SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST NUMBER 1736.04 A REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS UNDER EPA= S NATURAL GAS STAR PROGRAM@

November 15, 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION......................... 1 1( a) TITLE AND NUMBER OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION................... 1 1( b) CHARACTERIZATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION................. 1 1( c) TERMS OF CLEARANCE OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION ................ 1 2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION.................................... 3 2( a) NEED AND AUTHORITY FOR THE COLLECTION........................... 3 2( b) PRACTICAL UTILITY/ USERS OF THE DATA............................. 4 3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA.......... 4 3( a) NONDUPLICATION.................................................. 4 3( b) CONSULTATIONS................................................... 4 3( c) PUBLIC NOTICE................................................... 4 3( d) EFFECTS OF LESS FREQUENT COLLECTION............................. 5 3( e) GENERAL GUIDELINES.............................................. 5 3( f) CONFIDENTIALITY................................................. 5 3( g) SENSITIVE QUESTIONS............................................. 5 4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED......................... 5 4( a) RESPONDENTS/ SIC CODES........................................... 5 4( b) INFORMATION REQUESTED........................................... 5 5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT............................... 9 5( a) AGENCY ACTIVITIES............................................... 9 5( b) COLLECTION METHODOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT.......................... 10 5( c) SMALL ENTITY FLEXIBILITY....................................... 10 5( d) COLLECTION SCHEDULE............................................. 10 6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION..................... 10 6( a) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT BURDEN................................... 10 6( b) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT COSTS.................................... 11 6( c) ESTIMATING AGENCY BURDEN AND COST.............................. 11 6( d) ESTIMATING THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSE AND TOTAL BURDEN............. 15 6( e).......................... BOTTOM LINE BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS 16 6( f) REASONS FOR CHANGE IN BURDEN................................... 16 6( g) BURDEN STATEMENT ........................................................................................................... 16 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 1( a) Title and Number of the Information Collection This ICR is entitled " Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements Under EPA's Natural Gas STAR Program," ICR number 1736.04.

1( b) Characterization of the Information Collection 1 Natural Gas STAR is a voluntary program sponsored by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) that encourages natural gas companies to adopt cost effective methods for reducing methane emissions. The program works with natural gas production, processing, storage, transmission, and distribution companies to remove barriers that inhibit the implementation of various emission reduction opportunities. The Program effectively advances the adoption of emission reduction technologies by working with Natural Gas Star Partners to evaluate a set of Best Management Practices ( BMPs) and various Partner Reported Opportunities ( PROs) in the context of their current business operations, and implement them where cost effective. The program= s BMPs and PROs save participants money, improve operational efficiency, and enhance the protection of the environment.

Participation in the program begins with the completion and submittal of a one page Memorandum of Understanding ( MOU) that outlines responsibilities of the Natural Gas STAR Partner and EPA. The MOU commits a Natural Gas STAR Partner to reviewing all of its gas related operations in the U. S. and considering a set of options that reduce emissions, increase profits and competitiveness, and maintain or enhance gas delivery service. In addition, Partners agree to implement BMPs that pertain to the Partner's operation ( production, transmission, processing, storage, and/ or distribution). Partners also agree that the BMPs are generally cost effective for the industry, but favorable economics are dependent upon site specific factors.

Natural Gas STAR Partners agree to submit an Implementation Plan within six to twelve months of signing the MOU. In subsequent years, Partners must complete and submit an Annual Report that documents the implementation of BMPs and PROs and associated methane emission reduction accomplishments. In return for their participation, Partners are allowed to advertise their membership and involvement in the program. EPA helps Partners with their communication efforts and also provides program implementation assistance by analyzing emerging technologies and developing workshops and training courses. This voluntary agreement can be terminated by the Natural Gas STAR Partner or EPA with no notice or penalties.

1( c) Terms of Clearance of the Information Collection When this collection was approved in 2001, OMB asked EPA to evaluate the extent to which the partners would have reduced their emissions in the absence of the program, and that EPA should not use these data to estimate aggregate emission reductions across the industry resulting from the Natural Gas STAR Program. In regard to the latter issue, EPA agrees with OMB and recognizes the analytical issues associated with such an extrapolation. As a result, EPA does not use data reported through the Natural Gas STAR Program to estimate aggregate emission reductions across the industry.

The extent to which partners would have reduced their emissions in the absence of the Program is a challenging question, but one that EPA takes very seriously. As is described later in this Supporting Statement, Partners of the Natural Gas STAR Program are asked to submit Implementation Plans every three years describing the emissions reduction practices they plan to evaluate and implement. Partners are then asked to submit annual progress reports detailing emission reduction activities undertaken during the previous calendar year. The Natural Gas STAR Program asks that partners only include in their reports practices that were undertaken voluntarily; i. e. not to include reductions attributable to compliance with existing regulations.

The emission reductions reported by Partners include reductions associated with the implementation of traditional program Best Management Practices ( BMPs) and reductions achieved through the adoption of Partner 2 Reported Activities ( PROs). PROs are activities identified by Gas STAR Partners, beyond the original BMPs, that result in methane emissions reductions. It is worthwhile to note that in 2003, 64% of reductions reported to Gas STAR were due to these Partner identified emissions reduction activities. A significant portion of Gas STAR's efforts in recent years has been devoted to promoting these PROs through technical document development and hosting of specialized technology transfer workshops.

Emission reduction data submitted to EPA are used to measure the effectiveness of the Natural Gas STAR Program. EPA, however, does not attribute all of these emissions reductions to Natural Gas STAR. In particular, emission reduction data for Transmission and Distribution BMP 2, Pipeline Replacement, is largely considered regulatory driven and is not included when calculating program accomplishments. In addition, for each annual report, a quality assurance/ quality control check is performed on all data. Unrealistic emissions reduction claims and any errors or inconsistencies are identified and resolved through direct correspondence with the appropriate company ( ies). If necessary, these data are omitted or adjusted prior to their inclusion in the accounting of Natural Gas STAR Program accomplishments.

In an effort to ensure that these data accurately reflect the impact of the Program, EPA has performed a scenario analysis. As shown in Figure 1, a business as usual scenario was developed that displays projected methane emissions in the absence of the Natural Gas STAR Program. This emission scenario is calculated by multiplying emission factors by projected levels of production, processing and transmission/ distribution as reported in the Energy Information Agency's American Energy Outlook ( AEO 2002). The emission factors are assumed to decline 5% over 25 years to reflect increased efficiencies in the natural gas system.

In the same figure, an alternative emissions scenario is constructed that assumes all cost effective mitigation options are implemented over the time period. Cost effective mitigation options are defined as those options where the cost savings or revenue is greater than the cost of the mitigation option over the lifetime of a given emission reduction project. While these options are cost effective, they are not implemented in the no action scenario because of information, policy and other non cost barriers. The difference between this emission scenario and the no action scenario represents the total potential emission reduction that would reasonably be achieved by the Natural Gas STAR Program if all barriers to implementation were removed. Details on this analysis can be found at the following EPA website: http:// www. epa. gov/ methane/ intlanalyses. html.

Using this analysis as a guide, EPA is able to estimate the extent to which regulatory, information, and other barriers that often inhibit the implementation of these activities can be overcome by the Natural Gas Program. The Program overcomes these barriers this through a variety of activities including:

 Development of technical fact sheets, reports and articles  Hosting technology transfer workshops  Providing analytical support to Partner companies  Supporting research activities  Publicizing achievements of Partner companies  Providing a mechanism for recording and storing information about emission reduction activities In addition to benefiting Partner companies who report these reductions, these activities benefit non Partner companies who are not reporting to the Program. For example, all the technical documents developed by the Program are 3 made available to the public on the Gas STAR website, and workshop attendance is not restricted to Program Partners. Thus, it can be assumed that some of the close to 40% of the natural gas industry that is not participating in the Natural Gas STAR Program is also implementing some of the emission reduction activities that are encouraged by the Program. As noted above, Natural Gas STAR does not attempt to estimate the accomplishments of these companies, even though their activities are at least partially due to the existence of the Natural Gas STAR Program.

Figure 1: Natural Gas Industry Emission Projections 20 25 30 35 40 45 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 MMTCE Baseline without Measures Baseline with cost effective options included 2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection EPA has developed this ICR to obtain authorization to collect information from Natural Gas STAR Partners. EPA needs to collect initial information in the MOU to formally establish participation in the Natural Gas STAR Program and to obtain general information on new Natural Gas STAR Partners. EPA uses information obtained in the MOU to identify and initiate communication with the Partner= s Natural Gas STAR Implementation Manager and Media Liaison.

By agreeing to participate in the Natural Gas STAR Program, the Partner commits to completing and submitting an Implementation Plan and an Annual Report. The Implementation Plan and Annual Report are necessary to evaluate a Partner's progress and performance, and assess overall program results. The information provided in these communications also allows EPA to identify the equipment, systems, maintenance methods, and implementation methods most commonly utilized, and to provide technical and other assistance to Partners in completing and enhancing their planned implementation of BMPs and PROs.

2( b) Practical Utility/ Users of the Data 4 EPA uses information submitted in the MOU to update its database/ tracking system containing information on current and potential Natural Gas STAR Partners. The database serves as a source of general information and a mailing list for both Partners and non partner companies. EPA uses information submitted in the Implementation Plan and Annual Report to document the progress of companies and organizations in implementing the program and reducing methane emissions. EPA enters report information received from Partners into the tracking system. EPA also aggregates these data and prepares various progress reports. EPA uses these data to develop technical publications on specific economic emission reduction practices and case studies of successful implementation experiences. These documents serve to demonstrate to current and potential Partners the cost savings that can be realized through various equipment upgrades and maintenance activities, and to provide technical and implementation assistance.

3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 3( a) Nonduplication The information to be obtained under this ICR has not been collected by EPA or any other Federal agency.

3( b) Consultations EPA has consulted with not more than nine Natural Gas STAR Partners to obtain their views on this method of data collection and has obtained their input on the burden estimate. Organizations consulted included:

 Great Lakes Gas Transmission Company;  Baltimore Gas and Electric Company;  El Paso Natural Gas Company;  Bay State Gas Company;  PECO Energy Company;  ANR Pipeline Company;  Enron; and  Shell E & P Company.

EPA has followed up with some of these companies and a few others in order to determine the reduction of burden that has been experienced by companies utilizing the on line reporting system ( first available in 2002). Organizations consulted on this specific matter included:

 Great Lakes Gas Transmission Company;  American Electric Power Company;  Atlanta Gas Light Company;  SCANA, Inc.;  PECO Energy Company;  Burlington Resources, Inc.;  CrossCountry Energy Company; and  Shell E & P Company.

3( c) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, EPA solicited public comments on the ICR through an announcement in the Federal Register on June 29, 2004 ( 69 FR 38893). No comments were received in response to the notice. 5 3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection The development of an MOU and Implementation Plan are one time information submittals from companies that voluntarily choose to become Partners in the Natural Gas STAR Program. Partners must also prepare and submit an Annual Report while participating in the program. EPA believes that any reduction in the frequency of this information collection would impede efforts by EPA to evaluate results of the program.

3( e) General Guidelines None of these reporting or record keeping requirements violate any of the regulations established by OMB in 5 CFR 1320.5.

3( f) Confidentiality Participation in the Natural Gas STAR Program is voluntary. Natural Gas STAR Partners may designate information submitted under this ICR as confidential business information. EPA will treat all such information as confidential business information and will not make the company or agencyspecific information collected under this ICR available to the general public.

3( g) Sensitive Questions No questions of a sensitive nature are asked in the MOU, Implementation Plan, or the Annual Report.

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 4( a) Respondents/ NAICS Codes The following is a list of North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) codes and associated industries that may be affected by information collection requirements covered under this ICR:

211111 Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas Extraction 48621 Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas 22121 Natural Gas Distribution 4( b) Information Requested EPA's Natural Gas STAR Program specifies requirements for Partners. All Natural Gas STAR Partners must develop and submit a one page Memorandum of Understanding ( MOU) with the Agency upon agreeing to participate in the program. Partners also must complete and submit to EPA a Natural Gas STAR Program Implementation Plan within six months of signing the MOU. The Implementation Plan is an outline of what will happen over the next three years, and serves as a plan for the Partner to follow. Partners also submit an Annual Report to the Agency. The Annual Report documents what has been accomplished in the past year, using the Implementation Plan as a guideline for comparison.

Memorandum of Understanding Natural Gas STAR Partners are required to develop and submit to EPA an MOU that describes the terms of participation in the program.

( i) Data items: 6 Partners must provide the following information in the MOU:

! The name, title, address, telephone and facsimile number, and email address of a Natural Gas STAR Program Implementation Manager and a Media Liaison;

! The name, address, and telephone number of the Partners's CEO, President, or Chairman, if applicable;

! A camera ready version of the Partner's logo, or other emblem;

( ii) Respondent activities:

In developing the MOU, Partners must perform the following activities:

! Receive and review the MOU;

! Gather information and fill out the MOU;

! Sign the MOU and submit it to EPA.

Implementation Plan Partners must complete and submit a Natural Gas STAR Implementation Plan within six to twelve months of signing the MOU.

( i) Data items:

The Implementation Plan form requests the following information:

! General company information ( e. g., company name and contact, position, address, SIC code, telephone and facsimile numbers, etc.);

! An Implementation Plan Summary; and ! Information on applicable Best Management Practices, which are reported by BMP type:

 Directed Inspection and Maintenance at Surface Facilities;  Identification and Rehabilitation of Leaky Distribution Pipe;  Directed Inspection and Maintenance programs at Compressor Stations;  Use of Turbines at Compressor Stations for New Installations or When Retiring Reciprocating Engines;  Identification and Replacement of High Bleed Pneumatic Devices;  Installation of Flash Tank Separators on Dehydrators;  Replace Gas Pneumatics with Instrument Air Systems; and  Implement Directed Inspection and Maintenance at Gas Plants and Booster Stations.

! Information on applicable Partner Reported Opportunities that the company chooses to evaluate and implement ( ii) Respondent activities: 7 Partners must conduct the following activities in preparing the Implementation Plan:

! Review the instructions;

! Gather the requested information and develop the Implementation Plan;

! Complete the form( s);

! Sign and submit the plan to EPA; and  Update the plan, if necessary.

Annual Report Partners must complete and submit a Natural Gas STAR Annual Report while participating in the program.

( i) Data items:

The Annual Report form requests the following information:

! General company information ( e. g., company name and contact, position, address, period covered by report, SIC code, telephone and facsimile numbers, etc.);

! An Annual Report Summary; and ! Information on Best Management Practices executed, which are reported by BMP type:

 Directed Inspection and Maintenance at Surface Facilities;  Identification and Rehabilitation of Leaky Distribution Pipe;  Directed Inspection and Maintenance programs at Compressor Stations;  Use of Turbines at Compressor Stations for New Installations or When Retiring Reciprocating Engines;  Identification and Replacement of High Bleed Pneumatic Devices;  Installation of Flash Tank Separators on Dehydrators;  Replace Gas Pneumatics with Instrument Air Systems; and  Implement Directed Inspection and Maintenance at Gas Plants and Booster Stations.

! Information on applicable Partner Reported Opportunities that the company chooses to evaluate and implement ( ii) Respondent activities:

Partners must conduct the following activities in preparing the Annual Report:

! Review the instructions;

! Gather the requested information for the initial report;

! Complete the initial form( s);

! Sign and date the initial report; 8 ! Submit the initial report to EPA; and  Prepare and submit a subsequent Annual Report.

Use of EPA Developed Materials EPA will loan certain materials to Natural Gas STAR Partner's for the purpose of publicizing the program. The Partner will reproduce and return the materials to the EPA within 30 days.

( i) Data items:

Partner may request camera ready negatives, mechanicals, and other directly reproducible material for the creation of the following:

! Natural Gas STAR brochures; ! Natural Gas STAR briefs; ! Natural Gas STAR video; and ! Other Natural Gas STAR materials.

( ii) Respondent activities:

! Make a request to the EPA to borrow materials; and ! Return all borrowed materials within thirty ( 30) days of their receipt.

Additional Activities During participation in the program, Partners may be required to notify EPA within two weeks of any change in Natural Gas STAR Program Implementation Manager responsibility.

( i) Data items:

Partner must provide EPA with the name of the new Implementation Manager.

( ii) Respondent activities:

 Notify EPA within two weeks of any change in Natural Gas STAR Implementation Manager responsibility.

5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5( a) Agency Activities The Natural Gas STAR Program requires EPA to perform activities after a Partner submits the MOU, Implementation Plan, and Annual Report.

Memorandum of Understanding EPA must perform the following activities following the submittal of an MOU:

! Review the MOU to ensure completeness and accuracy, and follow up, if necessary; 9 ! Sign the MOU;

! Develop a cover letter;

! Copy the cover letters and MOUs;

! Send cover letter and original MOU back to Partner;

! File copies of cover letters and MOUs; and ! Enter MOU information into a database.

Implementation Plan EPA must perform the following activities after the submittal of an Implementation Plan:

! Review the plan to ensure completeness and accuracy, and followup if necessary;

! Make copies of the plan;

! File copies of the plan; and ! Enter information into a database.

Annual Report EPA must perform the following activities after the submittal of an Annual report:

! Review the report to ensure completeness and accuracy, and followup if necessary;

! Make copies of the report;

! File copies of the report; and ! Enter information into a database.

Use of EPA Developed Materials EPA may perform the following activities after the receiving a request for materials:

! Make record of request;

! Ship materials to the Partner; and ! Receive returned materials.

Additional Activities EPA also may be required to perform the following additional activity:

! Enter any changes in Partner's information into a database ( e. g., Implementation Manager's responsibility, size of facility, newsletter mailing list, etc.). 10 5( b) Collection Methodology and Management In collecting and analyzing the information associated with this ICR, EPA uses a state of the art telephone system, personal computers, and applicable database and word processing software. In addition to traditional hard copy data collection methods, all information can be submitted to EPA electronically. EPA has created the capability for companies to submit Annual Reports through a password protected website or by e mailing an electronic reporting form.

EPA ensures the accuracy and completeness of collected information by reviewing each submittal. EPA enters the information obtained from the MOU, Implementation Plan, and Annual Reports into a database and aggregates data obtained from the Implementation Plan and Annual Reports to track the progress of Partners in reducing methane emissions.

5( c) Small Entity Flexibility EPA expects that some Natural Gas STAR Partners may be small entities. EPA has designed its plan and electronic reporting forms to minimize respondent burden while obtaining sufficient and accurate information. In addition, the burden associated with the Natural Gas STAR Program is inherently reduced since the initial agreement to participate is voluntary.

5( d) Collection Schedule EPA collects initial information in the MOU, which is completed and submitted by each Partner upon agreement to participate in the program. EPA collects information in the Implementation Plan six to twelve months after receiving a signed MOU. Each Spring, EPA collects information in the Annual Report to monitor emission reduction progress. Finally, EPA may collect other program information on a periodic basis or as the information is submitted; these items include notification of changes in Implementation Manager responsibility, and notification of changes in a Partner's gas system.

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden In order to obtain accurate hourly burden and cost estimates, EPA consulted with fewer than nine members of the affected universe and reviewed comments received during the comment period. Exhibit 1 presents the estimated annual respondent burden and costs for information collection activities associated with the Natural Gas STAR Program.

6( b) Estimating Respondent Costs EPA estimates an average hourly labor rate ( hourly rate plus overhead) of $ 138 for legal staff, $ 112 for managerial staff, $ 80 for technical staff, and $ 42 for clerical staff. In developing these estimates, EPA used U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data and consulted with Natural Gas STAR Partners. To develop respondent capital and O & M cost estimates, EPA consulted with members of the oil and gas industry. EPA believes that the capital or operations and maintenance costs of this program are not significant. The only O & M costs expected are for postage. A postage cost of $ 3.00 is attributed to all activities involving the sending of materials to account for the use of trackable mail.

6( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Costs 11 Exhibit 2 presents the estimated Agency burden hours and costs for the information collection activities associated with this ICR. EPA estimates an average hourly labor cost ( labor plus overhead) of $ 67.04 for legal staff, $ 62.63 for managerial staff, $ 45.97 for technical staff, and $ 18.46 for clerical staff. To derive these estimates, EPA used the 2004 Federal Pay Schedule salary figures. For purposes of this ICR, EPA assigned staff the following government service levels:

 Legal Staff GS 15, Step 1  Managerial Staff GS 14, Step 4  Technical Staff GS 12, Step 5  Clerical Staff GS 5, Step 1. 12 E XHIBIT 1: ESTIMATED ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST Hours and Costs Per Respondent/ Activity Total Hours and Costs Number of Leg. Mgr. Tech. Cler. Respon. Labor Capital/ Respon. Total Total $ 137.68/ $ 112.42/ $ 79.58/ $ 41.68/ Hours/ Cost/ Startup O & M or Hours/ Cost/

INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITY Hour Hour Hour Hour Activity Activity Cost Cost Activities Year Year Memorandum of Understanding Receive and review the MOU 1.00 8.00 0.00 0.00 9.00 $ 1,037 $ 0 $ 0 8 72 $ 8,296 Gather information and fill out MOU data sheet 1.00 25.00 0.00 2.00 28.00 $ 3,032 $ 0 $ 0 8 224 $ 24,256 Sign and submit MOU to EPA 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 $ 77 $ 0 $ 3 8 8 $ 640 SUBTOTAL 304 $ 33,192 Implementation Plan Review instructions 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 $ 225 $ 0 $ 0 8 16 $ 1,800 Gather information and develop the Implementation Plan 0.00 10.00 10.00 0.00 20.00 $ 1,920 $ 0 $ 0 8 160 $ 15,360 Complete the form( s) 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 $ 154 $ 0 $ 0 8 16 $ 1,232 Sign and submit plan to EPA 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 $ 77 $ 0 $ 3 8 8 $ 640 Update Implementation Plan, as necessary 0.00 6.50 4.00 1.50 12.00 $ 1,112 $ 0 $ 3 35 420 $ 39,025 SUBTOTAL 620 $ 58,057 Annual Report Review instructions 0.00 7.00 0.00 0.00 7.00 $ 787 $ 0 $ 0 8 56 $ 6,296 Gather the requested information for the initial report 0.00 10.00 37.00 0.00 47.00 $ 4,069 $ 0 $ 0 8 376 $ 32,552 Complete the initial form( s) 0.00 4.00 0.00 1.00 5.00 $ 491 $ 0 $ 0 8 40 $ 3,928 Sign and submit the initial report to EPA 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 $ 77 $ 0 $ 3 8 8 $ 640 Prepare and submit a subsequent Annual Report 0.00 10.00 18.50 1.50 30.00 $ 2,428 $ 0 $ 3 108 3,240 $ 262,548 SUBTOTAL 3,720 $ 305,964 Use of EPA Developed Materials Make request to EPA for materials 0.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 3.00 $ 267 $ 0 $ 0 11 33 $ 2,937 Return borrowed materials within 30 days 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 $ 42 $ 0 $ 3 11 11 $ 495 SUBTOTAL 44 $ 3,432 Additional Activities Notify EPA within two weeks of any change in Natural Gas Star Implementation Manager responsibility 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.50 1.50 $ 133 $ 0 $ 3 11 17 $ 1,4962 13 SUBTOTAL 17 $ 1,496 TOTAL $ 0 $ 21 4,705 $ 402,141 EXHIBIT 2: ESTIMATED ANNUAL AGENCY BURDEN AND COST Hours and Costs Per Respondent/ Activity Total Hours and Costs Number of Leg. Mgr. Tech. Cler. Respon. Labor Capital/ Respon. Total Total $ 67.04/ $ 62.69/ $ 45.97/ $ 18.46/ Hours/ Cost/ Startup O & M or Hours/ Cost/

INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITY Hour Hour Hour Hour Activity Activity Cost Cost Activities Year Year Memorandum of Understanding Review MOU and follow up, if necessary 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 $ 46 $ 0 $ 0 8 8 $ 368 Sign the MOU 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.05 $ 3 $ 0 $ 0 8 ERR $ 23 Develop a cover letter 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 $ 2 $ 0 $ 0 8 1 $ 14 Copy cover letters and MOUs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 $ 1 $ 0 $ 0 8 1 $ 11 Send cover letters and original MOU back to partner 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 $ 2 $ 0 $ 3 8 1 $ 38 File copies of cover letters and MOUs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 $ 2 $ 0 $ 0 8 1 $ 14 Enter MOU information into a data base 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 $ 4 $ 0 $ 0 8 2 $ 34 Subtotal 13 $ 500 Implementation Plan Review plan and follow up, if necessary 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 $ 84 $ 0 $ 0 35 70 $ 2,942 Make copies of plan 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 $ 1 $ 0 $ 0 35 3 $ 47 File copies of plan 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 $ 2 $ 0 $ 0 35 4 $ 59 Enter information into data base 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 $ 4 $ 0 $ 0 35 9 $ 148 Subtotal 85 $ 3,196 Annual Report Review report and follow up, if necessary 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 4.00 $ 168 $ 0 $ 0 116 464 $ 19,502 Make copies of report 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 $ 1 $ 0 $ 0 116 9 $ 157 File copies of report 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 $ 2 $ 0 $ 0 116 12 $ 196 Enter information into data base 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 $ 8 $ 0 $ 0 116 58 $ 979 Subtotal 543 $ 20,833 Use of EPA Developed Materials Make record of request 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 $ 2 $ 0 $ 0 9 1 $ 15 Ship materials to the partner 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 $ 4 $ 0 $ 3 9 2 $ 65 Receive returned materials 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 $ 4 $ 0 $ 0 9 2 $ 38 14 Subtotal 5 $ 118 Additional Activities Enter updated information into data base 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 $ 4 $ 0 $ 0 49 12 $ 207 Subtotal 12 $ 207 TOTAL $ 0 $

$ 6 659 $ 24,855 15 To derive hourly estimates, EPA divided annual compensation estimates by 2,080, which is the number of hours in the Federal work year. EPA then multiplied hourly rates by the standard government overhead factor of 1.6.

6( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs Currently, there are 108 Natural Gas STAR Program Partners, and EPA anticipates that an average of eight new Partners will join the program annually. The average annual universe numbers are shown below in Table 1.

TABLE 1 Estimated Number of Program Partners in Fiscal Years 2004 2006 Type of Partner Fiscal Year ' 04 Fiscal Year ' 05 Fiscal Year ' 06 Average New Partners Enrolled 9 8 8 8 Total Program Partners 108 116 124 116 Memorandum of Understanding Each potential Partner must complete and submit an MOU to participate in the program. EPA expects that eight new Partners will complete and submit an MOU each year.

Implementation Plan Each Partner must complete and submit the Implementation Plan within six to twelve months of signing and submitting the MOU. Thus, the Agency expects that all eight new Partners will prepare and submit the Implementation Plan each year. Additionally, EPA estimates that each year, 30 percent of all existing Partners ( 35 facilities) will update the Implementation Plan and submit it to EPA.

Annual Report All existing Partners must complete and submit an Annual Report. EPA estimates that completing the initial Annual Report will take approximately twice as long as subsequent reports. EPA also expects that the eight new Program Partners joining each year will complete and submit an initial report and all 108 other existing Partners ( 116 minus the eight new Partners) will complete and submit subsequent reports.

Use of EPA Developed Materials Each year, EPA estimates that 10 percent of all Partners will request the use of EPA developed materials for promotional purposes. Thus, EPA estimates that 11 Partners ( 108 x .1) will request materials from EPA each year.

Additional Activities EPA expects that some additional information submittals may be required of some Partners. EPA estimates that approximately 10 percent of all Partners 16 experience changes in their Implementation Manager responsibilities each year. Thus, EPA estimates that an average of 11 Partners ( 108 x .1) will notify EPA of changes in Implementation Manager responsibilities 6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs Exhibits 1 and 2 show the aggregate annual burden and cost to respondents and the government, respectively, for the information collection activities covered under this ICR. The bottom line burden for respondents is approximately 4,423 hours per year with an annual cost of approximately $ 402,141. The annual bottom line burden to the Agency is approximately 659 hours, at a cost of approximately $ 24,854 per year. Over the three year period covered by this ICR, EPA estimates the burden of the program to be 13,269 hours and $ 1,261,998 for respondents, and 1,977 hours and $ 74,562 for EPA.

6( f) Reasons for Change in Burden The overall reporting burden for respondents has increased from the previous ICR. Burden hours increased from 4,059 to 4,423 hours per year and annual costs increased from $ 321,844 to $ 402,141. This change is largely the result of:

 Higher hourly labor rates due to inflation; and  An increase in the number of program participants.

The increase, however, was tempered by a reduction in the estimate of time spent filling out and submitting the annual report due to the introduction of on line reporting in 2002. Fifty eight percent of reporting partners used the on line system in 2004, and partners reported a subsequent decreased burden of 15% for this activity. This reduced the average labor cost of preparing and submitting an annual report from $ 2,782 to $ 2,540 ( at constant 2004 labor rates.)

6( g) Burden Statement The average per facility reporting burden for information collection requirements associated with completing the MOU is estimated to be 3.06 hours. The burden estimate includes time to receive, review, complete, sign, and submit the MOU.

The average per facility reporting burden for information collection requirements associated with completing the Implementation Plan is estimated to be 5.3 hours. The burden estimate includes time to receive and review the plan form; gather the requested information; complete the form; sign and date the form; and submit the form to EPA.

The average per facility reporting burden for information collection requirements associated with completing the Annual Report for Program Partners is estimated to be 27.4 hours. The burden estimate includes time to receive and review the report form; gather the requested information; complete the form; sign and date the form; and submit the form to EPA. This estimate includes a reduced estimate for those partners using the on line reporting system, and a factor to account for the percentage of partners who are likely to use the on line reporting system.

The average per facility reporting burden for information collection requirements associated with requesting the use of EPA Developed materials is estimated to be .4 hours. The burden estimate includes time to make the 17 request to the EPA for the materials and to return the materials to the EPA within thirty days of receiving them.

For Natural Gas STAR Partners, the average per facility reporting burden for information collection requirements associated with additional activities is estimated to be .2 hours. The reporting burden includes time to notify EPA of changes in Natural Gas STAR Program Implementation Manager responsibility.

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 OAR 2004 0082, which is available for public viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is ( 202) 566 1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center is ( 202) 566 1742. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. Use EDOCKET 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, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID Number OAR 2004 0082 and OMB Control Number 2060 0328 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in collecting this information.


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 76 (Tuesday, April 21, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22201-22202]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09082]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2015-N-0001]

Request for Nominations on the Allergenic Products Advisory
Committee

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting that any
industry organizations interested in participating in the selection of
a nonvoting industry representative to serve on the Allergenic Products
Advisory Committee for the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research
notify FDA in writing. FDA is also requesting nominations for a
nonvoting industry representative to serve on the Allergenic Products
Advisory Committee. A nominee may either be self-nominated or nominated
by an organization to serve as a nonvoting industry representative.
Nominations will be accepted for current or upcoming vacancies
effective with this notice.

DATES: Any industry organization interested in participating in the
selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry
interests must send a letter stating that interest to the FDA by May
21, 2015, (see sections I and II for further details). Concurrently,
nomination materials for prospective candidates should be sent to FDA
by May 21, 2015.

ADDRESSES: All statements of interest from interested industry
organizations interested in participating in the selection process of
nonvoting industry representative nomination should be sent to Janie
Kim (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). All nominations for
nonvoting industry representatives may be submitted electronically by
accessing the FDA Advisory Committee Membership Nomination Portal:
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/FACTRSPortal/FACTRS/index.cfm or
by mail to Advisory Committee Oversight and Management Staff, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5103,
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Information about becoming a member of an
FDA advisory committee can also be obtained by visiting FDA's Web site
at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janie Kim, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX: 301-595-
1307, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Agency intends to add a nonvoting
industry representative to the following advisory committee:

I. Allergenic Products Advisory Committee

    The Committee reviews and evaluates available data concerning the
safety, effectiveness, and adequacy of labeling of marketed and
investigational allergenic biological products or materials that are
administered to humans for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of
allergies and allergic disease, and makes appropriate recommendations
to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs of its findings regarding the
affirmation or revocation of biological product licenses, on the
safety, effectiveness, and labeling of the products, on clinical and
laboratory studies of such products, on amendments or revisions to
regulations governing the manufacture, testing and licensing of
allergenic biological products, and on the quality and relevance of
FDA's research programs which provide the scientific support for
regulating these agents.

II. Selection Procedure

    Any industry organization interested in participating in the
selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry
interests should send a letter stating that interest to the FDA contact
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) within 30 days of publication of
this document (see DATES). Within the subsequent 30 days, FDA will send
a letter to each organization that has expressed an interest, attaching
a complete list of all such organizations; and a list of all nominees
along with their current resumes. The letter will also state that it is
the responsibility of the interested organizations to confer with one
another and to select a candidate, within 60 days after the receipt of
the FDA letter, to serve as the nonvoting member to represent industry
interests for the committee. The interested organizations are not bound
by the list of nominees in selecting a candidate. However, if no
individual is selected within 60 days, the Commissioner will select the
nonvoting member to represent industry interests.

III. Application Procedure

    Individuals may self-nominate and/or an organization may nominate
one or more individuals to serve as a nonvoting industry
representative. Contact information, current curriculum vitae, and the
name of the committee of interest should be sent to the FDA Advisory
Committee Membership Nomination Portal (see ADDRESSES) within 30 days
of publication of this document (see DATES). FDA will forward all
nominations to the organizations expressing interest in participating
in the selection process for the committee. (Persons who nominate
themselves as nonvoting industry representatives will not participate
in the selection process).
    FDA seeks to include the views of women, and men, members of all
racial and ethnic groups and individuals with and without disabilities
on its advisory committees and, therefore encourages nominations of
appropriately qualified candidates from these groups.
    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14, relating to advisory committees.

    Dated: April 15, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-09082 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: November 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 214)]
[Notices]
[Page 57541]
[DOCID:fr06no09-105]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold its annual forum on small business
capital formation on November 19, 2009 beginning at 9 a.m.
    The forum will include roundtables focusing on the state of small
business capital formation and the SEC's accredited investor definition
for private and limited offerings.
    The roundtables will take place in the Auditorium of the
Commission's headquarters at 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC and will
be open to the public with seating on a first-come, first-served basis.
Doors will open at 8:30 a.m. Visitors will be subject to security
checks.
    For further information, please contact Anthony Barone at 202-551-
3261.

    Dated: November 3, 2009.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-26894 Filed 11-4-09; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 7, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 46)]
[Notices]
[Page 12483-12485]
[DOCID:fr07mr08-132]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57410; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-96]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as
Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto, to Amend the Quarterly Option
Series Pilot Program To Permit the Listing of Additional Series

March 3, 2008.

I. Introduction

    On August 7, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposal to amend its rules relating to the quarterly
option series (``QOS'') pilot program (``Pilot Program'') to permit the
listing of additional series and to adopt a delisting program for
outlying QOS series with no open interest. On January 17, 2008, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. The
proposed rule change, as amended, was published for comment in the
Federal Register on January 28, 2008.\3\ The Commission received no
comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change,
as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57170 (January 18,
2008), 73 FR 4927 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    Current Exchange rules permit, on a pilot basis, the listing and
trading of QOS in options on indexes or options on exchange-traded
funds (``ETFs'') that satisfy the applicable listing criteria under
CBOE rules.\4\ QOS trade based on

calendar quarters that end in March, June, September and December. The
Exchange lists QOS that expire at the end of the next consecutive four
calendar quarters, as well as the fourth quarter of the next calendar
year. Currently, the Exchange lists QOS in five ETF options: (1)
Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock (QQQQ); (2) iShares Russell 2000 Index
Fund (IWM); (3) DIAMONDS Trust, Series 1 (DIA); (4) Standard and Poor's
Depositary Receipts/SPDRs (SPY); and (5) Energy Select SPDR (XLE).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54123 (July 11,
2006), 71 FR 40558 (July 17, 2006) (SR-CBOE-2006-65) (``Pilot
Program Release''). Under the pilot program, the Exchange may list
QOS in up to five currently listed option classes that are either
options on ETFs or indexes. The Exchange is also permitted to list
QOS in any options class that is selected by other securities
exchanges that employ a similar pilot program under their respective
rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE Rule 5.5(e)(3) provides that the Exchange shall list strike
prices for a QOS that are within $5 from the closing price of the
underlying security on the preceding day. Recently, the Exchange has
received requests from market participants to add additional strike
prices for QOS that would be outside of the $5 price range for setting
strikes (hereinafter ``+/-$5 range''). Investors and other market
participants have advised the Exchange that they are buying and selling
QOS options to trade volatility. In order to adequately replicate the
desired volatility exposure, these market participants need to trade
several option series, many having strike prices that fall outside the
+/-$5 range currently allowed under the QOS rules.
    In addition, other participants have advised the Exchange that
their investment strategies involve trading options tied to a
particular option ``delta,'' \5\ rather than a particular level of the
underlying security or index. At issue is the fact that delta depends
on both the relative difference between the level of the underlying
security or index and the option strike price, and time to expiration.
For example, with IWM trading at $85 per share, the strike price
corresponding to a ``25-delta'' IWM call (i.e., a call option with a
delta of 25) with one month to expiration would be 89. However, the
strike price corresponding to a ``25-delta'' IWM call with 3 months to
expiration would be 93, and the strike price of a ``25-delta'' call
with 1 year to expiration would be 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Delta'' is a measure of how an option price will change in
response to a $1 price change in the underlying security or index.
For example, an ABC option with a delta of ``50'' can be expected to
change by $0.50 in response to a $1 change in the price of ABC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In short, CBOE has been advised that the +/-$5 range for QOS in IWM
options is insufficient to satisfy customer demand. In response, the
Exchange proposes to amend Rule 5.5(e) to permit the Exchange to list
strike prices for QOS in ETF options that fall within a percentage
range (30%) above and below the price of the underlying ETF.
Additionally, upon demonstrated customer interest, the Exchange also
will be permitted to open additional strike prices of QOS in ETF
options that are more than 30% above or below the current price of the
underlying ETF. Market-Makers trading for their own account will not be
considered when determining customer interest under this provision. In
addition to the initial listed series, the proposal will permit the
Exchange to list up to sixty (60) additional series per expiration
month for each QOS in ETF options.
    The Exchange also is proposing to implement a delisting policy.
Under the proposed delisting policy, the Exchange will, on a monthly
basis, review QOS series that are outside a range of five (5) strikes
above and five (5) strikes below the current price of the underlying
ETF, and delist series with no open interest in both the put and the
call series having a strike price: (i) higher than the highest strike
price with open interest in the put and/or call series for a given
expiration month; or (ii) lower than the lowest strike price with open
interest in the put and/or call series for a given expiration month.\6\
Notwithstanding the proposed delisting policy, the Exchange will grant
customer requests to add strikes and/or maintain strikes in QOS
eligible for delisting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ For a detailed example of how the delisting policy will
work, see Notice, supra note 3, at 4928.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Approval of the Proposed
Rule Change

    After careful review and based on the Exchange's representations,
the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is
consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\7\
In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \8\ in that it is designed
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system,
and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission notes
that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Commission believes that the proposed expansion
in the range and number of strike prices that the Exchange may list for
QOS will provide investors with added flexibility in the trading of
equity options and further the public interest by allowing investors to
establish equity options positions that are better tailored to meet
their investment objectives. The Commission also believes that the
proposal strikes a reasonable balance between the Exchange's desire to
accommodate market participants by offering a wider array of investment
opportunities and the need to avoid unnecessary proliferation of
options series and the corresponding increase in quotes. The Commission
notes that the delisting policy proposed by the Exchange is designed to
mitigate the number of options series with no open interest, which
would reduce quote traffic accordingly.
    In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission has relied
upon the Exchange's representation that it has the necessary systems
capacity to support new options series that will result from this
proposal. The Commission expects the Exchange to continue to monitor
for option series with little or no open interest and trading activity
and, consistent with the delisting policy approved today as part of
this proposed rule change, to act promptly to delist such options. In
addition, the Commission expects that CBOE will continue to monitor the
trading volume associated with the additional option series listed as a
result of this proposal and the effect of these additional series on
market fragmentation and on the capacity of the Exchange's, OPRA's, and
vendors' automated systems.
    Finally, the Commission notes that this rule change will become
part of the pilot program and, going forward, its effects will be
considered by the Commission in the event that the Exchange seeks to
renew or make permanent the pilot program.\9\ Thus, in

the Exchange's future reports on the Pilot Program, the Exchange should
include analysis of (1) the impact of the additional series on the
Exchange's market and quote capacity, and (2) the implementation and
effects of the delisting policy, including the number of series
eligible for delisting during the period covered by the report, the
number of series actually delisted during that period (pursuant to the
delisting policy or otherwise), and documentation of any customer
requests to maintain QOS strikes that were otherwise eligible for
delisting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ As set forth in the Pilot Program Release, if the Exchange
were to propose an extension, expansion, or permanent approval of
the Pilot Program, the Exchange must submit, along with any filing
proposing such amendments to the program, a report that provides an
analysis of the Pilot Program covering the entire period during
which the Pilot Program was in effect. See Pilot Program Release,
supra note 4. The Pilot Program Release requires the Exchange to
include in its report, at a minimum: (1) Data and written analysis
on the open interest and trading volume in the classes for which QOS
were opened; (2) an assessment of the appropriateness of the option
classes selected for the Pilot Program; (3) an assessment of the
impact of the Pilot Program on the capacity of the Exchange, OPRA,
and market data vendors (to the extent data from market data vendors
is available); (4) any capacity problems or other problems that
arose during the operation of the Pilot Program and how the Exchange
addressed such problems; (5) any complaints that the Exchange
received during the operation of the Pilot Program and how the
Exchange addressed them; and (6) any additional information that
would assist in assessing the operation of the Pilot Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\10\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2007-96), as modified
by Amendment No. 1 thereto, be, and it hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-4389 Filed 3-6-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P