![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Findings of Significant Contribution and Rulemaking on Section 126; Petitions for Purposes of Reducing Interstate Ozone Transport, Technical Correction, and Notice of Availability of Additional Technical Documents
Related Material
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: March 3, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 41)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 10341-10350]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03mr99-27]
[[Page 10341]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
_______________________________________________________________________
40 CFR Part 52
Findings of Significant Contribution and Rulemaking on Section 126;
Petitions for Purposes of Reducing Interstate Ozone Transport,
Technical Correction, and Notice of Availability of Additional
Technical Documents; Proposed Rule
[[Page 10342]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[FRL-6305-9]
Findings of Significant Contribution and Rulemaking on Section
126; Petitions for Purposes of Reducing Interstate Ozone Transport,
Technical Correction, and Notice of Availability of Additional
Technical Documents
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPR), technical
correction, and notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with section 126 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA
is proposing action on recent requests from Maine and New Hampshire
which ask EPA to now make findings of significant contribution under
the 8-hour ozone standard regarding sources named in their August 1997
petitions. The EPA has previously proposed action on the petitions from
these States with respect to the 1-hour ozone standard as part of a
proposal on eight petitions that were submitted individually by eight
Northeastern States (63 FR 52213, September 30, 1998; and 63 FR 56292,
October 21, 1998). Today's action supplements that proposal.
These 8-hour petitions specifically request that EPA make a finding
that nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions from certain stationary
sources in other States significantly contribute to 8-hour ozone
nonattainment problems in the petitioning State. If EPA makes such a
finding of significant contribution, EPA is authorized to establish
Federal emissions limits for the sources.
In this SNPR, EPA is proposing to find that portions of the Maine
and New Hampshire petitions are approvable with respect to the 8-hour
standard based solely on technical considerations. The EPA is proposing
that the technically approvable portions of the petitions be deemed
granted or denied at certain later dates pending certain actions by the
States and EPA regarding State submittals in response to the final
NOX State implementation plan call (NOX SIP
call). The control requirements that would apply to sources in source
categories for which a final finding will ultimately be granted were
proposed in the October 21, 1998 notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR).
The EPA is also proposing to deny portions of the petitions with
respect to the 8-hour standard.
This SNPR also corrects inadvertent errors in Table II-1 and the
part 52 regulatory text in the October 21, 1998 NPR.
In addition, today's SNPR provides notice of the availability of
additional technical documents that have recently been placed in the
NOX SIP call docket.
The transport of ozone and its precursors is important because
ozone, which is a primary harmful component of urban smog, has long
been recognized, in both clinical and epidemiological research, to
adversely affect public health.
DATES: The comment period on this SNPR ends on April 11, 1999. Comments
must be postmarked by the last day of the comment period and sent
directly to the Docket Office listed in ADDRESSES (in duplicate form if
possible). A public hearing will be held on March 12, 1999 in
Washington, DC, if requested. Please refer to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
for additional information on the comment period and public hearing.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted to the Air and Radiation Docket
and Information Center (6102), Attention: Docket No. A-97-43, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW, room M-1500,
Washington, DC 20460, telephone (202) 260-7548. Comments and data may
also be submitted electronically by following the instructions under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION of this document. No confidential business
information (CBI) should be submitted through e-mail.
Documents relevant to this action are available for inspection at
the Docket Office, at the above address, between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30
p.m., Monday though Friday, excluding legal holidays. A reasonable
copying fee may be charged for copying.
The public hearing, if there is one, will be held at the EPA
Auditorium at 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC, 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions concerning today's SNPR
should be addressed to Carla Oldham, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division, MD-15,
Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711, telephone (919) 541-3347, email
atoldham.carla@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Hearing
The EPA will conduct a public hearing on the section 126 SNPR on
March 5, 1999 beginning at 11:00 a.m., if requested by March 1, 1999.
The EPA will not hold a hearing if one is not requested. Please check
EPA's webpage at http://www.epa.gov/airlinks on March 2, 1999 for the
announcement of whether the hearing will be held. If there is a
hearing, it will be held at the EPA Auditorium at 401 M Street SW,
Washington, DC, 20460. The metro stop is Waterfront, which is on the
green line. Persons planning to present oral testimony at the hearings
should notify JoAnn Allman, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division, MD-15,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone (919) 541-1815, email
allman.joann@epa.gov no later than March 1, 1999. Oral testimony will
be limited to 5 minutes each. Any member of the public may file a
written statement before, during, or by the close of the comment
period. Written statements (duplicate copies preferred) should be
submitted to Docket No. A-97-43 at the above address. The hearing
schedule, including lists of speakers, will also be posted on EPA's
webpage at http://www.epa.gov/airlinks prior to the hearing. A verbatim
transcript of the hearing, if held, and written statements will be made
available for copying during normal working hours at the Air and
Radiation Docket and Information Center at the above address.
Availability of Related Information
The official record for this rulemaking, as well as the public
version, has been established under docket number A-97-43 (including
comments and data submitted electronically as described below). A
public version of this record, including printed, paper versions of
electronic comments, which does not include any information claimed as
CBI, is available for inspection from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The official rulemaking
record is located at the address in ADDRESSES at the beginning of this
document. Electronic comments can be sent directly to EPA at: A-and-R-
Docket@epamail.epa.gov. Electronic comments must be submitted as an
ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of
encryption. Comments and data will also be accepted on disks in
WordPerfect in 5.1/6.1 file format or ASCII file format. All comments
and data in electronic form must be identified by the docket number A-
97-43. Electronic comments on this SNPR may be filed online at many
Federal Depository Libraries.
The EPA has issued a separate rule on NOX transport
entitled, ``Finding of Significant Contribution and Rulemaking for
Certain States in the Ozone Transport Assessment Group
[[Page 10343]]
Region for Purposes of Reducing Regional Transport of Ozone'' (63 FR
57357, October 27, 1998) (see notices included in the docket for this
rulemaking). The rulemaking docket for that rule (Docket No. A-96-56),
hereafter referred to as the NOX SIP call, contains
information and analyses that are relied upon in the section 126 NPR
and today's supplemental proposal on the Maine and New Hampshire
petitions. Documents II-L-01 and II-L-02 in the docket for today's
action describe which documents in the NOX SIP call docket
are included by reference. Documents related to the NOX SIP
call rulemaking are available for inspection in docket number A-96-56
at the address and times given above. In addition, the proposed
NOX SIP call and associated documents are located at http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/otagsip.html. Modeling and air quality assessment
information can be obtained in electronic form at http://
www.epa.gov.scram001/regmodcenter/t28.htm. Information related to the
budget development can be found at http://www.epa.gov/capi.
Additional information relevant to this SNPR concerning the Ozone
Transport Assessment Group (OTAG) is available on the web at http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/. If assistance is needed in accessing the system, call
the help desk at (919) 541-5384 in Research Triangle Park, NC.
Documents related to OTAG can be downloaded directly from OTAG's
webpage at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/otag. The OTAG's technical data are
located at http://www.iceis.mcnc.org/OTAGDC.
Outline
I. Background
A. Summary of Petitions
B. Rulemaking Schedule
II. Proposed Action on the 8-Hour Petitions
A. Technical Determinations
B. Action on Whether to Grant or Deny the 8-Hour Petitions
1. Portion of the Petitions for Which EPA is Proposing an
Affirmative Technical Determination
2. Portion of the Petitions for Which EPA is Proposing a Denial
C. Requirements for Sources for Which EPA Makes a Section 126(b)
Finding
III. Corrections and Clarifications to October 21, 1998 NPR
IV. Notice of Availability of Additional Technical Documents
V. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Impact Analysis
B. Impact on Small Entities
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
E. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
F. Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice
G. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental
Partnership
H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
I. Background
A. Summary of Petitions
In August 1997, New Hampshire, Maine, and six other Northeastern
States filed petitions under section 126 seeking to mitigate what they
described as significant transport of one of the main precursors of
ground-level ozone, NOX, across State boundaries. All of the
petitioning States directed their petitions at the 1-hour ozone
standard. Three of the States, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and
Vermont, also directed their petitions at the new 8-hour ozone
standard. In notices dated September 30, 1998 (63 FR 52213) and October
21, 1998 (63 FR 56292), EPA proposed action on the petitions. The
October 21, 1998 NPR contains the longer, more detailed version of the
proposal. Familiarity with that notice is assumed for purposes of
today's SNPR. In the NPR, EPA proposed action under the 1-hour and/or
the 8-hour standard as specifically requested in each State's petition.
At that time, the Maine and New Hampshire petitions were only directed
at the 1-hour standard. Therefore, EPA believed the Agency was not
authorized to evaluate impacts of the emissions of the named upwind
sources on 8-hour nonattainment problems in Maine and New Hampshire.
Maine 8-Hour Petition
On November 30, 1998, Maine requested that EPA make findings of
significant contribution under the 8-hour standard based on information
in its 1997 section 126 petition. Maine did not request any other
changes to its original petition. Therefore, the geographic scope of
the petition and the named sources and source categories to be
considered are the same for the 8-hour standard as the 1-hour standard.
The Maine petition identifies ``electric utilities and steam-
generating units having a heat input capacity of 250 mmBtu/hr or
greater'' that are located within 600 miles of Maine's ozone
nonattainment areas as significantly contributing to nonattainment and
maintenance problems in Maine. The geographic area covered by the Maine
petition includes all or parts of Connecticut, Delaware, District of
Columbia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, New Hampshire,
North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia,
and West Virginia.
The Maine petition requests that EPA establish an emissions
limitation of 0.15 lb/mmBtu for electric utilities and establish the
Ozone Transport Commission Memorandum of Understanding's (on
NOX reductions) level of control for steam generating units,
in a multistate cap-and-trade NOX market system.
New Hampshire Petition
On November 30, 1998, New Hampshire submitted a request that EPA
make findings of significant contribution with respect to the 8-hour
ozone standard based on information in its 1997 petition. New Hampshire
did not request any other changes in its original petition. Therefore,
the geographic scope of the petition and the named sources and source
categories to be considered are the same for the 8-hour standard as the
1-hour standard.
The New Hampshire section 126 petition identified ``fossil fuel-
fired indirect heat exchange combustion units and fossil fuel-fired
electric generating facilities which emit ten tons of NOX or
more per day'' that are located in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR)
States and OTAG Subregions 1-7 as significantly contributing to
nonattainment in, or interfering with maintenance by, New Hampshire.
The geographic area covered includes all or parts of Connecticut,
Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky,
Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, New
York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee,
Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.
The New Hampshire petition requests that EPA establish compliance
schedules and emissions limitations no less stringent than: (1) Phase
III of the Ozone Transport Commission Memorandum of Understanding on
NOX reductions; and/or (2) 85 percent reductions from the
projected 2007 baseline; and/or (3) an emission rate of 0.15 lb/mmBtu.
B. Rulemaking Schedule
Section 126(b) generally requires EPA to make the requested finding
or deny the petition within 60 days of receipt. It also requires EPA to
provide the opportunity for a public hearing for the petition. In
addition, EPA's action under section 126 is subject to the procedural
requirements of section 307(d) of the CAA. One of these requirements is
notice-and-comment rulemaking and
[[Page 10344]]
providing an opportunity for public hearing.
As discussed in Section I.E. of the NPR, on February 25, 1998, the
eight petitioning States filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of New York to compel EPA to take action on
the States' section 126 petitions that were submitted in August 1997
(State of Connecticut v. Browner, No. 98-1376). The EPA and the eight
States filed a proposed consent decree to establish the rulemaking
schedule. The court accepted a modified version of the consent decree
on October 26, 1998.
The schedule in the consent decree requires EPA to take final
action on at least the technical merits of the August 1997 petitions by
April 30, 1999. The consent decree further permits EPA to structure the
final action it would take by April 30, 1999 so as to defer the
granting or denial of the petitions to certain later dates extending to
as late as May 1, 2000, pending certain actions by EPA and the States
in response to the NOX SIP call. In the NPR, EPA proposed to
take this form of alternative final action.
The consent decree does not apply to the later November 30, 1998 8-
hour petitions. However, for the sake of efficiency and certainty, EPA
intends to take final action on these new petitions along with the
final action on the rest of the petitions. Further, EPA is proposing to
structure the final action on the Maine and New Hampshire 8-hour
petitions according to the same terms and schedule as was proposed for
the other petitions (see Section II.A.2.c and II.F.2 of the NPR).
II. Proposed Action on the 8-Hour Petitions
In evaluating the Maine and New Hampshire petitions under the 8-
hour standard, EPA is applying the analytical approach proposed in the
section 126 NPR as the applicable test under section 126 (see Section
II of the NPR). The approach relies on conclusions drawn in the final
NOX SIP call.
The EPA's proposed action consists of three components: (1)
technical determinations of whether upwind sources or source categories
named in the petitions significantly contribute to nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard in the relevant
petitioning State; (2) for those sources for which EPA is proposing an
affirmative technical determination, action specifying when a finding
that such sources emit or would emit in violation of the section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prohibition will be deemed made or not made (or made
but subsequently withdrawn) and, thus, when a petition will be deemed
granted or denied (or granted but subsequently denied) for purposes of
section 126(b); and (3) the specific emissions-reduction requirements
that will apply when such a finding is deemed made. Each of these
proposed actions is described below.
A. Technical Determinations
Using the NPR approach for making determinations on the technical
merits of the petitions, EPA first looked to see which States named in
the petitions contribute significantly to 8-hour nonattainment or
maintenance problems in the petitioning State. These linkages were
established in the NOX SIP call and are summarized in Table
1 below.
Table 1.--Named Upwind States Which Contain Sources that Significantly
Contribute to 8-Hour Nonattainment in Petitioning State
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Named upwind states that
Petitioning state significantly contribute
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maine.................................. CT, DE, DC, MD, MA, NJ, NY, NC,
PA, RI, VA
New Hampshire.......................... CT, DE, DC, MD, MA, NJ, NY, OH
PA, RI
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the next step, EPA determined which of the named major
stationary NOX sources or source categories in the linked
States may emit in violation of the prohibition in section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) because they emit in amounts that contribute
significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by,
the petitioning State. For this, EPA proposed in the NPR to use its
analysis of highly cost-effective measures from the NOX SIP
call. Thus, if EPA identified highly cost-effective measures for a
particular source category in the NOX SIP call, then EPA
proposed to make an affirmative ``technical determination'' for that
category. The highly cost-effective control measures are discussed in
Section II.C of the NPR and are summarized in Table 2 below.
Table 2.--Summary of Feasible, Highly Cost-Effective NOX Control
Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subcategory Control measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Large EGUsa....................... State-by-State ozone season
emissions level (in tons) based on
applying a NOX emission rate of
0.15 lb/mmBtu on all applicable
sources
Large Non-EGUs<INF>a</INF>................... State-by-State ozone season
emissions level (in tons) based on
applying a 60 percent reduction
from uncontrolled emissions on all
applicable sources
Large Process Heaters............. No additional controls highly cost
effective
Small Sources..................... No additional controls highly cost
effective
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a The definitions of ``large EGUs'' and ``large non-EGUs'' for purposes
of this rulemaking are given in the applicability section of the
proposed part 97 regulation in the NPR and clarified in a December 24,
1998 Federal Register notice (63 FR 71220), and a January 13, 1999
Federal Register notice (64 FR 2418).
In short, EPA is proposing today to make affirmative technical
determinations of significant contribution (or interference) for those
large electricity generating units (EGUs) and non-EGUs for which highly
cost-effective controls are available (as shown in Table 2), to the
extent those sources are located in one of the linked States named in
the relevant petition (as shown in Table 1).
For all named sources that are located in States that are not
linked to New Hampshire or Maine and for sources that are located in
linked States but for which highly cost- effective controls are not
available, EPA is proposing to deny the petitions. For States not
linked to New Hampshire or Maine, EPA's basis for this denial is (i)
for certain States, based on a proposed negative technical
determination because EPA determined in the NOX SIP call
that the States are not linked to New Hampshire or Maine; and (ii) for
other States, based on EPA's inability to make an affirmative technical
determination due to inadequate information.
More specifically, in addition to those listed in Table 1 above
(and those noted below), the New Hampshire 8-hour petition identifies
all or parts of the following States: Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky,
Michigan, Missouri, North
[[Page 10345]]
Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. The EPA is proposing
a negative technical determination with respect to sources in these
States for the New Hampshire 8-hour petition because in the
NOX SIP call, EPA determined that these States should not be
linked to New Hampshire. Therefore, EPA is proposing to deny this part
of the New Hampshire petition.
Similarly, in addition to those listed in Table 1 above (and those
noted below), the Maine 8-hour petition identifies all or parts of the
following States: Ohio and West Virginia. The EPA is proposing a
negative technical determination with respect to sources in these
States for the Maine 8-hour petition because in the NOX SIP
call, EPA determined that these States should not be linked to Maine.
Therefore, EPA is proposing to deny this part of the Maine petition.
The New Hampshire 8-hour petition also identifies all or parts of
the following States, in addition to those noted above: Iowa, Maine,
and Vermont. The Maine 8-hour petition also identifies all or parts of
the following States, in addition to those noted above: New Hampshire
and Vermont. In the NOX SIP call rule, EPA stated that it
did not have adequate modeling information to make a final
determination as to whether these States met the ``significant
contribution'' standard under section 110(a)(2)(D) (63 FR 57398,
October 27, 1998). In the section 126 NPR, EPA indicated that it
intended to conduct further modeling for New Hampshire, Vermont, and
Maine prior to taking final action on the section 126 rule (63 FR
56304, 56308, October 21, 1998). As discussed below, EPA is in the
process of informing Iowa, Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont (among
others) that the Agency does not intend to do additional modeling prior
to completion of this rulemaking by the required date of April 30,
1999. Accordingly, for the present, EPA is obliged to deny, on grounds
of inadequate information, the portions of the New Hampshire and Maine
section 126 petitions that request an affirmative finding for those
four States.
The regulatory text accompanying today's SNPR sets forth each of
the proposed findings and affirmative technical determinations for
sources named in the Maine and New Hampshire 8-hour petitions.
All the source categories in named States for which EPA is
proposing an affirmative technical determination in today's SNPR have
already received a proposed affirmative technical determination of
significant contribution in the section 126 NPR with respect to the New
Hampshire and Maine 1-hour petitions and/or one or more of the other
petitions. Appendix A to proposed part 97 in the October 21, 1998 NPR
lists all existing sources for which EPA proposed to make an
affirmative technical determination with respect to at least one
petitioning State.
B. Action on Whether to Grant or Deny the 8-Hour Petitions
1. Portion of the Petitions for Which EPA Is Proposing an Affirmative
Technical Determination
For the portions of the Maine and New Hampshire petitions for which
EPA is proposing an affirmative technical determination, EPA proposes
to issue the type of final action described in Section II.A.2.c. of the
NPR for the reasons given in that section. Under that approach, the
portions of the petitions for which EPA makes an affirmative technical
determination would be granted or denied at certain later dates pending
certain actions by the States and EPA regarding State submittals in
response to the final NOX SIP call. The schedule allows
States the opportunity to develop and submit plans to reduce
NOX transport before EPA would make any final findings under
section 126. The schedule and conditions under which the applicable
final findings on the petitions would be triggered are discussed in
Section II.F.2 of the NPR.
2. Portion of the Petitions for Which EPA Is Proposing a Denial
Consistent with the overall approach, EPA is proposing that the
sources for which EPA makes a negative technical determination (as
described above) do not or would not emit in violation of the section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prohibition. As a result, EPA proposes to deny the
portions of the Maine and New Hampshire petitions relating to such
sources. In addition, EPA is proposing to deny the portions of the
Maine petition relating to sources located in New Hampshire and
Vermont, as well as the New Hampshire petition relating to sources
located in Iowa, Maine, and Vermont, due to the insufficiency of the
data as to whether emissions from such sources emit in violation of the
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prohibition.
C. Requirements for Sources for Which EPA Makes a Section 126(b)
Finding
In the NPR, EPA proposed the requirements that would apply to any
new or existing major source or group of stationary sources for which a
section 126(b) finding is ultimately made. The emissions control
program is discussed in detail in Section III of the NPR and was
proposed as a new part 97 in title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations.
III. Corrections and Clarifications to October 21, 1998 NPR
Clarification to List of States Whose Sources Do Not Make a Significant
Contribution to Nonattainment in, or Interfere with Maintenance by, the
Petitioning States
In the NPR (63 FR 56303-04), EPA identified 11 States as containing
sources that do not make a significant contribution to nonattainment
in, or interfere with maintenance by, any of the petitioning States
under the 1- hour and/or the 8-hour ozone standards. The EPA listed
these States as Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota,
Mississippi, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Wisconsin, and Vermont. The
EPA added that it does not have the same information available for the
States of Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont; that EPA intended to
conduct further analysis with respect to those States; and that if such
further analyses indicated that sources in any of those States
contributed significantly to a relevant petitioning State, EPA would
issue a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking based on the new
information (63 FR 56304, 56308).
These statements are clarified as follows: Based on determinations
made in the NOX SIP call, the States of Georgia, South
Carolina, and Wisconsin should be treated as containing sources that do
not make a significant contribution to nonattainment in, or interfere
with maintenance by, any of the petitioning States under the 1- hour
and/or 8-hour ozone standards. As further indicated in the
NOX SIP call, for the remaining eight States of Arkansas,
Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Hampshire, and
Vermont, EPA does not, at this time, have sufficient information--that
is, adequate air quality modeling studies--to make a determination as
to whether or not those States make a significant contribution to, or
interfere with maintenance by, any of the petitioning States under the
two ozone standards. Moreover, EPA is in the process of informing those
eight States (along with other States in the midwest and south), that
EPA does not expect to conduct those modeling studies prior to taking
final action on the petitions by April 30, 1999. Accordingly, the NPR
is clarified to propose a denial for the portions of the section 126
petitions under either ozone standard that pertain to those eight
States on grounds of inadequate
[[Page 10346]]
information to demonstrate whether or not sources in those States do
contribute significantly to, or interfere with maintenance by, any of
the petitioning States.
Correction to Table II-1 of the NPR \1\
When EPA published Table II-1 in the NPR, EPA inadvertently left
off Ohio as being a significant contributor to New Hampshire under the
1-hour standard. In addition, asterisks were inadvertently left off of
Michigan and North Carolina where the States were listed as significant
contributors to Connecticut. These errors are corrected in the version
of the table shown below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See discussion below, in ``Additional Notice to Reopen
Comment Period.''
Table II-1.--[from the NPR]. Named Upwind States which Contain Sources
that Contribute Significantly to 1-Hr Nonattainment in Petitioning
States.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioning State (Nonattainment Area) Named Upwind States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New York............................... DE, DC, IN, KY, MD, MI, NC, NJ,
OH, PA, VA, WV
Connecticut............................ DE, DC, IN*, KY*, MD, MI*, NC*,
NJ, NY, OH, PA, VA, WV
Pennsylvania........................... NC, OH, VA, WV
Massachusetts.......................... OH, WV
Rhode Island........................... OH, WV
Maine.................................. CT, DE, DC, MD, MA, NJ, NY, PA,
RI
New Hampshire.......................... CT, DE*, DC*, MA, MD*, NJ, NY,
OH*, PA, RI, VA*
Vermont................................ None
Total.................................. CT, DE, DC, IN, KY, MA, MD, MI,
NC, NJ, NY, OH, PA, RI, VA, WV
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Upwind States marked with an asterisk are included in the table because
they contribute to an interstate nonattainment area that includes part
of the petitioning State. Part of New Hampshire is included in the
Boston/Portsmouth nonattainment area; part of Connecticut is included
in the New York City nonattainment area.
Correction to Part 52 Regulatory Text 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See discussion immediately below, in ``Additional Notice to
Reopen Comment Period.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Part 52 regulatory text in the NPR is corrected to list Ohio as
a significant contributor to New Hampshire under the 1-hour standard.
Additional Notice to Reopen Comment Period
The EPA is publishing, in the Federal Register, a separate notice
to reopen the comment period on the NPR to allow comment concerning the
effect of EPA's proposed determinations that the 1-hour ozone standard
no longer applies to certain areas in States that have submitted
section 126 petitions (63 FR 69598, December 17, 1998). If EPA
finalizes these determinations, EPA may then deny at least portions of
the section 126 petitions of those States. Under these circumstances,
EPA would revise Table II-1, above, and the accompanying regulatory
text, accordingly.
Drafting Revisions to Proposed Part 52 Regulatory Text
The proposed part 52 regulatory text language that EPA included in
the NPR contained provisions identifying EPA's proposed determinations
for both affirmative technical determinations and negative technical
determinations (63 FR 56327-32, October 21, 1998). Upon further
consideration, EPA believes that, purely as a matter of drafting, it is
not necessary to include regulatory text identifying negative technical
determinations or denials. The regulatory text is revised accordingly.
IV. Notice of Availability of Additional Technical Documents
In the section 126 NPR, EPA stated that all documents in the docket
for the NOX SIP call (Docket No. A-96-56) should be
considered as part of the docket for the section 126 rulemaking (Docket
No. A-97-43). The EPA has recently included in the NOX SIP
call docket various technical documents, including air quality and
economic modeling analyses, that had been inadvertently omitted from
that docket. These documents may be found in Sections VI-D and VI-F of
the NOX SIP call docket. A list of the documents is attached
as Appendix A to this notice. These documents have been incorporated by
reference into the docket for the section 126 rulemaking.
V. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether a regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review
and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
The EPA considers today's SNPR to be one piece of its overall
proposal on the eight section 126 petitions. As discussed in the
October 21, 1998 NPR, the EPA believes that its action on the section
126 petitions is a ``significant regulatory action'' because it raises
novel legal and policy issues arising from the Agency's obligation to
respond to the petitions, and because the action could have an annual
effect on the economy of more than $100 million. As a result, the NPR
was submitted to OMB for review, and EPA prepared a regulatory impact
analysis (RIA) titled ``Regulatory Impact Analysis for the
NOX SIP Call, FIP, and Section 126 Petitions.'' This RIA
assesses the costs, benefits, and economic impacts associated with
federally-imposed requirements to mitigate NOX emissions
from sources contributing to downwind nonattainment of the ozone
national ambient air quality standards. Any written comments from OMB
to EPA and any written EPA response to those comments are included in
the docket. The docket is available for public inspection at the EPA's
Air Docket Section, which is listed in the ADDRESSES section of this
preamble. The RIA is available in hard copy by contacting the EPA
Library at the address under ``Availability of Related Information''
and in electronic form as discussed above in that same section. All of
the sources covered under the Maine and New Hampshire petitions with
respect to the 8-hour standard are also covered with respect to the
Maine and New Hampshire 1-hour petitions and/or one or more of the
other petitions and, therefore, were considered in the RIA analyses for
the NPR. This SNPR does not create any additional impacts beyond what
were proposed in the NPR, therefore, no additional RIA is needed.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA), provides that
whenever an agency is required to publish a general notice of proposed
rulemaking, it must
[[Page 10347]]
prepare and make available an initial regulatory flexibility analysis,
unless it certifies that the proposed rule, if promulgated, will not
have ``a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.''
In the process of developing the NPR, EPA worked with the Small
Business Administration (SBA) and OMB and obtained input from small
businesses, small governmental jurisdictions, and small organizations.
On June 23, 1998, EPA's Small Business Advocacy Chairperson convened a
Small Business Advocacy Review Panel under section 609(b) of the RFA as
amended by SBREFA. In addition to its chairperson, the panel consists
of EPA's Director of the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
within the Office of Air and Radiation, the Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs within OMB, and the Chief Counsel
for Advocacy of the SBA.
As described in the NPR, this panel conducted an outreach effort
and completed a report on the section 126 proposal. The report provides
background information on the proposed rule being developed and the
types of small entities that would be subject to the proposed rule,
describes efforts to obtain the advice and recommendations of
representatives of those small entities, summarizes the comments that
have been received to date from those representatives, and presents the
findings and recommendations of the panel. The completed report,
comments of the small entity representatives, and other information are
contained in the docket for this rulemaking.
It is important to note that the panel's findings and discussion
are based on the information available at the time this report was
drafted. The EPA is continuing to conduct analyses relevant to the
proposed rule, and additional information may be developed or obtained
during the remainder of the rule development process. This SNPR does
not affect any additional sources or source categories beyond those
that are affected by the NPR. All of the sources covered by this SNPR
are already being considered in the SBREFA process that was initiated
for the NPR and, therefore, no separate SBREFA analysis is needed for
today's SNPR.
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub.L.
104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 2
U.S.C. 1532, EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including
a cost-benefit analysis, for any proposed or final rule that ``includes
any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100,000,000 or more * * * in any one year.'' A ``Federal mandate'' is
defined under section 421(6), 2 U.S.C. 658(6), to include a ``Federal
intergovernmental mandate'' and a ``Federal private sector mandate.'' A
``Federal intergovernmental mandate,'' in turn, is defined to include a
regulation that ``would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local,
or tribal governments,'' section 421(5)(A)(i), 2 U.S.C. 658(5)(A)(i),
except for, among other things, a duty that is ``a condition of Federal
assistance,'' section 421(5)(A)(i)(I). A ``Federal private sector
mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose an enforceable duty
upon the private sector,'' with certain exceptions, section 421(7)(A),
2 U.S.C. 658(7)(A).
As discussed in the NPR, the EPA is taking the position that the
requirements of UMRA apply because EPA's action on the section 126
petitions could result in the establishment of enforceable mandates
directly applicable to sources (including sources owned by State and
local governments) that would result in costs greater than $100 million
in any 1 year. The UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider
a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least-
costly, most cost-effective or least-burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The EPA's UMRA analysis,
``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Analysis For the Proposed Section 126
Petitions Under the Clean Air Act Amendments Title I,'' is contained in
the docket for this action and is summarized in the NPR. Because this
SNPR does not create any additional mandates beyond what were proposed
in the NPR, no additional UMRA analysis is needed for today's SNPR.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
The control requirements that would apply to any sources for which
a final section 126 finding is made were proposed in the October 21,
1998 NPR. This SNPR does not propose any additional control
requirements. The information collection requirements related to the
NPR control measures were submitted for approval to the OMB under the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An Information
Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by EPA (ICR No.
1889.01), and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer, OPPE Regulatory
Information Division, US Environmental Protection Agency (2137), 401 M
St., SW, Washington, DC 20460 or by calling (202) 260-2740. See Section
V.D. of the NPR for a discussion of the ICR document.
E. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that EPA determines (1)
``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866,
and (2) the environmental health or safety risk addressed by the rule
has a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on children; and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. This
proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it does not involve
decisions on environmental health risks or safety risks that may
disproportionately affect children.
In accordance with section 5(501), the Agency has evaluated the
environmental health or safety effects of the rule on children and
found that the rule does not separately address any age groups.
However, in conjunction with the final NOX SIP call
rulemaking, the Agency has conducted a general analysis of the
potential changes in ozone and PM levels experienced by children as a
result of the NOX SIP call; these findings are presented in
the RIA. The findings include population-weighted exposure
characterizations for projected 2007 ozone and PM concentrations. The
population data includes a census-derived subdivision for the under 18
group. This analysis generally applies to the section 126 proposal
because the section 126 action is a subset of the NOX SIP
call.
F. Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice
Executive Order 12898 requires that each Federal agency make
achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and
activities on minorities and low-income populations. In conjunction
with the final NOX SIP call
[[Page 10348]]
rulemaking, the Agency has conducted a general analysis of the
potential changes in ozone and PM levels that may be experienced by
minority and low-income populations as a result of the NOX
SIP call; these findings are presented in the RIA. The findings include
population-weighted exposure characterizations for projected ozone
concentrations and PM concentrations. The population data includes
census-derived subdivisions for whites and non-whites, and for low-
income groups. These findings generally apply to the section 126
proposal because the section 126 action is a subset of the
NOX SIP call.
G. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership
Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local
or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If the mandate is
unfunded, EPA must provide OMB a description of the extent of EPA's
prior consultation with representatives of affected State, local and
tribal governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
The EPA has concluded that the rulemaking on the eight section 126
petitions may create a mandate on State and local governments, and that
the Federal government will not provide the funds necessary to pay the
direct costs incurred by the State and local governments in complying
with the mandate. In order to provide meaningful and timely input in
the development of this regulatory action, EPA sent letters to five
national associations whose members include elected officials. The
letters provided background information, requested the associations to
notify their membership of the proposed rulemaking, and encouraged
interested parties to comment on the proposed actions by sending
comments during the public comment period and presenting testimony at
the public hearing on the proposal. Any comments will be taken into
consideration as the action moves toward final rulemaking.
Furthermore, for the section 126 rulemaking, EPA published an
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that served to provide notice of
the Agency's intention to propose emissions limits and to solicit early
input on the proposal. This process helped to ensure that small
governments had an opportunity to give timely input and obtain
information on compliance.
This SNPR does not affect any additional sources or source
categories beyond those that are affected by the NPR. Therefore, all of
the sources covered by this SNPR were already considered in the
consultation process with State, local, and tribal governments that was
conducted for the NPR, and no separate consultation process is needed
for today's SNPR.
H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the government
provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs
incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA
must provide to OMB, in a separately identified section of the preamble
to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation
with representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the
nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue
the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to
develop an effective process permitting elected and other
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's SNPR does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments and, in any event, will not
impose substantial direct compliance costs on such communities. The EPA
is not aware of sources located on tribal lands that could be subject
to the requirements EPA is proposing in this notice. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Pub L. No. 104-113, directs EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through
OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
The control requirements that would apply to any sources for which
a final section 126 finding is made with respect to today's action were
proposed in the October 21, 1998 NPR. This SNPR does not propose any
additional control requirements. As discussed in Section V.I of the
NPR, the control requirements incorporate a number of voluntary
consensus standards.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Emissions trading,
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone transport, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: February 25, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
Appendix A to the Preamble--Availability of Additional Technical
Documents
The following tables list the documents that have recently been
placed in Sections VI-D and VI-F of the NOX SIP call docket
(Docket No. A-96-56).
Table A-1.--Additions to Section VI-D of Docket No. A-96-56
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commenter, Addressee, Title or
Document Number Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI-D-05........................... Draft--Summary of Revised 2007 Base
and Budget Seasonal NOX Emissions
VI-D-06........................... Technical Support Document on
Development of Modeling Inventory
and Budgets for the Ozone Transport
SIP Call
[[Page 10349]]
VI-D-07........................... Draft Appendices for Revised Budget
Calculations for Electric
Generation Sources
VI-D-08........................... Explanation of Revised Budget
Calculations
VI-D-09........................... Draft Appendices for Revised Budget
Calculations for Non-Electric
Generation Point Sources
VI-D-10........................... Revised Draft Utilization
Information for Electricity
Generators Used in Budget
Calculations for the Proposed SIP
Call
VI-D-11........................... Road Map to IPM Run Files for the
Proposed Ozone Transport Rulemaking
VI-D-12........................... Data Used to Determine State-
Specific Electricity Generator
Growth Used in the Ozone Transport
Rulemaking
VI-D-13........................... Summary of State-Specific 1996-2007
Growth Factors for Electricity
Generating Units in the SIP Call
Region
VI-D-14........................... Segments of five IPM runs used to
prepare the electric power industry
emissions reduction and cost
analysis in the Supplemental Ozone
Transport Rulemaking Regulatory
Analysis
VI-D-15........................... Estimates of Annual Incremental
Costs of Combustion Control on Coal-
Fired Units that are Part of EPA's
Estimates of Compliance Costs for
the SNPR
VI-D-16........................... Initial Base Case--Winter 1998
Electricity Demand Forecast, SIPJ
VI-D-17........................... 0.15 Trading--Winter 1998
Electricity Demand Forecast, SIP2
VI-D-18........................... Final Base Case--Winter 1998
Electricity Demand Forecast, SIP5--
2
VI-D-19........................... Initial Base Case--Summer 1996
Electricity Demand Forecast, SIP3
VI-D-20........................... 0.15 Trading--Summer 1996
Electricity Demand Forecast, SIP14
VI-D-21........................... Incremental Cost Analyses
VI-D-22........................... Four additional sets of IPM run
files which provide results of
analysis of five cap-and-trade
options
VI-D-23........................... EPA Utility/Non-Utility Zero-out
Model Runs: emissions inputs and
ozone predictions in electronic
form and tabular summaries of ozone
metrics in hard copy form
VI-D-24........................... EPA UAM-V Zero-out Model runs:
emissions inputs and ozone
predictions in electronic form
VI-D-25........................... EPA UAM-V Base Case and Strategy
Model Runs: emissions inputs and
ozone predictions in electronic
form
VI-D-26........................... EPA CAM<INF>X</INF> Base Case and Source
Apportionment Model Runs: emissions
inputs and ozone predictions in
electronic form
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table A-2.--Additions to Section VI-F of Docket No. A-96-56
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commenter, Addressee, Title or
Document Number Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI-F-01........................... 0.12/0.15/0.20 3-zone trading
beginning in 2003 (output from the
IPM model)
VI-F-02........................... 0.1 5/0.20 2-zone trading beginning
in 2003 (output from the IPM model)
VI-F-03........................... Sensitivity Analysis of a 7-week
outage period for SCR Hook-up (SIP
47)
VI-F-04........................... Sensitivity Analysis of a 9-week
outage period for SCR Hook-up (SIP
48)
VI-F-05........................... Final .15 with interstate trading
beginning in 2003 (SIP 80)
VI-F-06........................... Corrected .15 with intrastate
trading beginning in 2003 (SIP 83)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 52 of chapter 1 of
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended
as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart A--General Provisions [Amended]
2. Section 52.34 as proposed at 63 FR 56292 on October 21, 1998, is
amended by removing paragraphs (b)(3) and (4); by revising paragraphs
(c)(3) and (4); by removing paragraphs (d)(3), (4), (7), and (8) and
redesignating paragraphs (d)(5) and (6) as paragraphs (d)(3) and (4)
respectively; by revising paragraphs (e)(3) and (4); by adding
paragraph (e)(2)(xi); by removing paragraphs (f)(3) and (4); by
removing paragraphs (g)(3), (4), (7), and (8) and redesignating
paragraphs (g)(5) and (6) as paragraphs (g)(3) and (4) respectively; by
removing paragraphs (h)(3) and (4); and by removing paragraphs (i)(3),
(4), (7), and (8) and redesignating paragraphs (i)(5) and (6) as
paragraphs (i)(3) and (4) respectively; to read as follows:
Sec. 52.34 Action on petitions submitted under section 126 relating to
emissions of nitrogen oxides.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) Affirmative Technical Determinations with Respect to the 8-Hour
Ozone Standard in Maine. The Administrator of EPA finds that any
existing or new major source or group of stationary sources emits or
would emit NOX in amounts that contribute significantly to
nonattainment in the State of Maine, with respect to the 8-hour NAAQS
for ozone if it is or will be:
(i) In a category of sources described in 40 CFR 97.4;
(ii) Located in one of the States (or portions thereof) listed in
paragraph (c)(6) of this section; and
(iii) Within one of the ``Named Source Categories'' listed in the
portion of Table F-1 of appendix F of this part describing the sources
covered by the petition of the State of Maine.
(4) States or Portions of States that Contain Sources for which EPA
is Making an Affirmative Technical Determination with Respect to the 8-
Hour Ozone Standard in Maine. The States, or portions of States, that
contain sources for which EPA is making an affirmative technical
determination are:
(i) Connecticut.
(ii) Delaware.
(iii) District of Columbia.
(iv) Maryland.
(v) Massachusetts.
(vi) New Jersey.
(vii) New York.
(viii) North Carolina.
(ix) Pennsylvania.
(x) Rhode Island.
(xi) Virginia.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(2) * * *
(xi) Ohio
* * * * *
(3) Affirmative Technical Determinations with Respect to the 8-Hour
Ozone Standard in New Hampshire. The Administrator of EPA finds that
any existing or new major source or group of stationary sources emits
or would emit NOX in amounts
[[Page 10350]]
that contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with
maintenance by, the State of New Hampshire, with respect to the 8-hour
NAAQS for ozone if it is or will be:
(i) In a category of sources described in 40 CFR 97.4;
(ii) Located in one of the States (or portions thereof) listed in
paragraph (e)(6) of this section; and
(iii) Within one of the ``Named Source Categories'' listed in the
portion of Table F-1 of appendix F of this part describing the sources
covered by the petition of the State of New Hampshire.
(4) States or Portions of States that Contain Sources for which EPA
is Making an Affirmative Technical Determination with Respect to the 8-
Hour Ozone Standard in New Hampshire. The States, or portions of
States, that contain sources for which EPA is making an affirmative
technical determination are:
(i) Connecticut.
(ii) Delaware.
(iii) District of Columbia.
(iv) Maryland.
(v) Massachusetts.
(vi) New Jersey.
(vii) New York.
(viii) Pennsylvania.
(ix) Rhode Island.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-5201 Filed 3-2-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P