[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 30, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34395-34399]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13334]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OH135-1a, FRL-6600-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Ohio

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving, as set forth below, a request from Ohio 
for a revision to the Ohio State Implementation Plan (SIP) for 
transportation conformity. The transportation conformity SIP revision 
enables the State of Ohio to implement and enforce the Federal 
transportation conformity requirements at the State or local level. The 
submitted amendments to Ohio Administrative Code reflect the third set 
of EPA revisions to the federal transportation conformity rules. These 
rule changes will assure conformity of transportation improvement 
programs, transportation plans and transportation projects to the SIP. 
On October 6, 1999, the State of Ohio submitted the adopted rules and 
public hearing documentation to EPA and requested a revision to the 
federally approved SIP.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 31, 2000, unless EPA receives 
adverse written comments by June 29, 2000. If adverse comment is 
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the 
Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take 
effect.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, 
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604.
    Copies of the material submitted by the State in support of this 
request is available for inspection at the Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. (Please telephone Patricia Morris 
at (312) 353-8656 before visiting the Region 5 Office.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Morris, Environmental 
Scientist, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), USEPA, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8656.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. What is Transportation Conformity?
    B. Why Must the State Submit a Transportation Conformity SIP?
II. Review of the State Transportation Conformity Rule.
    A. What Did the State Submit?
    B. How Does the Submittal Change the Currently Approved State 
Transportation Conformity Rules?
    C. What is EPA Approving Today and Why?
III. Rulemaking Actions
IV. Administrative Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866
    B. Executive Orders on Federalism
    C. Executive Order 13045
    D. Executive Order 13084
    E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    F. Unfunded Mandates
    G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
    H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    I. Petitions for Judicial Review

I. Background

A. What is Transportation Conformity?

    The purpose of transportation conformity is to assure that 
transportation plans, programs and projects, approved by the United 
States Department of Transportation conform to the purpose of the SIP 
to attain and maintain the public health based air quality standards. 
Conformity provisions first appeared in the Clean Air Act (CAA) 
amendments of 1977 (Public Law 95-95). Although these provisions did 
not define the term conformity, they provided that no Federal 
department could engage in, support in any way or provide financial 
assistance for, license or permit, or approve any activity which did 
not conform to a SIP that has been approved or promulgated for the 
nonattainment or maintenance areas.
    The CAA Amendments of 1990 expanded the scope and content of the 
conformity provisions by defining conformity to an implementation plan. 
Conformity is defined in section 176(c) of the CAA as conformity to the 
SIP's purpose of eliminating or reducing the severity and number of 
violations of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards and achieving 
expeditious attainment of such standards, and that affected activities 
will not: (1) Cause or contribute to any new violation of any standard 
in any area, (2) increase the frequency or severity of any existing 
violation of any standard in any area, or (3) delay timely attainment 
of any standard or any required interim emission reductions or other 
milestones in any area.
    The CAA requires EPA to promulgate criteria and procedures for 
determining conformity of all Federal actions in the nonattainment or 
maintenance areas to the SIP. Actions under title 23 United States Code 
(U.S.C.) or the Federal Transit Act are covered under the 
transportation conformity rules codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart T 
and part 93, subpart A--Conformity to State or Federal Implementation 
Plans of Transportation Plans, Programs, and Projects Developed, Funded 
or Approved Under Title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act. The 
criteria and procedures developed for all other federal actions are 
called ``general conformity'' rules.

B. Why Must the State Submit a Transportation Conformity SIP?

    The original 1993 conformity rule required the States and local 
agencies to adopt and submit a transportation conformity SIP revision 
to the EPA not later than November 24, 1994 (40 CFR 51.396). Ohio 
submitted its SIP revision for state transportation conformity rules on 
August 17, 1995.
    The federal transportation conformity rule however, was amended on 
August 8, 1995, and again on November 14, 1995. The November 14, 1995, 
amendments allow 12 months, or until November 14, 1996, for States to 
submit a transportation conformity SIP revision consistent with these 
amendments. Ohio had submitted state conformity rules consistent with 
the original November 24, 1994, conformity rules on August 17, 1995, 
and these rules were conditionally approved by EPA on May 16, 1996 (61 
FR 24702). The condition of the approval was that Ohio update the State 
transportation conformity rules to be consistent with the federal 
amendments. Ohio updated its State

[[Page 34396]]

rules and met the condition of the conditional approval within the 
allotted time.
    The federal conformity rule was again amended on August 15, 1997 
(40 CFR parts 51 and 93 Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: 
Flexibility and Streamlining). States were again given a 12 month time 
frame to submit State rules consistent with the amendment. Ohio 
proceeded to update the state transportation conformity rules and 
submitted the rules on October 6, 1999 (this submittal is the subject 
of this rulemaking action). However, on March 2, 1999, the United 
States Court of Appeals for District of Columbia Circuit issued its 
opinion in Environmental Defense Fund v. Environmental Protection 
Agency, No. 97-1637. The Court granted the environmental group's 
petition for review and ruled that several provisions in the federal 
transportation conformity rules were unlawful. The rules approved in 
this rulemaking are consistent with the August 15, 1997, federal 
conformity amendments that remained unchanged by the Court decision. 
However, Ohio will need to submit another transportation conformity SIP 
revision consistent with future amendments to the transportation 
conformity rule.
    The approval of these State transportation conformity rules will 
update the federally approved State rules to be more consistent with 
the federal conformity rules, thereby improving the conformity process 
and providing consistency with other States rules and the federal rule.

II. Review of the State Transportation Conformity Rule

A. What Did the State Submit?

    Pursuant to the requirements under section 176(c)(4)(C) of the 
Clean Air Act, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) 
submitted a SIP revision to the EPA on October 6, 1999. In its 
submittal, the State adopted State rules to meet the requirements of 40 
CFR part 51, subpart T, and part 93 subpart A, as published on August 
15, 1997. Transportation conformity is required for all nonattainment 
or maintenance areas for any transportation related criteria pollutants 
(40 CFR 51.394 (b)).
    The State of Ohio currently has 28 counties which are ozone 
nonattainment or ozone maintenance areas and thus require Ohio to 
prepare transportation conformity analyses. These areas are: Toledo 
area (Lucas and Wood Counties), Cleveland/Akron area (Lorain, Cuyahoga, 
Medina, Summit, Portage, Geauga, Lake, and Ashtabula Counties), 
Youngstown area (Trumbull and Mahoning Counties), Canton (Stark 
County), Columbus (Franklin, Delaware and Licking Counties), Cincinnati 
(Hamilton, Butler, Clermont, and Warren Counties), Dayton (Preble, 
Montgomery, and Greene Counties), Springfield (Miami and Clark 
Counties), Clinton County, Columbiana County, and Jefferson County. In 
addition to the ozone nonattainment and maintenance areas, Cuyahoga 
County is also a maintenance area for carbon monoxide.
    Section 51.390 of the transportation conformity rule requires that 
the majority of the Federal rules be incorporated verbatim, with only a 
few exceptions. In addition, the rule states that State rules can not 
be more stringent than the Federal rules unless the conformity 
provisions ``apply equally to non-federal as well as Federal entities'' 
(40 CFR 51.396(a)). The OEPA held a public hearing on the 
transportation conformity submittal on December 10, 1998.

B. How Does the Submittal Change the Currently Approved State 
Transportation Conformity Rules?

    The currently approved Ohio conformity rules comply with the 1994 
federal conformity regulations. These federal regulations have been 
amended significantly, as discussed in the previous section. The Ohio 
submittal revises the State conformity regulations consistent with the 
1997 Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: Flexibility and 
Streamlining, which is the most current federal transportation 
conformity regulation.
    Section 51.390 of the federal transportation conformity rule states 
that to be approved by the EPA, the submitted SIP revision must 
``address all requirements of this subpart in a manner which gives them 
full legal effect.'' In particular, the revision shall incorporate the 
provisions of the following sections verbatim, except insofar as needed 
to give effect to a stated intent in the revision to establish criteria 
and procedure more stringent than the requirements stated in these 
sections: 93.101, 93.102, 93.103, 93.104, 93.106, 93.109, 93.110, 
93.111, 93.112, 93.113, 93.114, 93.115, 93.116, 93.117, 93.118, 93.119, 
93.120, 93.121, 93.126, and 93.127. The State of Ohio submittal 
incorporated all of the above sections verbatim following the August 
15, 1997 version of the federal rules, with only clarifying changes. 
The criteria and procedures for consultation between State and local 
agencies, metropolitan planning organizations and federal agencies were 
changed from the previous State consultation rules. These changes are 
not being approved, as discussed further in the next section.

C. What is EPA Approving Today and Why?

    We are approving certain sections of the Ohio transportation 
conformity rule amendments which were adopted on January 26, 1999, and 
became effective on February 16, 1999.
    The following is a summary of the Ohio Administrative Code and the 
sections that are being approved and why, and the sections that are not 
being approved and why:
    OAC 3745-101-02 Definitions. These definitions are consistent with 
the federal rule and the Court decisions. This rule is being approved.
    OAC 3745-101-03 (A), (B), (C), (D), (G), (H), (I), (J), (K), (L) 
Applicability, priority, and frequency of conformity determinations. 
The sections listed are being approved as consistent with the federal 
rule and the Court decisions. However, sections (E) and (F) are not 
being approved. Section E allows projects to proceed to completion 
after completing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 
requirements. This provision was struck down by the court in case No. 
97-1637. Section F allows a grace period of 12 months for new 
nonattainment areas. This was disallowed by the United States Court of 
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in case No. 96-1007.
    OAC 3745-101-04 Consultation. This section is not being approved. 
The State is required to promulgate procedures and rules for 
consultation between State and local agencies, metropolitan planning 
organizations and federal agencies. Although this section has not been 
affected by the Court decisions, the submitted version does not have 
the detail of the previously approved consultation rule. Therefore, 
rule OAC 3745-101-04 will remain the same as previously approved.
    OAC 3745-101-05 Content of transportation plans. This section is 
being approved. It is consistent with the federal rule and the Court 
decisions.
    OAC 3745-101-06 Relationship with NEPA and fiscal constraints. This 
section is being approved. It is consistent with the federal rule and 
the Court decisions.
    OAC 3745-101-07 Criteria and procedures for conformity 
determination, assumptions, emissions model, and consultation. Sections 
A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J are being approved except for the 
parts of the sections which require a submitted budget to be used 45 
days after submittal to EPA. These sections are contrary to the March 
2, 1999, Court

[[Page 34397]]

decisions. The parts of sections that are not being approved are as 
follows: OAC 3745-101-07 (C)(1)(a), (C)(2)(a),
    OAC 3745-101-08 Criteria and procedures for implementation of TCMs, 
current conformity, and projects from a plan and TIP. This section is 
being approved. It is consistent with the federal rule and the Court 
decisions.
    OAC 3745-101-09 Localized CO and PM10 violations and compliance 
with PM10 control measures. This section is being approved. It is 
consistent with the federal rule and the Court decisions.
    OAC 3745-101-10 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets. Sections A, B, C 
and D are being approved because these sections are consistent with the 
federal rule and the Court decisions. Section E is not being approved 
because it is not consistent with the March 2, 1999 Court decisions.
    OAC 3745-101-11 Criteria and Procedures: Emission Reductions in 
Areas Without Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets. This section is being 
approved. It is consistent with the federal rule and the Court 
decisions.
    OAC 3745-101-12 Consequences of Control Strategy Implementation 
Plan Failures. This section is being approved because it is consistent 
with the federal rule and the Court decisions, except for section 
(A)(2) which allows 120 days after a control strategy SIP disapproval 
before a conformity lapse takes effect. The Court ruled that a 
conformity lapse must take effect on the same day as the effective date 
of a control strategy disapproval.
    OAC 3745-101-13 Requirements for Adoption or Approval of Projects 
by Other Recipients of Funds Designated Under Title 23 U.S.C. or the 
Federal Transit Laws. This section is being approved because it is 
consistent with the federal rule and the Court decisions, except for 
section (A)(1) which allows a regionally significant project in the 
first 3 years of the Transportation Improvement Program to proceed 
during a conformity lapse. This provision was rescinded by the Court.
    OAC 3745-101-14 Procedures for Determining Regional Transportation-
Related Emissions. This section is being approved. It is consistent 
with the federal rule and the Court decisions.
    OAC 3745-101-15 Procedures for Determining Localized CO and PM10 
Concentrations (Hot-Spot Analysis). This section is being approved. It 
is consistent with the federal rule and the Court decisions.
    OAC 3745-101-17 Enforceability of design concept and scope and 
project-level mitigation and control measures. This section is being 
approved. It is consistent with the federal rule and the Court 
decisions.
    OAC 3745-101-18 Exempt projects. This section is being approved. It 
is consistent with the federal rule and the Court decisions.
    OAC 3745-101-19 Traffic Signal Synchronization Projects. This 
section is being approved. It is consistent with the federal rule and 
the Court decisions.

III. Rulemaking Actions

    EPA is approving portions of the Ohio Transportation Conformity SIP 
revision submitted on October 6, 1999. EPA is only approving the 
sections detailed in the above listing. The rules being approved are 
consistent with the federal transportation conformity rule and the 
subsequent Court decisions. EPA is publishing this action without prior 
proposal because EPA views this as a noncontroversial revision and 
anticipates no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in 
this Federal Register publication, EPA is proposing to approve the SIP 
revision should adverse written comments be filed. This action will be 
effective without further notice unless EPA receives significant and 
relevant adverse written comments by June 29, 2000. Should the Agency 
receive such comments, it will publish a final rule informing the 
public that this action will not take effect. Any parties interested in 
commenting on this action should do so at this time. If no such 
comments are received, the public is advised that this action will be 
effective on July 31, 2000.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory 
Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Orders on Federalism

    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. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office 
of Management and Budget 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 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.'' Today's rule does not 
create a mandate on state, local or tribal governments. The rule does 
not impose any enforceable duties on these entities. Accordingly, the 
requirements of section 1(a) of Executive Order 12875 do not apply to 
this rule.
    On August 4, 1999, President Clinton issued a new executive order 
on federalism, Executive Order 13132, (64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999),) 
which will take effect on November 2, 1999. In the interim, the current 
Executive Order 12612, (52 FR 41685 (October 30, 1987),) on federalism 
still applies. This rule will not have a substantial direct effect on 
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 12612. 
The rule affects only one State, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act.

C. 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 
Executive Order 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 rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does 
not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or 
safety risks.

D. Executive Order 13084

    Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects 
the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes 
substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the 
Federal government provides the funds

[[Page 34398]]

necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by the tribal 
governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office 
of Management and Budget, 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 rule does not 
significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal 
governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive 
Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements 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 not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental 
jurisdictions.
    This final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because SIP approvals under section 110 and 
subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create any new 
requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is already 
imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not create 
any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under 
the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute 
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such 
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

F. 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 
annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; 
or to 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 approval action promulgated does not 
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual 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 
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or 
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This rule is not a ``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing 
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with 
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards'' 
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies 
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical.
    The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's 
action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to 
the use of VCS.

I. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 31, 2000.
    Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this 
final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes 
of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition 
for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the 
effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged 
later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 
307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, 
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Transportation conformity, 
Transportation-air quality planning, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 14, 2000.
Elissa Speizman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, title 
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart KK--Ohio

    2. Section 52.1870 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(122) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.1870  Identification of Plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (122) On October 6, 1999, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 
submitted revised Transportation Conformity rules for the State of 
Ohio. The submittal made revisions to the current State plan for the 
implementation of the federal transportation conformity requirements at 
the State and local level in accordance with 40 CFR part 51, subpart 
T--Conformity to State or Federal Implementation Plans of 
Transportation Plans, Programs, and Projects

[[Page 34399]]

Developed, Funded or Approved Under Title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal 
Transit Act. Only certain sections of the submittal are approved.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Ohio Administrative Code: amended rules, OAC 3745-101-02, OAC 
3745-101-03 (A), (B), (C), (D), (G), (H), (I), (J), (K), (L), except 
(E) and (F), OAC 3745-101-05, OAC 3745-101-06, OAC 3745-101-07 (A), 
(B), (C) except for (C)(1)(a) and (C)(2)(a), (D), (E), (F), (G), (H), 
(I), (J), OAC 3745-101-08, OAC 3745-101-09, OAC 3745-101-10, OAC 3745-
101-11, OAC 3745-101-12 except for (A)(2), OAC 3745-101-13 except 
(A)(1), OAC 3745-101-14, OAC 3745-101-15, OAC 3745-101-17, OAC 3745-
101-18, OAC 3745-101-19, effective on February 16, 1999.
    (B) No action is being taken on: OAC 3745-101-04.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 00-13334 Filed 5-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P