[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 99 (Monday, May 23, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31182-31183]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10947]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2022-0221]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Rancocas Creek, Burlington
County, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations; request for
comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the US Route 543 (Riverside-Delanco)
Bridge across Rancocas Creek, mile 1.3, at Burlington County, NJ. This
deviation will test a change to the drawbridge operation schedule to
determine whether a permanent change to the schedule is needed. The
Coast Guard is seeking comments from the public regarding these
proposed changes.

DATES: This deviation is effective from May 23, 2022 through 7:59 p.m.
on October 15, 2022. For the purpose of enforcement, actual notice will
be used from 1 p.m. on May 4, 2022, until May 23, 2022. Comments and
related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before August 1,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2022-0221 using Federal Decision Making Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this test
deviation, call or email Mr. Mickey D. Sanders, Fifth Coast Guard
District (dpb); telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    The purpose of the deviation is to test the seasonal operating
regulation of the US Route 543 (Riverside-Delanco) Bridge across
Rancocas Creek, mile 1.3, at Burlington County, NJ. The US 543
(Riverside-Delanco) Bridge across Rancocas Creek, mile 1.3, at
Burlington County, NJ, has a vertical clearance of 4 feet above mean
high water in the closed-to-navigation position. The bridge currently
operates under 33 CFR 117.745(b).
    The Burlington County Bridge Commission who owns and operates the
bridge has requested this change in the operation schedule to reduce
the number of bridge openings during off-peak hours, while providing
for the reasonable needs of navigation. The Rancocas Creek is used
predominately by recreational vessels and pleasure crafts.
    The bridge will be maintained in the closed-to-navigation position
from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m., and from 8 p.m. to 11 p.m., Monday through
Friday, from 7 a.m. to 1 p.m., and from 8 p.m. to 11 p.m., Saturday and
Sunday, and from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m., daily, from May 4, 2022, through
October 15, 2022.
    The three-year, monthly average number of bridge openings from 7
a.m. to 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. to 1 p.m., Saturday and
Sunday, and from 8 p.m. to 11 p.m., daily, as drawn from the data
contained in the bridge tender logs, is presented below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Average
            April to October (2018, 2019 and 2020)              monthly
                                                                openings
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monday-Friday, 7 a.m. to 3 p.m...............................          4
Saturday & Sunday, 7 a.m. to 1 p.m...........................          2
Daily, 8 p.m. to 11 p.m......................................          7
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed-to-navigation
position may do so at any time. The bridge will be able to open in case
of an emergency and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels
to pass. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways
through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in
operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange
their transits to minimize any impact caused by the test deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
normal operation at the end of the effective period of this test
deviation. This deviation is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

II. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal Decision
Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2022-0221 in the search box and click
``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the Search Results column,
and click on it. Then click on the Comment option. If your material
cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the
person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document
for alternate instructions.
    To view documents mentioned in this proposed rule as being
available in the docket, find the docket as described in the previous
paragraph, and then select ``Supporting & Related Material'' in the
Document Type column. Public comments will also be placed in our online
docket and can be viewed by following instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked Questions web page. We review all
comments received, but we will only post comments that address the
topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not to post off-topic,
inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive.
    We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to http://www.regulations.gov will include any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and submissions in response to this
document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).

    Dated: May 17, 2022.
Hal R. Pitts,
Bridge Program Manager, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2022-10947 Filed 5-20-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 117 (Tuesday, June 18, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28221-28223]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12843]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2019-0411]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Blazing Paddles, Cuyahoga River, Cleveland, OH

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
certain waters of the Cuyahoga River during the Blazing Paddles Stand
Up Paddle Race. This safety zone is intended to restrict vessels from a
portion of the Cuyahoga River during the event. This temporary safety
zone is necessary to protect mariners and racers from the navigational
hazards associated with Standup Paddleboard Race. Entry of vessels or
persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by
the Captain of the Port Buffalo.

DATES: This rule is effective from 7:45 a.m. through 2:30 p.m. on June
22, 2019.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2019-0411 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LT Ryan Junod, Chief of Waterways Management, U.S. Coast
Guard Marine Safety Unit Cleveland; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' On April 26, 2019 the Captain of the Port (COTP) Buffalo
published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), Docket Number USCG-
2019-0121, to include safety zones for annual events into a final rule.
This event was included in that NPRM. Its purpose was to mitigate
potential threats to personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in
the navigable waters within the specified safety zones. The NPRM
addressed these concerns, and invited public comments, which ended on
May 28, 2019. As such, it is unnecessary to publish a separate NPRM for
this event, as the public previously had the opportunity to comment on
it, and no comments were received.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after final
publication in the Federal Register because doing so would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. Delaying the
effective date of this rule to wait for final publication would inhibit
the Coast Guard's ability to protect spectators and vessels from the
hazards associated with a stand up paddleboard race.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The COTP has determined that a
large-scale paddle craft event on a navigable waterway will pose a
significant risk to participants and the boating public. This rule is
needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the
navigable waters within the safety zone while the Blazing Paddles Race
is happening.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 7:45 a.m. through 2:30
p.m. on June 22, 2019. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters
at the start point at position 41[deg]29'36'' N and 081[deg]42'13'' W
to the turnaround point at position 41[deg]28'52'' N and
081[deg]40'33'' W and returning to the starting point on the Cuyahoga
River; Cleveland, OH. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure
the safety of vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and
after the scheduled 8:00 a.m. through 2:00 p.m. Paddleboard Race. Entry
into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited
unless authorized by the COTP or a designated on-scene representative.
The COTP or a designated on-scene representative may be contacted via
VHF Channel 16.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the
characteristics of the safety zone. The safety zone created by this
rule will be relatively small and is designed to minimize its impact on
navigable waters. Furthermore, the safety zone has been designed to
allow vessels to transit around it. In addition, the safety zone will
have built in times to allow vessels to travel through when races are
not being held. Thus, restrictions on vessel movement within

that particular area are expected to be minimal. Under certain
conditions, moreover, vessels may still transit through the safety zone
when permitted by the COTP.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves establishment of a safety zone. It is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) in
Table 3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Implementing
Procedures 5090.1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting
this determination is available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0411 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0411  Safety Zone; Blazing Paddles; Cuyahoga River,
Cleveland, OH.

    (a) Location. The safety zone will encompass all waters of the
Cuyahoga River in Cleveland OH, beginning at position 41[deg]29'36'' N
and 081[deg]42'13'' W to the turnaround point at position
41[deg]28'52'' N and 081[deg]40'33'' (NAD 83) and returning to the
starting position.
    (b) Enforcement period. The rule in this section will be enforced
from 7:45 a.m. through 2:30 p.m. on June 22, 2019.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo
(COTP) or his designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP or his designated on-scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the COTP is any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been designated by the
COTP to act on his behalf.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the COTP Buffalo or his on-scene representative to
obtain permission to do so. The COTP or his on-scene representative may
be

contacted via VHF Channel 16 or at<PHONE_NUMBER>. Vessel operators
given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply
with all directions given to them by the COTP or his on-scene
representative.

    Dated: June 12, 2019.
Joseph S. Dufresne,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2019-12843 Filed 6-17-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 203 (Monday, October 23, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48939-48940]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22937]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0060]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Banana River, Indian Harbour
Beach, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; reopening comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is re-opening the comment period to solicit
additional comments concerning its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
published in April 2017 that proposes to change the regulation
governing Mathers Bridge across the Banana River, mile 0.5, in Indian
Harbour Beach, FL. The Coast Guard District Seven Bridge Office
received a request from the City of Indian Harbour Beach, Florida
requesting to re-open the comment period in order to allow members of
the public to comment that did not have awareness of the initial notice
and comment period.

DATES: Comments and relate material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before November 22, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2017-0060 using Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email LT Allen Storm with Coast Guard Sector Jacksonville
Waterways; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background and Purpose

    On April 24, 2017, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled, ``Banana River, Indian Harbour Beach, FL'' in the
Federal Register (82 FR 18877). The original comment period closed on
June 23, 2017. The NPRM proposed the initial change to the regulation
governing the Mathers Bridge across the Banana River, mile 0.5, in
Indian Harbour Beach, FL and contains useful background and analysis
related to the initial proposed change. The public is encouraged to
review the NPRM.
    The City of Indian Harbour Beach notified the Seventh Coast Guard
District Bridge Office they were unaware of the proposed regulation
change as it impacts their residents. Reopening the comment period and
providing notification of this action to the local media should
accomplish the goal intended, which is to reach a broader range of
waterway and highway users.

II. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    Public participation is essential to effective rulemaking, and
consideration of all comments and material received during the comment
period will be made. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this
rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number
for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to
which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, visit http://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in this docket
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.
    This notice, re-opening the comment period, ensures notice and
opportunity to comment on the NPRM before making the proposed changes
final. This notice is issued under authority of 33 U.S.C. 1223 and 5
U.S.C. 552.

    Dated: October 17, 2017.
Peter J. Brown,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2017-22937 Filed 10-20-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 181 (Friday, September 18, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56530-56531]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23397]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75911; File No. SR-ISE-2015-29]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Amend the Schedule of Fees

September 14, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on September 9, 2015, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(the ``Exchange'' or the ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as
described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared
by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The ISE proposes to amend the Schedule of Fees to eliminate the
disaster recovery network fee charged to telecommunications vendors
that connect to the Exchange's backup datacenter in New York. The text
of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site
(http://www.ise.com), at the principal office of the Exchange, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange rents cabinet space in its backup datacenter to
unaffiliated telecommunications vendors that are responsible for
redistributing connectivity to market participants that desire access
in order to maintain connectivity to the ISE when the primary
datacenter is not operational.\3\ The disaster recovery network fee
assessed to these telecommunications vendors is based on the amount of
cabinet space used by each vendor, and is $2,300 per month for a half-
cabinet and $2,800 per month for a full cabinet. The fee is designed to
recover the cost of running the backup datacenter, including space,
power, and cooling, and also reflects the value that these
telecommunications vendors receive from contracting with market
participants that use their services to connect to the backup
datacenter.\4\ As the Exchange is in the process of moving its backup
datacenter to a new facility that members will be able to connect to
directly, the Exchange now proposes to eliminate the fees charged to
telecommunications vendors that are connected to the current site. The
telecommunications vendors that are connected to the backup datacenter
provide access to members that need connectivity, and are expected to
keep providing this access while members are gradually transferred over
to the new disaster recovery site. With the upcoming changes, however,
the telecommunication vendors, who have already paid substantial
hardware and other costs in addition to the fees charged by the
Exchange, may not be able to recoup fees from sufficient market
participants to cover the cost of maintaining their connections during
this period. The Exchange therefore believes that it is appropriate to
eliminate the disaster recovery network fee at this time, and believes
that doing so will allow telecommunications vendors to continue to
provide access to the backup datacenter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For operational reasons, market participants are not
permitted to connect directly to the backup datacenter, and must go
through a telecommunication vendor.
    \4\ Telecommunications vendors contract with interested market
participants that access the datacenter through their services for a
fee. With this arrangement, the fees that ISE charges
telecommunications vendors can be spread across multiple market
participants.

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

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\5\ in general, and Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\6\ in particular, in that it is designed to provide
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among its members and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable, equitable, and not
unfairly discriminatory to eliminate the disaster recovery network fee
as the Exchange is in the process of moving its backup datacenter to a
new facility. During the period of this move, the Exchange expects that
the telecommunications vendors currently connected to the backup
datacenter will continue to provide access to interested parties in
order to facilitate access to the Exchange in the event the primary
datacenter is not operational. As members move their connections over
to the new backup facility, however, the telecommunications vendors
will be able to provide service to an increasingly narrow field of
market participants. Given the expected reduction in the demand for
connectivity through the telecommunication vendors, and the substantial
hardware and other costs the vendors have already incurred in
establishing and maintaining connectivity to the backup datacenter, the
Exchange has determined to eliminate the disaster recovery network fee.
The Exchange believes that eliminating this fee during the crossover
period will facilitate access to the backup datacenter while the
Exchange moves over to its new facility by making it economical for the
telecommunications vendors to remain connected and to continue to
provide connectivity to interested market participants.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\7\ the Exchange does
not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on
intermarket or intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange is
eliminating a fee charged to telecommunications vendors connected to
the backup datacenter in anticipation of its move to a new facility.
This change will facilitate access to the backup datacenter by making
it economical for the telecommunications vendors to maintain their
connections so that market participants can connect through them until
they are moved over to the new backup datacenter, and will not impose
any burden on competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \8\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\9\ because it establishes a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by ISE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-ISE-2015-29 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-ISE-2015-29. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No. SR-ISE-2015-29 and should be
submitted on or before October 9, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-23397 Filed 9-17-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR RadNet ICR# 0877.10

Section I: Part A

1.  Identification of the Information Collection

1.(a)	Title of the Information Collection

RadNet (formerly, Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System
[ERAMS])

1.(b)	Short Characterization

RadNet in this ICR refers to EPA’s national environmental radiation
monitoring network.  The objectives of RadNet (formerly, Environmental
Radiation Ambient Monitoring System [ERAMS] and renamed in 2005 to
RadNet) are to provide a means of estimating ambient levels of
radioactive pollutants in our environment, to follow trends in
environmental radioactivity levels, and to detect and assess the impact
of fallout and other intrusions of radioactive materials.  Data
generated from EPA's RadNet have been and are being used to provide the
information base for making decisions necessary to ensure the protection
of public health.  The system enables EPA to determine if additional
sampling or other actions are required in particular cases of
radioactive releases to the environment, and, where necessary, RadNet
can provide ancillary information on population exposure, radiation
trends, and other aspects of such releases.

The RadNet network is used to collect air particulate, precipitation,
drinking water, and pasteurized milk samples.  Most RadNet air
particulate monitors are capable of measuring radiation from the filter
in real-time, sending the data hourly to EPA.  The data from analysis of
these samples constitute the nation's single major source of
environmental radiation data.  The responsibility for operating RadNet
is assigned by the EPA’s Office of Radiation and Indoor Air to the
Director, National Analytical Radiation Environmental Laboratory
(NAREL), Montgomery, Alabama. The component sampling locations are
distributed throughout the United States and cover each geographical
region, individual states, and most major population centers.  The
respondents, primarily state and some local personnel, voluntarily
collect the samples and complete the information forms.  The forms
request descriptive information related to sample collections (e.g.,
sample type, sample location, length of sampling, and volume
represented).  Requested sampling frequencies are as follows:

Air particulate samples are requested twice weekly. *

Precipitation samples are collected after each measurable rainfall and
composited into monthly samples.

Pasteurized milk samples are collected quarterly.

Drinking water samples are collected quarterly.

*   Many variable, site-specific conditions may preclude predicting a
specific number of filters changed by a respondent weekly.  For example,
operator safety may be compromised by construction or severe weather,
which may preclude routine air sample collection.  Reduced operator
availability may cause reduced filter change frequency if an
operator’s non-volunteer job duties increase, or if frequency of
visits to a monitor site decreases, such as may occur with sites at
remote locations generally visited in conjunction with non-volunteer job
duties.  The RadNet Quality Assurance Project Plan contains a detailed
discussion of these conditions.  It is important to recognize that these
variations do not affect the quality of the results of the analyses.

The samples are sent to NAREL for radiochemical analyses.  To ensure
that the data generated at NAREL are of known quality, a quality
assurance plan (available upon request) is followed during all phases of
sample collection and analysis activities.

All results are stored in the NAREL computer and made available online
at the EPA website and when necessitated by circumstances can be
available daily. See Attachment 1 for the forms used by respondents and
NAREL personnel to document sampling in all RadNet media:  air,
precipitation, milk, and drinking water.

The utility of RadNet data is evidenced by its extensive use by a number
of federal, state and commercial entities.  DOE's National Laboratories
(including Oak Ridge, Savannah River, Brookhaven, and Argonne) and many
universities across the country utilize the data generated by the
operation of the RadNet network.  RadNet data are also used by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and NRC licensed nuclear power
plants and their environmental contractors to establish background data.
 These data are used by some power plant operators as a baseline to
ensure compliance with NRC release limits.  The states also use RadNet
data to supplement or compare with environmental radiation information
generated by their own programs.

Data from this program have been used to measure fallout following
atmospheric nuclear weapon tests until 1980, when atmospheric testing of
nuclear weapons ceased.  During and following the accident at Three Mile
Island, RadNet stations in the adjacent states demonstrated to the
public that there were no radioactive materials in their areas as a
result of the accident.  Increased monitoring following the nuclear
incident at Chernobyl in 1986 provided daily reports of atmospheric
concentrations of radionuclides across the United States.  Most
recently, RadNet was the largest source of radiological data following
the Fukushima reactor accidents in 2011.

The collection of samples will involve 302 respondents with an annual
respondent burden cost of approximately 299,913 dollars, including costs
of benefits and overhead. The respondents are not asked or required to
keep records and all supplies and equipment relating to RadNet
activities are provided by NAREL at no cost to the respondents.

RadNet data back to 1981 may be found at the EPA web site
http://www.epa.gov/radnet/radnet-data/online-data.html.  RadNet data on
the web are interactive--the database can be queried and searched.
Quarterly reports are no longer produced in hard copy, due to the
availability of RadNet data online.  NAREL does not survey respondents,
other than on specific issues regarding their work as sample collectors.
  That is done through routine conversations with them via telephone as
part of the process of maintaining the flow of samples and supplies
between NAREL and respondents.

Currently, expansion of the real-time air network of RadNet, which began
in 2006, is being completed.  Since 2006, the number of air samplers has
increased from 52 to the current 146 and will increase to a total of 156
during the period of this ICR (from February 2013 through February
2016).  The total of 156 samplers will be comprised of 140
near-real-time samplers plus a legacy of approximately 16 conventional
samplers.  The size of the other media networks (milk, drinking water,
and precipitation) are expected to remain essentially unchanged, except
for the normal fluctuation of volunteer participants.  The increased
burden for the Agency provided in this supporting statement is primarily
the result of the increased sample load inherent in an expanded air
monitoring system.

2.  Need for and Use of the Collection

2.(a)	Need / Authority for the Collection

The legal basis of RadNet originated and resides in Executive Order
10831 and Public Law 86-373.  Executive order 10831 was announced to the
public on July 31, 1959, and issued August 4, 1959.  This order came in
response to recommendations contained in a memorandum to the President
from Elmer B. Staats on July 31, 1959.  As reiterated before the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy by Maurice H. Stans, these recommendations
also became a part of the legislative history of the 1959 amendments to
the Atomic Energy Act. Radioactive fallout and environmental radiation
monitoring became a responsibility of the Department of Health,
Education and Welfare (HEW) under these legal mandates.  In 1970,
Reorganization Plan No. 3 transferred HEW's fallout and radioactive
monitoring responsibilities to the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA).  On July 1, 1973, through its Office of Radiation Programs (ORP),
EPA developed and implemented a new continuous monitoring system.  This
system, originally termed ERAMS and now called RadNet, was designed to
complete and complement the monitoring system previously instituted by
HEW's Public Health Service under Executive Order 10831.

The objectives of RadNet are to provide a means of estimating ambient
levels of radioactive pollutants in our environment, to follow trends in
environmental radioactivity levels, and to assess the impact of fallout
and other intrusions of radioactive materials.  Data generated from
EPA's RadNet have been and are being used to provide the information
base for making decisions necessary to ensure the protection of public
health.  The system enables EPA to determine if additional sampling or
other actions are required in particular cases of radioactive releases
to the environment, and, where necessary, RadNet can provide ancillary
information on population exposure, radiation trends, and other aspects
of such releases.

2.(b)	Use / Users of the Data

Data generated by RadNet are used to provide a means of estimating
ambient levels of radioactive pollutants in our environment, to follow
trends in environmental radioactivity levels, and to detect and assess
the impact of fallout and other intrusions of radioactive materials.
Data generated from EPA's RadNet have been and are being used to provide
the information base for making decisions necessary to ensure the
protection of public health.  The system enables EPA to determine if
additional sampling or other actions are required in particular cases of
radioactive releases to the environment and, where necessary, RadNet can
provide ancillary information on population exposure, radiation trends,
and other aspects of such releases.

The utility of the RadNet data is evidenced by its extensive use by a
number of federal, state and commercial entities.  DOE's national
Laboratories (including Oak Ridge, Savannah River, Brookhaven, and
Argonne) and many universities across the country utilize the data
generated by the operation of the RadNet network.  RadNet data are also
used by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and NRC licensed nuclear power
plants and their environmental contractors to establish background data.
 These data are used by some power plant operators as a baseline to
ensure compliance with NRC release limits.  The states also use RadNet
data to supplement or compare with environmental radiation information
generated by their own programs.

Data from this program have been used to measure fallout following
atmospheric nuclear weapon tests until 1980, when atmospheric testing of
nuclear weapons ceased.  During and following the accident at Three Mile
Island, RadNet stations in the adjacent states demonstrated to the
public that there were no radioactive materials in their areas as a
result of the accident.  Increased monitoring following the nuclear
incident at Chernobyl in 1986 provided daily reports of atmospheric
concentrations of radionuclides across the United States.  Most
recently, RadNet was the largest source of radiological data following
the Fukushima reactor accidents in 2011.

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

3. (a)	Non-duplication

RadNet has been in operation for 40 years.  During that time, data
derived from the system have been disseminated nationally and
internationally.  The professional/information network developed over
the life of RadNet has identified other environmental radiation data
systems in the United States, but none have RadNet's national scope or
exact collection and analytical structure.  This was recently
highlighted during the months following the nuclear reactor accidents in
Fukushima, Japan.

Immediately following the accident at Chernobyl in 1986 in the former
Soviet Union, the President's order charged EPA with lead responsibility
for monitoring possible environmental effects in the United States.  It
was the unique nationwide monitoring capability of RadNet that helped
EPA respond to that Presidential Order.  Similarly, during the nine-year
EPA follow-up monitoring of the accident at Three Mile Island RadNet was
called upon because of its unique national scope and analytical
structure and capability.

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

The first Federal Register(FR) notice has been completed.  The notice
was published February 15, 2013 in FR Vol. 78, No. 32.  EPA received no
comments.

3. (c)	Consultations

The National Analytical Radiation Environmental Laboratory (NAREL) is
involved in telephone and written communication with the respondents who
supply the samples.  In addition, NAREL is an active participant in the
Council of Radiation Control Program Directors (CRCPD), which is an
association of individuals from radiation programs from all fifty
states.  These individuals and their associates make up a significant
number of RadNet data users.  NAREL's participation in this association
allows for frequent consultations on a variety of issues involving
RadNet with many RadNet data users.  Comments from federal and state
agencies and other organizations concerning RadNet are welcomed and are
noted at NAREL.

3. (d)	Effects of Less Frequent Collection

Alternate, less frequent collection intervals have been considered but
not adopted because these would not provide the continuous current
"picture" of the radiation levels across the United States now available
with the current system.  Less frequent collection would eliminate the
ability to determine and respond to elevated radiation levels soon after
they occur and would dramatically decrease the ability to map trends in
radiation data following a release.

3. (e)	General Guidelines

The respondents are requested to supply precipitation samples and air
filters and accompanying forms more often than on a quarterly basis.
This is done so that elevated levels of radiation will be detected as
soon as possible so as to allow for the quickest response possible to
potential health threats.

The respondents submit sample collection information on a one page form
that accompanies the sample to the NAREL.  Since most samples are
collected in the field, electronic means of recording or sending the
information are not feasible.  In addition, to avoid assigning incorrect
sampling information to a sample, the sample and sampling information
need to be linked when they are sent to the lab.  The most effective
means to do this is to attach a form with the information to the sample.

3. (f-g)	Confidentiality and Sensitive Questions

The section on confidentiality and sensitive questions does not apply to
RadNet.  The respondents do not supply confidential or sensitive
information.

4.  The Respondents and the Information Requested

4.(a)	Respondents / NAICS Codes

All fifty states, primarily the State Public Health Departments (NAICS
Code 92312), send samples along with one page sample collection forms to
NAREL.  The respondents were chosen for two basic reasons: most of them
routinely collect samples of this type as part of their normal
activities, and in order to obtain meaningful information concerning
ambient radiation levels for the entire United States samples must be
collected from as many parts of the country as feasible.

4.(b)(i)	Information Requested

Respondents provide actual samples of air, precipitation, drinking
water, and milk.  Respondents do provide descriptive information about
their samples on one page forms (see Attachments 1-6).  The respondents
are not requested or required to maintain records.  Since the forms, as
shown in the attachments, have had only very minor changes over time
expiration dates are not included on them.

4.(b)(ii)	Respondent Activities

RadNet respondents perform the following tasks in order to provide
samples to NAREL:

Read instructions concerning the sampling process

Collect samples in appropriate containers

Mail/ship samples to NAREL in Montgomery, Alabama

Complete description forms regarding samples

Most respondents are employees of state health agencies and routinely
perform sampling of their own that is analogous to RadNet sampling.

5.	The Information Collected

5.(a)	Agency Activities

Since RadNet began operating in the early 1970's, the following
functions have been part of EPA's inventory of Agency activities:

Maintain a master database

Answer respondent questions

Coordinate respondent sample submissions

Maintain records of sample submissions

Publish and disseminate data from sample analyses

Analyze samples submitted by respondents

Prepare and send sampling material

Provide maintenance and or replacements for sampling instruments

5.(b)	Collection Methodology and Management

The RadNet network involves the collection of a variety of samples
including air filters, milk, drinking water, and rain water
(precipitation) samples.  Standard Operating Procedures (available upon
request), contain the detailed procedures used to ensure uniform
collection of the samples and the standard forms filled out by the
respondents when they collect the samples.  The forms were designed to
minimize the burden on the respondents.  In most cases only the date of
sampling, location of sampling, and the name of the individual taking
the sample are required.  Since most samples are taken in the field, an
electronic means of recording and sending this information is not
feasible.  To ensure that the sample collection information accompanies
the correct sample, the sample and the information need to be sent
together.  This is best accomplished by attaching the one page form to
each sample when it is sent to the NAREL.

When the samples and accompanying forms arrive at NAREL, the samples are
assigned an identification number.  This number and information from the
accompanying forms are entered into the NAREL computer.  The samples are
then analyzed for a variety of radionuclides.    Data from the analyses
performed at NAREL are also entered into the computer.  The data are
stored in a database and are available to the public online at the EPA
website http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/erams_query_v2.simple_query.  When
necessitated by unique circumstances, data from the RadNet network can
be made available daily.  The data are verified by at least two
individuals at NAREL.  To ensure that the data are accurate and
reliable, all activities associated with the RadNet network must conform
to the RadNet Quality Assurance Project Plan and the Quality Assurance
Manual, which detail the data quality objectives, project organization
and responsibility, internal quality control checks, and other areas
relating to quality assurance.

5.(c)	Small Entity Flexibility

This section is not applicable because the respondents are state
agencies.

5.(d)	Collection Schedule

Listed below are the requested sample collection frequencies that
require completion of sample collection forms.

Sample					Requested Collection frequency

Milk					Quarterly

Drinking water				Quarterly

Precipitation				As precipitation occurs

	Air filters				Two times per week *

*   Many variable, site-specific conditions may preclude predicting a
specific number of filters changed by a respondent weekly.  For example,
operator safety may be compromised by construction or severe weather,
which may preclude routine air sample collection.  Reduced operator
availability may cause reduced filter change frequency if an
operator’s non-volunteer job duties increase, or if frequency of
visits to a monitor site decreases, such as may occur with sites at
remote locations generally visited in conjunction with non-volunteer job
duties.  The RadNet Quality Assurance Project Plan contains a detailed
discussion of these conditions.  It is important to recognize that these
variations do not affect the quality of the results of the analyses.

In the rare case of an emergency, such as Three Mile Island, Chernobyl,
or Fukushima, EPA may request an increased sample collection frequency.

6.	Estimating the Burden and Cost of Collection

6.(a)	Estimating Respondent Burden

Total individual respondent burden for RadNet is estimated to be 8,243
hours annually.  This 5 percent reduction in burden from 8,710 hours
annually is primarily driven by the use of improved technology which
reduces manual calculations for the real-time air monitors.  Improved
technology of the RadNet real-time air monitors also allows some
operations to be performed by EPA personnel at NAREL rather than
requiring respondent time.  EPA continues to look for other ways to
reduce operator burden, particularly in the real-time air monitoring
program.

Burden hour estimates are based primarily on sample collection times
tested by NAREL personnel and informal telephone conversations with
respondents over the years.  Additional information used in estimating
burden hours was obtained through discussions of NAREL personnel with
personnel from state radiation departments at Council of Radiation
Control Program Directors (CRCPD) meetings.  Discussions with
respondents and RadNet management revealed that the technical labor
category is the most appropriate one for all RadNet burden activities.

Although the respondent burden assumes 302 sampling locations, there can
be times when the actual number of stations reporting is less than that,
due to unexpected nonparticipation by some stations.  However,
participation is not anticipated to decrease by more than 15 percent.

6.(b)	Estimating Respondent Cost

Total respondent cost for RadNet is estimated to be about $300,000
annually.  This 37 percent reduction in cost from about $480,000
annually is again primarily driven by the use of improved technology.
The improved technology of the real-time RadNet air monitors allows
operation by volunteers with a much wider range of technological skills
which reduces the hourly rate assumed in the calculation.  Additionally,
as stated in 6.(a), improved technology aides in reducing respondent
burden and thus cost.

Informal conversations and discussions with respondents and RadNet
management have revealed that the technical labor category is the
correct one for all RadNet respondent burden activities.  Since the
hourly wages of the respondents depend on years of employment and the
pay scales of their respective states, an actual average hourly wage
would require obtaining confidential information from the respondents.
Based on our informal discussions with respondents and RadNet managers,
the hourly rate at the GS-9(1) level, 36.384 dollars/hour ($22.74 per
hour times a 1.6 overhead multiplication factor, based upon OPM salary
tables for “rest of U.S.” effective January 2012 as displayed at
http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/2012/g
eneral-schedule/rus_h.pdf), is a good approximation of the
respondents’ hourly wage for this technical labor category.  This is
reduced from the previous reports which used GS-12(1) as a basis.  This
reduction is due to newer information concerning respondent’s time
burden and reduced burden of the real-time air program due to improved
technology.

The respondents are not asked or required to keep records, and all
supplies and materials relating to RadNet activities are provided by the
NAREL at no cost to the respondents.

There are no capital costs for sample collectors (respondents). All
equipment and materials are supplied by NAREL.

6.(c)	Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

Total agency burden and cost for RadNet are estimated to be about 28,700
hours and $2,376,000 annually.  The 31 percent increase in burden from
21,930 is primarily due to additional sample throughput in the
laboratory and additional data review and maintenance operations needed
to support the expanded network of real-time air monitors.  These
additional hours result in a 25% increase in agency personnel cost from
about $1,447,000 to $1,803,000 annually.  Additionally, EPA estimates
the cost for supplies for the RadNet program to be $78,000 annually,
which is a 5% increase due to the additional RadNet air samplers.
Finally, EPA estimates the capital costs to decrease significantly from
about $1,383,000 to about $495,000.  The decrease in capital cost is
primarily due to EPA having completed air monitor purchases, which was
the largest capital acquisition.

Our agency burden estimates are based on our years of experience in
operating the RadNet network.  Since the activities for the operation of
RadNet involves worker at various GS levels, we used composite burden
hours and calculated hourly costs at the GS-13 level (step 1) times 1.6
(the overhead multiplication factor) to be 62.74 dollars/hour.  The
total number of annual hours devoted to RadNet by Agency personnel is
estimated to be 28,706 hours.

	6.(d)	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost/Burden Tables

See burden tables on pages 11-13.

6.(e)	Reasons For Change in Burden

Total respondent burden for RadNet was reduced by 5% primarily due to
the use of improved technology of the RadNet real-time air monitors.
Total agency burden increased by 31 percent, primarily due to additional
sample throughput in the laboratory and additional data review and
maintenance operations needed to support the expanded network of
real-time air monitors.

6.(f)	Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection
of information is estimated to average just under 0.5 hours per
response.  Burden means the total time and effort 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 No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0041-0008, which is available for online viewing at
HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov/" www.regulations.gov , or in
person viewing at the Office of Air and Radiation Docket in the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW,
Washington, DC.  The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8 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 Air and Radiation Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.   Use
EPA’s electronic docket and comment system at  HYPERLINK
"http://www.regulations.gov/" www.regulations.gov , to submit or view
public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket,
and to access those documents in the docket that are available
electronically.  Once in the system, select “docket search,” then
key in the docket ID number identified above.  Please note that EPA’s
policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in
paper, will be made available for public viewing at  HYPERLINK
"http://www.regulations.gov/" www.regulations.gov  as EPA receives them
and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material,
CBI, or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by
statute.  For further information about the electronic docket, go to
HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov/" www.regulations.gov .

Section II: Part B

In the case of the RadNet network, respondents send in actual samples
such as air filters, milk, drinking water, and rain.  With each sample
the respondents send in a one page form which basically requires the
date and location of sampling, the size of the sample, and the name of
the individual taking the sample.  This is basic information that
identifies the sample and requires no real data gathering on the part of
the respondent.  The respondent simply supplies information on the
sampling process that he/she just performed.

The design of RadNet makes it the most comprehensive radiation
monitoring network in the nation.  The 302 sampling sites span the
United States and cover most major population centers in all
geographical regions.  They are typically located at or near state
health facilities and samples are collected voluntarily by state
personnel.  Although the choice of sampling station locations is not
based on a truly randomized design, the nationwide dispersion of sites
does represent a close approximation to randomly selected locations with
consideration given to population centers and potential radiation source
distribution.  This arrangement maximizes the coordination with state
and local agencies collecting the samples as it does not place stations
in extremely remote and relatively inaccessible locations.

The RadNet network satisfies the three major objectives of an
environmental monitoring program as set forth by the Health Physics
Society's Committee on Upgrading the Quality of the Environmental Data
(EPA 520/1-80-012).  These objectives are:

a.	to assess dose,

b.	to determine any trends of environmental radiation dose rates and
concentrations

	of radioactive materials, and

c.	to reassure members of the public and governmental organizations
regarding

 	radiation hazards and environmental radiation exposures.

The Society specifically references EPA's RadNet as an example of a
functioning environmental monitoring program that incorporates these
major desirable features.

TABLE 1

Annual Respondent Burden Cost Estimates

Activity	Hours per Occurrence

(A)	Occurrences per Year

(B)	Hours per Respondent per Year

(C = A x B)	Respondents per Year

(D)	Burden-hours per years

(E = C x D)	Cost per year

(F = E x $36.38/hr)*

Read Instructions

    Air 	1	2	2	156	312	11,351.81

    Precipitation 	0.5	2	1	33	33	1,200.67

    Drinking water	0.5	2	1	74	74	2,692.42

    Milk	1	2	2	39	78	2,837.95

Collect Samples

    Air	0.32	104	32.9	156	5137.6	186,926.44

    Precipitation	0.23	26.2	6.1	33	201.6	7,335.01

    Drinking  Water	0.15	4	0.6	74	44.4	1,615.45

    Milk	3.90	4	15.6	39	608.4	22,136.03

Complete and Mail Forms

    Air	0.1	104	10.4	156	1622.4	59,029.40

    Precipitation	0.1	26.2	2.6	33	86.4	3,143.58

    Drinking Water	0.1	4	0.4	74	29.6	1,076.97

    Milk	0.1	4	0.4	39	15.6	567.59

TOTAL ANNUAL  HOURS	8243

	TOTAL ANNUAL  LABOR COST

299,913.31

RESPONDENTS’ TOTAL ANNUAL COST**

299,913.31

*  The rate used in this table is that of a GS-9/1 for 2012.  The
$36.384 per hour amounts to the GS-9/1 rate of $22.74/hr multiplied by
an overhead rate of 1.6.

**  Record keeping costs, capital costs, and maintenance costs are zero
(0) for respondents.

					TABLE 2

Annual Agency Burden/Cost Estimates

(Activities)

Line Item	Burden Activity	Annual Hours	Agency Costs*

1	Maintaining master database	50	3,137.00

2	Monitoring real-time data (contractor)	3,288	206,000.00

3	Monitoring real-time data (NAREL)	500	31,370.00

4	Maintain real-time monitors (contractor)	6,480	421,200.00

5	Maintain system operations (NAREL)	1,500	94,120.00

76	IT support (contractor)	1,920	108,000.00

7	Answering respondent questions	210	13,175.40

8	Coordinating respondent submissions	1,462	91,725.88

9	Maintaining records of samples	1,462	91,725.88

10	Publishing and disseminating data	300	18,822.00

11	Analyzing samples	9,734	610,711.16

12	Providing sampling supplies	1,800	112,932.00

	TOTAL	28,706	1,802,909.32

* For federal employees, the activity costs assume an average of GS-13/1
($62.74/hr) rate.  Lines 2, 4, and 6 are contractor costs.  GS hourly
rates

 are based upon 2012 data from the Office of Personnel Management
(http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/2012/
general-schedule/rus_h.pdf).

					TABLE 3

Agency Burden/Cost Estimates (Capital Costs)*

Line Item 	Unit Cost ($)	No. Units	Total ($)

Physical site preparation for air samplers	3,000	4	12,000

Supplies to field stations 	500	156	78,000

Maintain real-time monitors parts (annual total)	180,000	1	180,000

Maintain real-time monitors (contractor site visits, annual total)
180,000	1	180,000

IT costs

	Data disaster recovery site	22,000	1	22,000

Oracle license	15,000	1	15,000

Internet access	18,000	1	18,000

FTP software	500	1	500

Records retention	1,800	1	1,800

Backup software	6,000	1	6,000

Equipment refresh	10,000	1	10,000

CDX website host	50,000	1	50,000

Grand Total	573,300

*All capital costs in this table, except for the $78,000 to supply field
stations, pertain to costs supporting the expansion and upgrade

 of the RadNet air network.

					TABLE 4

Summary of Respondent and Agency Total Costs

Line Item	Total ($)

Annual Respondent Burden	299,913.31

Annual Agency Burden for Activities	1,802,909.32

Annual Agency Burden for Capital Costs	573,300

Combined (activity and capital cost) Burden

       to the Agency	2,376,209.32

ATTACHMENT 1

Forms Used by RadNet Respondents

(click on PDF icon below)

 PAGE

 PAGE   2