Item not available in edocket This item is not available in the edocket system. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i. e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Please contact the Water Docket for more information.

Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard copy at the Water Docket, EPA/ DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The 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 Public Reading Room is ( 202) 566 1744, and the telephone number for the Water Docket is ( 202) 566 2426.


SUPPORTING STATEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMMMM) (Renewal)

1.  Identification of the Information Collection

	1(a) Title of the Information Collection

NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMMMM) (Renewal), EPA ICR 2027.05, OMB Control Number 2060-0516

	1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract

	The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication were proposed on August 8, 2001 (66  -  - FR 41729), and promulgated on April 14, 2003 (68 FR 18062).  These regulations apply to each existing, new,  or reconstructed source at facilities engaged in flexible polyurethane foam fabrication.  For the purpose of the rule, flexible polyurethane foam fabrication is further divided in the following   two subcategories: 1) loop slitter adhesive use; and 2) flame lamination.  This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart MMMMM.

	In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities.  They 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.  These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of all affected facilities subject to NESHAP.

	Any owner/operator subject to the provisions of this part shall maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least five years following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports, and records.  All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority.   In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are sent directly to the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional office.

	Based on our consultations with industry representatives, there is an average of one affected facility at each plant site, and each plant site has only one respondent (i.e., the owner/operator of the plant site).

	Over the next three years, an average of 14 respondents per year will be subject to the standard, and one additional respondent per year will become subject to the standard.  All of    the existing respondents are flame lamination sources, with an anticipation of one additional respondent per year over the three years of this ICR.  There is no loop slitter facility that would be subject to the regulation.

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

	The respondents to this ICR (the "Affected Public) are publicly owned and operated flexible polyurethane foam fabrication facilities.  None of the facilities are owned by either state, local and tribal agencies or the Federal government.  The burden to the "Affected Public" may be found below in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost  -  NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMMMM) (Renewal). The burden to the "Federal Government" is attributed entirely to work performed by Federal employees and/or government contractors. This burden is calculated below in Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden and Cost  -  NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMMMM) (Renewal).

2.  Need for and Use of the Collection

	2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

      The EPA is charged under section 112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, to establish standards of performance for each category or subcategory of major sources and area sources of hazardous air pollutants.  These standards are applicable to new or existing sources of hazardous air pollutants and shall require the maximum degree of emission reduction.  In addition, section 114(a) states that the Administrator may require any owner/operator subject to any requirement of this Act to:

            (A) Establish and maintain such records; (B) make such reports;
(C) install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit procedures, or methods; (D) sample such emissions    (in accordance with such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe); (E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is impractical; (F) submit compliance certifications in accordance with Section 114(a)(3); and (G) provide such other information as the Administrator may reasonably require.

      In the Administrator's judgment, particulate matter emissions from facilities in flexible polyurethane foam fabrication cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.  Therefore, the NESHAP were promulgated   for the source category at 40 CFR part 63, subpart MMMMM.

      2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

	The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the standard ensure compliance with the applicable regulations which were promulgated in accordance with the Clean Air Act.  The collected information is also used for targeting inspections and as evidence in legal proceedings.
      Performance tests are required in order to determine an affected facility's initial capability to comply with the emission standard.  Continuous emission monitors are used to ensure compliance with the standard at all times.  During the performance test, a record of the operating parameters under which compliance was achieved may be recorded and used to determine compliance in place of a continuous emission monitor.

	The notifications required in the standard are used to inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the requirements of the regulations.  The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to check if the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated, that leaks are being detected and repaired, and that the standards are  being met.  The performance test may also be observed.

	The required semiannual reports are used to determine periods of excess emissions, identify problems at the facility, verify operation/maintenance procedures and for compliance determinations.

3.  Non-duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

	The requested recordkeeping and reporting are required under 40 CFR part 63, subpart MMMMM.

	3(a) Non-duplication

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

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

      An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this ICR was published in the Federal Register (76 FR 26900) on May 9, 2011.  No comments were received on the burden published in the Federal Register.

	3(c) Consultations

      The Agency has consulted industry experts and internal data sources to project the number of affected facilities and industry growth over the next three years.  The primary source of information as reported by industry, in compliance with the recordkeeping and reporting provisions in the standard is the Online Tracking Information System (OTIS), which is operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Compliance.  OTIS is EPA's database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of all compliance data.

      Industry trade associations and other interested parties were provided an opportunity to comment on the burden associated with the standard as it was being developed.  In developing this ICR, we contacted: 1) the Polyurethane Foam Association, at<PHONE_NUMBER>; and 2) Flexible Foam Products, Inc. at<PHONE_NUMBER>.  EPA did not receive any comments from       the consultations.

      It is our policy to respond after a thorough review of comments received since the last ICR renewal as well as those submitted in response to the First Federal Register Notice.

      3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

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

	3(e) General Guidelines

	These reporting or recordkeeping requirements do not violate any of the regulations promulgated by OMB at 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

	These standards require the respondents to maintain all records, including reports and notifications for at least five years.  This is consistent with the General Provisions as applied to the standards.  The EPA believes that the five-year records retention requirement is consistent with the Part 70 permit program and the five-year statute of limitations on which the permit program is based.  The retention of records for five years allows EPA to establish the compliance history of a source, any pattern of non-compliance, and to determine the appropriate level of enforcement action. EPA has found that the most flagrant violators have violations extending beyond the five years.  In addition, EPA would be prevented from pursuing the violators due to either the destruction or nonexistence of essential records.

	3(f) Confidentiality

	Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B - Confidentiality of Business Information (CBI) (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 3999, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 28, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

	3(g) Sensitive Questions

	The reporting or recordkeeping requirements in the standard do not include sensitive questions.
4.  The Respondents and the Information Requested

	4(a) Respondents/SIC Codes

	The respondents to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are flexible polyurethane foam fabrication facilities. The U. S. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code for the respondents affected by the standards is SIC 3086, which corresponds to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 326150 for "Urethane and Other Foam Products (except Polystyrene) Manufacturing."

4(b) Information Requested

		(i)  Data Items

      In this ICR, all the data that is recorded or reported is required by NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMMMM).

	A source must make the following reports:

                                 Notifications
Initial notification
63.9(b), 63.8816(b)
Notification of construction/reconstruction
63.9(b)(1)(iii), 63.8816.(c)
Notification of performance test
63.9(e), 63.8816(d)
Notification of compliance status
63.9(h)(2)(ii), 63.8816(e)

                                    Reports
First compliance report
63.8818(b)(1)
Semiannual compliance report
63.8818(b)(3)
Annual compliance report
63.8818(c)
Startup/Shutdown/Malfunction (SSM)  report
63.10(d)(5)(i), 63.8818(f)(1)

A source must make the following reports:

                                Recordkeeping
Record of startup, shutdown, and malfunctions
63.10(b)(1), 63.8820(a)
Records are required to be retained for five years
63.10(b)(2)

Electronic Reporting

	At the present, respondents are using monitoring equipment that automatically records parameter data.  Although personnel at the affected facility must evaluate the data, this internal automation has significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and recordkeeping at the plant site.
	Also, regulatory agencies in cooperation with the respondents continue to create reporting systems to transmit data electronically.  However, electronic reporting systems are still not widely used.  At this time, it is estimated that approximately 10 percent of the respondents use electronic reporting.

		(ii)  Respondent Activities

                             Respondent Activities
Read instructions.
Perform initial performance test, Reference Method 311 test, and repeat performance tests if necessary.
Write the notifications and reports listed above.
Enter information required to be recorded above.
Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information.
Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of processing and maintaining information.
Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of disclosing and providing information.
Train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information.
Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

	Currently, sources are using automated monitoring equipment that provides parameter data in an automated way (e.g. continuous parameter monitoring system).  Although personnel at the sources still need to evaluate the data, this type of monitoring equipment has significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and recordkeeping.

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

	5(a) Agency Activities

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

                               Agency Activities
Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests if necessary.
Review notifications and reports, including performance test reports, and excess emissions reports, required to be submitted by industry.
Audit facility records.
Input, analyze, and maintain data in the Online Tracking Information System (OTIS).

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

	Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority could inspect the source to determine whether the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated.  Performance test reports are used by the Agency to discern a source's initial capability to comply with the emission standard.  Data and records maintained by the respondents are tabulated and published for use in compliance and enforcement programs. The semiannual reports are used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations.

	Information contained in the reports is entered into OTIS which is operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Compliance.  OTIS is EPA's database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance data for approximately 125,000 industrial and government-owned facilities.  EPA uses the OTIS for tracking air pollution compliance and enforcement by local and state regulatory agencies, EPA regional offices and EPA headquarters.  EPA and its delegated Authorities can edit, store, retrieve and analyze the data.

	The records required by this regulation must be retained by the owner/operator for five years.

	5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

	The majority of the respondents are large entities (i.e., large businesses).  However, the impact on small entities (i.e., small businesses) was taken into consideration during the development of the regulation.  Due to technical considerations involving the process operations and the types of control equipment employed, the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are the same for both small and large entities.  The Agency considers these requirements the minimum needed to ensure compliance and, therefore, cannot reduce them further for small entities.  To the extent that larger businesses can use economies of scale to reduce their burden, the overall burden will be reduced.

	5(d) Collection Schedule

      The specific frequency for each information collection activity within this request is shown below in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost − NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMMMM) (Renewal).

6.  Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

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

      The Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

6(a)  Estimating Respondent Burden

	The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from these recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be 15,601 (Total Labor Hours from Table 1 below).  These hours are based on Agency studies and background documents from the development of this regulation, Agency knowledge and experience with the NESHAP program, the previously approved ICR, and any comments received.

	6(b)  Estimating Respondent Costs

		(i)  Estimating Labor Costs

	This ICR uses the following labor rates:

      Managerial 	$121.42   ($57.82 + 110%)
      Technical	$99.14   ($47.21 + 110%)
      Clerical	$49.81   ($23.27 + 110%)

These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2011, "Table 2: Civilian Workers, by occupational and industry group."  The rates are from column 1, "Total Compensation."  The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.

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

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

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

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

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Continuous Monitoring Device

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Capital/Startup Cost for One Respondent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(C)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of New Respondents

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(D)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Capital/Startup Cost,  (B X C)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(E)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual O&M Costs for One Respondent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(F)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Respondents with O&M

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(G)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total O&M,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(E X F)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Differential pressure, pH, liquid flow rate,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 data recorder

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$997

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$997

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1,674

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1,674
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The total capital/startup costs for this ICR are $997.  This is the total of column D in the above table.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The total operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for this ICR are $1,674.  This is the total of column G.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The average annual cost for capital/startup and operation and maintenance costs to industry over the next three years of the ICR is estimated to be $2,671. These are recordkeeping costs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

	6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

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

	The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is estimated to be $82,501.

      This cost is based on the average hourly labor rate as follows:

      	Managerial	$62.27   (GS-13, Step 5, $38.92 + 60%)
      	Technical	$46.21   (GS-12, Step 1, $28.88 + 60%)
      	Clerical	$25.01   (GS-6, Step 3, $15.63 + 60%)

      These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), 2011 General Schedule, which excludes locality rates of pay. The rates have been increased by 60 percent to account for the benefit packages available to government employees. Details upon which this estimate is based appear below in Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden and Cost − NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMMMM) (Renewal).

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

      Based on our research for this ICR, on average over the next three years, approximately 13 existing respondents will be subject to the standard.  It is estimated that one additional respondent per year will become subject.  The overall average number of respondents, as shown in the table below, is 14 per year.

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

                        Respondents That Submit Reports

                  Respondents That Do Not Submit Any Reports

                                     Year

                                      (A)
                           Number of New Respondents

                                      (B)
                        Number of Existing Respondents

                                      (C)
  Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records but Do Not Submit Reports

                                      (D)
         Number of Existing Respondents That Are Also New Respondents

                                      (E)
                             Number of Respondents
                                  (E=A+B+C-D)
                                       1
                                       1
                                      12
                                       0
                                       0
                                      13
                                       2
                                       1
                                      13
                                       0
                                       0
                                      14
                                       3
                                       1
                                      14
                                       0
                                       0
                                      15
Average
                                       1
                                      13
                                       0
                                       0
                                      14

	To avoid double-counting respondents, column D is subtracted.  As shown above, the average Number of Respondents over the three-year period of this ICR is 14.

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

                            Total Annual Responses
                                      (A)
                        Information Collection Activity
                                      (B)
                             Number of Respondents
                                      (C)
                              Number of Responses
                                      (D)
  Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit Reports

                                      (E)
                            Total Annual Responses
                                   E=(BxC)+D
Initial notification
                                       1
                                       1
                                       0
                                       1
Application of construction
                                       1
                                       1
                                       0
                                       1
Notification of performance test
                                       1
                                       1
                                       0
                                       1
Notification of compliance status
                                       1
                                       1
                                       0
                                       1
First compliance report
                                       1
                                       1
                                       0
                                       1
Semiannual compliance report
                                      14
                                       2
                                       0
                                      28
SSM report
                                      14
                                      10
                                       0
                                      140

                                     Total
                                      173

	The number of Total Annual Responses is 173.

	The total annual labor costs are $1,494,882. Details regarding these estimates may be found below in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost − NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMMMM) (Renewal).

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

      The detailed bottom line burden hours and cost calculations for the respondents and the Agency are shown in Tables 1 and 2, respectively, and summarized below.

      (i) Respondent Tally

	The total annual labor hours are 15,601 at a cost of $1,494,882.  Details regarding these estimates may be found below in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost − NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMMMM) (Renewal).

      Furthermore, the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 90 hours per response.

	The total annual capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entity are $2,671.  The cost calculations are detailed in Section 6(b)(iii), Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.

		(ii) The Agency Tally

	The average annual Agency burden and cost over next three years is estimated to be 1,831 labor hours at a cost of $82,501.  See below Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden and Cost − NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMMMM) (Renewal).

	6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden

      There is an increase in burden hours for both the respondents and the Agency in this   ICR compared to the previous ICR.  This is because there are, on average, 3 more existing units subject to this standard due to a growth in the respondent universe during the past three years.

      There is also an increase in the total labor and Agency costs as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens.  The change in cost estimates reflects an increase in respondent numbers (described above) and updated labors rates available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

	6(g) Burden Statement

      The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 90 hours per response.  Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

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

      To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0255.  An electronic version of the public docket is available at http://www.regulations.gov/ which may be used to obtain a copy of the draft collection of information, submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically.  When in the system, select "search," then key in the docket ID number identified in this document.  The documents are also available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., 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 docket center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0255 and OMB Control Number 2060-0516 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

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

Table 1:  Annual Respondent Burden and Cost  -  NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMMMM) (Renewal)

                                  Burden item

                                      (A)
                                    Person-
                                   hours per
                                  occurrence

                                      (B)
                                    No.  of
                                  occurrences
                                per respondent
                                   per year

                                      (C)
                                    Person-
                                   hours per
                                  respondent
                                   per year
                                    (C=AxB)

                                      (D)
                                  Respondents
                                 per year  [a]

                                      (E)
                                   Technical
                                    person-
                                   hours per
                                     year
                                    (E=CxD)

                                      (F)
                                  Management
                                 person-hours
                                   per year
                                   (Ex0.05)

                                      (G)
                                   Clerical
                                    person-
                                hours per 	year
                                    (Ex0.1)

                                      (H)
                                 Cost, $  [b]
1.   Read instructions [c]
                                       4
                                       1
                                       4
                                       1
                                       4
                                      0.2
                                      0.4
                                                                        $440.77
2.   Gather information [c]
                                       4
                                       1
                                       4
                                      14
                                      56
                                      2.8
                                      5.6
                                                                      $6,170.82
3.   Reports

      i.  Initial notification  [c]
                                       2
                                       1
                                       2
                                       1
                                       2
                                      0.1
                                      0.2
                                                                        $220.39
     ii.  Application for construction
          for new sources [c]
                                       2
                                       1
                                       2
                                       1
                                       2
                                      0.1
                                      0.2
                                                                        $220.39
    iii. Notification of performance
          test [c, d]
                                       2
                                       1
                                       2
                                       1
                                       2
                                      0.1
                                      0.2
                                                                        $220.39
    iv.  Notification of compliance
          status [c]
                                      20
                                       1
                                      20
                                       1
                                      20
                                       1
                                       2
                                                                      $2,203.87
     v.  First compliance report [c]
                                       8
                                       1
                                       8
                                       1
                                       8
                                      0.4
                                      0.8
                                                                        $881.55
    vi.  Semiannual compliance report [d]
                                       4
                                       2
                                       8
                                      14
                                      112
                                      5.6
                                     11.2
                                                                     $12,341.65
   vii.  Annual compliance report [e]
                                       2
                                       1
                                       2
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                                                             $0
  viii.  SSM report [f]
                                       2
                                      10
                                      20
                                      14
                                      280
                                      14
                                      28
                                                                     $30,854.12
Subtotal for Reporting Requirements

                                     558.9

4.  Recordkeeping requirements

    a.  Plan activities [c]
                                      10
                                       1
                                      10
                                       1
                                      10
                                      0.5
                                       1
                                                                      $1,101.93
    b.  Implement activities for flame
         lamination

     i.  Record SSM
                                       1
                                      100
                                      100
                                      14
                                     1,400
                                      70
                                      140
                                                                    $154,270.62
    ii.  Conduct performance test [c], [g]
                                      50
                                       1
                                      50
                                       1
                                      50
                                      2.5
                                       5
                                                                      $5,509.67
   iii.  Record CPMS measurements
                                       2
                                      300
                                      600
                                      14
                                     8,400
                                      420
                                      840
                                                                    $925,623.72
   iv.  CPMS calibration and
         maintenance [h]
                                       4
                                      50
                                      200
                                      14
                                     2,800
                                      140
                                      280
                                                                    $308,541.24
    c.  Implement activities for loop sitters

       i.  Record adhesives used and
           suppliers
                                       1
                                       1
                                       1
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                                                             $0
      ii.  Conduct Method 311 test
                                       4
                                       1
                                       4
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                                                             $0
    d.  Develop record system

       i.  SSM plan [c, d]
                                      40
                                       1
                                      40
                                       1
                                      40
                                       2
                                       4
                                                                      $4,407.73
      ii.  Continuous parameter
           monitoring system (CPMS)
           maintenance plan [c, d]
                                      20
                                       1
                                      20
                                       1
                                      20
                                       1
                                       2
                                                                      $2,203.87
    e.  Time to train personnel

       i.  CPMS acquisition and
            installation [c][, d]
                                      20
                                       1
                                      20
                                       1
                                      20
                                       1
                                       2
                                                                      $2,203.87
      ii.  CPMS inspection and
           monitoring [c][, d]
                                       4
                                       1
                                       4
                                       1
                                       4
                                      0.2
                                      0.4
                                                                        $440.77
    f.  Store, file, and maintain all
         records [i]
                                       1

                                      12
                                      12
                                      14
                                      168
                                      8.4
                                     16.8
                                                                     $18,512.47
    g.  Retrieve records/reports [j]
                                       1
                                      12
                                      12
                                      14
                                      168
                                      8.4
                                     16.0
                                                                     $18,512.47
Subtotal for Recordkeeping Requirements

                                    15,042

                                    13,566
                                     678.3
                                                                        1,356.6

TOTAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST (rounded)

                                    15,601
                                                                     $1,494,882

Assumptions:
[a]  We have assumed that the average number of respondents that will be subject to the rule will be 14. There will be one additional new source (flame lamination) that will become subject to the rule over the three-year period of this ICR.
[b]  This ICR uses the following labor rates: $121.42 per hour for Executive, Administrative, and Managerial labor; $99.14 per hour for Technical labor, and $49.81 per hour for Clerical labor.  These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2011, "Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational and industry group."  The rates are from column 1, "Total Compensation."  The rates have been increased by 110% to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.
c  This is a one-time activity for each new facility.
[d]  We have assumed that this applies only to flame lamination facilities.
[e]  We have assumed that this applies to facilities that use loop slitter adhesive.
[f]  We have assumed that it will take each respondent two hours ten time per year to complete SSM reports.
[g]  We have assumed that this will also include writing site-specific test plan.
[h]  We have assumed that it will take each respondent four hours 50 times per year to implement the CPMS calibration and maintenance activity.
i  We have assumed that it will take each respondent 1 hour twelve times per year to store, file and maintain records.
[j]  We have assumed that it will take each respondent 1 hour twelve times per year to retrieve records/reports.

Table 2:  Average Annual EPA Burden and Cost −NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMMMM) (Renewal)

	Activity
                                      (A)
                                  EPA person-
                                   hours per
                                  occurrence
                                      (B)
                                    No. of
                                  occurrences
                                   per plant
                                    per year
                                      (C)
                                  EPA person
                                   hours per
                                plant  per year
                                    (C=AxB)
                                      (D)
                             Plants per year  [a]
                                      (E)
                                   Technical
                                 person-hours
                                   per year
                                    (E=CxD)
                                      (F)
                                  Management
                                 person-hours
                                   per year
                                   (Ex0.05)

                                      (G)
                                   Clerical
                                    person-
                                hours per year
                                    (Ex0.1)
                                      (H)
                                  Cost, $ [b]
1.   Review initial notification [c]
                                       4
                                       1
                                       4
                                       1
                                       4
                                      0.2
                                      0.4
                                                                        $207.29
2.   Review application for                   construction [c]
                                       4

                                       1

                                       4

                                       1

                                       4

                                      0.2

                                      0.4

                                                                        $207.29

3.   Review notification of                    compliance status [c]
                                      20
                                       1
                                      20
                                       1
                                      20
                                       1
                                       2
                                                                      $1,036.45
4.   Review initial compliance              report [c][, d]
                                       2

                                       1

                                       2

                                       0

                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                                                             $0

5.   Review initial compliance              report [c][, e]
                                      20
                                       1
                                      20
                                       1
                                      20
                                       1
                                       2
                                                                      $1,036.45
6.   Review notification of                    performance test [c][, d]
                                       4
                                       1
                                       4
                                       1
                                       4
                                      0.2
                                      0.4
                                                                        $207.29
7.   Review annual compliance             report [d]
                                       1

                                       1

                                       1

                                       0

                                       0

                                       0

                                       0

                                                                             $0

8.   Review semiannual                         compliance report [e]
                                      15

                                       2

                                      30

                                      14

                                      420

                                      21
                                      42

                                                                     $21,765.41

9.  Review startup, shutdown,             malfunction report [e]
                                       8

                                      10

                                      80

                                      14

                                     1,120

                                      56

                                      112

                                                                     $58,041.09

TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST (rounded)

                                     1,831

                                                                        $82,501

Assumptions:
a  We have assumed that the average number of respondents subject to the rule will be 14. There are nine flame lamination facilities that are currently subject to the regulation and it is estimated that one additional respondent per year will be subject to the requirements over the three-year period of this ICR.  There are no loop slitters that are considered major sources that would be subject to the rule.

b  This cost is based on the following labor rates which incorporates a 1.6 benefits multiplication factor to account for government overhead expenses: Managerial rate of $62.27 (GS-13, Step 5, $38.92 x 1.6), Technical rate of $46.21 (GS-12, Step 1, $28.88 x 1.6), and Clerical rate of $25.01 (GS-6, Step3, $15.63 x 1.6).  These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) "2011 General Schedule" which excludes locality rates of pay.
[c]  This is a one-time activity performed once per facility.
    [d]  We have assumed that this applies to facilities that use loop slitter adhesive.
    [e]  We have assumed that this applies only to flame lamination facilities.


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 172 (Thursday, September 3, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54909-54910]
[FR Doc No: 2020-19424]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 31328 Amdt. No. 3919]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or removes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures (ODPs) for operations at certain
airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption
of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the
National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational
facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.
These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective September 3, 2020. The compliance date
for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of September 3, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:

For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the
affected airport is located;
    3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free
of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center at nfdc.faa.gov to
register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP
copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service
Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedures
and Airspace Group, Flight Technologies and Procedures Division, Flight
Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration. Mailing Address:
FAA Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, Flight Procedures and Airspace
Group, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Registry Bldg. 29, Room 104,
Oklahoma City, OK 73169. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing,
amending, suspending, or removes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP and its associated
Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form
documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5
U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part 97.20. The applicable FAA
forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when
required by an entry on 8260-15A.
    The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, their complex
nature, and the need for a special format make publication in the
Federal Register expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use
the regulatory text of the SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead
refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers of
aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by
reference are realized and publication of the complete

description of each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on FAA form
documents is unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR
sections and specifies the types of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs
with their applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies
the airport and its location, the procedure, and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPS, Takeoff
Minimums and/or ODPS as identified in the amendatory language for part
97 of this final rule.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as Amended in the
transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments
may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center
(FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate
flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts.
    The circumstances that created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less
than 30 days. For the remaining SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, an
effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.
    Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPs and
Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the
conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of
the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and
public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary
to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C 553(d),
good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866;(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,1979) ;
and (3)does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal.
    For the same reason, the FAA certifies that this amendment will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (Air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 21, 2020.
Wade Terrell,
Aviation Safety Manager, Flight Procedures & Airspace Group, Flight
Technologies and Procedures Division.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by
establishing, amending, suspending, or removing Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure
Procedures effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113,40114,
40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:

Effective 8 October 2020

Plymouth, MA, Plymouth Muni, ILS OR LOC RWY 6, Amdt 1G
Bowie, MD, Freeway, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 2A
Bar Harbor, ME, Hancock County-Bar Harbor, ILS OR LOC RWY 22, Amdt
6D
Mooreland, OK, Mooreland Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig-A
Tyler, TX, Tyler Pounds Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Amdt 3A

Effective 5 November 2020

Alamosa, CO, San Luis Valley Rgnl/Bergman Field, VOR-A, Amdt 7,
CANCELLED
Hartford, CT, Hartford-Brainard, RNAV (GPS) RWY 2, Orig-C
Meriden, CT, Meriden Markham Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Orig-F
Palm Coast, FL, Flagler Executive, RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, Amdt 1B
Atlanta, GA, Fulton County Airport-Brown Field, VOR-A, Amdt 1C,
CANCELLED
Butler, GA, Butler Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Amdt 2A
Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 9C, ILS RWY 9C (SA
CAT I), ILS RWY 9C (CAT II), ILS RWY 9C (CAT III), Orig
Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 27C, ILS RWY 27C
(SA CAT I), ILS RWY 27C (CAT II), ILS RWY 27C (CAT III), Orig
Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9C, Orig
Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27C, Orig
Clay Center, KS, Clay Center Muni, NDB RWY 35, Amdt 2A, CANCELLED
Lake Charles, LA, Lake Charles Rgnl, RADAR-1, Amdt 5D
Churchville, MD, Harford County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 1A
Rockland, ME, Knox County Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Orig-B
Alma, MI, Gratiot Community, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Amdt 2
Muskegon, MI, Muskegon County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Amdt 2A
Muskegon, MI, Muskegon County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Amdt 1C
Muskegon, MI, Muskegon County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Amdt 2A
Muskegon, MI, Muskegon County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 2D
South Haven, MI, South Haven Area Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 1F
Rochester, MN, Rochester Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 13, Amdt 9A
Rochester, MN, Rochester Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 20, Amdt 2C
Kosciusko, MS. Kosciusko-Attala County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Orig-C
Salem, OR, Mcnary Fld, LOC BC RWY 13, Amdt 9B
Salem, OR, Mcnary Fld, LOC Y RWY 31, Amdt 4B
Somerset, PA, Somerset County, NDB RWY 25, Amdt 7B, CANCELLED
Lancaster, SC, Lancaster County-McWhirter Field, VOR/DME-A, Amdt 1,
CANCELLED
Lakeway, TX, Lakeway Airpark, VOR/DME-A, Amdt 2, CANCELLED
Wichita Falls, TX, Kickapoo Downtown, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1A
Moab, UT, Canyonlands Field, VOR-A, Amdt 11A
Cable, WI, Cable Union, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig-B
Eagle River, WI, Eagle River Union, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle
DP, Orig-A
La Crosse, WI, La Crosse Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 1C
Manitowoc, WI, Manitowoc County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 2
Manitowoc, WI, Manitowoc County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 2
Rhinelander, WI, Rhinelander-Oneida County, Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle DP, Amdt 4B
Sheboygan, WI, Sheboygan County Memorial, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Amdt 4

[FR Doc. 2020-19424 Filed 9-2-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 31, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31325-31326]
[FR Doc No: 2011-13317]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM98-1-000]

Records Governing Off-the Record Communications; Public Notice

    This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of
the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.
    Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission
decisional employees, who

make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-the-record communication
relevant to the merits of a contested proceeding, to deliver to the
Secretary of the Commission, a copy of the communication, if written,
or a summary of the substance of any oral communication.
    Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional
file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the
proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited
communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the
decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not
be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a
proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or
contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may
request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and
responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant
such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any
person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record
communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the
official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with
Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.
    Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional
record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a
cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR
385.2201(e)(1)(v).
    The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently
received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed
are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are
available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or
may 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. For
assistance, please contact FERC, Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Docket No.              File date      Presenter or  requester
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prohibited:
    1. Docket No. ER04-449-          5-19-11  \1\ Connie Caldwell
     018.
        ER04-499-019........
Exempt:
    1. CP10-477-000.........         5-10-11  \2\ Gertrude F. Johnson
    2. CP10-477-000.........         5-11-11  \3\ Gertrude F. Johnson
    3. CP11-46-000..........          5-3-11  \4\ Kenneth Warn
    4. CP11-46-000..........         5-12-11  \5\ Kenneth Warn
    5. ER10-1791-000........          5-9-11  Hon. Rick Snyder
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Memorandum to File Attaching Informational Filing.
\2\ Record of e-mail correspondence.
\3\ Telephone record.
\4\ Record of phone conference call.
\5\ Record of phone conference call.

    Dated: May 23, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-13317 Filed 5-27-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57876-57879]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22690]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-93308; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2021-067]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
its Fee Schedule

 October 13, 2021
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on September 30, 2021, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange''
or ``BZX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``BZX'' or ``BZX
Equities'') proposes to amend its Fee Schedule. The text of the
proposed rule change is provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule by (1) modifying
Tier 2 of the Step-Up Tiers as provided under footnote 2 of the Fee
Schedule; and (2) eliminating two existing tiers and introducing a new
tier of the Single Market Participant Identifier (``MPID'') Investor
Tiers, as provided under footnote 4 of the Fee Schedule, effective
October 1, 2021.
    The Exchange first notes that it operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. More specifically, the
Exchange is only one of 16 registered equities exchanges, as well as a
number of alternative trading systems and other off-exchange venues
that do not have similar self-regulatory responsibilities under the
Exchange Act, to which market participants may direct their order flow.
Based on publicly available information,\3\ no single registered
equities exchange has more than 17% of the market share. Thus, in such
a low-concentrated and highly competitive market, no single equities
exchange possesses significant pricing power in the execution of order
flow. The Exchange in particular operates a ``Maker-Taker'' model
whereby it pays credits to Members that add liquidity and assesses fees
to those that remove liquidity. The Exchange's fee schedule sets forth
the standard rebates and rates applied per share for orders that
provide and remove liquidity, respectively. Particularly, for
securities at or above $1.00, the Exchange provides a standard rebate
of $0.0018 per share for orders that add liquidity and assesses a fee
of $0.0030 per share for orders that remove liquidity. Additionally, in
response to the competitive environment, the Exchange also offers
tiered pricing which provides Members opportunities to qualify for
higher rebates or reduced fees where certain volume criteria and
thresholds are met. Tiered pricing provides an incremental incentive
for Members to strive for higher tier levels, which provides
increasingly higher benefits or discounts for satisfying increasingly
more stringent criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Cboe Global Markets, U.S. Equities Market Volume
Summary, Month-to-Date (September 27, 2021), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_statistics/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Step-Up Tiers
    The Step-Up Tiers set forth in footnote 2 of the Fee Schedule
provides Members an opportunity to qualify for an enhanced rebate for
liquidity adding orders that yield fee codes B, V and Y \4\ where they
increase their relative liquidity each month over a predetermined
baseline. Tier 2 of the Step-Up Tiers provides an enhanced rebate of
$0.0032 per share to a Member that has a Step-Up Add TCV \5\ from April
2020 equal to or greater than 0.30%. The Exchange notes that step-up
tiers are designed to encourage Members that provide displayed
liquidity on the Exchange to increase their order flow, which would
benefit all Members by providing greater execution opportunities on the
Exchange. Now the Exchange proposes to replace the current criteria for
Step-Up Tier 2, with the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Fee code B is appended to displayed orders adding liquidity
to BZX (Tape B), fee code V is appended to displayed orders adding
liquidity to BZX (Tape A), and fee code V [sic] is appended to
displayed orders adding liquidity to BZX (Tape C). Each is provided
a rebate of $ 0.00180.
    \5\ ``Step-Up Add TCV'' means ADAV as a percentage of TCV in the
relevant baseline month subtracted from current ADAV as a percentage
of TCV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Member has a Step-Up ADAV \6\ from June 2021 equal to or
greater than 10,000,000; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ``Step-Up ADAV'' means ADAV (as defined below) in the
relevant baseline month subtracted from current ADAV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Member has an ADV \7\ equal to or greater than 0.30% of
the TCV \8\ or Member has an ADV equal to or greater than 35,000,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``ADAV'' means average daily added volume calculated as the
number of shares added per day and ``ADV'' means average daily
volume calculated as the number of shares added or removed,
combined, per day. ADAV and ADV are calculated on a monthly basis.
    \8\ ``TCV'' means total consolidated volume calculated as the
volume reported by all exchanges and trade reporting facilities to a
consolidated transaction reporting plan for the month for which the
fees apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the tier as proposed will further
incentivize increased order flow to the Exchange, which may contribute
to a deeper, more liquid market to the benefit of all market
participants by creating a more robust and well-balanced market
ecosystem. Step-Up Tier 2, as modified, continues to be available to
all Members and provide Members an opportunity to receive an enhanced
rebate.

Single MPID Investor Tiers
    Pursuant to footnote 4 of the Fee Schedule, the Exchange currently
offers three [sic] Single MPID Investor Tiers that provide Members an
opportunity to receive incrementally greater enhanced rebates from the
standard rebate for liquidity adding orders that yield fee codes B, V
and Y where Members (by MPID) meet certain incrementally more difficult
volume-based criteria. For example, Single MPID Investor Tier 1
currently provides an enhanced rebate of $0.0030 per share for
qualifying orders (i.e., yield fee code B, V and Y) where 1) an MPID
has an Step-Up ADV \9\ from May 2021 equal to or greater than 0.10% TCV
or the MPID has a Step-Up ADV from May 2021 equal to or greater than
8,000,000; and 2) an MPID adds a Step-Up ADAV from May 2021 equal to or
greater than 0.05% of TCV. The Exchange proposes to eliminate existing
Tiers 2 and 3 of the Single MPID Investor Tiers, and rename existing
Tier 4 to Tier 2. The Exchange notes that no Member has reached Tiers 2
or 3 in several months, and the Exchange no longer wishes to, nor is it
required to, maintain such tiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ ``Step-Up ADV'' means ADV in the relevant baseline month
subtracted from current day ADV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to adopt new Tier 3 of the Single MPID
Investor Tiers. New Tier 3 provides a proposed enhanced rebate $0.0034
for a Member's qualifying orders where an MPID has a Step-Up ADAV as a
percentage of TCV equal to or greater than 0.20% from September 2021 or
the MPID has a Step-Up ADAV from September 2021 equal to or greater
than 20,000,000. Members that achieve the proposed Single MPID Investor
Tier 3 must therefore increase the amount of liquidity added on BZX
over a baseline amount, thereby contributing to a deeper and more
liquid market. Incentivizing an increase in liquidity adding volume
through additional criteria and enhanced rebate opportunities,
encourages liquidity adding Members on the Exchange to contribute to a
deeper, more liquid market, and to increase transactions opportunities
provided by such increased liquidity, together providing for overall
enhanced price discovery and price improvement opportunities on the
Exchange. As such, increased overall order flow benefits all Members by
contributing towards a robust and well-balanced market ecosystem.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\10\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5),\11\ in
particular, as it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation
of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among its Members, issuers
and other persons using its facilities. The Exchange operates in a
highly competitive market in which market participants can readily
direct order flow to competing venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive or incentives to be insufficient. The
proposed rule changes reflect a competitive pricing structure designed
to incentivize market participants to direct their order flow to the
Exchange, which the Exchange believes would enhance market quality to
the benefit of all Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed changes to the Step-Up Tier 2
are reasonable because the tier, as modified, continues to be available
to all Members and provide Members an opportunity to receive an
enhanced rebate. The Exchange next notes that relative volume-based
incentives and discounts have been widely adopted by exchanges,
including the Exchange, and are reasonable, equitable, and non-
discriminatory because they are open to all Members on an equal basis
and provide additional discounts that are reasonably related to (i) the
value to an exchange's market quality and (ii) associated with higher
levels of market activity, such as higher levels of liquidity provision
and/or growth patterns. The Exchange also believes that the current
enhanced rebates under the Step-Up Tier 2 continues to be commensurate
with the proposed criteria. That is, the rebate reasonably reflects the
difficulty in achieving the criteria as amended. The Exchange believes
the proposed changes to the Step-Up Tier 2 represents an equitable
allocation of rebates and is not unfairly discriminatory because all
Members are eligible for the Step-Up Tier 2 and would have the
opportunity to meet the tier's criteria and would receive the current
rebate if such criteria is met. Without having a view of activity on
other markets and off-exchange venues, the Exchange has no way of
knowing whether this proposed rule change would definitely result in
any Members qualifying for the proposed tier. While the Exchange has no
way of predicting with certainty how the proposed tier will impact
Member activity, the Exchange anticipates that at least three Member
will be able to satisfy the criteria proposed under the new tier.\12\
The Exchange also notes that proposed tier/rebate will not adversely
impact any Member's ability to qualify for other reduced fee or
enhanced rebate tiers. Should a Member not meet the proposed criteria
under the modified tier, the Member will merely not receive that
corresponding enhanced rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Exchange notes that no Members have met Step-Up Tier 2
in recent months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed amendment to remove the Single
MPID Investor Tiers 2 and 3 is reasonable because no Member has
achieved these tiers in several months. Furthermore, the Exchange is
not required to maintain these tiers and Members still have a number of
other opportunities and a variety of ways to receive enhanced rebates,
including the proposed Single MPID Investor Tier 3. The Exchange
believes the proposal to eliminate the Single MPID Investor Tiers 2 and
3 is also equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it applies
to all Members.
    The Exchange also believes proposed Single MPID Investor Tier 3 is
a reasonable means to encourage Members to increase their added
liquidity on the Exchange each month over a predetermined baseline by
offering Members an additional opportunity to meet criteria to receive
an enhanced rebate. More specifically, the Exchange notes that greater
add volume order flow may provide for deeper, more liquid markets and
execution opportunities at improved prices, which the Exchange believes
incentivizes liquidity providers to submit additional liquidity
opportunities. This overall increase in activity deepens the Exchange's
liquidity pool, offers additional cost savings, supports the quality of
price discovery, promotes market transparency and improves market
quality, for all investors.
    Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed Single MPID
Investor Tier 3 is reasonable as it does not represent a significant
departure from the criteria or corresponding enhanced rebates currently
offered in the Fee Schedule, including other Single MPID Investor
Tiers, and that the proposed enhanced rebate is commensurate with the
new criteria. Particularly, the proposed rebate is reasonably based on
the difficulty of satisfying the tier's proposed criteria as compared
to the existing Single MPID Investor Tiers, which provide lower rebates
for less stringent criteria. Indeed, the proposed criteria in new Tier
3 includes higher growth thresholds that Members can

achieve than other Single MPID Investor Tiers and, as a result, a
higher enhanced rebate of $0.0034, as proposed, than the enhanced
rebates offered in the other Single MPID Investor Tiers.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed Single MPID Investor
Tier 3 represents an equitable allocation of fees and rebates and is
not unfairly discriminatory because all Members are eligible for the
new Single MPID Investor Tier 3 and have the opportunity to meet the
tier's criteria and receive the applicable enhanced rebate if such
criteria is met. Without having a view of activity on other markets and
off-exchange venues, the Exchange has no way of knowing whether this
proposed rule change would definitely result in any Members qualifying
for the proposed tier. While the Exchange has no way of predicting with
certainty how the proposed tier will impact Member activity, the
Exchange anticipates that at least one Member will be able to satisfy
the criteria proposed under the new tier. The Exchange also notes that
the proposed tier will not adversely impact any Member's ability to
qualify for reduced fees or enhanced rebate offered under other tiers.
Should a Member not meet the proposed new criteria, the Member will
merely not receive the corresponding proposed enhanced rebate.
    As noted above, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive
market. The Exchange is only one of 16 equity venues to which market
participants may direct their order flow, and it represents a small
percentage of the overall market. It is also only one of several maker-
taker exchanges. Competing equity exchanges offer similar rates and
tiered pricing structures to that of the Exchange, including schedules
of rebates and fees that apply based upon members achieving certain
volume thresholds.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Rather, as discussed above, the
Exchange believes that the proposed changes would encourage the
submission of additional order flow to a public exchange, thereby
promoting market depth, execution incentives and enhanced execution
opportunities, as well as price discovery and transparency for all
Members. As a result, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes
further the Securities and Exchange Commission's (the ``Commission's''
or the ``SEC's'') goal in adopting Regulation NMS of fostering
competition among orders, which promotes ``more efficient pricing of
individual stocks for all types of orders, large and small.''
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change does not impose any
burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Particularly, the amended
Step-Up Tier 2 and proposed Single MPID Investor Tier 3 apply to all
Members equally in that all Members are eligible for these tiers, have
a reasonable opportunity to meet the tiers' criteria and will receive
the enhanced rebate on their qualifying orders if such criteria is met.
The Exchange does not believe the proposed changes burdens competition,
but rather, enhances competition as it is intended to increase the
competitiveness of BZX by adopting an additional pricing incentive in
order to attract order flow and incentivize participants to increase
their participation on the Exchange, providing for additional execution
opportunities for market participants and improved price transparency.
Greater overall order flow, trading opportunities, and pricing
transparency benefits all market participants on the Exchange by
enhancing market quality and continuing to encourage Members to send
orders, thereby contributing towards a robust and well-balanced market
ecosystem.
    Next, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change does not
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As previously
discussed, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive market. In
such an environment, the Exchange must continually review, and consider
adjusting, its fees and rebates to remain competitive with other
exchanges. Members have numerous alternative venues that they may
participate on and direct their order flow, including other equities
exchanges, off-exchange venues, and alternative trading systems.
Additionally, the Exchange represents a small percentage of the overall
market. Based on publicly available information, no single equities
exchange has more than 17% of the market share.\13\ Therefore, no
exchange possesses significant pricing power in the execution of order
flow. Indeed, participants can readily choose to send their orders to
other exchange and off-exchange venues if they deem fee levels at those
other venues to be more favorable. Moreover, the Commission has
repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over regulatory
intervention in determining prices, products, and services in the
securities markets. Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and
SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the
market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting market
competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors
and listed companies.'' \14\ The fact that this market is competitive
has also long been recognized by the courts. In NetCoalition v.
Securities and Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit stated as follows:
``[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow is `fierce.' . . .
As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market system, buyers and
sellers of securities, and the broker-dealers that act as their order-
routing agents, have a wide range of choices of where to route orders
for execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to take its market share
percentages for granted' because `no exchange possesses a monopoly,
regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of order flow from broker
dealers'. . . .''.\15\ Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe its
proposed fee changes imposes any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra note 3.
    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
    \15\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \16\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \17\
thereunder. 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 will institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CboeBZX-2021-067 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-CboeBZX-2021-067. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CboeBZX-2021-067, and should be
submitted on or before November 9, 2021.

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

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-22690 Filed 10-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 18, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 42302]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17426]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[ Docket No. ER12-2215-000]

Spion Kop Wind, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding,
of Spion Kop Wind, LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate schedule, noting that such application
includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of
future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file 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 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability is August 1, 2012.
    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-referenced proceeding(s) 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 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>.

    Dated: July 12, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-17426 Filed 7-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P