SUMMARY: On October 2, 1997, the OCC, the Board, and the FDIC (the
agencies) requested public comment for 60 days on proposed revisions to
the Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income (Call Report), which
are currently approved collections of information. After considering
the comments the agencies received, the Federal Financial Institutions
Examination Council (FFIEC), of which the agencies are members, made
several modifications to the proposed revisions.
In accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the OCC, the Board, and the FDIC may
not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond
to, an information collection that has been extended, revised, or
implemented on or after October 1, 1995, unless it displays a currently
valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. Comments
are invited on: (a) Whether the collections of information are
necessary for the proper performance of the agencies' functions,
including whether the information has practical utility; (b) the
accuracy of the agencies' estimates of the burden of the information
collections, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the
collections on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e)
estimates of capital or startup costs and costs of operation,
maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before March 30, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments to
any or all of the agencies. All comments, which should refer to the OMB
control number(s), will be shared among the agencies.
Written comments should be submitted to the Communications
Division, Ninth Floor, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 250 E
Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20219; Attention: Paperwork Docket No.
1557-0081 (FAX number (202) 874-5274; Internet address:
email@example.com). Comments will be available for inspection
and photocopying at that address.
Written comments should be addressed to Mr. William W. Wiles,
Secretary, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th and C
Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551, or delivered to the Board's mail
room between 8:45 a.m. and 5:15 p.m., and to the security control room
outside of those hours. Both the mail room and the security control
room are accessible from the courtyard entrance on 20th Street between
Constitution Avenue and C Street, N.W. Comments received may be
inspected in room M-P-500 between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., except as
provided in section 261.8 of the Board's Rules Regarding Availability
of Information, 12 CFR 261.8(a).
Written comments should be addressed to Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary, Attention: Comments/OES, Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, 550 17th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20429. Comments
may be hand delivered to the guard station at the rear of the 550 17th
Street Building (located on F Street), on business days between 7:00
a.m. and 5:00 p.m. (Fax number: (202) 898-3838; Internet address:
firstname.lastname@example.org). Comments may be inspected and photocopied in the
FDIC Public Information Center, Room 100, 801 17th Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. between 9:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on business days.
A copy of the comments may also be submitted to the OMB desk
officer for the agencies: Alexander Hunt, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive
Office Building, Room 3208, Washington, D.C. 20503.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A copy of the proposed revised
collection of information may be requested from any of the agency
clearance officers whose names appear below.
Jessie Gates, OCC Clearance Officer, (202) 874-5090, Legislative
and Regulatory Activities Division, Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency, 250 E Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20219.
Mary M. McLaughlin, Board Clearance Officer, (202) 452-3829,
Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors of the Federal
Reserve System, 20th and C Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) users may contact Diane
Jenkins, (202) 452-3544, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
Systems, 20th and C Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551.
Steven F. Hanft, FDIC Clearance Officer, (202) 898-3907, Office of
the Executive Secretary, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550
17th Street N.W., Washington, D.C. 20429.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for OMB approval to extend, with
revision, the following currently approved collections of information:
Report Title: Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income (Call
Form Number: FFIEC 031, 032, 033, 034.\1\
\1\ The FFIEC 031 report form is filed by banks with domestic
and foreign offices. The FFIEC 032 report form is filed by banks
with domestic offices only and total assets of $300 million or more.
The FFIEC 033 report form is filed by banks with domestic offices
only and total assets of $100 million or more but less than $300
million. The FFIEC 034 report form is filed by banks with domestic
offices only and total assets of less than $100 million.
Frequency of Response: Quarterly.
Affected Public: Business or other for-profit.
Type of Review: Revisions of currently approved collections.
OMB Number: 1557-0081.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,700 national banks.
Estimated Time per Response: 39.92 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden: 431,164 hours.
OMB Number: 7100-0036.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,002 state member banks.
Estimated Time per Response: 45.80 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden: 183,566 hours.
OMB Number: 3064-0052.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 6,131 insured state nonmember
Estimated Time per Response: 29.67 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden: 727,672 hours.
The estimated time per response in an average which varies by
agency because of differences in the composition of the banks under
each agency's supervision (e.g., size distribution of banks, types of
activities in which they are engaged, and number of banks with foreign
offices). The time per response for a bank is estimated to range from
15 to 400 hours, depending on individual circumstances.
General Description of Report
This information collection is mandatory: 12 U.S.C. 161 (for
national banks), 12 U.S.C. 324 (for state member banks), and 12 U.S.C.
1817 (for insured state nonmember banks). Except for select sensitive
items, this information collection is not given confidential treatment.
Small businesses (i.e., small banks) are affected.
Banks file Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income with the
agencies each quarter for the agencies' use in monitoring the condition
and performance of reporting banks and the industry as a whole. Call
Reports are also used to calculate banks' deposit insurance and
Financing Corporation assessments and for monetary policy and other
public policy purposes.
Revisions initially proposed for the Call Report consisted of:
reducing the frequency for reporting ``Preferred deposits'' and
reducing the level of detail in the trading assets and liabilities
schedule filed by larger banks; replacing existing items for ``High-
risk mortgage securities'' and ``Structured notes'' with items for
securities with significant price volatility; adding new items for
reporting on transactions with affiliates, low level recourse
transactions, and (for larger banks) capital requirements for market
risk; clarifying the reporting requirements relating to allowances and
provisions for credit losses; changing the reporting basis used for
reporting holdings of available-for-sale securities in the domestic
office assets and liabilities schedule completed by banks with foreign
offices; and modifying the categorization of securitized consumer loans
for the purchase of certain types of vehicles in two items collected
annually from larger banks.
After considering the comments, the FFIEC decided not to proceed
with the proposed changes relating to securities with significant price
volatility and transactions with affiliates at this time. The FFIEC
also is revising the instructions for reporting industrial development
bonds for conformity with a bank's other public reporting. The comments
on the initial proposal and the changes made in response to the
comments are discussed below.
Discussion of Comments Received and Changes Made
On October 2, 1997, the FDIC, the OCC, and the Board jointly
published a notice soliciting comments for 60 days on proposed
revisions to the Call Report (62 FR 51715). The notice described the
specific changes that the agencies, with the approval of the FFIEC,
were proposing to implement as of March 31, 1998.
In response to this notice, the FDIC, the OCC, and the Board
collectively received 14 comment letters: 1 from a community bank, 9
from large banks, and 4 bankers' associations. In general, most of the
commenters that specifically addressed the revisions to the Call Report
that are being submitted for OMB review were supportive. On the other
hand, those commenters who discussed the proposed changes relating to
securities with significant price volatility and transactions with
affiliates, which the agencies are not currently planning to implement,
disagreed with those parts of the proposal. Some commenters urged the
FFIEC and the agencies to pursue
greater reductions in reporting burden and to eliminate items not
needed for safety and soundness purposes. Three commenters also
indicated that the agencies should provide guidance on the regulatory
capital treatment of certain transactions that must be recorded as
secured borrowings under Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)
Statement No. 125 because of the effect of this accounting treatment on
the amount of assets reported on the balance sheet. The agencies and
the FFIEC have considered all of the comments received on the proposal.
More specific information on the comments received is presented
Reductions in Frequency and Detail--Four commenters specifically
addressed the proposals to reduce the reporting frequency for the
``Preferred deposits'' item from quarterly to annually for all banks
and the level of detail collected on trading assets each quarter from
large banks. Each commenter supported this proposed change. However,
one of these four commenters also suggested that the agencies establish
a consistent reporting date for all items collected only once each
year, i.e., annually as of December 31. The agencies had not proposed
to use a common reporting date for those Call Report items collected
once each year. For many of the annual items in the Call Report that
are reported at dates other than December 31, the agencies' decision to
collect this information at other quarter-end dates was made in
response to requests from banks over the years. These banks have
indicated that it would be less burdensome for them to have the
reporting of various annual items spread throughout the year rather
than having them concentrated at year-end when many once-a-year tax and
other external reporting requirements demand their attention. Thus, the
agencies concluded that they should not change the reporting dates for
some or all annual items to a common date without first seeking
industry comment. The FFIEC and the agencies are implementing the
change in reporting frequency for preferred deposits and the reduction
in detail on trading assets as proposed.
Investment Securities with Significant Price Volatility--Five
commenters addressed the proposal to replace existing items on ``High-
risk mortgage securities'' and ``Structured notes'' with items covering
certain mortgage-backed securities and all other securities whose price
volatility exceeds a specified threshold level under a specified
interest rate scenario. This reporting change was intended to enhance
the Call Report data used in the monitoring of interest rate risk.
However, the proposal did not describe the specific test that banks
would have to use to measure price volatility for purposes of the
revised items. Three of the five commenters compared this proposed
reporting change to the proposed Supervisory Policy Statement on
Investment Securities and End-User Derivatives Activities which the
FFIEC had issued for comment on October 3, 1997 (21 FR 51862). These
commenters indicated that the proposed Call Report items with their
specific test for significant price volatility are inconsistent with
the proposed FFIEC supervisory policy statement which would eliminate
specific ``high-risk'' tests in favor or broader risk management
guidance. According to these commenters, stress test requirements
removed by the proposed supervisory policy should not be reinstated
through Call Report requirements.
The fourth commenter expressed concern about not having the
opportunity to comment on the specific price volatility test to be used
for reporting the revised items. This commenter stated that the need to
use a specific price test will require systems changes and therefore
the test must be defined well in advance of the effective date of
revised items. This commenter and the fifth commenter indicated that
the specific price volatility test should be issued for public comment
to ensure that the test does not result in excessive reporting burden.
After considering the comments, the agencies and the FFIEC decided
not to implement the proposed Call Report change in 1998. The existing
items on ``high-risk mortgage securities'' and ``structured notes''
will continue to be collected during 1998. Changes to these items can
be reconsidered for implementation at some future date after the
industry has had an opportunity for notice and comment on a more
specific proposal. In the interim, the agencies' staffs will study
alternatives for obtaining data on highly price sensitive securities,
including the related reporting burden, based on how such data is
intended to be used in the agencies' monitoring systems and interest
rate risk testing procedures.
Transactions Between Banks and Their Affiliates--The agencies
proposed to add four new items to the Call Report that would provide
data on a bank's ``covered transactions'' (loans or extensions of
credit and other transactions that expose that expose the bank to risk)
with affiliates. Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act regulates
certain covered transactions in order to safeguard the resources of
banks against misuse for the benefit of organizations under common
control with the bank. The four proposed items would collect data on
the quarter-end amount and the quarter's maximum amount of covered
transactions with transactions subject to Section 23A's collateral
requirements and those not subject to the collateral requirements
All eight of the commenters that addressed this proposed reporting
change opposed it. These commenters were concerned about the additional
reporting burden of the proposed items, especially the items collecting
data on the maximum amount of covered transactions during the quarter,
and did not believe the benefit of the new information would be
commensurate with the additional burden. They stated that compliance
with Section 23A can be monitored more efficiently through the
examination process, which is currently how the agencies evaluate a
bank's transactions with affiliates. One commenter noted that the
agencies had not presented evidence to show that compliance with this
statutory requirement has become a serious problem. Another stated that
if compliance is a problem at a few banks, the agencies should resolve
this matter with those banks individually rather than by adding new
reporting requirements for all banks.
One commenter suggested that, if the agencies decide to collect
data on affiliate transactions in the Call Report, banks should report
only the quarter-end amounts to limit reporting burden. Two other
commenters recommended that, if the data must be reported, that the
reporting requirement apply only if covered transactions exceed a
specified amount. Two commenters also urged the agencies to treat
affiliate transaction information, if it were to be reported at all, as
After considering the comments, the FFIEC decided that the agencies
should not proceed with the implementation of the proposed affiliate
transaction items at this time. Further consideration will be given to
alternative methods for the collection of information related to
Section 23A. Moreover, evaluating the risk of a bank's transactions
with its affiliates and its compliance with Section 23A will continue
to be an important element of the agencies' examination process.
Reporting of Low Level Recourse Transactions for Risk-Based Capital
Purposes--Under the agencies' risk-based capital standards, the amount
of risk-based capital that must be maintained for assets transferred
with limited recourse should not exceed the maximum amount of recourse
a bank is contractually liable under the recourse agreement. The low
level recourse rule also may apply to sales and securitizations of
assets in which contractual cash flows (e.g., interest-only strips
receivable and so-called spread accounts), retained subordinated
interests, or other assets (e.g., collateral invested amounts or cash
collateral accounts) act as credit enhancements.
Current Call Report instructions require a bank to report its low
level recourse transactions in Schedule RC-R--Regulatory Capital using
the so-called ``gross-up'' method. In general, this method requires the
bank to multiply the maximum amount of its recourse exposure by the
reciprocal of the full effective minimum risk-based capital requirement
for the assets transferred and to report the resulting dollar amount as
an off-balance sheet credit equivalent amount in the risk weight
category appropriate to the assets transferred. However, another method
of handling the bank's low level recourse transactions--the so-called
``direct reduction'' method--in many cases results in a more accurate
measure of the bank's risk-based capital ratios, but this method is not
currently permitted. Therefore, the agencies proposed to allow banks to
use the ``direct reduction'' method. Under the direct reduction method,
a bank generally would reduce its risk-based capital by the maximum
amount of its recourse exposure (and would exclude this amount from its
assets if the exposure were in the form of an on-balance sheet asset).
Banks electing this reporting method would begin to complete a new
Schedule RC-R item to disclose the amount by which assets and total
risk-based capital have been reduced through the application of the
direct reduction method.
Half of the commenters addressed this proposed change and all of
them supported it. One commenter requested that the agencies ensure
that the Call Report instructions for low level recourse transactions
clearly describe the mechanics of the risk-based capital calculation
under each method. The FFIEC and the agencies are adding an item for
the direct reduction method as proposed and will provide appropriate
instructions for reporting low level recourse exposures.
Capital Requirements for Market Risk--Effective January 1, 1998,
banks with substantial trading activity must hold capital based on
their market risk exposure. The market risk rule supplements the risk-
based capital ratio calculations that focus principally on credit risk
and adjusts both the risk-based capital ratio denominator and
numerator. To enable the agencies and other users of the Call Report to
calculate the risk-based capital ratios of those banks subject to the
market risk rule, the agencies proposed to add items for ``Market risk
equivalent assets'' and ``Tier 3 capital'' to Schedule RC-R--Regulatory
Capital on the FFIEC 031 and 032 report forms only.
Two commenters addressed the market risk proposal. One supported
the proposed changes while the second did not express an overall
opinion. However, the second commenter observed that the Board's
interim guidance to bank holding companies for the reporting on the
market risk in the FR Y-9C bank holding company report indicates that
``covered positions,'' \2\ except those that must also be risk weighted
for credit risk, should be reported as zero percent risk weight assets,
while the agencies' proposal stated that these covered positions should
be reported in the Call Report in ``On-balance sheet asset values
excluded from and deducted in the calculation of the risk-based capital
ratio'' (Schedule RC-R, item 8) and not as zero percent risk weight
assets. The agencies acknowledge this differing treatment for covered
positions in the two types of reports. This difference arises because
of the different structures of the regulatory capital schedules in
these two reports: the bank holding company schedule does not have an
item comparable to item 8 of the bank schedule, which is used to
capture the amount of all on-balance sheet assets that are not risk-
weighted for credit risk. The covered positions that are on-balance
sheet assets possess this characteristic. Nevertheless, the difference
in report structures has no impact on the overall calculation of risk-
\2\ The term ``covered positions'' means all positions in the
trading account, and all foreign exchange and commodity positions,
whether or not in the trading account.
This commenter also recommended that, with the advent of capital
requirements for market risk, the Call Report instructions should be
reworded to indicate that a bank's allowance for credit losses can be
included in Tier 2 capital up to a maximum of 1.25 percent of risk-
weighted assets plus market risk equivalent assets. The FFIEC and the
agencies agree with this recommendation and will revise the
Reporting by Banks With Foreign Offices of Investment Securities
Holdings in the Domestic Office Assets and Liabilities Schedule--The
agencies proposed to require banks with foreign offices that file the
FFIEC 031 version of the Call Report forms to report all investment
securities held in domestic offices on a cost basis in items 10 through
17 of Schedule RC-H--Selected Balance Sheet Items for Domestic Offices.
At present, these investment securities are reported in these Schedule
RC-H items on the same basis as they are reported on these banks'
consolidated balance sheet (Schedule RC), i.e., held-to-maturity
securities are reported at amortized cost while available-for-sale
securities are reported at fair value.
One commenter stated that this proposed change is contrary to
generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). This commenter also
noted that, although the amortized cost data for these securities are
available, its existing reporting systems compile cost data only on a
consolidated basis and not for domestic offices only. Therefore, for
this commenter, the proposed reporting change would require a costly
and time consuming collection effort.
While the agencies recognize that adopting this reporting change
will cause some banks to adjust their reporting systems, the FFIEC and
the agencies are implementing this change as proposed because the
revised securities data will better satisfy agency data needs, thereby
increasing the utility of the domestic office securities data. These
data are used in analyses and comparisons which also include data on
securities that are held domestically by nonbank sectors and reported
on a cost basis. Thus, the uses for which these Call Report data are
collected are not a function of their balance sheet categorization and
accounting basis under GAAP.
Allowance for Credit Losses--Accounting guidance issued by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants in 1996 clarified
that a bank must allocate its allowance for credit losses between on-
balance sheet financial instruments and off-balance sheet credit
exposures. Previously, these allowance components often were reported
in the aggregate on the balance sheet in the allowance for loan and
lease losses. In 1997, the FFIEC advised banks to allocate their
allowance for credit losses on the Call Report balance sheet consistent
with their allocation methodology for other financial reporting
purposes. Banks were further advised to aggregate these components of
the allowance for credit losses when completing Schedule RI-B, part
II--Changes in Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses and for risk-based
The agencies proposed to retain this method of reporting the
credit losses on the balance sheet, in Schedule RI-B, and in the
regulatory capital schedule (Schedule RC-R). For consistency, the
agencies also proposed to recaption the items labelled ``Provision for
loan and lease losses'' as ``Provision for credit losses'' in the
income statement (Schedule RI) and in Schedule RI-B. Two commenters
addressed this proposal. One supported it while the second favored only
the risk-based capital treatment of the allowance for credit losses,
preferring to have Schedule RI-B, part II, cover only the allowance for
loan and lease losses. The FFIEC and the agencies considered this
suggestion, but did not accept it. There has been an absence of bank
objections during 1997 to the reporting method which the agencies
proposed to retain for Schedule RI-B, part II.
Reporting of Securitized Consumer Loans for Vehicle Purchases--The
agencies proposed to revise the instructions for reporting securitized
consumer loans so that loans for the purchase of pickup trucks, other
light trucks, and vans for personal use would be included in ``Loans to
purchase private passenger automobiles'' rather than in ``All other
consumer credit.'' The only commenter commenting on this instructional
change agreed with the change. The FFIEC and the agencies are
implementing the change as proposed.
Categorization of Industrial Development Bonds on the Balance
Sheet--In September 1997, the FFIEC printed and distributed revised,
updated Call Report instruction books to all banks and invited comments
on the accuracy, adequacy, and clarity of the revised instructions. One
commenter recommended that the agencies simplify the instructions for
reporting industrial development bonds (IDBs) in the Call Report. More
specifically, the commenter suggested that the agencies replace the
existing Call Report instructions governing whether a bank should
report its IDBs as securities or as loans with instructions stating
that IDBs should be reported as securities or as loans on the Call
Report consistent with the manner in which the bank reports these
instruments on its balance sheet for other financial reporting
purposes. The FFIEC and the agencies agree and are revising the
Other Comments--Three commenters discussed the effect of the
provisions of FASB Statement No. 125, ``Accounting for Transfers and
Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities,''
that took effect for transfers occurring after December 31, 1997. These
newly effective provisions relate to the accounting for collateral and
secured borrowings, repurchase agreements, securities lending, and
similar transactions. If certain conditions are met, collateral
received by a creditor must be recorded as an asset on the creditor's
balance sheet. Under previous GAAP, the collateral may not have been
recorded on the creditor's balance sheet. As a result of this change in
accounting standards, some banks will see their total on-balance sheet
assets increase, which would increase the denominators in the
calculation of these banks' leverage capital and risk-based capital
ratios. The effect of these provisions of FASB Statement No. 125 will
appear for the first time in the March 31, 1998, Call Report.
These commenters stated that regulatory capital ratios should be
computed using a pre-FASB Statement No. 125 approach to collateralized
transactions so that regulatory capital is not allocated twice for the
same transaction. These commenters recommended that the FFIEC change
the Call Report instructions in 1998 to say that amounts added to the
balance sheet because of the collateral provisions of FASB Statement
No. 125 should be excluded from average total assets and risk-weighted
assets. When it considered these comments, the FFIEC concluded that
this was primarily a regulatory capital issue that should be addressed
as a supervisory matter under the FFIEC's Task Force on Supervision.
The Task Force on Supervision has requested that its capital working
group evaluate the issue these commenters have raised.
Five commenters indicated that the proposed changes do not
significantly reduce the reporting burden imposed by the Call Report.
They urged the FFIEC and the agencies to do more to reduce burden,
eliminate items not related to safety and soundness, and work to
fulfill the mandate of Section 307 of the Riegle Community Development
and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994. Section 307 requires the four
federal banking and thrift agencies to work jointly to develop a single
form for the filing of core information by banks, savings associations,
and bank holding companies. It also directs the agencies to review the
information they collect from these institutions that supplements the
core information and eliminate those reporting requirements that are
not warranted for safety and soundness or other public purposes. Thus,
it is clear from Section 307 that Call Report data should not be
collected exclusively to meet the agencies' safety and soundness needs.
Nevertheless, the agencies regularly review the existing Call Report
requirements in order to identify items that are no longer sufficiently
useful to warrant their continued collection. Since 1995 these reviews
have led to the elimination of numerous items and reductions in the
level of detail in several areas. For 1998, as discussed above, the
FFIEC and the agencies also decided not to implement certain proposed
revisions about which commenters' expressed concern about burden.
In addition to eliminating a number of items that were considered
unnecessary for safety and soundness and other public purposes, the
FFIEC and the agencies have, as part of their Section 307 efforts,
adopted GAAP as the reporting basis for the Call Report, combined the
four sets of Call Report instructions into a single comprehensive set
which includes an index, made the Call Report forms and instructions
available on the Internet, and implemented an electronic filing
requirement for the Call Report. The FFIEC and the agencies are
continuing to analyze the specific uses of the individual Call Report
items in order to ascertain their relative importance to the agencies
and assist in the agencies' ongoing effort to eliminate information
with the least practical utility. Furthermore, the banking and thrift
agencies are continuing their work on a common core report that will
satisfy the requirements of Section 307.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 17, 1998.
William W. Wiles,
Secretary of the Board.
Dated: February 17, 1998.
Director, Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division, Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency.
Dated at Washington, DC, this 20th day of February, 1998.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Robert E. Feldman,
[FR Doc. 98-4859 Filed 2-25-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-33-M, 6210-01-M, 6714-01-M