Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request, 53501-53502 [2011-21858]

Download as PDF 53501 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 166 / Friday, August 26, 2011 / Notices The NRC has found that the application for the source materials license complied with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission’s regulations. As required by the Act and the Commission’s regulations in 10 CFR 40.32(b)–(c), the staff has found that LCI is qualified by reason of training and experience to use source material for the purpose that it requested, and that LCI’s proposed equipment and procedures for use at its Lost Creek Project are adequate to protect public health and minimize danger to life or property. The NRC 1 ...... 2 ...... 3 ...... 4 ...... 5 ...... 6 ...... 7 ...... 8 ...... 9 ...... 10 .... 11 .... 12 .... 13 .... 14 .... 15 .... 16 .... staff’s review supporting these findings is documented in the SER. The NRC staff also concluded, in accordance with 10 CFR 40.32(d), that issuance of Materials License SUA–1598 to LCI will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public. The staff also found in accordance with 10 CFR 40.32(e), after weighing the environmental, economic, technical, and other benefits against environmental costs and considering available alternatives, that the appropriate action is to issue Materials License SUA–1598. LCI’s request for a materials license was previously noticed in the Federal In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC’s ‘‘Rules of Practice,’’ the details with respect to this action, including the SER and accompanying documentation and license, are available electronically in the NRC Library at http:// www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. The ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related to this notice are: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Applicant’s Application, March 20, 2008 ...................................................................................................................... Response to Request for Additional Information, December 12, 2008 ....................................................................... Response to Request for Additional Information, January 16, 2009 ........................................................................... Response to Request for Additional Information, February 27, 2009 ......................................................................... Generic Environmental Impact Statement for In-Situ Leach Uranium Milling Facilities, May 2009 ............................ Response to Request for Additional Information, August 5, 2009 ............................................................................... Applicant’s Notification of Monitoring Well Network, May 22, 2009 ............................................................................ Lost Creek Project Exemption Request, July 2, 2009 ................................................................................................. Exemption to 10 CFR 40.42(e), April 6, 2010 .............................................................................................................. Response to Open Issues in Safety Evaluation Report, April 22, 2010 ...................................................................... Revisions to Application, April 22, 2010 ....................................................................................................................... Clarifications to Technical Report, May 14, 2010 ........................................................................................................ Replacement Pages to Application, June 24, 2010 ..................................................................................................... Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Lost Creek ISR Project in Sweetwater County, Wyoming, June 2011. NRC Safety Evaluation Report, August 2011 .............................................................................................................. Source Materials License for Lost Creek, August 17, 2011 ........................................................................................ If you do not have access to ADAMS, or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209 or 301–415–4737, or via e-mail to PDR.Resource@nrc.gov. These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC’s PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Keith I. McConnell, Deputy Director, Decommissioning and Uranium Recovery Licensing Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES Register on July 10, 2008 (73 FR 39728), with a notice of an opportunity to request a hearing. The NRC did not receive any requests for a hearing on the license application. Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Tanya Palmateer Oxenberg, Ph.D., Project Manager, Uranium Recovery Licensing Branch, Decommissioning and Uranium Recovery Licensing Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Telephone: (301) 415–6142; fax number: (301) 415–5369; e-mail: tanya.oxenberg@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 17th day of August 2011. VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:37 Aug 25, 2011 Jkt 223001 [FR Doc. 2011–21927 Filed 8–25–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Upon written request, copies available from: U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC 20549–0213. Extension: Rule 15g–9; SEC File No. 270– 325; OMB Control No. 3235–0385. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a request for extension of the previously PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 ML081060525 ML090080451 ML090360163 ML090840399 ML091530075 ML092310728 ML091740295 ML091940438 ML093350365 ML102100241 ML102420249 ML101600528 ML101820155 ML11125A006 ML112231724 ML111940049 approved collection of information discussed below. Section 15(c)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.) (the ‘‘Exchange Act’’) authorizes the Commission to promulgate rules that prescribe means reasonably designed to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, or manipulative practices in connection with over-the-counter (‘‘OTC’’) securities transactions. Pursuant to this authority, the Commission in 1989 adopted Rule 15a– 6 which was subsequently redesignated as Rule 15g–9, 17 CFR 240.15g–9 (the ‘‘Rule’’). The Rule requires brokerdealers to produce a written suitability determination for, and to obtain a written customer agreement to, certain recommended transactions in penny stocks that are not registered on a national securities exchange, and whose issuers do not meet certain minimum financial standards. The Rule is intended to prevent the indiscriminate use by broker-dealers of fraudulent, high pressure telephone sales campaigns to sell penny stocks to unsophisticated customers. The Commission staff estimates that there are approximately 253 brokerdealers subject to the Rule. The burden of the Rule on a respondent varies E:\FR\FM\26AUN1.SGM 26AUN1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES 53502 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 166 / Friday, August 26, 2011 / Notices widely depending on the frequency with which new customers are solicited. On the average for all respondents, the staff has estimated that respondents process three new customers per week, or approximately 156 new customer suitability determinations per year. We also estimate that a broker-dealer would expend approximately one-half hour per new customer in obtaining, reviewing, and processing (including transmitting to the customer) the information required by Rule 15g–9, and each respondent would consequently spend 78 hours annually (156 customers × .5 hours) obtaining the information required in the rule. We determined, based on the estimate of 253 brokerdealer respondents, that the current annual burden of Rule 15g–9 is 19,734 hours (253 respondents × 78 hours). In addition, we estimate that if tangible communications alone are used to transmit the documents required by Rule 15g–9, each customer should take: (1) No more than eight minutes to review, sign and return the suitability determination document; and (2) no more than two minutes to either read and return or produce the customer agreement for a particular recommended transaction in penny stocks, listing the issuer and number of shares of the particular penny stock to be purchased, and send it to the broker-dealer. Thus, the total current customer respondent burden is approximately 10 minutes per response, for an aggregate total of 1,560 minutes for each broker-dealer respondent. Since there are 253 respondents, the annual burden for customer responses is 394,680 minutes (1,560 customer minutes per each of the 253 respondents) or 6,578 hours. In addition, we estimate that, if tangible means of communications alone are used, broker-dealers could incur a recordkeeping burden under Rule 15g–9 of approximately two minutes per response. Since there are approximately 253 broker-dealer respondents and each respondent would have approximately 156 responses annually, respondents would incur an aggregate recordkeeping burden of 78,936 minutes (253 respondents × 156 responses × 2 minutes per response), or 1,315 hours. Accordingly, the aggregate annual hour recordkeeping burden associated with Rule 15g–9 is 27,627 hours (19,734 hours to prepare the suitability statement and agreement + 6,578 hours for customer review + 1,315 hours for processing). We recognize that under the amendments to Rule 15g–9, the burden hours may be slightly reduced if the transaction agreement required under the rule is provided through electronic VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:37 Aug 25, 2011 Jkt 223001 means such as an e-mail from the customer to the broker-dealer (e.g., the customer may take only one minute, instead of the two minutes estimated above, to provide the transaction agreement by e-mail rather than regular mail). If each of the customer respondents estimated above communicates with his or her brokerdealer electronically, the total burden hours on the customers would be reduced from 10 minutes to 9 minutes per response, or an aggregate total of 1,404 minutes per respondent (156 customers × 9 minutes for each customer). Since there are 253 respondents, the annual customer respondent burden, if electronic communications were used by all customers, would be approximately 355,212 minutes (253 respondents × 1,404 minutes per each respondent), or 5,920 hours. We do not believe the time burden on broker-dealers in obtaining, reviewing, and processing the suitability determination would change through use of electronic communications. In addition, we do not believe that, based on information currently available to us, recordkeeping burdens under Rule 15g– 9 would change where the required documents were sent or received through means of electronic communication. Thus, if all brokerdealer respondents obtain and send the documents required under the rule electronically, the aggregate annual hour burden associated with Rule 15g–9 would be 26,969 hours (19,734 hours to prepare the suitability statement and agreement + 5,920 hours for customer review + 1,315 recordkeeping hours). We cannot estimate how many brokerdealers and customers will choose to communicate electronically. If we assume that 50 percent of respondents would continue to provide documents and obtain signatures in tangible form, and 50 percent would choose to communicate electronically in satisfaction of the requirements of Rule 15g–9, the total aggregate hour burden would be 27,297 burden hours ((27,627 aggregate burden hours for documents and signatures in tangible form × 0.50 of the respondents = 13,813 hours) + (26,969 aggregate burden hours for electronically signed and transmitted documents × 0.50 of the respondents = 13,484 hours). The broker-dealer must keep the written suitability determination and customer agreement required by the Rule for at least three years. Completing the suitability determination and obtaining the customer agreement in writing is mandatory for broker-dealers who effect transactions in penny stocks and do not qualify for an exemption, but PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 does not involve the collection of confidential information. Please note that 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 control number. The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. Background documentation for this information collection may be viewed at the following link, http:// www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be directed to (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or by sending an e-mail to: Shagufta_Ahmed@omb.eop.gov; and (ii) Thomas Bayer, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi PavlikSimon, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an e-mail to: PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov. Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice. Dated: August 22, 2011. Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary. [FR Doc. 2011–21858 Filed 8–25–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC 20549. Extension: Rule 17f–2(c); SEC File No. 270– 35; OMB Control No. 3235–0029. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget requests for approval of extension of Rule 17f–2(c) (17 CFR 240.17f–2(c)). Rule 17f–2(c) allows persons required to be fingerprinted pursuant to Section 17(f)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to submit their fingerprints E:\FR\FM\26AUN1.SGM 26AUN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 166 (Friday, August 26, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53501-53502]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21858]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon written request, copies available from: U.S. Securities and 
Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, 
Washington, DC 20549-0213.

Extension: Rule 15g-9; SEC File No. 270-325; OMB Control No. 3235-
0385.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange 
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management 
and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved 
collection of information discussed below.
    Section 15(c)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 
78a et seq.) (the ``Exchange Act'') authorizes the Commission to 
promulgate rules that prescribe means reasonably designed to prevent 
fraudulent, deceptive, or manipulative practices in connection with 
over-the-counter (``OTC'') securities transactions. Pursuant to this 
authority, the Commission in 1989 adopted Rule 15a-6 which was 
subsequently redesignated as Rule 15g-9, 17 CFR 240.15g-9 (the 
``Rule''). The Rule requires broker-dealers to produce a written 
suitability determination for, and to obtain a written customer 
agreement to, certain recommended transactions in penny stocks that are 
not registered on a national securities exchange, and whose issuers do 
not meet certain minimum financial standards. The Rule is intended to 
prevent the indiscriminate use by broker-dealers of fraudulent, high 
pressure telephone sales campaigns to sell penny stocks to 
unsophisticated customers.
    The Commission staff estimates that there are approximately 253 
broker-dealers subject to the Rule. The burden of the Rule on a 
respondent varies

[[Page 53502]]

widely depending on the frequency with which new customers are 
solicited. On the average for all respondents, the staff has estimated 
that respondents process three new customers per week, or approximately 
156 new customer suitability determinations per year. We also estimate 
that a broker-dealer would expend approximately one-half hour per new 
customer in obtaining, reviewing, and processing (including 
transmitting to the customer) the information required by Rule 15g-9, 
and each respondent would consequently spend 78 hours annually (156 
customers x .5 hours) obtaining the information required in the rule. 
We determined, based on the estimate of 253 broker-dealer respondents, 
that the current annual burden of Rule 15g-9 is 19,734 hours (253 
respondents x 78 hours).
    In addition, we estimate that if tangible communications alone are 
used to transmit the documents required by Rule 15g-9, each customer 
should take: (1) No more than eight minutes to review, sign and return 
the suitability determination document; and (2) no more than two 
minutes to either read and return or produce the customer agreement for 
a particular recommended transaction in penny stocks, listing the 
issuer and number of shares of the particular penny stock to be 
purchased, and send it to the broker-dealer. Thus, the total current 
customer respondent burden is approximately 10 minutes per response, 
for an aggregate total of 1,560 minutes for each broker-dealer 
respondent. Since there are 253 respondents, the annual burden for 
customer responses is 394,680 minutes (1,560 customer minutes per each 
of the 253 respondents) or 6,578 hours.
    In addition, we estimate that, if tangible means of communications 
alone are used, broker-dealers could incur a recordkeeping burden under 
Rule 15g-9 of approximately two minutes per response. Since there are 
approximately 253 broker-dealer respondents and each respondent would 
have approximately 156 responses annually, respondents would incur an 
aggregate recordkeeping burden of 78,936 minutes (253 respondents x 156 
responses x 2 minutes per response), or 1,315 hours. Accordingly, the 
aggregate annual hour recordkeeping burden associated with Rule 15g-9 
is 27,627 hours (19,734 hours to prepare the suitability statement and 
agreement + 6,578 hours for customer review + 1,315 hours for 
processing).
    We recognize that under the amendments to Rule 15g-9, the burden 
hours may be slightly reduced if the transaction agreement required 
under the rule is provided through electronic means such as an e-mail 
from the customer to the broker-dealer (e.g., the customer may take 
only one minute, instead of the two minutes estimated above, to provide 
the transaction agreement by e-mail rather than regular mail). If each 
of the customer respondents estimated above communicates with his or 
her broker-dealer electronically, the total burden hours on the 
customers would be reduced from 10 minutes to 9 minutes per response, 
or an aggregate total of 1,404 minutes per respondent (156 customers x 
9 minutes for each customer). Since there are 253 respondents, the 
annual customer respondent burden, if electronic communications were 
used by all customers, would be approximately 355,212 minutes (253 
respondents x 1,404 minutes per each respondent), or 5,920 hours. We do 
not believe the time burden on broker-dealers in obtaining, reviewing, 
and processing the suitability determination would change through use 
of electronic communications. In addition, we do not believe that, 
based on information currently available to us, recordkeeping burdens 
under Rule 15g-9 would change where the required documents were sent or 
received through means of electronic communication. Thus, if all 
broker-dealer respondents obtain and send the documents required under 
the rule electronically, the aggregate annual hour burden associated 
with Rule 15g-9 would be 26,969 hours (19,734 hours to prepare the 
suitability statement and agreement + 5,920 hours for customer review + 
1,315 recordkeeping hours).
    We cannot estimate how many broker-dealers and customers will 
choose to communicate electronically. If we assume that 50 percent of 
respondents would continue to provide documents and obtain signatures 
in tangible form, and 50 percent would choose to communicate 
electronically in satisfaction of the requirements of Rule 15g-9, the 
total aggregate hour burden would be 27,297 burden hours ((27,627 
aggregate burden hours for documents and signatures in tangible form x 
0.50 of the respondents = 13,813 hours) + (26,969 aggregate burden 
hours for electronically signed and transmitted documents x 0.50 of the 
respondents = 13,484 hours).
    The broker-dealer must keep the written suitability determination 
and customer agreement required by the Rule for at least three years. 
Completing the suitability determination and obtaining the customer 
agreement in writing is mandatory for broker-dealers who effect 
transactions in penny stocks and do not qualify for an exemption, but 
does not involve the collection of confidential information. Please 
note that 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 control number.
    The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of 
information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No 
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a 
collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a 
valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
    Background documentation for this information collection may be 
viewed at the following link, http://www.reginfo.gov. Comments should 
be directed to (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange 
Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of 
Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503 or by sending an e-mail to: Shagufta_Ahmed@omb.eop.gov; and (ii) Thomas Bayer, Director/Chief Information 
Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi Pavlik-Simon, 
6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an e-mail to: 
PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov. Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days 
of this notice.

    Dated: August 22, 2011.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-21858 Filed 8-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P