Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0568-0009
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Fees for Water Infrastructure Project Applications Under Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act
Posted Date: 2017-06-28T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 28, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29242-29246]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13438]

[[Page 29242]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 35

[EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0568; FRL-9964-19-OW]
RIN 2040-AF64

Fees for Water Infrastructure Project Applications Under WIFIA

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: With this rule EPA establishes fees related to the provision 
of federal credit assistance under Subtitle C of the Water Resources 
Reform and Development Act of 2014 (WRRDA), which is referred to as the 
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 2014 (WIFIA). WIFIA 
authorizes EPA to provide secured (direct) loans and loan guarantees to 
eligible water infrastructure projects and to charge fees to recover 
all or a portion of the Agency's cost of providing credit assistance 
and the costs of retaining expert firms, including financial, 
engineering, and legal services, in the field of municipal and project 
finance to assist in the underwriting and servicing of Federal credit 
instruments.

DATES: Effective date: June 28, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jordan Dorfman, Water Infrastructure 
Division, Office of Wastewater Management, Mail Code 4201C, 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202)564-0614; email address: 
dorfman.jordan@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action only applies to entities seeking credit assistance 
under the WIFIA program for the development and construction of a water 
infrastructure project. EPA has published an interim final rule to 
implement this new credit assistance program. A list of eligible 
entities and eligible projects can be found in the Interim Final Rule 
entitled, ``Credit Assistance for Water Infrastructure Projects.'' This 
interim final rule is available at Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0569, 
at http://www.regulations.gov.

B. What action is the Agency taking?

    EPA is establishing fees associated with the provision of federal 
credit assistance under the WIFIA program. WIFIA authorizes EPA to 
provide secured (direct) loans and loan guarantees to eligible water 
infrastructure projects. EPA has published an Interim Final Rule 
entitled, ``Credit Assistance for Water Infrastructure Projects'' to 
establish procedures for the implementation of the WIFIA Program. As 
specified under 33 U.S.C. 3908(b)(7), 3909(b), and 3909(c)(3), Congress 
in WIFIA authorizes EPA to charge fees to recover all or a portion of 
the Agency's cost of providing credit assistance and the costs of 
retaining expert firms, including financial, engineering, and legal 
services, in the field of municipal and project finance to assist in 
the underwriting and servicing of Federal credit instruments. EPA is 
establishing an application fee, credit processing fee, servicing fee, 
optional supplemental fee, and fee for extraordinary expenses to cover 
these costs to the extent not covered by congressional appropriations.

C. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    This final rule is issued under the authority of 33 U.S.C. 
3908(b)(7), 3909(b), 3909(c)(3), and 3911.

D. What fees are being established?

    In the Interim Final Rule entitled, ``Credit Assistance for Water 
Infrastructure Projects,'' EPA established an application process for 
WIFIA credit assistance that is divided into two steps. The first step 
requires the submission of a letter of interest. No fees are 
established for the letter of interest step. Projects selected to 
continue in the application process will then be invited to submit an 
application at which time the application fee must be paid. For this 
second step, EPA will only select those projects that it expects might 
reasonably proceed to closing. For more information on this process, 
please refer to the WIFIA Implementation Rule at 40 CFR part 35 subpart 
Q or in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0569, at http://www.regulations.gov. Consequently, EPA anticipates that the fees 
established in this rule will apply only to projects EPA expects are 
likely to proceed to closing. Detailed application information is 
contained in a program guide developed by EPA and posted on the WIFIA 
Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/wifia. This two-step process limits the 
time, cost, and effort required to be expended by prospective borrowers 
prior to having a reasonable expectation of funding by WIFIA.
    As described in greater detail below, the types of fees EPA is 
establishing are consistent with other Federal Credit programs. In 
particular, the WIFIA program was designed by Congress to resemble the 
Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act program, 
commonly known as TIFIA. Accordingly, to the extent practicable, the 
WIFIA program has been crafted by EPA to be implemented in a similar 
manner as the Department of Transportation implements the TIFIA 
program. The rationale for establishing these fees is to cover EPA's 
costs of administering the program to the extent these costs are not 
covered by congressional appropriations. To effectively administer the 
program, EPA will incur both internal administrative costs (staffing, 
program support contracts, and other costs) as well as the costs of 
retaining expert firms, including legal, engineering, and financial 
services, in the field of municipal and project finance, to assist in 
the underwriting of the Federal credit instrument.
    The Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act of 2016, 
Pub. L. 114-332, in section 5008(c), amended WIFIA to allow, at the 
request of an applicant, the financing of fees as part of the loan. 
While not reflected in this rule, the ability to finance fees as part 
of a WIFIA loan is an option available to applicants. EPA will publish 
additional information or guidance, as necessary, on its Web site at: 
http://www.epa.gov/wifia.
Application Fee
    EPA will require a non-refundable application fee for each project 
that is invited to submit an application (second step following 
submission of letter of interest) for credit assistance under WIFIA. 
The application fee will be due upon submission of the application. For 
fiscal year 2017, the application fee is $25,000 for applications for 
projects serving small communities (population of not more than 25,000 
people). For all other project applications, the application fee is 
$100,000. These application fees represent an amount equal to 0.5 
percent of the minimum threshold project cost ($5 million for small 
communities and $20 million for larger communities, 33 U.S.C. 
3907(a)(2)), which EPA considers to be sufficient to begin the 
financial, engineering, and legal analysis of the project while 
providing assurance that the applicant intends to proceed to closing, 
and therefore costs incurred by EPA may be recovered. EPA will 
undertake significant costs to evaluate applications and hire expert 
firms for underwriting and considers an application fee essential for 
applicants

[[Page 29243]]

to show good faith in applying for assistance, to help cover the 
agency's administrative costs in processing applications, and to ensure 
effective administration of the program. These fees will be required at 
the time of submission of the application, and the application will not 
be reviewed without fee payment. Because EPA will only invite projects 
to submit an application and application fee if the project is 
reasonably expected to proceed to closing, no applicant would pay a fee 
without a reasonable expectation that the project could receive 
funding.
    For fiscal years 2018 and beyond, EPA may need to adjust the amount 
of the application fee based on early program implementation 
experience. A change in the application fee will not change the total 
fees charged, only the initial fee which is credited to the final fee 
at closing, or in the event that the project does not proceed to 
closing, at withdrawal or denial of the application.
Credit Processing Fee
    EPA will require a credit processing fee at the time of closing, or 
in the event that the project does not proceed to closing, e.g., if the 
application is withdrawn or denied, for projects selected to submit an 
application. The proceeds of any such fees will be used to pay the 
remaining portion of EPA's cost of providing credit assistance and the 
costs of retaining expert firms, including legal, engineering, and 
financial services, in the field of municipal and project finance to 
assist in the underwriting of the Federal credit instrument. The 
initial application fee described above will be credited to the credit 
processing fee. For example, if the total credit processing fee is 
$400,000 and the applicant pays $100,000 with the application, $300,000 
will be due at closing, or in the event that the project does not 
proceed to closing, e.g., if the application is withdrawn or denied. 
The total credit processing fee for each project will be set based on 
the costs incurred by EPA for that specific project. Due to the nature 
of credit processing, the amount is expected to vary among applicants. 
This variation is a reflection of the amount of time taken to process a 
loan, which may not directly correlate with the size of the loan. More 
complicated transactions with lengthy negotiations will have higher 
costs. EPA estimates these costs could be in the range of approximately 
$350,000-$700,000 per project, broken down as follows:
     Financial advisor: $100,000 to $250,000 per project;
     Law firm: $200,000 to $350,000 per project; and
     Engineering firm: $50,000 to $100,000 per project.
    EPA may waive a portion of the fee charged to an applicant in the 
event that Congress appropriates resources adequate to pay for EPA's 
cost of administering the WIFIA program as well as additional funding 
to pay for loan processing. WIFIA currently provides that EPA may 
retain $2.2 million annually from funds appropriated to the program to 
pay for the administration of the program, including internal 
administrative costs of staffing, program support contracts (separate 
from the expert services described previously), and other internal 
administrative needs.
    To the extent Congress appropriates administrative funds in excess 
of those needed for EPA's internal administrative costs, EPA may use 
the remaining available administrative allowance (less any amount 
needed for future years' administration) to reduce fees. EPA will 
allocate additional administrative funds by reducing fees by an equal 
amount per loan for those projects that serve a population with a 
median household income that is 80 percent or less of the state median 
household income. If additional administrative funds remain, EPA will 
reduce fees by an equal amount per loan for those projects serving a 
population of not more than 25,000. If additional administrative funds 
still remain, EPA will reduce fees by an equal amount for each 
remaining loan.
Servicing Fee
    EPA will charge an annual servicing fee during repayment of the 
loan. The fee will be dependent on the costs of servicing the credit 
instrument (e.g. collecting and processing loan principal and interest 
payments) as determined by the Administrator. Such fees will be set at 
a level to enable the Agency to recover all or a portion of the costs 
to the Federal Government of servicing WIFIA credit instruments and 
will be determined at the time of closing. EPA expects such fees to 
range from $12,000 to $15,000 annually per loan.
Optional Supplemental Fee
    EPA may charge a fee, with agreement of the applicant, to reduce 
the budget authority required to fund the credit instrument. Although 
EPA considers it unlikely that a scenario will arise under which it 
would assess such a fee, the Agency sees benefit in establishing the 
flexibility to allow an applicant to ``buy down'' the budget authority 
required for the credit instrument. This could allow an applicant to 
proceed to closing in the event that sufficient budget authority would 
not otherwise be available. Such a fee will only be charged upon 
agreement by an applicant.
Extraordinary Expenses Fee
    EPA may charge a fee to cover extraordinary expenses in the event 
that a borrower experiences difficulty relating to technical, 
financial, or legal matters or other events (e.g., engineering failure 
or financial workouts) that require EPA to incur time or expenses 
beyond standard monitoring. EPA will be entitled to payment in full 
from the borrower of additional fees in an amount determined by EPA and 
of related fees and expenses of its independent consultants and outside 
counsel, that are incurred directly by EPA and not paid directly by the 
borrower.

III. Summary of Public Comments and EPA Responses

    The Agency received comments from eight commenters on the proposed 
rule. The comments, including the Agency's responses, are included in 
the docket for this rulemaking. Responses to the most significant 
comments are included in this section. This section addresses comments 
regarding the rationale used to establish the application fee amount 
and the method by which EPA will reduce fees in the event additional 
sufficient resources are available for such a purpose.

A. Rationale for Establishing Application Fee

    With respect to the establishment of the application fee, and the 
lower fee level set for projects serving small communities of under 
25,000, one commenter suggested that EPA establish more than two levels 
for the application fee. The commenter stated that as proposed, the 
application fee for a community of 50,000 would be the same as for a 
large metropolitan area. The commenter also suggested an alternative to 
setting fee levels by population by basing the fee levels on project 
size.
    EPA appreciates the commenters suggestions but will not adopt the 
suggestions. The application fee was established at $100,000 in order 
to allow the Agency to begin the financial and legal analysis of the 
project while providing assurance that the applicant intends to proceed 
to closing, and therefore costs incurred by the Agency may be 
recovered. The reduced fee was established based on the statutory 
allowance for project serving communities of under 25,000 to apply for 
loans where total eligible costs are at

[[Page 29244]]

least $5 million, as opposed to the minimum of $20 million required of 
all other applicants. The reduced application fee allows small 
communities with fewer resources to begin the application process. 
Creating a reduced application fee for such communities logically 
follows the statutory allowance for reduced project size for such 
communities. Setting application fee levels by project size does not 
correlate to the ability of an applicant to pay the application fee. 
Small communities with large projects would struggle to pay a much 
higher application fee, while large metropolitan areas that can easily 
pay the application fee might see a reduced fee.
    Another commenter stated that in order to not discourage 
applications for projects serving low-income communities, WIFIA 
application fees should be waivable or greatly reduced for those 
projects that serve a population with a median household income that is 
at least 80 percent or less of the state median household income. The 
commenter proposes that economically stressed communities regardless of 
size be eligible for application fee waivers or substantial application 
fee reduction.
    EPA appreciates the commenters proposal, but will not adopt the 
proposal. As previously stated, the application fee was established at 
$100,000 in order to allow the Agency to begin the financial and legal 
analysis of the project while providing assurance that the applicant 
intends to proceed to closing, and therefore costs incurred by the 
Agency may be recovered. A reduction or waiver of the application fee 
would remove the incentive for communities to proceed to closing by 
eliminating the risk of losing the application fee. EPA expects fewer 
small community applicants entitled to the reduced fee than applicants 
that can show economic stress. If a significant number of applicants 
receive an application fee waiver or reduction, EPA will be unable to 
begin the financial and legal analysis required for each project 
applicant due to limited resources. As previously stated, if sufficient 
resources exist for EPA to reduce fees, such resources will be used to 
reduce the fees of applicants that serve a population with a median 
household income that is at least 80 percent or less of the state 
median household income.

B. Methodology To Reduce Fees in the Event Additional Sufficient 
Resources Are Available

    In paragraph (f) of the final rule language, EPA has the authority 
to reduce the credit processing fee established under paragraph (c), to 
the extent that Congress appropriates funds in any given year beyond 
those sufficient to cover internal administrative costs. In the 
proposed rule, EPA proposed three alternative methods by which the 
Agency could allocate additional administrative funds to reduce fees:
     By reducing fees by an equal amount per loan in the 
relevant year;
     By reducing fees by an equal amount per loan for those 
projects serving a population of not more than 25,000; or
     By reducing fees by an equal amount per loan for those 
projects that serve a population with a median household income that is 
80 percent or less of the state median household income.
    Alternatively, EPA could allocate such fee reductions through a 
combination of these three methods. EPA requested comment on each of 
these potential options or other potential approaches. EPA received 
three comments related to this request.
    The first commenter suggested that a combination of the three 
methods should be used and that EPA should first reduce or eliminate 
credit processing fees charged to applicants for projects that 
primarily serve a population with a median household income of 80 
percent or less of the state median household income. The commenter's 
rationale is that this approach will target fee relief toward 
communities that are likely facing some of the most significant water 
affordability challenges, and whose residents could most benefit from 
both low-cost financing and fee relief. The commenter suggested that 
any remaining funding available after eliminating credit processing 
fees in these low-income communities should be used to reduce the 
credit processing fees for all of that year's remaining applicants by a 
pro-rata percentage of the total credit processing fees paid by the 
applicant. Any forgiveness of credit processing fees should be 
calculated on the balance of these fees after the credit for payment of 
an application fee has been applied.
    The second commenter suggested that EPA should first reduce the 
credit processing fee for communities for whom the fees would impose 
the greatest financial hardship. The commenter stated that EPA should 
reduce applicant fees by an equal amount per loan for those projects 
that serve a population with a median household income that is 80 
percent or less of the state median household income. Once fees have 
been reduced for hardship communities, any remaining funds should be 
used to reduce credit processing fees by an equal amount per loan for 
projects serving communities with populations of under 25,000.
    The third commenter suggested that EPA reduce fees on a pro-rata 
share based on loan size.
    EPA appreciates the comments received on this important issue and 
agrees with the first and second commenters that a combination of 
methods should be used to reduce the credit processing fees of 
applicants to the extent that Congress appropriates funds in any given 
year beyond those sufficient to cover internal administrative costs. 
The Agency agrees that the most important use of these additional funds 
is to reduce the impact of the fees on the neediest applicants. In 
order to reduce the impact of fees on those applicants most in need, 
EPA will reduce the credit processing fee, to the extent possible, by 
an equal amount per loan, on a dollar basis, for those projects that 
serve a population with a median household income that is 80 percent or 
less of the state median household income. If funds remain, EPA will 
then reduce fees by an equal amount per loan, on a dollar basis, for 
those projects serving a population of not more than 25,000. If funds 
still remain, EPA will reduce fees by an equal amount per loan, on a 
dollar basis, for all remaining loans. EPA cannot reduce fees as a 
percentage of the credit processing fee paid by an applicant because 
the total credit processing fee for each loan will not be known until 
loan closing.
    EPA appreciates the third commenter's suggestion, but will not 
adopt the suggestion. The credit processing fee is not determined by 
loan size. The estimated range of the credit processing fee is based on 
the complexity of the underlying transaction and the difficulty or 
length of time of negotiations. Therefore, between two applicants, one 
with a greater loan size may have a smaller fee. Providing greater 
relief to applicants charged a smaller fee, irrespective of need, does 
not align with the Agency's desire to provide relief to the neediest 
applicants.

[[Page 29245]]

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the PRA because this rule merely establishes fees associated with a 
previously promulgated rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In 
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant 
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no 
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small 
entities subject to the rule. Participation in the WIFIA loan program 
is voluntary. While many projects serving small communities are 
potentially eligible for WIFIA loans, we anticipate only one to two 
small community applications per year as small communities have access 
to below market rate loans and other subsidies through the Clean Water 
State Revolving Fund, the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, and 
other funding sources. A small community will only apply and undertake 
a WIFIA loan in cases where the WIFIA loan provides positive economic 
benefits relative to other potential funding sources, based upon 
consideration of relevant economic factors, including loan rate, loan 
terms, fees and other transaction costs. I have therefore concluded 
that this action will have no net regulatory burden for all directly 
regulated small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or 
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes 
no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments or the 
private sector.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects 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.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. While a tribal government, or a consortium of 
tribal governments may apply for WIFIA credit assistance, this action 
does not have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, 
on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal Government and Indian tribes.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is 
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and 
because environmental health or safety risks are not addressed by this 
action.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is 
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution or use of energy. This rulemaking simply imposes fees 
required to apply for credit assistance; therefore, by itself, this 
rulemaking will not have any effect on the supply, distribution or use 
of energy.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 
February 16, 1994) because it does not establish an environmental 
health or safety standard.

K. National Environmental Policy Act

    Each project obtaining assistance under this program is required to 
adhere to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). This rulemaking simply imposes fees required to 
apply for credit assistance; therefore, by itself, this rulemaking will 
not have any effect on the quality of the environment.

L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule 
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of 
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 35

    Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
and Water finance.

    Dated: June 19, 2017.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR part 35 is 
amended as follows:

PART 35--STATE AND LOCAL ASSISTANCE

0
1. The authority citation for part 35 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.; 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 42 
U.S.C. 300f et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.; 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.; 
15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq.; Pub. L. 104-134, 
110 Stat. 1321, 1321-299 (1996); Pub. L. 105-65, 111 Stat. 1344, 
1373 (1997), 2 CFR 200.

0
2. Add Sec.  35.10080 to read as follows:

Sec.  35.10080  Fees.

    (a) Application fee. EPA will require a non-refundable application 
fee for each project applying for credit assistance under the WIFIA 
program. An application fee will be due upon submission of the complete 
application. For applications for projects serving small communities 
(population of not more than 25,000 people), this application fee will 
be $25,000. For all other applications, this application fee will be 
$100,000. The initial application fee will be credited to the credit 
processing fee required under paragraph (c) of this section.
    (b) Adjustment of application fee. For each application and 
approval cycle, EPA may adjust the amount of the application fee 
described in paragraph (a) of this section based on program 
implementation experience and cost expectations. EPA will publish this 
amount in each Federal Register solicitation for letters of interest.
    (c) Credit processing fee. Except as otherwise provided in 
paragraph (f) of this section, EPA will require an additional credit 
processing fee for projects selected to receive WIFIA assistance upon 
closing, or in the event that the project does not proceed to closing, 
e.g., if the application is

[[Page 29246]]

withdrawn or denied. The proceeds of any such fees will be used to pay 
the remaining portion of the Agency's cost of providing credit 
assistance and the costs of retaining expert firms, including 
financial, engineering, and legal services, in the field of municipal 
and project finance, to assist in the underwriting of the Federal 
credit instrument. All of, or a portion of, this fee may be waived.
    (d) Servicing fee. EPA will require borrowers to pay a servicing 
fee for each credit instrument approved for funding. Separate fees may 
apply for each type of credit instrument (e.g., a loan guarantee, a 
secured loan with a single disbursement, or a secured loan with 
multiple disbursements), depending on the costs of servicing the credit 
instrument as determined by the Administrator. Such fees will be set at 
a level sufficient to enable the EPA to recover all or a portion of the 
costs to the Federal Government of servicing WIFIA credit instruments.
    (e) Optional supplemental fee. If, in any given year, there is 
insufficient budget authority to fund the credit instrument for a 
qualified project that has been selected to receive assistance under 
WIFIA, EPA and the approved applicant may agree upon a supplemental fee 
to be paid by or on behalf of the approved applicant at the time of 
execution of the term sheet to reduce the subsidy cost of that project. 
No such fee may be included among eligible project costs.
    (f) Reduced fees. To the extent that Congress appropriates funds in 
any given year beyond those sufficient to cover internal administrative 
costs, EPA may utilize such appropriated funds to reduce fees that 
would otherwise be charged under paragraph (c) of this section.
    (g) Extraordinary expenses. EPA may require payment in full by the 
borrower of additional fees, in an amount determined by EPA, and of 
related fees and expenses of its independent consultants and outside 
counsel, to the extent that such fees and expenses are incurred 
directly by EPA and to the extent such third parties are not paid 
directly by the borrower, in the event that a borrower experiences 
difficulty relating to technical, financial, or legal matters or other 
events (e.g., engineering failure or financial workouts) which require 
EPA to incur time or expenses beyond standard monitoring.

[FR Doc. 2017-13438 Filed 6-27-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P