[Federal Register: May 10, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 89)]
[Notices]
[Page 25875]
[DOCID:fr10my10-70]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1874-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

Virginia; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the Commonwealth of Virginia (FEMA-1874-DR), dated February 16,
2010, and related Determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: May 4, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Recovery Directorate,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the Commonwealth of Virginia is hereby amended to include the
following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely
affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his
declaration of February 16, 2010.

    The Independent Cities of Covington, Galax, and Radford for
Public Assistance.
    The Independent Cities of Covington, Galax, and Radford for
emergency protective measures (Category B), including snow
assistance, under the Public Assistance program for any continuous
48-hour period during or proximate to the incident period.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-10977 Filed 5-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 140 (Thursday, July 21, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 47325]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17279]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 60 and 62

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0033; FRL-9949-36-OAR]
RIN 2060-AS84

Clean Energy Incentive Program Design Details; Extension of
Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: On June 30, 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
proposed a rule titled, ``Clean Energy Incentive Program Design
Details.'' The EPA is extending the comment period on the proposed rule
that was scheduled to close on August 29, 2016, by four days until
September 2, 2016. The EPA is making this change to align the public
comment period with the public hearing submittal time frame.

DATES: The public comment period for the proposed rule published in the
Federal Register on June 30, 2016 (81 FR 42940), is being extended.
Written comments must be received on or before September 2, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for the proposed rulemaking
(available at http://www.regulations.gov). The Docket ID No. is EPA-HQ-
OAR-2016-0033. Information on this action is posted at https://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan/clean-energy-incentive-program. Submit your
comments, identified by the appropriate Docket ID No. to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or withdrawn. The EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. If you need to
include CBI as part of your comment, please visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html for instructions. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make.
    For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit
http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information on this
action, contact Dr. Tina Ndoh, Sector Policies and Programs Division,
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (D243-04), Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number:
(919) 541-2750; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: To provide administrative simplicity for
stakeholders by aligning the public comment period on the proposal with
the 30-day timeframe for submissions after the public hearing on August
3, 2016, the EPA has decided to extend the public comment period until
September 2, 2016.

    Dated: July 13, 2016.
Michael Koerber,
Associate Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2016-17279 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 27 (Thursday, February 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6850-6853]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2944]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66321; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2011-95]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Granting
Approval of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Listing and Trading of the
PIMCO Total Return Exchange Traded Fund Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule
8.600

February 3, 2012.

I. Introduction

    On December 13, 2011, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to list and trade shares (``Shares'') of the PIMCO
Total Return Exchange Traded Fund (``Fund'') under NYSE Arca Equities
Rule 8.600. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on December 22, 2011.\3\ The Commission received no
comments on the proposal. This order grants approval of the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65988 (December 16,
2011), 76 FR 79741 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to list and trade the Shares of the Fund
pursuant to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600, which governs the listing
and trading of Managed Fund Shares on the Exchange. The Shares will be
offered by PIMCO ETF Trust (``Trust''), a statutory trust organized
under the laws of the State of Delaware and registered with the
Commission as an open-end management investment company.\4\ The
investment manager to the Fund is Pacific Investment Management Company
LLC (``PIMCO'' or ``Adviser''). PIMCO Investments LLC serves as the
distributor for the Fund, and State Street Bank & Trust Co. serves as
the custodian and transfer agent for the Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Trust is registered under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1) (``1940 Act''). On July 7, 2011, the Trust
filed with the Commission Post-Effective Amendment No. 30 to Form N-
1A relating to the Fund (File Nos. 333-155395 and 811-22250)
(``Registration Statement''). In addition, the Commission has issued
an order granting certain exemptive relief to the Trust under the
1940 Act. See Investment Company Act Release No. 28993 (November 10,
2009) (File No. 812-13571) (``Exemptive Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Adviser is affiliated with a broker-dealer and has implemented
a ``fire wall'' with respect to such broker-dealer regarding access to
information concerning the composition and/or changes to the Fund's
portfolio. If PIMCO elects to hire a sub-adviser for the Fund that is
also affiliated with a broker-dealer, such sub-adviser will implement a
fire wall with respect to such broker-dealer regarding access to
information concerning the composition and/or changes to the
portfolio.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Commentary .06 to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600. In the
event (a) the Adviser or any sub-adviser becomes newly affiliated
with a broker-dealer, or (b) any new manager, adviser, or sub-
adviser becomes affiliated with a broker-dealer, it will implement a
fire wall with respect to such broker-dealer regarding access to
information concerning the composition and/or changes to the
portfolio, and will be subject to procedures designed to prevent the
use and dissemination of material non-public information regarding
such portfolio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Description of the Fund

    The Fund will seek maximum total return, consistent with
preservation of capital and prudent investment management. The Fund
will invest under normal market circumstances \6\ at least 65% of its
total assets in a diversified portfolio of Fixed Income Instruments \7\
of varying maturities. The Fund will invest primarily (under normal
market circumstances, at least 65% of its total assets) in investment-
grade Fixed Income Instruments, but may invest up to 10% of its total
assets in high-yield Fixed Income Instruments

(``junk bonds'') rated B3 through Ba1 by Moody's Investors Service,
Inc., or equivalently rated by Standard & Poor's Ratings Services or
Fitch, Inc., or, if unrated, determined by PIMCO to be of comparable
quality. The average portfolio duration of the Fund normally will vary
within two years of the duration of the Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate
Index, which as of May 31, 2011, was 5.19 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The term ``under normal market circumstances'' includes, but
is not limited to, the absence of extreme volatility or trading
halts in the fixed income markets or the financial markets
generally; operational issues causing dissemination of inaccurate
market information; or force majeure type events such as systems
failure, natural or man-made disaster, act of God, armed conflict,
act of terrorism, riot or labor disruption or any similar
intervening circumstance.
    \7\ ``Fixed Income Instruments'' on which the Fund will focus
will be: Debt securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S.
Government, its agencies or government-sponsored enterprises (``U.S.
Government Securities''); corporate debt securities of U.S. and non-
U.S. issuers, including convertible securities and corporate
commercial paper; mortgage-backed and other asset-backed securities;
inflation-indexed bonds issued both by governments and corporations;
structured notes, including hybrid or ``indexed'' securities and
event-linked bonds; bank capital and trust preferred securities;
loan participations and assignments; delayed funding loans and
revolving credit facilities; bank certificates of deposit, fixed
time deposits and bankers' acceptances; repurchase agreements on
Fixed Income Instruments and reverse repurchase agreements on Fixed
Income Instruments; debt securities issued by states or local
governments and their agencies, authorities and other government-
sponsored enterprises; obligations of non-U.S. governments or their
subdivisions, agencies and government-sponsored enterprises; and
obligations of international agencies or supranational entities.
    Securities issued by U.S. Government agencies or government-
sponsored enterprises may not be guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In selecting Fixed Income Instruments for the Fund, PIMCO will
develop an outlook for interest rates, currency exchange rates, and the
economy, analyze credit and call risks, and use other security
selection techniques. The proportion of the Fund's assets committed to
investments in Fixed Income Instruments with particular characteristics
(such as quality, sector, interest rate, or maturity) will vary based
on PIMCO's outlook for the U.S. economy and the economies of other
countries in the world, the financial markets, and other factors.
    PIMCO will attempt to identify areas of the bond market that are
undervalued relative to the rest of the market. PIMCO will identify
these areas by grouping Fixed Income Instruments into sectors, such as
money markets, governments, corporates, mortgages, asset-backed and
international. Once investment opportunities are identified, PIMCO will
shift assets among sectors depending upon changes in relative
valuations and credit spreads.
    The Fund may invest in debt securities and instruments that are
economically tied to foreign countries. PIMCO generally considers an
instrument to be economically tied to a non-U.S. country if the issuer
is a foreign government (or any political subdivision, agency,
authority or instrumentality of such government), or if the issuer is
organized under the laws of a non-U.S. country. In the case of certain
money market instruments, such instruments will be considered
economically tied to a non-U.S. country if either the issuer or the
guarantor of such money market instrument is organized under the laws
of a non-U.S. country.
    The Fund may invest up to 30% of its total assets in securities
denominated in foreign currencies and may invest beyond this limit in
U.S. dollar-denominated securities of foreign issuers, subject to the
Fund's 10% of total assets limit on investments in preferred stock,
convertible securities, and other equity related securities.\8\ The
Fund will normally limit its foreign currency exposure (from non-U.S.
dollar-denominated securities or currencies) to 20% of its total
assets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Fund will not invest in any non-U.S registered equity
securities, except if such securities are traded on exchanges that
are members of the Intermarket Surveillance Group (``ISG'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Fund may invest up to 15% of its total assets in securities and
instruments that are economically tied to emerging market countries.
PIMCO has broad discretion to identify countries that it considers to
qualify as emerging markets but generally considers an instrument to be
economically tied to an emerging market country if the issuer or
guarantor is a government of an emerging market country (or any
political subdivision, agency, authority or instrumentality of such
government), if the issuer or guarantor is organized under the laws of
an emerging market country, or if the currency of settlement of the
security is a currency of an emerging market country. While corporate
debt securities and debt securities economically tied to an emerging
market country generally must have $200 million or more par amount
outstanding and significant par value traded to be considered as an
eligible investment for the Fund, at least 80% of issues of such
securities held by the Fund must have $200 million or more par amount
outstanding.
    The Fund may invest, without limitation, in mortgage- or asset-
backed securities. The Fund may purchase or sell debt and equity
securities on a when-issued, delayed delivery, or forward commitment
basis. In addition, the Fund may, without limitation, seek to obtain
market exposure to the securities in which it primarily invests by
entering into a series of purchase and sale contracts or by using other
investment techniques (such as buy backs or dollar rolls). The ``total
return'' sought by the Fund will consist of income earned on the Fund's
investments, plus capital appreciation, if any, which generally arises
from decreases in interest rates, foreign currency appreciation, or
improving credit fundamentals for a particular sector or security.
    The Fund may invest in Brady Bonds, which are debt securities
created through the exchange of existing commercial bank loans to
sovereign entities for new obligations in connection with a debt
restructuring, as well as in municipal bonds. The types of municipal
bonds in which the Fund may invest include municipal lease obligations,
municipal general obligation bonds, municipal cash equivalents, and
pre-refunded and escrowed to maturity municipal bonds. The Fund may
also invest in industrial development bonds, which are municipal bonds
issued by a government agency on behalf of a private sector company and
which, in most cases, are not backed by the credit of the issuing
municipality. The Fund may invest in pre-refunded municipal bonds,
which are tax-exempt bonds that have been refunded to a call date on or
before the final maturity of principal and remain outstanding in the
municipal market. Furthermore, the Fund may invest in securities issued
by entities whose underlying assets are municipal bonds.
    The Fund may invest in Lower Tier II, Upper Tier II, and Tier I
bank capital securities, which are issued by banks to help fulfill
their regulatory capital requirements. Bank capital is generally, but
not always, investment grade. The Fund may invest in variable and
floating rate debt securities, floating rate debt instruments, and
engage in credit spread trades. The Fund may make short sales as part
of its overall portfolio management strategies or to offset a potential
decline in value of a security.

Other Portfolio Holdings

    The Fund may engage in foreign currency transactions on a spot
(cash) basis and enter into forward foreign currency exchange
contracts. The Fund may enter into these contracts to hedge against
foreign exchange risk, to increase exposure to a foreign currency, or
to shift exposure to foreign currency fluctuations from one currency to
another. The Fund may use one currency (or a basket of currencies) to
hedge against adverse changes in the value of another currency (or a
basket of currencies) when exchange rates between the two currencies
are positively correlated. The Fund will segregate or ``earmark''
assets determined to be liquid by PIMCO in accordance with the
procedures established by the Fund's Board of Trustees (or, as
permitted by applicable law, enter into certain offsetting positions)
to cover its obligations under forward foreign currency exchange
contracts entered into for non-hedging purposes.
    If PIMCO believes that economic or market conditions are
unfavorable to investors, PIMCO may temporarily invest up to 100% of
the Fund's assets in certain defensive strategies, including holding a
substantial portion of the Fund's assets in cash, cash equivalents, or
other highly rated, short-term debt securities, including debt
securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government, its agencies or
instrumentalities, and affiliated money market and/or short-term bond
funds.

    The Fund may invest in, to the extent permitted by Section
12(d)(1)(A) of the 1940 Act, other affiliated and unaffiliated funds,
such as open-end or closed-end management investment companies,
including other exchange traded funds, provided that the Fund's
investment in units or shares of investment companies and other open-
end collective investment vehicles will not exceed 10% of the Fund's
net assets. The Fund may invest securities lending collateral in one or
more money market funds to the extent permitted by Rule 12d1-1 under
the 1940 Act, including series of PIMCO Funds, an affiliated open-end
management investment company managed by PIMCO.
    The Fund may invest up to 10% of its total assets in preferred
stock, convertible securities and other equity related securities.
Consistent with the Exemptive Order, the Fund will not invest in
options contracts, futures contracts, or swap agreements.
    The Fund may not concentrate its investments in a particular
industry, as that term is used in the 1940 Act, and as interpreted,
modified, or otherwise permitted by regulatory authority having
jurisdiction from time to time. The Fund may not, with respect to 75%
of the Fund's total assets, purchase the securities of any issuer,
except securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government or any of
its agencies or instrumentalities, if, as a result (i) more than 5% of
the Fund's total assets would be invested in the securities of that
issuer, or (ii) the Fund would hold more than 10% of the outstanding
voting securities of that issuer. For the purpose of this restriction,
each state and each separate political subdivision, agency, authority,
or instrumentality of such state, each multi-state agency or authority,
and each guarantor are treated as separate issuers of municipal bonds.
    The Fund may hold up to 15% of its net assets in illiquid
securities. Certain financial instruments, including, but not limited
to, Rule 144A securities, loan participations and assignments, delayed
funding loans, revolving credit facilities, and fixed- and floating-
rate loans will be included in the 15% limitation on illiquid
securities.
    The Fund intends to qualify annually and elect to be treated as a
regulated investment company under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue
Code. The Fund will not invest in any non-U.S registered equity
securities, except if such securities are traded on exchanges that are
ISG members. The Fund's investments will be consistent with the Fund's
investment objective and will not be used to enhance leverage. That is,
while the Fund will be permitted to borrow as permitted under the 1940
Act, the Fund's investments will not be used to seek performance that
is the multiple or inverse multiple of the Fund's broad-based
securities market index.
    Additional information regarding the Trust, Fund, Shares, Fund's
investment strategies, risks, creation and redemption procedures, fees,
portfolio holdings and disclosure policies, distributions and taxes,
and information relating to the daily disclosure of the Fund's
holdings, Portfolio Indicative Value (``PIV''), and net asset value
(``NAV''), among others, can be found in the Notice and the
Registration Statement, as applicable.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Notice and Registration Statement, supra notes 3 and 4,
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission's Findings

    The Commission has carefully reviewed the proposed rule change and
finds that it is consistent with the requirements of Section 6 of the
Act \10\ and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a
national securities exchange.\11\ In particular, the Commission finds
that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\
which requires, among other things, that the Exchange's rules be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. The Commission notes that
the Fund and the Shares must comply with the requirements of NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 8.600 to be listed and traded on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \11\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposal to list and trade the Shares
on the Exchange is consistent with Section 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the
Act,\13\ which sets forth Congress' finding that it is in the public
interest and appropriate for the protection of investors and the
maintenance of fair and orderly markets to assure the availability to
brokers, dealers, and investors of information with respect to
quotations for, and transactions in, securities. Quotation and last-
sale information for the Shares will be available via the Consolidated
Tape Association (``CTA'') high-speed line. In addition, the PIV, as
defined in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600(c)(3), will be widely
disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least every 15
seconds during the Exchange's Core Trading Session.\14\ On each
business day, before commencement of trading in Shares in the Core
Trading Session on the Exchange, the Trust's Web site will disclose the
Disclosed Portfolio, as defined in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600(c)(2),
that will form the basis for the Fund's calculation of the NAV at the
end of the business day.\15\ The NAV of the Fund's Shares will be
calculated once daily Monday through Friday as of the close of regular
trading on the New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE''), generally 4 p.m.
Eastern time (``E.T.'') on any business day. In addition, information
regarding market price and trading volume of the Shares will be
continually available on a real-time basis throughout the day on
brokers' computer screens and other electronic services, and the
previous day's closing price and trading volume information for the
Shares will be published daily in the financial section of newspapers.
The Trust's Web site will also include a form of the prospectus for the
Fund, information relating to NAV, and other quantitative and trading
information. Moreover, a basket composition file, which includes the
security names and share quantities required to be delivered in
exchange for the Shares, together with estimates and actual cash
components, will be publicly disseminated daily prior to the opening of
the NYSE via the National Securities Clearing Corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1)(C)(iii).
    \14\ According to the Exchange, several major market data
vendors display and/or make widely available PIVs published on the
CTA or other data feeds.
    \15\ On a daily basis, the Adviser will disclose for each
portfolio security or other financial instrument of the Fund the
following information: Ticker symbol (if applicable), name of
security or financial instrument, number of shares or dollar value
of financial instruments held in the portfolio, and percentage
weighting of the security or financial instrument in the portfolio.
The Web site information will be publicly available at no charge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission further believes that the proposal to list and trade
the Shares is reasonably designed to promote fair disclosure of
information that may be necessary to price the Shares appropriately and
to prevent trading when a reasonable degree of transparency cannot be
assured. The Commission notes that the Exchange will obtain a
representation from the issuer of the Shares that the NAV per Share
will be calculated daily and that the NAV and the Disclosed Portfolio
will be made available to all market

participants at the same time.\16\ In addition, the Exchange will halt
trading in the Shares under the specific circumstances set forth in
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600(d)(2)(D), and may halt trading in the
Shares if trading is not occurring in the securities and/or the
financial instruments comprising the Disclosed Portfolio of the Fund,
or if other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the
maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present.\17\ The Exchange
will consider the suspension of trading in or removal from listing of
the Shares if the PIV is no longer calculated or available or the
Disclosed Portfolio is not made available to all market participants at
the same time.\18\ The Exchange represents that the Adviser is
affiliated with a broker-dealer, and such Adviser has implemented a
``fire wall'' with respect to the broker-dealer regarding access to
information concerning the composition and/or changes to the Fund's
portfolio.\19\ Further, the Commission notes that the Reporting
Authority that provides the Disclosed Portfolio must implement and
maintain, or be subject to, procedures designed to prevent the use and
dissemination of material non-public information regarding the actual
components of the portfolio.\20\ The Exchange states that it has a
general policy prohibiting the distribution of material, non-public
information by its employees. The Commission also notes that the
Exchange may obtain information via the ISG from other exchanges that
are members of ISG or with which the Exchange has in place a
comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600(d)(1)(B).
    \17\ With respect to trading halts, the Exchange may consider
all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt or suspend
trading in the Shares of the Fund. Trading in Shares of the Fund
will be halted if the circuit breaker parameters in NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 7.12 have been reached. Trading also may be halted
because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the
Exchange, make trading in the Shares inadvisable.
    \18\ See NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600(d)(2)(C)(ii).
    \19\ See supra note 5 and accompanying text. The Commission
notes that an investment adviser to an open-end fund is required to
be registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (``Advisers
Act''). As a result, the Adviser and its related personnel are
subject to the provisions of Rule 204A-1 under the Advisers Act
relating to codes of ethics. This Rule requires investment advisers
to adopt a code of ethics that reflects the fiduciary nature of the
relationship to clients as well as compliance with other applicable
securities laws. Accordingly, procedures designed to prevent the
communication and misuse of non-public information by an investment
adviser must be consistent with Rule 204A-1 under the Advisers Act.
In addition, Rule 206(4)-7 under the Advisers Act makes it unlawful
for an investment adviser to provide investment advice to clients
unless such investment adviser has (i) adopted and implemented
written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent
violation, by the investment adviser and its supervised persons, of
the Advisers Act and the Commission rules adopted thereunder; (ii)
implemented, at a minimum, an annual review regarding the adequacy
of the policies and procedures established pursuant to subparagraph
(i) above and the effectiveness of their implementation; and (iii)
designated an individual (who is a supervised person) responsible
for administering the policies and procedures adopted under
subparagraph (i) above.
    \20\ See NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600(d)(2)(B)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further represents that the Shares are deemed to be
equity securities, thus rendering trading in the Shares subject to the
Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities.
In support of this proposal, the Exchange has made representations,
including:
    (1) The Shares will conform to the initial and continued listing
criteria under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600.
    (2) The Exchange has appropriate rules to facilitate transactions
in the Shares during all trading sessions.
    (3) The Exchange's surveillance procedures applicable to derivative
products, which include Managed Fund Shares, are adequate to properly
monitor Exchange trading of the Shares in all trading sessions and to
deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and applicable federal
securities laws.
    (4) Prior to the commencement of trading, the Exchange will inform
its Equity Trading Permit Holders in an Information Bulletin of the
special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Shares.
Specifically, the Information Bulletin will discuss the following: (a)
The procedures for purchases and redemptions of Shares in Creation Unit
aggregations (and that Shares are not individually redeemable); (b)
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 9.2(a), which imposes a duty of due diligence
on its Equity Trading Permit Holders to learn the essential facts
relating to every customer prior to trading the Shares; (c) the risks
involved in trading the Shares during the Opening and Late Trading
Sessions when an updated PIV will not be calculated or publicly
disseminated; (d) how information regarding the PIV is disseminated;
(e) the requirement that Equity Trading Permit Holders deliver a
prospectus to investors purchasing newly issued Shares prior to or
concurrently with the confirmation of a transaction; and (f) trading
information.
    (5) For initial and/or continued listing, the Fund will be in
compliance with Rule 10A-3 under the Act,\21\ as provided by NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 5.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See 17 CFR 240.10A-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (6) The Fund will not: (a) Hold more than 15% of its net assets in
illiquid securities, including, but not limited to, Rule 144A
securities, loan participations and assignments, delayed funding loans,
revolving credit facilities, and fixed- and floating-rate loans; (b)
pursuant to the terms of the Exemptive Order, invest in options
contracts, futures contracts, or swap agreements; or (c) invest in any
non-U.S. registered equity securities, except if such securities are
traded on exchanges that are ISG members.
    (7) The Fund's investments will be consistent with the Fund's
investment objective and will not be used to enhance leverage.
    (8) A minimum of 100,000 Shares of the Fund will be outstanding at
the commencement of trading on the Exchange.
    This approval order is based on the Exchange's representations.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \22\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\23\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2011-95) be, and it
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-2944 Filed 2-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 29, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 187)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 49798-49801]
[DOCID:fr29se09-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0682; Directorate Identifier 2001-NM-237-AD;
Amendment 39-16025; AD 2009-20-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767-200 and -300 Series
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain Boeing Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes,
that requires replacing certain door-mounted escape slides and slide-
raft assemblies with new slide-raft assemblies. This AD also requires
the following actions, as applicable: replacing certain escape system
latches with new latches; modifying or replacing certain counterbalance
assemblies with new counterbalance assemblies; and adjusting the door
counterbalance system. The actions specified by this AD are intended to
prevent the escape slides and slide-rafts of the forward and mid-cabin
entry and service doors from being too steep for evacuation in the
event that the airplane rotates onto the aft fuselage into the extreme
tip-back condition. In the extreme tip-back condition, the forward and
mid-cabin exits could result in steeper sliding angles, which could
cause injury to passengers and crewmembers during an emergency
evacuation. This action is intended to address the identified unsafe
condition.

DATES: Effective November 3, 2009.
    The incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of November 3, 2009.

ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be
obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. This
information may be examined at the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue,
SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the Document Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Guion, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Boeing Model 767-200 and -
300 series airplanes was published as a supplemental notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register on June 17, 2008 (73 FR
34233). That action proposed to require replacing certain door-mounted
escape slides and slide-raft assemblies with new slide-raft assemblies;
replacing certain escape system latches with new latches; and modifying
or replacing certain counterbalance assemblies with new counterbalance
assemblies; as applicable. The supplemental NPRM also proposed to
extend the compliance time, add requirements to install a longer firing
cable and test the valve of the inflation trigger system of the slide-
raft and, for certain airplanes, add procedures to adjust the door
counterbalance systems.

Explanation of Revised Service Information

    Since we issued the supplemental NPRM, we have reviewed Boeing
Service Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 3, dated July 3, 2008. We
referred to Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 2, dated
September 27, 2007, in the supplemental NPRM as the appropriate source
of service information for replacing the slide-rafts. The procedures in
Revision 2 and Revision 3 are essentially the same; however, Revision 3
corrects certain typographical errors, including certain part numbers
for the slide-rafts.
    We have revised paragraph (a) of this AD to refer to Boeing Service
Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 3, dated July 3, 2008, as the
appropriate source of service information. We have also included Boeing
Service Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 2, dated September 27, 2007, in
Table 1 of this AD to state that actions done before the effective date
of this AD in accordance with Revision 2 are acceptable for compliance
with the requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD.

Comments

    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to
the comments received.

Requests To Withdraw Supplemental NPRM or Extend Compliance Time

    Air Transport Association (ATA), American Airlines, and Delta
Airlines request that we either withdraw the supplemental NPRM or
extend the compliance time for replacing the slide-rafts. All Nippon
Airways requests a compliance time of 8 years (96 months), and ATA
requests a compliance time of 10 years (120 months) rather than the 72
months proposed in the supplemental NPRM.
    ATA also cites information to show the improbability of the unsafe
condition, and maintains that we should withdraw the NPRM due to its
lack of potential to add safety benefit, its significantly
disproportional costs, its unjustified compliance period, and the fact
that the intent of the proposal is already being accomplished on an
attrition basis. ATA also states that if the FAA disagrees with its
justifications and proceeds with the final rule, it recommends a 10-
year compliance period for better correlation with risk-management
methods.
    American Airlines and ATA further object to the requirement to
replace the slide-rafts. They agree with the manufacturer that the
unsafe condition specified in the supplemental NPRM is not a safety
issue. American Airlines and ATA state that the likelihood that the
scenario described in the supplemental NPRM would result in a time-
limited evacuation is extremely improbable.
    We partially agree with the commenters. We do not agree with the
requests to withdraw the supplemental NPRM. We have determined that an
unsafe condition exists. Although the specific conditions addressed in
the supplemental NPRM have not been

encountered in service, we have received reports of partial tip-back
during accidents/incidents that could have resulted in extreme tip-back
given slightly different conditions, making this type of event
foreseeable. During at least one of these partial tip-back events, the
slides were deployed to facilitate evacuation. We do not agree that the
low probability of encountering such a foreseeable event is
justification to withdraw the supplemental NPRM. We have also
determined that an interval based on the ``useful service life'' of the
slides, which is 15 years, would not address the unsafe condition in a
timely manner.
    However, we do agree that it is appropriate to extend the
compliance time. We have determined that a compliance time of 96 months
represents an appropriate interval of time in which the required
actions can be performed, while still maintaining an adequate level of
safety. In developing an appropriate compliance time, we considered the
safety implications, parts availability, and normal maintenance
schedules for timely accomplishment of the modifications. We also
considered the costs to comply with the actions (see updated cost
information in the Costs of Compliance section). The revised compliance
time will allow operators to offset the costs of complying with this AD
with the costs associated with normal slide replacement. Therefore, we
have revised paragraph (a) of this AD to extend the compliance time for
replacing the slide-rafts from 72 months to 96 months.

Requests To Remove Firing Cable Requirement From the Supplemental NPRM

    Continental Airlines, Goodrich, and Boeing ask that we remove
paragraph (b), ``Modification of the Firing Cable,'' from the
supplemental NPRM. Delta points out that the requirement to modify the
firing cable is proposed in Docket FAA-2008-0302 (and is now required
by AD 2008-21-05, amendment 39-15689 (73 FR 59486, October 9, 2008)) at
a compliance time of 36 months rather than the 72 months proposed in
the supplemental NPRM. Boeing states that we should also remove the
reference to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-25A0395, dated August
31, 2006, from Table 1 ``Previous Revisions of Service Bulletins,''
because that service bulletin relates to the modification specified in
paragraph (b) of the supplemental NPRM.
    We agree with the commenters' requests to remove paragraph (b) of
the supplemental NPRM and the reference to Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 767-25A0395, dated August 31, 2006. The requirement to modify
the firing cable is already included in AD 2008-21-05. Therefore, we
have revised this AD as requested. The requirement to modify the firing
cable will remain part of AD 2008-21-05, which also includes other
tasks related to the firing cable.

Requests To Revise Cost Impact

    Goodrich, and ATA, on behalf of its member American Airlines,
request that we revise the ``Cost Impact'' paragraph. American Airlines
states that we did not include the cost of the slide-rafts in the
original NPRM; as the slide-rafts are the dominant cost of the
modification, ATA and American Airlines state that the cost estimate is
both incomplete and inaccurate. Goodrich points out that the costs in
the supplemental NPRM reflect prices for 2004 and requests that we
revise the cost of the slide-rafts to 2008 prices.
    We agree with Goodrich to revise the cost of the slide-rafts to
reflect 2008 prices. The ``Cost Impact'' paragraph below includes the
current price of the slide-rafts. We acknowledge American Airlines'
request, but point out that although the original NPRM did not include
the cost of the slide-rafts, the supplemental NPRM did include those
costs.

Request To Change Applicability

    Boeing requests that we change the applicability of the
supplemental NPRM to refer to airplanes identified in Boeing Service
Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 3, dated July 3, 2008, rather than
referring only to those Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes that
have line numbers 1 through 793 inclusive, equipped with door-mounted
escape slide systems. Boeing states that the applicability, as written
in the supplemental NPRM, might make an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) request necessary for Model 767 door-mounted escape
system part numbers that are not addressed by the proposed AD.
    We agree with Boeing for the reasons stated, and have revised the
applicability statement of this AD to include a reference to Boeing
Service Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 3, dated July 3, 2008, which
includes specific details about which airplanes are affected by this
AD.

Requests To Extend Comment Period

    Delta Airlines and ATA request additional time to review the
supplemental NPRM. Delta requests that we extend the comment period for
an additional 60 days because of the complex nature of the supplemental
NPRM, the inclusion of multiple service bulletins, the extensive
background and significant number of comments in response to the
original NPRM, the hugely significant costs, and the fact that the
original NPRM was thought to have been withdrawn. ATA also requests an
extension of 60 days to the comment period, citing costs and the need
to assess the complex requirements.
    We disagree with the requests to provide additional time to comment
on the supplemental NPRM. As Delta points out in their comment, there
was a period of 4.5 years between the release of the original NPRM and
the supplemental NPRM, which gave operators sufficient time to consider
the requirements. We have not changed the AD in this regard.

Request for Industry-Wide Response

    Delta Airlines requests that ATA coordinate an industry-wide
response to the supplemental NPRM with the goal of gathering enough
technical information to support its cancellation. Delta states that,
given previous discussions with Boeing regarding risk and probability,
the supplemental NPRM does not appear to have adequate merit. Also,
given the significant cost impact, the industry would be well-served by
opening the time to conduct a coordinated effort to ensure that the
action proposed in the supplemental NPRM is not mandated.
    We neither agree nor disagree with the request for ATA to
coordinate an industry-wide response. This comment is directed to ATA
and is beyond the scope of the AD action. We disagree that the
supplemental NPRM does not have adequate merit. We consider the
proposed actions to be an adequate response to an unsafe condition. As
stated previously, although the specific conditions addressed in the
supplemental NPRM have not been encountered, there have been accidents/
incidents that make this type of event foreseeable. We do not agree
that the low probability of encountering such a foreseeable event is
justification for withdrawing the supplemental NPRM. Therefore, we have
not changed the AD in this regard.
    As explained previously, we also considered the costs to comply
with the actions proposed in the supplemental NPRM. While we determined
that a compliance time based on the ``useful service life'' of the
slides would not address the unsafe condition in a timely manner, we
did agree to extend the compliance time for replacing the slide-rafts
from 72 months to 96 months. The revised compliance time will allow

operators to offset the costs of complying with this AD with the costs
associated with normal slide replacement. We have revised paragraph (a)
of this AD to extend the compliance time for replacing the slide-rafts
from 72 months to 96 months.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the available data, including the comments
noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public
interest require the adoption of the rule with the changes previously
described. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither
increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of
the AD.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 745 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 261 airplanes of U.S. registry
are affected by this AD. The work hours and required parts per airplane
vary according to the configuration group to which the affected
airplane belongs. The average labor rate is $80 per work hour. The
``Cost Impact per Airplane Configuration Group'' table shows the
estimated costs.

                                                      Cost Impact per Airplane Configuration Group
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Fleet cost, by
     Airplane configuration group        U.S.-registered       Work hours          Kit cost          Slide cost     Cost per airplane    configuration
                                            airplanes                                                                                group
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.....................................                208                  6             $1,236           $222,002           $223,718        $46,533,334
2.....................................                 12                 12              2,472            448,502            451,934          5,423,208
3.....................................                 41                 11             98,858            222,002            321,740         13,191,340
4.....................................                  0                 11             34,012            222,002            256,894                  0
5.....................................                  0                 17             35,248            448,502            485,110                  0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the figures in the ``Cost Impact per Airplane
Configuration Group'' table, the cost impact of this AD on U.S.
operators is estimated to be $65,147,882.
    The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed requirements
of this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions
in the future if this AD were not adopted. The cost impact figures
discussed in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to
perform the specific actions actually required by the AD. These figures
typically do not include incidental costs, such as the time required to
gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other
administrative actions.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. 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.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations adopted herein will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, it
is determined that this final rule does not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) Is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866;
(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) will not have a
significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial
number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

2009-20-02 Boeing: Amendment 39-16025. Docket No. FAA-2008-0682;
Directorate Identifier 2001-NM-237-AD.

    Applicability: Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes, line
numbers 1 through 793 inclusive; certificated in any category;
equipped with door-mounted escape slide systems; as identified in
Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 3, dated July 3, 2008.
    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
    To prevent the escape slides and slide-rafts of the forward and
mid-cabin entry and service doors from being too steep for
evacuation in the event that the airplane rotates onto the aft
fuselage into the extreme tip-back condition, accomplish the
following:

Replacement of Slide-Rafts

    (a) Within 96 months after the effective date of this AD,
replace the applicable slide-rafts at the applicable door or doors,
and do all other applicable actions including, but not limited to,
changing the latches, and replacing or modifying the counterbalance
assemblies, by accomplishing all applicable actions specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25A0266,
Revision 3, dated July 3, 2008.

Credit for Actions Accomplished Previously

    (b) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the service bulletins listed in Table 1 of this AD
are

acceptable for compliance with the corresponding requirements of
this AD.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Boeing Service Bulletin    Revision level             Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alert Service Bulletin 767-                1  December 4, 2006.
 25A0266.
Alert Service Bulletin 767-                2  September 27, 2007.
 25A0266.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (c)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN:
Andrew Guion, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental
Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Or, e-mail information
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

Incorporation by Reference

    (d) You must use Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision
3, dated July 3, 2008, to do the actions required by this AD, unless
the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

Effective Date

    (e) This amendment becomes effective on November 3, 2009.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 11, 2009.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-22668 Filed 9-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: November 21, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 224)]
[Notices]
[Page 65569-65571]
[DOCID:fr21no07-50]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2007-0559, FRL-8498-3]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; Implementation of the Oil
Pollution Act Facility Response Plan Requirements (Renewal); EPA ICR
No. 1630.09, OMB Control No. 2050-0135

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that an Information
Collection Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an
existing approved collection. The ICR, which is abstracted below,
describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated
burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 21,
2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-2007-0559, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov

(our preferred method) or by mail to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
Superfund Docket (Mailcode 2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB by mail to: Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention:
Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lori Lee, Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, Office of Emergency Management, (Mail Code: 5104A),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: 202-
564-2501; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On July 18, 2007 (72 FR 39406), EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any
additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-2007-0559, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Superfund Docket in

the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>,
and the telephone number for the Superfund Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at
http://www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the

index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA receives

them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted
material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information
whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further
information about the electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov
.

    Title: Implementation of the Oil Pollution Act Facility Response
Plan Requirements (Renewal).

    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR No. 1630.09, OMB Control No. 2050-0135.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on November 30, 2007.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The authority for EPA's facility response plan (FRP)
requirements is derived from section 311 of the Clean Water Act, as
amended by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. EPA's FRP regulation is
codified at 40 CFR 112.20 and 112.21. All FRP-related reporting and
recordkeeping activities are mandatory. No amendments were made to the
FRP regulation since submission of the current ICR approval (November
30, 2004). While EPA recently finalized amendments to the SPCC rule (71
FR 77266 (December 26, 2006) and 72 FR 27443 (May 16, 2007)), these
amendments are not expected to impact the number of facilities subject
to FRP requirements, nor are they expected to substantively affect the
burden of complying with FRP requirement.

Purpose of Data Collection

    A facility-specific response plan will help an owner or operator
identify the necessary resources to respond to an oil spill in a timely
manner. If implemented effectively, the FRP will reduce the impact and
severity of oil spills and may prevent spills because of the
identification of risks at the facility. Although the facility owner or
operator is the primary data user, EPA also uses the data in certain
situations to ensure that facilities comply with the regulation and to
help allocate response resources. State and local governments may also
use the data to assist in local emergency preparedness planning
efforts.
    EPA reviews all submitted FRPs and must approve FRPs for those
facilities whose discharges may cause ``significant and substantial
harm'' to the environment. EPA approval is needed in order to ensure
that facilities believed to pose the highest risk have planned for
adequate resources and procedures to respond to a spill. (See 40 CFR
112.20(f)(3) for further information about the criteria for
``significant and substantial harm.'')
    Response Plan Certification. Under Sec.  112.20(e), the owner or
operator of a facility subject to SPCC requirements in 40 CFR part 112
but that does not meet the ``substantial harm'' criteria in Sec.
112.20(f)(1) must complete and maintain at the facility the
certification form contained in Appendix C to part 112.
    Response Plan Preparation. Under Sec.  112.20(a) or (b), the owner
or operator of a facility that meets the ``substantial harm'' criteria
in Sec.  112.20(f)(1) must prepare and submit to the EPA Regional
Administrator an FRP following Sec.  112.20(h). Such a facility may be
a newly constructed facility or may be an existing facility that meets
paragraph (f)(1) as a result of a planned change (paragraph
(a)(2)(iii)) or an unplanned change (paragraph (a)(2)(iv)) in facility
characteristics. Under paragraph (c), the owner or operator may be
required to amend the FRP.
    Response Plan Maintenance. Under Sec.  112.20(g), the owner or
operator must periodically review the FRP to ensure consistency with
the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
and Area Contingency Plans. Under Sec.  112.20(d), the facility owner
or operator must revise and resubmit revised portions of the FRP after
material changes at the facility. FRP changes that do not result in a
material change in response capabilities shall be provided to the
Regional Administrator as they occur. Training and periodic drills and
exercises are required to test the effectiveness of the FRP and are
required under Sec.  112.21.
    Recordkeeping. Under Sec.  112.20(e), an owner or operator who
determines that the FRP requirements do not apply must certify and
retain a record of this determination. An owner or operator who is
subject to the requirements must keep the FRP at the facility (Sec.
112.20(a)), keep updates to the FRP (Sec.  112.20(d)(1) and (2)), and
log activities such as discharge prevention meetings, response
training, and drills and exercises (Sec.  112.20(h)(8)(iv)).
    Burden Statement. The average annual reporting and recordkeeping
burdens for this collection of information to a newly regulated
facility for which an FRP is not required (i.e., facility where the
owner or operator certifies that the facility does not meet the
``substantial harm'' criteria) are estimated at 0.4 hours per year. The
average annual reporting and recordkeeping burdens to a newly regulated
facility for which an FRP is required (i.e., first-year costs for plan
development) are estimated at 99.7 hours per year. The average annual
reporting and recordkeeping burdens to a facility for which the owner
or operator is maintaining an FRP (i.e., subsequent year costs for
annual plan maintenance) are estimated at 240.1 hours. Burden means 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. This includes the time needed to review
instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and
systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and
providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and requirements which have
subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a
collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the
collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by
this action are a subset of facilities that are required to have a
spill prevention, control, and countermeasure (SPCC) plan under the Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation (40 CFR part 112).
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 22,574.
    Frequency of Response: Less than once a year.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 432,627.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $17,427,828 includes $29,483
annualized capital costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 202,367 hours in
the total estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of
Approved ICR Burdens. This decrease reflects EPA's current inventory of
facilities that have submitted and are maintaining an FRP as per 40 CFR
part 112. While there have been no changes in the regulation that
affected the per-facility regulatory burden, the number of facilities
currently subject to FRP requirements is lower than had been estimated
for the current ICR, resulting in a lower aggregate burden.

    Dated: November 14, 2007.
Richard T. Westlund,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E7-22756 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: November 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 229)]
[Notices]
[Page 74028-74029]
[DOCID:fr30no10-65]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP11-31-000; PF10-16-000

Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Application

November 23, 2010.
    Take notice that on November 12, 2010, Transcontinental Gas
Pipeline Company, LLC (Transco), 2800 Post Oak Boulevard, Houston,
Texas 77056-6106, filed an application in Docket No. CP11-31-000
pursuant to sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and
Part 157(A) of the Commission's regulations for a certificate of public
convenience and necessity authorizing Transco to construct and operate
its Mid-Atlantic Connector Expansion Project. This expansion project
will provide 142,000 dekatherms per day (Dth/d) of incremental firm
transportation service to Virginia Power Services Energy Corp. Inc.,
and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (MAC Shippers). Specifically,
Transco proposes to construct approximately 2.78 miles of new pipeline
looping facilities and replacement pipeline facilities on Transco's
existing mainline, 18,950 horsepower of additional compression at two
existing compressor stations, and construction or modification of
above-ground facilities. The project will also involve the retirement
of four compressor units at Transco's existing Compressor Station 175
in Fluvanna County, Virginia and abandonment in place of approximately
0.12 miles of Mainline B pipeline in Fairfax County, Virginia. Transco
seeks authorization under NGA section 7(b) and Part 157 of the
Commission's regulations for the abandonment of these facilities. The
application is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection. This filing is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for
TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Bela
Patel, Regulatory Analyst, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, P.O.
Box 1396, Houston, TX, 77251-1396, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>
(telephone).
    Transco states that by letter dated April 23, 2010, in Docket No.
PF10-16-000, the Commission's Office of Energy Projects granted
Transco's April 15, 2010, request to utilize the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) Pre-Filing Process for the Projects. Transco has also
submitted an applicant-prepared Draft Environmental Assessment that was
prepared during the Pre-Filing Process that was included with this
application. Now, as of the filing of this application on November 12,
2010, the NEPA Pre-Filing Process for this project has ended. From this
time forward, this proceeding will be conducted in Docket No. CP11-31-
000, as noted in the caption of this notice.

    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) 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 EA for this
proposal. The filing of the 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.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: December 14, 2010.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-30153 Filed 11-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MEMORANDUM

TO:	Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

FROM:	TJ Finseth and Danielle Lewis, ERG

DATE:	January 29, 2013

SUBJECT:	Flue Gas Desulfurization Future Profile Sensitivity Analysis

ERG is providing technical support to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Water, Engineering and Analysis Division (EAD) for development of effluent limitations guidelines and standards (ELGs) for the Steam Electric Power Generating Industry. As part of this technical support, EPA, with support from ERG, estimated compliance costs and baseline and post-compliance loadings for all plants identified as currently discharging FGD wastewater. The analyses and the conclusions that EPA presented in the proposed rule (e.g., compliance costs, pollutant loadings, economic achievability) reflect wastestreams generated by air pollution controls that will likely be in operation at plants at the time EPA takes final action on this rulemaking. However, EPA recognizes that some recently promulgated Clean Air Act requirements may lead to additional air pollution controls (and resulting wastestreams) at existing plants beyond this date. In an effort to take these potential changes into account, EPA conducted a sensitivity analysis that forecasts future installations of air pollution controls through 2020 and estimated the associated costs of complying with the proposed regulatory requirements for the wastewater that may result from the forecasted air pollution control installations. This memorandum discusses the sensitivity analysis EPA performed to assess how the forecasted future installations of FGD systems may affect the estimated costs and pollutant removals for the proposed ELGs.
EPA has two primary data sources upon which to predict future air pollution control installations: 1) Integrated Planning Model projections for the final Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) rule; and 2) responses to EPA's Questionnaire for the Steam Electric Power Generating Effluent Guidelines (Steam Electric Survey). At the time EPA promulgated the MATS rule in 2011, it projected air pollution control retrofits using Integrated Planning Model (IPM) modeling (which also included projected retrofits associated with the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) and other state and federal requirements). To support the ELG rulemaking, EPA's Steam Electric Survey asked the industry to report plans for installing certain new air pollution controls at facilities through the year 2020. EPA has no reason to conclude that either the IPM FGD projections or the survey responses are more accurate than the other. In fact, both of these sources may overstate actual installations. Prior to MATS becoming final, many plant owners and operators assumed that wet scrubbers would be the only technology available to meet emissions limits for acid gases. However, as EPA gathered and published additional data on facility emission rates (which informed how the Agency set the standards), and as stakeholders researched and published additional information on the performance of less capital-intensive control technologies such as dry sorbent injection, it has become clear that many facilities will find it more cost-effective to forgo wet scrubbers in favor of other emission reduction strategies. Furthermore, major economic variables such as electricity demand and natural gas prices have changed substantially since the market conditions prevalent when respondents were answering the survey in 2010. For example, it is possible that a facility originally indicating an expectation in the Steam Electric Survey to install a wet scrubber by 2020 may now find itself no longer competitive in the updated marketplace with substantially lower natural gas prices and lower electricity demand growth than previously expected. Consequently, the facility may elect to retire and thereby neutralize the previously reported intent to install a wet FGD system. Nevertheless, these two sources remain the best available information EPA has with which to estimate future predictions.
As a first step in conducting the sensitivity analysis, EPA compared the projections from the two sources. This comparison demonstrated that the IPM projections for the MATS Policy Case and the Steam Electric Survey responses are consistent at the aggregate level. Furthermore, in a very large part, both the survey and IPM identify the same generating units as being wet-scrubbed, either currently or in the future (the two sources are in agreement for approximately 94 percent of the wet scrubbed units). The two sources also predict similar wet-scrubbed generating capacities on an industry level. In the very few cases where there are differences between the two sources, the difference is primarily due to the expected variation at a unit-level (e.g., IPM model predicts wet FGD at unit A and dry FGD at unit B, but instead the survey responses report wet FGD at unit B and dry FGD at unit A). Another difference between the MATS IPM estimates and the industry survey estimates is that, in a very few cases, the IPM results predict that certain plants would retire (and therefore would not install wet scrubbers). In conducting the analyses for the ELGs, EPA made the conservative assumption (i.e., one that would tend to overestimate costs, if anything) that a plant would still be in operation in 2020 unless the plant has formally announced that it would close by then. The comparison of the IPM FGD projections and the Steam Electric Survey are included in document titled "Comparison of Current Industry Profile of IPM Projections" (DCN SE00818).
EPA developed a conservative upper-bound estimate of future FGD installations by combining the information from both sources to develop its "future steam profile." By this, EPA means it combined any source that reported or projected a wet FGD into one "future steam profile." Clearly, this "future steam profile" is conservative because it reflects more wet FGDs than are anticipated to actually be installed  -  by aggregating the IPM projections and the Steam Electric Survey responses it results in a total number of wet FGD systems and wet-scrubbed capacity that is greater than predicted by either of those individual sources. EPA identified twenty-one "future steam profile" plants based on only the IPM forecast estimates. Using both IPM projections and the Steam Electric Survey, EPA identified a complete "future steam profile" of twenty-nine plants that may install a wet FGD system after EPA promulgates the final ELGs.
For each plant identified as having a future wet FGD system in the "future steam profile," EPA estimated the costs for these plants to install the FGD treatment technology options considered for the proposed rule. To estimate the costs, EPA first determined the wastewater flow rate associated with the new wet FGD system. EPA determined the flow rate by either using projected flow rates provided in the Steam Electric Survey, or by using the methodology EPA developed for planned FGD systems that did not report FGD wastewater flow rate, described in EPA's Incremental Costs and Pollutant Removals for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category. EPA also evaluated the level of FGD wastewater treatment that would be installed at each plant in the "future steam profile."  The Steam Electric Survey requested each plant to describe the treatment technology that they planned to use to treat the wastewater from the planned FGD system. EPA categorized these proposed treatment systems as either a settling pond or chemical precipitation system based on the survey responses. For the planned FGD systems identified by only the IPM projection (i.e., no survey data available regarding the future installation), EPA categorized the system as a settling pond unless the plant already has a currently operating FGD system. For these IPM-identified plants that already operate at least one wet FGD system, EPA assumed that the new wastewater treatment system would be similar to the FGD treatment system already operating at the plant. EPA used the FGD wastewater flow and treatment-in-place data for each plant in the "future steam profile" to estimate the pre-tax engineering compliance cost for each technology option for the proposed rule. These costs are presented in Table 1.
EPA compared the compliance costs for the "future steam profile" to the costs for the current profile.  EPA determined that even under this conservative analysis that would overestimate costs, incorporating the "future steam profile" into the ELG analyses would increase the costs of the proposed rule by no more than 10 to 15 percent. Table 2 presents the total annualized costs of compliance to society for Regulatory Options 3 and 4, for both the "current steam profile" and the "future steam profile." Even assuming these higher costs, EPA finds that these additional costs are economically achievable.
EPA also estimated the pollutant loadings associated with the projected wastewater discharges from the "future steam profile" plants. EPA used the FGD wastewater flow and treatment-in-place data described above to evaluate baseline loadings and post-compliance loadings for each FGD treatment technology option. Table 3 presents the estimated baseline and post-compliance loadings for the "future steam profile." Loadings from the "future steam profile" plants would increase the total industry baseline loadings by approximately seven percent.
EPA calculated the pollutant removals that would be realized by these "future steam profile" plants complying with each of the FGD treatment technology options. Pollutant removals are presented in Table 4. Accounting for pollutant removals from the "future steam profile" plants would increase total industry pollutant removals by seven percent for the preferred regulatory options. See DCN SE01756 for the complete plant-level loadings output, including baseline and post-compliance loadings.
Using the baseline loadings discussed above, EPA conducted an environmental assessment (EA) analysis to determine if the additional baseline loadings from "future steam profile" plants would result in additional water quality exceedances. The EA analysis showed that water quality exceedances would increase for the evaluated criteria by between zero and ten percent. The freshwater national recommended water quality criteria are most affected by the increased pollutant loadings with exceedances increasing by ten percent. Other evaluated criteria for cancer risks, ecological health, and other national recommended water quality criteria would increase zero to five percent. While the "future steam profile" increases the number of baseline exceedances (i.e., those exceedances prior to implementation of revised ELGs), EPA expects most of these additional exceedances would go away under the preferred options for the proposed rule, which would also result in increased benefits associated with the proposed rule.
EPA notes that subsequent to its analysis, the CSAPR was vacated by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. EPA will continue to assess the potential impacts that changes to air pollution regulations may have on future installations of wet FGD systems. For the purpose of FGD wastewater analyses for this rulemaking, EPA has made a conservative assumption that all of the previously projected wet scrubber additions in the CSAPR-inclusive baseline (which also included MATS, state rules, consent decrees, etc.) would continue to be built, and that discharges from those additional wet scrubbers would therefore be subject to the proposed revisions to the ELGs.
Table 1. Estimated Compliance Cost for the "Current Steam Profile" and "Future Steam Profile"
                                 Cost Element
                          "Current Steam Profile"
            "Future Steam Profile"  -  Based on IPM Projection
"Future Steam Profile"  -  Based on Combined IPM and Steam Electric Survey Projection
One-Stage Chemical Precipitation Costs
   Total Capital Cost
$1,450,000,000
$1,600,000,000
$1,650,000,000
   Total O&M Cost
$194,000,000
$215,000,000
$221,000,000
One-Stage Chemical Precipitation with Biological Treatment Costs
   Total Capital Cost
$2,500,000,000
$2,770,000,000
$2,850,000,000
   Total O&M Cost
$257,000,000
$285,000,000
$293,000,000
One-Stage Chemical Precipitation with Vapor-Compression Evaporation Costs
   Total Capital Cost
$6,240,000,000
$6,970,000,000
$7,160,000,000
   Total O&M Cost
$1,030,000,000
$1,120,000,000
$1,150,000,000
Note: Values rounded to three significant figures.
Note: Values presented in the "Future Steam Profile" columns represent the entire industry in the future, including the "current steam profile." To obtain values associated with just the future profile generating units (i.e., excluding the currently operating units), subtract the "Current Steam Profile" from the "Future Steam Profile."

Table 2. Total Annualized Social Costs for the "Current Steam Profile" and "Future Steam Profile" for Regulatory Options 3 and 4
                               Regulatory Option
                          "Current Steam Profile"
            "Future Steam Profile"  -  Based on IPM Projection
"Future Steam Profile"  -  Based on Combined IPM and Steam Electric Survey Projection
                                       3
$572,000,000
$613,000,000
$625,000,000
                                       4
$1,380,000,000
$1,420,000,000
$1,430,000,000
Note: Assumes a 3 percent discount rate.
Note: Values presented in the "Future Steam Profile" columns represent the entire industry in the future, including the "current steam profile." To obtain values associated with just the future profile generating units (i.e., excluding the currently operating units), subtract the "Current Steam Profile" from the "Future Steam Profile."

Table 3. Estimated Pollutant Loadings for the "Current Steam Profile" and "Future Steam Profile"
                               Technology Option
                          "Current Steam Profile"
            "Future Steam Profile"  -  Based on IPM Projection
"Future Steam Profile"  -  Based on Combined IPM and Steam Electric Survey Projection

                                  Pounds/Year
                                   TWPE/Year
                                  Pounds/Year
                                   TWPE/Year
                                  Pounds/Year
                                   TWPE/Year
Baseline
                                 3,240,000,000
3,030,000
                                 3,420,000,000
3,200,000
                                 3,470,000,000
3,260,000
Chemical Precipitation Option
3,650,000,000[a]
1,490,000
3,890,000,000[a]
1,590,000
3,960,000,000
1,620,000
Chemical Precipitation with Biological Treatment Option
2,080,000,000
411,000
2,220,000,000
438,000
2,250,000,000
444,000
Chemical Precipitation with Vapor-Compression Evaporation Option
13,500,000
36,400
14,200,000
38,600
14,400,000
39,100
Note: Values rounded to three significant figures.
Note: Values presented in the "Future Steam Profile" columns represent the entire industry in the future, including the "current steam profile." To obtain values associated with just the future profile generating units (i.e., excluding the currently operating units), subtract the "Current Steam Profile" from the "Future Steam Profile."
a  -  Characterization data used to estimate pollutant concentrations for baseline FGD surface impoundments does not include concentration data for ammonia, hexavalent chromium, and TKN. These pollutants are included in the post-compliance loadings and as a result appear to increase in concentration from baseline to technology option.

Table 4. Estimated Loadings Removals for the "Future Steam Profile"
                               Technology Option
                          "Current Steam Profile"
            "Future Steam Profile"  -  Based on IPM Projection
"Future Steam Profile"  -  Based on Combined IPM and Steam Electric Survey Projection

                                  Pounds/Year
                                   TWPE/Year
                                  Pounds/Year
                                   TWPE/Year
                                  Pounds/Year
                                   TWPE/Year
Reduction:
Baseline -> Chemical Precipitation Option
-417,000,000[a]
1,530,000
-472,000,000[a]
1,610,000
-492,000,000
1,640,000
Reduction:
Baseline -> Chemical Precipitation with Biological Treatment Option
1,160,000,000
2,620,000
1,210,000,000
2,760,000
1,220,000,000
2,810,000
Reduction:
Baseline -> Chemical Precipitation with Vapor-Compression Evaporation Option
3,220,000,000
2,990,000
3,410,000,000
3,160,000
3,450,000,000
3,220,000
Note: Values rounded to three significant figures.
Note: Values presented in the "Future Steam Profile" columns represent the entire industry in the future, including the "current steam profile." To obtain values associated with just the future profile generating units (i.e., excluding the currently operating units), subtract the "Current Steam Profile" from the "Future Steam Profile."
a  -  Characterization data used to estimate pollutant concentrations for baseline FGD surface impoundments does not include concentration data for ammonia, hexavalent chromium, and TKN. These pollutants are included in the post-compliance loadings and as a result appear to increase in concentration from baseline to technology option.