41432 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 168 / Thursday, August 31, 2017 / Notices 

Total Responses: 29,938. 

Average Time per Response: 12.65 

minutes. 

Estimated Total Burden Hours: 6,312 

hours. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized and/or 

included in the request for Office of 

Management and Budget approval of the 

information collection request; they also 

will become a matter of public record. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 25th day of 

August 2017. 

Kimberley Hill, 

Chief, Division of Management Systems. 

[FR Doc. 2017–18444 Filed 8–30–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–24–P 

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Comment Request 

AGENCY: National Science Foundation. 

ACTION: Submission for OMB review; 

comment request. 

SUMMARY: The National Science 

Foundation (NSF) has submitted the 

following information collection 

requirement to OMB for review and 

clearance under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 on the National 

Science Foundation Proposal and 

Award Policies and Procedures Guide. 

NSF may not conduct or sponsor a 

collection of information unless the 

collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB control number 

and the agency informs potential 

persons who are to respond to the 

collection of information that such 

persons are not required to respond to 

the collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. 

Comments: Comments are invited on: 

(a) Whether the collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 

of burden including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on those who are to respond, including 

through the use of appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. 

DATES: Comments regarding these 

information collections are best assured 

of having their full effect if received 

October 2, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

addressed to: Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention: 

Desk Officer for National Science 

Foundation, 725 17th Street NW., Room 

10235, Washington, DC 20503, and to 

Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance 

Officer, National Science Foundation, 

4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1265, 

Arlington, Virginia 22230 or send email 

to splimpto@nsf.gov. Individuals who 

use a telecommunications device for the 

deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1– 

800–877–8339, which is accessible 24 

hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a 

year (including federal holidays). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Suzanne H. Plimpton at splimpto@

nsf.gov. Copies of the submission(s) may 

be obtained by calling 703–292–7556. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is the 

second notice for public comment on 

plans to obtain OMB clearance for the 

Survey of Public Attitudes Toward and 

Understanding of Science and 

Technology (S&T Attitudes Survey); the 

first notice was published in the Federal 

Register at 82 FR 15240, and no 

comments were received. NSF is 

forwarding the proposed renewal 

submission to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for clearance 

simultaneously with the publication of 

this second notice. The full submission 

may be found at: http://

www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. 

Title of Collection: Survey of Public 

Attitudes Toward and Understanding of 

Science and Technology. 

OMB Approval Number: 3145–NEW. 

Summary of Collection: Established 

within the NSF by the America 

COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 

§ 505, codified in the National Science 

Foundation Act of 1950, as amended, 

the National Center for Science and 

Engineering Statistics (NCSES) serves as 

a central Federal clearinghouse for the 

collection, interpretation, analysis, and 

dissemination of objective data on 

science, engineering, technology, and 

research and development for use by 

practitioners, researchers, policymakers, 

and the public. The Survey of Public 

Attitudes Toward and Understanding of 

Science and Technology (‘‘S&T 

Attitudes Survey’’) is part of this NCSES 

system, focused on public support for, 

understanding of, and attitudes toward 

science and technology. The S&T 

Attitudes Survey is conducted as one 

module of the General Social Survey 

(GSS), one of the three large, high 

quality social surveys funded under a 

grant by the National Science 

Foundation. 

Use of the Information and Means of 

Dissemination: The S&T Attitudes 

Survey was established to gather highquality data on public attitudes toward 

and understanding of science for the 

NCSES biennial publication, Science 

and Engineering Indicators (SEI). SEI is 

a congressionally mandated report on 

the status of the science and engineering 

enterprise in the United States, 

including comparisons with other 

countries. The ‘‘Science and 

Technology: Public Attitudes and 

Understanding’’ chapter of the report is 

dedicated to public understanding of 

and attitudes toward science and 

technology. These attitudes and 

understandings may influence students’ 

decisions to pursue STEM careers, 

public support for funding scientific 

research, what technologies are adopted 

and how, and what public policies are 

put in place. It is expected that the 

information in Chapter 7 will be used by 

policymakers, journalists, government 

agencies, researchers, and the general 

public. 

NSF will publish statistics from the 

survey in NCSES’ SEI report and 

possibly in InfoBriefs that focus on 

particular research topics. SEI, 

Infobriefs, and data tables and figures 

will be made available electronically on 

the NSF Web site. Public use data files 

will also be developed and made freely 

available via the Internet. 

Expected Respondents: GSS 

respondents are a probability sample of 

all noninstitutionalized English and 

Spanish speaking persons 18 years of 

age or older, living in the United States. 

The expected number of participants is 

1,250. 

Estimate of Burden: In the 2014 GSS 

data collection cycle, respondents took 

an average of 20 minutes to respond to 

the S&T Attitudes Survey module. This 

is not expected to change. In addition, 

while the target number of participants 

is 1,250, this can vary depending on the 

systematic assignment of GSS 

respondents to the S&T Attitudes 

Survey and patterns of non-response. 

No more than 1,313 participants are 

expected for the 2018 GSS. Thus, the 

total number of person-hours expected 

for the 2018 GSS is at most (20/60) * 

1,313 or 438 hours. 

Updates: Relative to the first Federal 

Register notice, there is one substantive 

change. The first notice described an 

older methodology. The current 

methodology is as follows. The sample 

is a multi-stage area probability sample. 

The geographical units employed are 

national frame areas (NFAs) which are 

comprised of Metropolitan Statistical 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 168 / Thursday, August 31, 2017 / Notices 41433 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81074 (July 

5, 2017), 82 FR 32030 (July 11, 2017) (SR–DTC– 

2017–008; SR–FICC–2017–014; SR–NSCC–2017– 

008) (‘‘Notice’’). 

4Available at http://www.dtcc.com/en/legal/ 

rules-and-procedures. FICC is comprised of two 

divisions: The Government Securities Division 

(‘‘GSD’’) and the Mortgage-Backed Securities 

Division (‘‘MBSD’’). Each division serves as a 

central counterparty, becoming the buyer and seller 

to each of their respective members’ securities 

transactions and guarantying settlement of those 

transactions, even if a member defaults. GSD 

provides, among other things, clearance and 

settlement for trades in U.S. Government debt 

issues. MBSD provides, among other things, 

clearance and settlement for trades in mortgagebacked securities. GSD and MBSD maintain 

separate sets of rules, margin models, and clearing 

funds. 

5The parent company of the Clearing Agencies is 

The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation 

(‘‘DTCC’’). DTCC operates on a shared services 

model with respect to the Clearing Agencies. Most 

corporate functions are established and managed on 

an enterprise-wide basis pursuant to intercompany 

agreements under which it is generally DTCC that 

provides a relevant service to a Clearing Agency. 

Notice, 82 at 32031. 

6 Id. 

7 Id. 

8 Id. 

9 Id. 

10 Id.; see Supervisory Guidance on Model Risk 

Management, SR Letter 11–7, dated April 4, 2011, 

issued by the Board of Governors of the Federal 

Reserve System and the Office of the Comptroller 

of the Currency, at 3. 

Areas (MSAs) and non-metropolitan 

counties. The sample is selected using 

the United States Postal Service postal 

delivery sequence file (DSF) and, where 

the DSF has poor coverage (90% or 

less), field listing. The 17 largest MSAs 

are included with certainty, while other 

NFAs are sampled with probability 

proportionate to size (PPS) and with 

implicit stratification by geographic and 

demographic characteristics. Within all 

selected NFAs, tracts or block groups 

are further selected with PPS and 

implicit stratification by additional 

geographic and demographic 

characteristics. The tertiary sampling 

units, addresses, are a random sample 

from the DSF or, alternatively, a field 

inventory of addresses. When a housing 

unit is visited by a field interviewer, one 

person is selected to be interviewed 

from the housing unit at random. Not all 

GSS respondents are given the S&T 

Attitudes survey, which is a module on 

the GSS. Which GSS respondents get 

the S&T Attitudes module is determined 

by systematic sampling conducted to 

ensure that each NFA and segment (tract 

or block group) in the sample has an 

equal number of S&T Attitudes surveys. 

Dated: August 28, 2017. 

Suzanne H. Plimpton, 

Reports Clearance Officer, National Science 

Foundation. 

[FR Doc. 2017–18472 Filed 8–30–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7555–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–81485; File Nos. SR–DTC– 

2017–008; SR–FICC–2017–014; SR–NSCC– 

2017–008] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The 

Depository Trust Company; Fixed 

Income Clearing Corporation; National 

Securities Clearing Corporation; Order 

Approving Proposed Rule Changes To 

Adopt the Clearing Agency Model Risk 

Management Framework 

August 25, 2017. 

On June 20, 2017, The Depository 

Trust Company (‘‘DTC’’), Fixed Income 

Clearing Corporation (‘‘FICC’’), and 

National Securities Clearing Corporation 

(‘‘NSCC,’’ each a ‘‘Clearing Agency,’’ 

and collectively, ‘‘Clearing Agencies’’) 

filed with the Securities and Exchange 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’), proposed 

rule changes SR–DTC–2017–008, SR– 

FICC–2017–014, and SR–NSCC–2017– 

008 (collectively, the ‘‘Proposed Rule 

Changes’’), respectively, pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities 

Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 

19b–4 thereunder.2 The Proposed Rule 

Changes were published for comment in 

the Federal Register on July 11, 2017.3

The Commission did not receive any 

comment letters on the Proposed Rule 

Changes. For the reasons discussed 

below, the Commission approves the 

Proposed Rule Changes. 

I. Description of the Proposed Rule 

Changes 

The Proposed Rule Changes would 

adopt the Clearing Agency Model Risk 

Management Framework 

(‘‘Framework’’), which would set forth 

the model risk management practices 

adopted by the Clearing Agencies. 

Although the Framework would be a 

rule of each Clearing Agency, the 

Proposed Rule Changes do not require 

any changes to the Rules, By-Laws and 

Organizational Certificate of DTC, the 

Rulebook of GSD, the Clearing Rules of 

MBSD,4 or the Rules & Procedures of 

NSCC, as the Framework would be a 

standalone document for each Clearing 

Agency. 

In general, the Framework would 

describe the model risk management 

practices adopted by the Clearing 

Agencies. The Framework is designed to 

help identify, measure, monitor, and 

manage the risks associated with the 

design, development, implementation, 

use, and validation of quantitative 

models. The Framework would describe 

(i) governance of the Framework; (ii) key 

terms; (iii) model inventory procedures; 

(iv) model validation procedures; (v) 

model approval process; and (vi) model 

performance procedures. 

A. Governance of the Framework 

The Framework would outline the 

Clearing Agencies’ governance of the 

Framework itself. The Framework 

would be owned and managed by (i) the 

Clearing Agencies’ risk management 

area generally responsible for model 

validation and control matters, (ii) the 

DTCC Model Validation and Control 

Group (‘‘MVC’’),5 and (iii) senior 

management and the Board of Directors 

of each Clearing Agency (‘‘Boards’’), 

which would have review and oversight 

authority.6

The Framework would provide that (i) 

any change to the Framework must be 

approved by the Boards or such 

committees as may be delegated 

authority by the Boards, from time to 

time, pursuant to the Boards’ charters, 

(ii) MVC shall review this Framework 

no less frequently than annually, and 

(iii) any and all changes to this 

Framework are subject to regulatory 

review and approval.7

B. Key Terms 

The Framework would define two key 

terms: Model and Model Risk. The term 

‘‘Model’’ would refer to a quantitative 

method, system, or approach that 

applies statistical, economic, financial, 

or mathematical theories, techniques, 

and assumptions to process input data 

into quantitative estimates.8 A Model 

would consist of three components: (1) 

An information input component, 

which would deliver assumptions and 

data to the Model; (2) a processing 

component, which would transform 

inputs into estimates; and (3) a reporting 

component, which would translate the 

estimates into useful business 

information.9 A Model also would cover 

quantitative approaches whose inputs 

are partially or wholly qualitative or 

based on expert judgment, provided that 

the output is quantitative in nature.10

The term ‘‘Model Risk’’ would refer to 

the potential for adverse consequences 

from decisions based on incorrect or 

misused Model outputs and reports, and 

primarily occurring due to (i) 

fundamental errors in the design or 

development of Models; (ii) incorrect 

Model input or assumptions; (iii) 

erroneous implementation of Models; 

(iv) unauthorized or incorrect changes 

to Models; (v) changes in market 

conditions rendering existing Models 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES