[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 149 (Thursday, August 4, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47736-47738]
[FR Doc No: 2022-16710]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP22-493-000; PF22-2-000]

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C.; Notice of Application and
Establishing Intervention Deadline

    Take notice that on July 22, 2022 Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company,
L.L.C. (TGP or Applicant), 569 Brookwood Village, Suite 749,
Birmingham, AL 35209 filed an application under sections 7(c) of the
Natural Gas Act (NGA), and Part 157, of the Commission's regulations
authorizing TGP to construct, install, modify, operate, and maintain
certain pipeline lateral and appurtenant facilities located in Dickson,
Houston and Stewart Counties, Tennessee all as more fully set forth in
the application which is on file with the Commission and open for
public inspection.
    Specifically, TGP is requesting approval to: (1) Construct
approximately 32 miles of a new 30-inch-diameter pipeline lateral,
connecting to TGP's existing Lines 100-3 and 100-4 and extending to a
delivery point in Stewart County, Tennessee (Cumberland Pipeline); (2)
install new bi-directional back pressure regulation facilities near
TGP's Lines 100-3 and 100-4 (``Pressure Regulation Station''), located
at the origin of the proposed Cumberland Pipeline in Dickson County,
Tennessee; (3) install a new meter station (``Cumberland Meter
Station''), located at the terminus of the proposed Cumberland Pipeline
on TVA property in Stewart County, Tennessee; and (4) install
appurtenant facilities, including in-line inspection traps at each end
of the proposed Cumberland Pipeline and three new mainline valves. The
total estimated cost of this project is approximately $184.8 million.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended

access to the Commission's Public Reference Room, due to the
proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning the Novel
Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on March 13,
2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
at [email protected] or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Any questions regarding the proposed project should be directed to
Tina S. Hardy, Director, Regulatory Affairs, Tennessee Gas Pipeline
Company, L.L.C., 569 Brookwood Village, Suite 749, Birmingham, AL 35209
by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by email to [email protected].
    On November 5, 2021 the Commission granted the Applicant's request
to utilize the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Pre-Filing
Process and assigned Docket No. PF22-2-000 to staff activities involved
in the Project. Now, as of the filing of the July 22, 2022 application,
the Pre-Filing Process for this project has ended. From this time
forward, this proceeding will be conducted in Docket No. CP22-493-000
as noted in the caption of this Notice.
    Also, Applicant stated that a water quality certificate under
section 401 of the Clean Water Act is required for the project from the
Tennessee Department of Environmental Conservation. The request for
certification must be submitted to the certifying agency and to the
Commission concurrently. Proof of the certifying agency's receipt date
must be filed no later than five (5) days after the request is
submitted to the certifying agency.
    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure,\1\ within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will
either: complete its environmental review and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or environmental
assessment (EA) for this proposal. The filing of an EA in the
Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify
federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all
necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal
authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission
staff's FEIS or EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 157.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project: you can file comments on the project, and you can file a
motion to intervene in the proceeding. There is no fee or cost for
filing comments or intervening. The deadline for filing a motion to
intervene is 5 p.m. Eastern Time on August 19, 2022.

Comments

    Any person wishing to comment on the project may do so. Comments
may include statements of support or objections to the project as a
whole or specific aspects of the project. The more specific your
comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your comments
are timely and properly recorded, please submit your comments on or
before August 19, 2022.
    There are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the
Commission. In all instances, please reference the Project docket
number CP22-493-000 in your submission.
    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the eComment
feature, which is located on the Commission's website at www.ferc.gov
under the link to Documents and Filings. Using eComment is an easy
method for interested persons to submit brief, text-only comments on a
project;
    (2) You may file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov)
under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide
comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on ``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing you
are making; first select ``General'' and then select ``Comment on a
Filing''; or
    (3) You may file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address below.\2\ Your written comments must reference
the Project docket number (CP22-493-000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Hand delivered submissions in docketed proceedings should be
delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225 Wilkins Avenue,
Rockville, Maryland 20852.

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426

    The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments (options 1
and 2 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or [email protected]
    Persons who comment on the environmental review of this project
will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list and will
receive notification when the environmental documents (EA or EIS) are
issued for this project and will be notified of meetings associated
with the Commission's environmental review process.
    The Commission considers all comments received about the project in
determining the appropriate action to be taken. However, the filing of
a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the
proceeding. To become a party, you must intervene in the proceeding.
For instructions on how to intervene, see below.

Interventions

    Any person, which includes individuals, organizations, businesses,
municipalities, and other entities,\3\ has the option to file a motion
to intervene in this proceeding. Only intervenors have the right to
request rehearing of Commission orders issued in this proceeding and to
subsequently challenge the Commission's orders in the U.S. Circuit
Courts of Appeal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 18 CFR 385.102(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To intervene, you must submit a motion to intervene to the
Commission in accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure \4\ and the regulations under the NGA \5\ by the
intervention deadline for the project, which is August 19, 2022. As
described further in Rule 214, your motion to intervene must state, to
the extent known, your position regarding the proceeding, as well as
your interest in the proceeding. For an individual, this could include
your status as a landowner, ratepayer, resident of an impacted
community, or recreationist. You do not need to have property directly
impacted by the project in order to intervene. For more information
about motions to intervene, refer to the FERC website at https://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 18 CFR 385.214.
    \5\ 18 CFR 157.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are two ways to submit your motion to intervene. In both
instances, please reference the Project docket number CP22-493-000 in
your submission.
    (1) You may file your motion to intervene by using the Commission's
eFiling feature, which is located on the Commission's website
(www.ferc.gov)

under the link to Documents and Filings. New eFiling users must first
create an account by clicking on ``eRegister.'' You will be asked to
select the type of filing you are making; first select ``General'' and
then select ``Intervention.'' The eFiling feature includes a document-
less intervention option; for more information, visit https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/document-less-intervention.pdf.; or
    (2) You can file a paper copy of your motion to intervene, along
with three copies, by mailing the documents to the address below.\6\
Your motion to intervene must reference the Project docket number CP22-
493-000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Hand delivered submissions in docketed proceedings should be
delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225 Wilkins Avenue,
Rockville, Maryland 20852.

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426

    The Commission encourages electronic filing of motions to intervene
(option 1 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or [email protected]
    Motions to intervene must be served on the applicant either by mail
or email at: Tina S. Hardy, Director, Regulatory Affairs, Tennessee Gas
Pipeline Company, L.L.C. 569 Brookwood Village, Suite 749, Birmingham,
AL 35209 or by email at [email protected]. Any subsequent
submissions by an intervenor must be served on the applicant and all
other parties to the proceeding. Contact information for parties can be
downloaded from the service list at the eService link on FERC Online.
Service can be via email with a link to the document.
    All timely, unopposed \7\ motions to intervene are automatically
granted by operation of Rule 214(c)(1).\8\ Motions to intervene that
are filed after the intervention deadline are untimely and may be
denied. Any late-filed motion to intervene must show good cause for
being late and must explain why the time limitation should be waived
and provide justification by reference to factors set forth in Rule
214(d) of the Commission's Rules and Regulations.\9\ A person obtaining
party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the
Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies (paper or
electronic) of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other
parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The applicant has 15 days from the submittal of a motion to
intervene to file a written objection to the intervention.
    \8\ 18 CFR 385.214(c)(1).
    \9\ 18 CFR 385.214(b)(3) and (d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tracking the Proceeding

    Throughout the proceeding, additional information about the project
will be available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at
(866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC website at http://www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link as described above. The eLibrary link also provides
access to the texts of all formal documents issued by the Commission,
such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. For more information and to register, go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Intervention Deadline: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 19, 2022.

    Dated: July 29, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-16710 Filed 8-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 103 (Wednesday, May 31, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24963-24965]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11194]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC17-7-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-725T); Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Energy.

ACTION: Comment request.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or
FERC) is submitting its information collection [FERC-725T, Mandatory
Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System: TRE Reliability
Standards] to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review of
the information collection requirements. Any interested person may file
comments directly with OMB and should address a copy of those comments
to the Commission as explained below. The Commission previously issued
a Notice in the Federal Register (82 FR 14215, 3/17/2017) requesting
public comments. The Commission received no comments on the FERC-
725Tand is making this notation in its submittal to OMB.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due by June 30,
2017.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB, identified by the OMB Control No.
1902-0273 (FERC-725T) should be sent via email to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Desk Officer. The Desk Officer may
also be reached via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Commission, in
Docket No. IC17-7-000, by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and by fax at
(202) 273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the information collection

requirements for all collections described below with no changes to the
current reporting requirements. Please note that each collection is
distinct from the next.
    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collections of
information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the Commission, including whether the information will have
practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the
burden and cost of the collections of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance
the quality, utility and clarity of the information collections; and
(4) ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.

FERC-725T [Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System:
TRE Reliability Standards]

    OMB Control No.: 1902-0273.
    Abstract: Reliability Standard BAL-001-TRE-01 applies to entities
registered as Generator Owners (GOs), Generator Operators (GOPs), and
Balancing Authorities (BAs) within the Texas Reliability Entity region.
    Regional Reliability Standard BAL-001-TRE-01 is more comprehensive
than the existing continent-wide Reliability Standards addressing
frequency response, BAL-001-0.1a and BAL-003-0.1b in that the regional
standard includes additional requirements and applies to generator
owners and generator operators as well as balancing authorities. The
expanded applicability of the regional Reliability Standard, thus,
increases the reporting burden for entities that operate within the
ERCOT \1\ Interconnection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Electric Reliability Council of Texas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The information collection requirements entail the setting or
configuration of the Control System software, identification and
recording of events, data retention, and submitting frequency
measurable events to the compliance enforcement authority (Regional
Entity or NERC).
    Submitting frequency measurable events. As per Requirement R1, the
BA has to identify and post information regarding Frequency Measurable
Events (FME). Further, the BA has to calculate and report to the
Compliance Enforcement Authority data related to Primary Frequency
Response (PFR) performance of each generating unit/generating facility.
    Data retention. The BA, GO, and GOP shall keep data or evidence to
show compliance, as identified below, unless directed by its Compliance
Enforcement Authority to retain specific evidence for a longer period
of time as part of an investigation. Compliance audits are generally
about three years apart.
     The BA shall retain a list of identified Frequency
Measurable Events and shall retain FME information since its last
compliance audit for Requirement R1, Measure M1.
     The BA shall retain all monthly PFR performance reports
since its last compliance audit for Requirement R2, Measure M2.
     The BA shall retain all annual Interconnection minimum
Frequency Response calculations, and related methodology and criteria
documents, relating to time periods since its last compliance audit for
Requirement R3, Measure M3.
     The BA shall retain all data and calculations relating to
the Interconnection's Frequency Response, and all evidence of actions
taken to increase the Interconnection's Frequency Response, since its
last compliance audit for Requirements R4 and R5, Measures M4 and M5.
     Each GOP shall retain evidence since its last compliance
audit for Requirement R8, Measure M8.
     Each GO shall retain evidence since its last compliance
audit for Requirements R6, R7, R9 and R10, Measures M6, M7, M9 and M10.

Modification to Governor Controller Setting/Configuration (to be
removed from the FERC-725T information collection). This category of
response burden is being removed from FERC-725T. The ``Modification to
Governor Controller Setting/Configuration'' category was a one-time
requirement related to implementation of the BAL-001-TRE-01 Reliability
Standard. Each GO was required to set its governor settings according
to Requirement R6. In order to modify its settings, the GO had to
generate governor test reports, governor setting sheets, and/or
performance monitoring reports. The burden (912 hours) associated with
this category was averaged over 2014-2016 \2\. The response
requirements included in this category were complete within 18 months
of the effective date of the standard \3\ or by 10/1/2015. Due to
completion, the corresponding 304 annual burden hours are now being
removed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The total annual figure for this response category was 304
hours.
    \3\ The effective date of the standard was 4/1/2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Respondent: NERC Registered entities (specifically
balancing authorities, generator owners, generator operators).
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \4\ The Commission estimates the annual
public reporting burden for the information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For
further explanation of what is included in the information
collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal Regulations 1320.3.
    \5\ The estimates for cost per hour are based on 2015 wage
figures and derived as follows:
     $64.29/hour, the average salary plus benefits per
engineer (from Bureau of Labor Statistics at https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm).
     $37.75/hour, the salary plus benefits per information
and record clerks (from Bureau of Labor Statistics at https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm).
    All calculated wage figures within the burden table are rounded
to the nearest dollar.
    \6\ BA (balancing authority)
    \7\ BA (balancing authority), GO (generator owner), and GOP
(generator operator)
    \8\ Rounded from $75.50.

                            FERC-725T (Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System: TRE Reliability Standards)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Annual  number
                                     Number of     of  responses   Total number    Average burden  and cost   Total annual  burden hours     Cost per
                                    respondents         per        of responses        per  response \5\         and total  annual cost     respondent
                                                    respondent                                                                                ($)
                                             (1)             (2)     (1) * (2) =  (4).......................  (3) * (4) = (5)...........       (5) / (1)
                                                                             (3)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintenance and Submission of              \6\ 1               1               1  16 hrs.; $1,029...........  16 hrs.; $1,029...........          $1,029
 Event Log Data.
Evidence Retention..............         \7\ 130               1             130  2 hrs.; $76 \8\...........  260 hrs.; $9,815..........             $76
                                 ------------------------------------------------                            -------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............             131  ..........................  276 hrs.; $10,844.........  ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: May 24, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-11194 Filed 5-30-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 80 (Thursday, April 25, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24346-24347]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09566]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1004; Airspace Docket No. 12-ANM-21]
RIN 2120-AA66

Modification of VOR Federal Airway V-595, Oregon

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies VHF omnidirectional range (VOR) Federal
airway V-595 in Oregon due to the scheduled decommissioning of the
Portland, OR, VOR/DME navigation aid, which currently serves as an end
point for the route.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, June 27, 2013. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace Policy and ATC
Procedures Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On October 22, 2012, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to modify V-595 in Oregon (77 FR
64444). Interested parties were invited to participate in this
rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on this proposal to
the FAA. No comments were received.
    The original proposal would have terminated V-595 at the HARZL
navigation fix which is approximately 29 NM southeast of the Portland
VOR/DME. Subsequent to publication of the NPRM, it was determined that
mountainous terrain in the area would limit the service volume of the
Deschutes, OR, VORTAC to a degree that the Deschutes VORTAC could not
be used to identify the entire length of the proposed segment between
Deschutes and the HARZL fix.
    Consequently, the FAA issued a supplemental NPRM (SNPRM) (78 FR
9009, February 7, 2013) to solicit comments on a proposed further
modification of V-595 to delete the entire segment between Deschutes
VORTAC and the Portland VOR/DME. No comments were received in response
the SNPRM.

The Rule

    The FAA is amending Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by modifying VOR Federal airway V-595 due to the scheduled
decommissioning of the Portland, OR, VOR/DME. This action removes that
segment of V-595 between the Portland, OR, VOR/DME and the Deschutes,
OR, VORTAC. By separate rulemaking action, the FAA has proposed to
establish new area navigation routes (T-routes) to provide additional
navigation options in the affected area (78 FR 4354, January 22, 2013.
    VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA Order
7400.9W signed August 8, 2012 and effective September 15, 2012, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The VOR Federal airway
listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant
preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so
minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when
promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it modifies a VOR Federal airway due to navigation aid
infrastructure changes.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,
paragraph 311a. This airspace action consists of a modification of an
existing airway and is not expected to cause any potentially
significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances
exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the FAA Order
7400.9W, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 8,
2012, and effective September 15, 2012, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010(a)--Domestic VOR Federal Airways

V-595 [Amended]

    From Rogue Valley, OR, to Deschutes, OR.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 10, 2013.
Gary A. Norek,
Manager, Airspace Policy and ATC Procedures Group.
[FR Doc. 2013-09566 Filed 4-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 180 (Wednesday, September 16, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57698-57700]
[FR Doc No: 2020-19415]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2020-0256; FRL-10014-22-Region 7]

Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Restriction of Emission of Lead From
Specific Lead Smelter-Refinery Installations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by Missouri on February 5,
2019. Missouri requested that EPA revise its approved plan which
restricts emission of lead from specific lead smelter-refinery
installations. The revisions remove emission restrictions for a
facility that is no longer operating, update a reference to the Federal
National Emissions Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
secondary lead smelters, and update incorporation by reference to
testing methods. Minor editorial revisions have also been made for
clarity. The EPA's approval of this rule revision is being done in
accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This final rule is effective on October 16, 2020.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2020-0256. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov or please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert F. Webber, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Permitting and Standards
Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number:
(913) 551-7251; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What is Being Addressed in this Document?
II. Have the Requirements for Approval of a SIP Revision Been Met?
III. The EPA's Response to Comments
IV. What Action is the EPA Taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is Being Addressed in this Document?

    The EPA is approving revisions to 10 Code of State Regulation (CSR)
10-6.120, Restriction of Emissions of Lead From Specific Lead Smelter-
Refinery Installations, in the Missouri SIP. The EPA received the
Missouri Department of Natural Resources' (MoDNR) SIP revision
submission on February 15, 2019. The revisions are described in detail
in the technical support document (TSD) included in the docket for this
action.
    The revisions to 10 CSR 10-6.120 eliminate restrictions for a
facility that is no longer operational as a primary lead smelter,
update the reference to the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants (NESHAP), subpart X, update the incorporation by
reference information, and make editorial changes to the rule for
clarity.
    Based on a detailed analysis in its TSD of the revisions to the
state rule listed above EPA is approving the revisions to this rule
because it promotes clarity by removing emission limits no longer
needed for the former Herculaneum primary lead smelter, updates
references to the NESHAP, subpart X, and test methods. These revisions
will not have a negative impact on air quality.

II. Have the Requirements for Approval of a SIP Revision Been Met?

    The State submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The
State placed this rule revision on public notice from June 29 through
October 4, 2008. The state received three comments from two sources
during the comment period: EPA provided two comments and Doe Run
Resource Recycling Facility provided one comment on the rule revisions.
MoDNR responded to all three comments received. The revision meets the
substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and
implementing regulations.

III. The EPA's Response to Comments

    The public comment period on the EPA's proposed rule opened June 1,
2020, the date of its publication in the Federal Register and closed on
July 1, 2020. During this period, the EPA received one adverse comment.
    Comment: The Commenter expresses opposition to EPA approving
Missouri's requested revisions. The commenter expresses concern that
the revisions could potentially eliminate or delay regulatory
protections if a new facility comes in or the former Herculaneum
primary lead smelter refinery reopens. In addition, the commenter
states that ``the removal of a numeric emission limit for Doe Run now
makes the rule unenforceable'' and refers to Doe Run's comment
concerning the numerical limit during Missouri's public comment
process.
    Response: The EPA finds that removal of the emission limits in
Table 1 of 10 CSR 10-6.120, which were solely applicable to Doe Run's
Herculaneum facility, is appropriate because the limits in the table
are less stringent than the limits in the state's attainment plan and
supporting Consent Judgment for the 2008 Lead National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS). The EPA's approval of the state's attainment
plan for the 2008 Lead NAAQS was effective on November 19, 2014. See 79
FR 62572. Missouri's removal of the emissions limitations from Table 1
of 10 CSR 10-6.120 does not affect the enforceability of the state's
more stringent attainment plan and the emission limits necessary to
meet the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
    As stated in the TSD for this action, the Herculaneum primary lead
smelter ceased lead smelting operations on December 13, 2013 as
required by a Consent Decree.\1\ Doe Run's current and future operation
of the facility is governed by the Consent Decree, which is federally
enforceable, and the Consent Judgment, which has been approved into the
Missouri SIP and is also federally enforceable. If a new company were
to reopen the former primary lead smelter, it would be subject to the
requirements of the Consent Decree, federal regulations such as the New
Source Performance Standards for Primary Lead Smelters at 40 CFR part
60, subpart R, and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air

Pollutants for Primary Lead Smelting at 40 CFR part 63, subpart TTT, in
addition to the permitting requirements of the Missouri SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ U.S. and State of Missouri v. Doe Run Resources Corp., et
al, No. 4:10-cv-01895-JCH, (E.D.Mo. Dec. 21, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the commenter's concern about removal of the numeric
emission limit from 10 CSR 10-6.120 and Doe Run's comment to Missouri
concerning a difference of opinion about what the limit should be, the
EPA interprets this comment to apply to the Doe Run Resource Recycling
Facility in Boss, Missouri, which is a separate facility from the
former primary lead smelter in Herculaneum, Missouri. In reviewing the
state's submittal to EPA (EPA-R07-2020-0256-002), the EPA notes that
the numeric limit that was the subject of the Doe Run Resource
Recycling Facility's comment to Missouri is outside of the scope of
this action, as the limit is not contained in the version of 10 CSR
6.120 that was previously approved into the SIP, and the limit was not
submitted for approval into the SIP in this action. See 80 FR 52194.

IV. What Action is the EPA Taking?

    The EPA is taking final action to amend Missouri's SIP to include
the revisions to 10 CSR 10-6.120 as requested in its February 15, 2019,
submission.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that
includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of
1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the
Missouri Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set
forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the
EPA Region 7 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more
information).
    Therefore, these materials have been approved by the EPA for
inclusion in the State Implementation Plan, have been incorporated by
reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under
sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final
rulemaking of the EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference
in the next update to the SIP compilation.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 62 FR 27968, May 22, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTA) because this rulemaking does not
involve technical standards; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by November 16, 2020. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Lead, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Test
methods.

    Dated: August 27, 2020.
James Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA is amending 40 CFR
part 52 as set forth below:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart AA--Missouri

0
2. In Sec.  52.1320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entry ``10-6.120'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1320   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                       EPA--Approved Missouri Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          State
       Missouri citation                Title        effective date   EPA approval date        Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Missouri Department of Natural Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chapter 6--Air Quality Standards, Definitions, Sampling and Reference Methods, and Air Pollution Control
                                      Regulations for the State of Missouri
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
10-6.120.......................  Restriction of            10/25/18  9/16/20, [insert    .......................
                                  Emissions of Lead                   Federal Register
                                  from Specific                       citation].
                                  Lead Smelter-
                                  Refinery
                                  Installations.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-19415 Filed 9-15-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 111 (Thursday, June 11, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27851-27854]
[FR Doc No: E9-13723]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. IC-28758; 812-13619]

Nuveen Tax-Advantaged Total Return Strategy Fund, et al.; Notice
of Application

June 4, 2009.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of application for an order under section 6(c) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') for an exemption from sections
18(a)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act.

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

Applicants: Nuveen Tax-Advantaged Total Return Strategy Fund, Nuveen
Real Estate Income Fund, Nuveen Diversified Dividend and Income Fund,
Nuveen Multi-Strategy Income and Growth Fund, Nuveen Multi-Strategy
Income and Growth Fund 2, Nuveen Quality Preferred Income Fund, Nuveen
Quality Preferred Income Fund 2, Nuveen Quality Preferred Income Fund
3, Nuveen Senior Income Fund, Nuveen Floating Rate Income Fund and
Nuveen Floating Rate Income Opportunity Fund (each, a ``Fund'' and
collectively, ``Funds'').

Summary of Application: Applicants request an order (``Order'')
granting an exemption from sections 18(a)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act for
a period from the date of the Order until October 31, 2010. The Order
would permit each Fund to issue or incur debt subject to asset coverage
of 200% that would be used to refinance all of the Fund's issued and
outstanding auction rate preferred shares (``ARPS'') issued prior to
February 1, 2008 that are outstanding at the time such post-order debt
is issued or incurred. The Order also would permit each Fund to declare
dividends or any other distributions on, or purchase, capital stock
during the term of the Order, provided that such post-Order debt has
asset coverage of at least 200% after deducting the amount of such
transaction.

Filing Dates: The application was filed on December 29, 2008, and
amended on March 27, 2009, and June 2, 2009.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by
mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on June 29, 2009, and should be accompanied by proof of service on
applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate
of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's
interest, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons
who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by
writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants: c/o Gifford R. Zimmerman,
Managing Director, Assistant Secretary and Associate General Counsel,
Nuveen Asset Management, 333 West Wacker Drive, Chicago, IL 60606.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bruce R. MacNeil, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6817, or Julia Kim Gilmer, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company
Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or an applicant
using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or
by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants' Representations

    1. Each of the Funds is organized as a Massachusetts business trust
and is a closed-end management investment company registered under the
Act. Each Fund is advised by Nuveen Asset Management (``Nuveen'') and
has issued and outstanding a class of common shares and a class of one
or more series of ARPS.
    2. Applicants state that the Funds issued their outstanding ARPS
for purposes of investment leverage to augment the amount of investment
capital available for use in the pursuit of their investment
objectives. Applicants state that, through the use of leverage, the
Funds seek to enhance the investment return available to the holders of
their common shares by earning a rate of portfolio return (which
includes the return obtained from securities purchased from the
proceeds of ARPS offerings) that exceeds the dividend rate that the
Funds pay to holders of the ARPS. Applicants represent that ARPS
shareholders are entitled to receive a stated liquidation preference
amount of $25,000 per share (plus any accumulated but unpaid dividends)
in any liquidation, dissolution, or winding up of the relevant Fund
before any distribution or payment to holders of the Fund's common
shares. Applicants also state that dividends declared and payable on
ARPS have a similar priority over dividends declared and payable on the
Funds' common shares. In addition, applicants state that ARPS are
``perpetual'' securities and are not subject to mandatory redemption by
a Fund (provided certain asset coverage tests are met). Further,
applicants state that ARPS are redeemable at each Fund's option.
    3. Applicants state that prior to February 2008, dividend rates on
the ARPS for each dividend period were set at the market clearing rate
determined through an auction process that brought together bidders,
who sought to buy ARPS, and holders of ARPS, who sought

to sell their ARPS. Applicants explain that if an auction fails to
clear (because of an imbalance of sell orders over bids), the dividend
payment rate over the next dividend period is set at a specified
maximum applicable rate (the ``Maximum Rate'') determined by reference
to a short-term market interest rate. Applicants state that an
unsuccessful auction is not a default; the relevant Fund continues to
pay dividends to all holders of ARPS but at the specified Maximum Rate
rather than a market clearing rate. Applicants state that they had
experienced no unsuccessful auctions prior to February 2008.
    4. Applicants state that the lead underwriter of the initial
placement of a particular series of ARPS (each a ``Lead Manager'')
would regularly place bid orders with its own capital in an auction to
help ensure that there would be a sufficient number of bid orders
relative to sell orders to permit an auction to clear. Applicants
represent that the auction mechanism generally provided readily
available liquidity to holders of ARPS for almost twenty years.
Applicants believe that many holders of ARPS relied on them as part of
a cash management vehicle, based in part on their expectation of ready
liquidity.
    5. Applicants state that leading up to February 2008, the Lead
Managers began to experience financial pressures that led them to be
unwilling to hold ARPS on their balance sheets and to cease entering
supporting bids at ARPS auctions. Applicants state that beginning on
February 12, 2008, all closed-end funds advised by Nuveen that had
outstanding ARPS (including the Funds) experienced auction failures due
to an imbalance between buy and sell orders. Applicants also state that
they believe there is no established secondary market that would
provide holders of ARPS with the liquidation preference of $25,000 per
share. Applicants state that to date the Funds have redeemed
approximately 81% of their outstanding ARPS with, in part, borrowings
from (a) a commercial paper conduit facility, (b) a prime brokerage
facility, and (c) a bank line of credit, but have been prohibited from
replacing all of their outstanding ARPS because they would not have the
300% asset coverage required by section 18(a)(1) of the Act after a
full redemption of the ARPS. As a result, applicants state that there
is currently no reliable mechanism for holders of ARPS to obtain
liquidity, and believe that, industry-wide, the current lack of
liquidity is causing distress for a substantial number of ARPS
shareholders and creating severe hardship for many investors.
    6. Applicants seek relief for a period from the date of any Order
until October 31, 2010 (``Exemption Period'') to facilitate temporary
borrowings by the Funds that would enhance their ability to provide a
liquidity solution to the holders of their ARPS in the near term\1\
while they either pay down or seek a more permanent form of replacement
leverage, such as a new type of preferred stock.\2\ Because of the
limited availability of debt financing in the current, severely
constrained capital markets, the applicants believe that the
negotiation, execution and closing of a borrowing transaction to
replace the leverage currently represented by the Funds' outstanding
ARPS, if it can be effected, might take several months following the
issuance of the Order. Applicants further state that once the debt
incurred in replacement of a Fund's outstanding ARPS is in place, it is
uncertain whether and when the applicants will be able to issue VRDP
Shares to replace the debt, or how quickly the securities and capital
markets will return to conditions that would enable the applicants to
achieve compliance with the asset coverage requirements that would
apply in the absence of the Order. Given the continuing unsettled state
of the securities and capital markets, the applicants believe that the
Exemption Period is reasonable and appropriate. Each Fund's refinancing
of ARPS would be subject to the Fund obtaining any necessary approval
of changes to the Fund's fundamental investment policies and approval
of the refinancing arrangements by the Fund's board of trustees
(``Board'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Each Fund notes that the cost of the replacement leverage is
expected, over time, to be lower than the total cost of ARPS based
on the Maximum Rates applicable to the ARPS of those Funds.
    \2\ Applicants state that certain closed-end municipal bond
funds in the same group of investment companies as the applicants
(but none of the applicants) have issued Variable Rate Demand
Preferred Shares (``VRDP Shares''), a new type of preferred stock
that supplements or replaces existing ARPS. Applicants further state
that it is not certain that the Funds will be able to redeem all of
their ARPS through the issuance of VRDP shares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 18(a)(1)(A) of the Act provides that it is unlawful for
any registered closed-end investment company to issue any class of
senior security representing indebtedness, or to sell such security of
which it is the issuer, unless such class of senior security will have
an asset coverage of at least 300% immediately after issuance or sale.
Section 18(a)(2)(A) of the Act provides that it is unlawful for any
registered closed-end investment company to issue any class of senior
security that is a stock, or to sell any such security of which it is
the issuer, unless such class of senior security will have an asset
coverage of at least 200% immediately after such issuance or sale.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Section 18(h) of the Act defines asset coverage of a senior
security representing indebtedness of an issuer as the ratio which
the value of the total assets of the issuer, less all liabilities
and indebtedness not represented by senior securities, bears to the
aggregate amount of senior securities representing indebtedness of
the issuer. The section defines asset coverage of the preferred
stock of an issuer as the ratio which the value of the total assets
of the issuer, less all liabilities and indebtedness not represented
by senior securities, bears to the aggregate amount of senior
securities representing indebtedness of the issuer plus the amount
the class of senior security would be entitled to on involuntary
liquidation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Section 18(a)(1)(B) prohibits a closed-end fund from declaring a
dividend or other distribution on, or purchasing, its own capital stock
unless its outstanding indebtedness will have an asset coverage of at
least 300% immediately after deducting the amount of such dividend,
distribution or purchase price.\4\ Section 18(a)(2)(B) prohibits a
closed-end fund from declaring a dividend or other distribution on, or
purchasing, its own common stock unless its outstanding preferred stock
will have an asset coverage of at least 200% immediately after
deducting the amount of such dividend, distribution or purchase price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ An exception is made for the declaration of a dividend on a
class of preferred stock if the senior security representing
indebtedness has an asset coverage of at least 200% at the time of
declaration after deduction of the amount of such dividend. See
section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Act. Further, section 18(g) of the Act
provides, among other things, that ``senior security,'' for purposes
of section 18(a)(1)(B), does not include any promissory note or
other evidence of indebtedness issued in consideration of any loan,
extension or renewal thereof, made by a bank or other person and
privately arranged, and not intended to be publicly distributed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Section 6(c) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that the
Commission, by order upon application, may conditionally or
unconditionally exempt any person, security, or transaction from any
provision of the Act if and to the extent necessary or appropriate in
the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and
the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act.
    4. Applicants request that the Commission issue an Order under
section 6(c) of the Act to exempt each Fund from the 300% asset
coverage requirements set forth in sections

18(a)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act. Specifically, the Funds seek relief
from the section 18 asset coverage requirements for senior securities
representing indebtedness for the Exemption Period to permit the Funds
to refinance any ARPS issued prior to February 1, 2008 that are
outstanding at the time of the Order with debt subject to the 200%
asset coverage requirement for stock, rather than the 300% asset
coverage that would ordinarily apply under section 18 to senior
securities representing indebtedness, (a) when they incur that debt,
and (b) when they declare dividends or any other distributions on, or
purchase, their capital stock, after deduction of the amount of such
dividend, distribution or purchase price.\5\ Applicants state that,
except as permitted under the requested Order, if issued, the Funds
would meet all of the asset coverage requirements of section 18(a) of
the Act. In addition, applicants state that each Fund that borrows in
reliance on the Order will either pay down or refinance the debt within
the Exemption Period so that the Fund would, at the expiration of the
Exemption Period, comply with the applicable asset coverage
requirements (200% for stock or 300% for debt) under section 18 of the
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For purposes of the Order, ARPS refinancings refer to such
post-Order borrowings and any refinancings of such post-Order
borrowings until the expiration of the Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Applicants state that section 18 reflects congressional concerns
regarding preferential treatment for certain classes of shareholders,
complex capital structures, and the use of excessive leverage.
Applicants submit that another concern was that senior securities gave
the misleading impression of safety from risk. Applicants believe that
the request for temporary relief is necessary, appropriate and in the
public interest and that such relief is consistent with the protection
of investors and the purposes intended by the policy and provisions of
the Act.
    6. Applicants note that the illiquidity of ARPS is a unique,
exigent situation that is posing urgent, and in some cases, severe
hardships on ARPS shareholders. Applicants represent that the proposed
replacement of the ARPS with debt would provide liquidity for the
Funds' ARPS shareholders while the Funds continue their efforts to
obtain a more permanent form of financing (such as through the issuance
of VRDP Shares) that fully complies with the asset coverage
requirements of section 18.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See supra note 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. Applicants represent that the Order would help avoid the
potential harm to common shareholders that could result if the Funds
were to deleverage their portfolios in the current difficult market
environment or that could result if a reduction in investment return
reduced the market price of common shares. Applicants also state that
the requested Order would permit the Funds to continue to provide their
common shareholders with the enhanced returns that leverage may
provide.
    8. Applicants believe that the interests of both classes of the
Funds' current investors would be well served by the requested order--
the ARPS shareholders because they would achieve the liquidity that the
market currently cannot provide (as well as full recovery of the
liquidation value of their shares) and the common shareholders because
the cost of the new form of leverage would, over time, be lower than
that of the total cost of the ARPS based on their Maximum Rates and the
adverse consequences of deleveraging would be avoided.
    9. Applicants represent that the proposed borrowing would be
obtained from banks, insurance companies or qualified institutional
buyers (as defined in Rule 144(a)(1) under the Securities Act of 1933)
who would be capable of assessing the risk associated with the
transaction. Applicants also state that, to the extent the Act's asset
coverage requirements were aimed at limiting leverage because of its
potential to magnify losses as well as gains, they believe that the
proposal would not unduly increase the speculative nature of the Funds'
common shares because the relief is temporary and the Funds would be no
more highly leveraged if they replace the existing ARPS with
borrowing.\7\ Applicants also state that the proposed liquidity
solution would not make the Funds' capital structure more complex,
opaque, or hard to understand or result in pyramiding or inequitable
distribution of control.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Applicants acknowledge that managing any portfolio that
relies on borrowing for leverage entails the risk that, when the
borrowing matures and must be repaid or refinanced, an economically
attractive form of replacement leverage may not be available in the
capital markets. For that reason, any portfolio that relies on
borrowing for leverage is subject to the risk that it may have to
deleverage, which could be disadvantageous to the portfolio's common
shareholders. Applicants therefore state that they regard leveraging
through borrowing as potentially a temporary, interim step, with the
issuance of new preferred stock such as VRDP Shares as a possible
longer-term replacement source of portfolio leverage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. Applicants state that the current state of the credit markets,
which has affected the ARPS, is an historic event of unusual severity,
which requires a creative and flexible response on the part of both the
public and private sectors. Applicants believe that these issues have
created an urgent need for tailored, rapid, thoughtful and responsive
solutions. Applicants believe that the request meets the standards for
exemption under section 6(c) of the Act.

Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief shall
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. Each Fund that borrows subject to 200% asset coverage under the
Order will do so only if such Fund's Board, including a majority of the
trustees who are not ``interested persons'' (as defined in section
2(a)(19) of the Act) (``Independent Trustees''), shall have determined
that such borrowing is in the best interests of such Fund, its common
shareholders, and its ARPS shareholders. Each Fund shall make and
preserve for a period of not less than six years from the date of such
determination, the first two years in an easily accessible place,
minutes specifically describing the deliberations by the Board and the
information and documents supporting those deliberations, the factors
considered by the Board in connection with such determination, and the
basis of such determination.
    2. Upon expiration of the Exemption Period, each Fund will have
asset coverage of at least 300% for each class of senior security
representing indebtedness.
    3. The Board of any Fund that has borrowed in reliance on the Order
shall receive and review, no less frequently than quarterly during the
Exemption Period, detailed progress reports prepared by management (or
other parties selected by the Independent Trustees) regarding and
assessing the efforts that the Fund has undertaken, and the progress
that the Fund has made, towards achieving compliance with the
appropriate asset coverage requirements under section 18 by the
expiration of the Exemption Period. The Board, including a majority of
the Independent Trustees, will make such adjustments as it deems
necessary or appropriate to ensure that the Fund comes into compliance
with section 18 of the Act within a reasonable period of time, not to
exceed the expiration of the Exemption Period. Each Fund will make and
preserve minutes describing these reports and the Board's review,
including copies of such reports and all other information provided to
or relied upon by the Board, for a period of not less than six years,
the first two years in an easily accessible place.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-13723 Filed 6-10-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P