	60.7(a)(3)

Initial performance test	60.8(d)

Initial performance test results	60.8(a)

Rescheduled initial performance test	60.8(d)

Demonstration of continuous monitoring system	60.7(a)(5)

Compliance status	60.7 (a)(7)

Physical or operational change	60.7(a)(4)

Opacity or visible emissions	60.7(a)(6)

Periodic startup, shutdown, malfunction reports	60.7(b)

Source status report	60.7(c)

Reports	Standard Citation by Section

Semiannual	60.7(c)

A source must make the following records:

Recordkeeping for 40 CFR part 60, subpart G

Startup, shutdowns, malfunctions, periods where the continuous
monitoring system is inoperative	60.7(b)

Emission test results and other data needed to determine emissions
60.7(c)

All reports and notifications	60.19

Record of applicability	60.70

Records of sources with continuous monitoring systems (CMS)	60.7(c)

Maintain records for two years	60.7(f)

Electronic Reporting

Currently, sources are using monitoring equipment that provides
parameter data in an automated way, e.g., leaks and spills of mercury.
Although personnel at the source still need to evaluate the data, this
type of monitoring equipment has significantly reduced the burden
associated with monitoring and recordkeeping.  In addition, some
regulatory agencies are setting up electronic reporting systems to allow
sources to report electronically which is reducing the reporting burden.
 However, electronic reporting systems are still not widely used by the
regulatory agencies.  It is estimated that approximately 10 percent of
the respondents use electronic reporting.

(ii)  Respondent Activities

Respondent Activities

Read instructions.

Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate CMS for opacity.

Perform initial performance test, Reference Method 7, and repeat
performance tests if necessary.

Write the notifications and reports listed above.

Enter information required to be recorded above.

Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and
utilizing technology and systems for the purpose of collecting,
validating, and verifying information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the
purpose of processing and maintaining information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the
purpose of disclosing and providing information.

Adjust existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements.

Train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information.

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

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

5(a)  Agency Activities

EPA conducts the following activities in connection with the
acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the required
information.

Agency Activities

Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests if
necessary.

Review notifications and reports, including performance test reports,
and excess emissions reports, required to be submitted by industry.

Audit facility records.

Input, analyze, and maintain data in the Air Facility System (AFS).

5(b)  Collection Methodology and Management

Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority might inspect
the source to determine whether the pollution control devices are
properly installed and operated.

Performance test reports are used by the Agency to discern a source(s
initial capability to comply with the emission standard and note the
operating conditions under which compliance was achieved.  Data and
records maintained by the respondents are tabulated and published for
use in compliance and enforcement programs.  The semiannual reports are
used for problems identification, as a check on source operation and
maintenance, and for compliance determinations.

Information contained in the reports is entered into the AFS which is
operated and maintained by the EPA Office of Compliance.  AFS is the EPA
database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance
and annual emission inventory data for over 100,000 industrial and
government-owned facilities.  EPA uses the AFS for tracking air
pollution compliance and enforcement by local and state regulatory
agencies, EPA regional offices and EPA headquarters.  EPA and its
delegated Authorities can edit, store, retrieve and analyze the data.

The records required by this regulation must be retained by the owner or
operator for two years.

5(c)  Small Entity Flexibility

A majority of the affected facilities are large entities (e.g., large
businesses).  The number of small entities in the affected population
could not be determined based on a review of available sources including
those in the rulemaking dockets and EPA’s publications Review of New
Source Performance Standards for Nitric Acid Plants (EPA-450/3-84-011)
and A Review of Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources –
Nitric Acid Plants (EPA-450/3-79-013).  However, the possible impact on
small entities (i.e., small businesses) was taken into consideration
during the development of the regulation.  Due to technical
considerations involving the process operations and the types of control
equipment employed, the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are the
same for both small and large entities.  The Agency considers these
requirements the minimum needed to ensure compliance and, therefore,
cannot reduce them further for small entities.  To the extent that
larger businesses can use economies of scale to reduce their burden, the
overall burden will be reduced.

5(d)  Collection Schedule

The specific frequency for each information collection activity within
this request is shown in Table 1: Average Annual Industry Burden and
Costs for NSPS for Nitric Acids (40 CFR part 60, subpart G).

6.  Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for the
recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry for
the subpart included in this ICR.  The individual burdens are expressed
under standardized headings believed to be consistent with the concept
of burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act.  Wherever appropriate,
specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified.  Responses to
this information collection are mandatory.

The 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.

6(a)  Estimating Respondent Burden

The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from
these recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be 1,291
(Total Labor Hours from Table 1).  These hours are based on Agency
studies and background documents from the development of the regulation,
Agency knowledge and experience with the NSPS program, the previously
approved ICR, and any comments received.

6(b)  Estimating Respondent Costs

(i)  Estimating Labor Costs

This ICR uses the following labor rates:  $93.09 per hour for Executive,
Administrative, and Managerial labor; $64.13 per hour for Technical
labor, and $39.65 per hour for Clerical labor.  These rates are from the
United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
“September 2003, Table 10. Private Industry, by Occupational and
Industry group”.  The rates are from column 1, “Total
Compensation”.  The rates have been increase by 110 percent to account
for the benefit packages available to those employed by private
industry.

Managerial	$93.09   ($44.33 + 110%)

Technical	$64.13   ($30.54 + 110%)

Clerical	$39.65   ($18.88 + 110%)

(ii)  Estimating Capital/Startup and Operation and Maintenance Costs

The type of industry costs associated with the information collection
activities in the subject standard are both labor costs which are
addressed elsewhere in this ICR and the costs associated with continuous
monitoring.  The capital/startup costs are one-time costs when a
facility becomes subject to the regulation.  The annual operation and
maintenance costs are the ongoing costs to maintain the monitors and
other costs such as photocopying and postage.

(iii)  Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

(A)

Continuous Monitoring Device	(B)

Capital/Startup Cost for One Respondent	(C)

Number of New Respondents 	(D)

Total Capital/Startup Cost,

(B X C)	(E)

Annual O&M Costs for One Respondent	(F)

Number of Respondents  with O&M	(G)

Total O&M,

(E X F)

NOx	$68,000	1	$68,000	$100,000	24	$2,400,000

The total capital/startup costs for this ICR are $68,000.  This is the
total of column D in the above table.

The total operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for this ICR are
$2,400,000.  This is the total of column G.

The average annual cost for capital/startup and operation and
maintenance costs to industry over the next three years of the ICR is
estimated to be $2,468,000.

6(c)  Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

The only costs to the Agency are those costs associated with analysis of
the reported information.  EPA's overall compliance and enforcement
program includes activities such as the examination of records
maintained by the respondents, periodic inspection of sources of
emissions, and the publication and distribution of collected
information.

The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is
estimated to be $4,915 (rounded).  This cost is based on the average
hourly labor rate at a GS-12, Step 1, times a 1.6 benefits
multiplication factor to account for government overhead expenses for a
total of $39.49 per hour.

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) (2003
General Schedule( which excludes locality rates of pay.  Details upon
which this estimate is based appear in Table 2: Average Annual EPA
Burden and Costs - NSPS for Nitric Acid Plants (40 CFR part 60, subpart
G), below.

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

Based on our research for this ICR, approximately 24 existing sources
are currently subject to the standard.  It is estimated that an
additional one affected facility at an existing source per year will
become subject to the regulation over the next three years.

Number of respondents is calculated using the following table which
addresses the three years covered by this ICR.

Number of Respondents

	Respondents That Submit Reports	Respondents That Do Not Submit Any
Reports

	Year	(A)

Number of New Respondents	(B)

Number of Existing Respondents	(C)

Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit
Reports	(D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Are Also New Respondents (with
initial notification requirements)	(E)

Number of Respondents

(E=A+B+C-D)

1	1	23	0	1	23

2	1	24	0	1	24

3	1	25	0	1	25

Average	1	24	0	1	24

To avoid double-counting respondents, column D is subtracted.  As shown
above, the average Number of Respondents over the three year period of
this ICR is twenty-four.

The total number of annual responses per year is calculated using the
following table:

Total Annual Responses

(A)

Number of New Respondents	(B)

Number of Reports for New Respondents	(C)

Number of Existing Respondents	(D)

Number of Reports for Existing Respondents	(F)

Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit
Reports	(E)

Total Annual Responses

E=(AxB)+(CxD)+F

1	3	24	2	0	51

The number of Total Annual Responses is 51.

The total annual labor costs are $81,639.  Details regarding these
estimates may be found in Table 1: Average Annual Industry Burden and
Costs, NSPS for Nitric Acid Plants (40 CFR part 60, subpart G), below.

The total annual capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entities
are $2,468,000.  These costs are detailed in Section 6(b)(iii),
Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.

6(e)  Bottom Line Burden Hours Burden Hours and Cost Tables

The bottom line burden hours and cost tables for both the Agency and the
respondents are attached.  The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 25
hours per response.

6(f)  Reasons for Change in Burden

There is no change in the labor cost to the respondents in this ICR
compared to the previous ICR. This is due to two considerations.  First,
the regulations have not changed over the past three years and are not
anticipated to change over the next three years.  Secondly, the growth
rate for the industry is very low, negative or non-existent.  Therefore,
the cost figures in the previous ICR reflect the current burden to the
respondents and are reiterated in this ICR.  Due to rounding-up in Table
1, there is an increase of one hour in the total labor hours to the
respondents.

6(g)  Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection
of information is estimated to average 25 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; train personnel to
be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or
otherwise disclose the information.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB
Control Number.  The OMB Control Numbers for EPA regulations are listed
at 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

	To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of
the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques,
EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number
EPA-HQ-OECA-2009-0525.  An electronic version of the public docket is
available at http://www.regulations.gov/ which may be used to obtain a
copy of the draft collection of information, submit or view public
comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to
access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically.  When in the system, select “search,” then key in
the docket ID number identified in this document.  The documents are
also available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance
Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.  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 docket center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  Also, you can send comments to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, 725 17th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention:
Desk Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number
EPA-HQ-OECA-2009-0525 and OMB Control Number 2060-0019 in any
correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in
collecting this information.

Table 1:  Annual Respondent Burden and Cost – NSPS for Nitric Acid
Plants (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart G)

Burden item	(A)

Respondent hours per occurrence	(B)

Number of occurrences per respondent per year	(C)

Hours per respondent per year

(C=AxB)	(D)

Number of respondents per year  	(E)

Technical hours per year

@$64.13

(CxD)	(F)

Management hours per year @$93.09

(Ex0.05)	(G)

Clerical hours per year @$39.65

(Ex0.1)

	(H)

Total cost per year a

1.  Applications	N/A

	2.  Survey and Studies	N/A

	3.  Reporting Requirements

     New Sources b

    A. Read instructions 	1	1	1	1	1	0.05	0.1	$72.74

    B. Required activities

       Initial performance test 	360	1	360	1	360	18	36	$26,189.82

       Demonstration of monitoring system	Included in 3B

	       Repeat performance test c 	360	1	360	0.2	72	3.6	7.2	$5,237.96

       Ref Method 7	4	1	4	1	4	0.2	0.4	$291.00

       Ref  Method 2	4	1	4	1	4	0.2	0.4	$291.00

    C. Create information	Included in 3B

	    D. Gather existing information	N/A

	    E. Write reports

    New Sources

       Notification of construction/
reconstruction	2	1	2	1	2	0.1	0.2	$145.50

       Notification of initial startup	2	1	2	1	2	0.1	0.2	$145.50

       Notification of initial performance test	2	1	2	1	2	0.1	0.2
$145.50

       Performance test report	Included in 3B

	    Existing Sources

       Notification of physical/operational           changes d	8	1	8
2.4	19.2	0.96	1.92	$1,396.80

       Semiannual reports of excess                      emissions e	8	1
8	24	192	9.6	19.2	$13,967.90

SUBTOTAL REPORTING

	757	$47,884

4.  Recordkeeping requirements

   A. Read instructions 	Included in 4B

	   B. Plan activities 	Included in 4B

	   C. Implement activities	Included in 4B

	   D. Develop record systems	N/A

	   E. Time to enter information

       Records of daily production rates and        hours of operation	8
1	8	24	192	9.6	19.2	$13,967.90

       Records of occurrence of startup,               shutdown, and
malfunctions	8	1	8	24	192	9.6	19.2	$13,967.90

      Records of performance test data	80	1	80	1	80	4	8	$5,819.96

   F.  Audits	N/A

	SUBTOTAL RECORDKEEPING

	534	$33,756

TOTAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST (rounded)

	1,291	$81,639

Assumptions:

a  We assume that all tasks are to be performed by management, technical
and clerical personnel.  This ICR uses the following labor rates: $93.09
for Managerial labor, $64.13 for Technical labor and $39.65 for Clerical
labor.  These rates are from the United States Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics, “September 2003, Table 10. Private
Industry, by Occupational and Industry group.”  The rates have been
increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available
to those employed by private industry.  We also included contractors at
$100.  The labor rate was also taken from the above occupational and
industry group under Blue-Collar occupation, that covers Machine
operators, and took the rates from column 1, “Total Compensation,”

b  We assume that there will be one new, modified or reconstructed
facility constructed for the next three years.

c  We assume that 20 percent of facilities would have to repeat
performance testing each year due to failure.

d  We assume that 10 percent of the facilities would be modified or
reconstructed over the next three years.

e  We assume that it will take eight hours to write semiannual reports.

Table 2:  Average Annual EPA Burden - NSPS for Nitric Acid Plants (40
CFR Part 60, Subpart G)

	Activity

(A)

EPA

Per

Occurrence

(B)

Occurrences

plant/

 year

(C)

EPA hr/

plant/yr

 (C=AxB)

(D)

Plants/

 year

(E) e

EPA Hours

Per  Year

(E=CxD)

(F) a

EPA Cost  Per Year (Ex$39.49)

Required activities

   New Plant b

      Initial performance  test c	24	1	24	1	24	$947.76

      Repeat performance tests d	24	0.2	4.8	0.2	0.96	$37.91

Report Review

   New Plant

      Notification of construction/reconstruction/modification	2	1	2	1	2
$78.98

      Notification of initial startup	0.5	1	0.5	1	0.5	$19.74

      Notification of actual startup	0.5	1	0.5	1	0.5	$19.74

      Notification of initial test	0.5	1	0.5	1	0.5	$19.74

   Existing Plants

      Semiannual reports	2	2	4	24	96	$3,791.04

Subtotals Labor Burden and cost

	124.46	$4,914.91

 TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST (rounded)

	124	$4,915

Assumptions:

a  The cost is based on the hourly rate at a GS-12, Step 1, times a 1.6
benefits multiplication factor to account for government overhead
expenses for a total of $39.49.  This rate is from the Office of
Personnel Management (OPM) “2003 General Schedule” which excludes
locality rates of pay.

b  We assume that there will be one new source (respondent) per year
over the three years period of this ICR.

c  We assume that it would take 24 hours to complete initial performance
test.

    d  We assume 20 percent of initial performance tests are repeated
due to failure.

 PAGE

 PAGE   7


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 18, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69444-69446]
[FR Doc No: 2019-27212]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87726; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2019-092]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Amend Exchange Rule 5515 Which Governs the Listing of Warrants on
the Nasdaq Capital Market To Replace the Current Requirement That a
Warrant Have 400 Round-Lot Holders With a Revised Requirement of 100
Holders That Are Both Public Holders and Round-Lot Holders

December 12, 2019.
    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 December 5, 2019, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' 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 Exchange Rule 5515 which governs the
listing of warrants on the Nasdaq Capital Market. Specifically, Nasdaq
proposes to replace the current requirement that a warrant have 400
Round-Lot Holders with a revised requirement of 100 Holders that are
both Public Holders and Round-Lot Holders, which is substantially
similar to a long-standing requirement for listing warrants on the NYSE
American Exchange.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal office of
the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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
    Nasdaq Exchange Rule 5515 governs the initial listing of warrants
on the Nasdaq Capital Market. Among the requirements for listing
warrants on the Nasdaq Capital Market is that each warrant to be listed
must have 400 Round-Lot Holders.\3\ The corresponding

rule of the NYSE American Market is Section 105 of the NYSE American
Company Guide, which requires that each warrant to be listed must have
100 public warrantholders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Specifically, Rule 5515(a) currently provides that for
initial listing on the Nasdaq Capital Market, ``rights, warrants and
put warrants (that is, instruments that grant the holder the right
to sell to the issuing company a specified number of shares of the
Company's common stock, at a specified price until a specified
period of time) must meet the following requirements: (1) At least
400,000 issued; (2) The underlying security must be listed on Nasdaq
or be a Covered Security; (3) At least three registered and active
Market Makers; and (4) In the case of warrants, at least 400 Round
Lot Holders (except that this requirement will not apply to the
listing of rights or warrants in connection with the initial firm
commitment underwritten public offering of such warrants).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Prior to 2010, Nasdaq did not have a holder requirement for listing
warrants on the Nasdaq Capital Market. In 2010, Nasdaq adopted a round
lot holder requirement for the initial listing of warrants on the
Nasdaq Capital Market to help ensure that warrants listed on the Nasdaq
Capital Market had adequate distribution and a liquid trading
market.\4\ At the time, Nasdaq determined to adopt the same 400 round
lot holder requirement as applied to list warrants on the Nasdaq Global
Market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61594 (February 25,
2010), 75 FR 9982 (March 4, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In most instances, the requirements for the Nasdaq Capital Market
are lower than those of the Nasdaq Global Market. In addition, Nasdaq
has positioned the Nasdaq Capital Market tier to compete for companies
that otherwise may list on the NYSE American exchange. Accordingly,
Nasdaq has determined to modify its minimum holder requirement to list
warrants on the Nasdaq Capital Market so that it is lower than the
requirement for the Nasdaq Global Market and substantially similar to
the requirement for NYSE American.\5\ Specifically, Nasdaq proposes to
adopt the standard of 100 Holders that are both Public Holders \6\ and
Round-Lot Holders,\7\ which is substantially similar to (but could be
more stringent than) the NYSE American 100 public warrantholders
requirement.\8\ Nasdaq is proposing no changes to Nasdaq's other
initial listing requirements for warrants on the Nasdaq Capital Market,
nor is Nasdaq proposing changes to Nasdaq's continued listing standards
for warrants.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In considering this change, Nasdaq compared the trading
quality of warrants listed on Nasdaq with that of warrants listed on
NYSE American. The study reviewed trading during 2019 for warrants
listed as of January 1, 2019, and included factors such as average
daily volume executed, average quoted and effective spreads, and
volatility. While it is difficult to draw conclusions given the
small universe of data (only six warrants were listed on NYSE
American as of January 1, 2019, and warrants on both markets did not
trade on a large number of days) and other differences between the
exchanges in market structure and listing requirements, based on
this review, in Nasdaq's opinion, there was no evidence indicating
that trading quality in warrants listed on NYSE American under its
current listing standard was worse than those of warrants listed on
Nasdaq under its standard. Additionally, Nasdaq is unaware that NYSE
American has taken adverse action against a warrant or an issuer of
such warrant listed under Section 105 of the NYSE American Company
Guide based on the quantitative listing standards in question.
    \6\ Nasdaq Rule 5005(a)(36) defines Public Holders as ``holders
of a security that includes both beneficial holders and holders of
record, but does not include any holder who is, either directly or
indirectly, an Executive Officer, director, or the beneficial holder
of more than 10% of the total shares outstanding.''
    \7\ Nasdaq Rule 5005(a)(40) defines a Round Lot Holder as ``a
holder of a Normal Unit of Trading of Unrestricted Securities. The
number of beneficial holders will be considered in addition to
holders of record.''
    \8\ The proposed Nasdaq requirement could be more stringent than
the NYSE American requirement because the Nasdaq rule would require
that the holders be both Public Holders and Round Lot Holders, and
would exclude holders of restricted securities, whereas the NYSE
American rule only requires that they be public holders.
    \9\ Nasdaq notes that Section 105 of the NYSE American Company
Guide also provides requirements around warrant exercise provisions
when a company has the right to reduce the exercise price of its
warrants. Similar to these NYSE American requirements, Nasdaq
believes that its rules also require a company with such a right to
comply with any applicable tender offer regulatory provisions under
the federal securities laws and to publicly disclose material
information such as the reduction of the warrant exercise price.
Nasdaq intends to file a subsequent rule filing to provide
transparency to this.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\10\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ 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. Specifically, Nasdaq believes this proposed rule change
removes an impediment to a free and open system by enabling Nasdaq to
compete with NYSE American for the listing of a broader scope of
warrants and simultaneously by offering issuers of such warrants an
additional listing option. Nasdaq further believes that it does so
without impacting the protection of investors or the public interest
because, in Nasdaq's opinion, the quantitative standards at issue have
been applied by NYSE American for many years without harm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. To the contrary, the Exchange
believes the proposed rule change is pro-competitive in that it permits
competition for more issuers of warrants. Today, there is no such
competition because such issuers are not eligible for listing on
Nasdaq.

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

    Because the foregoing 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, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \12\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \14\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \15\ permits the
Commission to 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 Exchange may allow the issuer of a warrant currently affected by
the existing rule the opportunity to list on Nasdaq. The Exchange notes
that its proposal is based on an existing NYSE American rule and, in
its view, the proposal does not raise new issues that are inconsistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that waiver of the operative delay is
appropriate because the proposed warrant holder

requirement is substantially similar to the rules of another national
securities exchange.\16\ For these reasons, the Commission believes
that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. Therefore, the
Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the
proposal as operative upon filing.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See also supra note 9.
    \17\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission also 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 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-NASDAQ-2019-092 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-NASDAQ-2019-092. 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 office 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-NASDAQ-2019-092 and should be submitted
on or before January 8, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-27212 Filed 12-17-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 86)]
[Notices]
[Page 21046-21048]
[DOCID:fr06my09-152]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59843; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2009-035]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Modify Fees for Members Using the NASDAQ Market Center

April 29, 2009.
    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 April 14, 2009, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed
rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items
have been prepared by NASDAQ. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of
the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ NASDAQ has designated
this proposal as establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge,
which renders the proposed rule change effective upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.

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

    NASDAQ proposes to modify pricing for NASDAQ members using the
Nasdaq Market Center. This proposed rule change, which is effective
upon filing, will become operative on April 15, 2009. The text of the
proposed rule change is available at http://
nasdaqomx.cchwallstreet.com/, at NASDAQ's principal office, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, NASDAQ 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. NASDAQ 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
    NASDAQ is modifying its pricing for order execution and routing of
equities. As detailed below, NASDAQ is establishing two fee schedules
for the month of April, the first is applicable from April 1 through
April 14 and the second from April 15 to April 30. The effect of the
fee changes will vary with respect to the listing venue of the
securities being traded and whether a member is accessing or providing
liquidity or routing an order.
    Fee Schedule Applicable From April 1 through April 14. For the
first half of April, NASDAQ will charge the same ``per transaction''
fees and offer the same ``per transaction'' credits that were approved
[sic] \5\ and put into effect prior to April 1 through the filing of
SR-NASDAQ-2009-029. NASDAQ will modify the fee schedule by reducing the
levels of market activity at which members qualify for reduced ``per
transaction'' pricing. For firms that meet the reduced market activity
requirements, this will result in an effective reduction of
transaction-based prices. For firms that do not meet the reduced market
activity requirements, there will be no change in fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Commission does not approve proposed rule changes filed
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As always, NASDAQ calculates market activity levels on a monthly
basis at the end of each month. Therefore, although NASDAQ is not
changing the transaction-based fees and rebates for the first half of
April and the firms' market activity for this period have already been
fixed, firms can still affect their average market activity

levels for the entire month of April by increasing their market
activity on NASDAQ during the second half of April. Firms that increase
their activity level to exceed the newly-reduced activity requirements
will receive reduced fees per transaction.
    The specific changes to market activity requirements are as
follows. For securities listed on NASDAQ and the New York Stock
Exchange (``NYSE''), NASDAQ is reducing the activity requirements for
the tier for members with an average daily volume through the Nasdaq
Market Center in all securities of (i) more than 50 million shares of
liquidity provided, and (ii) more than 60 million shares of liquidity
accessed and/or routed.\6\ The new fee schedule will require average
daily volume through the Nasdaq Market Center in all securities of (i)
more than 35 million shares of liquidity provided, and (ii) more than
55 million shares of liquidity accessed and/or routed. Members
qualifying for this tier will continue to pay $0.0026 per share
executed when accessing liquidity (or 0.1% of the total transaction
cost in the case of executions of securities priced at less than $1 per
share). There will be no change to the second pricing tier applicable
to members with an average daily volume through the Nasdaq Market
Center in all securities of (i) more than 25 million shares of
liquidity provided, and (ii) more than 40 million shares of liquidity
accessed and/or routed. Members qualifying for this tier will continue
to pay $0.0028 per share executed when accessing liquidity (or 0.1% of
the total transaction cost in the case of executions at less than $1
per share). As is currently the case, members not qualifying for a
reduced pricing tier will pay $0.0030 per share executed to access
liquidity (or 0.1% of the total transaction cost in the case of
executions at less than $1 per share).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ As is currently the case with respect to reduced pricing
tiers, orders that do not attempt to execute in the Nasdaq Market
Center for the full size of the order prior to routing are not
counted in determining shares of liquidity routed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to securities listed on exchanges other than NASDAQ or
NYSE, NASDAQ is also modifying the levels of activity required to
qualify for favorable pricing tiers while leaving the level of charges
and credits associated with tiers unchanged. Thus, in order to qualify
for the most favorable fee to access and route liquidity, a member must
(i) provide more than 35 million shares of liquidity (currently 50
million) and (ii) access or route more than 55 million shares of
liquidity (currently 60 million). Members qualifying for this tier
currently pay $0.0029 per share executed to access liquidity or to
route after attempting to execute for the full size of the order, and
this fee will remain unchanged.\7\ Members not qualifying for a reduced
pricing tier will continue to pay $0.0030 per share executed to access
liquidity and to route after checking the Nasdaq Market Center book for
the full size of the order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For securities priced under $1, the fee to access liquidity
remains 0.1% of the total transaction cost, and the fee to route
remains 0.3% of the total transaction cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ is also decreasing the market activity levels required to
qualify for the most favorable credits it pays to liquidity providers.
With respect to NASDAQ and NYSE-listed securities, currently a member
must provide more than 50 million shares of liquidity to qualify for
the most favorable pricing tier, where the credit for displayed
liquidity is $0.0025 per share, with the credit for non-displayed
liquidity remaining at $0.0015 per share. The next most favorable tier
currently requires a member to provide a daily average of more than 25
million shares of liquidity, and the credit for displayed liquidity is
$0.0022 per share, with the credit for non-displayed liquidity
remaining $0.001 per share.\8\ Under the revised pricing schedule,
members qualify for the most favorable pricing tier by providing 35
million shares of liquidity, and for the second tier by providing 20
million shares of liquidity. Members not qualifying for these pricing
tiers will continue to receive $0.001 per share for non-displayed
liquidity and $0.002 per share for displayed liquidity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ All credits described relate to executions of securities
priced at $1 or more per share. Both before and after implementation
of the proposed rule change, the credit with respect to executions
of securities priced at less than $1 per share is $0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to securities listed on exchanges other than NASDAQ or
NYSE, NASDAQ is also reducing the volume levels required to qualify for
favorable credits while the transaction-based pricing will remain
unchanged. Thus, in order to qualify for the most favorable credit, a
member must provide an average daily volume of more than 35 million
shares of liquidity (currently 50 million): The most favorable credit
will remain $0.0015 for non-displayed liquidity and $0.0028 for
displayed liquidity. To qualify for the next most favorable credit, a
member must provide a daily average volume of more than 20 million
shares of liquidity (currently 25 million): Members is [sic] this tier
receive $0.001 per share for non-displayed liquidity and $0.0025 per
share for displayed liquidity. Other members will continue to receive
$0.001 per share for non-displayed liquidity and $0.002 per share for
displayed liquidity.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ In all cases, no credit is paid with respect to securities
priced at less than $1 per share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fee Schedule Applicable From April 15 through April 30. For the
second half of April, NASDAQ will modify the fee schedule by (1)
adopting a uniform transaction fee of $0.0030 per share for accessing
liquidity in all securities priced over $1.00, (2) adding a new tier of
market activity at which favorable pricing is available, and (3)
reducing the transaction-based fees and increasing the transaction-
based credits offered for each tier of market activity. For firms that
meet reduced market activity requirements, this will result in a
reduction of transaction-based prices. For firms that do not meet any
reduced market activity requirements, there will be no change in fees.
Unless specifically mentioned, all other fees set forth in Rule 7018
regarding the first half of April will remain the same for the second
half of April.
    Specifically, with respect to credits provided for tiers of
liquidity-providing activity, NASDAQ will retain its current tiers of
average daily volume of liquidity provided of 20 million and 35 million
shares, and add a third tier of credits that will be available to
members that provide average daily volume of liquidity of 125 million
shares.\10\ NASDAQ is also modifying the transaction-based credits paid
to liquidity providers in each market activity tier. Members that
qualify for the highest tier of market activity by providing an average
daily volume of 125 million shares or more will receive a credit of
$0.00295 per share, as opposed to $0.0025 that they currently receive
with respect to NASDAQ and NYSE stocks and $0.0028 for stocks listed on
other exchanges. Members that provide 35 million shares of more will
receive a credit of $0.0029 per share as opposed to $0.0025 that they
currently receive with respect to NASDAQ and NYSE stocks and $0.0028
for stocks listed on other exchanges. Members that provide 20 million
shares or more will receive a credit of $0.0025 per share, as opposed
to $0.0022 that they currently receive with respect to NASDAQ and NYSE
stocks and the same as currently offered for stocks listed on other
exchanges. Finally, members that provide less than 20 million shares
will

receive a credit of $0.0020 per share in all securities as they do
today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Again, average daily volume of liquidity provided is
calculated on a monthly basis. Therefore, the daily volume that a
member provided during the first half of April will impact the
volume tier into which the member falls at the end of April.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\11\ in general, and with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\12\ in particular, in that it provides for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among members and issuers and other persons using any facility or
system which NASDAQ operates or controls. The proposed fee change
applies uniformly to all NASDAQ members. The impact of the changes upon
the net fees paid by a particular market participant will depend upon a
number of variables, including its monthly volume, the prices of its
quotes and orders (i.e., its propensity to add or remove liquidity),
and the listing venue for the securities that it trades. NASDAQ notes
that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market
participants can readily direct order flow to competing venues if they
deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive. The proposed
rule change reflects a reduction in the overall cost of trading on
NASDAQ. Nasdaq believes that the applicable fees and credits remain
competitive with those charged by other venues and therefore continue
to be reasonable and equitably allocated to those members that opt to
direct orders to NASDAQ rather than competing venues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \13\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\14\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(ii).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2009-035 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2009-035. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
    To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room on official
business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal offices of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2009-035, and should be submitted on or before
May 27, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-10428 Filed 5-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 113 (Thursday, June 11, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35553-35555]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12498]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0546; Project Identifier 2020-CE-001-AD; Amendment
39-21137; AD 2020-03-50]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Cirrus Design Corporation Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Cirrus Design Corporation (Cirrus) Model SF-50 airplanes. This
AD was sent previously as an emergency AD to all known U.S. owners and
operators of these airplanes. This AD requires disconnecting and
removing the headset amplifier and microphone interface circuit card
assemblies for the 3.5 mm audio and microphone jacks. This AD was
prompted by a cabin fire incident that occurred on a Cirrus Model SF50
airplane during ground operations where the operator observed smoke
exiting from behind the right sidewall interior panel. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective June 11, 2020 to all persons except those
persons to whom it was made immediately effective by Emergency AD 2020-
03-50, issued on February 14, 2020, which contained the requirements of
this amendment.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication identified in this AD as of June 11,
2020.
    The FAA must receive comments on this AD by July 27, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this final rule, contact
Cirrus Design Corporation; 4515 Taylor Circle Duluth, MN 55811; phone:
(800) 279-4322; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: https://cirrusaircraft.com. You may view the referenced service information at
the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901
Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is
also available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0546.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0546; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed
above. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Dubusky, Aerospace Engineer,
Chicago ACO Branch, FAA, 2300 East Devon Avenue, Room 107, Des Plaines,
Illinois 60018; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On February 14, 2020, the FAA issued Emergency AD 2020-03-05, which
requires disconnecting and removing the headset amplifier and
microphone interface circuit card assemblies. This emergency AD was
sent previously to all known U.S. owners and operators of these
airplanes. This action was prompted by a cabin fire incident that
occurred on a Cirrus Model SF50 airplane during ground operations. The
operator observed smoke exiting from behind the right sidewall interior
panel located behind crew seat 2 and forward of passenger seat 5. The
investigation into the incident determined the probable root cause was
a malfunction of the headset amplifier (part number (P/N) 38849-001)
and the microphone interface (P/N 35809-001) circuit card assemblies
for the 3.5 millimeter (mm) audio and microphone jacks. This
malfunction can result in an electrical short and subsequent
uncontained cabin fire without activating circuit protection.
    This condition, if not addressed, could lead to an uncontained
cabin fire, resulting in possible occupant injury or loss of airplane
control.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Cirrus Alert Service Bulletin Number SBA5X-23-03,
dated February 7, 2020 (SBA5X-23-03). The service information contains
instructions to disconnect and remove the headset amplifier and
microphone interface circuit card assemblies for the 3.5 mm audio and
microphone jacks. This service information is reasonably available
because the interested parties have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this AD because it evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in SBA5X-23-03
as described previously.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that required the immediate adoption of
Emergency AD 2020-03-50, issued on February 14, 2020, to all known U.S.
owners and operators of these airplanes. The FAA found that the risk to
the flying public justified waiving notice and comment prior to
adoption of this rule because immediate corrective action was necessary
to prevent an electrical short and subsequent uncontained cabin fire,
which could result in occupant injury or loss of airplane control.
These conditions still exist and the AD is hereby published in the
Federal Register as an amendment to section 39.13 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.13) to make it effective to all
persons. Therefore, the FAA finds good cause that notice and

opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable. In addition,
for the reasons stated above, the FAA finds that good cause exists for
making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public
comment. However, the FAA invites you to send any written data, views,
or arguments about this final rule. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include Docket Number FAA-2020-0546
and Project Identifier 2020-CE-001-AD at the beginning of your
comments. The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall
regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this final
rule. The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date
and may amend this final rule because of those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments the FAA receives, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive
verbal contact that is received about this final rule.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 173 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                Action                        Labor cost          Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remove audio and microphone circuit    6 work-hours x $85 per              N/A            $510          $88,230
 cards.                                 hour = $510.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. The FAA does control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, the FAA has included all costs in its cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) do not
apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt
a rule without prior notice and comment. Because FAA has determined
that it has good cause to adopt this rule without notice and comment,
RFA analysis is not required.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866, and
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

2020-03-50 Cirrus Design Corporation: Amendment 39-21137; Docket No.
FAA-2020-0546; Project Identifier 2020-CE-001-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective June 11, 2020 to
all persons except those persons to whom it was made immediately
effective by Emergency AD 2020-03-50, issued on February 14, 2020,
which contained the requirements of this amendment.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Cirrus Design Corporation (Cirrus) Model SF50
airplanes, serial numbers 0005 through 0176 and 0178, certificated
in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air
Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 23; Communications.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a cabin fire incident that occurred on a
Cirrus Model SF50 airplane during ground operations. The
investigation into the incident determined the probable root cause
was a malfunction of the headset amplifier (part number (P/N) 38849-
001) and the microphone interface (P/N 35809-001) circuit card
assemblies for the 3.5 millimeter (mm) audio and microphone jacks.
The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent an electrical short and
subsequent uncontained cabin fire, which could result in occupant
injury or loss of airplane control.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Corrective Action

    Before further flight, disconnect and remove the headset
amplifier and microphone interface circuit card assemblies by
following the Accomplishment Instructions, steps A. and G. through
K., of

Cirrus Alert Service Bulletin Number SBA5X-23-03, dated February 7,
2020.

(h) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits are prohibited.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Chicago ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Joe Dubusky,
Aerospace Engineer, Chicago ACO Branch, FAA, 2300 E. Devon Ave., Des
Plaines, IL 60018; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Cirrus Alert Service Bulletin Number SBA5X-23-03, dated
February 7, 2020.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For the service information identified in this AD, contact
Cirrus Design Corporation, Cirrus Design Corporation; 4515 Taylor
Circle Duluth, MN 55811; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: https://cirrusaircraft.com.
    (4) You may view the referenced service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901
Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view the service information that is incorporated by
reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For more information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on May 28, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-12498 Filed 6-10-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P