[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 225 (Wednesday, November 23, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71722-71726]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25470]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96336; File No. SR-NYSENAT-2022-25]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE National, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule
Change To Make Certain Revisions to the Preamble to Rule 10.9217 and
Add Rule 2.1210 to the List of Minor Rule Violations in Rule 10.9217(f)

November 17, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on November 4, 2022, NYSE National, Inc. (``NYSE National''
or the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I
and II 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 and approving the proposal
on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to (1) make certain revisions to the preamble
to Rule 10.9217 (Violations Appropriate for Disposition Under Rule
10.9216(b)); (2) add Rule 2.1210 (Registration Requirements) to the
list of minor rule violations in Rule 10.9217(f) and associated fine
levels in Rule 10.9217(g); and (3) make certain non-substantive
clarifying changes to Rule 10.9217. The proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, 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 self-regulatory organization
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 those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item III below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below,

of the most significant parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to (1) make certain revisions to the preamble
to Rule 10.9217 (Violations Appropriate for Disposition Under Rule
10.9216(b)); (2) add Rule 2.1210 (Registration Requirements) to the
list of minor rule violations in Rule 10.9217(f) and associated fine
levels in Rule 10.9217(g); and (3) make certain non-substantive
clarifying changes to Rule 10.9217.
Preamble to Rule 10.9217
    The preamble to current Rule 10.9217 consists of four subsections
(a) through (d). The Exchange propose to modify subsections (a) through
(d) based on the preamble to the version of Rule 10.9217 adopted by the
Exchange's affiliate NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca''), as follows.
    Subsection (a) currently provides that any ETP Holder or Associated
Person may be subject to a fine under Rule 10.9216(b) with respect to
any rules listed in the rule and that the fine amounts and fine levels
set forth therein apply to the fines imposed. Subsection (a) further
provides that any fine imposed pursuant to the rule and not contested
shall not be publicly reported, except as may be required by Rule 19d-1
under the Exchange Act or as may be required by any other regulatory
authority.
    The Exchange proposes that the current first sentence of subsection
(a) would be unchanged except that the Exchange would add ``, not to
exceed $5,000,'' after ``fine'' to clarify that a minor rule fine on
the Exchange cannot exceed $5,000.\4\ The Exchange proposes to delete
the second sentence providing that any fine imposed pursuant to this
Rule and not contested shall not be publicly reported, except as may be
required by Rule 19d-1 under the Exchange Act or as may be required by
any other regulatory authority. This information is duplicative of
information contained in Rule 10.9216(b)(4) and 10.9217(c) in greater
detail and further contains a process for contesting a fine which, as
discussed below, the Exchange proposes to eliminate. As proposed, NYSE
National Rule 10.9217(a) would be the same as NYSE Arca Rule
10.9217(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83289 (May 17,
2018), 83 FR 23968, 23968 n.6 (May 23, 2018) (SR-NYSENAT-2018-02)
(Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated
Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Amended by Amendment No. 1,
To Support the Re-Launch of NYSE National, Inc. on the Pillar
Trading Platform). As part of Amendment No. 1, the Exchange, among
other things, adopted NYSE American's maximum $5,000 fine for minor
rule violations under Rule 10.9217. See Amendment No.1, n. 59,
available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysenat-2018-02/nysenat201802-3653908-162416.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsection (b) currently provides that if a person or organization
that has been fined pursuant to the rule pays the fine, such payment
shall be deemed a waiver of any right to a disciplinary proceeding
under the Rule 10.9000 Series and of any right to review of the matter
by the BCC, CFR or the Board of Directors. This provision incorporated
requirements originally set forth in the Exchange's legacy Rule
8.15(c). The Exchange's affiliates' rules contained similar
provisions.\5\ The Exchange believes that provision would be redundant
and unnecessary. As discussed below, the Exchange proposes to eliminate
the specific process detailed in Rule 10.9217(c) to convert a minor
rule fine into a disciplinary hearing. Moreover, under the Exchange's
current procedures set forth in Rule 10.9216(b)(1), if Enforcement has
reason to believe a violation has occurred and if the ETP Holder or
Associated Person does not dispute the violation, Enforcement may
prepare and request that the ETP Holder or Associated Person execute a
minor rule violation plan letter accepting a finding of violation,
consenting to the imposition of sanctions, and agreeing to waive such
ETP Holder's or Associated Person's right to a hearing before a Hearing
Panel or, if applicable, an Extended Hearing Panel, and any right of
review by the Exchange Board of Directors, the SEC, and the courts, or
to otherwise challenge the validity of the letter, if the letter is
accepted. Under current Rule 10.9216(b)(4), if an ETP Holder or
Associated Person executes the minor rule violation plan letter and the
letter is accepted by the CRO, it is deemed final. The Exchange
accordingly proposes to replace the current text of subsection (b) with
the sentence ``Regulatory Staff designated by the Exchange shall have
the authority to impose a fine pursuant to this Rule.'' As proposed,
NYSE National Rule 10.9217(b) would be the same as NYSE Arca Rule
10.9217(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For instance, the New York Stock Exchange LLC's (``NYSE'')
legacy Rule 476A(c) provided that if the person against whom a minor
rule violation fine is imposed pays the fine, such payment is deemed
to be a waiver by such person of such person's right to a
disciplinary proceeding under NYSE Rule 476 and any review of the
matter by a Hearing Panel or the Exchange Board of Directors. NYSE's
legacy rules came into effect when the NYSE adopted disciplinary
rules modeled on the rules of the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc. (``FINRA''). See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
69045 (March 5, 2013), 78 FR 15394 (March 11, 2013) (SR-NYSE-2013-
02) (Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Adopting Investigation,
Disciplinary, Sanction, and Other Procedural Rules That Are Modeled
on the Rules of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and To
Make Certain Conforming and Technical Changes). The NYSE recently
proposed to delete its legacy disciplinary rules. See SR-NYSE-2022-
48.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsection (c) currently provides that any person or organization
that has been fined pursuant to Rule 10.9217 may contest such fine by
filing with Enforcement a written application containing: (1) an
identification of the Exchange action over which the review is being
requested; (2) the reason(s) why the applicant disagrees with such
action; and (3) the relief sought. Such written application must be
submitted not more than five (5) business days after receipt of written
notification that a fine has been imposed pursuant to this Rule. The
subsection further provides that if a determination is contested
pursuant to this subsection, the matter shall become a formal
disciplinary action, and any penalty imposed by a hearing panel shall
be publicly reported to the Exchange membership after such decision has
become ``final'' pursuant to Rule 10.8313. Further, any person or
organization found in violation of a minor rule under this plan is not
required to report such violation on SEC Form BD or Form U-4, provided
that the sanction imposed consists of a fine not exceeding $2,500 and
the sanctioned person or organization has not sought an adjudication,
including a hearing, or otherwise exhausted the administrative remedies
available with respect to the matter. Finally, any fine imposed in
excess of $2,500 will be subject to current rather than quarterly
reporting pursuant to Rule 19d-1 under the Act.
    The Exchange proposes to no longer permit persons or organizations
fined pursuant to Rule 10.9217 to contest the minor rule violation
letter by filing a written application and converting it into a regular
disciplinary proceeding. None of the Exchange's affiliates that adopted
the FINRA disciplinary rules permit persons or organizations fined
pursuant to their version of Rule 10.9217 to contest the fine in this
manner, including affiliates such as the NYSE that also permitted such
a procedures under its legacy rules.\6\ The

proposed changes would thereby further harmonize the Exchange's Rule
10.9217 with the version adopted by the Exchange's affiliates.
Moreover, the Exchange believes that its current disciplinary rules
already provide similar and sufficient procedural protections to
persons fined under Rule 10.9217. Currently, if an ETP Holder or
Associated Person disputes a minor rule fine, Enforcement's only
recourse would be to file a complaint under Rule 10.9211. Similarly, if
an ETP Holder or Associated Person executes a minor rule plan letter
under Rule 10.9216 and the CRO rejects the letter, the Exchange may
take any other appropriate disciplinary action with respect to the
alleged violation. Further, the ETP Holder or Associated Person shall
not be prejudiced by the execution of the minor rule violation plan
letter under Rule 10.9216(b)(1) and, under Rule 10.9216(b)(4), the
letter may not be introduced into evidence in connection with the
determination of the issues set forth in any complaint or in any other
proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Under legacy NYSE Rule 476A(d), any person against whom a
minor rule violation was imposed could contest the Exchange's
determination by timely filing a written response meeting the
requirements of an answer as provided in NYSE Rule 476(d), at which
point the matter became a disciplinary proceeding subject to NYSE
Rule 476. As adopted, NYSE Rule 9216 does not permit a Respondent
(as defined in the disciplinary rules) to contest a minor rule
violation letter by filing an answer and convert it into a regular
disciplinary proceeding. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
68678 (January 16, 2013), 78 FR 5213, 5226 (January 24, 2013) (SR-
NYSE-2013-02) (Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Adopting
Investigation, Disciplinary, Sanction, and Other Procedural Rules
That Are Modeled on the Rules of the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority and To Make Certain Conforming and Technical Changes). As
noted above, the NYSE recently filed to delete its legacy
disciplinary rules. See also note 4, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to effectuate this change, the Exchange proposes to delete
the first three sentences of subsection (c). The last two sentences,
which are identical to NYSE Arca Rule 10.9217(c), would remain
unchanged.
    The Exchange does not proposes any changes to current Rule
10.9217(d).
Addition of Rule 2.1210 to the List of Eligible Rules
    The Exchange proposes to add Rule 2.1210 the list of eligible rules
in Rule 10.9217(f).
    Rule 2.1210, which was adopted in 2018,\7\ sets forth the
requirements for persons engaged in the investment banking or
securities business of an ETP Holder to be registered with the Exchange
as a representative or principal in each category of registration
appropriate to his or her functions and responsibilities as specified
in Rule 2.1220.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84350 (October 3,
2018), 83 FR 51030 (October 10, 2018) (SR-NYSENAT-2018-21) (Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Amendments to Rules
Regarding Qualification, Registration and Continuing Education
Applicable to Equity Trading Permit Holders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to add Rule 2.1210 to the list of rules in
Rule 10.9217(f) eligible for disposition pursuant to a fine. A
substantially similar version of Rule 2.1210 was adopted by the NYSE in
2018 \8\ and is currently eligible for minor rule fines under the
NYSE's version of Rule 9217.\9\ The Exchange also proposes to add
first, second and third level fines for violations of Rule 2.1210 to
Rule 10.9217(g)(2) as new item 6. As proposed, failure to comply with
the registration requirements of Rule 2.1210 would be eligible for a
$1,000 fine for the first violation, $2,500 for the second violation
and $5,000 for the third and subsequent violations. The proposed fine
levels would be the same as the applicable fine levels for individuals
violating NYSE Rule 1210 set forth in NYSE Rule 9217.\10\ Current item
6 under Rule 10.9217(g)(2) governing failure to comply with the CAT
Compliance Rules in the Rule 6.6800 Series would become new item 7. As
discussed below, the Exchange would add a new footnote 2 to current
item 6 (new item 7) setting forth the range for violations of the CAT
Compliance Rules and delete ``Up to $2,500.00'' from the chart.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84336 (October 2,
2018), 83 FR 50727 (October 9, 2018) (SR-NYSE-2018-44) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Amendments To Rules Regarding
Qualification, Registration and Continuing Education Applicable to
Members and Member Organizations).
    \9\ See NYSE Rule 9217.
    \10\ As set forth in Rule 10.9217(c), any fine imposed in excess
of $2,500 would be subject to current rather than quarterly
reporting to the Commission pursuant to Rule 19d-1 under the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change would strengthen the
Exchange's ability to carry out its oversight and enforcement
responsibilities in cases where full disciplinary proceedings are
unwarranted in view of the minor nature of the particular violation.
Non-Substantive Clarifying Changes
    The Exchange proposes to add clarifying language regarding the
disposition of minor rule fines for violations of the CAT Compliance
Rules in the Rule 6.6800 Series based on language adopted by the
Exchange's affiliates. Specifically, the Exchange would add a new
footnote 2 to current item 6 (proposed item 7, discussed above) of Rule
10.9217(g)(2) that would provide as follows:

    For failures to comply with the Consolidated Audit Trail
Compliance Rule requirements of the Rule 6.6800 Series, the Exchange
may impose a minor rule violation fine of up to $2,500. For more
serious violations, other disciplinary action may be sought.

    The language is identical to that adopted by the Exchange's
affiliates NYSE and NYSE Chicago, Inc.\11\ As noted, ``Up to
$2,500.00'' would be deleted from the chart in current item 6 as
redundant of proposed footnote 2. The proposed change is not intended
to make a substantive change. Violations of the CAT Compliance Rules
are currently eligible for minor rule fines and $2,500 is currently the
maximum eligible fine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See NYSE Rule 9217(d) (``For failures to comply with the
Consolidated Audit Trail Compliance Rule requirements of the Rule
6800 Series, the Exchange may impose a minor rule violation fine of
up to $2,500. For more serious violations, other disciplinary action
may be sought.''); NYSE Chicago 10.9217(f), n. ** (same).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Act,\12\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5),\13\ in particular, because it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to
remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open
market and a national market system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Preamble to Rule 10.9217
    The Exchange believes that harmonizing the preamble to Rule 10.9217
with that of its affiliates would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system by a
providing greater harmonization between Exchange rules and those of its
affiliates in connection with minor rule fines, thereby fostering
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities and will remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system.
Moreover, by adopting the same applicable minor rule standards for
violations of those standards as its affiliates, the Exchange would
promote regulatory consistency.
    More specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes
to Rule 10.9217(a) clarifying that minor rule fines cannot exceed
$5,000 and deleting duplicative information

regarding the public reporting of uncontested minor rule fines would
further the goal of transparency and add clarity to the Exchange's
rules. The Exchange believes that the proposed changes would also be
consistent with the public interest and the protection of investors
because investors will not be harmed and in fact would benefit from
increased transparency, thereby reducing potential confusion. In
addition, the Exchange believes that deleting current rule text in Rule
10.9217(b) providing that payment of a minor fine is deemed a waiver of
any right to a disciplinary proceeding and of any right to review would
be redundant of the Exchange's current procedures set forth in Rule
10.9216(b)(1) whereby execution of a minor rule violation plan letter
accepted by the CRO is final and waives the right to a hearing and any
right of review by an ETP Holder or Associated Person. Finally, the
proposed elimination of the procedure set forth in Rule 10.9217(c) to
contest the minor rule violations would further harmonize the
Exchange's Rule 10.9217 with the version adopted by the Exchange's
affiliates. As discussed above, the Exchange believes that its current
disciplinary rules already provide similar and sufficient procedural
protections to persons fined under Rule 10.9217. Eliminating the legacy
contestation procedure in Rule 10.9217(c) would accordingly promote
efficiency by applying uniform procedures for contesting a minor rule
fine across exchanges.
Addition of Rule 2.1210 to the List of Eligible Rules
    Minor rule fines provide a meaningful sanction for minor or
technical violations of rules when the conduct at issue does not
warrant stronger, immediately reportable disciplinary sanctions. The
inclusion of a rule in Rule 10.9217 does not minimize the importance of
compliance with the rule, nor does it preclude the Exchange from
choosing to pursue violations of eligible rules through formal
disciplinary action if the nature of the violations or prior
disciplinary history warrants more significant sanctions. Rather, the
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will strengthen the
Exchange's ability to carry out its oversight and enforcement
responsibilities in cases where full disciplinary proceedings are
unwarranted in view of the minor nature of the particular violation.
The option to impose a minor rule sanction gives the Exchange
additional flexibility to administer its enforcement program in the
most effective and efficient manner while still fully meeting the
Exchange's remedial objectives in addressing violative conduct.
    The proposed rule change is thus designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices because it will provide the Exchange
the ability to issue a minor rule fine for violations of the
registration requirements set forth in Rule 2.1210 where a more formal
disciplinary action may not be warranted or appropriate. In addition,
the Exchange believes that adding rules based on the rules of its
affiliate to the Exchange's minor rule plan, and adding associated fine
levels based on the treatment of similar registration rule violations
by its affiliate NYSE, would promote fairness and consistency in the
marketplace by permitting the Exchange to issue a minor rule fine for
violations of substantially similar rules that are already eligible for
minor rule treatment, thereby harmonizing minor rule plan fines across
affiliated exchanges for the same conduct. As noted, the proposed fine
levels would be the same as the applicable fine levels for individuals
violating NYSE Rule 1210 set forth in NYSE Rule 9217.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposed amendments to Rule
10.9217 are consistent with Section 6(b)(6) of the Act,\14\ which
provides that members and persons associated with members shall be
appropriately disciplined for violation of the provisions of the Act,
the rules and regulations thereunder and the rules of the exchange, by
expulsion, suspension, limitation of activities, functions, and
operations, fine, censure, being suspended or barred from being
associated with a member, or any other fitting sanction. As noted, the
proposed rule change would provide the Exchange ability to sanction
minor or technical violations of proposed Rule 2.1210 pursuant to the
Exchange's rules. Finally, the Exchange also believes that the proposed
changes are designed to provide a fair procedure for the disciplining
of members and persons associated with members, consistent with
Sections 6(b)(7) and 6(d) of the Act.\15\ Rule 10.9217 does not
preclude an ETP Holder or Associated Person from contesting an alleged
violation under Rule 10.9216(b)and receiving a hearing on the matter
with the same procedural rights through a litigated disciplinary
proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(6).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(7) and 78f(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Non-Substantive Clarifying Changes
    The Exchange believes that the proposed non-substantive clarifying
changes described above would add clarity, consistency and transparency
to the Exchange's rules. The Exchange believes that adding such clarity
and transparency would also be consistent with the public interest and
the protection of investors because investors will not be harmed and in
fact would benefit from increased transparency, thereby reducing
potential confusion. In addition, the Exchange believes that the
incorporating language relating to violations of the CAT Compliance
Rules adopted by the Exchange's affiliates would promote fairness and
consistency in the marketplace by eliminating differences and
harmonizing language related to minor rule treatment of similar rule
violations across affiliates. The proposed change is not intended to
make any substantive change to the applicability of minor rule fines to
violations of the CAT Compliance Rules or the amount of those fines.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed change is not
designed to address any competitive issue but rather to update the
Exchange's rules to strengthen the Exchange's ability to carry out its
oversight and enforcement functions and deter potential violative
conduct and to align the Exchange's rule setting forth violations
eligible for a minor rule fine more closely with that of its
affiliates.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. 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-NYSENAT-2022-25 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-NYSENAT-2022-25. 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-NYSENAT-2022-25 and should be submitted
on or before December 14, 2022.

IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
Proposed Rule Change

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\16\ In
particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\17\ which requires that the
rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments and to perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the public interest. The Commission
also believes that the proposal is consistent with Sections 6(b)(1) and
6(b)(6) of the Act \18\ which require that the rules of an exchange
enforce compliance with, and provide appropriate discipline for,
violations of Commission and Exchange rules. Finally, the Commission
finds that the proposal is consistent with the public interest, the
protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act, as required by Rule 19d-1(c)(2) under the Act,\19\ which
governs minor rule violation plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1) and 78f(b)(6).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated above, the Exchange proposes to (1) make certain
revisions to the preamble to Rule 10.9217 (Violations Appropriate for
Disposition Under Rule 10.9216(b)); (2) add Rule 2.1210 (Registration
Requirements) to the list of minor rule violations in Rule 10.9217(f)
and associated fine levels in Rule 10.9217(g); and (3) make certain
non-substantive clarifying changes to Rule 10.9217.
    The Commission believes that Rules 10.9216(b) and 10.9217 are an
effective way to discipline a member for a minor violation of a rule.
More specifically, the Commission believes that the proposed revisions
to the preamble of Rule 10.9217 are consistent with the Act because
they would add clarity to the Exchange's rules and may help the
Exchange's ability to better carry out its oversight and enforcement
responsibilities. The proposed revisions to the preamble of Rule
10.9217 also would align Rule 10.9217 with the rules of the Exchange's
affiliates. The Commission believes that the proposed addition of Rule
2.1210 (Registration Requirements) to the Exchange's list of current
minor rule violations provides a reasonable means of addressing
violations that do not rise to the level of requiring formal
disciplinary proceedings, while providing greater flexibility in
handling certain violations. Furthermore, the Commission believes that
amending the associated fine schedule is consistent with the Act
because it may help the Exchange's ability to better carry out its
oversight and enforcement responsibilities by levying appropriate fines
for minor violations of the rules included in Rule 10.9217, including
minor violations of Rule 2.1210. Finally the Commission believes that
the Exchange's proposal to make certain non-substantive changes to Rule
10.9217 are consistent with the Act because these changes will add
clarity to the Exchange's rules.
    In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission in no way
minimizes the importance of compliance with the Exchange's rules and
all other rules subject to fines under Rules 10.9216(b) and 10.9217.
The Commission believes that a violation of any self-regulatory
organization's rules, as well as Commission rules, is a serious matter.
However, Rules 10.9216(b) and 10.9217 provide a reasonable means of
addressing rule violations that may not rise to the level of requiring
formal disciplinary proceedings, while providing greater flexibility in
handling certain violations. The Commission expects that the Exchange
will continue to conduct surveillance with due diligence and make a
determination based on its findings, on a case-by-case basis, whether a
fine of more or less than the recommended amount is appropriate for a
violation under Rules 10.9216(b) and 10.9217 or whether a violation
requires formal disciplinary action.
    For the same reasons as discussed above, the Commission finds good
cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\20\ for approving the
proposed rule change prior to the thirtieth day after the date of
publication of the notice of the filing thereof in the Federal
Register. The proposal will assist the Exchange in preventing
fraudulent and manipulative practices by allowing the Exchange to
adequately enforce compliance with, and provide appropriate discipline
for, violations of Exchange rules. Moreover, the proposed changes raise
no new or novel issues. Accordingly, the Commission believes that a
full notice-and-comment period is not necessary before approving the
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\21\ and Rule 19d-1(c)(2) thereunder,\22\ that the proposed rule change
(SR-NYSENAT-2022-25) be, and hereby is, approved on an accelerated
basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-25470 Filed 11-22-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: January 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 18)]
[Notices]
[Page 4576]
[DOCID:fr28ja10-72]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0001]

Veterinary Medicine Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will
be open to the public.
    Name of Committee: Veterinary Medicine Advisory Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and
recommendations to the agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on March 24, 2010, from
8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Location: Rockville Hilton, 1750 Rockville Pike, Rockville MD
20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Contact Person: Aleta Sindelar, Center for Veterinary Medicine
(HFV-3), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD
20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line,
1-800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in the Washington, DC area), code
3014512548. Please call the Information Line for up-to-date information
on this meeting. A notice in the Federal Register about last minute
modifications that impact a previously announced advisory committee
meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide timely
notice. Therefore, you should always check the agency's Web site and
call the appropriate advisory committee hot line/phone line to learn
about possible modifications before coming to the meeting.
    Agenda: On March 24, 2010, the committee will discuss and make
recommendations regarding modifications, if any, to the current risk
minimization and restricted distribution program for Pfizer's PROHEART
6 (NADA 141-189), the subsequent safety data collected under the Center
for Veterinary Medicine's risk minimization and restricted distribution
program, and the agency's role in continued product postmarketing
surveillance.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is
available at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/
default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before
March 17, 2010. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled
between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Those desiring to make formal
oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a brief
statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish
to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an
indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation
on or before March 9, 2010. Time allotted for each presentation may be
limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater
than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public
hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers
for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will
notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by March 10,
2010.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special
accommodations due to a disability, please contact Aleta Sindelar at
least 7 days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/
AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: January 22, 2010.
Jill Hartzler Warner,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Special Medical Programs.
[FR Doc. 2010-1626 Filed 1-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 86 (Thursday, May 3, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19586-19588]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09341]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83125; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2017-088]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 2 and Order Granting Accelerated
Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, To
Amend Nasdaq Rule 4703(a) To Allow Members To Designate an Order with a
RTFY or SCAN Routing Order Attribute To Activate at 7:00 a.m. ET

April 27, 2018.

I. Introduction

    On August 30, 2017, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend Nasdaq Rule 4703(a) relating to the times
for activating an order with a RTFY or SCAN routing order attribute.
The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on September 18, 2017.\3\ On October 31, 2017, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\4\ the Commission designated a longer
period within which to approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the
proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove the proposed rule change.\5\ On December 13, 2017, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change, which
amended and superseded the proposed rule change as originally filed.\6\
On December 15, 2017, the Commission published notice of Amendment No.
1 and instituted proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \7\
to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change,
as modified by Amendment No. 1.\8\ On March 14, 2018, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\9\ the Commission designated a longer
period within which to issue an order approving or disapproving the
proposed rule change.\10\ On April 19, 2018, the Exchange filed
Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change, which amended and
superseded the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No.
1.\11\ The Commission has received no

comments on the proposed rule change. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on Amendment No. 2 from interested persons,
and is approving the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No.
2, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81579 (September 12,
2017), 82 FR 43584.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81986, 82 FR 51453
(November 6, 2017). The Commission designated December 17, 2017 as
the date by which the Commission shall approve or disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the
proposed rule change.
    \6\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange: (1) Modified the proposal
to allow members entering an order with a RTFY or SCAN routing order
attribute to designate the order to activate at a specific time
during Pre-Market Hours (rather than System Hours) on the same day;
(2) specified that the proposed functionality would be offered on a
port level basis; (3) stated that all of the times-in-force in
Nasdaq Rule 4703(a) currently apply to orders with RTFY or SCAN
routing order attributes and made corresponding clarifications and
corrections throughout the proposal; (4) provided additional
information regarding why members might use the proposed
functionality; and (5) provided additional discussion regarding
members' best execution obligations and the application of the
Exchange's regulatory checks associated with the proposed
functionality, and reminded members of their regulatory obligations
(e.g., Market Access Rule, Regulation SHO) when using the proposed
functionality. Amendment No. 1 is available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nasdaq-2017-088/nasdaq2017088-2798107-161689.pdf.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82335, 82 FR 60637
(December 21, 2017).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82871, 83 FR 12229
(March 20, 2018). The Commission designated May 16, 2018 as the date
by which the Commission shall either approve or disapprove the
proposed rule change.
    \11\ In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange: (1) Further narrowed the
proposal by allowing members to designate orders with RTFY or SCAN
routing order attributes to activate at 7:00 a.m. ET; (2) provided
additional information regarding why members might use the proposed
functionality; and (3) compared the proposed functionality to
existing functionalities on other exchanges. Amendment No. 2 is
available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nasdaq-2017-088/nasdaq2017088-3476253-162214.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange proposes to amend Nasdaq Rule 4703(a) to allow members
to designate a 7:00 a.m. ET activation time for an order with a RTFY or
SCAN routing order attribute.
    RTFY is a routing option available for an order that qualifies as a
designated retail order under which orders check the system for
available shares only if so instructed by the entering firm and are
thereafter routed to destinations on the system routing table.\12\ If
shares remain unexecuted after routing, they are posted to the Nasdaq
book.\13\ Once on the book, should the order subsequently be locked or
crossed by another market center, the system will not route the order
to the locking or crossing market center.\14\ RTFY is designed to allow
orders to participate in the opening, reopening, and closing process of
the primary listing market for a security.\15\ SCAN is a routing option
under which orders check the system for available shares and
simultaneously route the remaining shares to destinations on the system
routing table.\16\ If shares remain unexecuted after routing, they are
posted on the Nasdaq book.\17\ Once on the book, should the order
subsequently be locked or crossed by another market center, the system
will not route the order to the locking or crossing market center.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Nasdaq Rule 4758(a)(1)(A)(v)b.
    \13\ See id.
    \14\ See id.
    \15\ See id.
    \16\ See Nasdaq Rule 4758(a)(1)(A)(iv).
    \17\ See id.
    \18\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq Rule 4703(a) provides the times-in-force that may be
assigned to orders entered into the system. According to Nasdaq Rule
4703(a), members specify an order's time-in-force by designating a time
at which the order will become active and a time at which the order
will cease to be active. All of the times-in-force currently described
in Nasdaq Rule 4703(a) are applicable to orders with RTFY or SCAN
routing order attributes.\19\ According to the Exchange, during Pre-
Market Hours,\20\ members usually designate orders with RTFY or SCAN
routing order attributes to activate upon entry or at 8:00 a.m. ET.\21\
The Exchange now proposes to amend Nasdaq Rule 4703(a) to provide that
a member entering an order with a RTFY or SCAN routing order attribute
may designate the order to activate at 7:00 a.m. ET if entered prior to
7:00 a.m. ET on the same day.\22\ As with the existing 8:00 a.m. ET
activation time, the Exchange proposes to offer the 7:00 a.m. ET
activation time on a port level basis.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Amendment No. 2 at n.12.
    \20\ ``Pre-Market Hours'' means the period of time beginning at
4:00 a.m. ET and ending immediately prior to the commencement of
Market Hours. See Nasdaq Rule 4701(g). ``Market Hours'' means the
period of time beginning at 9:30 a.m. ET and ending at 4:00 p.m. ET
(or such earlier time as may be designated by Nasdaq on a day when
Nasdaq closes early). See id.
    \21\ See Amendment No. 2 at 5.
    \22\ Orders can be entered into the system from 4:00 a.m. ET
until 8:00 p.m. ET. See Nasdaq Rule 4756(a)(3).
    \23\ See Amendment No. 2 at n.14. As a result, if, for example,
a member cancels an order entered through a port set for 7:00 a.m.
ET activation and wishes the order to instead activate at 8:00 a.m.
ET, it must either have another port set for activation at 8:00 a.m.
ET or, alternatively, enter the order at that time for immediate
activation. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities exchange.\24\ In particular, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\25\ which requires, among other things,
that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. The Commission notes that the
proposal would provide Exchange members with an additional time for
activating orders with RTFY or SCAN routing order attributes, and could
facilitate the entry of these orders.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \26\ The Exchange states that, should it become aware of other
orders that would also benefit from this change, it would consider
filing another rule change to extend the proposed activation
functionality to such other orders. See Amendment No. 2 at 13-14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that, as amended, the proposal would allow
members to activate orders with RTFY or SCAN routing order attributes
specifically at 7:00 a.m. ET. According to the Exchange, market
participants have coded their systems for trading during Pre-Market
Hours, such as 7:00 a.m. ET, as evidenced by trading sessions on other
exchanges \27\ that start at 7:00 a.m. ET.\28\ The Commission believes
that Exchange members may wish to activate orders with RTFY or SCAN
routing order attributes at 7:00 a.m. ET to benefit from the liquidity
at that time. The Commission also notes that the 7:00 a.m. ET
activation time is similar to existing functionalities on certain other
exchanges where orders can activate at 7:00 a.m. ET.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See infra note 29.
    \28\ See Amendment No. 2 at 7.
    \29\ See Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. Rule 1.5(ee); Cboe BYX
Exchange, Inc. Rule 1.5(ee); Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc. Rule 1.5(ii);
and Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. Rule 1.5(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange represents that as of the time that an order with a
RTFY or SCAN routing order attribute is activated, the Exchange would
subject orders that are eligible for display or execution to all of the
Exchange's standard regulatory checks, as it currently does with all
orders upon entry.\30\ These checks include compliance with Regulation
NMS, Regulation SHO, and relevant Exchange rules.\31\ Moreover, the
Exchange reminds its members of their regulatory obligations when
submitting an order with a RTFY or SCAN routing order attribute.\32\ In
particular, the Exchange reminds that members must comply with the
Market Access Rule, which requires, among other things, pre-trade
controls and procedures that are reasonably designed to assure
compliance with Exchange trading rules and Commission rules pursuant to
Regulation SHO and Regulation NMS.\33\ The Exchange also notes that a
member's procedures must be reasonably designed to ensure compliance
with the applicable regulatory requirements, not just at the time the
order is routed to the Exchange, but also at the time the order is
activated and becomes eligible for execution.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Amendment No. 2 at 10.
    \31\ See id.
    \32\ See id.
    \33\ See id. at 10-11.
    \34\ See id. at 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission further notes the Exchange's discussion of the best
execution obligations of members

utilizing the proposed 7:00 a.m. ET activation time.\35\ The Exchange
notes that members may cancel their inactive orders with RTFY or SCAN
routing order attributes at any time prior to the time the order
activates, which would allow members to react to conditions that may
cause them to violate their best execution obligations to their
customers should the orders activate and execute.\36\ The Exchange also
notes that members may cancel their active orders with RTFY or SCAN
routing order attributes and enter new orders at another time that the
members believe will satisfy their best execution obligations.\37\ The
Commission notes that Exchange members' use of the proposed 7:00 a.m.
ET activation time must be consistent with their best execution
obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See id. at 8-10.
    \36\ See id. at 8.
    \37\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 2 to the Proposed Rule
Change

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning whether Amendment No. 2 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-NASDAQ-2017-088 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-NASDAQ-2017-088. 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-NASDAQ-2017-088 and should be submitted
on or before May 24, 2018.

V. Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 2

    The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, prior to the thirtieth day
after the date of publication of notice of the filing of Amendment No.
2 in the Federal Register. As noted above, in Amendment No. 2, the
Exchange narrowed the proposal from allowing members to activate orders
with RTFY or SCAN routing order attributes at any time during Pre-
Market Hours, to specifically allowing members to activate these orders
at 7:00 a.m. ET, which is similar to existing functionalities on
certain other exchanges. Moreover, Amendment No. 2 provided additional
explanation regarding the potential benefits of a 7:00 a.m. ET
activation time. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, pursuant
to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\38\ to approve the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\39\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NASDAQ-2017-088), as
modified by Amendment No. 2, be, and hereby is, approved on an
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-09341 Filed 5-2-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


                                                      OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION                  UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

                                                            July 25, 2013

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Ammonium Carbamate  -  Toxicology Review and Reponses to Waiver Requests to Support a New Active Ingredient to Be Used to Generate Monochloroamine to Treat Pulp and Paper Mills and Recirculating Cooling Water Systems

PC Code: 000374 DP Barcode:  D412666 Decision No.:  474381 Registration No.: 74655-GU Petition No(s).:  N/A Regulatory Action:  New active ingredient and new use  Risk Assess Type: Single Chemical Case No.:  N/A TXR No.: N/A CAS No: 1111-78-0 MRID No(s).: 49042914; 49042918 40 CFR:  N/A

FROM:	Jenny J. Tao, Toxicologist 	Risk Assessment and Science Support Branch            Antimicrobials Division

THRU:        Timothy Leighton, Senior Scientist/Team Leader, Human Health 	Steven H. Weiss, Branch Chief      Risk Assessment and Science Support Branch	      Antimicrobials Division        TO:	Bill Erickson, Biologist  	Antimicrobials Division Toxicity Endpoint Selection Committee (ADTC)            Risk Assessment and Science Support Branch (RASSB)      Antimicrobials Division (AD) (7510P)

      This memo includes the toxicology review and responses to the waiver requests to support a new active ingredient, ammonium carbamate, to be used to generate monochloroamine for treating pulp and paper mills and recirculating cooling water systems.

I.  INTRODUCTION

The registrant, Hercules Inc., a Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Ashland Inc., submitted an application for Spectrum[(TM)] XD1878 (EPA Reg No. 74655-GU), which contains 19.5% of ammonium carbamate (CAS No: 1111-78-0), a new active ingredient (a.i.).  Spectrum[(TM)] XD1878 is intended to be used as bactericide, slimicide, and algaecide in control bacteria, fungi, and algae in water systems of pulp and paper mills and recirculating cooling water systems.  According to the proposed label, Spectrum[(TM)] XD1878 is to be used in conjunction with an oxidant such as sodium hypochlorite (12.5%) in specially designed Spectrum[(TM)] XD1878 feeder/delivery system, which is "programmed to automatically and optimally produce a dilute solution of monochloramine", in situ. The registrant indicated that all feeding, reactions, and outputs are carried out in an enclosed system (MRID 49042918).

The registrant submitted the acute 6 pack toxicity studies (except for acute inhalation toxicity) for ammonium carbamate technical and requested waivers for the following mammalian toxicology studies:

   1. Acute Inhalation Toxicity Study (870.1300)    2. 90-Day Oral Toxicity Study  -  Rodent (870.3100);    3. 90-Day Oral Toxicity Study  -  Non-Rodent (870.3150);    4. 90-Day Dermal Study (870.3250);    5. 90-Day Inhalation Study (870.3465);    6. Developmental (Teratogenicity) Study  -  Rats and Rabbits (870.3700);    7. Baterial Gene Mutation (870.5100);    8. In Vitro Mammalian Cell Gene Mutation Test (870.5300);    9. In Vitro Mammalian Chromosome Aberration Test (870.5375);    10. In Vivo Mammalian Cytogenetics Test (870.5380/5385/5395);    11. Immunotoxicity (870.7800).

II.  DISCUSSION

   1. Acute Toxicity     Ammonium carbamate technical was found to be low toxic (Toxicity Category III) with an observed lethal dose of 1080 mg/kg (female) for acute oral toxicity.  It is Toxicity Category IV for acute dermal toxicity with an LD50 greater than 5000 mg/kg (male and female combined).  Ammonium carbamate technical is severely irritating to the eyes (Toxicity Category I) but is neither a dermal irritant (Toxicity Category IV) nor a skin sensitizer (LLNA method).

The registrant requested a waiver for the acute inhalation toxicity, based on the fact that "a stable atmosphere of ammonium carbamate cannot be established and maintained for the purpose of an accurate acute inhalation toxicity study" due to the rapid evaporation of ammonium carbamate during an attempt to conduct an acute inhalation toxicity study, which made impossible to measure "either the chamber concentration or the aerodynamic particle size" (MRID 49042914).  Based on the Guideline requirements and the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Guidance for Waiving or Bridging of Mammalian Acute Toxicity Tests for Pesticides and Pesticide Products (Acute Oral, Acute Dermal, Acute Inhalation, Primary Eye, Primary Dermal, and Dermal Sensitization) (EPA/OPP, 2012), an acute inhalation toxicity study is waived.

The acute toxicity data are summarized below.

                                   Guideline                                       No.

                                  Study Type

                                   MRID No.

                                    Results

                               Toxicity Category

                                   870.1100

                              Acute Oral Toxicity

                                   49042912

                       LD50(female) = 1080 mg/kg

                                      III

                                   870.1200

                             Acute Dermal Toxicity

                                   49042913

                      LD50(comb.) > 5000 mg/kg

                                       IV

                                   870.1300

                           Acute Inhalation Toxicity

                                   49042914

                   waiver for technical material

                                      N/A

                                   870.2400

                            Primary Eye Irritation

                                   49042915

                              Severe Eye Irritant

                                       I

                                   870.2500

                           Primary Dermal Irritation

                                   49042916

                             Not a Dermal Irritant

                                      IV

                                   870.2600

                             Dermal Sensitization                                     (LLNA)

                                   49042917

                               Not a Sensitizer

                                      N/A            2. Subchronic Toxicity

In the proposed label and the waiver request document (MRID 49042918), it is indicated that the proposed use will occur in an enclosed system for transportation, feeding, reactions, and outputs, which results in minimum workers' exposure, in addition to the required personal protective equipment (PPE).  It is also indicated that the Spectrum[(TM)] XD1878 feeder/delivery system was designed to generate monochloramine in a controlled optimal manner to limit its dietary/drinking water exposures.  The proposed use of Spectrum[(TM)] XD1878 for treating pulp and paper mills and recirculating cooling water systems is essentially the same as other existing registrations in which ammonium sulfate is the precursor chemical, and the Agency concluded that there is "no risk concern".

Conclusively, RASSB will waive the data requirements listed above for ammonium carbamate as well but reserve the right to request specific toxicology studies on the active ingredient in the future, if such data are necessary for refining the hazard identification and risk assessment.

III.	CONCLUSION

The required toxicology studies are waived for the new a. i., ammonium carbamate, for the proposed use of treating pulp and paper mills and recirculating cooling water systems, based on the fact that it's operated in an enclosed system and there is minimum risk concern to exposure to the active ingredient and its reacting agents.

IV.	REFERENCES

MRID 49042914: Keenan, T. H. (2013).  Technical Ammonium Carbamate, Request for Waiver of Acute Inhalation, OCSPP Guideline No. 870.1300.

MRID 49042918: Keenan, T. H. (2013).  Discussion o f Toxicology and Occupational Exposure Data Requirements, Including Waiver Requests, For the Use of the Active Ingredient, Ammonium Carbamate, In Papermill Process Water and Recirculation Cooling water Treatment.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (2012). Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP): Guidance for Waiving or Bridging of Mammalian Acute Toxicity Tests for Pesticides and Pesticide Products (Acute Oral, Acute Dermal, Acute Inhalation, Primary Eye, Primary Dermal, and Dermal Sensitization).  http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/science/acute-data-waiver-guidance.pdf


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 43 (Monday, March 5, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12989-12991]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4498]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 43 / Monday, March 5, 2012 / Rules
and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0997; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-043-AD;
Amendment 39-16963; AD 2012-04-07]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Airbus Model A330-200 series airplanes; Model A330-300 series
airplanes; Model A340-200 series airplanes; and Model A340-300 series
airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report that three failures of the
retraction bracket occurred during fatigue testing before the
calculated life limit of the main landing gear (MLG). This AD requires
repetitive replacement of the affected retraction bracket of the MLG.
We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the retraction bracket,
which could result in a MLG extension with no damping, and consequent
structural damage of the MLG.

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 9, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1138; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on October 5, 2011 (76
FR 61645). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    During fatigue testing of the MLG [main landing gear], three
failures of the retraction bracket occurred before the calculated
life limitation. Further analysis has confirmed that those failures
were due to fatigue initiated by fretting between the bush and lug
bore.
    The failure of the retraction bracket, if not detected, could
lead to a MLG extension with no damping resulting in MLG structural
damage.
    Airbus carried out an investigation, demonstrating that the life
limit of retraction brackets must be reduced to 19,800 Landings
(LDG), which is below the life limit stated in the following A330
and A340 Airbus ALS Part 4 revisions:

--Airbus A330 ALS Part 4 revision 02 approved by EASA on 16 December
2009.
--Airbus A340 ALS Part 4 revision 01 approved by EASA on 15 December
2009.

    In order to maintain the structural integrity of the aeroplane,
this [EASA] AD requires the replacement of these MLG retraction
brackets before the accumulation of 19,800 total LDG.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (76 FR 61645, October 5,
2011) or on the determination of the cost to the public.

Explanation of Change Made to This AD

    We have re-designated Notes 1 and 2 of the NPRM (76 FR 61645,
October 5, 2011) as paragraph (h) in this final rule, and re-identified
subsequent paragraphs accordingly.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD with the change described
previously--and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these
minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (76 FR 61645, October 5, 2011) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (76 FR 61645, October 5, 2011).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 29 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 25 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $200,000 per
product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the
U.S. operators to be $5,861,625, or $202,125 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM (76 FR 61645, October 5,
2011), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the Docket Operations office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2012-04-07 Airbus: Amendment 39-16963. Docket No. FAA-2011-0997;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-043-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective April 9,
2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -
243, -301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, and -343
airplanes; and Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, and -313
airplanes; certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial
numbers; except airplanes on which Airbus modification 54500 has
been embodied in production; and except airplanes on which Airbus
Service Bulletin A330-32-3212 or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-
4256 has been embodied in service; as applicable to airplane model.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32: Landing
Gear.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report that three failures of the
retraction bracket occurred during fatigue testing before the
calculated life limit of the main landing gear (MLG). We are issuing
this AD to prevent failure of the retraction bracket, which could
result in a MLG extension with no damping, and consequent structural
damage of the MLG.

(f) Compliance

    You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD
performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions
have already been done.

(g) Replacement

    Before the accumulation of 19,800 total landings on the
retraction brackets of the MLG or within 900 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later: Replace the
affected retraction bracket of the MLG specified in table 1 of this
AD with a serviceable part, in accordance with a method approved by
the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, or European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (or its delegated agent). Thereafter,
before the accumulation of 19,800 total landings on any retraction
bracket of the MLG identified in table 1 of this AD, replace the
retraction bracket with a serviceable part, in accordance with a
method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA,
or EASA (or its delegated

                 Table 1--Retraction Bracket of the MLG
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Nomenclature                           Part No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retraction Bracket of the MLG...........................       201478303
                                                               201478304
                                                               201478305
                                                               201478306
                                                               201478307
                                                               201478308
                                                               201428380
                                                               201428381
                                                               201428382
                                                               201428383
                                                               201428384
                                                               201428385
                                                               201428378
                                                               201428379
                                                               201428351
                                                               201428352
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD:  Additional guidance for the
replacement can be found in Task 32-11-11-000-804-A, Removal of the
MLG Retraction Bracket Assembly, and Task 32-11-11-400-804-A,
Installation of the MLG Retraction Bracket Assembly, of Subsection
32-11-11 of Chapter 32 of the Airbus A330 or A340 Aircraft
Maintenance Manual, as applicable.

(h) Definitions

    (1) For purposes of this AD, ``total landings'' is defined as
the accumulated landings since the initial entry of the MLG
retraction bracket into service on any airplane.
    (2) For purposes of this AD, the initial entry into service for
the transferable systems components/items is defined as the date at
which the component/item accomplishes the first flight for which it
will undertake its intended function.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the International
Branch, send it to ATTN: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1138; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC, notify
your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district
office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter
must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to MCAI Airworthiness Directive EASA AD 2010-0205,
dated October 8, 2010, for related information.
    (2) For Airbus service information identified in this AD contact
Airbus SAS--Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 14, 2012.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-4498 Filed 3-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION

Please read the instructions before completing this form.  For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency’s Paperwork Clearance Officer.  Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW Washington, DC 20503.

1.  Agency/Subagency originating request:   OECA/ORE Air Enforcement Division,  Mobile Source Enforcement Branch

2.  OMB control number                 b. □ None

a. 2060-0135

3.  Type of information collection (check one)

     a. □ New collection

     b. □ Revision of a currently approved collection

     c.  X Extension of a currently approved collection

     d.   Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved

              collection for which approval has expired

     e. □ Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved

              collection for which approval has expired

     f. □ Existing collection in use without an OMB control number

4. Type of review requested (check one)

    a.   X Regular

    b. □ Emergency - Approval requested by:  ____/___/____

    c. □ Delegated

5.  Small entities

     Will this information collection have a significant economic

      impact on a substantial number of small entities?    □ Yes      X No

    For b-f, note item A2 of Supporting Statement Instructions

6.  Requested expiration date

   a.  X  Three years from approval date   b.□ Other Specify: __/___/___

7.  Title:      Enforcement Policy Regarding the Sale and Use of Aftermarket Catalytic Converters (Renewal)

8. Agency form number(s) (If applicable)   ICR No. 1292.07

9. Keywords

Environmental Protection, Clean Air Act, Pollution Control, Motor Vehicle Control

10. Abstract

Section 203(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act prohibits removing or rendering inoperative automobile emission control devices or elements of design. But for the adoption of the aftermarket catalytic converter enforcement policy, the manufacture, sale, or installation of aftermarket catalytic converters not equivalent to new original equipment would constitute a violation of the Act. Because replacement original equipment converters are expensive, many consumers had elected to not replace converters that malfunctioned subsequent to the expiration of the emissions warranty on their vehicles. The Agency believes that allowing the installation of slightly less effective aftermarket catalysts on offer vehicles can be environmentally beneficial if the Agency can be assured that the aftermarket catalysts meet certain standards, and if installers are accountable to select the proper converter for each vehicle application.

11.  Affected public (Mark primary with “P” and all others that apply with “X”)

a. __Individuals or households   d. __Farms

□  Voluntary

        b.  □ Required to obtain or retain benefits

        c.   P  Mandatory

13.  Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden

       a. Number of respondents      30,014______________

        b. Total annual responses      30,014_______________

            1. Percentage of these responses

                     collected electronically   _______0____________%

        c.  Total hours requested      ___212,101______________

        d.  Current OMB inventory  ___111,308______________

        e.  Difference                        ___100,793______________

        f.  Explanation of difference

             1.  Program Change       _______(58)______________

             2.  Adjustment               ____100,851______________

14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden (in thousands of dollars)

       a.  Total annualized capital/startup costs  ______286_____________

        b. Total annual costs (O&M) _______________390_____________

        c. Total annualized cost requested  ___________676_____________

        d. Current OMB inventory _________________856_____________

        e. Difference ____________________________(180)____________

        f. Explanation of difference

            1.  Program change _____________________0_______________

            2.  Adjustment       _____________________(180)____________

15. Purpose of  information collection (Mark Primary With “P” and all others that apply with “X”)

  a. __Application for benefits     e. __Program planning or management

  b. __Program evaluation            f. __Research

  c. __General purpose statistics   g. X_Regulatory  or  compliance

  d. __Audit

16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting (check all that apply)

□ Third party disclosure

      c.   X Reporting

              1. X On occasion        2. □ Weekly                   3. □ Monthly

              4. □ Quarterly               5.   □ Semi-annually        6. □ Annually

              7. □ Biannually              8. □ Other (describe) ______________

17.  Statistical methods

       Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

                                                        □ Yes            X  No

18.  Agency contact (person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission)

        Name:_________Jack McLaughlin

        Phone:             __(303) 236-9513

OMB 83-I 	10/95

19.  Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions

On behalf of this Federal agency, 1 certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with’

5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: 	The text of  5 CFR 1320.9,  and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3), appear at the end of the instructions.  The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth  in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

(a)  It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

(b)  It avoids unnecessary duplication;

(c)  It reduces burden on small entities;

(d)  It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

(e)  Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

(f)  It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

(g)  It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3):

(I)  Why the information is being collected’

(ii)  Use of information;

(iii)  Burden estimate;

(iv)  Nature of response (voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory);

(v)   Nature and extent of confidentiality; and

(vi)  Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

(h)  It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management

                          and use of the information to be collected (see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

(I)  It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and

(j)  It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.

Signature of Program Official

Date

Signature of Senior Official or designee	Oscar Morales, Director

	Collection Strategies  Division

	Office of Environmental Information

Date

OMB 83-I 	10/95

Certification Requirement for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions

5 CFR 1320.9 reads “As part of the agency submission to OMB of a proposed collection of information, the agency (through the head of the agency, the Senior Official or their designee) shall certify (and provide a record supporting such certification) that the proposed collection of information --

     “(a) is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including that the information to be collected will have practical utility;

     “(b) is not unnecessarily duplicative of information otherwise reasonably accessible to the agency;

     “(c) reduces to the extent practicable and appropriate the burden on persons who shall provide information to or for the agency, including with respect to small entities, as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 U.S.C § 601(6)), the use of such techniques as:

“(1) establishing differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to those who are to respond;

“(2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements; or collection of information , or any part thereof;

“(3) an exemption from coverage of the collection of information, or any part thereof;

      “(d) is written using plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology and is understandable to those who are to respond;

      “(e) is to be implemented in ways consistent and compatible, to the maximum extent practicable, with the existing reporting and recordkeeping practices of those who are to respond;

       “(f) indicates for each recordkeeping requirement the length of time persons are required to maintain the records specified;

       “(g) informs potential respondents of the information called for under § 1320.8(b)(3); [see below]

       “(h) has been developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected, including the processing of  the information in a manner  which shall enhance, where appropriate, the utility of the information to agencies and the public;

„

š

¬

®

Þ

à

®

°

Ð

æ

:

:

<

>

œ

Î

.

ž

\

\

(I)  uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology appropriate to the purpose for which the information is to be collected; and

       “(j) to the maximum extent practicable, uses appropriate information technology to reduce burden and improve data quality, agency efficiency and responsiveness to the public.”

NOTE: 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3) requires that each collection of information:

        “(3) informs and provides reasonable notice to the potential persons to whom the collection of information is addressed of:

“(I) the reasons the information is planned to be and/or has been used to further the proper performance of the functions of  the agency;

“(ii) the way such information is planned to be and/or has been used to further the proper performance of  the functions of the agency;

“(iii) an estimate, to the extent practicable, of  the average burden of  the collection (together  with a request that the public direct to the agency any comments concerning the accuracy of  this burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing this burden);

“(iv) whether responses to the collection of information are voluntary, required to obtain or retain a benefit (citing authority), or mandatory (citing authority);

“(v) the nature and extent of confidentiality to be provided, if any (citing authority); and

“(vi) the fact that any 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.”

OMB 83-I (Instructions)                                                                                10/95