Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 87 /Wednesday, May 6, 1998 / Notices 25031

protestants parties to the proceeding.

Any person wishing to become a party

must file a motion to intervene. Copies

of these filings are on file with the

Commission and are available for public

inspection.

David P. Boergers,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–11955 Filed 5–5–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6010–1]

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Request; Postponing

Consumption: An Examination of

Individual and Household Preferences

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this document announces

that EPA is planning to submit the

following proposed Information

Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB):

Postponing Consumption: An

Examination of Individual and

Household Preferences.

Before submitting the ICR to OMB for

review and approval, EPA is soliciting

comments on specific aspects of the

proposed information collection as

described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before July 6, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Melonie Williams (2172)

Office of Policy, Planning and

Evaluation, US EPA, 401 M St. SW,

Washington, DC 20460. Interested

persons may obtain a copy of the ICR

without charge by calling Melonie

Williams at 202–260–7978 or via e-mail

at williams.melonie@epamail.epa.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Melonie Williams at 202–260–7978 or

via e-mail at

williams.melonie@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Affected entities: Entities potentially

affected by this action are (i) those

individuals who are contacted and

asked to participate in the study and (ii)

those who voluntarily agree to

participate in the study. Residents in the

Atlanta, GA area will be contacted by

telephone (random-digit dialing),

students at an as-yet-undetermined

university will be contacted by e-mail

(via group mailing lists) and posted

announcements.

Title: Postponing Consumption: An

Examination of Individual and

Household Preferences.

Abstract: This information collection

exercise is a pilot study designed to

examine individual and household

discount rates and individual

preferences over intergenerational

distributions of wealth.

Currently, market interest rates are

used as proxies for individual and social

discount rates in economic analyses of

EPA programs. Considerable evidence

indicates, however, that these discount

rates may bear no relationship to market

rates. Instead, individual discount rates

appear to vary with respect to time

horizon, socio-demographic

characteristics, and the nature of the

good being traded across time.

This study will use the experimental

laboratory to examine individual and

household discount rates. Experiment

participants will be asked to make

intertemporal trade-offs and discount

rates will be inferred from their choices.

Participants will also be asked to

provide information on their sociodemographic characteristics and

financial market activities. Ultimately,

these data will be used to (i) generate

individual and household discount rates

for use in economic models involving

intertemporal components and (ii)

examine the appropriateness of using

market interest rates as social discount

rates in economic analyses of public

programs.

Moreover, the choice of a particular

discount rate to be used in economic

analyses of EPA programs is likely to

have consequences for the

intergenerational distribution of wealth.

Thus, equity issues may influence

individual preferences over the discount

rate used to evaluate EPA programs.

This study will use the experimental

laboratory to examine individual

preferences over income distributions.

Laboratory incentives will be designed

to create alternative social decision

mechanisms under which subjects

choose among different income

distributions that determine subject

payments. The characteristics defining

these alternative social decision

mechanisms correspond to equity issues

similar to those arising from EPA

policies. By observing individual

preferences over income distributions

under alternative decision rules, we can

provide EPA policymakers with

evidence on public preferences over

intergenerational distributions of

wealth.

Laboratory incentives will involve

real (as opposed to hypothetical)

economic commitments. Participation

in these experiments will be informed

and voluntary. Participants will be able

to terminate participation at any time

without penalty. Well-established

procedures will be in place to ensure

the participants’ anonymity and the

confidentiality of their responses. 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 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

The EPA would like to solicit

comments to:

(i) Evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility;

(ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information,

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used;

(iii) enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

(iv) minimize the burden of the

collection of information on those who

are to respond, including through the

use of appropriate automated electronic,

mechanical, or other technological

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology, e.g., permitting

electronic submission of responses.

Burden Statement: 330 subjects will

participate in those experiments

examining discount rates. Subjects will

convene in groups at an Atlanta

conference center. Each subject will

participate in one experimental session

and each experimental session will last

approximately 1.5 hours inclusive of

time to sign informed-consent forms,

answer questionnaires, read

experimental instructions and record

decisions. Subjects will incur an

estimated average of 45 minutes travel

time. Assuming a 75% show-up rate,

Haigler-Bailly, who is likely to conduct

the experiments, has estimated that 440

subjects should be recruited to obtain a

final sample size of 330. Recruiting is by

telephone and Haigler-Bailly estimates

that 2000 completed contacts are

necessary to obtain 440 recruits. The

phone calls will last from 2 minutes (for

those who refuse to participate) to 4

minutes (for those who agree to

participate). Hence, the estimated

burden for these experiments is 824

hours.

260 subjects will participate in those

experiments examining preferences over

income distributions. Subjects will

convene in groups on a university

campus. Each subject will participate in
25032 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 87 /Wednesday, May 6, 1998 / Notices

one experimental session and each

experimental session will last

approximately 1.25 hours inclusive of

time to sign informed-consent forms,

answer questionnaires, read

experimental instructions and record

decisions. Since subjects are located at

the site, travel time will be negligible.

Moreover, the recruitment burden will

be negligible, so no separate burden

estimate is calculated. Hence, the

estimated burden for these experiments

is 325 hours. Total burden for the pilot

study is thus 1149 hours. Labor costs

were estimated based on the Bureau of

Labor Statistics April 18, 1997 release of

weekly earnings of wage and salary

workers. Using median earnings ($504/

wk), the total burden cost is estimated

at $14,477.

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.

Dated: April 30, 1998.

Melonie B. Williams,

Economist.

[FR Doc. 98–12035 Filed 5–5–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6009–5]

Air Pollution Control; Proposed Action

on Clean Air Act Grant to the South

Coast Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed determination with

request for comments and notice of

opportunity for public hearing.

SUMMARY: The U.S. EPA has made a

proposed determination that reductions

in expenditures of non-Federal funds for

the South Coast Air Quality

Management District (SCAQMD) in

Diamond Bar, California are a result of

non-selective reductions in

expenditures. This determination, when

final, will permit the SCAQMD to be

awarded financial assistance for FY–98

by EPA, under section 105(c) of the

Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Comments and/or requests for a

public hearing must be received by EPA

at the address stated below by June 5,

1998.

ADDRESSES: All comments and/or

requests for a public hearing should be

mailed to: R. Michael Stenburg, Grants

and Program Integration Office (Air-8),

Air Division, U.S. EPA Region IX, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,

California 94105–3901; FAX (415) 744–

1076.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: R.

Michael Stenburg, Grants and Program

Integration Office (Air-8), Air Division,

U.S. EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne

Street, San Francisco, California 94105–

3901 at (415) 744–1182.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the

authority of Section 105 of the CAA,

EPA provides financial assistance

(grants) to the SCAQMD, whose

jurisdiction includes Los Angeles and

Orange Counties in southern California,

to aid in the operation of its air

pollution control programs. In FY–97,

EPA awarded the SCAQMD $4,844,967,

which represented approximately 5.1%

of the SCAQMD’s budget.

Section 105(c)(1) of the CAA, 42

U.S.C. 7405(c)(1), provides that ‘‘[n]o

agency shall receive any grant under

this section during any fiscal year when

its expenditures of non-Federal funds

for recurrent expenditures for air

pollution control programs will be less

than its expenditures were for such

programs during the preceding fiscal

year. In order for [EPA] to award grants

under this section in a timely manner

each fiscal year, [EPA] shall compare an

agency’s prospective expenditure level

to that of its second preceding year.’’

EPA may still award financial assistance

to an agency not meeting this

requirement, however, if EPA, ‘‘after

notice and opportunity for public

hearing, determines that a reduction in

expenditures is attributable to a nonselective reduction in the expenditures

in the programs of all Executive branch

agencies of the applicable unit of

Government.’’ CAA section 105(c)(2).

These statutory requirements are

repeated in EPA’s implementing

regulations at 40 CFR 35.210(a).

In its FY–98 § 105 grant application

the SCAQMD projected MOE of

$63,763,496. This amount represents a

shortfall of $11,450,587 from the actual

FY–97 MOE of $75,214,083. In order for

the SCAQMD to be eligible to be

awarded its FY–98 grant, EPA must

make a determination under § 105(c)(2).

The SCAQMD is a single-purpose

agency whose primary source of funding

is emission fee revenue. It is the ‘‘unit

of Government’’ for § 105(c)(2)

purposes. The SCAQMD submitted

documentation to EPA which shows

that over the last six years emission

reductions brought on by a combination

of regulated and voluntary emission

reductions and actions to minimize fee

increases on businesses have reduced

fee revenues from stationary sources

from a high of $66,914,362 in 1991–

1992 to approximately $50,724,900 in

1997–1998. As a result, the SCAQMD

has instituted hiring/salary freezes,

furloughs, and layoffs, has reduced its

equipment purchases and contract

expenditures, and has instituted new

programs to reduce costs such as permit

streamlining, computer-assisted permit

processing, and privatization efforts.

Therefore, the SCAQMD’s MOE

reduction resulted from a loss of fee

revenues due to circumstances beyond

its control. EPA proposes to determine

that the SCAQMD’s lower FY–98 MOE

level meets the § 105(c)(2) criteria as

resulting from a non-selective reduction

of expenditures. Pursuant to 40 CFR

35.210, this determination will allow

the SCAQMD to be awarded financial

assistance for FY–98.

This notice constitutes a request for

public comment and an opportunity for

public hearing as required by the Clean

Air Act. All written comments received

by June 5, 1998 on this proposal will be

considered. EPA will conduct a public

hearing on this proposal only if a

written request for such is received by

EPA at the address above by June 5,

1998.

If no written request for a hearing is

received, EPA will proceed to the final

determination. While notice of the final

determination will not be published in

the Federal Register, copies of the

determination can be obtained by

sending a written request to R. Michael

Stenburg at the above address.

Dated: April 20, 1998.

Steven Frey,

Acting Director, Air Division, U.S. EPA,

Region 9.

[FR Doc. 98–12031 Filed 5–5–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P