[Federal Register: January 18, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 11)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 2832-2836]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18ja05-16]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 122
[OW-2002-0068; FRL-7862-1]
RIN 2040-AE71
Extension of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit Deadline for Storm Water Discharges for Oil and Gas
Construction Activity That Disturbs One to Five Acres
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Today EPA proposes to amend the rule on National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System storm water permits to postpone until June
12, 2006, the requirement to obtain permit coverage for oil and gas
construction activity that disturbs one to five acres of land. This
would be the second postponement promulgated by EPA for these
activities. EPA proposes this postponement in order to afford the
Agency additional time to complete consideration of the issues raised
by stakeholders about storm water runoff from construction activities
at oil and gas sites and of procedures for controlling storm water
discharges as appropriate to mitigate impacts on water quality. EPA
intends to take final action with respect to today's proposal by March
10, 2005. Within six months of this final action (September 12, 2005),
EPA intends to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register for addressing these discharges and invite public comments.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule must be received on or before
February 17, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. OW-2002-
0068, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET,
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred
method for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
E-mail: ow-docket@epa.gov. Attention Docket ID No. OW-
2002-0068.
Mail: Water Docket, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 4101 T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Hand Delivery: Deliver your comments to: EPA Docket
Center, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC, Attention Docket ID No. OW-2002-0068. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation. The EPA Docket
Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the
Water Docket is (202) 566-2426.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. OW-2002-0068.
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.epa.gov/edocket
, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-
mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the federal regulations.gov Web sites are
``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting
comments, go to Section I.C of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the EDOCKET index
at
[[Page 2833]]
http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard
copy at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID No. OW-2002-0068. The
EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone
number for the Water Docket is (202) 566-2426.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Smith, Office of Wastewater
Management, Office of Water, Environmental Protection Agency, at 202-
564-0652 or e-mail: smith.jeff@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Affected Entities
Entities potentially affected by this action include operators of
construction activities disturbing at least one acre, but less than
five acres of land at oil and gas sites, North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes and titles: 211--Oil and Gas
Extraction, 213111--Drilling Oil and Gas Wells, and 213112--Support
Activities for Oil and Gas Operations.
This description is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected
by this action. This description identifies the types of entities that
EPA is now aware could potentially be affected by this action. Other
types of entities not identified could also be affected. To determine
whether your facility or company is affected by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 122.26(b)(15)
and (e)(8). If you have questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
EDOCKET, regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI). In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
i. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
ii. Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible.
viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. Background
The Water Quality Act of 1987 added statutory language in Section
402(p) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) that directs EPA to develop a
phased approach to regulate storm water discharges. EPA published the
Phase I Storm Water Rule on November 16, 1990 (55 FR 47990),
establishing NPDES permit application requirements for ``storm water
discharges associated with industrial activity.'' The Phase I
regulations define large construction activities that disturb five
acres of land and greater (or less than five acres of total land area
that is part of a larger common plan of development or sale if the
larger common plan will ultimately disturb five acres or more) as
``industrial activity'' under 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(x) and, as such,
they are required to obtain NPDES permit coverage for storm water
discharges. See also 40 CFR 122.21(c)(1).
EPA published the Phase II Storm Water Rule in the Federal Register
on December 8, 1999 (64 FR 68722). The Phase II regulations require
NPDES permit coverage as of March 10, 2003, for storm water discharges
from small construction sites disturbing at least one acre but less
than five acres of land and those sites disturbing less than one acre
that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale that, in
total, disturbs at least one but less than five acres (hereinafter
referred to as ``small construction sites'' or ``small construction
activities''). 40 CFR 122.26(b)(15)(i) and (e)(8). In developing the
Phase II regulations, EPA conducted an analysis of the potential
impacts of the rule on the national economy and also analyzed impacts
on small entities. Costs associated with the regulations were generally
associated with implementation of sediment and erosion control
practices or best management practices to reduce the pollutants
commonly found in construction storm water discharges that may
ultimately lead to water quality impairments. In performing these
analyses, EPA considered affected industrial sectors, including the oil
and gas industry. However, based on the information provided at the
time, EPA assumed that few, if any, oil and gas exploration,
production, processing, or treatment operations, or transmission
facilities would fall within the 1 to 5 acre range and thus require
NPDES permit coverage under the Phase II regulations. Therefore, while
that regulation did apply to these facilities, EPA did not include oil
and gas exploration sites in the economic analysis developed to support
the regulatory determination promulgated in the Phase II Final Rule.
See U.S. EPA, Economic Analysis of the Final Phase II Storm Water Rule,
EPA 833-R-99-002, October 1999.
EPA's authority to promulgate the 1999 Phase II storm water
regulations derives from CWA Section 402(p)(6) which directed EPA to
designate for regulation sources of storm water for purposes of
protecting water quality. EPA exercised this authority in 1999 to
designate storm water discharges from small municipal separate storm
sewer systems and small construction sites for NPDES regulation.
However, significant questions arose after the 1999 promulgation
regarding whether storm water discharges from small construction sites
associated with oil and gas activities presented a water quality
problem at a level that justified national categorical regulation
through the NPDES permit program, as well as
[[Page 2834]]
the potentially high cost of compliance for this industry. As a result
of these and other concerns, EPA amended its regulations to postpone
until March 10, 2005, the deadline for oil and gas construction
activities to obtain NPDES storm water permits under the Phase II rule,
to allow for further consideration of the environmental and economic
impacts of this requirement. See 68 FR 11325 (March 10, 2003).
During the past two years, EPA has gathered information on size,
location and other site characteristics to better evaluate compliance
costs associated with the control of storm water runoff from oil and
gas construction activities. In addition, EPA has met with various
stakeholders, including visits to a number of oil and gas sites with
construction-related activities, to discuss and review existing best
management practices for preventing contamination of storm water runoff
resulting from construction associated with these oil and gas
activities. Based on recent information provided by the U.S. Department
of Energy, EPA now estimates that on average there are 30,000 oil and
gas construction ``starts'' per year, including exploration and
development activities. Although EPA was aware of this estimate two
years ago (See 68 FR 11327 (March 10, 2003)), the Agency has
investigated this figure further and is now more confident that it
represents a reasonable estimate of the additional sites that should
have been considered when EPA promulgated the Phase II rule. Initially,
EPA assumed that very few of these starts would incur compliance costs
associated with the Phase II rule because most of them would be less
than one acre. However, EPA now believes that the majority of such
sites may exceed one acre when the acreage attributed to lease roads,
pipeline right-of-ways and other infrastructure facilities is
apportioned to each site. During the past two years, EPA has also
gathered economic data for the industry and is currently completing an
economic impact analysis of the existing Phase II regulations specific
to the oil and gas industry. EPA's analysis performed to date
recognizes that there can be administrative delays in the permitting
process that were not considered in the original economic analysis for
the 1999 Phase II rulemaking. In addition to concerns about costs and
economic impacts, EPA notes that issues have been raised by several
outside parties regarding Section 402(l)(2) of the CWA, which exempts
certain storm water discharges from oil and gas exploration,
production, processing, or treatment operations or transmission
facilities from the NPDES permit requirement.
EPA believes that further postponing the date for NPDES regulation
is appropriate for these sources because the Agency needs additional
time to complete its evaluation of the economic and legal issues that
have been raised. Moreover, EPA is continuing to evaluate procedures
and methods for controlling storm water discharges from these sources
as appropriate to mitigate impacts on water quality. Through this
action, EPA is proposing to exercise its authority under CWA Section
402(p)(6) to decide which sources to regulate through NPDES permits and
in particular, when to regulate those sources. In the meantime, EPA
strongly encourages oil and gas operators to employ best management
practices (BMPs) while engaged in construction activities to minimize
any water quality problems that may be associated with this type of
construction. EPA strongly recommends that operators consider employing
the BMPs described on the Agency's NPDES storm water Web site at:
http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/menuofbmps/con_site.cfm.
III. Today's Action
In today's action, EPA is proposing to extend until June 12, 2006,
the deadline for obtaining NPDES storm water permits for oil and gas
construction activity that disturbs at least one acre, but less than
five acres of land and sites disturbing less than one acre that are a
part of a larger common plan of development or sale that disturbs
between one and five acres. The text proposed at Sec. 122.26(e)(8) is
not meant to create any duty to apply for an NPDES permit that did not
already exist as a result of EPA's Phase II regulations. Rather, this
proposed amendment is meant merely to extend the permitting deadline
for a certain class of dischargers.
During the next fifteen months, EPA intends to (1) complete the
economic impact analysis; (2) complete the evaluation of the legal and
procedural implications associated with several options that the Agency
is considering with regard to regulation of storm water discharges from
oil and gas-related construction sites; (3) continue to evaluate
practices and methods operators may employ to control storm water
discharges from the sites affected by this proposal. EPA intends to
convene at least one public meeting with various stakeholders for the
purpose of exchanging information on current industry practices and the
effectiveness of those practices in protecting water quality and
obtaining input on the appropriate approach for addressing construction
storm water discharges from this industry. Finally, EPA expects to
propose and take some subsequent final action based on the Agency's
conclusions following these activities. EPA specifically solicits
comment on the proposed extension of the permit deadline for small oil
and gas sites. The Agency will address these comments when EPA takes
final action on today's proposal which EPA intends to do by March 10,
2005. Regarding other possible options under consideration for a
separate action, EPA does not have any specific draft regulatory
language to share with the public at this time. Within six months of
this final action, EPA intends to publish a notice of proposed
rulemaking in the Federal Register for addressing these discharges and
invite public comment.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)) the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to 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.
It has been determined that this proposed rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order
12866 and therefore is not subject to formal OMB review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed action would not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq. If promulgated, it would
[[Page 2835]]
merely postpone implementation of an existing rule deadline for
discharges associated with certain construction activity at oil and gas
sites.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information; processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business based
on SBA size standards; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a
government of a city, county, town, school district or special district
with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization
that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and
operated and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Because EPA
proposes to postpone a deadline for numerous small entities to comply
with NPDES permit requirements, this proposed action will not impose
any burden on any small entity. We continue to be interested in the
potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and welcome
comments on issues related to such impacts.
D. 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, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, Section 205 of 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 provisions of Section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
Section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
Section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
EPA has determined that this proposed rule to change an NPDES
deadline would not contain a Federal mandate that may result in
expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one year.
The proposed rule would not impose any additional costs to these
entities. Thus, today's proposed rule is not subject to the
requirements of Sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. For the same reason,
EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory requirements
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Thus,
today's proposed rule is not subject to the requirements of Section 203
of UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.''
This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. If
promulgated, 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus,
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule
from State and local officials.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled, ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.''
This proposed rule does not have Tribal implications. It will not
have substantial direct effects on Tribal governments, 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, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.
EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed rule
from tribal officials.
[[Page 2836]]
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health
or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have 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
regulation is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not
economically significant as defined under E.O. 12866.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This proposed rule would not be subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it
is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. The
only effect of this proposed rule would be to (1) delay the permit
authorization requirement for discharges associated with certain
construction activity at oil and gas sites by an additional fifteen
months and (2) allow EPA time necessary to develop a further proposal
to address storm water discharges from such activities.
I. National Technology Transfer And Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Pub. L. 104-113, Section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note) 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 standard bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
However, EPA is exploring the availability and potential use of
voluntary consensus standards developed consistent with the NTTAA as a
means of addressing storm water runoff from oil and gas construction
activities. Assuming that EPA ultimately extends the permitting
deadline as proposed, the Agency would expect any future action to
incorporate the use of voluntary consensus standards where such
standards are available consistent with NTTAA and the requirements of
the CWA.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 122
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control.
Dated: January 12, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Deputy Administrator.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, chapter I of title 40 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 122--EPA ADMINISTERED PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT
DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
1. The authority citation for part 122 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: The Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.
Subpart B--[Amended]
2. Revise Sec. 122.26(e)(8) to read as follows:
Sec. 122.26 Storm water discharges (applicable to State NPDES
programs, see Sec. 123.25).
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(8) For any storm water discharge associated with small
construction activity identified in paragraph (b)(15)(i) of this
section, see Sec. 122.21(c)(1). Discharges from these sources, other
than discharges associated with small construction activity at oil and
gas exploration, production, processing, and treatment operations or
transmission facilities, require permit authorization by March 10,
2003, unless designated for coverage before then. Discharges associated
with small construction activity at such oil and gas sites require
permit authorization by June 12, 2006.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-930 Filed 1-14-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P