[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 82112-82115]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32730]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-63588; File No. SR-NSCC-2010-11]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change to
Enhance the Reconfirmation and Pricing Service, Including the Creation
of the Obligation Warehouse

December 21, 2010.

I. Introduction

    On October 10, 2010, the National Securities Clearing Corporation
(``NSCC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') proposed rule change SR-NSCC-2010-11 pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'').\1\
Notice of the proposal was published in the Federal Register on October
25, 2010.\2\ The Commission received no comment letters. For the
reasons discussed below, the Commission is granting approval of the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63126 (October 18,
2010), 75 FR 65546 (October 25, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    Reconfirmation and Pricing Service (``RECAPS'') is NSCC's automated
fail clearance system for eligible securities. Through RECAPS, members
are provided with an opportunity on a quarterly basis to reconfirm and
reprice compared transactions which remain unsettled (i.e., fail
transactions). As approved, the rule change modifies RECAPS to run on a
more frequent basis, enhances RECAPS, and renames the RECAPS process
the Obligation Warehouse (``OW'' or ``OW Service''). As more fully
described below, the new enhanced service will provide: (1) Comparison
of transactions that are not otherwise submitted by the applicable
marketplaces or members themselves for trade comparison or recording
through other NSCC trade capture services; (2) tracking, storage, and
maintenance of unsettled obligations either compared through the
service or forwarded to it from other NSCC services in accordance with
NSCC rules including trades involving securities exited from NSCC's
Continuous Net Settlement (``CNS'') system, non-CNS Automated Customer
Account Transfer Service (``ACATS'') items,\3\ NSCC Balance Order
transactions, and Special Trades (collectively ``OW Obligations''); \4\
and (3) repricing and netting of fail obligations. The tracking,
storage, and maintenance functionality of the OW will provide
transparency, will make information available to its users, will serve
as a central depository of open (i.e., failed or unsettled) broker-to-
broker obligations, and will allow users to manage and to resolve
exceptions (e.g., ``don't know'' or ``DK'' obligations) in an efficient
and timely manner. The OW will also simultaneously provide on-going
maintenance and servicing of open OW Obligations such as adjustments
for corporate actions and regular scans for CNS eligibility.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Only non-CNS eligible ACATS items and CNS-eligible ACATS
items that have been designated as ex-CNS shall be forwarded to the
OW. Non-CNS ACATS items for mutual funds, limited partnerships, and
safekeeping items, however, will not be eligible for OW.
    \4\ Balance Orders will be forwarded to the OW after netting and
allotting has occurred in accordance with NSCC's Procedures.
    \5\ These functionalities will be made available at a date no
less than ten business days following announcement of implementation
by Important Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently RECAPS allows members \6\ to periodically reconfirm open,
aged fails (i.e., fails that are five or more days old), reprice such
fails to the current market value, and when possible, net the
reconfirmed and repriced fails. As part of the RECAPS process, those
CNS-eligible recompared fails are forwarded to CNS for processing and
settlement. Transactions in non-CNS eligible issues are repriced,
netted, and allotted, when applicable, and Balance Orders generated for
them or they are designated to settle trade-for-trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ All NSCC members that are also members of the Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'') are required to
participate in the RECAPS service, however, the service is available
to all NSCC members. See FINRA Rule 11190(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    RECAPS provides reject and DK capabilities for received advisories.
Advisories that are either ``unresponded to'' or ``DK'd'' are subject
to close-out action under the rules of the appropriate marketplace.
RECAPS requires members to respond through batch overnight submissions
to all open fails submitted by a contraparty. RECAPS provides for a
one-day settlement capability for all compared fails.

Obligation Warehouse

    Many of the transactions submitted to RECAPS by members are subject
to noncentralized, manual processes for purposes of comparison of fail
details and fail confirmation. Under this rule change, NSCC will
enhance and rename the RECAPS service as the OW to which members may
submit and may subsequently maintain and manage their unsettled
transactions. As part of these enhancements, NSCC will provide a trade
matching and confirmation process pursuant to which members may submit
to NSCC information on certain obligations that are not otherwise
submitted to NSCC by the applicable marketplaces or by the members
themselves through NSCC's other trade comparison or recording
services.\7\ Comparison of transactions submitted through the OW will
occur in real-time. Obligations will be tracked and maintained within
the OW and will be made available for RECAPS processing (as described
below) until settled or otherwise cancelled. In addition, transactions
exited from CNS, non-CNS-eligible ACATS items, Balance Orders, and
Special Trades will also be forwarded to the OW for storage and
maintenance and RECAPS processing.\8\ Compared items stored in the OW
(whether compared by the OW or forwarded to it from other NSCC services
or systems) will be referred to as ``OW Obligations.'' In order to
further reduce manual processing by members, NSCC may automatically
adjust any OW Obligations for certain mandatory reorganization events,
which will initially be limited to adjustments for forward splits, name
changes, redemptions, mergers (both cash and stock), and full calls
with respect to bonds.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Procedure II (Trade Comparison and Recording Service) sets
forth the procedures for comparison of direct submissions by members
and for trade recording of locked-in transactions. In accordance
with Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (``MSRB'') rules, NSCC
reports transactions in municipal securities compared through its
Real-time Trade Matching (``RTTM'') service to the MSRB on behalf of
members; however, transactions submitted through the OW will not be
reported by NSCC to the MSRB. In order to remain compliant with MSRB
reporting requirements, members will have to continue to make
submissions subject to MSRB rules through RTTM.
    \8\ Such items will be subject to the validation criteria of the
systems or services that forwarded them to the OW; therefore, the
matching or validation criteria (which are set forth in footnote 9
below) will not apply.
    \9\ Adjustments for mandatory reorganization events are expected
to be available shortly after February 4, 2011, or a date no less
than 10 business days following announcement of its implementation
by Important Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As approved, the OW Service will now forward to CNS on a daily
basis (or such other time frame as NSCC determines from time to time)
OW Obligations in CNS-eligible securities.\10\ However, the OW will not
be a guaranteed service, and an obligation forwarded to CNS will only
be guaranteed to the extent that the member pays its full settlement
obligation on the date the item is originally scheduled to settle in
CNS.

Transactions eligible for submission will have to have a valid CUSIP or
ISIN and be denominated in U.S. Dollars or such other currencies as
NSCC may designate from time to time. NSCC may determine from time to
time and shall announce by Important Notice which items are eligible
for submission to OW. Initially, government, mortgage-backed, and
foreign securities will all specifically not be eligible. Further, cash
trades will be processed by OW only after settlement failure of these
trades.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ This functionality is anticipated to be rolled out in early
March 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

OW Comparison and Trade Resolution Procedures

    As approved, the rule change will provide that once a party enters
the required transaction information,\11\ the contraparty will receive
an advisory to which it must respond by submitting identical
transaction details to facilitate a compared obligation or by
submitting a DK.\12\ If a member does not act on an advisory submitted
against it by the close of business on the day after submission, NSCC
may impose a fee upon the member. If the deliverer and receiver submit
trade data that matches in all required respects, the trade will be
deemed compared.\13\ NSCC may permit uncompared trade details to be
modified or cancelled by the submitter on the submission date through
the use of the appropriate instruction.\14\ Upon comparison, NSCC may
permit obligations to be cancelled if both receiver and deliverer agree
by submitting a cancel request or if one party accepts the other
party's cancel request. Each OW Obligation will receive an ``OW Control
Number'' to facilitate tracking the obligation through its settlement,
cancellation, or closure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Data required for a valid submission will include security
identification, quantity to which party is deliverer or receiver,
contrabroker, deliverer's final money, settlement date, market
participation identification (MPID) (if applicable), Member's unique
reference number (``x-ref'') whether a transaction should be
excluded from CNS processing, and other identifying details as NSCC
may require or permit.
    \12\ Obligations will be able to be submitted to the OW in real-
time. Required matching criteria will include the data required for
a valid submission (i.e., specific criteria listed in the
immediately preceding footnote except for the x-ref), and other
identifying details as NSCC may require or permit. Any submission of
a DK must include the applicable reason code pertaining to the
Member's disagreement with the transaction.
    \13\ For purposes of deeming a trade compared, NSCC will use an
initial money tolerance of $5 per million. The amount of the money
tolerance may change from time to time pursuant to the filing of a
proposed rule change by NSCC.
    \14\ Modification of transaction details will result in the
cancellation of the existing entry and the opening of a new
submission. Transaction details that have been DK'd by a contraparty
will be deleted from processing in accordance with time frames
specified by NSCC from time to time. Initially, such transaction
details will be deleted on the fifth business day following
submission of the DK by the contraparty.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC will have no responsibility for determining whether any trade
submission is duplicative of an earlier trade submission. All trade
submissions will be treated as separate submissions. NSCC may delete
trade input which is not matched by such time frames as it determines
from time to time.

Maintenance and Tracking

    As a result of the rule change, the OW service will permit members
to track each OW Obligation for the life of the obligation until it has
been (i) settled, (ii) cancelled by the members that are the parties to
the obligation, or (iii) otherwise closed in the OW Service by NSCC
pursuant to NSCC Rules (e.g., when the obligation becomes CNS-eligible
and is sent to CNS for settlement). NSCC may adjust any compared OW
Obligation with respect to certain mandatory reorganization events,
which will initially be limited to forward splits, name changes,
redemptions, mergers (both cash and stock), and full calls with respect
to bonds. In the case of such a mandatory reorganization, at such time
on or after the effective date of the reorganization as NSCC shall
determine and to the extent NSCC has the relevant information, the
affected OW Obligation may be adjusted in accordance with the terms of
the reorganization event. With respect to name changes and forward
splits, OW positions in the subject security will be converted into the
equivalent positions of the new securities, cash, or both and a new
obligation will be created automatically as part of the processing in
the OW. Any cash component associated with a mandatory reorganization
will be included as part of the member's daily money settlement with
NSCC.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ In the event that NSCC ceases to act for a member pursuant
to Rule 18, NSCC will reverse credits and debits relating to such a
cash adjustment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Unless otherwise excluded by a member, all CNS-eligible OW
Obligations that reach the status of settlement date minus one (``SD-
1'') or that have reached or passed their scheduled settlement date,
may be forwarded to CNS by NSCC on a daily basis.\16\ However, the
settlement of any such item forwarded to CNS will be guaranteed only to
the extent that the member pays its full settlement obligation on the
date the item is scheduled to settle in CNS. An item forwarded to CNS
from the OW may be exited from CNS to the extent the member fails to
complete its settlement obligation. If NSCC exits an item, any credits
received by a member arising from the corresponding payment obligation
shall be reversed, and settlement of the item shall be effected between
the receiving and delivering member outside the facilities of NSCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ This functionality is expected to be rolled out by March
2011 or on a date no less than 10 business days following
announcement of its implementation by Important Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OW Obligations for which deliveries are made through The Depository
Trust Company (``DTC'') through either The New York Window (``NYW'') or
electronic book-entry deliver order will be updated to indicate that
they have settled in accordance with proper instructions from DTC or
the member, respectively. In order to give effect to such an update,
members must provide DTC with instructions in accordance with DTC's
procedures and must include the OW Control Number. In the event of a
partial delivery through DTC, NSCC will update the records for the
respective OW Obligation accordingly based on information received
either from DTC or the member's update to their own OW Obligation
records. Other items will be recorded as settled upon the submission of
appropriate instructions by the counterparties. Obligations that have
been reflected in the OW as settled may be reopened (either partially
or fully) as a result of a delivery reclaim message sent by either
party to the obligation to OW. Updates to reflect reclaims of settled
transactions will be made once one party enters details of the original
transaction and the original transaction's OW Control Number.\17\ Once
these details are submitted, an advisory of the reclaim will be sent to
the contraparty that must then submit either identical transaction
details to facilitate the reclaim and reopening of the obligation in OW
or notification that it does not accept the reclaim details entered by
the initiating party. Updates for reclaims may only be submitted to the
OW for a period of two business days following the actual settlement
date of the relevant obligation. If the reclaim message is not accepted
by the contraparty, it will be deleted from the OW, and the parties
will need to generate a new reclaim message in OW. If the original
obligation has been settled for longer than two business days, any
reclaim message will be rejected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Transaction details required will be identical to those
required when comparing an obligation. Supra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to the approved rule change, if NSCC ceases to act for a
member, all open activity relating to that member

will be deleted from the OW. However, the reports relating to such
activity will be maintained in accordance with NSCC's record retention
requirements.

Modified RECAPS Process

    Pursuant to the rule change, the existing RECAPS process will
continue to function but in a modified form.\18\ Upon implementation of
OW, the RECAPS process will be incorporated into OW and will require
one day to complete. It is anticipated that the process will occur more
frequently than the current quarterly schedule.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ It is expected that the first RECAPS process in the OW will
run in late March or early April 2011.
    \19\ Upon implementation of the changes described herein, NSCC
anticipates operating the RECAPS process on a monthly cycle. Members
will be notified of changes in the processing cycle, if any, by an
NSCC Important Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On a day specified by NSCC, each OW Obligation eligible for RECAPS
\20\ will be re-priced, if appropriate,\21\ renetted and allotted, if
appropriate, the settlement date will be updated to the next business
date, and a new OW Obligation will be opened. Securities that are not
CNS-eligible or that are designated as trade-for-trade will not be
netted and allotted. Obligations eligible for RECAPS in the OW can be
excluded from the RECAPS process if so designated by the member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Obligations that are matched and have a settlement date of
at least two days prior to the date on which the RECAPS process
commences will be considered for inclusion in the RECAPS process.
Fail items not already in the OW but eligible for RECAPS processing
must be submitted to OW by the member prior to RECAPS processing.
    \21\ In the event that the current market price for a security
is not available, the obligation will be priced at the amount at
which the obligation was previously matched.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All new obligations arising from the RECAPS process will be tracked
and processed in accordance with the OW procedures described above. If
a fail was open over an interest payment date, the parties to the trade
will be required to settle that interest payment outside of NSCC. Any
net cash adjustments resulting from the RECAPS process will be sent to
NSCC as they are under the current process.

Reporting

    Under the new rule, each member will receive real-time updates
regarding its OW activity. In addition, NSCC will make available to
each member an end-of-day report that reflects all end-of-day positions
of such member in OW, which may be accessed by members through NSCC's
systems. Accordingly, NSCC will discontinue issuance of all RECAPS
reports (e.g., RECAPS Contracts/Supplemental Contracts and RECAPS
Compared Trade Summaries).
    The rule change also creates a new Rule 51 (Obligation Warehouse)
and Procedure IIA (Obligation Warehouse) to reflect the changes and
enhancements as described above. Rule 51 provides: (i) A general
description of the OW service, (ii) a provision relating to the
settlement of OW Obligations and the non-guaranteed nature of the
service, and (iii) a limitation of liability on the part of NSCC with
respect to obligations processed through the OW. Furthermore, the
provisions of Procedure IIA will supersede those set forth in Procedure
II, Section F (RECAPS), and thus Section F will be deleted.
    In addition, NSCC will make conforming changes to:
    a. Rule 1 (Definitions) to add a definition for ``Obligation
Warehouse'' and ``OW Obligation'';
    b. Rule 7 (Comparison and Trade Recording Operation) to remove
language from the rule relating to submission of data to NSCC for
reconfirmation and repricing of trade data with respect to transactions
already compared through the facilities of NSCC or other facilities, as
this service will now occur pursuant to Rule 51 and Procedure XVII;
    c. Rule 11 (CNS System) to provide that obligations arising from
Special Trades will be automatically entered into the OW;
    d. Rule 18 (Procedures for When NSCC Ceases to Act) to reflect that
(i) the OW Obligations that have been forwarded to CNS for settlement
relating to a member for which NSCC has ceased to act will be removed
from the CNS Accounting Operation and that any outstanding OW
Obligations of the member will be removed from the OW service and (ii)
NSCC will reverse any cash adjustments that were forwarded to
settlement relating to the OW activity of a member for which NSCC has
ceased to act;
    e. Rule 50 (Automated Customer Account Transfer Service) to reflect
that non-CNS ACATS items (as well as CNS-eligible items designated to
be delivered ex-CNS) will be automatically entered into the OW;
    f. Procedure V (Balance Order Accounting Operation) to reflect that
Balance Orders will be automatically entered into the OW; and
    g. Procedure VII (CNS Accounting Operation) to reflect (i) the
addition of CNS-eligible OW activity to the CNS Miscellaneous Activity
Report and (ii) securities removed from CNS that result in CNS Receive
or Deliver Instructions will be entered into the Obligation Warehouse
service.

Pilot and Participant Testing

    NSCC implemented a pilot program of the OW process in early
February 2010 for firms that had completed systems changes necessary to
participate in the process. This pilot program ended at the beginning
of June 2010 as additional discussions ensued between NSCC and its
participant members regarding the additional functionalities, which are
described in this filing, sought to be included within the service.
Prior to implementation of OW, a participating member testing period
will take place between November 2010 and January 2011. An industry-
wide test of the OW RECAPS process will be scheduled for some time in
the first quarter of 2011.

Implementation Time Frame

    NSCC will implement the changes set forth in this filing for all
members during the first quarter of 2011 with the first settlement date
expected to be on January 24, 2011. Mandatory reorganization events are
anticipated to be applied to OW Obligations shortly after February 4,
2011, on a date no less than 10 business days following announcement of
the implementation by Important Notice. Similarly, at the request of
the industry, the functionality providing for OW Obligations to be
reviewed for CNS-eligiblility and if eligible sent to CNS will be
implemented several weeks after the initial launch to give members time
to familiarize themselves with the OW settlement tracking
functionality. Accordingly, after March 4, 2011, or on a date no less
than 10 business days following announcement of its implementation by
Important Notice obligations in the OW will be reviewed for CNS-
eligibility and if eligible will be closed and sent to CNS. The first
RECAPS process in the OW will be run in late March or early April 2011.
NSCC members will be advised of the implementation dates through
issuance of NSCC's Important Notices.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ The dates set forth in this section are the dates NSCC
anticipates taking action. As stated above, NSCC will keep its
members informed of actual implementation and action dates by
Important Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 III. Discussion

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, among other things, that
the rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a national system
for the prompt and accurate clearance and

settlement of securities transactions.\23\ With the rule change
modifying and enhancing the RECAPS to establish the OW service, NSCC
will provide for greater efficiency and transparency with respect to
securities transactions obligations processed through the OW.
Furthermore, the modifications and enhancements will allow NSCC to
improve its service by providing prompt and automated confirmation,
comparison, and tracking of fail transactions.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \24\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered its impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, for the reasons stated above the Commission believes
that the rule change is consistent with NSCC's obligation under Section
17A of the Exchange Act, as amended, and the rules and regulations
thereunder.

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
in particular with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NSCC-2010-11) be and hereby
is approved.

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-32730 Filed 12-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


            Supporting Statement
for
Information Collection Request

     On-Highway Motorcycle Certification and Compliance Program (Renewal)
                         OMB Control Number 2060-0710
                            EPA ICR Number 2535.02

                              Compliance Division
                   Office of Transportation and Air Quality
                          Office of Air and Radiation
                     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

                      Part A of the Supporting Statement

Section 1: Identification of the Information Collection
1(a) Title and Number of the Information Collection
On-Highway Motorcycle (HMC) Certification and Compliance Program (Renewal); EPA ICR Number: 2535.02; OMB Control Number: 2060-0710.

1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract

Under the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7521 et seq.) manufacturers and importers of on-highway motorcycles must have a certificate of conformity issued by the EPA covering any vehicle they intend to offer for sale in the United States. A certificate of conformity represents to the prospective purchaser that the respective vehicle conforms to all applicable emissions requirements. In issuing a certificate of conformity, the EPA reviews vehicle information and emissions test data to determine if the required testing has been performed by the certificate applicant and the required emissions levels have been demonstrated. After a certificate of conformity has been issued, the Agency may request additional information to verify that the product continues to meet its certified emissions standards throughout its useful life.

The burden under this HMC ICR covers the application for a certificate of conformity (and supporting test results) submitted by HMC certification applicants prior to introduction into US commerce as well as various reports and information during and after production; but includes the defect information report (DR) and voluntary emissions recall report (VERR) that may not be applicable to manufacturers unless certain conditions are met. The EPA's processing of this information is conducted by the Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air and Radiation, US EPA. Since the last ICR was submitted, there have been no changes to the on-highway motorcycle program.  However, the EPA has developed several templates that manufacturers may use to meet their reporting obligations.

Information collected for the purposes listed above consists of descriptions of on-highway motorcycles (with emphasis on emission control systems), test results, defect and recall reports (if any), and sales information. These data are reviewed to verify that the necessary tests have been performed and the manufacturer's product line complies with emission standards throughout its useful life.

Section 2: Need for and Use of the Collection

2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

Under Title II of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7521 et seq.), the EPA is charged with issuing certificates of conformity for motor vehicle designs that comply with applicable emission standards set under section 202(a)(1) of the Act, such as those for Carbon Monoxide (CO), Hydrocarbons (HC) and Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx). (This authority was clarified in the Supreme Court's decision State of Massachusetts v. EPA, 127 S. Ct. 1438 (2007)). Section 202(a)(1) states that "the Administrator shall by regulation prescribe (and from time to time revise) [...] standards applicable to the emission of any air pollutant from any class or classes of new motor vehicles [...], which in his judgment cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare." Under Section 206(a) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7525) "... The Administrator shall test ... any new motor vehicle ... submitted by a manufacturer ... If such vehicle ... conforms ... the Administrator shall issue a certificate of conformity."  While the EPA has delegated a substantial portion of the process of calculating and reporting emissions and fuel economy results to the manufacturers, the test results upon which labels are based are subject to EPA confirmatory testing. Such confirmation testing makes sure that results from different manufacturers can be accurately used for comparison.

Relevant portions of the above statutes can be found online at https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/title-ii-emission-standards-moving-sources. The regulations dealing with on-highway motorcycle emission control can be found in 40 CFR Parts 85 and 86. These regulations are not attached to this statement due to their length and technical nature but may also be found on-line at www.ecfr.gov.

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The Clean Air Act directs the EPA to promulgate regulations for the control of exhaust and
crankcase emissions from new motorcycles. Under 40 CFR Part 85 and 86, the EPA has promulgated regulations to provide for the certification that new highway motorcycles meet emissions standards for certain exhaust emissions and continue to comply with those emissions standards throughout the useful life of the vehicle. The EPA gathers the following data to assess the compliance of vehicles at the time of certification and establishes certain reporting and recordkeeping requirements to monitor compliance from those certified vehicles.

Highway Motorcycles Certification and Compliance

The EPA requires manufacturers to provide various pieces of information in their certification applications that detail the manufacture and emissions control devices on the motorcycle. These requirements, such as adjustable parameters for engine control and operation, aftertreatment devices, engine air aspiration, auxiliary emissions control devices, etc; and emissions test data verifying these emissions control devices will meet the emissions standards under the motorcycle regulations. We may verify by inspection and subsequent testing whether the appropriate test cycle was performed and whether the engine complies under the regulations. In addition, manufacturers must report the actual sales of every vehicle and, if requested, provide a production vehicle so the EPA may verify that the vehicles covered by the certificate of conformity perform as certified.

Defect Reports and Voluntary Emissions Recall Reports

EPA's authority to require manufacturers that have been issued certificates of conformity to report on compliance issues with in-use products is derived from EPA's Clean Air Act § 208 authority. The EPA relies on manufacturers' existing feedback on the in-use performance of their products from a number of sources, most notably from their warranty claims systems. The purpose is to allow the EPA to assess whether a manufacturer is meeting its obligations under the Act including determinations of noncompliance. The defect provisions under 40 CFR Part 85, subpart T require manufacturers to report a "defect" exceeding a certain number of vehicles to the EPA and provide a remedy. Manufacturers may seek to cure the "defect" using the Voluntary Emissions Recall provisions under 40 CFR Part85, subpart S, using the reporting requirements under that regulation. Both the defect reporting requirement and the voluntary emissions recall reporting requirement allow the EPA to receive information on how manufacturers continue to comply with the emissions of their products not just at the time of certification, but throughout the useful life of the product.
 Investigation into Possible Noncompliance of HMCs
The HMC emissions compliance program includes pre-production, production, and in-use components. HMCs are evaluated as prototypes prior to production, and those designs that meet applicable criteria are certified for introduction into commerce. The EPA also has discretion to conduct production vehicle testing. While, this has become an important compliance tool for the EPA, no significant burden is assigned to this activity in this ICR due to the very limited nature in which this tool is used. Finally, in addition to the manufacturer voluntary recall program, the EPA will follow up on information shared with the Agency by other administrative and state agencies, such as California's Air Resources Board and Environment and Climate Control Canada, to investigate vehicle compliance.
EV-CIS
Electronic submission by manufactures to the EPA's Engine and Vehicle Compliance Information System known as EV-CIS began to be implemented for on-highway motorcycles in 2015; previously manufacturers entered information in EPA's Verify system. All reporting covered by this ICR may be entered and submitted electronically via the EPA's web-based Engines and Vehicles Compliance Information System, EV-CIS. The EV-CIS system features a web interface for the submission of manufacturer certification information. Subject to confidentiality claims, this information is made available to interested parties upon request. Emission test information and some recall notifications are available on the Internet.

Averaging Program for HC+NOx

To provide flexibility in meeting the on-highway motorcycle emissions standards, we adopted an emission credit program that provided an early incentive for HMC manufacturers to bank credits for use in future model years while retaining the ability to average emissions across engine families. Under the averaging program, manufacturers can balance the certified emissions of their motorcycles so that the sales-weighted emissions level meets the applicable standard. This means that some engine families may have emissions below the standards while others have emissions higher than the standards. For enforcement purposes, manufacturers are required to specify a certification limit, or ``Family Emission Limit'' (FEL), for each engine family. The FEL is the emission level that a particular engine family is certified as meeting and, in effect, becomes the standard for the individual family. The FEL may be above or below the applicable standard if the manufacturer's sales-weighted emissions average meets the applicable standard. Manufacturers participating in the averaging program (promulgated under 40 CFR 86.449), must certify each participating family to a FEL in its application for certification. In its application, participants must also project an average emission level for all families participating in the program. At the end of the model year, each participant must submit an end-of-year report accounting for the actual production volume, calculated to final average to demonstrate compliance with the standard. This report must be received by the EPA within 120 days of the end of the model year. This reporting requirement is a necessary component of the averaging program.

Section 3: Non-duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

3(a) Non-duplication

Almost all information requested from respondents under this ICR is required by statute and, in most cases, is not available from other sources. Due to the specialized nature of HMC manufacturing and the fact that product plans and emission performance information may be submitted to the EPA prior to the introduction of production vehicles into US commerce, this information is not available from any source other than the manufacturer. Therefore, this information is not likely to be collected by any other governmental agency for this or related purposes.

3(b) Public Notice

EPA issued a Federal Register Notice on November 4, 2019 (84 FR 59375).  No relevant comments were received.

3(c) Consultations

In preparing this ICR submission, the EPA has consulted with the following individuals working in the regulated industries:

Name
Firm
Telephone
Scott Bollinger
Harley-Davidson Motor Company
<PHONE_NUMBER>
Larry Keller
Polaris Industries Inc.
(651) 408-7253
Margaret Goldstein
Harrison Wolf
(714) 841-6400

The EPA has had informal conversations with Harrison Wolf concerning labor hour determination for the respondents to this ICR. Harrison Wolf serves as a certification consultant to multiple manufacturers, covering diverse products, both physical and technological. On September 16-19, 2019, EPA conducted a Compliance Workshop for manufacturers certifying small engines, including highway motorcycle manufacturers. The workshop provided opportunities for the regulated industries to receive information from the EPA regarding certification, reporting and recordkeeping obligations and to interact with the Agency concerning EPA's emissions programs. The EPA Compliance Division received positive feedback concerning the workshop and were provided perspectives from industry practitioners regarding benefits and challenges to EPA's certification programs. No additional comments were made concerning this ICR renewal at that time.

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

As required by the Clean Air Act (42 USC 7525(a)), manufacturers must submit emission information to the EPA on an annual basis coinciding with the manufacturer's "model year." The EPA allows applicants to define their own "model year", within limits under the statute and regulations, thus granting some flexibility in this regard. Major product changes typically occur at the start of a model year. For these reasons, a collection frequency longer than a model year is not possible. However, when a vehicle design is unchanged for subsequent model years the regulations allow manufacturers to certify using the data generated from the preceding year's certification. The use of previous data is often referred to as "carry over" of data to a subsequent model year, and as a result the amount of new information required for certification is substantially reduced.

3(e) General Guidelines

Manufacturers are required to keep some records for periods longer than three years. This requirement stems from the statutory requirement that manufacturers warrant some items for periods longer than three years. Manufacturers must also recall vehicle classes failing to meet emission standards during their useful life -- typically five to eight years depending on vehicle type. In order to satisfy these obligations, manufacturers must retain product information, with particular emphasis on the emission control systems. This information is vital in assuring that repairs and replacement parts properly function during the life of the warranty and that emissions limitations are met during the full useful life. The EPA believes that this recordkeeping requirement does not impose an unreasonable burden given the warranty and recall obligations. In fact, manufacturers would probably retain this information to support their normal business of supplying replacement parts.

This information collection activity otherwise complies with the remaining guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5.

3(f) Confidentiality

Information submitted by manufacturers is held as confidential until the specific vehicle to which it pertains is available for purchase. After vehicles are available, most information associated with the manufacturer/importer's application is available to the public. Under section 208 of the Clean Air Act (42 USC 7542(c)) all information, other than trade secret processes or methods, must be publicly available unless a class determination made by EPA's Office of General Counsel determines otherwise.  Proprietary information is granted confidentiality in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. Section 552, and EPA regulations at 40 CFR Part 2 Subpart B.

3(g) Sensitive Questions

No sensitive questions are asked in this information collection. This collection complies with the Privacy Act and OMB Circular A-108.

Section 4: Respondents and Information Requested

4(a) Respondents/NAICS Codes

The respondents are involved in industries that manufacture or introduce into commerce highway motorcycles shown in the following table:

Category
NAICS Codes [A]
Examples of Potentially Regulated Entities
Industry
336991
Motorcycle, Bicycle, and Parts Manufacturing
Industry
336310
Motor Vehicle Gasoline Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing
A North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)

4(b) Information Requested

(i) Data items

Manufacturers of on-highway motorcycles are required to submit descriptions of their planned product line, including detailed descriptions of the emission control system, test data, and demonstrations of compliance with other requirements, such as methods for determining deterioration factors for durability and permeation standards for tanks and fuel lines. Manufacturers supply test data to verify that their products will comply with the emission standards. They are also required to notify the EPA of in-use defects experienced by their vehicles and report voluntary recall plans and progress. Other major data items include copies of warranties; and averaging and banking calculations (where required); and production reports after the end of the model year.

(ii) Respondent Activities

All manufacturers must describe their product(s) and supply test data and other information to verify compliance with EPA's regulations and emissions standard. Small Manufacturers may provide less information at the time of certification but must still retain their data if the EPA requests that information at a later date. Additional Information regarding manufacturer reporting and recordkeeping requirements may be found in the IC Reporting Spreadsheet in the Appendix.

 A manufacturer should include in a single application for certification, a description of all vehicles in each class/engine family for which certification is required. A manufacturer may, however, choose to apply separately for certification of part of its product line. The selection of test vehicles and the computation of test results will be determined separately for each certification application.

 The application shall be in writing signed by an authorized representative of the manufacturer, and shall include the following:

 Identification and description of the vehicles covered by the application and a description of their engine, emission control system and fuel system components. This shall include a detailed description of each auxiliary emission control device.
 Transmission gear ratios,
 overall drive ratios and vehicle mass (or range of mass)
 The label and its location shall be specified, §86.413.
 Available optional equipment shall be described.
 The range of available fuel and ignition system adjustments.
 Projected U.S. sales data sufficient to enable the Administrator to select a test fleet representative of the vehicles for which certification is requested. If reduced testing based on low sales volume is requested the method of predicting sales shall be described.
 A description of the test equipment (if applicable) and fuel and engine lubricant proposed to be used.
 A description of the proposed service accumulation procedure and a description of the proposed scheduled maintenance.
 A statement of recommended periodic and anticipated maintenance and procedures necessary to assure that the vehicles covered by a certificate of conformity in operation conform to the regulations, listings of the fuels and lubricants to be recommended to the ultimate purchaser and a description of the program for training of personnel for such maintenance, and the equipment required to perform this maintenance.
 A description of normal assembly line operations and adjustments if such procedures exceed 100 km (62 miles) or three hours of engine operations.
 A description of the evaporative emission controls and applicable test data.
 The name of an agent for service of process located in the United States. Service on this agent constitutes service on you or any of your officers or employees for any action by EPA or otherwise by the United States related to the requirements of this part.
 The EPA may conduct a limited number of "confirmatory tests" to monitor manufacturer test results. This generally requires that emissions test vehicle(s) be shipped by the certifying manufacturer to the EPA's designated testing laboratory.
 Manufacturers must also submit reports concerning defects that exceed a regulatory minimum number of production vehicles and voluntary recalls, if instituted by the manufacturer, conducted; they may also be requested to submit to production vehicle testing that the EPA may elect to conduct.

 Manufacturers must also retain records. These tasks are repeated for each model year, although typically previous data and information can be used when no significant changes have occurred from the previous model year. If, during a model year, a product change is made (an "amendment" to an application or certified configuration), the EPA must be notified. Under some circumstances EPA may require additional test data.

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

 Agency Activities

The EPA is required under the Clean Air Act to collect information and issue certificates of conformity for highway motorcycles that meet emissions requirements at the time of certification and throughout the useful life of a vehicle. To perform EPA's function under the Act and our regulations, the EPA collects certification information from the regulated community to assess whether a vehicle meets the emissions standard. That information would consist of all vehicle engine and emissions designs, auxiliary emissions control devices (AECD's), adjustable parameters, emissions control devices and related aftertreatment technologies, all test data, model year production, averaging calculations, and contact persons. These data elements must be both collected and analyzed by the EPA to assess whether manufacturers and their vehicles are complying and continuing to comply with meeting these emission standards throughout their useful life. help the EPA to determine how a vehicle will meet the emissions standards. Therefore, a significant portion of the EPA's emission compliance activity is spent reviewing applications to verify that the correct vehicle tests have been conducted and necessary information submitted. Amendments to applications must also be selectively reviewed for possible emissions impacts and manufacturers' evaluations thereof. This is also part of the certification review process of an application even after a certificate has been granted. Another part of this process involves determining if the use of data from a previous model year is appropriate or if new testing will be required. The EPA also selects a number of vehicles for confirmation at an EPA designated test facility. In addition to certificate application and test data review, the EPA also maintains the relevant reporting system (EV-CIS) and analyzes relevant data for regulatory development and compliance oversight purposes.

The EPA prepares annual reports of emission test results submitted by the manufacturers. These and other reports, data and information are now available on the EPA's website.at https://www3.epa.gov/otaq/crttst.htm.

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

All routine information (test results, vehicle descriptions, and all aspects of certification applications) is electronically transmitted directly from the manufacturers through the EV-CIS system.

All information received by the EPA is subject to review. Data submitted electronically is in some cases automatically screened; for example, on-highway motorcycle test results that are close to the emission standard(s) are flagged for a more detailed review. Descriptions of the proposed product line are checked with EV-CIS submissions to make certain that the appropriate vehicles have been tested. (The emission program relies on a combination of "worst case" and representative data to accomplish its goals.)

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

The EPA has special procedures for small-volume on-highway motorcycle manufacturer certifications; i.e., those whose total sales are less than 10,000 units per year. These special procedures allow the "small-volume" manufacturer to submit a simplified application for certification with respect to durability demonstrations. These manufacturers also have reduced testing and reporting requirements. Further, by the very nature of their size, small volume manufacturers typically have very limited product lines. This characteristic both reduces the amount of information that must be submitted and simplifies the process of selecting the correct test vehicle(s). There are also several special provisions to reduce the regulatory burden on small highway motorcycle manufacturers; in addition to hardship exemptions and program delays, manufacturers with sales less than 3000 units per year and 500 employees may use broader definitions of engine categories to group more engine families under one certification application. This may result in fewer certification fees and less certification testing cost.

5(d) Collection Schedule

Manufacturers must submit information for each "model year" that it intends to build (or import) vehicles. Submission is by "engine family" designation. A "model year" approximates when a product is produced. Engines and vehicles can be designated the next model-year if manufactured by January 2 of the preceding calendar-year. For instance, a 2019 model year engine or vehicle can be produced from January 2, 2018 through December 31, 2019. If a product is unchanged between model years, much of the information can be carried over to the new model year application. The collection frequency and burden are determined to a large extent by the manufacturer's marketing and production plans. However, as required by law, some submission is required for each model year's production.

Section 6: Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden

The burden estimates below consider the HMC program described above in section 4.

In agreement with this ICR, each manufacturer's activities toward certification or a related reporting or record keeping requirement is counted as a "response". As explained in support of that action, this is by far the most logical and tractable unit of activity for burden accounting.

Within the HMC program, the estimation of respondent burden hours and respondent costs essentially breaks down as testing costs, which constitute the majority of Operations and Maintenance; testing facilities costs, which constitute the majority of Startup and Capital; the labor hours to conduct the tests; and additional costs and hours associated with other reporting and recordkeeping burdens, including amendments to a certificate of conformity and compliance testing responses. In addition, some features are specific to particular programs (notably permeation testing).

This ICR has been updated to reflect certification information over the previous three years, assessing the most accurate information for our estimates under this ICR. The data used in this ICR may be found on the EPA website at https://www3.epa.gov/otaq/crttst.htm.

The present burden estimate continues the process of updating based on a renewed examination of the burdens, consultations with industry, and consultations with program administrators within the EPA. The Respondent hours reflected in this ICR represent EPA's most recent and continuing conversation with industry contacts and informal conversations with industry practitioners through the certification and compliance process.

To calculate reporting and recordkeeping burdens we start with the burden of submitting information to the EPA and storing that information, then we consider the costs of developing the information that must be reported. Consequently, this ICR has traditionally included the burden of conducting tests that have to be reported to support the EPA's oversight of compliance with the Clean Air Act. We take the cost of conducting the tests to include contracting the cost of testing to outside test laboratories, the capital costs of building the facilities to run the tests, if applicable, and the associated operations and maintenance costs in support of such facility(s), as well as the service mileage accumulation for durability determinations, and labor costs associated with performing all of these functions. All calculations are provided in the highway motorcycle spreadsheet in the Appendix (titled: "HWY MC Worksheet_2020).

Previously, we have provided estimates of responses that have reflected respondents to the ICR. As an example, the preceding ICR stated there were 74 responses, which were actually the number of respondents. For this ICR we have corrected that oversight and now reflect both the total number of respondents (55) and the total number of responses (929) for highway motorcycles. The total 929 responses cover all certification, reporting and record keeping requirements for the respondents seeking certification with the EPA for highway motorcycles. The chart below now reflects these calculations for this ICR moving forward.
Estimated Annual Respondent Burden Hours:
Program/Activity
Engine Families/Year
Respondents/ Year
Total Responses/ year
Total
annual hours per Response (Average)
Highway Motorcycles
282
55
929
15,420

6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs
 Estimating labor costs

The labor costs in this ICR reflect the May 2018 BLS National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates (https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_336000.htm). With a 130 percent overhead multiplier, also based on the BLS benefits adjustment factor of 30 percent for 2018, the categories are $86.55 manager, $37.95 technical, and $29.15 administrative.

We have estimated labor costs for these three categories for each labor item for certification and compliance obligations. The total labor hours for all certified engine families is estimated to be 15,420, with the average annual labor burden to be 321 hours per response (engine family). This amounts to a total annual labor cost of $461.275. This would also average to $1,635.73 of labor cost per annual response.

 Estimating Operations and Maintenance Costs

Program/Activity
Number
of Respondents
Burden/
Response
($)
Total
($)
Highway Motorcycles
                                                                             55
                                                                      $6,935.00
                                                                       $182,560

Operations and Maintenance (O&M) costs are very largely those associated with running tests; there are also small cost elements associated with other reporting and recordkeeping activities. O&M costs in this ICR are therefore highly dependent on the fluctuations in the size of the industries and do not reflect new program changes.

O&M test costs here reflect a decrease in the number of new HMC engine families being certified that require new testing to demonstrate compliance with the standard. Many highway motorcycle manufacturers also contract with testing facilities to provide data to the EPA for certification and compliance testing. Our estimates for O&M from recordkeeping requirements is derived from our informal conversations with industry and reflect growing storage of information in electronic media, i.e. databases.

  Estimating Capital Costs

Annualized Capital and Startup Costs:

Program/Activity
Number
Respondents/Year
Burden/ Response ($)
Total
($)
Highway Motorcycles
55
$12,208.00
$97,664.00

To perform the required testing, a combination of "environmental" (exhaust and evaporative emissions) test cells are required. A significant change in this ICR is made for evaporative emissions testing, which was not fully anticipated in the previous ICR estimates. Our estimates now reflect two changes in information; 1) data of the evaporative program since the 2008 calendar year, and 2) estimates of evaporative testing from commercial test facilities.

These capital costs have long been treated as ongoing costs rather than start-up costs in the former ICR, OMB Control No. 2060-0104 series. In effect, this allows a capital cost to be attributed on a per-test basis. Because of the wide variety of circumstances among manufacturers (land availability, capital assets, lending terms, labor shifts) and the continuing changes in the numbers of vehicles and engines being certified from year to year, this is the best method of counting facilities capital costs and one which allows continuity of treatment from one collection request to another. This also has the result, as with O&M costs, that collection requests can reflect changes in the information burden due to market forces in the industry that are much too complicated to model. The changes in this estimate from the last renewal reflect re-estimations and changes in the industry, not program changes by the EPA and we will not depart from past practice in this on-highway motorcycle ICR.

The annualized depreciated costs of these facilities using the standard assumptions of seven percent interest yearly over 10 years is $5,333.00. This is regarded as a permanent capital cost item; that is, we regard the capital stock as being continuously depreciated and replaced.

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden

 The Compliance Division's Gasoline Engine Compliance Center administers the highway motorcycle certification and compliance programs. This group currently consists of one full-time employee in Ann Arbor, MI, and a Senior Environmental Employment (SEE) Program (for technical and administrative support) dedicated to the activities covered by this ICR. Other EPA employees from Washington, DC and Ann Arbor also provide support for these activities, such as IT personnel, agency lawyers at the Office of General Counsel and the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Activities, work assignment/contract managers, upper management, etc. Contract support is also provided for database development/maintenance as well as compliance program report processing.

	The cost of the Agency burden is based on hourly wage rates that are effective as of January 2019 as obtained from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and adjusted by a factor of 1.6 to account for benefits and overhead. For purposes of estimating Agency labor costs, the labor rates for engineers from the Detroit, MI area were used to reflect the fact that nearly all Agency labor costs for the highway motorcycle program will be incurred at OTAQ's Ann Arbor, MI location. These rates are available at https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/pdf/2018/DET_.pdf.

This ICR estimates the hourly wage for an EPA employee at $86.21 with an adjustment to $137.94. Administrative support is estimated to be an hourly wage of $35.87. Therefore, the combined wage for the Agency burden would be $173.81. We are estimating 3,275 hours a year for the Agency to review applications, conduct certification and compliance testing, review amendments to applications and certificates, and collect and review records required to be submitted to the EPA. This amounts to a total Agency burden of $248,328 annually to administer this program. These calculations are listed in the spreadsheet under the title, "Agency Burden."

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

From the above discussion the following total burden and cost estimates can be calculated. Due to the diverse nature of the HMC industry, there is no typical or average respondent. Respondents can be large manufacturers with many products such as Honda Motors, or they can be small businesses with a single product line. In addition, HWC's can also be small importers of a few specialized motorcycles per year that are manufactured abroad. The total burden and cost figures below are estimates on the basis of report data from production and end-of-year reports as well as estimates from EPA personnel.

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost

(i)  Respondent Tally

RESPONDENTS
55
BURDEN HOURS
15,420
LABOR COST
$461,275
OPERATING COST
$182,560
CAPITALIZED COST
$97,644
Total Cost
$741,499

(ii)  Agency Tally

EMPLOYEES (2):
$173.81
Annual LABOR Hours:
3275
Agency COST
$248,328

6(f) Reasons for change in burden

The change in burden compared to the currently approved ICR is due to improvements we have made in assessing O&M cost, refined labor hours from feedback provided by the regulated community and greater accounting for permeation testing and reporting to the EPA by highway motorcycle manufacturers.  The EPA has not made any program changes since the previous ICR renewal. The effect of these changes can be summarized as follows.

Additional Compliance Costs

In addition to the Agency's improved presence in certification and compliance, this ICR also recognizes the changes that have occurred in the highway motorcycle industry. EPA's compliance actions against such entities like Motor Science and Systems Launch Associates, has increased the need for all respondents to properly report production and averaging numbers as well as provide accurate certification test reports. In addition, due to the diverse nature of the highway motorcycle industry, many manufacturers are relying on contract test laboratories to conduct certification testing instead of maintaining a certification test lab to comply with EPA test requirements. Finally, evaporative and permeation reporting is required for highway motorcycles. Manufacturers have choices in terms of complying with how they choose to meet the evaporative and permeation requirements, but all must report evaporative emissions at the time of certification, an additional burden in this information collection.

Labor hours:   This renewal estimates a total of 15,420 hours annually for all respondents. This change is the result of corrections to the hours used to file applications, conduct exhaust and evaporative testing, and file an application under the EV-CIS system. This ICR also accounts for the time it likely takes respondents to comply with EPA production test orders, produce production numbers at the end of the model year, and maintain data used for certification and compliance. This increase in hours reflects the improved process of estimating respondent burden to comply with EPA requirements through certification and compliance activities.

Labor costs:  As stated above, this request uses BLS labor costs with a 130 percent multiplier, which captures the BLS estimate of overhead and medical care cost not reflected in the wage estimates. In addition, the labor cost estimate reflects changes in the number of vehicle certification applications to meet exhaust and evaporative emissions requirements.

6(g) Burden Statement

The average annual burden per respondent is approximately 280 hours, per engine family. These estimates include time to review applicable regulations and guidance documents, generate and gather the necessary information, submit documents, conduct certification and compliance testing, and provide all required reporting and record keeping activities.

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 submitting 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 the 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, the EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR - 2016 - 0027, which is available for online viewing at regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the [insert your Program Office docket name] in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.  The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  Regulations.gov can be used 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. When in the system, select "search," then key in the Docket ID Number identified above. Comments can also be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0027 and OMB Control Number 2060-0710 in any correspondence.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 74127]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29402]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ID-7277-000]

Beam, D. Richard; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on November 27, 2013, D. Richard Beam submitted
for filing, an application for authority to hold interlocking
positions, pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act (FPA),
16 U.S.C. 825d(b), Part 45 of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR part
45, and Order No. 664.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Commission Authorization to Hold Interlocking Positions, 112
FERC ] 61,298 (2005) (Order No. 664); order on reh'g, 114 FERC ]
61,142 (2006) (Order No. 664-A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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, 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. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    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 5 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 email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 18, 2013.

    Dated: November 29, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-29402 Filed 12-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


January 9, 2005 MEMORANDUM Subject: Product Chemistry Science Chapter for n Alkyl ( 60% C14, 30% C16, 5% C12, 5 % C18) dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride To: A. Najm Shamim, Ph. D Risk Assessor for ADBAC RED Regulatory Management Branch II Antimicrobials Division ( 7510C)

And Jacqueline Campbell McFarlane, CRM for ADBAC RED Regulatory Management Branch I Antimicrobials Division ( 7510C)

From: Chris Jiang, Chemist Product Science Branch Antimicrobials Division ( 7510C)

Thru: Karen P. Hicks, CTT Team Leader Product Science Branch Antimicrobials Division ( 7510C)

And Michele Wingfield, Branch Chief Product Science Branch Antimicrobials Division ( 7510C)

DP Barcode: D324587 Chemical Code: 035603 EPA Reg. No.: 3377 38 MRID #= s: 44467401 44467402 44467403 Enclosed is the Science Chapter for the for n Alkyl ( 60% C14, 30% C16, 5% C12, 5 % C18) Dimethyl Benzyl Ammonium Chloride Reregistration Eligibility Decision ( RED). Page 2 of 3 Science Chapter on for n Alkyl ( 60% C14, 30% C16, 5% C12, 5 % C18) Dimethyl Benzyl Ammonium Chloride ( MRID #= s: 44467401, 44467402, 44467403)

Product Chemistry Case Overview Chemical Overview The main ingredient covered for this Science Chapter is: n Alkyl ( 60% C14, 30 % C16, 5 % C12, 5% C18) Dimethyl Benzyl Ammonium Chloride Chemical Name: n Alkyl ( 60% C14, 30 % C16, 5 % C12, 5% C18) dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride Common/ Trade Names: ADBAC Chemical Family: Quaternary amines CAS Registry Number: 68391 01 5 OPP Chemical Code: 069104 Molecular Formula: RC9H13NCl ( R = n Alkyl ( 60% C14, 30 % C16, 5 % C12, 5% C18)) Molecular Weight: 377.83 SCIENCE ASSESSMENT The Agency thoroughly reviewed the registrants =

submissions ( in house literature) for the purpose of determining the reregistration eligibility of n alkyl ( 60% C14, 30 % C16, 5 % C12, 5% C18) dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride for use in wood preservatives, in material preservatives, in industrial processes and water systems, and in commercial , institutional, and residential premises.

Product Chemistry Assessment The physical and chemical characteristics of n alkyl ( 60% C14, 30 % C16, 5 % C12, 5% C18) dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride are described below.

Technical Grade Active Ingredient ( TGAI):

Chemical Name: n Alkyl ( 60% C14, 30 % C16, 5 % C12, 5% C18) dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride Molecular Wt. 377.83 Color: 50 APHA units Physical State: Liquid Odor: Ethanolic * Melting Point: 241.02 oC Boiling Point: Could not be established because test article is a multi component system with each component boiling at a different temperature Density: 0.9429 g/ cm3 at 25 oC Water Solubility: Completely soluble Page 3 of 3 * Vapor Pressure: 3.53 x 10 12 mm Hg Dissociation Constant: Not applicable * log Kow: 3.9104 pH: 7.59 Stability: Stable with respect to metal, nonmetal, temperature, and light Oxidizing/ Reducing Potential: Not applicable as product does not contain oxidizers or reducers Flash Point: 37.0 o C Explodability: Not applicable for liquids which are not potentially explosive Viscosity: 507.0 cSt 25 oC Miscibility: Not applicable as product is not to be mixed with petroleum solvents Corrosion Characteristics Corrosive to stainless steel and no corrosion to HDPE Dielectric breakdown voltage: Not applicable as product is not to be used near electrical equipment * Values obtained from EpiSuite n Alkyl ( 60% C14, 30 % C16, 5 % C12, 5% C18) dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride PRODUCT CHEMISTRY BIBLIOGRAPHY US EPA =

s MRID #: 44467401, Albemarle BQ1416 8 Biocide Product Chemistry, ( 1998) Albemarle Corp., Lab Project Number 8382 141 Quat 6, Albemarle Corporation.

US EPA =

s MRID #: 44467402, Tolbert, A., Product Chemistry Chemical Characterization for Determining Identity and Purity of 80% n Alkyl ( 60% C14, 30 % C16, 5 % C12, 5% C18) Dimethyl Benzyl Ammonium Chloride, ( 1998), Lab Project Number Quat 6B, Albemarle Corporation.

US EPA =

s MRID #: 44467403, Tolbert, A., Product Chemistry Chemical Characterization for Determining the Physical and Chemical Properties, and Accelerated Storage Stability of 80% n Alkyl ( 60% C14, 30 % C16, 5 % C12, 5% C18) Dimethyl Benzyl Ammonium Chloride, ( 1998), Lab Project Number Quat 6A, Albemarle Corporation.

EPISuite Computer Program


[Federal Register: December 24, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 246)]
[Notices]
[Page 68421]
[DOCID:fr24de09-20]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 1417-246]

Central Nebraska Public Power and Irrigation District; Notice of
Application for Amendment of License and Soliciting Comments, Motions
To Intervene, and Protests

December 17, 2009.
    Take notice that the following application has been filed with the
Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Shoreline Management Plan (SMP).
    b. Project No.: 1417-246.
    c. Date Filed: December 7, 2009.
    d. Applicant: Central Nebraska Public Power and Irrigation
District.
    e. Name of Project: Kingsley Dam Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the North Platte and Platte
Rivers in Garden, Keith, Lincoln, Gosper, and Dawson Counties,
Nebraska.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Michael A. Drain, Central Nebraska Public
Power and Irrigation District, 415 Lincoln Street, P.O. Box 740,
Holdrege, NE 68949-0740,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Any questions on this notice should be addressed
to Rebecca Martin at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments and/or motions: January 19, 2010.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: The
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project number (P-1417-246) on
any comments or motions filed.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all interveners filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an
intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to
the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a
particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document
on that resource agency. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be
served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the
particular application.
    k. Description of Proposal: Central Nebraska Public Power and
Irrigation District filed, for Commission approval, an SMP for the
Kingsley Dam Project. The SMP is a comprehensive plan to manage the
multiple resources and uses of the project's shoreline in a manner that
is consistent with license requirements and project purposes,
protection of environmental resources, and to address the needs and
interests of stakeholders.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing 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 field to access the document. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3372 or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions To Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title
``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as applicable,
and the Project Number of the particular application to which the
filing refers.
    p. Agency Comments: Federal, state, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.
    q. 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 at http://www.ferc.gov
under the ``e-Filing'' link.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-30577 Filed 12-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 129 (Thursday, July 5, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39704-39705]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16390]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0263; FRL-9519-5]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Printing, Coating and
Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the
nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before August 6,
2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2011-0263, to: (1) EPA online, using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency,
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, Mail Code
28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB
at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Learia Williams, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On May 9, 2011 (76 FR 26900), EPA sought comments on this ICR
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any additional
comments on this ICR should be submitted to both EPA and OMB within 30
days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0263, which is available for public viewing
online at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the
Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
EPA West, Room 3334, 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<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number
for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov, to either submit or view public comments, access
the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further information about the electronic docket, go to
www.regulations.gov.
    Title: NESHAP for Printing, Coating and Dyeing of Fabrics and other
Textiles (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 2071.05, OMB Control Number 2060-0522.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on August 31, 2012.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
    Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General
Provisions of the NESHAP at 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, and any changes,
or additions to the Provisions specified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart
OOOO.
    Owners or operators of the affected facilities must submit initial
notification, performance tests, and periodic reports and results.
Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is

inoperative. Reports, at a minimum, are required semiannually.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 69
hours per response. ``Burden'' means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; 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.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Owners or operators of printing,
coating and dyeing of fabrics and other textiles.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 143.
    Frequency of Response: Initially, occasionally, and semiannually.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 21,271.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $2,044,793, which includes $2,038,122
in labor costs, $2,953 in capital/startup costs, and $3,718 in
operation and maintenance (O&M) costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment increase in the
total estimated burden hours and costs for both the respondents and the
Agency as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved
Burdens. This increase is not due to any program changes. The increase
in the burden and cost reflects a growth in the respondent universe
since the last ICR renewal and an increase in labor rates. This ICR
uses updated labor rates in estimating the costs for all labor
categories.

John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2012-16390 Filed 7-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P