III.  STATUTORY AND EXECUTIVE ORDER REVIEWS

A.	Executive Order 12866:  Regulatory Planning and Review

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Under section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order (EO)
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a “an
“economically significant regulatory action” because it raises novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President’s
priorities, or the principles set forth in the EO..”  Implementation
of the PM2.5 NAAQS is likely to have an annual effect on the economy of
$100 million or more.  Accordingly, EPA submitted this action to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under EO 12866 and any
changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in
the docket for this action.  For clarity, we note that the estimated
costs of implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS are not created by this rule,
because the Clean Air Act requires state implementation of the 1997
PM2.5 standards (through state development of plans with enforceable
requirements for sources) on a statutory timetable regardless of whether
EPA issues this rule interpreting the statutory requirements.  The rule
reflects the statutory requirements and does not add further costs.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 In addition, as part of the “Regulatory Impact
Analysis for Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(September 2006),” EPA prepared an assessment of the estimated costs
and benefits associated with attaining the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in 2015,
incremental to currently promulgated federal and state programs
including for example the Clean Air Interstate Rule, the Nonroad Diesel
Rule, and other programs.  This analysis is included as Appendix A of
the report and is available in the docket for this action and on EPA’s
website at:    HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ecas/regdata/RIAs/Appendix%20A--2015%20Analysis.
pdf"
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ecas/regdata/RIAs/Appendix%20A--2015%20Analysis.p
df .  The This illustrative analysis finds that the estimated monetized
benefits of attaining the 1997 standards in 2015 are between $43 billion
and $97 billion annually, and the estimated monetized costs are $6.7
billion annually.   The RIA states:  “Note that because this analysis
was intended to compare costs and benefits of attaining alternative
standards by fixed dates, it did not attempt to identify for each
designated PM2.5 area measures that may be needed to meet subpart 1
Clean Air Act requirements, such as reasonably available measures and
attainment as expeditiously as practicable.  It is expected that
additional costs and benefits will begin to accrue in earlier years as
states comply with these requirements.”

B.	Paperwork Reduction Act

	The information collection requirements in this rule will be have been
submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.  The
information collection requirements are not enforceable until OMB
approves them.  This action does not add any new requirements involving

	The data collected from the collection of information as defined by the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

This rule provides the framework for the States to develop SIPs to
achieve a new or revised NAAQS.  This framework reflects the
requirementsState or local air agency respondents will include the
required SIP elements prescribed in CAA sections 110 and part D, subpart
1 of title I.  In that sense, the present final rule does not establish
any new information collection burden on States.  Had this rule not been
developed, States would still have the legal obligation under law to
submit nonattainment area SIPs under part D of title I of the CAA within
specified periods after their nonattainment designation for the PM2.5
standards, for Implementation plans and the SIPs would have to meet the
requirements of part D.

	Arequirements in this Implementation Rule (40 CFR 51.1000 – 51.1012).
 The PM2.5 SIP will contains rules and other requirements designed to
achieve the NAAQS by the deadlines established under the CAA, and it
also contains a demonstration that the State’s requirements will in
fact result in attainment.  The SIP must meet the CAA requirements in
subpart 1 to adopt RACM, RACT, and provide for RFP toward attainment for
the period prior to the area’s attainment date.  After a State submits
a SIP, the CAA requires EPA to approve or disapprove the SIP.  If EPA
approves the SIP, the rules in the SIP become Federally enforceable.  If
EPA disapproves the SIP (or if EPA finds that a State fails to submit a
SIP), the CAA requires EPA to impose sanctions (2:1 offsets for major
new or modified sources and restrictions on Federal highway funding)
within specified timeframes; additionally, EPA must prepare and publish
a FIP within 2 years after a disapproval or finding of failure to
submit.  The SIP must be publicly available.  States must maintain
confidentiality of confidential business information, however, if used
to support SIP analyses.  The SIP is a one-time submission, although the
CAA requires States to revise their SIPs if EPA requests a revision upon
a finding that the SIP is inadequate to attain or maintain the NAAQS.
The State may revise its SIP voluntarily as needed, but in doing so must
demonstrate that any revision will not interfere with attainment or RFP
or any other applicable requirement under the CAA (see section 110(l)).

	This rule does not establish requirements that directly affect the
general public and the public and private sectors, but, rather,
interprets the statutory requirements that apply to States in preparing
their SIPs.  The SIPs themselves will likely establish requirements that
directly affect the general public, and the public and private sectors.

	At the time of promulgation of the PM2.5 standards in 1997, EPA
estimated administrative costs associated with implementing the
standards.  See Chapter 10 of U.S. EPA 1997, Regulatory Impact Analyses
for the Particulate Matter and Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards, Innovative Strategies and Economics Group, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, N.C., July 16,
1997.  The EPA has begun developing revised cost and burden hour
estimates for the statutory SIP development obligations in this
implementation rule and will include them in a revised Information
Collection Request (ICR) in the near future.  Assessments of some of the
administrative cost categories identified as a part of the SIP for the
PM2.5 standards have already been conducted as a result of other
provisions of the CAA and associated ICRs (e.g. emission inventory
preparation, air quality monitoring program, conformity assessments,
NSR, 8-hour ozone, I/M program).  The new ICR will take these revised
administrative cost assessments into account and will reflect updated
assumptions regarding milestones for the first 3 year period.  The PM2.5
NAAQS implementation rule ICR and supporting statement will follow a
similar approach to that used in the ICR for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
implementation rule.  The approach also will reflect recent changes in
the procedures for the ICR preparation and approval process.

	The burden estimates in the ICR for this rule are incremental to what
is required under other provisions of the CAA. The Agency anticipates
additional administrative burden during the 3 year period of the ICR for
State governments and the Agency of 630,000 hours and 69,300 hours,
respectively.  Fifty percent of the hours are expended in the first year
with the remainder evenly divided between the second and third years of
the ICR period.  Tribes are not required to conduct attainment
demonstrations or submit the RFP, RACT, or RACM requirements.

The present value of the total additional costs for State governments,
the respondents, estimated at $33.4 million for the 3 year period.  On
an equivalent annual basis that is $12.7 million per year during the 3
year period of the ICR.  The present value of the Agency administrative
cost burden is estimated at $3.7 million dollars for the 3 year period.
This is equivalent to an equal annual stream of costs of $1.4 million
per year during the three year period. Burden means the total time,
effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate,
maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
agency.  This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop,
acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.

	An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.  The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.  When this ICR is approved by
OMB, the Agency will publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 in
the Federal Register to display the OMB control number for the approved
information collection requirements contained in this final rule.
However, the failure to have an approved ICR for this rule does not
affect the statutory obligation for the States to submit SIPs as
required under part D of the CAA.

C.	Regulatory Flexibility Act

	The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice
and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure
Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.  Small entities include small businesses, small organizations,
and small governmental jurisdictions.

For purposes of assessing the impacts of this final action on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) a small business as defined by
the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a
city, county, town, school district, or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; or (3) a small organization that is any
not-for-profit enterprise that is independently owned and operated and
is not dominant in its field.

	After considering the economic impacts of today’s this final rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and it is not
necessary to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis in conjunction
with this final rule.  The final rule governing SIPs will not directly
impose any requirements on small entities.  Rather, this rule interprets
the obligations established in the CAA for States to submit
implementation plans in order to attain the PM2.5 NAAQS.

D. 	Unfunded Mandates Reform Act  tc \l2 "Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

	Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public Law
104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal
governments and the private sector.  Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with “Federal mandates” that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
1 year.  Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, EPA is required by section 205 of the UMRA to identify and
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives, and adopt the
least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule.  The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law.  Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted.  Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including Tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan.  The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.

	This rule contains no Federal mandate that may result in expenditures
of $100 million or more for State, local, and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or the private sector in any 1 year.  The estimated
administrative burden hourhours and costs associated with implementing
the PM2.5 NAAQS were developed upon promulgation of are estimated in the
standard and presented in Chapter 10 of U.S. EPA 1997, Regulatory Impact
AnalysesICR for the Particulate Matter and Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards, Innovative Strategies and Economics Group, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, N.C., July
16, 1997.this rule.  The estimated costs presented there for States in
1990 dollars totaled $0.9totals $33.4 million.  The corresponding
estimate in 1997 dollars is $1.1 million. for a three-year period.
Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements of section 202 and
205 of the UMRA.  The EPA consulted with governmental entities affected
by this rule and has determined that this rule contains no regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including Tribal governments.

	The CAA imposes the obligation for States to submit SIPs to implement
the PM2.5 NAAQS.  In this rule, EPA is merely providing an
interpretation of those requirements.  However, even if this rule did
establish an independent requirement for States to submit SIPs, it is
questionable whether a requirement to submit a SIP revision would
constitute a Federal mandate in any case.  The obligation for a State to
submit a SIP that arises out of section 110 and section 172 (part D) of
the CAA is not legally enforceable by a court of law, and at most is a
condition for continued receipt of highway funds.  Therefore, it is
possible to view an action requiring such a submittal as not creating
any enforceable duty within the meaning of section 421(5)(9a)(I) of UMRA
(2 U.S.C. 658(a)(I)).  Even if it did, the duty could be viewed as
falling within the exception for a condition of Federal assistance under
section 421(5)(a)(i)(I) of UMRA (2 U.S.C. 658(5)(a)(i)(I)).

E.  Executive Order 13132: Federalism  tc \l2 "Executive Order 13132:
Federalism

	Executive Order 13132, entitled “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
“meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have Federalism implications.”
 “Policies that have Federalism implications” is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have “substantial direct
effects 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.”

	 This finalAt the time of proposal, EPA concluded that the proposed
rule doeswould not have Federalismany federalism implications.  It
willThe EPA stated that the proposed rule would not have substantial
direct effects 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, as specified in
Executive Order 13132.  However, EPA recognized that States would have a
substantial interest in this rule any corresponding revisions to
associated SIP requirements.  As described in section D, above (on
UMRA), EPA previously determined the costs to States to implement the
PM2.5 NAAQS to be approximately $0.9$33.4 million in 1990 dollars.  The
corresponding estimate in 1997 dollars is $1.1 million.   .  This rule
clarifies the statutory obligations of States in implementing the PM2.5
NAAQS.  Finally, the CAA establishes the scheme whereby States take the
lead in developing plans to meet the NAAQS.  This final rule would not
modify the relationship of the States and EPA for purposes of developing
programs to implement the NAAQS.  Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not
apply to this final rule.

	Although section 6 of Executive Order 13132 does not applyTherefore in
the spirit of Executive Order 12132, and consistent with EPA policy to
this rule, EPA actively engaged the States in the development of this
rule.  The EPA promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA held a number of calls with representatives of State
and local air pollution control agencies and hosted a public hearing in
Washington, DC in November 2005.  The EPA considered the comments from
State and local governments in developing the final rule.

	Therefore, EPA concludes that this final rule does not have federalism
implications.  It will not have substantial direct effects 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132.
The rule does not alter the relationship between the Federal government
and the States regarding the establishment and implementation of air
quality improvement programs as codified in the CAA.  Finally, as noted
above in section E on UMRA, this rule does not impose significant costs
on State, local, or Tribal governments or the private sector.  Thus,
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

F.	Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments  tc \l2 "Executive Order 13175: Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments

	Executive Order 13175, entitled "Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments" (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure "meaningful and timely input
by Tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
Tribal implications."  This final rule does not have "Tribal
implications" as defined in Executive Order 13175.  This rule concerns
the requirements for State and tribal implementation plans for attaining
the PM2.5 air quality standards.  The CAA provides for States to develop
plans to regulate emissions of air pollutants within their
jurisdictions.  The Tribal Air Rule (TAR) under the CAA gives Tribes the
opportunity to develop and implement CAA programs such as programs to
attain and maintain the PM2.5 NAAQS, but it leaves to the discretion of
the Tribe the decision of whether to develop these programs and which
programs, or appropriate elements of a program, they will adopt.

Although Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule, EPA did
reach out to Tribal leaders and environmental staff in developing this
rule.  From 2001 – 2004, the EPA supported a National Designations
Workgroup to provide a forum for tribal professionals to give input to
the designations process.  In 2006, EPA supportssupported a national
"Tribal Air call" which provides an open forum for all Tribes to voice
concerns to EPA about the NAAQS implementation process, including the
PM2.5 NAAQS.  In these meetings, EPA briefed call participants and
Tribal environmental professionals gave input as the rule was under
development.   Furthermore, in December 2005, EPA sent individualized
letters to all federally recognized Tribes about the proposal to give
Tribal leaders the opportunity for consultation.

	This final rule does not have Tribal implications as defined by
Executive Order 13175.  It does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian Tribes, since no Tribe has implemented a CAA program
to attain the PM2.5 NAAQS at this time.  The EPA notes that even if a
Tribe were implementing such a plan at this time, while the rule might
have Tribal implications with respect to that Tribe, it would not impose
substantial direct costs upon it, nor would it preempt Tribal law.

	Furthermore, this rule does not affect the relationship or distribution
of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian
Tribes.  The CAA and the TAR establish the relationship of the Federal
government and Tribes in developing plans to attain the NAAQS, and this
rule does nothing to modify that relationship.  As this rule does not
have Tribal implications, Executive Order 13175 does not apply.

G.	Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental
Health and Safety Risks tc \l2 "Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children from Environmental Health and Safety Risks

	EO 13045, “Protection of Children from Environmental Health and
Safety Risks,” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that
(1) is determined to be “economically significant” as defined under
Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or
safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have disproportionate
effect on children.  If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the
Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the
planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible
alternatives considered by the Agency.

This final rule is not subject to EO 13045 because it is not
economically significant as defined in EO 12866, and because the Agency
does not have reason to we believe that the environmental health or
safety risks risk addressed by this action present may have a
disproportionate risk toeffect on children.  This rule implements a
previously promulgated health-based Federal standard – the PM2.5
NAAQS.  As a matter of policy, however, we have evaluated the
environmental health or safety effects of the PM2.5 NAAQS on children.
The results of this evaluation are contained in the 1997 Federal
Register notice establishing the PM2.5 standards.  In that notice,
children are identified as one of the principle sub-populations that are
particularly sensitive to exposure to fine particle pollution.  This
final rule provides the framework by which States will require sources
to reduce pollutant emissions, thereby improving air quality and
reducing the exposure of children and others to unhealthy levels of fine
particle pollution.  . The NAAQS constitute uniform, national standards
for PM pollution; these standards are designed to protect public health
with an adequate margin of safety, as required by CAA section 109.
However, the protection offered by these standards may be especially
important for children because children, along with other sensitive
population subgroups such as the elderly and people with existing heart
or lung disease, are potentially susceptible to health effects resulting
from PM exposure.  Because children are considered a potentially
susceptible population, we have carefully evaluated the environmental
health effects of exposure to PM pollution among children.  These
effects and the size of the population affected are summarized in
section 9.2.4 of the Criteria Document and section 3.5 of the Staff
Paper.

 H. 	Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use tc \l2 "Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

	This final rule is not a “significant energy action” as defined in
Executive Order 13211, “Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use,” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it
is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.  This rule is not a “significant
energy action,” because it does not establish requirements that
directly affect the general public and the public and private sectors,
but, rather, interprets the statutory requirements that apply to States
in preparing their SIPs.  The SIPs themselves will likely establish
requirements that directly affect the general public, and the public and
private sectors.

I.	National Technology Transfer Advancement Act tc \l2 "National
Technology Transfer Advancement Act

	As noted in the proposed rule, Section 12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer Advancement Act of 1995 (“NTTAA”), Public Law No. 104-113,
section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards (VCS) in its regulatory activities unless to do so
would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies.  The NTTAA
directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the
Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS.

This final rulemaking does not involve technical standards.  Therefore,
EPA is not considering the use of any VCS. The EPA will encourage the
States and Tribes to consider the use of such standards, where
appropriate, in the development of their implementation plans. tc \l2
"Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice
in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

J.	Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

	EO 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994) establishes Federal executive
policy on environmental justice.  Its main provision directs Federal
agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects of their programs, polices and
activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the
United States.

	The EPA has determined that the final rule should not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it increases the
level of environmental protection for all affected poplations without
having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on any population, including any minority or
low-income population.  The health and environmental risks associated
with fine particles were considered in the establishment of the PM2.5
NAAQS.  The level is designed to be protective with an adequate margin
of safety.  This final rule provides a framework for improving
environmental quality and reducing health risks for areas that may be
designated nonattainment.

K.  	Congressional Review Act

	The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the
rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to
each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General to the United
State.  The EPA will submit a report containing the rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register.  A Major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register.
 This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
This rule will be effective [INSERT DATE 60 DAYS FROM PUBLICATION].

IV. J.	Petitions for Judicial Review tc \l2 "L.  Petitions for Judicial
Review

	Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit by [INSERT DATE 60 DAYS FROM DATE OF
PUBLICATION].  Filing a petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this
rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time
within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such

rule or action.  This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements.  See Act section 307(b)(2).

K.	Judicial Review

	Under sections 307(d)(1)(E) and 307(d)(1)(V) of the CAA, the
Administrator determines that this action is subject to the provisions
of section 307(d).  Section 307(d)(1)(V) provides that the provisions of
section 307(d) apply to "such other actions as the Administrator may
determine."  While the Administrator did not make this determination
earlier, the Administrator believes that all of the procedural
requirements, e.g., docketing, hearing and comment periods, of section
307(d) have been complied with during the course of this rulemaking.

V.	Statutory Authority

	The statutory authority for this action is provided by sections [add
sections].  This rulemaking is subject to section 307(d) of the Act (42
U.S.C. 7407(d)).

 See 62 FR 38652-38760, National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Particulate Matter, Final Rule; also 40 CFR Part 50.

 See 62 FR 38652-38760, National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Particulate Matter, Final Rule; also 40 CFR Part 50.


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 73 (Monday, April 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 16414]
[FR Doc No: 2018-07787]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

    Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549-2736

Extension:
    Rule 6c-7, SEC File No. 270-269, OMB Control No. 3235-0276

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the
collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to
submit this existing collection of information to the Office of
Management and Budget for extension and approval.
    Rule 6c-7 (17 CFR 270.6c-7) under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq.) (``1940 Act'') provides exemption from
certain provisions of Sections 22(e) and 27 of the 1940 Act for
registered separate accounts offering variable annuity contracts to
certain employees of Texas institutions of higher education
participating in the Texas Optional Retirement Program. There are
approximately 50 registrants governed by Rule 6c-7. The burden of
compliance with Rule 6c-7, in connection with the registrants obtaining
from a purchaser, prior to or at the time of purchase, a signed
document acknowledging the restrictions on redeem ability imposed by
Texas law, is estimated to be approximately 3 minutes of professional
time per response for each of approximately 2,300 purchasers annually
(at an estimated $66 per hour),\1\ for a total annual burden of 115
hours (at a total annual cost of $7,590).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ $66/hour figure for a Compliance Clerk is based on the
Commission's estimates concerning the allocation of burden hours and
the relevant wage rates from the Commission's consultations with
industry representatives and on salary information for the
securities industry compiled by the Securities Industry and
Financial Markets Association's Office Salaries in the Securities
Industry 2013. The estimated wage figures are modified by Commission
staff to account for an 1,800-hour work-year and multiplied by 2.93
to account for bonuses, firm size, employee benefits, overhead, and
adjusted to account for the effects of inflation. See Securities
Industry and Financial Markets Association, Report on Management &
Professional Earnings in the Securities Industry 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The estimate of average burden hours is made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not derived from a
comprehensive or even a representative survey or study of the costs of
Commission rules or forms. The Commission does not include in the
estimate of average burden hours the time preparing registration
statements and sales literature disclosure regarding the restrictions
on redeem ability imposed by Texas law. The estimate of burden hours
for completing the relevant registration statements are reported on the
separate PRA submissions for those statements. (See the separate PRA
submissions for Form N-3 (17 CFR 274.11b) and Form N-4 (17 CFR
274.11c).)
    The Commission requests written comments on: (a) Whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549; or send an email
to: [email protected].

    Dated: April 9, 2018.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-07787 Filed 4-13-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P