[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 199 (Friday, October 11, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53307-53311]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-26207]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Part 946
[Docket No. 960418114-6278-04]
RIN 0648-AF72
Weather Service Modernization Criteria
AGENCY: National Weather Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Weather Service Modernization Act, 15
U.S.C. 313n (the Act), the National Weather Service (NWS) is publishing
an amendment to its criteria for modernization actions requiring
certification. This amendment adds criteria unique to closing a field
office to ensure that closure actions will not result in any
degradation of service. Closing a field office is the final step in an
often complex transition process in which a field office is carefully
phased out at the same time as one or more associated Weather Forecast
Offices (WFO) assume the service responsibilities for that office.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 11, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of documents stated in the preamble as
being available upon request should be sent to Julie Scanlon, NOAA/NWS,
SSMC2, Room 9332, 1325 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, Maryland
20910.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nicholas Scheller, 301-713-0454.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 6, 1996, the NWS published, for
comment, proposed modernization criteria unique to closing a field
office (see 61 FR 28804). In that notice, there were two minor errors.
The first was a typographical error in section II.A.5 of Attachment 1
to the June 6, 1996 notice, as was pointed out in one of the public
comments (see comment B.1. below). The correct figure is 10,000 feet as
indicated in section 706(b)(4) of Public Law 102-567. The second error
appeared in the Supplementary Information section of the June 6, 1996
notice. Under ``Evaluation of Services to In-state Users'', the list of
field offices planned for closure that are the only field office in a
state incorrectly included Weather Service Office (WSO) Hartford, CT.
The correct list of field offices planned for closure that are the only
field office in a state is: WSO Baltimore, MD; WSO Concord, NH; WSO
Providence, RI; and WSO Wilmington, DE.
After consideration of the public comments that were received and,
after consultation with the National Research Council's (NRC) NWS
Modernization Committee and the Modernization Transition Committee
(MTC), the NWS is now establishing the final modernization criteria for
closing a field office. Consultation with the NRC's NWS Modernization
Committee was completed on September 9, 1996. During consultation with
the MTC on September 19, 1996, the MTC offered the following:
The Modernization Transition Committee (MTC) has reviewed the
comments received in response to the notice in the Federal Register,
considered information provided through presentations and reports,
and thoroughly discussed the issue of closure of National Weather
Service offices in relationship to modernization with the following
conclusions:
1. The criteria for closure are consistent with the need to
maintain timely and accurate weather services; and
2. When applied the criteria will ensure no degradation of
weather services.
Therefore, the MTC recommends the adoption of the closure
criteria.
Peter R. Leavitt,
Chair, Modernization Transition Committee.
Public comments were received from a trade journal, Minnesota Cold
Weather Resource Center, and the State of Hawaii.
The issues and concerns raised in the comments and NWS' response
follows.
A. Comments Generally Related to the Proposed Closure Criteria
1. Comment: Three comments addressed various aspects of
notification of modernization actions: (a) One comment stated that
``The current NWS procedure of posting proposed NWS actions in the
Federal Register without concurrent notification to known interested
parties, especially individuals, local affected communities, etc. is
totally unacceptable''; (b) two comments stated that advertised local
public hearings should be held in communities affected by proposed
modernization actions, particularly certifications; (c) one comment
expressed frustration about the continual change of timetables
concerning the status of the International Falls office; and (d) one
comment requested that the State of Hawaii be kept fully informed on
the status of modernization activities and receive copies of
certifications.
Response: (a) Notification of Modernization Actions--The Federal
Register is the Federal Government's official means of providing
notification of actions, requesting public comments, etc. Public Law
102-567 specifically requires NWS to publish certain modernization
actions in the Federal Register. These include proposed and final
modernization criteria (section 704) and proposed and final
certifications (section 706). Also, the Federal Advisory Committee Act
requires advanced notification of Federal advisory committee meetings
be published in the Federal Register. Since the MTC is a Federal
advisory committee, established by section 707 of Public Law 102-567,
notification of MTC meetings are published in the Federal Register.
In recognition of the fact that weather service users may not read
the Federal Register regularly, NWS has taken additional steps to
advise interested parties of opportunities to provide input on
modernization actions. For example, in May 1996, NWS published proposed
automation criteria in the Federal Register for public comment.
Coincident with this publication, NWS mailed over 3,000 letters to
users advising them of the opportunity to comment. Also, when the
proposed closure criteria were published in the Federal Register in
June 1996, NWS sent a letter to each member of Congress advising them
of the opportunity to comment.
Beyond the Federal Register, there are several other ways in which
NWS keeps interested parties informed on modernization actions. A
National Implementation Plan (NIP) is published annually as required by
section 703 of Public Law 102-567. In addition to describing the
overall NWS modernization program, the NIP provides a detailed status
report on implementation progress and state-by-state notification
tables that list completed and upcoming (next 3 years)
[[Page 53308]]
modernization activities for each weather office. The NIP is
distributed to each member of Congress, cooperating agencies, state and
local governments, and users of weather services. Each of the 119
future Weather Forecast Offices operates an extensive outreach program
that includes notification to users several years in advance of
modernization actions technical coordination with users several months
prior to modernization actions, and follow-up with users after
modernization actions. This outreach program was described in detail in
the June 6, 1996 Federal Register notice that proposed closure criteria
and is also described in the annual NIP.
(b) Local Public Hearings--The MTC was established to review
certifications as well as advise the Secretary of Commerce and Congress
on implementation of modernization and matters of public safety and the
provision of weather services which relate to modernization. The MTC is
comprised of representatives from the NWS, the Department of Defense,
the Federal Aviation Administration, the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, civil defense and public safety organizations, news media, the
National Weather Service Employees Organization, and private sector
users of weather information, as prescribed by section 707 of Public
Law 102-567. Each proposed certification is made available to the MTC
for review and is also published in the Federal Register for a 60-day
public comment period. Meetings of the MTC are held about 4 times per
year to review certifications that have completed the 60-day public
comment period. The MTC is provided with copies of all public comments
received. MTC findings, conclusions and recommendations on each
certification are included as part of the certification package that
goes to the Secretary of Commerce for decision. Where particular
community concern is evident, the MTC is willing to hold a meeting in
that community. For example, in 1994, the MTC held meetings in Redwood
City and Monterey, California to consider the proposed relocation of
the San Francisco Weather Service Forecast Office from Redwood City to
Monterey. As mentioned previously, the MTC is a Federal advisory
committee, so advanced notification of MTC meetings are published in
the Federal Register, the meetings are open to the public, and a public
comment period is part of the meeting agenda so that members of the
public may address the MTC directly.
(c) Changing Timetables--NWS recognizes how frustrating changing
schedules can be. There are several reasons why modernization schedules
change. First, the NWS modernization program is a very complex, multi-
year effort encompassing a number of major system programs, each with
its own development/deployment schedule. Second, year-to-year budget
decisions often result in schedule adjustments. Lastly, many
modernization actions are event driven, e.g., decommissioning of an old
system requires commissioning of the replacement system. While calendar
schedules are forecast for these type of actions, until all
prerequisites are actually met, the action can not be taken, NWS
attempts to keep all interested parties informed of the latest schedule
for modernization actions through the NIP and local outreach efforts as
described above in the response to comment A.1.a.
(d) Status of Modernization in Hawaii--NWS agrees and will keep the
State of Hawaii fully informed on the status of modernization
activities through the annual NIP and its outreach program as described
in the response to comment A.1.a. Copies of proposed and final
certifications are published in the Federal Register.
2. Comment: Two comments stated that an independent review of
certifications recommended by the Meteorologist-In-Charge (MIC) is
needed to assure an objective and thorough process.
Response: There are several mechanisms in place to provide
independent oversight of NWS modernization. As described in the
response to comment A.1.b above, the MTC provides independent review of
each certification. The National Academy of Science's National Research
Council (NRC) established an NWS Modernization Committee in 1990. In
the past 6\1/2\ years, this Committee has reviewed and reported on NWS
modernization both in its entirety and from a number of specific
perspectives. With respect to certification, in 1993, the NRC's
Modernization Committee reviewed and reported on the modernization
criteria on which the certifications would be based. This Committee
will continue to provide oversight of NWS modernization for at least
the next several years. Following is a list of NRC reports already
issued on NWS modernization:
{time} Toward A New National Weather Service--A First Report, March
1990
{time} Toward A New National Weather Service--A Second Report, April
1991
{time} Review of Modernization Criteria, July 1993
{time} National Weather Service Employee Feedback, April 1994
{time} Weather for Those Who Fly, April 1994
{time} Assessment of NEXRAD Coverage and Associated Weather Services,
June 1995
{time} The importance of the United States Weather Research Program
for NWS Modernization, February 1996
3. Comment: One comment stated that ``Many citizens of northern
Minnesota continue to feel that they are/will not receive the same
level of service from the NWS as the rest of the country.''
Response: Public Law 102-567 established a ``no degradation of
service'' requirement to be applied on an affected area by affected
area basis. This requirement is satisfied through the certification
process which must show that modernized weather services for an
affected area are at least equal to pre-modernized weather services for
that affected area. Comparison of one area to another area is not part
of the certification requirement.
4. Comment: One comment took exception to actions that do not
require certification, i.e., commissioning of new weather observation
systems and decommissioning outdated NWS radars. This comment stated
that ``An `outdated NWS radar' should not be decommissioned until it is
demonstrated that its intended replacement provides acceptable
performance and coverage of the required area down to an altitude of
10,000 feet. Appropriate performance criteria should be established for
such actions.''
Response: NWS agrees that appropriate criteria should be
established for certain modernization actions that do not require
certification. Section 704 of Public Law 102-567 requires establishment
of modernization criteria for: ``commissioning new weather observation
systems, decommissioning an outdated National Weather Service radar,
and evaluating staffing needs for field offices in an affected service
area.'' These modernization criteria were published for public comment
on December 6, 1993 (see 58 FR 64202) and were based on the July 1993
NRC report, Review of Modernization Criteria. After consultation with
both the NRC and the MTC and consideration of public comments that were
received, final modernization criteria for these actions were published
on March 2, 1994 (see 59 FR 9921). The criteria established for
decommissioning an ``outdated NWS radar'' do require that the replacing
NEXRADs (WSR-88Ds) be commissioned (i.e., satisfactorily support
warning and forecast services)
[[Page 53309]]
and that confirmation of services with users be obtained. The basic
requirement of Public Law 102-567 is that there be no degradation of
service and our criteria require that we identify where NEXRAD coverage
at 10,000 feet will and will not be provided to the affected service
area. However, there is no requirement for NEXRAD coverage at an
elevation of 10,000 feet.
5. Comment: One comment pointed out that ``pending actions in the
Congress that COULD effectively cancel or greatly modify current
modernization criteria provisions in the federal law. Thus review of
NWS modernization criteria is premature. This review should be
postponed until final Congressional action is taken on the matter.''
Response: The Civilian Science Authorization Act of 1996, House
Resolution 3322, includes a provision to streamline the certification
requirements of Public Law 102-567. The Senate has not taken any action
to change the certification requirements of Public Law 102-567. NWS can
not anticipate Congressional action and must continue to meet the
requirements of the existing law; therefore, establishment of closure
criteria is not premature. If and when changes to Public Law 102-567
are enacted, NWS will revise modernization criteria and certification
procedures as required to comply with any enacted changes.
6. Comment: One comment stated that ``It is not clear how these
proposed criteria will apply to the recent recommendations of the
Secretary of Commerce to the Congress on further changes to the
Modernization Plan. That should be clarified in this document.''
Response: In October 1995, the Secretary of Commerce released his
report, Secretary's Report to Congress on Adequacy of NEXRAD Coverage
and Degradation of Weather Services Under National Weather Service
Modernization for 32 Areas of Concern. This report assessed potential
degradation of service for 32 areas of concern that had been
established through the solicitation of comments from the public in
late 1994. The assessment utilized criteria developed by the National
Research Council in their June 1995 report, Toward a New National
Weather Service--Assessment of NEXRAD Coverage and Associated Weather
Services. The Secretary's report determined that new NEXRADs in
northern Indiana, northern Alabama and western Arkansas and a new WFO
in northern Indiana were needed to mitigate inadequacies in the
original modernization plan. The Secretary's report also identified
several areas of concern where further study was needed. In a sense,
the Secretary's report can be viewed as a mid-course review/adjustment
of the modernization program. This mid-course review/adjustment was
conducted in accordance with study guidelines (appendix A of the
Secretary's report) which stated in part, ``Submission of a report
under this section shall not relieve the Secretary from the requirement
of section 706(b) of the WSMA to certify no degradation of service when
she/he restructures a field office.'' Thus the proposed closure
criteria must be established to provide the basis for closure
certifications.
B. Comments Specifically Related to the Proposed Closure Criteria
1. Comment: One comment stated that ``The criteria for closure are
consistent with maintaining timely and accurate weather services for
Maui County.''
Response: NWS agrees.
2. Comment: One comment pointed out that there was an error in the
June 6, 1996 Federal Register notice.
Response: NWS agrees. There was a typographical error in section
II.A.5 of Attachment 1 to the June 6, 1996 notice. The correct figure
is 10,000 feet as indicated in section 706(b)(4) of Public Law 102-567.
The common criteria, attachment 1, were republished with the proposed
criteria unique to closure certification for the convenience of the
reader. These common criteria were established as final criteria on
March 2, 1994 (see 59 FR 9921).
3. Comment: Two comments addressed several aspects of NEXRAD
coverage at an elevation of 10,000 feet. One comment stated that ``In
the event that any community will not have coverage down to 10,000 feet
the existing local NWS radar should not be decommissioned or the local
WSO be closed. It should be noted that currently there are no
provisions if the NWS cannot certify coverage down to 10,000 feet for
any locality.'' Another comment stated that ``the fact remains that
portions of northern Minnesota are not covered by NEXRAD at the 10,000
foot level--the base criteria established by the NWS.''
Response: As mentioned in the response to comment A.4, there is no
requirement in Public Law 102-567 for NEXRAD coverage at an elevation
of 10,000 feet. Further, NWS has never established a criterion that
requires NEXRAD coverage at an elevation of 10,000 feet. Section
706(b)(4) of Public Law 102-567 does require each certification to
identify any area that will not be covered by NEXRAD at an elevation of
10,000 feet. Because of concerns about the adequacy of NEXRAD coverage,
the NRC conducted a study which compared pre-modernized and modernized
radar coverage for a number of weather phenomena. The NRC developed
criteria to assess the impact of degraded radar coverage for any
weather phenomenon on the quality of weather services. In June 1995,
the NRC delivered their report entitled, Toward a New National Weather
Service--Assessment of NEXRAD Coverage and Associated Weather Services.
A team of experts applied the NRC's criteria and prepared the
Secretary's Report to Congress on Adequacy of NEXRAD Coverage and
Degradation of Weather Services Under National Weather Service
Modernization for 32 Areas of Concern. In some cases, the Secretary's
Report concluded that degraded radar coverage would result in a
degradation of weather services and recommended mitigation actions (see
response to comment A.6). In other cases, the Secretary's Report
concluded that small areas of degraded radar coverage for particular
weather phenomena would not result in a degradation of weather
services. Ultimately, it is the certification process that will assess
the degradation of weather services for each affected area.
4. Comment: One comment asked ``Has the timetable for the liaison
officer been definitely set, and will they have access to the proper
tools to effectively do their job?''
Response: The liaison officer is designated at the time of
certification. Since certifications are event driven, (see the response
to comment A.1.c) timetables for liaison officers do sometimes change.
The annual NIP provides notification tables for when modernization
actions, including certifications, are expected to occur at each NWS
office. Section 706(f) of Public Law 102-567 specifies the duties of
the liaison officer as:
(1) Providing timely information regarding the activities of the
National Weather Service which may affect service to the community,
including modernization and restructuring: and
(2) working with area weather service users, including persons
associated with general aviation, civil defense, emergency
preparedness, and the news media, with respect to the provision of
timely weather warnings and forecasts.
All liaison offices will be provided with the necessary tools and
resources to perform these duties.
5. Comment: Concerning the Air Safety Appraisal, one comment stated
that ``This appraisal should include the effect of NEXRAD non-real time
[[Page 53310]]
operation on affected airport operations.''
Response: As part of the certification for closure or relocation of
a field office which is located on an airport, section 706(e)(1) of
Public Law 102-567 requires an air safety appraisal be conducted to
determine that such action will not result in degradation of service
that affects aircraft safety. The required air safety appraisal will
address the provision of weather services that affect aircraft safety.
Since NEXRAD is a tool used by NWS in the provision of these aviation
weather services, use of NEXRAD will be, at a minimum, implicitly
included in the appraisal.
6. Comment: One comment requested that ``NOAA ensure that the Maui
NWS office is not closed until all modernization and restructuring
(MAR) systems (4 Doppler weather radars, 8 Automated Surface Observing
Systems, GOES 9 and the AWIPS) are fully installed and performing to
expectations.''
Response: The Kahului Weather Service Office on Maui will not be
closed until the Secretary of Commerce can certify no degradation of
service. The ability to certify will be dependent on installation and
satisfactory performance of modernized systems, although not
necessarily all the ones listed in the comment. However, all 4 Doppler
weather radars and all 8 Automated Surface Observing Systems are
installed and several are already operational. GOES 9 has been launched
and is operational. AWIPS will be deployed and made operational at WFO
Honolulu prior to initiating the closure certification for WSO Kahului.
7. Comment: One comment stated that ``No action has been taken to
provide for lake wind advisories for the Rainy Lake area and Lake of
The Woods--two large bodies of water that host a great deal of
recreation.''
Response: In Minnesota, when winds are expected to meet a specified
criteria, the forecast office issues a wind advisory for area lakes.
The following conditions must be expected to exist for more than three
hours; sustained winds at speeds of 20 to 30 mph and gusts over 30 mph.
The advisories are typically issued during the months of April through
November, but in Northern Minnesota most advisories are issued between
May and October. These time frames are variable due to ice cover on the
lakes. The advisories are issued under the product ID MSPNPWMSP (WMO
header WWUS45 KMSP). In addition to the MSPNPWMSP product, wind
forecasts for the areas of concern can be found in the Minnesota Zone
Forecast Product MSPZFPMN (WMO header FPUS5 KMSP) and the Short Term
Forecasts. Short Term Forecasts for the Lake of the Woods area can be
found under the product BISNOWFAR (WMO header FXUS21 KFAR). Short term
forecasts for the Rainy Lake area can be found under the product
MSPNOWDLH (WMO header FXUS21 KDLH). The Zone Forecast Product provides
forecast information for generally a two day time period. Forecasts
from zero to six hours can be found in the Short Term Forecasts. The
products described above are available through: NWS Family of Services;
NOAA Weather Wire Service; NOAA Weather Radio; the media; and the
Internet (IWIN on the NWS home page). NOAA Weather Radio transmitters
are located in Littlefork (near International Falls and Rainy Lake) and
in Roosevelt (near Lake of the Woods).
C. Other Comments
1. Comment: One comment stated that ``Continued reports of ASOS
limitations in term (sic) of detecting various forms of precipitation
have not been addressed (sic). Also, there are reports of lost data
from ASOS locations.''
Response: Similar comments were received in response to the
proposed automation criteria that were published on May 2, 1996 (see 61
FR 19594). Responses to these comments were provided in the July 31,
1996 notice that established final automation criteria for service
level A, B and C airports (see 61 FR 39862). The NWS, as stated in the
response to these comments, is continuing to operate cooperative
observer stations and considering opening new COOP stations where
observations are scarce. In addition, the Supplementary Data Program
became operational on October 1, 1995 at 119 WFOs, where staffing and
equipment permits.
2. Comment: One comment took exception to the statement ``* * *
these criteria, if adopted as proposed, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. These
proposed criteria are intended for internal agency use only and will
not directly affect small business. * * * Accordingly no initial
regulatory flexibility analysis has been prepared.'' The comment then
stated that ``These criteria can effect EVERY business small or large,
and every government agency if the resulting National Weather Service
system fails to provide to the general public adequate, timely warning
of severe weather, especially tornadoes. Negative effects of ASOS
performance on national climatological records will have a devastating
effect on small businesses that depend on the validity of
climatological records. These criteria should be sent to the Chief
Council for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for review.''
Response: NWS has fully complied with the requirements of 5 U.S.C.
601 et seq., the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
605(b), NWS sent the proposed regulations to the Chief Counsel for
advocacy of the Small Business Administration along with a
certification that these criteria, if adopted, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This regulation merely establishes the procedures that will be followed
in meeting the requirement contained in Public Law 102-567, that NWS
cannot close a field office until the Secretary of Commerce certifies
to the Congress that there will be no degradation of service to the
affected area. This requirement will assure that NWS will fulfill its
mission and continue to provide the same level of weather forecasts,
warnings and advisories for the protection of life and property in the
United States. Moreover, this requirement ensures that any potential
impact of a closure, including the economic impact on small businesses
will be slight.
A. Classification Under Executive Order 12866
These regulations have been determined not to be significant for
purposes of E.O. 12866.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
These regulations set forth the criteria for certifying that
certain modernization actions will not result in a degradation of
service to the affected area. These criteria will be appended to the
Weather Service Modernization regulations. The Assistant General
Counsel for Legislation and Regulation of the Department of Commerce
has certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration when these criteria were proposed, that if adopted, they
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. Response to a comment received in regarding the
certification was addressed above. Accordingly, no final regulatory
flexibility analysis was prepared.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980
These regulations will impose no information collection
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
[[Page 53311]]
D. E.O. 12612
This rule does not contain policies with sufficient Federalism
implications to warrant preparation of a Federalism assessment under
Executive Order 12612.
E. National Environmental Policy Act
NOAA has concluded that issuance of this rule does not constitute a
major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment. Therefore, an environmental impact statement is not
required. A programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) regarding
NEXRAD was prepared in November 1984, and an Environmental Assessment
to update the portion of the EIS dealing with the bioeffects of NEXRAD
non-ionizing radiation was issued in 1993.
List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 946
Administrative practice and procedure, Certification,
Commissioning, Decommissioning, National Weather Service, Weather
service modernization.
Dated: October 8, 1996.
Elbert W. Friday, Jr.,
Assistant Administrator for Weather Services.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 15 CFR part 946 is amended
as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 946 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Title VII of Pub. L. 102-567, 106 Stat 4303 (15
U.S.C. 313n.)
2. Appendix A to part 946 is amended by adding a new Subsection (D)
under Section II. CRITERIA FOR MODERNIZATION ACTIONS REQUIRING
CERTIFICATION, to read as follows:
(E) Modernization Criteria Unique to Closure Certifications
1. Consolidation Certification: If the field office proposed for
closure has or will be consolidated, as defined in Sec. 946.2 of the
basic modernization regulations, this action has been completed as
evidenced by the approved certification or can be completed as
evidenced by all of the documentation that all of the requirements
of sections II.A. and II.B of this Annex have been completed.
2. Automation Certification: If the field office proposed for
closure has or will be automated, as defined in Sec. 946.2 of the
basic modernization regulations, this action has been completed as
evidenced by the approved certification or can be completed as
evidenced by documentation that all of the requirements of sections
II.A. and II.C. of this Annex has been completed.
3. Remaining Services and/or Observations: All remaining service
and/or observational responsibilities, if applicable to the field
office proposed for closure, have been transmitted as addressed in
the MIC's recommendation for certification.
4. User Confirmation of Services: Any valid user complaints
received related to provision of weather services have been
satisfactorily resolved and the issues addressed in the MIC's
recommendation for certification.
5. Warning and Forecast Verification: Warning and forecast
verification statistics, produced in accordance with the Closure
Certification Verification Plan, have been utilized in support of
the MIC's recommendation for certification.
[FR Doc. 96-26207 Filed 10-10-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-12-M
