  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR

AN INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST (ICR)

1.	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

	1(a). Title of the Information Collection

	Compliance Requirement for Child-Resistant Packaging

	OMB No. 2070-0052;  EPA No. 0616.09

	1(b). Short Characterization/Abstract

	This information collection program is designed to provide the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with assurances that the packaging
of pesticide products sold and distributed to the general public in the
United States meets standards set forth by the Agency pursuant to the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Registrants
must certify to the Agency that the packaging or device meets these
standards. There are no forms associated with this information
collection activity.

2.	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

	2(a). Need/Authority for the Collection

	Section 25(c)(3) of FIFRA authorizes EPA to establish standards for
packaging of pesticide products and pesticidal devices to protect
children and adults from serious illness or injury resulting from
accidental ingestion or contact (see Attachment A). The law requires
that these standards are designed to be consistent with those under the
Poison Prevention Packaging Act, administered by the Consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC). Unless a pesticide product qualifies for an
exemption, the product meets certain criteria regarding toxicity and
use, it must be sold and distributed in child-resistant packaging. The
authority for this information collection is pursuant to Section
25(c)(3) of the FIFRA. Compliance regulations are contained in 40 Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 157 (Attachment B).

	2(b). Practical Utility/Users of the Data

	EPA reviews a registrant's child-resistant packaging (CRP)
certification to determine if there are human safety/health risk
concerns. Exemption requests are reviewed to ascertain if there is a
health risk, and if CRP is technically feasible, practicable, and
appropriate.

NON DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

	3(a). Non duplication

	To avoid duplicative testing of packages for pesticidal and
non-pesticidal purposes, EPA's CRP regulations reference the CPSC
packaging standards and protocol testing procedures.  This is the only
information collection activity of its kind and the information
collected under this activity is collected only once per event (e.g.,
once per certification of CRP compliance).

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

	Pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d), EPA is publishing a Federal Register (FR)
notice soliciting comment on this information collection activity and
the Agency’s intent to renew the OMB approval of this ICR.  The FR
notice and the proposed renewal ICR as well as any public comments are
located in the docket for this action, which can be accessed at
HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  http://www.regulations.gov
using the docket indentifier EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0861.

	3(c). Consultations

	EPA consults with the CPSC on general packaging issues, products under
joint jurisdiction (e.g. bleaches and pine oil products), and the
regulatory aspect of implementing consumer (child) safety measures in a
way that keeps them consistent with those under the Poison Prevention
Packaging Act.

	The Agency also discusses specific packaging issues (for example,
determining what can reasonably be required or expected in terms of
technical and/or economic feasibility) with the CPSC and the packaging
industry itself. These consultations occur on an informal "as needed"
basis during the process of evaluating exemption requests and certifying
to the use of CRP.  In the past, when any sort of problem (technical,
administrative, or other) arose, or there were suggestions for
improvement in the program, the respondent is given ample opportunity to
inform the agency and vice versa. This communication between both
parties may take place either in a telephone conversation or in a
meeting setting, but not necessarily by a prescribed schedule.

	During the preparation of this ICR renewal, EPA staff contacted the
following representatives of pesticide registrants by telephone and
e-mail and asked them for their feedback on the burden and cost
estimates in the ICR:

Mark Jernigan

Federal Registration Manager

Bio-Lab, Inc.

P.O. Box 300002

Lawrenceville, GA 30049

(678) 502-4149

Amy Plato Roberts

Technology Sciences Group Inc.

1150 18th Street, NW, Suite 1000

Washington, DC 20036

Direct Dial:<PHONE_NUMBER>; E-Mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Website:
www.tsgusa.com

Stuart McArthur

Sr. Registration Spec.

S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc.

Howe St., Racine, WI, 53402

Tel. No.<PHONE_NUMBER>

Although Mr. Jernigan, Ms. Roberts, and Mr. McArthur all agreed that
preparation times can differ widely, they also agreed that on the
average, EPA’s burden hour estimates accurately reflected the time
needed to prepare the various types of CRP submissions (see Attachment
C).

	3(d).  Effects of Less Frequent Collection

	The information collection occurs once for each product-package
combination subject by law to the CRP provisions. In the absence of this
information collection activity, the burden of proof would be shifted
from the registrant to the EPA. Based on enforcement case precedents
involving CRP, EPA would need to have specific evidence to make the
product-package case. Consequently, on the basis of the time and cost
involved, EPA would find it difficult to fulfill its statutory
responsibilities to ensure that pesticides are equipped with protective
packages adequate to protect children from accidental illness or injury.

	3(e). General Guidelines

	The only PRA-imposed guideline in 5 CFR 1320.6 that is exceeded in this
collection is the recordkeeping retention period. Registrants or
applicants of pesticides for which CRP is required must retain the
records required under 40 CFR 157.36 for as long as the registration is
valid.

	Registrations are valid unless or until they are either voluntarily
canceled or withdrawn by the registrant or until EPA has cause to
suspend or cancel the registration due to an adverse finding by EPA.
Since the average period of marketability of a pesticide ranges from 15
to 30 years, the PRA-imposed guideline indicating that data, other than
health, medical, or tax records need not be retained for more than three
years may often be exceeded in this program.

	The Agency solicits packaging manufacturers to voluntarily submit
samples of CRPs that have passed CRP testing, identify the packaging,
its manufacturer, and list the package's classification according to the
ASTM International Standard D3475, "Standard Classification of
Child-Resistant Packages."  The Agency will compile and update the
information on an ongoing basis on its CRP Website (  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/crp/"  www.epa.gov/opprd001/crp/ ). The
Website includes descriptions and photographs of the package, with each
package classified according to the ASTM International D3475 Standard.

	The CRP Website will provide a service to CRP manufacturers and
pesticide registrants by displaying the various types of CRP in the
marketplace which, in turn, should facilitate compliance with the CRP
regulations. The Agency has posted the CRP Website.  An Agency request
for, and the public’s submission of, these packaging samples is not a
collection of information for the purposes of the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) Paperwork Reduction Act regulations.  OMB’s
regulations define “information” such that it excludes “samples of
products or of any other physical objects” (see 5 CFR 1320.3(h)(2)).
Therefore, EPA is not required to estimate the burden associated with
submitting these packaging samples.

	3(f). Confidentiality

	Although submission of confidential information is not required as a
part of this information collection, there has been at least one
instance where confidential data have been submitted voluntarily as
supporting material for an exemption request from CRP compliance
requirements.

	When any trade secret or Confidential Business Information (CBI) is
provided to EPA, such information is protected from disclosure under
section 10 of FIFRA. Data submitted to EPA is handled strictly in
accordance with the provisions of the FIFRA Confidential Business
Information Manual.

	This manual contains instructions relative to all contact with
confidential documents, including responsibilities of EPA employees,
physical security measures, CBI copying and destruction procedures,
transfer of CBI materials within the EPA, to contractors or other
government offices, computer security, CBI typing procedures (documents
to be typed internally or on contract), and division internal
procedures.

	The manual dictates that all CBI must be marked or flagged as such,
only authorized EPA personnel may be permitted access to CBI, and CBI
must be kept in secure (double locked) areas. Additionally, CBI for
destruction must be cleared by a Document Control Officer and placed in
the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances paper
shredder.

	3(g).  Sensitive Questions

	No information of a sensitive or private nature is requested in this
information collection activity.

4.	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

	4(a). Respondents/NAICS Codes

	The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code for
respondents under this ICR is 325320 (Pesticide and other Agricultural
Chemical Manufacturing).  EPA estimates that 703 registrants will be
required to respond to this information collection activity annually.
The number of respondents is based on the number of registrants in
FY2006 that have active registrations for pesticides meeting the use
criteria which trigger Child-Resistant Packaging (CRP) requirements.  In
FY2006, these registrants held 5,307 pesticide registrations with 40%
(2109 pesticide registrations) triggering the CRP requirements.  On
average, these 2109 affected registered products will submit a CRP
response once every three years.

	4(b). Information Requested

	Pesticide registrants subject to the regulations are required to
certify to the Agency that the packaging for the pesticide product meets
the standards of 40 CFR 157, or request an exemption to the requirement.

		(i)  Data items, including record keeping requirements

	The respondent certification letter must exercise one of the following
information options in this section or in section (i)(a) to comply with
40 CFR Part 157:

Certify to CRP by letter to Agency	The name, and EPA registration number
of the product to which the certification applies, the Certification
statement, the registrant’s name and address, the date, and the name,
title and signature of the company officer making the certification. The
Certification statement must contain a statement that the pesticide
product complies with 40 CFR 157.32.  A description of the packaging
used and the ASTM International Standard D3475, "Standard Classification
of Child-Resistant Packages," designation is requested (not required).

Not meet Toxicity Criteria	Submit toxicity data that indicate a specific
product's minimal toxicity, or reformulate to a less toxic product and
assert that the CRP regulations do not apply. Approximately 2 percent of
pesticide registrants choose this option for complying with the CRP
program.

Not for Residential Use	Revise product labeling so that CRP regulations
do not apply, i.e., specifying non-residential use areas, or eliminate
residential use. The registrant is required to send EPA a copy of the
revised labeling. Approximately 2 percent of pesticide registrants use
this option.

	Approximately 92 percent of pesticide registrants choose to certify
that their pesticide product packaging meets the effectiveness,
compatibility, and durability standards at 40 CFR 157.32. Registrants
who certify are required to maintain data to corroborate the
certification for the duration of the pesticide's registration as
required by 40 CFR 157.36. Of those registrants who do certify,
approximately 35 percent must submit data because of human safety/health
risk concerns.  If data is needed, EPA requests that registrants submit
data electronically to expedite data analysis. Pesticide Regulation (PR)
Notice 97-9 describes the benefits and requirements of electronic data
submission (see Attachment D).

		(i)(a)  Exemptions from CRP

	Currently, registrants have several options by which they may be
exempted from CRP requirements. These options include:

	(1) Package the product in a large size so that CRP regulations do not
apply. Exercising this option effectively eliminates sales to the
general public. It is based on the concept that certain bulk size
pesticide packages are intended for commercial use even in residential
areas (i.e., exterminator-use insecticides and contract lawn care
products). These package sizes are specified in 40 CFR 157.24 (a)(2).
The pesticide registrant is not required to seek a formal exemption for
this option, and approximately 4 percent of registrants use this option.
However, CRP may be required for products packaged in a size exceeding
those outlined in exemption criteria at 40 CFR 157.24(a)(2) if it is
determined by the EPA that the product is distributed or sold to the
general public. As such, EPA expects that some of these registrants will
no longer meet the criteria for the exemption.

	(2) Registrants may also assert that an exemption to CRP is warranted
because the hazards indicated by the toxicity criteria are not
indicative of risk to humans, or that CRP is not technically feasible,
practicable, or appropriate. Each request for an exemption is unique,
and the data necessary to support an exemption are unique. Less than 1
percent of pesticide registrants choose this option with the CRP
program.

		(ii)  Respondent Activities

	In order to comply with the CRP regulations, registrants must engage in
the following activities:

Read instructions	Review requirements of FIFRA section 25 (c)(3) and 40
CFR Part 157, including its reference to 16 CFR 1700.15(b) and 16 CFR
1700.20;

Plan activities	Decide under which option to comply with CRP compliance
requirements or whether an exemption will be requested;

Create information 	Compile necessary data regarding compliance or
exemption from CRP requirements;

Review data for

reliability and

appropriateness	Review performance testing data to ensure that it will
support CRP certification and identify the ASTM International Standard
D3475, “Standard Classification of Child-Resistant Packages,” for
the package.

Prepare and submit certification statement. 	Draft a certification
statement citing compliance with CRP requirements and include a
description of the package, or explain why the product is not subject to
CRP, or request an exemption from CRP compliance requirements and
compile/cite any supporting data as necessary. Submit information to
EPA.

Store, file, and

maintain data	Maintain any data and information sent to EPA to certify
CRP compliance, support a determination as to why product is not subject
to CRP, or justify an exemption from CRP.

5.	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED - AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

	5(a). Agency Activities

	Upon receipt of a certification letter, EPA performs the following
activities:

Review correspondence	Review correspondence for completeness.
Incomplete/incorrect certifications are returned to registrants;

Evaluate data and advise registrant 	Evaluate data submitted and
determine whether the registrant has met the CRP requirements, has
sufficiently substantiated reasons for not being subject to CRP (e.g.
reformulate to a less toxic product) or decide whether or not to grant
an exemption. Advise registrant of decision;

Store, file, and

maintain data	All CRP data submitted to the Agency are referenced by an
MRID number in the registration file jacket for the pesticide product.
The Agency maintains a record of all CRP certifications in its generic
database.

	5(b). Collection Methodology and Management

	EPA only collects data in support of a CRP certification when there are
human safety/health risk concerns. EPA requires that registrants
maintain data in support of their certifications of the child-resistance
of the product's packaging or devices. At the time of CRP certification
we are requesting that the registrant identify the type of packaging
used. This data is a part of their recordkeeping requirements (under 40
CFR 157.36). This additional piece of data may enable the Agency to
contact all pesticide registrants using a particular type of CRP should
a generic problem with the CRP become evident (e.g. trigger sprayers
that are no longer considered CRP).  It will also facilitate the review
of CRP exemption requests because the Agency can ascertain how similar
pesticide formulations are packaged.

	The generic database system continually tracks all registration actions
from the registration-pending stage through to full registration and
until a product is canceled. A generic database maintains information on
both currently registered products and previously registered products,
thereby acting as a registration action historical file. Additionally,
the CRP compliance certification hard copy correspondence letters are
filed in the pesticide product registration jacket.

	5(c). Small Entity Flexibility

	The incorporation of alternative methods to verify that the package
meets the requirements of 40 CFR 157.32 have allowed manufacturers to
use extrapolation schemes, available child-resistant protocol test data,
and supporting documentation without spending the time and money to
develop the data on their exact package. The burden and cost to industry
also is minimized by: the reference of the CPSC effectiveness standards
and protocol test procedures that preclude duplicative testing for
pesticidal and non-pesticidal purposes, and also allow for the use of
CRP developed for non-pesticidal purposes; the use of packaging
manufacturer's data rather than product-specific data; discretion and
innovation with regard to product packaging compatibility and package
selection; and the granting of the size exemptions without requiring an
application from the registrant or approval by EPA.

5(d). Collection Schedule

	CRP certification is usually conducted only when a registrant notifies
EPA by application of their intention to either change packaging, enter
the residential market, or otherwise become subject to CRP regulations.

6.	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

	6(a). Estimating Respondent Burden

	EPA estimates that the average burden associated with this information
collection activity is approximately 4.9 hours per response.1  This
estimate is based on an average response time across all response types
(i.e. submit CRP certifications, submit CRP certifications with data,
submit CRP exemption explanation based on large package size, submit CRP
exemption explanation based on a lack of toxicity, packaging issues,
eliminating residential use, lower product toxicity). The number of
respondents expected for each of the various response types is based on
the number of each type of CRP submission received annually.

	EPA’s estimates of respondent burden do not include any burden at
management levels.  Responses to this information collection activity
are generally handled, without management time, by the technical
personnel such as the regulatory affairs person and packaging personnel
with some clerical support.  These CRP actions require an estimated
average of 3.5 hours technical time and 1.4 hours clerical time, which
is broken down as follows:

25 technical minutes to ascertain whether the product is subject to the
CRP regulations (meets toxicity criteria, residential use) and to decide
whether to submit a CRP certification, data, be exempt from regulations
due to large size or other criteria;

86 technical minutes to create/prepare the information;

73 technical minutes to review submission for accuracy and
appropriateness (process, compile, complete document);

61 clerical minutes to format submission and prepare information;

25 technical minutes to review and sign the appropriate documents; and,

25 clerical minutes to mail the submission, file the respondent copy and
CRP documentation

Type of Response	Number of Responses	Percent of Total

CRP certification	401	57

CRP certification with data	246	35

Exempt – large package size	28	4

Exempt – lack of toxicity, packaging, no residential use, lower
product toxicity	28	4

	Respondents submitting CRP certifications without data require 1 hour
of technical labor time in order to determine whether the product is
subject to the CRP regulations (meets toxicity criteria, residential
use), identify the type of CRP used, and prepare the CRP certification.
An additional 30 minutes clerical time is required to complete the CRP
certification submission to the Agency and file the supporting CRP
information.

	Respondents submitting CRP certifications with data require 8 hours of
technical labor time in order to determine the product is subject to the
CRP regulations (meets toxicity criteria, residential use); identify the
type of CRP used; prepare the CRP certification; gather the supporting
CRP data; and 3 hours of clerical time to prepare the CRP data package,
complete the CRP certification submission to the Agency, and file the
supporting CRP data.

	Respondents that are exempt from CRP requirements based on large
package size require no time because the CRP regulations require no
action on their part. Respondents that are exempt from CRP requirements
for the following reasons require 4 technical hours and 1.9 clerical
hours to prepare their submission indicating why CRP is not required
and/or CRP is not possible: no residential uses, a lack of (or lower)
product toxicity, packaging issues.  These burden estimates by response
type are summarized in Table 1.

	The total estimated respondent burden to comply with this information
collection activity is 3,473 burden hours/year (4.94 hours per
respondent x 703 respondents) at a cost of $193,567.  This cost estimate
is illustrated in Table 2.

Table 1.	ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN BY RESPONSE TYPE

Type of Response	No. of Responses	Technical Burden 	Clerical Burden
Aggregate Burden

Hours Per Event	Total	Hours Per Event	Total

	CRP certification	401	1	 401	0.5	200.5	601.5

CRP certification with data	246	8	1968	3	738	2706

Exempt from CRP due to large package size	28	0	0	0	0	0

Exempt from CRP due to lack of toxicity, packaging, no residential use,
lower product toxicity	28	4	 112	1.9	53.2	165.2

TOTAL

703	n/a	2481	n/a	991.7	3,473

	6(b). Estimating Respondent Costs

For a period of some years, when estimating labor rates for most OPP
program ICR renewals, the Agency adjusted the ICR renewal labor rates by
using methods such as the NASA Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Deflator
Inflation Calculator to index the labor cost for a particular year.
However, in July 2006, Agency economists completely re-estimated wages,
benefits, and overhead for all labor categories for the pesticide
industry, state government and Agency employees.  The Agency analysis
uses currently available information on labor rates and other benefits
from publicly available websites.  A copy of the methodology used to
re-estimate the labor rates and formulas used to derive the fully loaded
rates and overhead costs is in Attachment E.

To derive the labor rates for this ICR, Agency economists estimated the
wages for the technical and clerical labor categories using the
methodology cited above.  The respondent costs for this renewal for
technical and clerical rates are estimated at $64.80 and $33.05 per
hour, respectively.  These labor rates are fully loaded and include
benefits and overhead costs.

	The total average cost of the estimated burden per respondent to comply
with the CRP is approximately $275 per response. Using the Agency’s
burden estimate and the fully-loaded labor rates, the Agency estimates
total applicant costs to be approximately $193,567  per year. There are
no capital expenditures associated with this information collection
activity.

Table 2.	ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN/COST ESTIMATES

COLLECTION ACTIVITIES	Burden Hours	TOTAL

	Tech.

$64.80/hr.	Clerical

$33.05/hr.	Burden

Hours	Costs

(in USD)

Read instructions	0	0	0	0

Plan activities	0.41	0	0.41	26.57

Create information including electronic format of data	1.43	0	1.43	92.66

Process, compile, and complete written compliance document	1.24	1.04
2.28	114.72

Review submission	0.41	0	0.41	26.57

Store, submit, file, or maintain data	0	0.41	0.41	13.55

TOTAL	3.5	1.4	4.94	274

ANNUAL BURDEN:        4.94 Total Hours   x   703 Respondents    =
3,473 Burden Hours

ANNUAL COSTS:

		(a) Technical: 3.53 hours x $64.80 x 703 respondents = 	$160,807

		(b) Clerical:    1.41 hours x $33.05 x 703 respondents = 	$  32,760

	Total      =     	$193,567

	6(c). Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

	The Agency burden hours for the entire CRP process will decrease from
19.8 hours to18.9 hours per response.  There has been a decrease in the
number of exemption requests from CRP due to lack of toxicity or
packaging, which are the most resource intensive activity, and an
increase in the number of CRP certifications with data, which results in
an overall decrease in the Agency burden per response.

	Annual burden to the Agency is estimated at 13,296.5 burden hours at a
cost of $869,311.  The main portion of the burden hours is expected to
result from the evaluation of data related to human safety/health risk
concerns associated with CRP certification, and assessing some of the
more complex options for compliance (e.g. requesting an exemption).

Table 3.	ANNUAL AGENCY BURDEN BY RESPONSE TYPE

Action	No. of Respondents	Technical Burden 	Clerical Burden

Hrs Per Event	Total	Hrs Per Event	Total

CRP certification	401	2.3	922.3	1	401

CRP certification with data	246	40	9840	1	246

Exempt from CRP due to large package size (registrant meets size
requirement, no action needed)	28	0	0	0	0

Exempt from CRP due to lack of toxicity, packaging, no residential use,
lower product toxicity	28	66.5	1862	0.9	25.2

TOTAL	703	n/a	12,624.3	n/a	672.2

Agency Burden = 12,624.3 (technical burden) + 672.2 (clerical burden) =
13,296.5

Total hrs/Agency Action = 13,296.5 ÷ 703 = 18.9 hrs

	The average Agency burden per CRP response is estimated to be
approximately 18.9 hours, costing $1,236.57 per response ($869,310.82 ÷
703).

Table 4.	ANNUAL AGENCY BURDEN/COST ESTIMATES

COLLECTION ACTIVITIES	BURDEN HOURS (per respondent)	TOTAL

	Mgmt. $93.07/hr	Tech. $66.34/hr	Clerical

$47.17/hr.	Burden

Hours	Costs

(in USD)

Read correspondence

0

1

0

1	$66.34

Execute activities including data review and certifications for large
size nonliquid pool chemicals

0

17

0

17	$1127.78

Store, file, or maintain data

0

0

0.9

0.9	$42.45

TOTAL

0

18

0.9

18.9	$1236.57

ANNUAL BURDEN: 18.9 Total Hours x 703 Responses = 13,296.5 Hours

ANNUAL COSTS:

		(a) Technical:    18 hours x $66.34 x 703 responses = $839,466.36

		(b) Clerical:       0.9 hours x $47.17 x 703 responses = $ 29,844.46

Total 	  $869,310.82

	6(d). Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Table

	Hours	Costs

Respondent Burden/Cost Estimates 	3,473 	$193,567

Agency Burden/Cost Estimates	13,297 	$869,311

	6(e). Reasons for Change In Burden

	The number of responses remains the same at 703 from the last ICR
approval.  The total burden hours per respondent for compliance with the
CRP requirements increased from 3 hours to 4.9 hours at a total cost of
about $275 per response. The estimated annual burden under the last ICR
approval was 2,109 hours. Under this renewal ICR, the annual burden is
estimated to be 3,473 hours. The increased burden represents an
adjustment to the burden estimate.  Neither the number of responses nor
the average burden estimate for each response type has changed.
However, the distribution of those responses among the four response
types has changed, with a net shift from less-burdensome to
more-burdensome type responses (e.g., increased percentage of
registrants electing to certify to the CRP requirements with data).

	A number of registrants who have traditionally marketed their products
in CRP have selected new packaging designs, thereby triggering the CRP
requirements with data to insure human safety/health risk concerns.
Additionally, increased burden may be attributed to increased complexity
of CRP testing for more complex new CRP (e.g. 2 closures on 1 bottle),
increased use of CRP outside necessitating additional information (e.g.
outdoor ant baits).  Some respondents may opt to certify to CRP due to
changes in the cost of packaging, recycling, and safety factors. Some
registrants voluntarily use CRP to avoid having to stock multiple
packaging inventories for different products and/or an increased
environmental conscience. Some respondents may be electing to certify to
CRP because it is less time consuming than electing to submit toxicity
data, reformulate to a less toxic product, or request an exemption.

	6(f). Burden Statement

	The total annual respondent burden for the collection of information
contained in this ICR is estimated to be 3,473 hours. The average
"respondent" (certifier) burden for the Compliance Requirement for the
CRP regulations is estimated to be 4.9 hours per submission of data
necessary to support a claim that product is not subject to CRP, should
be exempt from CRP, or CRP certification, including time for:  reading
relevant federal legislation and regulations; conducting performance
testing on closures and/or devices; reviewing test data; prepare
submission or CRP certification; and recordkeeping regarding the CRP
certification or submission.

As defined by the PRA and 5 CFR 1320.3(b), “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 purpose of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.

An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA’s
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and included on the related
collection instrument or form, if applicable.

To facilitate public 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 No. EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0861.  All documents in the docket
are listed in the docket index. Although listed in the index, some
information may not be publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.  Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.  Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic docket
at   HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  http://www.regulations.gov
, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public
Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal
Drive, Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are
from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW,
Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.  Please include
the EPA Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0861 and OMB Control No. 2070-0052
in any correspondence.

Attachments to the Supporting Statement

Attachment A:	Section 25 (c)(3) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) - available at   HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/crp/"  http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/crp/  or
in the docket to this ICR at EPA-HQ-2006-0861

Attachment B:	40 CFR Part 157 - PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS FOR PESTICIDES
AND DEVICES – available at    HYPERLINK
"http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_03/40cfr157_03.html"
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_03/40cfr157_03.html  or in
the docket to this ICR at EPA-HQ-2006-0861

Attachment C:	Record of Consultations Between the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency and Respondents to the Information Collection Request:
“Compliance Requirement for Child-Resistant Packaging” - available
in the docket to this ICR at EPA-HQ-2006-0861

 Attachment D:	Pesticide Registration Notice 97-9 - Electronic
Submission of Child-resistant Packaging Test Data for All Pesticides and
Child-resistant Testing of Prefilled, Nonrefillable Insecticide Bait
Stations Not Designed or Intended To Be Opened or Activated in a Manner
That Exposes the Contents to Human Contact - available at    HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/opppmsd1/PR_Notices/pr97-9.html"
http://www.epa.gov/opppmsd1/PR_Notices/pr97-9.html  or in the docket to
this ICR at EPA-HQ-2006-0861

Attachment E:	Methodology For Estimating OPP ICR Wage Rates for
Industry, State and EPA Labor Costs: Memo From Richard Keigwin, Director
Biological and Economic Analysis Division, July 25 , 2006. – available
in the docket to this ICR at EPA-HQ-2006-0861

	1 Based on Table 1, the avg. technical burden across all response types
is approx. 3.53 hrs. per response (2481 ÷ 703) and the avg. clerical
burden across all response types is approx. 1.41 hrs. per response
(991.7 ÷ 703).  For the purposes of estimating respondent burden and
cost (see Table 2), EPA assumes that the average burden is 4.94 hrs. per
response (3.53 technical hrs. + 1.41 clerical hrs.).

 PAGE

p.  PAGE   15  of   NUMPAGES  15

January 29, 2007


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 62 (Thursday, March 31, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18789-18791]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06656]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9467-01-R2]

Notice of Availability of Draft NPDES General Permit for Small
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems in the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico and Federal Facilities Within the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of draft NPDES general permit.

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

SUMMARY: The Director of the Caribbean Environmental Protection
Division (CEPD), Environmental Protection Agency--Region 2 (EPA), is
issuing this Notice of a Draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) general permit, PRR040000/PRR04000F, for discharges from
small municipal separate storm sewer systems (small MS4s) from
urbanized areas within the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico to waters of the
United States. This draft NPDES general permit establishes Notice of
Intent (NOI) requirements, standards, prohibitions and management
practices for discharges of stormwater from small MS4 urbanized areas.
A prior Notice of Availability of a draft general permit was issued by
EPA on June 11, 2014. EPA has substantially modified the draft

general permit and is issuing a new draft general permit.

DATES: Public comments must be received on or before May 16, 2022.
Within the comment period, interested persons may request a public
hearing, pursuant to 40 CFR part 124, concerning the proposed draft
permit. Requests for a public hearing must be sent or delivered in
writing to the same address, as provided below, for public comments
prior to the close of the comment period. Requests for a public hearing
must state the nature of the issues proposed to be raised in the
hearing. Pursuant to 40 CFR part 124, EPA shall hold a public hearing
if it finds, on the basis of the requests, a significant degree of
public interest on the proposed draft permit. If EPA decides to hold a
public hearing, a public notice of the date, time and place of the
hearing will be made at least 30 days prior to the hearing.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments by one of the following methods:
    1. Mail: Multimedia Permits and Compliance Branch, U.S. EPA Region
2, City View Plaza II, Suite 7000, 48 Road 165 Km 1.2, Guaynabo, Puerto
Rico 00968-8069.
    2. Email: [email protected].gov.
    The draft permit is based on an administrative record available for
public review at EPA, Region 2, Caribbean Environmental Protection
Division, City View Plaza II, Suite 7000, 48 Road 165 Km 1.2, Guaynabo,
Puerto Rico 00968-8069. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying
requests. However, the draft general permit and fact sheet are
available at EPA's website: https://www.epa.gov/npdes-permits/npdes-permits-phase-2-stormwater-program-puerto-rico.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Additional information concerning the
draft permit may be obtained between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30
p.m. Monday through Friday excluding holidays from: Sergio Bosques,
Caribbean Environmental Protection Division, U.S. EPA, Region 2, City
View Plaza II, Suite 7000, 48 Road 165 Km 1.2, Guaynabo, Puerto Rico
00968-8069; telephones:<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; or by email:
[email protected]. EPA encourages virtual communication as access
to the office is limited at this time.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is proposing to issue the draft NPDES
general permit for the discharge of stormwater from small MS4s to
waters within the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. The permit describes
three distinct small MS4s, which include the conventional cities and
towns; Non-Conventional state, federal and other publicly-owned
systems; and Non-Conventional transportation systems.
    The conditions in the draft permit are established pursuant to
Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 402(p)(3)(B)(iii) to ensure that
pollutant discharges from small MS4s are reduced to the maximum extent
practicable (MEP), protect water quality, and satisfy the appropriate
water quality requirements of the CWA. The term small municipal
separate storm sewer system is available in 40 CFR 122.26(b). In
addition, this term also includes systems similar to separate storm
sewer systems and flood management conveyances in municipalities such
as military bases, large hospital or prison complexes, highways, flood
control pump stations, and other thoroughfares. The term does not
include separate storm sewers in very discrete areas, such as
individual buildings. For example, an armory located in an urbanized
area would not be considered a regulated small MS4.
    The draft general permit sets forth the requirements for the small
MS4 to ``reduce the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent
practicable, including management practices, control techniques, and
system, design and engineering methods.'' (See CWA section
402(p)(3)(B)(iii)). MEP is the statutory standard that establishes the
level of pollutant reductions that MS4 operators must achieve. EPA
believes that the implementation of best management practices (BMPs),
designed to control storm water runoff from the MS4, is, generally, the
most appropriate approach for reducing pollutants to satisfy the MEP
standard. Pursuant to 40 CFR. 122.44(k), the draft permit contains
BMPs, including development and implementation of a comprehensive
stormwater management program (SWMP), as the mechanism to achieve the
required pollutant reductions.
    Section 402(p)(3)(B)(iii) of the CWA also authorizes EPA to include
in an MS4 permit ``such other provisions as [EPA] . . . determines
appropriate for control of . . . pollutants.'' This provision forms a
basis for imposing water quality-based effluent limitations (WQBELs),
consistent with the authority in Section 301(b)(1)(C) of the CWA. See
Defenders of Wildlife v. Browner, 191 F.3d 1159, 1166-67 (9th Cir.
1999); 64 FR. 68722, 68753, 68788 (Dec. 8, 1999). Accordingly, the
draft permit contains the WQBELs, expressed in terms of BMPs, which EPA
has determined are necessary and appropriate under the CWA.EPA issued a
final general permit to address stormwater discharges from small MS4s
on June 13, 2016. The 2016 general permit required small MS4s to
develop and implement a SWMP designed to control pollutants to the
maximum extent practicable and protect water quality. This draft permit
continues to build on the requirements of the 2016 general permit.
    EPA views the MEP standard in the CWA as an iterative process. MEP
should continually adapt to current conditions of the MS4, and BMP
effectiveness. Compliance with the requirements of this general permit
will meet the MEP standard. The iterative process of MEP consists of a
municipality developing a program consistent with specific permit
requirements, implementing the program, evaluating the effectiveness of
the BMPs included as part of the program, then revising those parts of
the program that are not effective at controlling pollutants, then
implementing the revisions, and evaluating again. The changes contained
in the draft general permit reflect the iterative process of MEP.
Accordingly, the draft general permit contains similar tasks and
details of the 2016 general permit.
    EPA has provided, in the draft general permit fact sheet, a summary
of the permit conditions. The draft general permit and fact sheet are
available at EPA's website: https://www.epa.gov/npdes-permits/npdes-permits-phase-2-stormwater-program-puerto-rico.

Other Legal Requirements

A. Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    The provisions related to the ESA have been continued from those in
the 2016 general permit. EPA will be requesting concurrence from the
appropriate Federal services (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
National Marine Fisheries Service) in connection with the 2021 draft
and has renewed this request for the proposed draft general permit.

B. Executive Order 12866

    EPA has determined that this draft general permit is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order
12866 and is therefore not subject to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) review.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements of this permit were
previously approved by OMB under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and assigned OMB control number
2040-0004.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
requires that EPA

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for rules subject to the
requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553(b) that have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. However, general NPDES permits
are not ``rules'' subject to the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553(b), and
are therefore not subject to the RFA.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA), Public Law
104-4, generally requires federal agencies to assess the effects of
their ``regulatory actions'' (defined to be the same as ``rules''
subject to the RFA) on tribal, state and local governments and the
private sector. However, general NPDES permits are not ``rules''
subject to the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553(b) and, are, therefore, not
subject to the RFA or the UMRA.
    Authority: This action is being taken under the Clean Water Act, 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

Carmen R. Guerrero-P[eacute]rez,
Director, Caribbean Environmental Protection Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-06656 Filed 3-30-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 145 (Tuesday, July 29, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 44022]
[FR Doc No: 2014-17792]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP14-1116-000.
    Applicants: Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC.
    Description: New Volume with Housekeeping to be effective 8/22/
2014.
    Filed Date: 7/22/14.
    Accession Number: 20140722-5022.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/4/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-1117-000.
    Applicants: Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC.
    Description: Cancel entire Fourth Revised Volume No. 1 to be
effective 8/22/2014.
    Filed Date: 7/22/14.
    Accession Number: 20140722-5052.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/4/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-1118-000.
    Applicants: East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC.
    Description: Statements of Rates Cleanup Filing to be effective 8/
25/2014.
    Filed Date: 7/22/14.
    Accession Number: 20140722-5055.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/4/14.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 23, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary..
[FR Doc. 2014-17792 Filed 7-28-14; 8:45 am].
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 150 (Tuesday, August 5, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45345-45346]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18370]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0645]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Willamette River, Portland, OR

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs The Broadway Bridge, across the
Willamette River, mile 11.7, at Portland, OR. This deviation is
necessary to accommodate the 2014 Pints to Pasta foot race event. This
deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed position to allow
safe movement of event participants.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7:30 a.m. on September 7, 2014
to 10:30 a.m. on September 7, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2014-0645] is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email the Bridge Administrator, Coast Guard Thirteenth
District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If
you have questions on viewing the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Multnomah County has requested a temporary
deviation from the operating schedule for the Broadway Bridge, mile
11.7, crossing the Willamette River at Portland, OR. The requested
deviation is to accommodate the annual Pints to Pasta event. To
facilitate this event, the draw of the bridge will be maintained in the
closed-to-navigation positions as follows: The Broadway Bridge, at mile
11.7, crosses the Willamette River and provides 90 feet of vertical
clearance above Columbia River Datum 0.0 need not open for vessel
traffic from 7:30 a.m. on September 7, 2014, to 10:30 p.m. on September
7, 2014. Vessels which do not require a bridge opening may continue to
transit beneath this bridge during the closure period. The normal
operating conditions for this bridge operates in accordance with 33 CFR
117.897 which allows for the bridge to remain closed between 7 a.m. and
9 a.m. and 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. Monday through Friday. This deviation
period is from 7:30 a.m. on September 7, 2014 to 10:30 a.m. September
7, 2014. This deviation allows the Broadway Bridge, at mile 11.7 across
the Willamette River, to

remain in the closed position and need not open for maritime traffic
from 7:30 a.m. through 10:30 a.m. on September 7, 2014. The bridge
shall operate in accordance to 33 CFR 117.897 at all other times.
Waterway usage on this stretch of the Willamette River includes vessels
ranging from commercial tug and barge to small pleasure craft. Vessels
able to pass through the bridge in the closed positions may do so at
any time. The bridge will be able to open for emergencies and there is
no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass. The Coast Guard will
also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast
Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge
so that vessels can arrange their transits to minimize any impact
caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: July 24, 2014.
Steven M. Fischer,
Bridge Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014-18370 Filed 8-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 70 (Thursday, April 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21648-21650]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08466]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69318; File No. SR-CTA/CQ-2013-02]

Consolidated Tape Association; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of the Seventeenth Charges Amendment to the Second
Restatement of the CTA Plan and Ninth Charges Amendment to the Restated
CQ Plan

April 5, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 608 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 27, 2013, the Consolidated Tape Association (``CTA'') Plan and
Consolidated Quotation (``CQ'') Plan participants (``Participants'')
\3\ filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
a proposal to amend the Second Restatement of the CTA Plan and Restated
CQ Plan (collectively, the ``Plans'').\4\ The proposal represents the
seventeenth charges amendment to the CTA Plan and the ninth charges
amendment to the CQ Plan (``Amendments'') and delays the effective date
for the change to the Network B interrogation device fee payable in
respect of professional subscribers.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \2\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \3\ The Participants are: BATS Exchange, Inc., BATS-Y Exchange,
Inc., Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated, Chicago Stock
Exchange, Inc., EDGA Exchange, Inc. (``EDGA''), EDGX Exchange, Inc.
(``EDGX''), Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA''), International Securities Exchange, LLC, NASDAQ OMX BX,
Inc. (``Nasdaq BX''), NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. (``Nasdaq PSX''), Nasdaq
Stock Market LLC, National Stock Exchange, New York Stock Exchange
LLC (``NYSE''), NYSE MKT LLC (formerly NYSE Amex, Inc.), and NYSE
Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca''). Because the proposal constitutes a
Ministerial Amendment under both clause (1) of Section IV(b) of the
CTA Plan and clause (1) of Section IV(c) of the CQ Plan, the
Chairman of CTA and the CQ Plan's Operating Committee may submit the
proposal on behalf of the Participants.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 10787 (May 10,
1974), 39 FR 17799 (May 20, 1974) (declaring the CTA Plan
effective); 15009 (July 28, 1978), 43 FR 34851 (August 7, 1978)
(temporarily authorizing the CQ Plan); and 16518 (January 22, 1980),
45 FR 6521 (January 28, 1980) (permanently authorizing the CQ Plan).
The most recent restatement of both Plans was in 1995. The CTA Plan,
pursuant to which markets collect and disseminate last sale price
information for non-NASDAQ listed securities, is a ``transaction
reporting plan'' under Rule 601 under the Act, 17 CFR 242.601, and a
``national market system plan'' under Rule 608 under the Act, 17 CFR
242.608. The CQ Plan, pursuant to which markets collect and
disseminate bid/ask quotation information for listed securities, is
a ``national market system plan'' under Rule 608 under the Act, 17
CFR 242.608.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69157 (March 18,
2013), 78 FR 17946 (March 25, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Rule 608(b)(3)(ii) under the Act,\6\ the Participants
designated the Amendments as concerned solely with the administration
of the Plans. As a result, the Amendments are effective upon filing
with the Commission. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
Amendments, the Commission may summarily abrogate the Amendments and
require that the Amendments be refiled in accordance with paragraph
(a)(1) of Rule 608 and reviewed in accordance with paragraph (b)(2) of
Rule 608, if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary
or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors,
or the maintenance of fair and orderly markets, to remove impediments
to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a national market system or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments from interested persons on
the proposed Amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 242.608(b)(3)(ii).

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

I. Rule 608(a)

A. Description and Purpose of the Amendments

    On March 11, 2013, the Participants filed for immediate
effectiveness the Sixteenth Charges Amendment to the Second Restatement
of the CTA Plan and the Eighth Charges Amendment to the Restated CQ
Plan.\7\ These two amendments (``Fee Change Amendments'') made a number
of changes to the fees payable under the Plans in an effort to achieve
greater simplicity and to reduce administrative burdens. Among those
fee changes, the Fee Change Amendments combined separate monthly device
fees that professional subscribers pay for Network B last sale
information under the CTA Plan and for Network B quotation information
under the CQ Plan into one monthly fee of $24.00 per device for both
last sale information and quotation information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Fee Change Amendments stated that the Participants anticipated
implementing the proposed fee changes in 2013, without specifying a
date. In the notice that the Participants sent to the industry, they
specified April 1, 2013, as the date the Fee Change Amendments would be
implemented.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See email from Steve Abrams, Counsel to the CTA, to Kathy
England and Natasha Cowen, Securities and Exchange Commission, April
3, 2013 (clarifying implementation dates applicable to the Fee
Change Amendments).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsequently, due to the technical needs of data recipients to make
systems changes to accommodate the revised fee, the Participants
decided to extend the effective date for implementation of the combined
Network B $24.00 device fee to July 1, 2013, and therefore submitted
the Amendments. The effective date for the changes to the Network A
device fees and the other changes set forth in the Fee Change
Amendments remains April 1, 2013. The Amendments do not change the
language of the CTA Plan or of its fee schedule.

B. Additional Information Required by Rule 608(a)

1. Governing or Constituent Documents
    Not applicable.
2. Implementation of the Amendments
    Because the Amendments constitute ``Ministerial Amendments'' under
clause (1) of Section IV(b) of the CTA Plan and clause (1) of Section
IV(c) of the CQ Plan, the Chairman of CTA and the CQ Plan's Operating
Committee may submit the Amendments to the Commission on behalf of the
Participants in the CTA Plan and the CQ Plan. Because the Participants
designate the Amendments as concerned solely with the administration of
the Plans, the Amendments are effective upon filing with the
Commission.
3. Development and Implementation Phases
    See Item I(B)(2) above.
4. Analysis of Impact on Competition
    The proposed amendments do not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act. The Participants do not believe that the Amendments introduce
terms that are unreasonably discriminatory for the purposes of Section
11A(c)(1)(D) of the Act.
5. Written Understanding or Agreements Relating to Interpretation of,
or Participation in, Plan
    Not applicable.
6. Approval by Sponsors in Accordance With Plan
    See Item I(B)(2) above.
7. Description of Operation of Facility Contemplated by the Proposed
Amendments
a. Terms and Conditions of Access
    See Item I(A) above.
b. Method of Determination and Imposition, and Amount of, Fees and
Charges
    See Item I(A) above.
c. Method of Frequency of Processor Evaluation
    Not applicable.
d. Dispute Resolution
    Not applicable.

II. Rule 601(a) (Solely in Its Application to the Amendments to the CTA
Plan)

A. Equity Securities for Which Transaction Reports Shall Be Required by
the Plan

    Not applicable.

B. Reporting Requirements

    Not applicable.

C. Manner of Collecting, Processing, Sequencing, Making Available and
Disseminating Last Sale Information

    Not applicable.

D. Manner of Consolidation

    Not applicable.

E. Standards and Methods Ensuring Promptness, Accuracy and Completeness
of Transaction Reports

    Not applicable.

F. Rules and Procedures Addressed to Fraudulent or Manipulative
Dissemination

    Not applicable.

G. Terms of Access to Transaction Reports

    Not applicable.

H. Identification of Marketplace of Execution

    Not applicable.

III. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed
Amendments to the CTA Plan are 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-CTA/CQ-2013-02 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-CTA/CQ-2013-02. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the Amendments that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the
Amendments between the Commission and any person, other than those that
may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5
U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the
Commission's Public Reference Room, 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 Amendments also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the CTA.
    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-CTA/CQ-2013-02
and should be submitted on or before May 2, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(27).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-08466 Filed 4-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P