[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 6 (Monday, January 10, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1367-1375]
[FR Doc No: 2011-148]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 580

[Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0046; Notice 2]

Petition for Approval of Alternate Odometer Disclosure
Requirements

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Final Determination.

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

SUMMARY: The State of Wisconsin has petitioned for approval of
alternate requirements to certain requirements under Federal odometer
law. NHTSA is issuing this final determination granting Wisconsin's
petition as it pertains to vehicle transfers. This determination does
not include vehicles covered by a lease agreement.

DATES: Effective Date: February 9, 2011.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets. Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://DocketInfo.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Case, Office of the Chief
Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>)
(Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    Federal odometer law, which is largely based on the Motor Vehicle

Information and Cost Savings Act (Cost Savings Act) \1\ and the Truth
in Mileage Act of 1986 \2\, as amended (TIMA), contains a number of
provisions to limit odometer fraud and assure that the purchaser of a
motor vehicle knows the true mileage of the vehicle. The Cost Savings
Act requires the Secretary of Transportation to promulgate regulations
requiring the transferor (seller) of a motor vehicle to provide a
written statement of the vehicle's mileage registered on the odometer
to the transferee (buyer) in connection with the transfer of ownership.
This written statement is generally referred to as the odometer
disclosure statement. Further, under TIMA, vehicle titles themselves
must have a space for the odometer disclosure statement, and States are
prohibited from licensing vehicles unless a valid odometer disclosure
statement on the title is signed and dated by the transferor. Titles
must also be printed by a secure printing process or other secure
process. TIMA also contains specific disclosure provisions on transfers
of leased vehicles. Federal law also contains document retention
requirements for motor vehicle dealers and lessors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Public Law 92-513, 86 Stat. 947, 961 (1972).
    \2\ Public Law 99-579, 100 Stat. 3309 (1986).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    TIMA's motor vehicle mileage disclosure requirements apply in a
State unless the State has alternative requirements approved by the
Secretary. The Secretary has delegated administration of the odometer
program to NHTSA. A State may petition NHTSA for approval of such
alternate odometer disclosure requirements.
    The State of Wisconsin has petitioned NHTSA for approval of
alternate odometer disclosure requirements under TIMA. The Wisconsin
Department of Transportation (WisDOT) proposes a paperless electronic
title transfer scheme, described more fully in section IV, similar to
the Commonwealth of Virginia's alternate odometer disclosure program,
approved by NHTSA on January 2, 2009. 74 FR 643, 650 (January 7, 2009).
Wisconsin's program will not apply to, or in lieu, of the provisions of
Federal odometer law related to, transactions involving at least one
out-of-State party.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ It also does not apply to disclosures by power of attorney
where the title is held by a lien holder because, in Wisconsin,
lienholders do not hold the vehicle title.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With limited exceptions, NHTSA initially determined that
Wisconsin's proposal satisfied Federal odometer law, and proposed
granting Wisconsin's petition on the condition that it amend its
program or demonstrate that it meets the requirements of Federal law.
See 75 FR 20965 (April 22, 2010). To gain final approval, Wisconsin was
required to demonstrate that its program conforms to Federal odometer
law disclosure requirements specifying that an odometer disclosure
statement, including the brand, be made at the time of transfer when
the seller is unavailable.\4\ NHTSA's Initial Determination also asked
Wisconsin to address aspects of its e-Odometer program relating to
transfer of leased vehicles. As addressed below, Wisconsin will submit
a separate petition regarding transfer of leased vehicles. After
careful consideration of comments, and the entire record, NHTSA is
granting Wisconsin's petition for title transfers other than those
involving a lease agreement. NHTSA's analysis is set forth below in
Section VI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Section 408 of the Cost Savings Act, recodified at 49
U.S.C. 32705, and 49 CFR 580.5(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Statutory Background

    NHTSA reviewed the statutory background of Federal odometer law in
its consideration and approval of Virginia's petition for alternate
odometer disclosure requirements. See 73 FR 35617 (June 24, 2008) and
74 FR 643 (January 7, 2009). The statutory background of the Cost
Savings Act and TIMA, and the purposes behind TIMA, are discussed at
length in NHTSA's Final Determination granting Virginia's petition. 74
FR 643, 647-48. A brief summary of the statutory background of Federal
odometer law and the purposes of TIMA follows.
    In 1972, Congress enacted the Cost Savings Act, among other things,
to prohibit tampering of odometers on motor vehicles and to establish
certain safeguards for the protection of purchasers with respect to the
sale of motor vehicles having altered or reset odometers. See Public
Law 92-513, section 401, 86 Stat. 947, 961-63 (1972). The Cost Savings
Act required that, under regulations to be published by the Secretary,
the transferor of a motor vehicle provide a written vehicle mileage
disclosure to the transferee, prohibited odometer tampering and
provided for enforcement. See Id. at section 408, 86 Stat. at 947.
Section 408 states that the Secretary shall prescribe rules requiring
any transferor of a motor vehicle to provide a written disclosure to
the transferee that includes the cumulative mileage on the odometer and
if the odometer reading is known to be different than the miles the
vehicle has actually traveled, a statement that the actual mileage is
unknown. In general, the purpose for the disclosure was to assist
purchasers to know the true mileage of a motor vehicle.
    A major shortcoming of the odometer provisions of the Cost Savings
Act was that they did not require that the odometer disclosure
statement be on the title. In a number of States, they were on separate
documents that could be altered easily or discarded and did not travel
with the title. See 74 FR 644. Consequently, the disclosure statements
did not necessarily deter odometer fraud employing altered documents,
discarded titles, and title washing. Id.
    Congress enacted TIMA in 1986 to address the Cost Savings Act's
shortcomings. It amended the Cost Savings Act to prohibit States from
licensing vehicles after transfers of ownership unless the new owner
(transferee) submitted a title from the seller (transferor) containing
the seller's signed and dated statement of the vehicle's mileage, as
previously required by the Cost Savings Act. See Public Law 99-579, 100
Stat. 3309 (1986); 74 FR 644 (Jan. 7, 2009). TIMA also prohibits the
licensing of vehicles for use in any State unless the title issued to
the transferee is printed using a secure printing process or other
secure process, indicates the vehicle mileage at the time of transfer,
and contains additional space for a subsequent mileage disclosure by
the transferee when it is sold again. Id. Other provisions created
similar safeguards for leased vehicles.
    TIMA added a provision to the Cost Savings Act that, with the
approval of the Secretary of Transportation, allows States to have
alternate requirements to those required under TIMA respecting the
disclosure of mileage. It amended Section 408 of the Cost Savings Act
to add a new subsection (f), which provided that the requirements of
subsections (d) and (e)(1) respecting the disclosure of motor vehicle
mileage when motor vehicles are transferred or leased shall apply in a
State unless the State has in effect alternate motor vehicle mileage
disclosure requirements approved by the Secretary. Subsection (f)
provided further that the Secretary shall approve alternate motor
vehicle mileage disclosure requirements submitted by a State unless the
Secretary determines that such requirements are not consistent with the
purpose of the disclosure required by subsection (d) or (e), as the
case may be.
    In 1988, Congress amended section 408(d) of the Cost Savings Act to
permit the use of a secure power of attorney in circumstances where the
title was held by a lienholder. The Secretary was required to publish a
rule to implement the provision. See Public Law 100-561

section 40, 102 Stat. 2805, 2817 (1988), which added Section
408(d)(2)(C). In 1990, Congress amended section 408(d)(2)(C) of the
Cost Savings Act. The amendment addressed retention of powers of
attorneys by States and provided that the rule adopted by the Secretary
not require that a vehicle be titled in the State in which the power of
attorney was issued. See Public Law 101-641 section 7(a), 104 Stat.
4654, 4657 (1990).
    In 1994, in the course of the recodification of various laws
pertaining to the Department of Transportation, the Cost Savings Act,
as amended, was repealed, reenacted, and recodified without substantive
change. See Public Law 103-272, 108 Stat. 745, 1048-1056, 1379, 1387
(1994). The odometer statute is now codified at 49 U.S.C. 32701 et seq.
In particular, Section 408(a) of the Cost Savings Act was recodified at
49 U.S.C. 32705(a). Sections 408(d) and (e), which were added by TIMA
(and later amended), were recodified at 49 U.S.C. 32705(b) and (c). The
provisions pertaining to approval of State alternate motor vehicle
mileage disclosure requirements were recodified at 49 U.S.C. 32705(d).

III. Statutory Purposes

    As discussed above, the Cost Savings Act, as amended by TIMA in
1986, states that NHTSA ``shall approve alternate motor vehicle mileage
disclosure requirements submitted by a State unless the [NHTSA]
determines that such requirements are not consistent with the purpose
of the disclosure required by subsection (d) or (e) as the case may
be.'' (Subsections 408(d), (e) of the Cost Savings Act were recodified
to 49 U.S.C. 32705(b) and (c)). In light of this provision, we now turn
to our interpretation of the purposes of these subsections as germane
to Wisconsin's petition.
    Our Final Determination granting Virginia's petition for alternate
odometer disclosure requirements identified the purposes of TIMA
germane to petitions for approval of odometer disclosure requirements
that did not include disclosures involving leased vehicles or
disclosures by power of attorney.\5\ 74 FR 643, 647-48 (January 7,
2009). A brief summary of the purposes identified in the Virginia Final
Determination follows. In the Initial Determination of Wisconsin's
petition, the Agency identified the purposes of TIMA relevant to
odometer disclosures for transfer of leased vehicles. 75 FR 20972-73.
Since, as explained below, Wisconsin has indicated that it will submit
a separate petition regarding transfer of leased vehicles, the purposes
of TIMA relevant to leased vehicles are not discussed here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Since Virginia's program did not cover disclosures involving
leased vehicles or disclosures by power of attorney, the purposes of
Sections 408(d)(2)(C) and 408(e) of the Cost Savings Act, as
amended, were not germane and were not addressed in the notice
approving the Virginia program. See 74 FR 647 n. 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One purpose of TIMA is to assure that the form of the odometer
disclosure precludes odometer fraud. 74 FR 647. To prevent odometer
fraud facilitated by disclosure statements that were separate from
titles, TIMA required mileage disclosures to be on a secure vehicle
title instead of a separate document. These titles also had to contain
space for the seller's attested mileage disclosure and a new disclosure
by the purchaser when the vehicle was sold again. This discouraged
mileage alterations on titles and limited opportunities for obtaining
new titles with lower mileage than the actual mileage. Id.
    A second purpose of TIMA is to prevent odometer fraud by processes
and mechanisms making odometer mileage disclosures on the title a
condition of any application for a title and a requirement for any
title issued by a State. 74 FR 647. This provision was intended to
eliminate or significantly reduce abuses associated with lack of
control of the titling process. Id.
    Third, TIMA sought to prevent alterations of disclosures on titles
and to preclude counterfeit titles through secure processes. 74 FR 648.
In furtherance of these purposes, paper titles (incorporating the
disclosure statement) must be produced using a secure printing process
or protected by ``other secure process.'' \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Congress intended to encourage new technologies by including
the language ``other secure process.'' The House Report accompanying
TIMA noted that `` `other secure process' is intended to describe
means other than printing which could securely provide for the
storage and transmittal of title and mileage information.'' H.R.
Rep. No. 99-833, at 33 (1986). ``In adopting this language, the
Committee intends to encourage new technologies which will provide
increased levels of security for titles.'' Id. See also Cost Savings
Act, as amended by TIMA, section 408(d), recodified at 49 U.S.C.
32705(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A fourth purpose is to create a record of vehicle mileage and a
paper trail. 74 FR 648. The underlying purposes of this record and
paper trail were to better inform consumers and provide mechanisms for
tracing odometer tampering and prosecuting violators. TIMA's
requirement that new applications for titles include signed mileage
disclosure statements on the titles from the prior owners creates a
permanent record that is easily checked by subsequent owners or law
enforcement officials. This record provides critical snapshots of
vehicle mileage at every transfer, which are the fundamental links of
this paper trail.
    Finally, the general purpose of TIMA is to protect consumers by
assuring that they receive valid representations of the vehicle's
actual mileage at the time of transfer based on odometer disclosures.
74 FR 648.

IV. The Wisconsin Program

    As explained in NHTSA's Initial Determination, Wisconsin petitions
for approval of alternate odometer disclosure requirements. 75 FR
20965, 20967 (Apr. 22, 2010). Wisconsin requests alternate disclosure
requirements for motor vehicle private party (including motor vehicle
dealers) transfers, including transactions involving a lienholder.\7\
Wisconsin's petition included a request for alternate odometer
disclosure requirements for transactions involving leased vehicles but,
as explained below, Wisconsin states that it will submit a separate
petition addressing electronic odometer disclosure for leased vehicle
transfers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Under Wisconsin law, a lienholder does not physically
possess the title to the vehicle; the title remains with the vehicle
owner. Thus, Wisconsin does not permit odometer disclosure by power
of attorney when title is held by a lienholder and does not petition
for alternate requirements regarding odometer disclosure by power of
attorney. Wisconsin does accept a written odometer disclosure by
power of attorney from an out-of-state party that registers the
vehicle in Wisconsin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Recent Wisconsin legislation establishes that the title, title
application, and other specified information maintained by the DMV in
its database are the original and controlling title records for a
vehicle. See Wis. Stat. Ann. Sec.  342.01(2)(ac) and Sec.  342.09(4)
(2009). Wisconsin proposes creating an electronic odometer statement
(e-Odometer) residing in the WisDOT Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)
database as the official odometer statement. Under the proposal, a
distinct e-Odometer system will be created to accept and maintain e-
Odometer statements as stand-alone electronic records, separate from an
electronic title. E-Odometer statements will be linked to, and become
part of the title record in the DMV database. The DMV's titling system
will automatically link the e-Odometer statements to a vehicle's title
whenever an electronic title transaction occurs, and a title transfer
could not be completed unless proper odometer disclosure is entered in
the e-Odometer record. According to Wisconsin's petition, if a paper
title is needed, the DMV will print it on secure paper with the
odometer disclosure

statement in the proper location and format.
    Wisconsin's original petition encompassed transfers of leased
vehicles. In the Initial Determination, NHTSA raised questions about
this aspect of Wisconsin's program. In its comments on that
Determination, Wisconsin stated that lessee odometer disclosure would
be addressed in the second implementation phase, and that the State
would consult with NHTSA. Wisconsin asked that NHTSA approve its
petition with the understanding that Wisconsin would consult with NHTSA
to satisfy all requirements. If NHTSA is unable to approve the State's
petition with that provision, the State requested approval of the
petition except for the lessor/lessee transaction process. The State
would expect to file a separate petition for approval of the lessor/
lessee transaction in the future. NHTSA cannot approve a petition or
part of a petition on the basis of future consultations. As a result,
NHTSA is unable to grant Wisconsin's petition as it pertains to
transfers of vehicles involving a lease agreement. This is without
prejudice for Wisconsin to develop e-Odometer provisions for the
transfer of leased vehicles in a future phase of its implementation
plan and to petition NHTSA for approval of electronic leased vehicle
odometer disclosure in the future. We will not discuss Wisconsin's
proposal for leased vehicles below.

A. Overview of Wisconsin's Electronic Titling System

    Wisconsin has implemented a titling system that permits
individuals, organizations and businesses (collectively, DMV Customers)
to process vehicle title transactions electronically through its
automated processing partnership system (APPS) program. See Wis. Admin.
Code Sec.  Trans 1565.01. Under APPS, a vendor \8\ approved by the DMV
\9\ creates a computer system to link or interface DMV customers with
the DMV database. The link permits the DMV customer to access the DMV
database and conduct authorized title transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ According to Wisconsin's petition, a ``vendor'' is a person,
business or organization that contracts with the DMV to provide a
host computer system by which agents may obtain access to specified
information services. Wis. Admin. Code Sec.  Trans 156.02(8). An
approved vendor must work with Wisconsin's DMV to develop an
automated interface software application that meets the automated
interface specifications prescribed by DMV. Wis. Admin. Code Sec.
Trans 156.03(4).
    \9\ In order to become an approved vendor, an entity must submit
an application with certain information to DMV, submit an approved
implementation plan, work with DMV to meet the automated interface
specifications prescribed by DMV and execute a contract with DMV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to gain direct access to the DMV's database under the
vendor system, a DMV customer must enter into an agreement with an
approved vendor, obtain DMV approval to process title transactions, and
enter into a contract with the DMV. To maintain system security and
integrity, employees of DMV customers using the interface will have to
submit a signed affidavit to the DMV before accessing the system. Once
the DMV customer complies with these requirements, the DMV customer
will be able to perform authorized title transactions directly within
the DMV's system.
    Currently, Wisconsin requires motor vehicle dealers to
electronically process title transactions for vehicles that they sell.
See Wis. Stat. Ann. Sec.  342.16(1)(a) and (am) (2009); Wis. Admin.
Code Sec.  Trans 141.01. Motor vehicle dealers can perform electronic
titling transactions through APPS or through an Internet-based
interface with the DMV, known as e-MV11. In order to process title
transactions using the e-MV11, a DMV customer must apply to the DMV by
submitting an application setting forth the name, address and contact
of the entity and providing the names and access authority of employees
performing title transactions. After setting up the required security
protocols, the DMV customer can enter the appropriate title
transaction.\10\ Also, under Wisconsin's electronic titling program,
motor vehicle dealers are required to maintain and keep their title
transactions records, including odometer disclosure statements, for
five years. See Wis. Admin. Code Sec.  Trans 141.08(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ According to Wisconsin's petition, authorized transactions
for amending an electronic odometer record are or will be:
    1. Dealer sales to private buyers, including purchases and
trade-ins from private buyers;
    2. Dealer reassignments to other dealers;
    3. Consignor statement when consigning a vehicle for sale;
    4. Dealer or auction purchase of out-of-state vehicle and
subsequent sale of vehicle with Wisconsin title (Wisconsin could
produce a secure paper title for use by the other State.);
    5. DMV odometer corrections on title;
    6. Involuntary liens from towing/storage, landlord, or mechanic;
    7. Repossessions;
    8. Private sales where title is processed by DMV agent or
financial institution;
    9. Lessee to lessor statement upon relinquishing a leased
vehicle; and
    10. Private sales using e-MVPublic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to Wisconsin's petition, the electronic titling program
will be expanded to include other persons, businesses, and
organizations. These businesses and organizations, such as lienholders
or auction companies, will conduct electronic title transactions
through APPS. Individuals conducting private sales of unencumbered
vehicles will eventually have the ability to perform title transfer and
odometer disclosure through an Internet-based application called e-
MVPublic.

B. Wisconsin's e-Odometer Program

    Wisconsin asserts that e-Odometer entries will provide a virtual
replacement of existing secure paper odometer disclosure statements for
vehicle transactions. Under Wisconsin's proposal, the e-Odometer system
will be a unique electronic application within Wisconsin's electronic
title transfer system. Although the e-Odometer entry will be a stand-
alone secure electronic record, it will be safely and securely
electronically linked to the electronic title record of the vehicle by
the vehicle identification number (VIN) and become part of the vehicle
title. Title transfer could not occur unless the transferor and
transferee, or other authorized persons such as dealer employees,
perform the required disclosure and acceptance through the e-Odometer
system. Once the odometer disclosure and acceptance is completed, the
statement is stored in the e-Odometer system and linked to the
electronic title record by the VIN.
    The petition states that the following information will be stored
in the secure e-Odometer record:
    1. VIN;
    2. Description of the vehicle by make, model, model year and body
type;
    3. Odometer reading and date of the reading;
    4. The Brand (actual, not actual or exceeds limits of odometer);
    5. Name, address of person disclosing odometer reading (must match
the transferor);
    6. Name, address of person accepting odometer reading (must match
the transferee); and
    7. Statement reference to Federal law requirement and potential
penalties.
    Some of the e-Odometer information and other vehicle information
will be available to DMV personnel through a DMV vehicle inquiry
function, while limited information will be available to the public
through a public inquiry function. The information available to DMV
personnel includes:
    1. Vehicle description;
    2. Title owner information;
    3. Brands, if any;
    4. Most current odometer reading, status and date recorded;
    5. Odometer reading, status and record date history;
    6. Lien information; and

    7. Owner in possession of the vehicle.
    The publicly available information includes:
    1. Vehicle description;
    2. Most current odometer reading, status and date recorded;
    3. Brands, if any; and
    4. Lien information.
    Wisconsin's petition states that creation of or amendments to e-
Odometer records will be possible only when titles are transferred in
the course of authorized transactions by authorized persons.

C. Wisconsin e-Odometer Implementation Schedule

    Wisconsin plans to implement its e-Odometer program in three
phases. Because motor vehicle dealers are already required to complete
title transactions electronically, Wisconsin intends to begin the e-
Odometer program with these dealers. See Wis. Stat. Ann. Sec.
342.16(1)(a) and (am) (2009); Wis. Admin. Code Sec.  Trans 141.01. The
second phase will implement e-Odometer in title transfers involving
lienholders, motor vehicle auctions, and vehicle repossessions. The
final phase will implement e-Odometer in transfers of unencumbered
motor vehicles between private individuals. Phase two and three are
still under development and Wisconsin has not provided an estimated
implementation schedule. According to the petition, during phase-in,
some odometer disclosure transactions will be electronic but some will
continue to be on the secure paper title and secure paper odometer
statement.
1. Phase One: e-Odometer in Dealer Transactions
    Wisconsin's petition states e-Odometer will apply first to motor
vehicle transfers through motor vehicle dealers. During this phase,
eligible title transactions include reassignments among dealers,
consignments, and retail sales. In order to complete a transaction,
there must be an odometer disclosure and acceptance of the odometer
statement. The odometer disclosure and acceptance will be permitted
between the following persons: (1) Authorized dealer personnel and an
individual buyer; (2) an individual seller trading in a vehicle and
authorized dealer personnel; (3) authorized dealer personnel in the
case of dealer reassignments; and (4) an individual vehicle owner and
an authorized person on behalf of a consignee in the case of vehicle
consignment. According to Wisconsin, the identities of all persons
involved will be verified and authenticated through the DMV's
processes.
    Under Wisconsin's plan, dealer title transfer transactions will be
completed through an APPS's vendor interface application or the e-MV11
Internet-based application. During these title transfer transactions,
e-Odometer forms will be imported into the transaction and completed by
the authorized persons.
2. Phase 2: e-Odometer in Title Transactions between Private Parties
Involving Lienholders and Other Commercial Entities
    Wisconsin's petition states that the second phase will incorporate
e-Odometer procedures into title transfers in a number of
circumstances, including between private parties when there is a lien
on the vehicle. These title transactions will be processed by the
financial institution holding the lien. During this phase, e-Odometer
will be available to the financial institution through the APPS
application or an application WisDOT develops for these lenders.
Because lienholders do not possess titles under Wisconsin law, a
satisfied lienholder will access e-Odometer to electronically release
the lien to allow production of a clear title. To facilitate this
process, e-Odometer forms will be available to buyers and sellers
through an Internet application allowing completion of the required
odometer disclosures and acceptances.
    During this second phase, Wisconsin also plans to incorporate use
of the e-Odometer system into title transfers involving motor vehicle
auctions, involuntary vehicle transfers (i.e. involuntary liens and
repossessions), corrections to odometer information on titles, and
other transactions involving secure odometer statements.
3. Phase 3: e-Odometer in Private Sales
    The last phase of Wisconsin's program will incorporate e-Odometer
entries into private sales of unencumbered vehicles. The title transfer
will be conducted through an on-line application called e-MVPublic.\11\
For private transfers of motor vehicles, odometer disclosure and
acceptance will be accomplished by the seller and buyer through e-
MVPublic once their identities are verified by DMV processes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ For individuals without Internet access, Wisconsin is
considering providing access to e-MVPublic at its DMV service
centers. At a minimum, Wisconsin states that public libraries offer
public access to computers and the Internet, which will enable
individuals without Internet to use e-Odometer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Identity Verification Under Wisconsin e-Odometer

    Wisconsin's petition describes two verification processes whose
operation differs depending on whether the user is a DMV partner or
regular customer (such as a dealer or financial institution) or an
intermittent user. For a DMV partner or regular customer, the first
step is being approved by the DMV to access its database. As part of
the approval process, the entity must provide the legal business name
and address of the business. After approval, identity verification
procedures will require these users to enter into an agreement with the
DMV that includes security procedures--including establishing an
account and secure logon ID. The users are identified and authenticated
through a unique ``user ID'' and password that are traced to a
particular person on the account.
    Vendors will manage the verification process. The Wisconsin APPS
program requires approved vendors to design precise electronic security
and audit trail procedures into its interface, which DMV will then
verify. This interface requires three administrative steps to identify,
authenticate, and authorize users of the DMV's database. First, vendors
must create an audit journal to identify the individual responsible for
each transaction. Vendors assign each user a ``user ID'' that can be
traced to the individual user. Next, to authenticate the user, a
password known only to the user that is associated with the ``user ID''
is entered before a transaction is allowed. If an individual user is
not authorized by the vendor for the type of transaction requested, the
system will immediately terminate the transaction. Last, vendors must
authorize the user to access the appropriate information. In addition
to the identification protocols, vendors must create and maintain
access logs that can be used for auditing and recording keeping, which
include, among other things, a history of each customer transaction.
    Under Wisconsin's plan, DMV partners and regular customers must
submit the identity of each employee who will conduct title
transactions and specify each employee's authority to perform
transactions in the DMV's database. Prior to obtaining authorization
from the DMV to conduct title transfer transactions, each employee must
submit a signed affidavit acknowledging security procedures and
safeguards. The DMV must confirm each user's authorization before the
user can process title transactions.
    For individuals who are not DMV partners or regular customers,

Wisconsin will require individuals to establish an electronic signature
that can uniquely identify the person. Identity verification begins
with the customer entering a minimum of three personal identifiers for
the correct customer record in the DMV database. Personal identifiers
include name, address, date of birth, product number, Driver License/ID
number, and a Federal Employer Identification Number or partial Social
Security Number (possibly the last four or five digits).\12\ After the
user inputs the personal identifiers into the system, the system will
check DMV customer records and verify that the user is the correct
individual or business, and will authorize the customer to update the
odometer statement. Once the user is verified, the user can begin the
title transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Wisconsin prohibits nonresidents from applying for a
Wisconsin title, except in certain limited exceptions. See Wis.
Admin. Code Sec.  Trans 154.13(2). A nonresident who is eligible to
apply for a Wisconsin title will not be considered a DMV partner or
regular customer. These nonresidents will be subject to the e-
Odometer requirements as long as the vehicle is titled and
transferred within Wisconsin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Odometer Disclosure Under Wisconsin e-Odometer

    Wisconsin's petition states that two parties must engage in an
authorized e-Odometer transaction to effectuate the odometer
disclosure. In order to conduct the e-Odometer disclosure, each party
will access the DMV database by providing information to satisfy the
identity verification requirements of the system and the VIN of the
vehicle. Under Wisconsin's proposal, a transferor must disclose the
odometer reading and brand (actual/not actual/exceeding odometer
limits) and the transferee must accept the odometer reading to allow
the transaction to go forward.\13\ The e-Odometer transaction will
remain in a pending status between the transferor and transferee until
each party completes the required actions, e.g., disclosure by the
seller and acceptance by the buyer. Once both actions have been
accomplished, the e-Odometer record will be secured within DMV's
database and become part of the electronic title through the VIN.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Wisconsin states that there are a limited number of
exceptions under Wisconsin law and e-Odometer to the requirement for
two parties to engage in a transaction to update a title. One
exception is involuntary transfer of the vehicle through
repossession by a financial institution in which the title is issued
to the financial institution. This exception is permissible under
Federal odometer law because repossession is not a transfer of
ownership and does not require an odometer disclosure statement. See
49 CFR 580.3. Another exception is when the seller is not available.
If the seller is not available, the DMV database permits the
transferee to state the odometer reading with a brand of ``not
actual.'' If the transferor becomes available to make the
disclosure, DMV will change the recorded status to ``actual.'' This
exception does not conform to Federal odometer law, which requires
an odometer disclosure statement, including the brand, at the time
of transfer of ownership. 49 U.S.C. 32705(a)(1); 49 CFR 580.5(a).
Federal odometer law does not permit subsequent alterations to the
brand as contemplated by Wisconsin. NHTSA believes that permitting
such an exception could create a loophole that will be abused.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To clarify the e-Odometer procedure, Wisconsin provides an exemplar
title transaction involving a dealer trade-in. In a vehicle trade-in
transaction, the customer (transferor) must bring the paper title to
the dealer (transferee) at the time of the transfer. After entering all
the required data in the Wisconsin electronic title system and
initiating the e-Odometer process, the dealer will then destroy the
paper title.\14\ Under the e-Odometer process, the customer discloses
the odometer reading (and brand) and the dealer accepts the odometer
reading. The vehicle's odometer reading is then stored in the DMV
database and linked virtually to the vehicle's title through the VIN.
Upon later sale of the trade-in vehicle, the dealer (as the transferor)
must disclose the odometer reading (and brand) and the vehicle buyer
(as the transferee) must accept the odometer reading. The dealer and
buyer will access e-Odometer at the time of the sale to complete the
disclosure and acceptance of the odometer statement, which upon
acceptance by the buyer secures the odometer statement in the DMV's
database. After the sale of the vehicle is completed, the dealer
completes title processing in APPS or e-MV11 by titling the vehicle in
the consumer's name, verifying that secure odometer disclosure has been
completed. After titling is complete, the updated e-Odometer entry
becomes part of the title record. For in-State transactions, a paper
title is issued only upon request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ According to Wisconsin, the dealer's failure to destroy the
title subjects the dealer to civil penalties and other sanctions,
such as license suspension or removal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Wisconsin's Position on Meeting the Purposes of TIMA

    Wisconsin has maintained that its e-Odometer program meets the
purposes of TIMA, as described by NHTSA in its Final Determination on
the Commonwealth of Virginia's petition for alternate odometer
disclosure requirements. See 74 FR 643, 647-48 (January 7, 2009).
    Wisconsin's petition states that e-Odometer is part of the
vehicle's title. Under e-Odometer, the VIN links the odometer statement
to the title record. The system automatically imports e-Odometer into
the title transfer transaction process conducted by the transferor and
transferee. A title transaction cannot occur unless the odometer
disclosure statement is made and accepted. The e-Odometer information
is then secured, stored, and becomes visible through the vehicle's
electronic title record.
    According to the petition, other system requirements provide a
significant level of security for the e-Odometer system. First, title
transfer cannot occur unless the authorized persons update e-Odometer
entries. Second, only those persons authorized to make title transfer
transactions (e.g., authorized dealer personnel or authenticated
private owners) are able to make e-Odometer statements. Third, odometer
disclosure under the e-Odometer system is only permitted when a title
is transferred.\15\ If a title is required to be printed on a secure
title paper, the DMV system will automatically include the odometer
disclosure information on the printed title. If a title on secure title
paper is used in a vehicle transfer, the odometer information shown on
the secure paper title will be entered into the e-Odometer electronic
record during the title transfer transaction process and the paper
title will be destroyed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ As noted above, there are some exceptions under Wisconsin
law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Wisconsin's petition also states that odometer disclosure is a
required data input for application for a title and a required output
on the title. According to the petition, the odometer disclosure and
acceptance is a required input to an electronic title transaction,
whether performed through APPS or e-MV11. Although APPS permits
odometer disclosure and acceptance at different times, e-Odometer
secures the disclosure and acceptance and stores it electronically
until the odometer disclosure is imported during title processing.
    Wisconsin's petition asserts that e-Odometer provides a level of
security against altering, tampering, and counterfeiting equivalent to
the odometer statement on a secure paper title. According to Wisconsin,
the e-Odometer statement is secured in the DMV database as soon as the
transferor electronically discloses and the transferee accepts the
odometer reading. After the transferee accepts the odometer disclosure,
e-Odometer stores that mileage disclosure, the date, and the names and
addresses of the

transferor and transferee, and will not allow any changes to that
entry.
    Finally, Wisconsin's petition contends that the authentication and
verification of the transferor's and transferee's electronic signatures
are readily detectable and reliably traced to the particular
individual. Wisconsin states that the DMV has established extensive
security procedures for vendors who process vehicle transactions on
behalf of the DMV and regularly interact with the DMV, and for
individuals and intermittent business customers who wish to make
entries in DMV records. Wisconsin's security procedures are governed
under Wisconsin statutes, administrative rules, contracts, DMV policy
and procedure, and electronic security protocols. DMV Partners and
regular business customers will access the e-Odometer system through
secure applications that are already in use for vehicle title
transactions. Individuals and intermittent business customers will
access the e-Odometer system through a secure Internet application.
Both applications require information, such as electronic signatures,
that can authenticate and verify the users' identity.

V. Summary of Public Comments

    NHTSA received comments from two entities: (1) WisDOT; and (2) the
American Automotive Leasing Association (AALA). The AALA comments are
discussed in section VI below.
    WisDOT's comments responded to NHTSA requirements in the Agency's
Initial Determination that Wisconsin (1) conform its program to the
requirements of Federal odometer law by not permitting the alteration
of the brand on an electronic odometer statement when the seller of the
vehicle is unavailable at the time of the transfer, or fully explains
how this exception complies with the law and its purposes; (2) permit
lessors to retain each odometer disclosure statement they give and
receive; and (3) clarify the system's ability to allow lessors to place
a different brand on the disclosure statement in those instances where
the lessor believes, or has reason to believe, that the statement
provided by the lessee is inaccurate. WisDOT submitted comments
indicating that it will manage e-odometer disclosure when a seller is
unavailable by requiring the buyer to give the odometer reading with a
brand of ``not actual,'' and specifying that the ``not actual'' brand
cannot be changed, even if the seller appears later.
    While Wisconsin will seek approval of alternate odometer disclosure
requirements for leased vehicle transfers at a later date, its comments
addressed NHTSA's concerns about these transfers. Wisconsin indicated
that it will create a mandatory system for lessors to retain all
odometer statements they receive for the five-year period required by
Federal regulations, 49 CFR 580.8(b). Wisconsin also indicated that it
will build e-Odometer to facilitate odometer statements by lessors if
the lessor believes, or has reason to believe, that the lessee's
disclosure does not reflect the actual mileage of the vehicle.

VI. NHTSA's Final Determination

    In this part, NHTSA considers the Wisconsin program in light of the
purposes of the disclosure required by subsection (d) of section 408 of
the Cost Savings Act.\16\ We also respond to comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Since Wisconsin's program does not cover disclosures by
power of attorney or transfers involving leased vehicles, the
purposes of sections 408(d)(1)(c) and (e) of the Cost Savings Act as
amended by TIMA are not germane. Thus, Wisconsin continues to be
subject to all Federal requirements that are not based on sections
408(d)(1)(A), (B), and (2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Cost Savings Act, as amended by TIMA, the standard is
that NHTSA ``shall'' approve alternate motor vehicle mileage disclosure
requirements submitted by a State unless NHTSA determines that such
requirements are not consistent with the purpose of the disclosure
required by subsection (d) or (e) as the case may be. The purposes are
discussed above, as is the Wisconsin alternate program.
    As explained above, one purpose of the disclosures under section
408(d) and (e) of the Cost Savings Act is to assure that the form of
the odometer disclosure precludes odometer fraud. NHTSA has determined
that Wisconsin's alternate electronic odometer disclosure requirements
satisfy this purpose. Under Wisconsin's program, the vehicle's odometer
reading must be entered in the course of the title transfer transaction
for transfer of title to occur. The reading is disclosed by the
transferor and, if valid, accepted by the transferee. Thereafter the
odometer disclosure statement will reside as an electronic record in
the DMV database and will be linked to the vehicle's title by the VIN.
This electronic odometer disclosure is a required element of the
transfer and part of the title record in the DMV database. If a hard
copy of the title is needed, Wisconsin generates a title with the
odometer disclosure statement on the title using a secure printing
process. Wisconsin's system will, therefore, have the odometer
disclosure as part of the vehicle title as required by TIMA. Also,
Wisconsin's electronic title and odometer system provides an electronic
equivalent to TIMA's requirement that the title contain a space for the
transferor to disclose the vehicle's mileage. For conventional paper
transactions in Wisconsin, hard copies of electronic titles will
continue to provide a separate space for owners to execute a proper
odometer disclosure in keeping with TIMA and current practice.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Wisconsin notes that paper titles will be produced for
title transfer transactions that involve out-of-state parties, such
as a vehicle sale to an out-of-state dealer or retail purchaser, an
auction sale to an out-of-state dealer or a retail consumer in
Wisconsin that requests a paper title.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Another purpose of TIMA is to prevent odometer fraud by processes
and mechanisms making the disclosure of an odometer mileage on the
title a condition for the application for a title and a requirement for
the title issued by the State. NHTSA has determined that Wisconsin's
title transfer process satisfies this purpose by requiring disclosure
and acceptance of odometer information before the transaction can be
completed. If the transaction is successful, the DMV's system will
create or amend an electronic title and store the linked electronic
odometer statement. A new title will not be issued without entry and
acceptance of the odometer disclosure. Our Initial Determination raised
a question about alteration of the brand. Wisconsin indicated in its
petition that, if the seller is not available at the time of transfer
of ownership, the DMV database permits the transferee to state the
odometer reading with a brand of ``not actual.'' If the transferor
later becomes available to make the disclosure and does so, DMV would
change the recorded status to ``actual.'' In the Initial Determination,
NHTSA stated that a change to the title subsequent to transfer of the
vehicle does not conform to Federal odometer law, which requires an
odometer disclosure statement, including the brand, to be made at the
time of transfer. 75 FR 20965, 20971 (April 22, 2010) (citing 49 U.S.C.
32705(a)(1); 49 CFR 580.5(a)). Wisconsin's comments to our Initial
Determination indicate that Wisconsin's program will not permit a post-
transfer change of the brand. Wisconsin allows the buyer to give the
odometer reading a brand of ``not actual'' where not properly completed
by the seller, and this brand cannot be changed, even if the seller
appears later. The Agency notes that a transferor and/or transferee
cannot incorporate a ``not actual'' brand to the odometer disclosure
statement as a matter of course or convenience, but only if the mileage

indicated on the odometer and on the odometer disclosure statement is
inaccurate. 49 U.S.C. 32705(a)(3); 49 CFR 580.5(e)(3). 49 U.S.C.
32705(a)(3).
    Another purpose of TIMA is to prevent alterations of disclosures on
titles and to preclude counterfeit titles through secure processes. The
agency has determined that Wisconsin's electronic disclosure
requirements are as secure as current paper titles. Wisconsin's
electronic odometer statement is disclosed by the transferor and
accepted by the transferee, and thereafter stored in a secure DMV
database system. When the State maintains the e-Odometer database with
appropriate levels of security, electronic recording of odometer
readings and disclosures will be maintained in a way in which
alteration is unlikely. The odometer reading, which will be linked to
the electronic title record by the VIN, cannot be altered except when
it is updated during the title transfer process by authorized users. On
subsequent title transfers, the transferor and transferee will have to
complete the odometer disclosure and acceptance for the transaction to
be completed.
    When fully implemented, all subsequent title transfers will be
performed through the APPS or e-MV11, or other secure on-line process.
Each time an on-line title transfer occurs, the DMV database system
stores the electronic version of the odometer statement. The DMV will
issue a paper title only when necessary, e.g., title transfer
transactions that involve out-of-State parties. Since the title and
odometer statement remain in electronic form under State care and
custody, the likelihood of an individual altering, tampering or
counterfeiting the title or odometer statement is significantly
decreased. These electronic records will be maintained in a secure
environment and any unauthorized access will be detected by the system.
Moreover, under Wisconsin law, the electronic title record is the
official and controlling title. If a conflict exists between the
electronic title and a paper title, the paper title is void.
    Another purpose of TIMA is to create a record of the mileage on
vehicles and a paper trail. The underlying purposes of this record
trail are to enable consumers to be better informed and provide a
mechanism through which odometer tampering can be traced and violators
prosecuted. In NHTSA's view, the proposed Wisconsin's electronic title
transfer system will create a scheme of records, equivalent to the
current ``paper trail,'' that assists law enforcement in identifying
and prosecuting odometer fraud. Under the Wisconsin program, creation
of a paper trail starts with the requirement for certain DMV customers
to process title transactions through the APPS program. Under APPS, a
DMV customer must sign a written agreement with the DMV that includes
security procedures, an account, and a secure logon ID. DMV customers
also must provide the DMV with the names of the individuals authorized
to conduct transactions in APPS. These individuals are issued a secure
logon ID and password that can be traced by the DMV to their
transactions. In addition, APPS vendors must create security protocols
that include an audit journal that can identify each person responsible
for each title transaction. Vendors must also provide the DMV with a
daily report detailing all security violations. Furthermore, Wisconsin
requires motor vehicle dealers to retain copies of electronic titles
for motor vehicles owned and offered for sale and odometer statements
received and given for a period of 5 years.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Wisconsin indicates that its e-Odometer system will permit
motor vehicle dealers the ability to retain copies of all odometer
disclosure statements received or given by the dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For individuals not using APPS, the identity verification
procedures require the establishment of electronic signatures of the
parties. Due to the system's procedures for validating and
authenticating the electronic signature of each individual through
DMV's database, the electronic signatures of the transferor and
transferee are reliable, readily detectable and can easily be linked to
particular individuals.\19\ Because the electronic signature consists
of data elements such as the name, address, date of birth, product
number, driver license or identification card number, and a Federal
Employer Identification Number or the last four or five digits of the
individual's Social Security number, Wisconsin's e-Odometer system can
validate and authenticate individual electronic signatures. This
authentication process also allows Wisconsin to trace the individuals
involved in the transaction. This capacity maintains the purposes of
creating a paper trail since the Wisconsin system will have a history
of each vehicle's title transfer and odometer disclosure. These
electronic records will create the electronic equivalent to a paper
based system that will be readily available to law enforcement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Electronic signatures are generally valid under applicable
law. Congress recognized the growing importance of electronic
signatures in interstate commerce when it enacted the Electronic
Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (E-Sign). See Public
Law 106-229, 114 Stat. 464 (2000). E-Sign established a general rule
of validity for electronic records and electronic signatures. 15
U.S.C. 7001. It also encourages the use of electronic signatures in
commerce, both in private transactions and transactions involving
the Federal government. 15 U.S.C. 7031(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    TIMA's overall purpose is to protect consumers by assuring that
they receive valid odometer disclosures representing a vehicle's actual
mileage at the time of transfer. Here, the alternate disclosure
requirements of Wisconsin's program include characteristics that will
assure that representations of a vehicle's actual mileage will be as
valid as those found in current paper title transfers. Identity
authentication, maintenance in a secure electronic environment, and
transferee verification of the mileage data reported by the transferor
all help to ensure valid disclosures. In addition, by providing rapid
access to records of past transfers and by maintaining audit logs of
each and every title transfer transaction, the Wisconsin program could
potentially provide a superior deterrent to odometer fraud.
Furthermore, Wisconsin's program offers the public the opportunity to
view the most recent odometer reading and date of that reading through
an Internet application. A prospective purchaser can access the public
e-Odometer information to assess a vehicle's true value by comparing
the vehicle's current odometer reading to the electronic record stored
with the DMV.
    As discussed above, NHTSA has not approved Wisconsin's plan insofar
as it concerns leased vehicles. That program is under development. We
recognize that while, in general, the AALA supported the Wisconsin
petition, in its comments to the Initial Determination the AALA raised
several concerns. The organization stated that Wisconsin's program
should address interstate transactions. The AALA's comments also
contended that requiring lessors to retain lessee odometer statements
is unnecessary since these statements will be retained in Wisconsin's
e-Odometer system. The AALA further contended that lessees should be
allowed to fill out odometer statements electronically and that the
Secretary should make clear that this practice is allowed. In the
AALA's view, lessors should also be able to electronically submit their
own odometer value when a lessee does not submit an odometer statement
and the lessor is confident that it can provide a valid odometer
reading. The AALA also requested that Wisconsin's system allow lessors
to issue odometer statements that will be verified by purchasers to
account for any miles accrued during the resale process. The
organization added that lessors should be allowed to issue disclosure
statements where

multiple or amended statements are needed to ensure accurate reporting
when leased vehicles are purchased by lessees or a lessee's employee
but no third-party reseller is involved. Finally, the AALA stated that
Wisconsin's proposal should state clearly that the lessee odometer
disclosure statement may be provided by the driver. Since this notice
does not resolve the leased vehicle part of Wisconsin's program, we are
not addressing AALA's comments. If Wisconsin resubmits a petition
regarding leased vehicles, the AALA will have an opportunity to comment
on it.
    For the foregoing reasons, and upon review of the entire record,
NHTSA hereby issues a final determination granting Wisconsin's petition
for requirements that apply in lieu of the Federal requirements adopted
under section 408(d) of the Cost Savings Act, other than the portions
of the petition addressing transfer of leased vehicles, which Wisconsin
indicates in its comments will be addressed in a separate petition.
Other requirements of the Cost Savings Act continue to apply in
Wisconsin. NHTSA reserves the right to rescind this determination in
the event that future information indicates that the operation of
Wisconsin's alternative disclosure system does not satisfy one or more
applicable requirements.

    Issued on: January 4, 2011.
David L. Strickland,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011-148 Filed 1-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


ICR SUPPORTING STATEMENT OUTLINE Part A

1. Identification of the Information Collection

1(a) Title of the Information Collection

Confidential Financial Disclosure Form for Special Government Employees Serving on Federal Advisory Committees at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Renewal); EPA ICR No. 2260.05, OMB Control No. 2090-0029

1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract

The purpose of this information collection request is to assist the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) in selecting federal advisory committee members who will be appointed as Special Government Employees (SGEs), mostly to EPA's scientific and technical committees.  To select SGE members as efficiently and cost effectively as possible, the  Agency needs to evaluate potential conflicts of interest before a candidate is hired as an SGE and appointed as a member to a committee by EPA's Administrator or Deputy Administrator.

Agency officials developed the "Confidential Financial Disclosure Form for Special Government Employees Serving on Federal Advisory Committees at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency," also referred to as Form 3110-48, for a greater inclusion of information to discover any potential conflicts of interest as recommended by the Government Accountability Office.

2. Need for and use of the Collection 	 2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

In June 2001, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report entitled "EPA's Science Advisory Board Panels  -  Improved Policies and Procedures Needed to Ensure Independence and Balance."  GAO recommended that EPA develop policies and procedures that better identify and mitigate potential conflicts of interest and support the development of balanced panels.  Recommendations included gathering the required conflict of interest information before a member is selected, specifically:

::	Determine whether each panel will be reviewing a "particular matter" before selecting the panel in order to identify the financial conflict-of-interest requirements, if any, to which the panelists will be subject.

::	Obtain and evaluate relevant background information on peer review panel candidates before appointing panel members.  The evaluation should include explicitly discussing with potential panelists: (1) items not adequately reported on the confidential financial disclosure form as well as items reported that could present conflicts of interest; (2) other information relevant to assessing impartiality, such as research conducted and previous public statements or positions on the matter being reviewed, interest of the employer or clients in the matter, participation in legal proceedings, work for chemical companies or other affected industries, and prior or current research grants that could be affected by the matter; and (3) whether they have any potential conflicts of interest related to the specific panel being established.  Further, pertinent information obtained from discussions with panelists should be documented."

As part of that effort to respond to GAO's recommendations, EPA developed a new and improved form for all of its scientific and technical committee's Special Government Employees.

EPA's Designated Federal Officers (DFOs) who manage EPA federal advisory committees experienced great difficulty trying to use the OGE Form 450 to identify actual or potential conflicts of interest of potential candidates for Federal Advisory Committee membership.  The OGE Form 450 was confusing for the proposed members and they did not identify all financial interests of possible concern.  In response to the GAO's recommendations, EPA developed the Form 3110-48 to ensure that all relevant financial interests are identified and considered during the member selection process.   It is important for EPA to have this information collection in place because we continuously need to appoint new SGE members as new advisory committees are created or as members' terms of appointment expire.

The Form 3110-48 is completed by candidates for membership as SGEs on EPA federal advisory committees.  The form is completed as part of the member selection process and before they are invited to serve as a member of a federal advisory committee at EPA.  The Form 3110-48 is reviewed by the Committee's Designated Federal Officer, and the Program Office Deputy Ethics Official (DEO) to determine whether there is a financial conflict of interest between the proposed member's public responsibilities and private interests/activities and whether there is any appearance of a lack of impartiality.  In some cases, the Alternate Designated Agency Ethics Official also reviews the form.  As GAO recommended, it is important to collect this information before the potential member is appointed to the advisory committee, because if a conflict of interest is identified after the person is appointed, the Agency may have to terminate the person's membership and identify another person to serve on the committee.  This is potentially embarrassing to both the Agency and the appointed member. It is also important to know upfront that a candidate could serve if appointed, as the appointment process is time consuming and, as required by the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Agency must ensure that the advisory committee is balanced in the points of view represented.  If a conflict is identified after a person is appointed to an advisory committee as an SGE, additional time is needed to select a replacement and the Agency loses valuable time and expertise in receiving the advice it needs.   Also important is the fact that finding replacement members creates a burden of additional cost and staff hours.  Using the Form 3110-48 benefits EPA by increasing efficiency and saving time and money.

Currently nine of EPA's 21 federal advisory committees appoint members as SGEs and have a need to use the Form 3110-48.  This number may increase as new committees are added, or decrease as committees are terminated.  EPA anticipates averaging approximately 250 SGEs during the next 3 years. 2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

Information gathered from Form 3110-48 will continuously help EPA to evaluate relevant background information on Special Government Employee candidates before appointing members.  Using this form enables DFOs to expedite the process of selecting viable candidates for membership on EPA's federal advisory committees.

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

3(a) Non duplication

Almost all information requested from respondents under this ICR is personal in nature, and in most cases, is not available from other sources.

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

On June 24, 2014 (79 FR 35751) EPA sought comments on this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d).  EPA has received no comments to date. A second comment period will be opened for 30 days once this ICR is submitted to OMB.

3(c) Consultations

In accordance with OMB's Terms of Clearance on the previous approval of this ICR, EPA has reviewed the actual number of SGE confidential disclosure forms received over the last three years and consulted with various agency staff to determine trends in expected committee membership over the next three years. While committee membership can vary year to year, EPA anticipates that the number of SGEs completing the form during the period of this ICR will average 250 per year.

The below respondents were contacted for feedback on this ICR. They agreed that, on average, it takes approximately an hour to fill out the form.

Edward Gbur, Jr., Ph.D. University of Arkansas Member of EPA's Human Studies Review Board <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Kyle L. Galbraith, Ph.D. Carle Foundation Hospital Member of EPA's Human Studies Review Board  <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Dr. James McManaman University of Colorado Member of EPA's Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel  <EMAIL_ADDRESS> 3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

The form is required to be updated once a year.  The form allows Government officials to determine whether there is a statutory conflict between Special Government Employees public responsibilities and private interests and activities, or the appearance of a lack of impartiality, as defined by federal regulation.

18 U.S.C. 208: "An employee is prohibited from participating personally and substantially in an official capacity in any particular matter in which, to his knowledge, he or any person whose interests are imputed to him under this statute has a financial interest, if the particular matter will have a direct and predictable effect on that interest."

5 C.F.R. 2635.502: Appearance of lack of impartiality: "Where an employee knows that a particular matter involving specific parties is likely to have a direct and predictable effect on the financial interest of a member of his household, or knows that a person with whom he has a covered relationship is or represents a party to such matter, and where the person determines that the circumstances would cause a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts to question his impartiality in the matter, the employee should not participate in the matter unless he has informed the agency designee of the appearance of a problem and received authorization from the agency designee".

3(e) General Guidelines

This ICR complies with OMB's general guidelines for the collection of information.

3(f) Confidentiality

Title I of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (the Act), 5 USC App., Executive Order 12674, and 5 CFR Part 2634, Subpart I, of the Office of Government Ethics regulations require the reporting of financial information that is relevant to the administration and application of the criminal financial conflict of interest laws, administrative standards of conduct, and agency-specific statutory and program-related restrictions.  The primary use of the information collected on this form is to allow EPA to conduct the conflicts reviews in accordance with applicable Federal laws and regulations.  The information reported on the Form 3110-48 is "confidential" and required to be withheld from the public pursuant to Section 107(a) of the Act.  Agency personnel shall not publicly release the reports or the information contained therein except that disclosures may be pursuant to (1) a Federal, State or local law enforcement agency if the disclosing agency becomes aware of a violation or potential violation of law or regulation; (2) a court or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the Government is a party or in order to comply with a judge-issued subpoena; (3) a source when necessary to obtain information relevant to a conflict of interest investigation or decision; (4) the National Archives and Records Administration or the General Services Administration in records management inspections; (5) the Office of Management and Budget during legislative coordination on private relief legislation; and (6) in response to a request for discovery or for the appearance of a witness in a judicial or administrative proceeding, if the information is relevant to the subject matter. The confidential report will not be disclosed to any requesting person unless authorized by law.

EPA requires SGEs who are new to a federal advisory committee to complete parts 2-9 of Form 3110-48 before participating in a Committee activity.  Subsequently, SGEs must file reports annually to report on the previous calendar year.  For these annual reports, the SGEs must complete parts 2-8.  In addition, they must complete Part 1 ("Statement regarding any change since annual submission of the form") and Part 9 ("Identification of any other information related to conflicts of interest or appearance of a lack of impartiality") before participating in any new advisory activity.  Filers must provide sufficient information about outside interests and activities so that EPA DFOs and ethics officials can make an informed judgment regarding any conflict of interest or appearance of lack of impartiality. EPA staff may contact proposed SGEs to obtain additional information if necessary to determine whether there is a conflict between an SGE's public responsibilities and his/her or his/her spouse's private interests and activities.

3(g) Sensitive Questions

See response to 3(f).

4. The Respondents and the Information Requested

4(a) Respondents/SIC Codes

A Special Government Employee (SGE) is a person who is retained, designated, appointed, or employed to perform, with or without compensation, for a period not to exceed 130 days during any period of 365 consecutive days, temporary duties for the Federal Government either on a full-time or intermittent basis.  SGEs who provide advice to EPA are required to file the Form 3110-48 in lieu of the Office of Government Ethics Form 450 to disclose confidential financial information.  Form 3110-48 has been reviewed and approved for use by the Office of Government Ethics.

4(b) Information Requested

            (i) Data items, including record keeping requirements

The Agency will maintain records of the Form 3110-48.  Designated Federal Officers from Offices sponsoring federal advisory committees will retain files of the completed form.  The Agency does not anticipate any record keeping activities on the part of the respondents under this ICR.

            (ii) Respondent Activities

After being nominated by an outside party or themselves, respondents will be asked to  Complete the Form 3110-48.  Forms may be mailed or e-mailed to candidates.  Although candidates may type their information on the form on-line, they must then print the form and sign it.  They may return the form by mail, but may not return the form by e-mail as an original signature is required.   Each form will involve reading instructions and completing the form.   The form will require one hour to complete.  Subsequent forms filed annually should take less time to complete as respondents gain familiarity with its information requirements and may only need to make slight changes to information filed previously.

5. The Information Collected - Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management 	 5(a) Agency Activities

To respond to this ICR, we estimated the DFO spends one hour reviewing each Form 3110-48 (sometimes calling and asking for further clarification or to address areas not filled out completely).  The DFO labor cost is estimated to be a GS 14 Step 10, which is $66.19 per hour (rounded to $66 per hour) according to the Office of Personnel Management's 2014 Salary Table (http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/14Tables/html/DCB_h.aspx).

The EPA Deputy Ethics Official (DEO) labor cost is estimated to be a GS-15 Step 7, which in 2014 was $71.87, rounded to $72 per hour at one hour per form.   Both DFO and DEO total labor rates below include a factor of 1.6 (60%) for overhead costs.

DFO Cost EPA estimates that approximately 250 advisory committee members will serve on EPA's federal advisory committees as SGEs over the next 3 years.   Multiplying the number of SGE members (250) by the 3 year average dollar amount paid to EPA's DFOs ($66), and multiplying the subtotal cost of $16,500 by 1.6 (60% overhead) to allow for employee overhead costs, we estimate the subtotal to be $26,400.      Year 1 @ $66 for 1 hour x 250 = $16,500 x 1.6 = $26,400 Year 2 @ $66 for 1 hour x 250 = $16,500 x 1.6 = $26,400 Year 3 @ $66 for 1 hour x 250 = $16,500 x 1.6 = $26,400 	 DEO Cost Multiplying the number of SGE members (250) by the dollar amount paid to EPA's DEO with a 3 year average cost ($72), and multiplying the cost of $18,000 by 1.6 (60% overhead) to allow for employee overhead costs, we estimate the subtotal to be $28,800.

Year 1 @ $72 for 1 hour x 250 = $18,000 x 1.6 = $28,800 Year 2 @ $72 for 1 hour x 250 = $18,000 x 1.6 = $28,800 Year 3 @ $72 for 1 hour x 250 = $18,000 x 1.6 = $28,800

Total DFO and DEO Cost Using 3 Year Average The total 3 year average dollar burden estimate for this ICR (for both DFOs and DEO) is approximately $55,200 each year.

DFO 3 year average $26,400 + DEO 3 year average $28,800 = $55,200

Agency (EPA) activities associated with the collection of information include:

Designated Federal Officers (DFOs) for each committee with Special Government Employees (SGEs), Deputy Ethics Official, Assistant Deputy Ethics Official:    ::	First internal EPA review and approval of Form 3110-48 (completed 2003)    ::	Second internal EPA review and approval of Form 3110-48 (completed 2007)    ::	Taking actions to review the form, ascertain improvements, and revise periodically (approximately 3 year intervals or more if needed)

Designated Federal Officers (DFOs) for each committee with Special Government Employees (SGEs):    ::	Providing copies of the mandatory form    ::	Answering any respondent questions, follow-up    ::	Gathering respondents completed forms    ::	Reviewing and analyzing data    ::	Recordkeeping/storing completed form    ::	Forwarding form to EPA's Ethics staff for review and analyzing    	    Deputy Ethics Official:    ::	First review and approval of Form 3110-48 (completed 2003)    ::	Second review and approval of Form 3110-48 (completed 2007)

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

In collecting and analyzing the information associated with this ICR, EPA will use a telephone system, personal computers, e-mail and websites from which the respondents can obtain blank forms, as well as using the mail and committee meetings for distribution of the form. Although candidates (respondents) may type their information on the form on-line, they must then print the form and sign it.  They may return the form by mail, but may not return the form by e-mail as an original signature is required.

Although EPA uses internet websites and e-mail to distribute the blank forms, this form is not a survey instrument, and no database is necessary to aggregate results. This information is not available to the public.

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

Not applicable.

5(d) Collection Schedule 			    ::	After being nominated by an outside party or themselves, respondents are asked to Complete the Form 3110-48 (No schedule  -  dates are variable).          ::	After the initial completion of the Form 3110-48, respondents are asked to update the form annually (generally during January of each year).  Respondent's confidential financial information is not made public.

6. Estimating The Burden and Cost of the Collection 	 6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden

To respond to this ICR, we estimated that each responding SGE candidate will take one hour to complete the Form 3110-48.  We anticipate that EPA will pay an estimated labor cost of $55, which including the standard overhead factor of 1.6 produces a loaded wage rate of $88. We estimate that approximately 250 SGE advisory committee members will have to respond to this request each year.   Multiplying the estimated number of SGE members (250) by the dollar amounts to be paid to EPA's SGEs each successive year, and multiplying the subtotal costs of each successive year by 1.6 to allow for respondent overhead costs, we estimate that the total dollar burden estimate for this ICR to be approximately $22,000 for year 1, $22,000 for year 2 and $22,000 for year 3.  The grand total for all 3 years is estimated at $66,000.  The annual average respondent cost over the three years is $22,000, as indicated in the following annual respondent burden and cost table.

             6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs

            (i) Estimating Labor Costs

            Annual Cost for SGE Respondents               SGE Respondent  Activities to Complete Form 3110-48 Burden Hours/ Respondent

Burden for SGE Candidate

($55 per labor hour multiplied by 1.6 for overhead equals $88) Number of Respondents per Year

Total Cost per  Year Total per Year 60 minutes  (1 hour/100%) $88 250 $22,000      Read Instructions 10 minutes (~0.17%) (0.17 x $88 =)  $14.96 ($14.96 x 250 =) $3,740      Fill Out Form  48 minutes (~0.80% (0.80 x $88 =) $70.40 ($70.40 x 250 =) $17,600      Prepare Envelope to Mail                          2 minutes (~0.03%) (0.03 x $88 =) $2.64 ($2.64 x 250 =) $660 TOTAL 60 minutes $88 250 $22,000

(ii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs

Not applicable.

            (i) Capital/Start-up Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

Not applicable.

            (ii) Annualizing Capital Costs

Not applicable.

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

            Annual Agency Burden and Cost

Agency Hours

Number of Hours Per Year Labor Cost Per Year Overhead Cost Per Year Subtotal Labor & Overhead Cost

Total Cost/ Year (rounded) Form 3110-48

                                DFO Activities                                     For 250                                   Respondents $66 per hour

Distribute form to SGE Nominees (respondents) and answer their questions 5 minutes (0.0833) 250 $1,374 $825 $2,199

Review and analyze data of completed form, and ask follow-up  questions 45 minutes (0.75) 250 $12,375 $7,425 $19,800

Recordkeeping/ storing form  5 minutes (0.0833) 250 $1,374 $825 $2,199

Forward form to EPA Ethics Staff 5 minutes (0.0833 250 $1,374 $825 $2,199

       DFO Subtotal 60 min./1 hour (1.00) 250 $16,497 $9,900 $26,397 $26,400

                      DEO Activities For 250 Respondents $72 per hour

Review, analyze, follow-up, and approve or disapprove 60 min./1 hour (1.00) 250 $18,000 $10,800 $28,800

       DEO Subtotal      60 min./1 hour (1.00) 250 $18,000 $10,800 $28,800 $28,800 EPA Grand Total (DFO & DEO) 120 min./ 2 hours 2.00 500 $34,497 $20,698 $55,195 $55,200

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

See 6(a) and (b).

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

            (i) Respondent Tally

     Bottom-Line Annual Burden and Cost for SGE Respondents               SGE Respondent  Activities to Complete Form 3110-48 Burden Hours/  Respondent

Burden for SGE Candidate

($55 per labor hour multiplied by 1.6 for overhead equals $88) Number of Respondents per Year

Total Cost per  Year 	 Total per Year 60 minutes  (1 hour/100%) $88 250 $22,000

(ii) The Agency Tally

Bottom-Line Annual Agency Burden and Cost

Agency Hours For Each  Review Number of Hours Per Year Labor Cost Per Year Overhead Cost Per Year Total Agency Cost per  Year Agency Total (DFO &DEO) For 250 Respondents 120 min./ 2 hours 2.00 500 $34,500 $20,700 $55,200

(iii) Variations in the Annual Bottom Line

We do not anticipate major variations in the annual bottom line burden hours and costs for the respondents or the Agency.

6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden

There is a decrease of 50 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This change is due to a decrease in the estimated number of respondents from 300 to 250.

6(g) Burden Statement

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

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OA-2010-0757, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Office of Environmental Information Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.  The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Office of Environmental Information Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.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.  Also, you can send comments 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 Number EPA-HQ-OA-2010-0757 and OMB Control No. 2090-0029 in any correspondence.


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 10, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31967-31968]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14709]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2839-005.
    Applicants: Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership.
    Description: Updated Market Power Analysis of Midland Cogeneration
Venture Limited Partnership.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5281.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/31/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1106-001.
    Applicants: Kestrel Acquisition, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Kestrel Acquisition,
LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5287.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1923-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 1771R11 NPPD NITSA NOA to be
effective 6/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5261.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1924-000.
    Applicants: Sanford Energy Associates, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Powervine Energy Market Based
Rate Tariff to be effective 7/3/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5263.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1925-000.
    Applicants: 62SK 8ME LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 9/2/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5002.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1926-000.
    Applicants: 63SU 8ME LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 9/2/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5003.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1927-000.
    Applicants: Cuyama Solar, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 9/2/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5004.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1928-000.
    Applicants: Gray Hawk Solar, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 9/2/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5005.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1929-000.
    Applicants: Portal Ridge Solar B, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 9/2/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5006.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1930-000.
    Applicants: Portal Ridge Solar C, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 9/2/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5007.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1931-000.
    Applicants: Red Horse III, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 9/2/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5011.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1932-000.
    Applicants: TPE Alta Luna, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 9/2/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5016.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1933-000.
    Applicants: Red Horse Wind 2, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 9/2/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5023.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1934-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: OATT Amendment Filing
Relating to Sale of Gulf Power to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5051.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1935-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Gulf NITSA Filing to be
effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5052.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1936-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Filing of Gulf PTP
Transmission Service Agreements (Daniel 1&2 and Scherer 3) to be
effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5053.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1937-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Filing of Gulf PTP
Transmission Service Agreements (Kingfisher I and II) to be effective
12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5054.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1938-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Transmission Facility Cost
Allocation Tariff Amendment Filing to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5056.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1939-000.
    Applicants: Georgia Power Company.

    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Transmission Facility Cost
Allocation Tariff Amendment Filing to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5057.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1940-000.
    Applicants: Gulf Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Transmission Facility Cost
Allocation Tariff Amendment Filing to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5058.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1941-000.
    Applicants: Mississippi Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Transmission Facility Cost
Allocation Tariff Amendment Filing to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5059.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1942-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Transition Services
Agreement Filing to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 7/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180703-5060.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 3, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-14709 Filed 7-9-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 156 (Monday, August 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40112-40113]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17256]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83792; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2018-040]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule
Change To List and Trade Shares of SolidX Bitcoin Shares Issued by the
VanEck SolidX Bitcoin Trust

August 7, 2018.
    On June 20, 2018, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'') 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 list and trade
shares of SolidX Bitcoin Shares issued by the VanEck SolidX Bitcoin
Trust, under BZX Rule 14.11(e)(4), Commodity-Based Trust Shares. The
proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register
on July 2, 2018.\3\ As of August 6, 2018, the Commission has received
more than 1,300 comments on the proposed rule change.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83520 (June 26,
2018), 83 FR 31014 (July 2, 2018).
    \4\ All comments on the proposed rule change are available on
the Commission's website at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboebzx-2018-040/cboebzx2018040.htm.

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

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \5\ provides that within 45 days of the
publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
Commission is extending this 45-day time period. The Commission finds
that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to
take action on the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time
to consider the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\6\ designates September 30, 2018, as the date by which the
Commission shall either approve or disapprove, or institute proceedings
to determine whether to disapprove, the proposed rule change (File No.
SR-CboeBZX-2018-040).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-17256 Filed 8-10-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P