Clean Air Act Proposed Interim Approval of Operating Permits Program; Georgia

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 70

[GA-95-01-FRL-5303-4]

Clean Air Act Proposed Interim Approval of Operating Permits

Program; Georgia

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed interim approval.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes interim approval of the Operating Permits

Program submitted by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources,

Environmental Protection Division (EPD) for the purpose of complying

with Federal requirements which mandate that states develop, and submit

to EPA, programs for issuing operating permits to all major stationary

sources, and to certain other sources.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by

October 26, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Carla

E. Pierce, Chief, Air Toxics Unit/Title V Program Development Team, Air

Programs Branch, at the EPA Region 4 office listed below. Copies of the

State's submittal and other supporting information used in developing

the proposed interim approval are available for inspection during

normal business hours at the following location: U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Air Programs Branch, Region 4, 345 Courtland Street,

NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30365.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yolanda Adams, Title V Program

Development Team, Air Programs Branch, Air, Pesticides & Toxics

Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4,

345 Courtland Street, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30365, (404) 347-3555,

Ext. 4149.

[[Page 49534]]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background and Purpose

A. Introduction

As required under title V of the Clean Air Act Amendments (sections

501-507 of the Clean Air Act (``the Act'')), EPA has promulgated rules

which define the minimum elements of an approvable state operating

permits program and the corresponding standards and procedures by which

the EPA will approve, oversee, and withdraw approval of state operating

permits programs (see 57 FR 32250 (July 21, 1992)). These rules are

codified at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 70. Title V

requires states to develop, and submit to EPA, programs for issuing

these operating permits to all major stationary sources and to certain

other sources.

The Act requires that states develop and submit these programs to

EPA by November 15, 1993, and that EPA act to approve or disapprove

each program within 1 year after receiving the submittal. If the

state's submission is materially changed during the one-year review

period, 40 CFR 70.4(e)(2) allows EPA to extend the review period for no

more than one year following receipt of the additional material. EPA

received EPD's title V operating permit program submittal on November

12, 1993. The State provided EPA with additional material in

supplemental submittals dated June 24, 1994, November 14, 1994, and

June 5, 1995. Because these supplements materially changed the State's

title V program submittal, EPA has extended the review period and will

work expeditiously to promulgate a final decision on the State's

program.

The EPA's program review occurs pursuant to section 502 of the Act

and the part 70 regulations, which together outline criteria for

approval or disapproval. Where a program substantially, but not fully,

meets the requirements of part 70, EPA may grant the program interim

approval from a period of up to 2 years. If EPA has not fully approved

a program by November 15, 1995, or by the end of an interim program, it

must establish and implement a Federal program.

B. Federal Oversight and Sanctions

If EPA were to finalize this proposed interim approval, it would

extend for two years following the effective date of final interim

approval, and could not be renewed. During the interim approval period,

the State of Georgia would be protected from sanctions, and EPA would

not be obligated to promulgate, administer and enforce a federal

permits program for Georgia. Permits issued under a program with

interim approval have full standing with respect to part 70, and the 1-

year time period for submittal of permit applications by subject

sources begins upon the effective date of interim approval, as does the

3-year time period for processing the initial permit applications.

Following final interim approval, if Georgia failed to submit a

complete corrective program for full approval by the date 6 months

before expiration of the interim approval, EPA would start an 18-month

clock for mandatory sanctions. If the State of EPA then failed to

submit a corrective program that EPA found complete before the

expiration of that 18-month period, EPA would be required to apply one

of the sanctions in section 179(b) of the Act,which would remain in

effect until EPA determined that EPA had corrected the deficiency by

submitting a complete corrective program. Moreover, if the

Administrator found a lack of good faith on the part of the State of

Georgia, both sanctions under section 179(b) would apply after the

expiration of the 18-month period until the Administrator determined

that Georgia had come into compliance. In any case, if, six months

after EPA applied the first sanction, the State of Georgia had not

submitted a revised program that EPA had determined corrected the

deficiencies that prompted disapproval, a second sanction would be

required.

If, following final interim approval, EPA were to disapprove

Georgia's complete corrective program, EPA would be required to apply

one of the section 179(b) sanctions on the date 18 months after the

effective date of the disapproval, unless prior to that date Georgia

had submitted a revised program and EPA had determined that it

corrected the deficiencies that prompted the disapproval. Moreover, if

the Administrator found a lack of good faith on the part of the State

of Georgia, both sanctions under section 179(b) would apply after the

expiration of the 18-month period until the Administrator determined

that Georgia had come into compliance. In all cases, if, six months

after EPA applied the first sanction, the State of Georgia had not

submitted a revised program that EPA had determined corrected the

deficiencies that prompted disapproval, a second sanction would be

required.

In addition, discretionary sanctions may be applied where warranted

any time after the end of an interim approval period if Georgia has not

timely submitted a complete corrective program or EPA has disapproved a

submitted corrective program. Moreover, if EPA has not granted full

approval to Georgia's program by the expiration of an interim approval

and that expiration occurs after November 15, 1995, EPA must

promulgate, administer and enforce a Federal permits program for the

State of Georgia upon interim approval expiration.

II. Proposed Action and Implications

A. Analysis of State Submission

EPA has concluded that the operating permit program submitted by

Georgia substantially meets the requirements of title V and part 70,

and proposes to grant interim approval to the program. For detailed

information on the analysis of the State's submission, please refer to

the Technical Support Document (TSD) contained in the docket at the

address noted above.

1. Support Materials

Pursuant to section 502(d) of the Clean Air Act as amended (1990

Amendments, the Governor of each state must develop and submit to the

Administrator an operating permits program under State or local law or

under an interstate compact meeting the requirements of title V of the

Act. Georgia submitted, under the signature of Governor Zell Miller,

the operating permits program, prepared by the EPD, to be implemented

in all areas of the State of Georgia.

The EPD submittal, provided as Section 1--``Program Description'',

addresses 40 CFR 70.4(b)(1) by describing how the EPD intends to carry

out its responsibilities under the part 70 regulations. This program

description has been deemed to be appropriate for meeting the

requirement of 40 CFR 70.4(b)(1).

Pursuant to 40 CFR 70.4(b)(3), the Governor is required to submit a

legal opinion from the attorney general (or the attorney for the State

air pollution control agency that has independent legal counsel)

demonstrating adequate authority to carry out all aspects of a title V

operating permits program. The State of Georgia submitted a legal

opinion from Michael J. Bowers, Attorney General of the State of

Georgia, demonstrating adequate legal authority to carry out the

issuance of permits to all sources subject to the requirements of the

part 70 regulations, and to promulgate regulations in compliance with

applicable State and Federal laws. This opinion including a supplement

to the opinion adequately addresses the thirteen provisions listed at

40 CFR 70.4(b)(3)(i)-(xiii).

[[Page 49535]]

Section 70.4(b)(4) requires the submission of relevant permitting

program documentation not contained in the regulations, such as permit

application forms, permit forms and relevant guidance to assist in the

implementation of the permit program. Section 4 of the EPD submittal

includes the permit application form with instructions, and a

permitting procedures manual as guidance to assist in the

implementation of the permit program. In addition, an updated permit

application was included in the November 14, 1994, supplemental

submittal. It has been determined that the application forms and

permitting procedures manual substantially meet the requirements of 40

CFR 70.5(c).

2. Regulations and Program Implementation

The State of Georgia has submitted Rule 391-3-1-.03(10), ``Title V

Operating Permits,'' and Rule 391-3-1-.03(9), ``Permit Fees,'' for

implementing the State part 70 programs as required by 40 CFR

70.4(b)(2). Sufficient evidence of their procedurally correct adoption

was included in Section 2 of the submittal. Copies of all applicable

State statutes and regulations which authorize the part 70 program,

including those governing State administrative procedures, were

submitted with the State's program.

The Georgia operating permits regulations closely follow the

Federal part 70 regulations. Georgia's program meets the following

requirements set out in the part 70 program. These requirements are

addressed in Georgia's Rule 391-3-1-.03(10) as follows: (A)

Applicability requirements (40 CFR 70.3(a)), Rule 391-3-1-.03(10)(b);

(B) Permit applications (40 CFR 70.5), Rule 391-3-1-.03(10)(c); (C)

Provisions for permit content (40 CFR 70.6), Rule 391-3-1-.03(10)(d);

(D) Provisions for permit issuance, renewals, reopenings and revisions,

including public participation (40 CFR 70.7), Rule 391-3-1-.03(10)(e);

and (E) Permit review by EPA and affected States (40 CFR 70.8), Rule

391-3-1-.03(10)(f). The Georgia Air Quality Act, Official Code of

Georgia Annotated (OCGA) sections 12-9-12, 12-9-13, 12-9-14, 12-9-23,

and 12-9-24, satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 70.11, for enforcement

authority.

The Georgia program in Rule 391-3-1-.03(10) substantially meets the

requirements of 40 CFR 70.4(b)(12) with regard to operational

flexibility. Any state that seeks to administer a program under part 70

is required by Sec. 70.4(b) to submit a plan which contains provisions

to allow for changes within a permitted facility without requiring a

permit revision provided that the facility provides the Administrator

and the permitting authority with written notification in advance of

the proposed changes, which shall be a minimum of 7 days. Section

70.4(b)(12)(iii)(A) states that the written notification shall state

when the changes will occur and shall describe the changes in emissions

that will result and how these increases and decreases in emissions

will comply with the terms and conditions of the permit. In addition,

Sec. 70.4(b)(12)(iii)(B) states that the permit shield may extend to

terms and conditions that allow such increases and decreases in

emissions. Georgia Rule 391-3-1-(10)(d)1.(ii) allows for a permit to

include terms and conditions allowing for trading of emissions changes

in the permitted facility solely for the purpose of complying with a

Federally enforceable emissions cap that is established in the permit

independent of otherwise applicable requirements; however, it does not

provide for the notification requirements and permit shield extension

found in Sec. 70.4(b)(12)(iii). Therefore, as a condition of full

approval, this rule must be revised to provide for the notification

requirements and the permit shield extension in part 70.

Section 70.4(b)(2) requires states to include in their part 70

programs any criteria used to determine insignificant activities or

emission levels for the purposes of determining complete applications.

Section 70.5(c) states that an application for a part 70 permit may not

omit information needed to determine the applicability of, or to

impose, any applicable requirement, or to evaluate appropriate fee

amounts. Section 70.5(c) also states that EPA may approve, as part of a

state program, a list of insignificant activities and emissions levels

which need not be included in permit applications. Under part 70, a

state must request and EPA may approve as part of that state's program

any activity or emission level that the state wishes to consider

insignificant.

The EPD provided its current permit exemption list found in Rule

391-3-1-.03(6) as its list of insignificant activities. Rule 391-3-1-

.03(6) states that these exemptions may not be used to lower the

potential to emit below ``major source'' thresholds or to avoid any

``applicable requirement''. This provision ensures that listed

facilities, units, or activities do not interfere with the

determination of applicable requirements or the determination of

whether or not a source is major under the Act. In addition, Georgia

Rule 391-3-1-.03(10)(c)2. incorporates 40 CFR 70.5(c) by reference,

thereby ensuring that an application for a part 70 permit does not omit

information needed to determine the applicability of, or to impose, any

applicable requirement, or to evaluate appropriate fee amounts.

However, Georgia's rule exempts source activities from permitting,

rather than from the obligation of including the activity in the permit

application.

Georgia's exemption rule does not make a distinction among

activities which can be omitted from permit applications and those

which are still considered insignificant but which must be listed in

the permit application. In addition, the EPD rule exempts facilities

from listing pollutants in the permit application, rather than

exempting the activity itself. The approaches mentioned above found in

Georgia's exemptions rule are not consistent with the insignificant

activities approach in part 70; therefore, EPA cannot propose full

approval of Georgia's exemptions list as the basis for determining

insignificant activities.

Part 70 of the operating permits regulations requires prompt

reporting of deviations from the permit requirements. Section

70.6(a)(3)(iii)(B) requires the permitting authority to define prompt

in relation to the degree and type of deviation likely to occur and the

applicable requirements. Although the permit program regulations should

define prompt for purposes of administrative efficiency and clarity, an

acceptable alternative is to define prompt in each individual permit.

EPA believes that prompt should generally be defined as requiring

reporting within two to ten days of the deviation. Two to ten days is

sufficient time in most cases to protect public health and safety as

well as to provide a forewarning of potential problems. For sources

with a low level of excess emissions, a longer time period may be

acceptable. However, prompt reporting must be more frequent than the

semiannual reporting requirement, given that this is a distinct

reporting obligation under 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A). Although Georgia

Rule 391-3-1-.03(10)(d)1.(1) adopts part 70.6(a) by reference, it does

not define prompt within the regulation. Where ``prompt'' is defined in

the individual permit but not in the program regulations, EPA may veto

permits that do not require sufficiently prompt reporting of

deviations.

Rule 391-3-1-.05, allows the EPD discretion to grant relief from

compliance with State rules and regulations under certain conditions.

The EPA regards Rule 391-3-1-.05 as wholly external to the program

submitted for approval under part 70, and consequently proposes to take

no

[[Page 49536]]

action on these provisions of State and local law in this rulemaking.

The EPA does not recognize the ability of a permitting authority to

grant relief from the duty to comply with a Federally enforceable part

70 permit, except where such relief is granted through procedures

allowed by part 70. In other words, a variance does not affect the

title V source until the title V permit is modified pursuant to the

procedures in part 70. EPA reserves the right to enforce the terms of

the part 70 permit where the permitting authority purports to grant

relief from the duty to comply with a part 70 permit in a manner

inconsistent with part 70 procedures. A part 70 permit may also

incorporate, via part 70 permit issuance or modification procedures,

the schedule of compliance set forth in a variance. However, EPA

reserves the right to pursue enforcement of applicable requirements

notwithstanding the existence of a compliance schedule in a permit to

operate. This is consistent with 40 CFR 70.5(c)(8)(iii)(C), which

states that a schedule of compliance ``shall be supplemental to, and

shall not sanction noncompliance with, the applicable requirements on

which it is based.''

The complete Georgia operating permits program submittal and the

TSD are available for review for more detailed information. The TSD

contains the detailed analysis of Georgia's program and describes the

manner in which the State's program meets all of the operating permit

program requirements of 40 CFR part 70.

3. Permit Fee Demonstration

Section 502(b)(3) of the Act requires that each permitting

authority collect fees sufficient to cover all reasonable direct and

indirect costs required to develop and administer its title V operating

permits program. Each title V program submittal must contain either a

detailed demonstration of the fee adequacy or a demonstration that

aggregate fees collected from title V sources meet or exceed $25 per

ton per year (Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjusted from 1989). The $25

per ton amount is presumed, for program approval, to be sufficient to

cover all reasonable program costs and is thus referred to as the

``presumptive minimum.''

The EPD elected to adopt the ``presumptive minimum'' of $25/ton

(annually adjusted by the CPI), for each regulated pollutant whose

emissions are above the threshold for that pollutant, except carbon

monoxide. EPD's title V fee will be assessed on the first 4,000 tons

per regulated pollutant per facility. In addition, Georgia has

demonstrated that the fees collected will be sufficient to administer

the program.

4. Provisions Implementing the Requirements of Other Titles of the Act

a. Authority and/or Commitments for Section 112 Implementation

Georgia has demonstrated in its title V program submittal broad

legal authority to incorporate into permits and enforce all applicable

requirements. This legal authority is contained in Georgia's enabling

legislation and in regulatory provisions defining ``applicable

requirements'' and stating that the permit must incorporate all

applicable requirements. Georgia has further supplemented its broad

legal authority with a commitment to ``take action, following

promulgation by EPA of regulations implementing section 112 of title

III of the Clean Air Act to either incorporate such new or revised

provisions by reference into State rules or submit State-drafted rules,

for EPA approval, to implement these provisions.'' EPA has determined

that this commitment, in conjunction with Georgia's broad statutory and

regulatory authority, adequately assures compliance with all section

112 requirements. EPA regards this commitment as an acknowledgement by

Georgia of its obligation to obtain further regulatory authority as

needed to issue permits that assure compliance with section 112

applicable requirements. This commitment does not substitute for

compliance with part 70 requirements that must be met at the time of

program approval.

EPA is interpreting the above legal authority and commitment to

mean that Georgia is able to carry out all section 112 activities. For

further rationale on this interpretation, please refer to the Technical

Support Document accompanying this proposed interim approval.

b. Implementation of Section 112(g) Upon Program Approval

EPA issued an interpretive notice on February 14, 1995 (60 FR

8333), which outlines EPA's revised interpretation of section 112(g)

applicability. The notice postpones the effective date of section

112(g) until after EPA has promulgated a rule addressing that

provision. The notice sets forth in detail the rationale for the

revised interpretation.

The section 112(g) interpretative notice explains that EPA is

considering whether the effective date of section 112(g) should be

delayed beyond the date of promulgation of the Federal rule so as to

allow states time to adopt rules implementing the Federal rule, and

that EPA will provide for any such additional delay in the final

section 112(g) rulemaking. Unless and until EPA provides for such an

additional postponement of section 112(g), Georgia must have a

Federally enforceable mechanism for implementing section 112(g) during

the period between promulgation of the Federal section 112(g) rule and

adoption of implementing State regulations.

EPA is aware that Georgia lacks a program designed specifically to

implement section 112(g). However, Georgia does have a preconstruction

review program that can serve as an adequate implementation vehicle

during the transition period because it would allow the State to select

control measures that would meet the maximum achievable control

technology (MACT), as defined in section 112, and incorporate these

measures into a Federally enforceable preconstruction permit.

For this reason, EPA proposes to approve the use of Georgia's

preconstruction review program found in Rule 391-3-1-.03, under the

authority of title V and part 70, solely for the purpose of

implementing section 112(g) to the extent necessary during the

transition period between section 112(g) promulgation and adoption of a

State rule implementing EPA's section 112(g) regulations. Although

section 112(l) generally provides authority for approval of state air

programs to implement section 112(g), title V and section 112(g)

provide for this limited approval because of the direct linkage between

the implementation of section 112(g) and title V. The scope of this

approval is narrowly limited to section 112(g) and does not confer or

imply approval for purpose of any other provision under the Act (e.g.,

section 110). This approval will be without effect if EPA decides in

the final section 112(g) rule that sources are not subject to the

requirements of the rule until State regulations are adopted. The

duration of this approval is limited to 18 months following

promulgation by EPA of the section 112(g) rule to provide adequate time

for the State to adopt regulations consistent with the Federal

requirements.

c. Program for Delegation of Section 112 Standards as Promulgated

Requirements for approval, specified in 40 CFR 70.4(b), encompass

section 112(l)(5) requirements for approval of a program for delegation

of section 112 standards as promulgated by EPA as they apply to part 70

sources. Section 112(l)(5) requires that the State's program contain

adequate authorities,

[[Page 49537]]

adequate resources for implementation, and an expeditious compliance

schedule, which are also requirements under part 70. Therefore, EPA is

also proposing to grant approval under section 112(l)(5) and 40 CFR

63.91 of the State's program for receiving delegation of future section

112 standards and programs that are unchanged from the Federal rules as

promulgated, and to delegate existing standards and programs under 40

CFR parts 61 and 63 for part 70 sources and non-part 70 sources.\1\

Georgia has informed EPA that it intends to accept delegation of

section 112 standards through adoption by reference. This program for

delegation applies to both existing and future standards, and to both

part 70 and non-part 70 sources. The details of the State's delegation

mechanism is set forth in a letter dated June 5, 1995, submitted by

Georgia as a title V program addendum.

\1\ The radionuclide National Emission Standards for Hazardous

Air Pollutant (NESHAP) is a section 112 regulation and therefore,

also an applicable requirement under the State operating permits

program for part 70 sources. There is not yet a Federal definition

of ``major'' for radionuclide sources. Therefore, until a major

source definition for radionuclide is promulgated, no source would

be a major section 112 source solely due to its radionuclide

emissions. However, a radionuclide source may, in the interim, be a

major source under part 70 for another reason, thus requiring a part

70 permit. The EPA will work with the State in the development of

its radionuclide program to ensure that permits are issued in a

timely manner.

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

d. Commitment To Implement Title IV of the Act

The State of Georgia developed acid rain permit rules in Rule 391-

3-1-.13, which was submitted as part of the operating permits program.

The State also submitted standard acid rain permit application forms

which will be revised as updated forms are provided by the EPA. These

rules and permit application forms meet the requirements of the acid

rain program.

B. Proposed Actions

The EPA is proposing to grant interim approval to the operating

permits program submitted by Georgia on November 12, 1993, and as

supplemented on June 24, 1994, November 14, 1994, and June 5, 1995. If

this approval is promulgated, the State must make the following changes

to receive full approval: (1) revise Rule 391-3-1-(10)(d)1.(ii) to

provide for the notification requirements and permit shield extension

found in Sec. 70.4(b)(12)(iii); and (2) correct all deficiencies in its

insignificant activities regulation.

This interim approval, which may not be renewed, extends for a

period of up to 2 years. During the interim approval period, the State

is protected from sanctions for failure to have a program, and EPA is

not obligated to promulgate a Federal permits program in the State.

Permits issued under a program with interim approval have full standing

with respect to part 70, and the 1-year time period for submittal of

permit applications by subject sources begins upon interim approval, as

does the 3-year time period for processing the initial permit

applications.

As discussed previously in section II.A.4.b., EPA proposes to

approve Georgia's preconstruction review program found in Rule 391-3-1-

.03, under the authority of title V and part 70 solely for the purpose

of implementing section 112(g) to the extent necessary during the

transition period between 112(g) promulgation and adoption of a State

rule implementing EPA's section 112(g) regulations.

In addition, as discussed in section II.A.4.c., EPA proposes to

grant approval under section 112(l)(5) and 40 CFR 63.91 to the State's

program for receiving delegation of future section 112 standards and

programs that are unchanged from Federal rules as promulgated.

Additionally, EPA is proposing to delegate existing standards and

programs under 40 CFR parts 61 and 63. This program for delegation

applies to both part 70 and non-part 70 sources.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Request for Public Comments

The EPA is requesting comments on all aspects of this proposed

interim approval. Copies of the State's submittal and other information

relied upon for the proposed interim approval are contained in docket

number GA-95-01 maintained at the EPA Regional Office. The docket is an

organized and complete file of all the information submitted to, or

otherwise considered by, EPA in the development of this proposed

interim approval. The principal purposes of the docket are:

(1) to allow interested parties a means to identify and locate

documents so that they can effectively participate in the approval

process, and

(2) to serve as the record in case of judicial review. The EPA will

consider any comments received by October 26, 1995.

B. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from

Executive Order 12866 review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The EPA's actions under section 502 of the Act do not create any

new requirements, but simply address operating permits programs

submitted to satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR part 70. Because this

action does not impose any new requirements, it does not have a

significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or

final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated

costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to

the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA

must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative

that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan

for informing and advising any small governments that may be

significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the proposed approval action promulgated

today does not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated

costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal

action approves pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and

imposes no new Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs

to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector,

result from this action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Operating permits,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Dated: September 15, 1995.

John H. Hankinson, Jr.,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95-23839 Filed 9-25-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-M