            Supporting Statement
for
Information Collection Request

     On-Highway Motorcycle Certification and Compliance Program (Renewal)
                            EPA ICR Number 2535.02

                               October 24, 2019

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

                      Part A of the Supporting Statement

Section 1: Identification of the Information Collection
1(a) Title and Number of the Information Collection
"Information Collection Request (ICR) for On-Highway Motorcycle (HMC) Certification and Compliance Program (Renewal)"; The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tracking number for this information collection request (ICR) is Number 2535.02. The Office of Management and budget (OMB) Control Number is 2060-0710.

1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract

Under the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7521 et seq.) manufacturers and importers of on-highway motorcycles must have a certificate of conformity issued by the EPA covering any vehicle they intend to offer for sale in the United States. A certificate of conformity represents to the prospective purchaser that the respective vehicle conforms to all applicable emissions requirements. In issuing a certificate of conformity, the EPA reviews vehicle information and emissions test data to determine if the required testing has been performed by the certificate applicant and the required emissions levels have been demonstrated. After a certificate of conformity has been issued, the Agency may request additional information to verify that the product continues to meet its certified emissions standards throughout its useful life. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the EPA's regulations in Title 40 of Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

The previous ICR authorization was based on an estimated 74 respondents for 5453 hours and $386,088 in costs, including $113,834 in annualized capital and startup, and $151,150 O&M costs per year.

The HMC program was previously included under the current ICR for On-Highway Motorcycle Certification and Compliance Program [EPA ICR No. 2535.01, OMB Control No. 2060-0710]. The burdens under this HMC ICR covers the application for a certificate of conformity (and supporting test results) submitted by HMC certification applicants prior to introduction into US commerce as well as various reports and information during and after production, including the defect information report (DR) and voluntary emissions recall report (VERR) that covers HMCs. The EPA's processing of this information is conducted by the Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air and Radiation, US EPA. There are no additional aspects of the on-highway motorcycle program that have been added to the program since the 2016 previous ICR. However, the EPA has developed several templates that manufacturers may use to meet their reporting obligations and made improvements to our compliance information system for which we request feedback from the reporting community.

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

All reporting covered by this ICR can now be entered and submitted electronically via the EPA's web-based Engines and Vehicles Compliance Information System, EV-CIS. Subject to confidentiality claims, this information is made available to interested parties upon request. Emission test information and some recall notifications are available on the internet.

The burdens in this ICR are based on experience administering the program from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2018. There are approximately 70 motorcycle manufacturers currently submitting applications each year to certify their products. The main changes from the previous ICR authorization are the following: updating the agency burden estimate, labor costs, and the number of respondents and responses. The current request estimates 70 respondents for 5,453 annual hours per respondent, a cost of about $1,188,628.31 total annual costs on all combined regulated industry respondents: $18,680 in operation and maintenance costs, $ $42,664.00 in capital and startup costs, and $988,626.31 in labor costs.

Additional details on the coverage of this ICR are given in Section 2(b), below.

Section 2: Need for and Use of the Collection

2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

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

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

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The discussion in this section outlines the major features of the program covered by this ICR as well as summarizing some of the recent historical and ongoing developments that have a bearing on the information burden.

Highway Motorcycles Certification and Compliance

Federal standards for HMCs have been in effect since the 1978 model year. On January 15, 2004, the EPA finalized the first revision to these standards, as well as included for the first time engines with displacements of less than 50cc and added new standards that require the use of low permeability fuel tanks and fuel hoses. These provisions were effective with the 2006 model year.

Manufacturers group vehicles/engines into engine families, conduct emissions tests to demonstrate compliance with exhaust emissions standards, calculate durability factors for useful-life compliance, and submit an application for certification along with an application fee. The EPA issues a certificate, possibly after confirmatory testing. Manufacturers are potentially subject to production vehicle testing for EPA in-use compliance investigations (40 CFR 86.415-78).

Defect Reports and Voluntary Emissions Recall Reports

A reporting component of the on-highway motorcycle program may require filing of defect reports, voluntary emissions recall reports, and voluntary recall quarterly reports by manufacturers for in-use vehicles. Manufacturers file these reports using templates provided by the EPA to streamline the reporting process. The reporting and recording keeping burden estimates are included in this ICR.

 Investigation into Possible Noncompliance of HMCs

The HMC emissions compliance program includes pre-production, production, and in-use components. HMCs are evaluated as prototypes prior to production, and those designs that meet applicable criteria are certified for introduction into commerce. The EPA also has discretion to conduct production vehicle testing. This has become an important compliance tool for the EPA. While the EPA retains the statutory and regulatory authority to conduct production tests for on-highway motorcycles no significant burden is assigned to this activity in this ICR due to the very limited nature in which this tool is used. Finally, in addition to the manufacturer voluntary recall program, the EPA will follow up on information shared with the agency by other administrative and state agencies, such as California's Air Resources Board and Environment and Climate Control Canada, to investigate vehicle compliance.

EV-CIS

Electronic submission by manufactures to the EPA's Engine and Vehicle Compliance Information System known as EV-CIS began to be implemented for on-highway motorcycles in 2015; previously manufacturers entered information in EPA's Verify system. The EV-CIS system features a web interface for the submission of manufacturer certification information. The savings from this, along with other features, including improved coordination with California's certification process and improved manufacturer capacity to self-correct submissions, are reflected in this ICR. For this reason, the reporting burden estimates associated with submitting information to the EPA in this ICR are more accurate than our previous ICR estimates. Feedback from the highway motorcycle manufacturers questioned for this ICR regarding our EV-CIS system continues to be largely positive.

Averaging Program for HC+NOx

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

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

3(a) Non-duplication

Efforts have been made to eliminate duplication in this information collection. As mentioned above, the EPA's implementation of the EV-CIS system, under which the manufacturer submission process occurs, should further help minimize duplication in submissions.

Because of the specialized nature of HMC manufacturing and the fact that product plans and emission performance information may be submitted to the EPA prior to the introduction of production vehicles into US commerce, this information is not available from any source other than the manufacturer. Therefore, this information is not likely to be collected by any other governmental agency for this or related purposes.

3(b) Public Notice

EPA will solicit public comment by means of a Federal Register Notice.

3(c) Consultations

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

Name
Firm
Telephone
Scott Bollinger
Harley-Davidson Motor Company

Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Larry Keller
Polaris Industries Inc.
(651) 408-7253
Margaret Goldstein
Harrison Wolf
714-841-6400

These individuals have experience with the reporting aspects of the EPA's current programs. Comments received have been reflected in the burden estimates discussed below.

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

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

3(e) General Guidelines

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

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

3(f) Confidentiality

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

3(g) Sensitive Questions

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

Section 4: Respondents and Information Requested

4(a) Respondents/NAICS Codes

The respondents are involved in the industries shown in the following table:

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

4(b) Information Requested

(i) Data items

Manufacturers of on-highway motorcycles are required to submit descriptions of their planned product line, including detailed descriptions of the emission control system, test data, and demonstrations of compliance with other requirements, such as methods for determining deterioration factors for durability. Manufacturers supply test data to verify that their products will comply with the emission standards. They are also required to notify the EPA of in-use defects experienced by their vehicles and reports of voluntary recalls. Other major data items include submission of technical service bulletins; copies of warranties; and averaging and banking calculations. Given the diversity of vehicles produced and the complicated nature of the regulations, in certain instances manufacturers may also find it advantageous to request variances from standard EPA procedures.

(ii) Respondent Activities

While there is no "typical" respondent, all manufacturers must describe their product and supply test data and other information to verify compliance. The biggest burden in this ICR comes from the cost of test facilities and the costs and labor hours of running tests to generate the data that must be reported to the EPA. The EPA will conduct a limited number of "confirmatory tests" to monitor manufacturer results. This generally requires that emissions test vehicle(s) be shipped to the EPA's designated testing laboratory. Manufacturers must also retain records. These tasks are repeated for each model year, although typically previous data and information can be "carried over" when no significant changes have occurred. If, during a model year a product change is made (an "amendment" to an application or certified configuration), the EPA must be notified. Under some circumstances additional test data may be required.

Manufacturers must also submit reports concerning defects that are discovered and voluntary recalls that are conducted; they may also be requested to submit to production vehicle testing that the EPA may elect to conduct.

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

 Agency Activities

A significant portion of the EPA's emission compliance activity is spent reviewing applications to verify that the correct vehicle tests have been conducted and necessary information submitted. Amendments to applications must also be selectively reviewed for possible emissions impacts and manufacturers' evaluations thereof. A part of this process involves determining if the use of data from a previous model year is appropriate or if new testing will be required. The EPA also selects a number of vehicles for confirmation at an EPA designated test facility. The EPA maintains the relevant reporting systems and records and analyzes relevant data for regulatory development and compliance oversight purposes.

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

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

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

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

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

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

5(d) Collection Schedule

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

Section 6: Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden

The burden estimates below consider the HMC program described above in section 2(b).

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

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

The changes in this ICR from ICR 2535.01 reflect changes in the numbers of mandatory tests performed due to estimates of the number of engine families certified and tested, rather than changes in regulation. The number of tests has been updated to reflect computer query results for model year 2017 and additional improvements from EPA's EV-CIS system. At the time of this ICR renewal preparation, Model Year 2018 data were not yet available.

The present burden estimate continues the process of updating based on a renewed examination of the burdens, consultations with industry, and consultations with program administrators within the EPA.

Whereas manufacturers develop their products within the context of compliance with all the requirements of the Clean Air Act, we understand the Paperwork Reduction Act to be centrally concerned with reporting and recordkeeping burdens. Thus, we start with the burden of submitting information to the EPA and keeping copies of that information. From there we go on to consider the costs of developing the information that must be reported. Consequently, this ICR has traditionally included the burden of conducting tests that have to be reported to support the EPA's oversight of compliance with the Clean Air Act. We take the cost of conducting the tests to include contracting the cost of testing to outside test laboratories, the capital costs of building the facilities to run the tests, if applicable, and the associated operations and maintenance costs in support of such facility(s), as well as the service mileage accumulation for durability determinations, and labor costs associated with performing all of these functions.

Estimated Respondent Burden Hours:
Program/Activity
Engine Families/Year
Respondents/ Year
Total
hours per Respondent (Average)
Highway Motorcycles
287
70
5,453

6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs
 Estimating labor costs

The labor costs in this ICR reflect the May 2018 BLS National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates (https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_336000.htm). With a 130 percent overhead multiplier, also based on the BLS benefits adjustment factor of 30 percent for 2018, the categories are $86.55 manager, $37.95 technical, and $29.15 administrative. Use of these rates represents a small increase in the rates previously used for the on-highway motorcycle burden adjustment (ICR 2535.01).

We have estimated labor costs for these three categories for each labor item for certification and compliance obligations. The total labor hours for each certified engine family, as well as all reporting, record-keeping and compliance testing requirements, is 15,089. This amounts to a total of $18,365.36 labor cost per engine family/certificate.

 Estimating Operations and Maintenance Costs

Program/Activity
Number
of Respondents
Burden/
Response
($)
Total
($)
Highway Motorcycles
                                                                              8
                                                                       $2335.00
                                                                     $18,680.00

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

O&M test costs here reflect a decrease in the number of new HMC engine families being certified that require new testing to demonstrate compliance with the standard. Many highway motorcycle manufacturers also contract with testing facilities to provide data to the EPA for certification and compliance testing. Contract costs are not allocated as an O&M cost for this ICR and appear as an annual expense requiring no additional labor expenditure by the respondent. Due to these changes in the industry as well as our method of allocating respondent expense, a change in the O&M costs comes from inclusion of testing estimates for this ICR for model year 2017.

  Estimating Capital Costs

Annualized Capital and Startup Costs:

Program/Activity
Number
Respondents/Year
Burden/ Response ($)
Total
($)
Highway Motorcycles
8
$5,333.00
$42,664.00

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

These capital costs have long been treated as ongoing costs rather than start-up costs in the 0783 series. In effect, this allows a capital cost to be attributed on a per-test basis. Because of the wide variety of circumstances among manufacturers (land availability, capital assets, lending terms, labor shifts) and the continuing changes in the numbers of vehicles and engines being certified from year to year, this is the best method of counting facilities capital costs and one which allows continuity of treatment from one collection request to another. This also has the result, as with O&M costs, that collection requests can reflect changes in the information burden due to market forces in the industry that are much too complicated to model. The changes in this estimate from the last renewal reflect re-estimations and changes in the industry, not program changes by the EPA and we will not depart from past practice in this on-highway motorcycle ICR.

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

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden

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

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

This ICR estimates the hourly wage for an EPA employee at $86.21 with an adjustment to $137.94. Administrative support is estimated to be an hourly wage of $35.87. Therefore, the combined wage for the Agency burden would be $173.81. We are estimating 3,650 hours a year for the Agency to review applications, conduct certification and compliance testing, review amendments to applications and certificates, and collect and review records required to be submitted to the EPA. This amounts to a total Agency burden of $1,047,540.82 annually to administer this program.

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

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

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost

(i)  Respondent Tally

RESPONDENTS
70
BURDEN HOURS
5453
LABOR COST
$988,626.31
OPERATING COST
$18,680.00
CAPITALIZED COST
$42,664.00

(ii)  Agency Tally

EMPLOYEES (2):
$173.81
Annual LABOR Hours:
3650
Agency COST
$634,393.64

6(f) Reasons for change in burden

The change in burden since the previous ICR renewal (ICR No. 2535.01) is due to the changes in cost methodology and coverage outlined above in 6(a) combined with new counts of the numbers of tests performed including evaporative testing. The EPA has not made any program changes (other than approved rulemakings) since the previous ICR renewal. The effect of these changes can be summarized as follows:

Additional Compliance Costs

In our previous ICR's, we did not individually account for the diverse activities required to review test data, initiate and run production vehicle testing, and monitor reporting and record keeping requirements. In addition to the Agency's improved presence in certification and compliance, this ICR also recognizes the changes that have occurred in the highway motorcycle industry. EPA's compliance actions against such entities like Motor Science and Systems Launch Associates, has increased the need for all respondents to properly report production and averaging numbers as well as provide accurate certification test reports. In addition, due to the diverse nature of the highway motorcycle industry, many manufacturers are relying on contract test laboratories to conduct certification testing instead of maintaining a certification test lab to comply with EPA test requirements. That has meant a reduction in Operation and Maintenance costs and a reallocation to Capital and contract cost in this ICR. Finally, evaporative and permeation testing is required for highway motorcycles. Manufacturers have choices in terms of complying with this requirement, but for those manufacturers that choose to certify there fuel lines and fuel tanks, there is an additional expense for certifying those evaporative components.

Labor hours:  The currently approved ICR has estimated 3,594 hours annually per respondent. This renewal estimates 5,453 hours annually per respondent. This change is the result of corrections to the hours used to file applications, conduct exhaust and evaporative testing, and file an application under the EV-CIS system. This ICR also accounts for the time it likely takes respondents to comply with EPA production test orders, produce production numbers at the end of the model year, and maintain data used for certification and compliance. This increase of 1860 hours reflects the improved process of estimating respondent burden to comply with EPA requirements through certification and compliance activities.

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

6(g) Burden Statement

The table in Section 6(e) presents the total estimated burden for the HMC exhaust and evaporative emissions compliance programs; approximately 5,453 hours per year. Annual operating and capitalized costs are approximately $18,680 and $181,322.00 respectively. While the universe of vehicle manufacturers is quite diverse and there is no "typical" respondent, the burden estimates for the various individual activities in section 6(a) can be used to estimate the burden for a particular respondent (about $ $4,141.56). These estimates include time to review applicable regulations and guidance documents, generate and gather the necessary information, submit documents, conduct certification and compliance testing, and provide all required reporting and record keeping activities.

Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and submitting information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, the EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR - 2016 - 0027, which is available for online viewing at regulations.gov.

This site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. When in the system, select "search," then key in the Docket ID Number identified above. EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.

The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

Comments can also be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0027 and OMB Control Number 2060-0710 in any correspondence.


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 109 (Thursday, June 6, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 26456]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11868]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86002; File No. 013-00132]

Initial Form ATS-N Filing; Notice of Extension of Commission
Review Period

June 3, 2019.
    On February 12, 2019, LeveL ATS filed an initial Form ATS-N (``Form
ATS-N'') with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').
Pursuant to Rule 304 under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''), the Commission may, after notice and an opportunity for
hearing, declare an initial Form ATS-N ineffective no later than 120
days from the date of filing with the Commission, or, if applicable,
the extended review period. June 12, 2019 is 120 calendar days from the
date of filing. Pursuant to Rule 304(a)(1)(iv)(B), the Commission may
extend the initial Form ATS-N review period for up to an additional 120
calendar days if the initial Form ATS-N is unusually lengthy or raises
novel or complex issues that require additional time for review.
    LeveL ATS was operating pursuant to an initial operation report on
Form ATS on file with the Commission as of January 7, 2019.\1\ LeveL
ATS filed an initial Form ATS-N on February 12, 2019. During the
initial 120 calendar day review period, the Commission staff has been
reviewing the disclosures on LeveL ATS's initial Form ATS-N. In
addition, the staff has been engaged in ongoing discussions with LeveL
ATS about its disclosures and manner of operations, as well as the
requirements of Form ATS-N, to facilitate complete and comprehensible
disclosures that reflect the complexities of those operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ An NMS Stock ATS (as defined in Rule 300(k) of Regulation
ATS) that was operating pursuant to an initial operation report on
Form ATS on file with the Commission as of January 7, 2019 is a
``Legacy NMS Stock ATS.'' 17 CFR 242.301(b)(2)(viii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Form ATS-N requires NMS Stock ATSs to file with the Commission, and
disclose to the public for the first time, certain information,
including descriptions by the NMS Stock ATSs of their fees, the trading
activities by their broker-dealer operators and their affiliates in the
NMS Stock ATSs, their use of market data, their written standards for
granting access to trading on the NMS Stock ATSs, and their written
safeguards and procedures for protecting their subscribers'
confidential trading information required by revised Rule 301(b)(10) of
Regulation ATS. The initial Form ATS-N disclosures and discussions with
Commission staff have revealed complexities about the operations of
Legacy NMS Stock ATSs including, among other things, matching
functionalities, means of order entry, order interaction and execution
procedures, conditional order processes, segmentation of orders, and
counterparty selection protocols. The Commission staff needs additional
time to review novel and complex issues such as these, which Commission
staff has discussed with LeveL ATS. Extending the initial Form ATS-N
Commission review period for an additional 120 calendar days will
provide Commission staff an opportunity to continue its review of the
initial Form ATS-N disclosures and discussions with LeveL ATS.
    In the conversations between LeveL ATS and Commission staff about
the initial Form ATS-N disclosures and the ATS operations, Commission
staff and LeveL ATS have discussed a potential amendment to update
LeveL ATS's disclosures regarding the complexities of its operations.
Extending the review period will enable the NMS Stock ATS to amend its
disclosures, if appropriate, and allow Commission staff to conduct a
thorough review of amendments to the initial disclosures provided on
the initial Form ATS-N.
    For the reasons given above, the Commission is extending the review
period of the initial Form ATS-N submitted by LeveL ATS. Accordingly,
pursuant to Rule 304(a)(1)(iv)(B), October 10, 2019 is the date by
which the Commission may declare the initial Form ATS-N submitted by
LeveL ATS ineffective.

    By the Commission.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-11868 Filed 6-5-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 209)]
[Notices]
[Page 63964-63966]
[DOCID:fr28oc08-54]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP08-476-000]

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Intent To
Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Mobile Bay South
Expansion Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

October 21, 2008.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the construction and operation of
facilities proposed by Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation
(Transco) in Choctaw County, Alabama.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process we will
use to gather input from the public and interested agencies on the
project. Your input will help the Commission staff determine which
issues need to be evaluated in the EA. Please note that the scoping
period will close on November 20, 2008.
    This notice is being sent to affected landowners; federal, state,
and local government representatives and agencies; environmental and
public interest groups; Native American tribes; other interested
parties in this proceeding; and local libraries and newspapers. We
encourage government representatives to notify their constituents of
this planned project and encourage them to comment on their areas of
concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, you may be contacted
by a pipeline company representative about the acquisition of an
easement to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities.
The pipeline company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable
agreement. However, if the project is approved by the Commission, that
approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if
easement negotiations fail

to produce an agreement, the pipeline company could initiate
condemnation proceedings in accordance with state law.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?'' was attached to the
project notice Transco provided to landowners. This fact sheet
addresses a number of typically asked questions, including the use of
eminent domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings.
It is available for viewing on the FERC Internet Web site (http://
www.ferc.gov).

Summary of the Proposed Project

    The proposed Mobile Bay South Expansion Project would involve the
construction and operation of Compressor Station 85, a new 9,470
horsepower (hp) compressor station to be located at the interconnection
of the Mobile Bay Lateral and Transco's main line in Choctaw County,
Alabama. Specifically, the Project will include all necessary piping,
auxiliary systems, and appurtenant facilities, including:
     Two 4,735 hp Caterpillar 3636; internal combustion engine-
driven compressor units;
     Approximately 2,400 feet of 30-inch diameter piping
extending from Transco's mainline to the compressor station and from
the compressor station to the Mobile Bay Lateral; and
     Station yard piping and appurtenances.
    Construction of the project facilities would enable Transco to
provide firm transportation service from Compressor Station 85 and
interconnects with party pipelines at Station 85 southward to delivery
points located on the Mobile Bay Lateral.
    The location of the project facilities is shown in Appendix 1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The appendices referenced in this notice are not being
printed in the Federal Register. Copies of all appendices, other
than Appendix 1 (maps), are available on the Commission's website at
the ``eLibrary'' link or from the Commission's Public Reference
Room, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, or call (202)
502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary refer to the
last page of this notice. Copies of the appendices were sent to all
those receiving this notice in the mail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nonjurisdictional Facilities

    Non-jurisdictional facilities associated with this project would
include electrical service provided to the compressor station from the
local utility, Black Warrior Electrical Membership Cooperative. A water
pipeline would also be constructed by North Choctaw Water to supply
water to the station.

Land Requirements for Construction

    Transco would purchase a 126.8-acre parcel of land to site the
facilities. Construction of the proposed facilities would require about
32.9 acres of land including aboveground facilities, outlet pipeline,
and access roads. Following construction, about 10 acres would be used
for operation of the project's facilities. The remaining 22.9 acres of
land would be restored within the existing compressor station property
or allowed to revert to former use along the pipeline right-of-way.

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
to discover and address concerns the public may have about proposals.
This process is referred to as ``scoping.'' The main goal of the
scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this Notice of Intent, the Commission staff
requests public comments on the scope of the issues to address in the
EA. All comments received are considered during the preparation of the
EA. State and local government representatives are encouraged to notify
their constituents of this proposed action and encourage them to
comment on their areas of concern.
    In the EA we \2\ will discuss impacts that could occur as a result
of the construction and operation of the proposed project under these
general headings:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``We'', ``us'', and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Office of Energy Projects (OEP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Geology and soils.
     Land use.
     Water resources, fisheries, and wetlands.
     Cultural resources.
     Vegetation and wildlife.
     Air quality and noise.
     Endangered and threatened species.
     Hazardous waste.
     Public safety.
    We will also evaluate possible alternatives to the proposed project
or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to lessen
or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    Our independent analysis of the issues will be in the EA. Depending
on the comments received during the scoping process, the EA may be
published and mailed to federal, state, and local agencies, public
interest groups, interested individuals, affected landowners,
newspapers, libraries, and the Commission's official service list for
this proceeding. A comment period will be allotted for review if the EA
is published. We will consider all comments on the EA before we make
our recommendations to the Commission.
    To ensure your comments are considered, please carefully follow the
instructions in the public participation section below.

Currently Identified Environmental Issues

    We have already identified several issues that we think deserve
attention based on a preliminary review of the proposed facilities and
the environmental information provided by Transco. This preliminary
list of issues may be changed based on your comments and our analysis.
     Cultural resources may be affected by the project.
     The project may have air emissions and noise impacts.
     The new compressor station may have visual impacts on the
surrounding area.
     The federally listed gopher tortoise habitat may be
affected.

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the Mobile Bay South Expansion Project. Your
comments should focus on the potential environmental effects,
reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental
impacts. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be.
To ensure that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please
send in your comments so that they will be received in Washington, DC
on or before November 20, 2008.
    For your convenience, there are three methods in which you can use
to submit your comments to the Commission. In all instances please
reference the project docket number CP08-476-000 with your submission.
The docket number can be found on the front of this notice. The
Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has dedicated
eFiling expert staff available to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the Quick
Comment feature, which is located on the Commission's internet Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov under the link to Documents and Filings. A Quick

Comment is an easy method for interested persons to submit text-only
comments on a project;
    (2) You may file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's Internet Web site at
http://www.ferc.gov under the link to Documents and Filings. eFiling
involves preparing your submission in the same manner as you would if
filing on paper, and then saving the file on your computer's hard
drive. You will attach that file as your submission. New eFiling users
must first create an account by clicking on ``Sign up'' or
``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing you are
making. A comment on a particular project is considered a ``Comment on
a Filing;'' or
    (3) You may file your comments via mail to the Commission by
sending an original and two copies of your letter to: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE.,
Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
    Label one copy of the comments for the attention of Gas Branch 2,
PJ11.2.

Environmental Mailing List

    An effort is being made to send this notice to all individuals,
organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially
affected by the proposed project. This includes all landowners who are
potential right-of-way grantors, whose property may be used temporarily
for project purposes, or who own homes within distances defined in the
Commission's regulations of certain aboveground facilities. By this
notice we are also asking governmental agencies, especially those in
Appendix 2, to express their interest in becoming cooperating agencies
for the preparation of the EA.
    If you do not want to send comments at this time but still want to
remain on our mailing list, please return the Information Request
(Appendix 3). If you do not return the Information Request, you will be
taken off the mailing list.

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an official party to the proceeding known as an
``intervenor.'' Intervenors play a more formal role in the process.
Among other things, intervenors have the right to receive copies of
case-related Commission documents and filings by other intervenors.
Likewise, each intervenor must send one electronic copy (using the
Commission's eFiling system) or 14 paper copies of its filings to the
Secretary of the Commission and must send a copy of its filings to all
other parties on the Commission's service list for this proceeding.
    If you want to become an intervenor you must file a motion to
intervene according to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214). Only intervenors have the right to seek
rehearing of the Commission's decision.
    The Notice of Application for this proposed project issued on
September 29, 2008 identified the date for the filing of interventions
as October 20, 2008. However, affected landowners and parties with
environmental concerns may be granted late intervenor status upon
showing good cause by stating that they have a clear and direct
interest in this proceeding which would not be adequately represented
by any other parties. You do not need intervenor status to have your
environmental comments considered.

Availability of Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at 1-866-208-FERC or on the
FERC Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link.
Click on the eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the
docket number excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number
field. Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries and direct links to
the documents. Go to http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/
EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-25617 Filed 10-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P