STANDARD FORM 83 SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR ICR 1750.04 [ RENEWAL OF ICR 1750.03]

REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS FOR NATIONAL VOC EMISSION STANDARDS FOR ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS Emission Standards Division U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711 April 27, 2005 1 PART A OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT 1. Identification of the Information Collection ( a) Title of the Information Collection " Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for National VOC Emission Standards for Architectural Coatings." The Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) tracking number for this information collection request ( ICR) is 1750.04. This is a renewal of a continuing ICR, OMB No. 2060 0393, expiration date April 30, 2005.

( b) Short Characterization/ Abstract Compliance with the architectural coatings rule was required by September 1999. The regulation requires that manufacturers and importers of architectural coatings adhere to volatile organic compound ( VOC) content limits in the regulation.

Information collection requirements for manufacturers and importers complying with the VOC content limits consist of product labeling; an initial notification report, which includes an explanation of any date code used; and subsequent explanations of any date codes revised after submittal of the initial report.

The regulation does not contain any additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements unless a manufacturer or importer chooses to comply through one of the optional provisions in lieu of meeting the VOC content limits ( i. e., the tonnage exemption,

exceedance fee, or recycled coating credit provisions).

The rule contains an optional tonnage exemption that allows each manufacturer and importer to exempt a specified total mass of VOC in architectural coatings. The tonnage exemption would be used for products that do not comply with the VOC content limits and for which no exceedance fee is paid. Additional information collection requirements for the tonnage exemption include records of VOC calculations and volumes of coating manufactured or imported and an annual report.

The rule includes an exceedance fee alternative compliance option to provide additional compliance flexibility. This is an economic incentive approach whereby manufacturers and importers may choose to comply with the VOC requirements in the rule by 2 paying a fee in lieu of meeting the VOC content limits. The per product exceedance fee is calculated based on both the volume of product manufactured or imported and the amount of VOC above the VOC content limit for that product. Additional information collection requirements for the exceedance fee option include records of fee calculations and inputs and an annual report.

Manufacturers and importers of recycled coatings have the option to take credit for the post consumer coating content when determining the VOC content of the coating, which results in a less stringent control requirement. Additional information collection requirements for the recycled coating option include records of VOC calculations, additional labeling, and an annual report.

All records required under the rule must be retained for 3 years.

The rule requires that the labels or lids of all subject architectural coatings display the date of manufacture, the manufacturer's recommended thinning, and the VOC content of the coating. Many manufacturers already include this information on their coating labels as a part of normal and usual practice. For additional flexibility, the date of manufacture can be expressed as a code and can be located either on the label, lid, or bottom of the container. The rule also requires that the labels or lids of all subject industrial maintenance coatings display a statement indicating that industrial maintenance coatings are primarily intended for industrial and professional use. In addition, each manufacturer and importer using the adjusted VOC content for a recycled coating is required to include a statement indicating the post consumer coating content on the coating container label or lid.

2. Need for and Use of the Collection ( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection Section 183( e) of the Clean Air Act ( CAA) requires EPA to regulate categories of consumer and commercial products that account for at least 80 percent of the VOC emissions, on a reactivity adjusted basis, in areas that violate the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone. The EPA determined that 3 the architectural coating category is one of the largest VOC emission sources among the consumer and commercial products categories, in many States represents a significant source of unregulated VOC emissions, and that VOC emissions from the use of architectural coatings contribute to ground level ozone formation in ozone nonattainment areas. Therefore, EPA published standards regulating VOC emissions from architectural coatings under section 183( e) of the CAA on September 11, 1998 ( 40 CFR part 59,

subpart D).

The reporting, labeling, and recordkeeping activities required under the architectural coatings rule enable EPA to determine whether or not coatings manufactured or imported for sale or distribution in the United States are in compliance with the requirements in the rule. Reports and records are used to determine whether exceedance fees ( if applicable) are paid for coatings for which the manufacturer or importer has chosen the exceedance fee option. For the tonnage exemption, the reports and records are used to ensure that the allowed exemption levels are not exceeded. Reports, records, and product labels associated with the recycled coatings provision are used to ensure that the adjusted VOC content is calculated properly.

( b) Practical Utility/ Users of the Data The data collected under this ICR are essential to ensure compliance with the rule and to evaluate its effectiveness.

Specifically, Agency enforcement personnel use the information collected to: ( 1) identify manufacturers and importers subject to the rule; ( 2) ensure that architectural coatings comply with VOC content standards, including accounting for recycled coating content; ( 3) verify that exceedance fees are calculated properly and paid in the correct amounts; ( 4) determine the volume of coating manufactured or imported for which fees are paid;

( 5) determine the total revenues paid in exceedance fees; and ( 6) verify that the VOC content of the coatings is calculated properly for the tonnage exemption and that the exemption levels are not exceeded. The reported information assists EPA in deciding which architectural coating manufacturers or importers should be inspected. The requirement for date of manufacture ( or 4 date code) to be placed on coating containers is useful to EPA for comparison to manufacturers' records and reports to determine compliance with VOC content limits, and with the exceedance fee and tonnage exemption requirements.

3. Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria ( a) Nonduplication The information collected pursuant to the regulation consists primarily of the VOC content information for architectural coating products, the calculation of exceedance fees due, the calculation of total VOC emissions from particular products claimed under the tonnage exemption, and the calculation of the post consumer coating content of recycled coatings. This information is not collected by any other Federal agency.

( b) Consultations Significant input and information was received from the affected industry, State and local governments, environmental groups, and coating users during development of the rule,

including regulatory negotiation meetings. Table 1 shows a list of the participants in the regulatory negotiations. In addition,

EPA held a public hearing in July 1996 and a public meeting in August 1996. The public meeting was specifically designed to obtain input from small businesses. The EPA considered numerous public comments in the development of this rule. The public comments are located in the docket for this rulemaking ( Docket No. A 92 18). The Federal Register document required under 5 CFR 1320.8( d), soliciting comments on this collection of information was published on February 25, 2005 ( 70 FR 9304). Two comments were received. These comments did not question any of the estimates of burden for this ICR, and therefore did not impact any calculations. One commenter did suggest that EPA consider future use of automated electronic data collection and future publication of a yearly report on the usage of the exceedance fee and tonnage exemption provisions. We will consider these suggestions in the future. 5 ( c) Effects of Less Frequent Collection This ICR includes a one time initial notification report for all manufacturers and importers. For those reporting VOC content adjusted for post consumer coating content, an annual report is required. For those using the tonnage exemption option, an annual report is required. For those using the exceedance fee option, an annual report is required. Less frequent reporting would not allow for effective or timely compliance determination.

The EPA believes annual reporting is frequent enough to provide the information needed for compliance tracking without being too burdensome on the industry or the Agency.

( d) General Guidelines This ICR adheres to the guidelines for Federal data requestors, as provided at 5 CFR 1320.5( d)( 2).

( e) Confidentiality ( i) Confidentiality. All information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, Chapter 1, part 2, subpart B Confidentiality of Business Information ( see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902,

September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 39999, September 28, 1978;

43 FR 42251, September 28, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

( ii) Sensitive questions. This section is not applicable because this ICR does not involve matters of a sensitive nature.

Table 1. Consultations Consumer Representatives Bernie Appleman, Steel Structures Painting Council Charles Field, Staff Vice President, National Association of Home Builders G. Lawrence Gettier, Traffic Control Project Engineer,

North Carolina Department of Transportation, Century Center  Traffic Engineering Branch John Peart, Research Chemist, Federal Highway Administration Tim Race, Chemist, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Vincent R. Sandusky, Executive Vice President, Painting and 6 Decorating Contractors of America John Stone, Chemist, G. S. A. Paint and Chemicals Commodity Center R. Sam Williams, Forest Products Laboratory Environmental Representatives David Hawkins, Senior Attorney, Natural Resources Defense Council Joel Schwartz, Staff Scientist, Coalition for Clean Air Ronald White, Deputy Director, National Programs, American Lung Association Industry Representatives Earle K. Borman, Jr., Senior Vice President, L& F Products Jack J. Bracco, Manager, Market Development, Architecture and Industrial Maintenance Coatings, Miles, Inc.

J. Andrew Doyle, Executive Director, National Paint and Coatings Association Marcel Gaschke, Group Marketing Manager, Polymers Division,

CIBA GEIGY Corporation Madelyn Harding, Administrator, Product Compliance and Registrations, The Sherwin Williams Company Robert J. Klepser, Laboratory Manager, Carboline Company James F. Lawrence, Senior Vice President, Cargill Inc.

Carl Minchew, Assistant to the Technical Director, Benjamin Moore & Co.

Kenneth J. Murray, Environmental Affairs Manager, Exxon Chemical Pete Nicholson, Market Manager, Industrial Finishes, Rohm and Haas Co.

John Prinz, Vice President Research, Development, and Quality, Sinclair Paint Company, Division of Insilco Corp.

Jim Sainsbury, Manager, Product Regulation, The Glidden Company Christine Stanley, Product Development Manager, Ameron Protective Coatings William Stewart, Director, Regulatory Affairs, The Valspar Corporation 7 Small Business Representatives Jay Haines, Attorney at Law, Haines & Riley Ned B. Kisner, President, Triangle Coatings, Inc.

Robert Wendoll, Chairman, Environmental, Legislative, and Regulatory Advocacy Program Richard Williamson, Executive Vice President, Trinity Coatings Company Labor Representative Mike Andrews, Representative of the Health and Safety Department, International Brotherhood of Painters and Allied Trades State Representatives S. William Becker, Executive Director, STAPPA/ ALAPCO Dan Belik, Enforcement Program Supervisor, Rule Development,

BAAQMD Robert Irvine, Senior Environmental Engineer, SIP Revision Unit, State of Michigan Department of Natural Resources,

Air Quality Division Peggy Taricco, Manager of Solvent Control Section, California Air Resources Board Bob Warland, Regional Air Pollution Control Engineer,

Region IV, New York State Department of Environmental Control Regional Headquarters Environmental Protection Agency Bruce Jordan, Director, Emission Standard Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Federal Government Observer Chris Kirtz, Director, Consensus and Dispute Resolution Program, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 8 4. The Respondents and the Information Requested ( a) Respondents/ NAICS and SIC Codes Respondents to this information collection are manufacturers and importers of architectural coatings. Manufacturers of architectural coatings fall within North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) 325510, " Paint and Coating Manufacturers," and Standard Industrial Classification ( SIC) 2851, " Paints, Varnishes, Lacquers, Enamels,

and Allied Products." Importers of architectural coatings fall within NAICS 424950 " Paint, Varnish and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers," and SIC 5198, " Wholesale Trade: Paints, Varnishes,

and Supplies."

( b) Information Requested ( i) Data items, including recordkeeping requirements.

Attachment 1, Source Data and Information Requirements,

summarizes the labeling, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. All records required under the rule must be retained for 3 years.

( ii) Respondent activities. Table 2 presents the labeling,

recordkeeping and reporting activities, and burdens for the rule.

The respondent activities required by the standards are listed in the first column of Table 2.

Several States regulate architectural coatings and require certain labeling, recordkeeping, and reporting activities. The regulation includes similar requirements to the extent practical in order to minimize the cumulative burden to the industry. 9 TABLE 2. AVERAGE ANNUAL INDUSTRY BURDEN AND COST OF REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING OVER THE 3 YEAR PERIOD BEGINNING May 1, 2005, FOR MANUFACTURERS COMPLYING WITH THE STANDARDS FOR ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS Burden Item ( A)

Person Hours Per Occurrence ( hrs/ manufacturer) ( B) Number of Occurrences Per Respondent Per Year ( C) Person Hours Per Respondent Per Year ( a)

( C= AxB) Dollars Per Houra ( D) Respondents per Year ( E)

Total Hours Per Year ( E= CxD) ( F)

Total Cost Per Yearb 1. Applications Not applicable 2. Surveys and Studies Not applicable 3. Reporting Requirements A. Read Instructions 2 1 2 $ 67 5c 10 $ 670 B. Gathering Existing Information Included in 3. C C. Write Report Initial Report 2 1 2 $ 99 5c 10 $ 990 Date Code Explanation 1 1 1 $ 67 5c 5 $ 335 Update Date Codes 2 1 2 $ 67 50d 100 $ 6,700 Recycled Coatings Report  Mass Balance 6 1 6 $ 99 12.5e 75 $ 7,425 Recycled Coatings Report  Formulation 4 1 4 $ 99 12.5e 50 $ 4,950 Exceedance Fee Annual Report 8 1 8 $ 99 120f 960 $ 95,040 Tonnage Exemption Annual Report 8 1 8 $ 99 150g 1,200 $ 118,800 4. Recordkeeping Requirements A. Read Instructions Included in 3. A B. Plan Activities 8 1 8 $ 99 5c 40 $ 3,960 C. Implement Activities Calculate VOC content for Each Product 42h 1 42 $ 67 5c 210 $ 14,070 TABLE 2. AVERAGE ANNUAL INDUSTRY BURDEN AND COST OF REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING OVER THE 3 YEAR PERIOD BEGINNING May 1, 2005 FOR MANUFACTURERS COMPLYING WITH THE STANDARDS FOR ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS ( CONTINUED)

Burden Item ( A)

Person Hours Per Occurrence ( hrs/ manufacturer) ( B) Number of Occurrences Per Respondent Per Year ( C) Person Hours Per Respondent Per Year ( a)

( C= AxB) Dollars Per Houra ( D) Respondents per Year ( E)

Total Hours Per Year ( E= CxD) ( F)

Total Cost Per Yearb 10 Calculate Adjusted VOC for Recycled Coatings 20 1 20 $ 67 25i 500 $ 33,500 Exceedance Fee

Calculations 64 1 64 $ 67 120f 7,680 $ 514,560 Tonnage Exemption Calculations 16 1 16 $ 67 150g 2,400 $ 160,800 D. Record Data Recycling Volumes 8 12 96 $ 67 25i 2,400 $ 160,800 Exceedance Fee 8 1 8 $ 67 120f 960 $ 64,320 Tonnage Exemption 4 1 4 $ 67 150g 600 $ 40,200 E. Time to Train Personnel Not applicable 5. Labeling 67j 1 67 $ 67 83k 5,561 $ 372,587 Total 22,761 $ 1,599,707 a All tasks are assumed to be performed by a technical person ($ 67/ hr) unless otherwise noted.

Activities planning is assumed to be performed by a manager ($ 99/ hr).

b Costs were calculated by multiplying the total number of hours by the hourly wages.

c Total number of manufacturers is estimated to be 500; 1 percent or 5 new respondents per year are assumed.

d Assumed that 10 percent of manufacturers update some date codes each year.

( 500 manufacturers)( 0.10) = 50 manufacturers.

e Assumed that 5 percent of manufacturers recycle coatings. ( 500 manufacturers)( 0.05) =

25 manufacturers. Of the 25 manufacturers, assumed half of the recycle coating manufacturers would demonstrate compliance using mass balance and the other half using formulations. 11 f Economic model estimates a total of 958 fee paying products, at an average of 8 products per manufacturer; 958 products ÷ 8 products per manufacturers = 120 manufacturers.

g Assumed that 150 manufacturers will use tonnage exemption option.

h Based on a time estimate of 1 hour per coating product. ( 1 hour/ product)( 42 products/ manufacturer) = 42 hours/ manufacturer.

i Assumed that 5 percent of manufacturers recycle coatings. ( 500 manufacturers)( 0.05) = 25 manufacturers.

j Based on an industry estimate of 320 hours needed to modify labels for a company with 200 paint products, or 1.6 hours per product.

( 1.6 hours/ product)( 42 products/ manufacturer) = 67 hours/ manufacturer.

k Assumed that half of the manufacturers would have to modify their labels over 3 years.

( 500 manufacturers)( 0.5)/( 3 years) = 83 manufacturers per year. 12 5. The Information Collected Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management ( a) Agency Activities A list of activities required of EPA is provided in Table 3.

( b) Collection Methodology and Management The initial notification reports collected under this rule are maintained in a computerized database. The other reports collected under this rule are maintained by the EPA Regional Offices. As noted in section 2( b) of this ICR, the information collected is a necessary part of compliance determination.

( c) Small Entity Flexibility Although the rule does not contain any specific small entity provisions, the rule contains two provisions that may reduce the burden of this rule on small entities. These provisions are the exceedance fee provision and the tonnage exemption.

( d) Collection Schedule The rule requires all manufacturers and importers of subject coatings to submit an initial notification report no later than September 13, 1999 ( March 13, 2000 for products registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, or within 180 days after becoming subject to the rule, whichever is later. All manufacturers and importers of subject coatings must submit an explanation of any new date code no later than 30 days after the new date code is first used.

Manufacturers and importers choosing the recycled coating provision must submit an annual report by March 1 following the year in which the recycled coating provision is used.

Manufacturers and importers choosing the exceedance fee provision must submit an annual report by March 1 following the calendar year in which the coatings for which the fee provision is used are manufactured or imported. Manufacturers and importers choosing the tonnage exemption must submit an annual report by March 1 of the year following the calendar year in which the exemption was claimed. 13 TABLE 3. AGENCY BURDEN FOR THE ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS RULE A B C D E F Reports EPA Technical Hours Per Occurrence Occurrences Per Year Person Hours Per Year ( Technical)

C = A x B Person Hours Per Year ( Management)

D = C x 0.05 Person Hours Per Year ( Clerical)

E = C x 0.1 Total Cost Per Yeara Initial Reportb 1.0 5 5 0.3 0.5 $ 386 Annual Report:

Manufacture of Recycled Coatings  Mass Balancec 1.0 12.5 12.5 0.6 1.3 $ 952 Annual Report:

Manufacture of Recycled Coatings  Formulationc 0.5 12.5 6.3 0.3 0.6 $ 477 Date Code Reportsb 0.5 5 2.5 0.1 0.3 $ 190 Date Code Updatesd 0.5 50 25 1.3 2.5 $ 1,909 Annual Report:

Exceedance Feee 4.0 120 480 24 48 $ 36,552 Annual Report:

Tonnage Exemptionf 2.0 150 300 15 30 $ 22,845 Maintenance of implementation database 60 1 60 3 6 $ 4,569 Totals 891.3 44.6 89.2 $ 67,880 a Total cost per year = ( column C)($ 67/ hr) + ( column D)($ 99/ hr) + ( column E)($ 42/ hr).

b Total number of manufacturers is estimated to be 500; 1 percent or 5 new respondents per year are assumed.

c Assumed 25 recycled coating manufacturers; assumed half use mass balance option and half use formulation option.

d Assumed 10 percent of all manufacturers update some date codes each year. ( 500 manufacturers)( 0.10) =

50 manufacturers.

e Assumed 120 manufacturers will pay fees on some coatings ( see footnote f in Table 2).

f Assumed 150 manufacturers will use tonnage exemption option. 14 6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection ( a) Estimating Respondent Burden The average annual burden estimates for reporting,

recordkeeping, and labeling requirements are presented in Table 2 for all manufacturers. These numbers were derived from estimates based on EPA's experience with other standards and from information obtained from the industry representatives listed in Table 1. Because this is a renewal of an existing ICR, these estimates represent the average annual burden that will be incurred by the affected industry in the 3 year period beginning May 1, 2005. The hours shown in column A of Table 2 are the burden estimate per manufacturer.

( b) Estimating Respondent Cost Table 2 also presents the estimated costs for the required recordkeeping, reporting, and labeling activities. Labor rates,

on a per hour basis, are based on Employer Cost for Employee Compensation total compensation rates of $ 46.84 for management personnel and $ 19.61 for clerical personnel as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics ( BLS) for September 2004. ( See Table 9 at http:// stats. bls. gov/ news. release/ ecec. toc. htm.)

Starting in 2004 technical personnel were no longer presented as a distinct category in the BLS tables. The labor rate for technical personnel is based on a total compensation rate of $ 30.76 for technical personnel as reported by the BLS for December 2003. ( See Table 9 at ftp:// ftp. bls. gov/ pub/ special. requests/ ocwc/ ect/ ececqrt. pdf.)

This figure was increased by 3 percent to $ 31.68 to match the increase in reported labor rates for management and clerical personnel from December 2003 to September 2004.

The total compensation rates were increased by 110 percent for overhead, resulting in the following labor rates: $ 42 for clerical personnel, $ 67 for technical personnel, and $ 99 for management personnel. There are no capital or operating and maintenance costs required by this collection.

( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost 15 Examination of records to be maintained by the respondents will occur incidentally as a part of the periodic inspection of sources that is part of EPA's overall compliance and enforcement program and is not attributable to this ICR. The only costs that the Federal government will incur are costs associated with the review of reported information, as presented in Table 3. Labor rates and associated costs are based on the same estimated industry hourly rates as follows: $ 42 for clerical personnel,

$ 67 for technical personnel, and $ 99 for management personnel.

( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs The respondent universe consists of 500 architectural coating manufacturers. Of these, 75 are considered large manufacturers and 425 are considered small manufacturers. Due to importers' small market presence ( less than 1 percent of total coating sales volume in 1990) and the lack of detailed product data on imported coatings, importers have not been included in this burden estimate.

The annual respondent burden will vary depending on the actual compliance choices that are made by the manufacturer or importer. Specifically, the burden will vary depending on whether the recycled coating, exceedance fee, or tonnage exemption provisions are chosen.

In order to estimate the industry burden, assumptions were made about the number of manufacturers that would choose each of the optional provisions ( see appropriate footnotes in Table 2).

Other assumptions were that the number of new respondents submitting the one time Initial Notification Report and date code explanations will be 1 percent of the total respondent universe of 500, or about 5 per year.

( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs Tables ( i) Respondent tally. The bottom line industry burden hours and costs, presented in Table 2, are calculated by summing the total hours per year column ( column E) and by summing the total cost per year column ( column F). The annual burden and 16 cost to the industry averaged over the 3 year period beginning May 1, 2005, is 22,761 hours and $ 1,599,707.

The average annual base reporting, recordkeeping, and labeling burden per manufacturer for this ICR is 46 hours ( 22,761 hours/ 500 manufacturers = 46 hours per manufacturer).

The actual burden for each manufacturer will vary depending on the compliance choices that they make. Manufacturers that meet all of the mandatory requirements and do not select any of the optional requirements will have an annual reporting,

recordkeeping, and labeling burden of approximately 12 hours ( 5,936 hours/ 500 manufacturers = 12 hours per manufacturer).

Manufacturers that choose the recycled coating provision will have an annual reporting, recordkeeping, and labeling burden of approximately 133 hours ( 3,025 hours/ 25 manufacturers =

121 hours per manufacturer; 12 hours + 121 hours = 133 hours per manufacturer). Manufacturers that choose the exceedance fee provision will have an annual reporting, recordkeeping, and labeling burden of approximately 92 hours ( 9,600 hours/ 120 manufacturers = 80 hours per manufacturer; 80 hours + 12 hours =

92 hours per manufacturer). Manufacturers that choose the tonnage exemption will have an annual reporting, recordkeeping,

and labeling burden of approximately 40 hours ( 4,200 hours/ 150 manufacturers = 28 hours per manufacturer; 28 hours + 12 hours =

40 hours per manufacturer).

The total per manufacturer reporting, recordkeeping, and labeling burden is the lowest for manufacturers that meet the VOC content limits, and would be higher for those that choose the optional tonnage exemption, exceedance fee provision, or recycled coating provision.

( ii) Agency tally. The bottom line Agency burden and cost,

presented in Table 3 is calculated in the same manner as the industry burden and cost. The estimated annual burden and cost averaged over the 3 year period beginning May 1, 2005, are 1,025 hours and $ 67,880. 17 ( iii) The complex collection. This ICR is a simple collection; therefore this section does not apply.

( iv) Variations in the annual bottom line. No significant variations in the annual respondent burden or cost are expected over the 3 year period beginning on May 1, 2005.

( f) Reasons for Change in Burden This renewal of a continuing ICR includes the following onetime burden and cost items: reading instructions, the initial report, the explanation of date codes, planning activities, and calculating VOC content. To develop the estimates of annual average burden, these one time activities were averaged over 3 years, beginning after the rule has been effective for more than 5 years. Therefore, EPA assumes that the vast majority of onetime initial reports already will have been submitted by May 2005 and only new notifications will be submitted during the period covered by this ICR renewal. The assumptions used as a basis for the burden calculations more fully explain this concept ( see footnotes in Table 2).

We have reduced the time estimate for calculating the VOC content of a product from 8 hours to 1 hour. This more accurately reflects the time required to perform this calculation.

We have reduced the time estimate for preparing exceedance fee reports from 64 hours to 8 hours and increased the time for performing exceedance fee calculations from 8 hours to 64 hours.

The calculations involve compiling and combining data which is more time consuming than reporting the results of the calculations. We have left the estimated number of exceedance fee reports at 120 per year. This estimate is higher than the actual number of reports submitted in 2003 and 2004 ( 88 in 2003 and 89 in 2004).

Similarly, we have reduced the time estimate for preparing tonnage exemption reports from 16 hours to 8 hours and increased the time for performing tonnage exemption calculations from 8 hours to 16 hours. We have also increased the number of tonnage 18 exemption reports per year from 100 to 150. The number of tonnage exemption reports should be more than the number of exceedance fee reports because the tonnage exemption allows some coatings to exceed their VOC content limit without incurring an exceedance fee.

( g) Burden Statement The total reporting and recordkeeping burden for this information collection averaged over the 3 year period beginning on May 1, 2005, is estimated to be 22,761 hours per year. The total annualized recordkeeping and reporting costs for this rule are estimated to be $ 1,599,707. This is the estimated burden for the estimated 500 respondents ( i. e., architectural coating manufacturers).

The average estimated burden, per respondent, is 46 hours per year. The total reporting and recordkeeping burden for an individual respondent will vary depending on the compliance option( s) chosen. Respondents meeting the VOC content limits will have the lowest reporting and recordkeeping burden.

Manufacturers and importers that choose the option of calculating an adjusted VOC content for recycled coatings, paying an exceedance fee, or exercising the tonnage exemption will have a higher reporting and recordkeeping burden. The final rule requires an initial one time notification from each respondent.

Respondents whose coating products have a VOC content that is less than or equal to the VOC content limits have no periodic requirements. Respondents using the recycled coatings provision must keep records and submit annual reports. Respondents taking advantage of the tonnage exemption must file an annual report and must maintain records for the coatings being claimed under the exemption. Respondents paying an exceedance fee must keep records for each coating product on which fees are paid and submit an annual report.

Burden in this context means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain,

retain, disclose, or provide information to or for a Federal 19 agency. This includes the time needed to: ( 1) review instructions; ( 2) 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;

( 3) adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; ( 4) train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; ( 5) search data sources; ( 6) complete and review the collection of information; and ( 7) 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 are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. OAR 2005 0049, which is available for public viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West,

Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is ( 202) 566 1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center is ( 202) 566 1742. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// epa. gov/ edocket. Use EDOCKET to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select 20 " search," then key in the docket ID number identified above.

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 Office for EPA.

Please include the EPA Docket ID No. ( OAR 2005 0049) and OMB control number ( 2060 0393) in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement This section is not applicable. A 1 Attachment 1 Source Data and Information Requirements Requirement Regulation Reference LABELING

Date of Manufacture 59.405( a)( 1)

Recommendation for thinning 59.405( a)( 2)

VOC content 59.405( a)( 3)

In addition, for each industrial maintenance coating:

One of the following statements of use 59.405( b)

For industrial use only.

For professional use only.

Not for residential use. or Not intended for residential use. or,

This coating is intended for use under the following condition( s): ( Include each condition that applies to the coating.)

Immersion in water, wastewater, or chemical solutions ( aqueous and nonaqueous solutions), or chronic exposure of interior surfaces to moisture condensation;

Acute or chronic exposure to corrosive, caustic, or acidic agents, or to chemicals, chemical fumes, or chemical mixtures or solutions;

Repeated exposure to temperatures above 120 degrees Celsius ( 250 degrees Fahrenheit);

Repeated ( frequent) heavy abrasion, including mechanical wear and repeated ( frequent) scrubbing with industrial solvents, cleansers, or scouring agents; or,

Exterior exposure of metal structures and structural components In addition, for each coating using the optional recycled coating credit: Requirement Regulation Reference A 2

The statement " Contains not less than X percent by volume post consumer coating." Where " X" is replaced with the percent, by volume, of postconsumer coating 59.405( c)

RECORDKEEPING For each coating for which the optional recycled coating credit is applied:

Minimum volume percent post consumer coating content 59.407( a)( 1)

Volume of post consumer coating received for recycling 59.407( a)( 2)

Volume of post consumer coating received that was unusable 59.407( a)( 3)

Volume of virgin materials 59.407( a)( 4)

Volume of final recycled coating 59.407( a)( 5)

Calculation of adjusted VOC content 59.407( a)( 6)

For each manufacturer and importer using the optional exceedance fee provision:

A list of the coatings and the associated coating categories in Table 1 of the regulation for which the exceedance fee is used 59.407( b)( 1)

Calculation of the annual fee for each coating and the total annual fee for all coatings 59.407( b)( 2)

The VOC content of each coating 59.407( b)( 3)

The excess VOC content of each coating 59.407( b)( 4)

The total volume manufactured or imported per period for each coating 59.407( b)( 5)

The annual fee for each coating 59.407( b)( 6)

The total annual fee for all coatings 59.407( b)( 7)

For each manufacturer or importer using the optional tonnage exemption: Requirement Regulation Reference A 3

A list of all coatings and the associated coating categories in Table 1 of the regulation for which the tonnage exemption is claimed 59.407( c)( 1)

The VOC content of each coating for which the exemption is claimed 59.407( c)( 2)

The annual sales for each coating for which the exemption is claimed 59.407( c)( 3)

The megagrams of VOC contained in each coating for which the exemption is claimed, and for all coatings combined for which the exemption is claimed, for the time period the exemption is claimed 59.407( c)( 4)

REPORTS Initial report for all manufacturers and importers:

Name and mailing address of the manufacturer or importer 59.408( b)( 1)

The street address of each one of the manufacturer's or importer's facilities in the U. S. producing, packaging, or repackaging any architectural coating subject to this subpart. 59.408( b)( 2)

List of categories of coatings in Table 1 of the regulation for which the manufacturer's or importer's coatings meet the definition 59.408( b)( 3)

Explanation of date code, if applicable 59.408( b)( 4)

Annual report for coatings for which the optional recycled coating credit is applied:

Minimum post consumer content of coatings 59.408( c)( 1)

Volume of post consumer coating received for recycling 59.408( c)( 2)

Volume of post consumer coating received that was unusable 59.408( c)( 3)

Volume of virgin materials used 59.408( c)( 4)

Volume of recycled coating manufactured or imported 59.408( c)( 5) Requirement Regulation Reference A 4 Annual report for manufacturers and importers using the optional exceedance fee:

Name and address 59.408( d)( 1)

A list of all coatings and the associated coating categories for which the exceedance fee is being used 59.408( d)( 2)

VOC content of each coating that exceeds the applicable VOC content limit in Table 1 of the regulation 59.408( d)( 3)

Excess VOC content of each coating product for which a fee is paid 59.408( d)( 4)

Total annual volume of all coatings for which a fee is paid 59.408( d)( 5)

The annual fee for each coating 59.408( d)( 6)

The total annual fee for all coatings 59.408( d)( 7)

Annual report for manufacturers and importers using the optional tonnage exemption:

A list of all coatings and the associated coating categories in Table 1 of the regulation for which the tonnage exemption was claimed 59.408( e)( 1)

The VOC content of each coating for which the exemption was claimed 59.408( e)( 2)

The actual sales for each coating for which the exemption was claimed 59.408( e)( 3)

The total megagrams of VOC contained in all the coatings for which the exemption was claimed 59.408( e)( 4)


[Federal Register: March 11, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 46)]
[Notices]
[Page 10563-10564]
[DOCID:fr11mr09-51]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

March 4, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
    Docket Numbers: RP06-540-007.
    Applicants: High Island Offshore System, L.L.C.
    Description: Second annual report of non-routine expenditures
pursuant to its O&M Agreement for calendar year 2008 of High Island
Offshore System, L.L.C.
    Filed Date: 03/02/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090302-5186.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 16, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-400-000.
    Applicants: Cheniere Creole Trail Pipeline, L.P.
    Description: Cheniere Creole Trail Pipeline, LP submits FERC Gas
Tariff, Original Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 02/27/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090302-0425.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-401-000.
    Applicants: Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Co.
    Description: Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Co. submits its
Annual Fuel and Electric Power Reimbursement Adjustment.
    Filed Date: 02/27/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090302-0424.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-402-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company.
     Description: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co, LLC submits First
Revised Sheet No. 28 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume
No. 1.
    Filed Date: 02/27/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090302-0426.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-403-000.
    Applicants: Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC submits
Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 7 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised
Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 02/27/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090302-0423.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-404-000.
    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P., Description: Equitrans, LP submits
Twenty Third Revised Sheet No. 5 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Original
Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 02/27/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090302-0422.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-405-000.
    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC submits Second Revised
Sheet No. 36 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 02/27/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090302-0421.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-407-000.
    Applicants: KO Transmission Company.
    Description: KO Transmission Co submits Twenty-fifth Revised Sheet
No. 10 to FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 02/27/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090302-0416.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-408-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP,
    Description: Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP submits Twelfth Revised
Sheet No. 11 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 02/27/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090302-0417.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-411-000.
    Applicants: Energy West Development, Inc.
    Description: Energy West Development, Inc submits a report relating
to its L&U Percentage, Inc for the period commencing 4/1/09.
    Filed Date: 02/27/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090302-0420.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-423-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gulf Transmission Company.
    Description: Columbia Gulf Transmission Company submits Forty
Eighth Revised Sheet No. 18 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised
Volume No 1.
    Filed Date: 02/27/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090303-0199.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-424-000.
    Applicants: National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation.
    Description: National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation submits One
hundred Twenty Fifth Revised Sheet No. 9 to its FERC Gas Tariff fourth
Revised Volume No 1.
    Filed Date: 02/27/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090303-0198.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-425-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Transmission, Inc.
    Description: Dominion Transmission, Inc submits First Revised Sheet
No. 41 to FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No 1.
    Filed Date: 02/27/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090303-0197.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-426-000.
    Applicants: Egan Hub Storage, LLC.
    Description: Egan Hub Storage, LLC submits Second Revised Sheet No
17 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No 1.
    Filed Date: 03/02/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090303-0200.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 16, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-428-000.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: ANR Pipeline Company submits First Revised Sheet 10A
et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume 1, to be effective 4/
1/09.
    Filed Date: 02/27/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090303-0252.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-430-000.
    Applicants: Empire Pipeline, Inc.
    Description: Annual Report of Empire Pipeline, Inc. pursuant to
Section 23.5 of its FERC Gas Tariff re: Compressor Fuel Factors and
Other Gas for Transporter's use.
    Filed Date: 03/02/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090302-5202.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 16, 2009.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a

compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket.
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants
parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or
protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In
reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or
protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served
on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-5147 Filed 3-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 7, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 234)]
[Notices]
[Page 72814-72815]
[DOCID:fr07de05-63]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL06-20-000]

Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Upper Peninsula Power
Company, WPS Energy Services, Inc., WPS Power Development, L.L.C.
Complainants v. Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Respondents; Notice of Complaint

November 29, 2005.
    Take notice that on November 23, 2005, Wisconsin Public Service
Corporation, Upper Peninsula Power Company, WPS Energy Services, Inc.
and WPS Power Development, L.L.C. (collectively, WPS Companies) filed a
formal complaint against the Midwest Independent Transmission System
Operator, Inc. and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (RTOs) pursuant to
section 206 of the Federal Power Act and 18 CFR 385.206, alleging that
the RTOs' October 31, 2005, compliance filing in Docket Nos. ER04-375-
017 and 018 fails to satisfy the Commission's directives to form a
comprehensive Joint and Common Market.
    The WPS Companies certify that copies of the complaint were served
on the contacts for the Midwest Independent Transmission System
Operator, Inc. and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all parties to this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on December 19, 2005.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-6951 Filed 12-6-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: June 29, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 125)]
[Notices]
[Page 35703]
[DOCID:fr29jn07-50]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER07-761-000 and ER07-761-001]

Fulcrum Energy Limited; Notice of Issuance of Order

June 22, 2007.
    Fulcrum Energy Limited (Fulcrum) filed an application for market-
based rate authority, with an accompanying tariff. The proposed market-
based rate tariff provides for the sale of energy, and capacity at
market-based rates. Fulcrum also requested waivers of various
Commission regulations. In particular, Fulcrum requested that the
Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by Fulcrum.
    On June 19, 2007, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director,
Division of Tariffs and Market Development--West, granted the requests
for blanket approval under Part 34 (Director's Order). The Director's
Order also stated that the Commission would publish a separate notice
in the Federal Register establishing a period of time for the filing of
protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard concerning the
blanket approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of
liability by Fulcrum should file a protest with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests is
July 19, 2007.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition to such blanket
approvals by the deadline above, Fulcrum is authorized to issue
securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a guarantor,
indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another
person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some lawful
object within the corporate purposes of Fulcrum, compatible with the
public interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for such
purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approvals of Fulcrums' issuance of securities or assumptions
of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-12616 Filed 6-28-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 12, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42870-42871]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19235]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

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

Extension:
    Rule 15c1-6, SEC File No. 270-423, OMB Control No. 3235-0472

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collection of information provided for in Rule 15c1-6 (17 CFR 240.15c1-
6) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.)
(``Exchange Act''). The Commission plans to submit this existing
collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget
(``OMB'') for extension and approval.
    Rule 15c1-6 states that any broker-dealer trying to sell to or buy
from a customer a security in a primary or secondary distribution in
which the broker-dealer is participating or is otherwise financially
interested must give the customer written notification of the broker-
dealer's participation or interest at or before completion of the
transaction. The Commission estimates that 394 respondents collect
information annually under Rule 15c1-6 and that each respondent would
spend approximately 10 hours annually complying with the collection of
information requirement (approximately 3,940 hours in aggregate).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the

collection of information on respondents, including 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.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    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_ADDRESS>
    Dated: September 6, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-19235 Filed 9-11-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 130 (Tuesday, July 7, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40713-40715]
[FR Doc No: 2020-14487]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-89188; File No. SR-FINRA-2020-019]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Temporarily Extend the Time To Complete Office
Inspections Under FINRA Rule 3110 (Supervision)

June 30, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 19, 2020, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA. FINRA has designated
the proposed rule change as constituting a ``non-controversial'' rule
change under paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 under the Act,\3\ which
renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this filing by the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA is proposing to adopt temporary Supplementary Material .16
(Temporary Extension of Time to Complete Office Inspections) under
FINRA Rule 3110 (Supervision) that, in light of the operational
challenges member firms are facing due to the outbreak of the
coronavirus disease (COVID-19), would extend the time by which member
firms must complete their calendar year 2020 inspection obligations
under Rule 3110(c) (Internal Inspections) to March 31, 2021.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The proposed rule change will automatically sunset on March
31, 2021. If FINRA seeks to provide additional temporary relief from
the rule requirement identified in this proposal beyond March 31,
2021, FINRA will submit a separate rule filing to further extend the
temporary extension of time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new
language is in italics; proposed deletions are in brackets.
* * * * *

3000. SUPERVISION AND RESPONSIBILITIES RELATING TO ASSOCIATED PERSONS

* * * * *

3100. Supervisory Responsibilities

* * * * *

3110. Supervision

* * * * *

(a) through (f) No Change.

   Supplementary Material:------

    .01 through .15 No Change.
    .16 Temporary Extension of Time to Complete Office Inspections.
Each member obligated to complete an inspection of an office of
supervisory jurisdiction, branch office or non-branch location in
calendar year 2020 pursuant to, as applicable, paragraphs (c)(1)(A),
(B) and (C) under Rule 3110, shall be deemed to have satisfied such
obligation if the applicable inspection is completed on or before March
31, 2021.
* * * * *

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

    In its filing with the Commission, FINRA included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. FINRA has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A,
B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    FINRA is closely monitoring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on
member firms, investors, and other stakeholders. FINRA recognizes that
firms are experiencing operational challenges with much of their
personnel working from home due to shelter-in-place orders,
restrictions on businesses and social activity imposed in various
states, and adhering to other social distancing guidelines consistent
with the recommendations of public health officials.\5\ FINRA believes
that these ongoing extenuating circumstances warrant sensible and
tailored accommodations for member firms to meet their inspection
obligations under Rule 3110(c) for calendar year 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, e.g., Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, How
to Protect Yourself & Others, https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/prevention.html (last visited June 17,
2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 3110(c) requires on-site inspections of offices of supervisory
jurisdiction (``OSJs'') and supervisory branch offices at least
annually (on a calendar-year basis), non-supervisory branch offices at
least every three years, and non-branch locations on a regular periodic
schedule, presumed to be every three years.\6\ As a result of the
compelling health and welfare concerns stemming from the COVID-19
pandemic, firms are facing potentially significant disruptions to their
normal business operations that may include staff absenteeism, the
increased use of remote offices or telework arrangements, travel or
transportation limitations, and technology interruptions or slowdowns.
These circumstances make it impracticable for firms in most cases to
reach and conduct an on-site inspection of office locations. To provide
firms an opportunity to better manage these operational challenges and
the resources attendant to fulfilling these supervisory obligations
during these pressing times, FINRA is proposing to adopt Rule 3110.16
that would extend the time by which inspections must be completed in
accordance with Rule 3110(c) for calendar year 2020 to March 31,
2021.\7\ FINRA emphasizes that this extension of time does not relieve
firms from the

on-site inspection requirement of branch offices and non-branch
locations currently prescribed by the rule. FINRA also notes that this
proposed extension of time would create further efficiencies for firms
by aligning with the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board's (``MSRB'')
temporary extension for meeting the inspection requirements of offices
set forth under MSRB Rule G-27 (Supervision) to March 31, 2021.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Rule 3110(c)(1)(A), (B), and (C). See also Rule 3110.13
(General Presumption of Three-Year Limit for Periodic Inspection
Schedules).
    \7\ See supra note 4.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88694 (April 20,
2020), 85 FR 23088 (April 24, 2020) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of File No SR-MSRB-2020-01). See also MSRB Notice
2020-09 (MSRB Amends Certain Rules to Provide Regulatory Relief
During COVID-19 Pandemic) (April 9, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes that this proposed extension of time is tailored to
address the needs and constraints on a firm's operations during the
COVID-19 pandemic, without significantly compromising critical investor
protection. FINRA believes that potential risks that may arise from
providing firms additional time to comply with their inspection
obligations due in calendar year 2020 are mitigated by firms' ongoing
supervisory obligations, off-site monitoring, and the temporary nature
of the extension. FINRA will continue to monitor the situation and
engage with member firms, other financial regulators, and governmental
authorities to determine whether additional regulatory relief or
guidance related to this rule may be appropriate. In particular, FINRA
will consider whether additional relief may be warranted to address any
backlog of 2020 inspections that may continue to exist in light of
ongoing public health and safety concerns.
    FINRA has filed the proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness and has requested that the SEC waive the requirement that
the proposed rule change not become operative for 30 days after the
date of the filing, so FINRA can implement the proposed rule change
immediately.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\9\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. The proposed rule change is intended to provide firms
additional time to comply with their Rule 3110(c) inspection
obligations due in calendar year 2020 to March 31, 2021, and does not
relieve firms from completing those obligations or from maintaining,
under the circumstances, a reasonably designed system to supervise the
activities of their associated persons to achieve compliance with
applicable securities laws and regulations, and with applicable FINRA
rules that directly serve investor protection. In a time when faced
with unique challenges resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, FINRA
believes that the proposed rule change is a sensible accommodation that
will afford firms the ability to observe the recommendations of public
health officials to provide for the health and safety of its personnel,
while continuing to serve and promote the protection of investors and
the public interest in this unique environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
intended solely to provide temporary relief given the impacts of the
COVID-19 pandemic crisis.\10\ As a result of the temporary nature of
the proposed relief, an abbreviated economic impact assessment is
appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See also FINRA Regulatory Notice 20-08.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Economic Impact Assessment
A. Regulatory Objective
    FINRA is proposing Rule 3110.16 to address an issue that has arisen
due to the impacts of the coronavirus outbreak and restrictions related
to health and safety concerns. In addition to social distancing
requirements that have been implemented across the United States to
benefit the health and welfare of the populace, firms are facing
potentially significant business disruptions that may include staff
absenteeism, increased use of remote offices or telework arrangements,
travel or transportation limitations, and technology interruptions or
slowdowns. These limitations pose significant challenges for firms to
satisfy the on-site inspection component of Rule 3110(c), which
requires travel to visit offices and non-branch locations. In
recognition of these circumstances, the proposed rule change would
provide temporary relief by extending the date by which firms must
complete their 2020 inspections.
B. Economic Baseline
    The Economic Baseline of the proposed temporary relief is the
obligation under Rule 3110(c), as described above, and the current
number and types of FINRA member locations that require inspections.
C. Economic Impact
    Proposed Rule 3110.16 is intended solely to provide an
accommodation from the timing requirements set forth under Rule 3110(c)
(as applicable to year 2020) due to the current pandemic-related
limitations in place across the United States to benefit the health and
welfare of the populace. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change
will not impose any new costs on member firms. Moreover, the proposed
rule change would align with similar temporary relief provided by the
MSRB (as discussed above), and such coordination among regulators will
provide for greater clarity and the efficient use of resources by firms
during this public health crisis.
    FINRA notes that even in the current environment, member firms have
an ongoing obligation to supervise the activities of their associated
persons at their branch offices and non-branch locations in a manner
reasonably designed to achieve compliance with applicable securities
laws and regulations, and with applicable FINRA rules. Any risks that
may arise from providing firms additional time to comply with their
Rule 3110(c) inspection obligations due in calendar year 2020 are
mitigated by firms' ongoing supervisory obligations, off-site
monitoring, and the temporary nature of the extension. As noted above,
the proposed rule change would be limited in time, and in place to
March 31, 2021, or until the conclusion of any extension thereof.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section

19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \12\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing. However,
pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), the Commission may designate a
shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. FINRA has asked the Commission to
waive the 30-day operative delay so that this proposed rule change may
become operative immediately upon filing. FINRA has stated that the
requested relief in this proposed rule change is in response to the
potentially significant disruptions to normal business operations that
may include staff absenteeism, the increased use of remote offices or
telework arrangements, travel or transportation limitations, and
technology interruptions or slowdowns. FINRA notes also that such
circumstances make it impracticable for firms in most cases to reach
and conduct an on-site inspection of office locations. FINRA states
that the temporary relief provided for in the proposed rule change will
provide firms an opportunity to better manage these operational
challenges and the resources attendant to fulfilling these supervisory
obligations. We note that this proposal provides only temporary relief
from the time required to complete office inspections; as proposed,
these changes would be in place through March 31, 2021. FINRA also
stated that the amended rule will revert back to its original state at
the conclusion of the temporary relief period and, if applicable, any
extension thereof. For these reasons, the Commission believes that
waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission
hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposal
operative upon filing.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule change's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2020-019 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2020-019. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3
p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and
copying at the principal office of FINRA. All comments received will be
posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that
we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2020-019 and
should be submitted on or before July 28, 2020.

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

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-14487 Filed 7-6-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: August 14, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 156)]
[Notices]
[Page 46534]
[DOCID:fr14au06-116]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54283; File No. SR-PCX-2005-97]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific Exchange, Inc. (n/k/a NYSE
Arca, Inc.), Order Approving Proposed Rule Change and Amendment Nos. 1
and 2 Thereto Requiring ETP Holders To Participate in the Federal Trade
Commission's National Do-Not-Call Registry

 August 8, 2006.
    On August 15, 2005, Pacific Exchange, Inc. (n/k/a NYSE Arca, Inc.)
(``NYSE Arca'') \1\ filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ a
proposed amendment to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 9.20. On May 26, 2006,
NYSE Arca filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\4\ On June
21, 2006, NYSE Arca filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule
change.\5\ The proposed rule change, as amended, was published for
comment in the Federal Register on July 10, 2006.\6\ The Commission
received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed
rule change, as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On March 6, 2006, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. filed a rule
proposal, effective upon filing, to amend its rules to reflect these
name changes: from Pacific Exchange, Inc. to NYSE Arca, Inc.; from
PCX Equities, Inc. to NYSE Arca Equities, Inc.; from PCX Holdings,
Inc., to NYSE Arca Holdings, Inc.; and from the Archipelago
Exchange, L.L.C. to NYSE Arca, L.L.C. See File No. SR-PCX-2006-24
(March 6, 2006).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ In Amendment No. 1, NYSE Arca partially amended the text of
proposed amended NYSE Arca Equities Rule 9.20 and made conforming
and technical changes to the original filing.
    \5\ In Amendment No. 2, NYSE Arca made additional changes to the
text of proposed amended NYSE Arca Equities Rule 9.20 and to the
original filing.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54079 (June 30,
2006), 71 FR 38957 (July 10, 2006) (this notice listed an incorrect
filing date for the initial proposal).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed amendment to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 9.20 would
replace the current text of Rule 9.20(b) with text that would require
ETP Holders to participate in the national do-not-call registry
maintained by the Federal Trade Commission (``FTC'') and to follow
applicable regulations of the Federal Communications Commission
(``FCC''). The proposed amendment would make Rule 9.20(b) consistent
with NYSE Rule 404A and requirements of FCC regulations applicable to
broker-dealers engaged in telemarketing by including provisions
concerning general telemarketing requirements, procedures, wireless
communications, outsourcing telemarketing, pre-recorded messages,
telephone facsimile or computer advertisements and caller
identification. The amended rule would generally prohibit ETP Holders
and their associated persons from making telemarketing calls to people
who have registered with the national do-not-call registry. The amended
rule also would set forth firm-specific do-not-call restrictions, time-
of-day restrictions, and disclosure requirements similar to those
contained in the current rule.
    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is
consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\7\
In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ which requires, among
other things, that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and national market system, and
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The
Commission believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is
designed to accomplish these ends by requiring ETP Holders and their
associated persons to observe time-of-day restrictions on telephone
solicitations, maintain firm-specific do-not-call lists, and refrain
from initiating telephone solicitations to investors and other members
of the public who have registered their telephone numbers on the
national do-not-call registry. The Commission also believes that the
proposed rule change, as amended, establishes adequate procedures to
prevent ETP Holders and their associated persons from making telephone
solicitations to do-not-call registrants, which should have the effect
of protecting investors by enabling persons who do not want to receive
telephone solicitations from members or member organizations to receive
the protections of the national do-not-call registry, while providing
appropriate exceptions to the rule's restrictions, which should promote
just and equitable principles of trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered whether the proposed rule change will promote efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\9\ that the proposed rule change (SR-PCX-2005-97), as amended, be
and is hereby approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-13241 Filed 8-11-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P