Anda di halaman 1dari 4

54872 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No.

187 / Thursday, September 27, 2007 / Proposed Rules

Commission by May 18 of the following more broadly disseminating the best 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal
calendar year, a letter or report of the practices throughout the industry. holidays.
independent accountant certifying For this reason, I respectfully concur. Please see the direct final rule which
approval, covering the subjects and in Jon Wellinghoff, is located in the Rules section of this
the format prescribed in the General Commissioner. Federal Register for detailed
Instructions of the applicable Form No. [FR Doc. E7–19015 Filed 9–26–07; 8:45 am] instructions on how to submit
2 or Form No. 2–A. The letter or report BILLING CODE 6717–01–P comments.
shall also set forth which, if any, of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
examined schedules do not conform to Charles Hatten, Environmental
the Commission’s requirements and ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air
shall describe the discrepancies that AGENCY Programs Branch (AR–18J),
exist. The Commission shall not be Environmental Protection Agency,
bound by the certification of compliance 40 CFR Part 52 Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
made by an independent accountant Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6031,
[EPA–R05–OAR–2006–0544; FRL–8470–8]
pursuant to this paragraph.
Approval and Promulgation of Air SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State’s
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
1. The authority citation for part 260 SIP submittal as a direct final rule
Agency (EPA).
continues to read as follows: without prior proposal because the
ACTION: Proposed rule. Agency views this as a noncontroversial
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717–717w, 3301– submittal and anticipates no adverse
3432; 42 U.S.C. 7101–7352. SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
a request from Ohio to amend its State comments. A detailed rationale for the
§ 260.3 [Removed] Implementation Plan (SIP) emission approval is set forth in the direct final
statement reporting regulation. Ohio rule. If no adverse comments are
2. Section 260.3 is removed. received in response to this rule, no
submitted the SIP revision requests to
WELLINGHOFF, Commissioner, concurring:
EPA on May 1, 2006, and supplemented further activity is contemplated. If EPA
The adequacy of data reported in Forms 2, on May 22, 2007. Ohio held a public receives adverse comments, the direct
2–A and 3–Q has been questioned for years. hearing on the submittal on September final rule will be withdrawn and all
Based on the comments received in response public comments received will be
to the NOI in this proceeding, the need to
8, 2005. The SIP revision concurrently
rescinds and revises portions of Ohio addressed in a subsequent final rule
update and supplement these forms is clear. based on this proposed rule. EPA will
Today, we propose modifications that should Administrative Code Chapter 3745–24
to be consistent with the Clean Air Act not institute a second comment period.
correct many deficiencies in these forms.
We have endeavored to make the changes emission statement program reporting Any parties interested in commenting
necessary to provide the data needed by the requirements for stationary sources. The on this action should do so at this time.
Commission to carry out our responsibility, revision makes the rule more general to Please note that if EPA receives adverse
and for the form users to effectively exercise apply to all counties designated comment on an amendment, paragraph,
their rights, under NGA Section 5. Most of nonattainment for ozone, and not to a or section of this rule and if that
the information requested is data that is provision may be severed from the
maintained by the pipeline and can readily
specific list of counties.
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
be transferred to existing and new schedules. DATES: Comments must be received on
as final those provisions of the rule that
Conversely, I do not believe that we have or before October 29, 2007. are not the subject of an adverse
blurred the distinction between NGA ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
sections 4 and 5, a concern expressed by comment. For additional information,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– see the direct final rule which is located
some commenters. I urge parties in their
comments to focus on whether our proposed
OAR–2006–0544, by one of the in the Rules section of this Federal
modifications have struck the proper balance. following methods: Register.
I also have a specific request for comment. 1. Follow the
Dated: September 4, 2007.
As noted, these forms are the vehicles the on-line instructions for submitting
Commission uses to obtain financial and comments. Bharat Mathur,
certain operational information from 2. E-mail: Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
pipelines. The forms provide information 3. Fax: (312) 886–5824. [FR Doc. E7–18895 Filed 9–26–07; 8:45 am]
concerning a pipeline’s past performance and 4. Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
its future prospects. For example, a pipeline Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs
is currently required to provide a statement
and system map identifying and detailing all
Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
important changes in the facilities it
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. AGENCY
operates.108 I propose that pipelines submit
an Energy Efficiency Statement as well. I 5. Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney,
Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 40 CFR Part 62
believe advancement of energy efficient
infrastructure is critical to help address the Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. [EPA–R07–OAR–2007–0943; FRL–8473–9]
energy crisis our country faces. The Energy Environmental Protection Agency, 77
Efficiency Statement would describe how the West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Approval and Promulgation of State
pipeline has incorporated efficiency in the
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only Plans for Designated Facilities and
facility changes it reports. Such transparency Pollutants; Missouri; Clean Air
will be useful in encouraging energy
accepted during the Regional Office
normal hours of operation, and special Mercury Rule
efficiency improvements by pipelines and
arrangements should be made for AGENCY: Environmental Protection
108 General Corporate Information and Financial
deliveries of boxed information. The Agency (EPA).
Statements, Important Changes during the Year and Regional Office official hours of
ACTION: Proposed rule.
Gas Plant Statistical Data, System Map. business are Monday through Friday,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:46 Sep 26, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\27SEP1.SGM 27SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 187 / Thursday, September 27, 2007 / Proposed Rules 54873

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve Web site is an I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To
the State Plan submitted by Missouri on ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which Take?
May 18, 2007, and revisions submitted means EPA will not know your identity EPA is proposing to approve the State
on September 6, 2007. The plan or contact information unless you Plan submitted by Missouri on May 18,
addresses the requirements of EPA’s provide it in the body of your comment. 2007, and revisions submitted on
Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), If you send an e-mail comment directly September 6, 2007. In its State Plan,
promulgated on May 18, 2005, and to EPA without going through http:// Missouri would meet CAMR by
subsequently revised on June 9, 2006., your e-mail requiring certain coal-fired EGUs to
EPA is proposing to determine that the address will be automatically captured participate in the EPA-administered
submitted State Plan fully meets the and included as part of the comment cap-and-trade program addressing Hg
CAMR requirements for Missouri. that is placed in the public docket and emissions. EPA is proposing to
CAMR requires States to regulate made available on the Internet. If you determine that the State Plan meets the
emissions of mercury (Hg) from large submit an electronic comment, EPA applicable requirements of CAMR.
coal-fired electric generating units recommends that you include your
(EGUs). CAMR establishes State budgets II. What Is the Regulatory History of
name and other contact information in
for annual EGU Hg emissions and CAMR?
the body of your comment and with any
requires States to submit State Plans to CAMR was published by EPA on May
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
ensure that annual EGU Hg emissions 18, 2005 (70 FR 28606, ‘‘Standards of
cannot read your comment due to
will not exceed the applicable State Performance for New and Existing
budget. States have the flexibility to technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be Stationary Sources: Electric Utility
choose which control measures to adopt Steam Generating Units; Final Rule’’). In
to achieve the budgets, including able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of this rule, acting pursuant to its authority
participating in the EPA-administered under section 111(d) of the Clean Air
CAMR cap-and-trade program. In the special characters and any form of
encryption and should be free of any Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7411(d), EPA
State Plan that EPA is proposing to required that all States and the District
approve Missouri would meet CAMR defects or viruses.
of Columbia (all of which are referred to
requirements by participating in the Docket: All documents in the herein as States) meet Statewide annual
EPA trading program. electronic docket are listed in the budgets limiting Hg emissions from
DATES: Comments must be received on index. coal-fired EGUs (as defined in 40 CFR
or before October 29, 2007. Although listed in the index, some 60.24(h)(8)) under CAA section 111(d).
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, information is not publicly available, EPA required all States to submit State
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– i.e., CBI or other information whose Plans with control measures that ensure
OAR–2007–0943, by one of the disclosure is restricted by statute. that total, annual Hg emissions from the
following methods: Certain other material, such as coal-fired EGUs located in the
1. Follow copyrighted material, is not placed on respective States do not exceed the
the on-line instructions for submitting the Internet and will be publicly applicable statewide annual EGU
comments. available only in hard copy form. mercury budget. Under CAMR, States
2. E-mail: Publicly available docket materials are may implement and enforce these
3. Mail: Michael Jay, Environmental available either electronically in http:// reduction requirements by participating
Protection Agency, Air Planning and or in hard copy at in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
Development Branch, 901 North 5th the Environmental Protection Agency, program or by adopting any other
Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Air Planning and Development Branch, effective and enforceable control
4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, measures.
your comments to: Michael Jay, Kansas 66101. EPA requests that if at all CAA section 111(d) requires States,
Environmental Protection Agency, 901 possible, you contact the person listed and along with CAA section 301(d) and
North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION the Tribal Air Rule (40 CFR part 49)
66101. Such deliveries are only CONTACT section to schedule your allows Tribes granted treatment as
accepted during the Regional Office’s inspection. The Regional Office’s States (TAS), to submit State Plans to
normal hours of operation. The Regional official hours of business are Monday EPA that implement and enforce the
Office’s official hours of business are through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., standards of performance. CAMR
Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 excluding Federal holidays. explains what must be included in State
p.m., excluding Federal holidays. Plans to address the requirements of
Instructions: Direct your comments to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CAA section 111(d). The State Plans
Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2007– Michael Jay at (913) 551–7460 or by e- were due to EPA by November 17, 2006.
0943. EPA’s policy is that all comments mail at Under 40 CFR 60.27(b), the
received will be included in the public SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Administrator will approve or
docket without change and may be disapprove the State Plans.
made available online at http:// Table of Contents, including any III. What Are the General Requirements
I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To Take?
personal information provided, unless of CAMR State Plans?
II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAMR?
the comment includes information III. What Are the General Requirements of CAMR establishes Statewide annual
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS

claimed to be Confidential Business CAMR State Plans? EGU Hg emission budgets and is to be
Information (CBI) or other information IV. How Can States Comply With CAMR? implemented in two phases. The first
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. V. Analysis of Missouri’s CAMR State Plan phase of reductions starts in 2010 and
Do not submit through http:// Submittal continues through 2017. The second or e-mail, A. State Budgets phase of reductions starts in 2018 and
information that you consider to be CBI B. CAMR State Plan continues thereafter. CAMR requires
or otherwise protected. The http:// VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews States to implement the budgets by

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:46 Sep 26, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\27SEP1.SGM 27SEP1
54874 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 187 / Thursday, September 27, 2007 / Proposed Rules

either: (1) Requiring coal-fired EGUs to allowances using a methodology chosen 4. The use of allowance set-asides
participate in the EPA-administered by the State. A State’s alternative and, if used, their size.
cap-and-trade program; or (2) adopting allowance allocation provisions must In Missouri’s alternative allowance
other coal-fired EGU control measures meet certain allocation timing methodology, Missouri has chosen to
of the respective State’s choosing and requirements and must ensure that total distribute Hg allowances directly based
demonstrating that such control allocations for each calendar year will upon Table I in 10 CFR 10–6.368. The
measures will result in compliance with not exceed the State’s annual EGU Hg table permanently allocates to
the applicable State annual EGU Hg budget for that year. designated units the entirety of
budget. Missouri’s mercury allowances for both
Each State Plan must require coal- V. Analysis of Missouri’s CAMR State phases of the program. Accordingly,
fired EGUs to comply with the Plan Submittal Missouri has not provided allowances
monitoring, recordkeeping, and A. State Budgets for the establishment of set-aside
reporting provisions of 40 CFR part 75 accounts.
concerning Hg mass emissions. Each In this action, EPA is proposing to Missouri’s State Plan requires coal-
State Plan must also show that the State approve Missouri’s State Plan that fired EGUs to comply with the
has the legal authority to adopt emission adopts the annual EGU Hg budgets monitoring, record keeping, and
standards and compliance schedules established for the State in CAMR, i.e., reporting provisions of 40 CFR part 75
necessary for attainment and 1.393 tons for EGU Hg emissions in concerning Hg mass emissions.
maintenance of the State’s annual EGU 2010–2017 and 0.55 tons for EGU Hg Missouri’s State Plan also demonstrates
Hg budget and to require the owners emissions in 2018 and thereafter. that the State has the legal authority to
and operators of coal-fired EGUs in the Missouri’s State Plan sets these budgets adopt emission standards and
State to meet the monitoring, as the total amount of allowances compliance schedules necessary for
recordkeeping, and reporting available for allocation for each year attainment and maintenance of the
requirements of 40 CFR part 75. under the EPA-administered CAMR cap- State’s annual EGU Hg budget and to
and-trade program. require the owners and operators of
IV. How Can States Comply With coal-fired EGUs in the State to meet the
CAMR? B. CAMR State Plan
monitoring, record keeping, and
Each State Plan must impose control The Missouri State Plan requires coal- reporting requirements of 40 CFR part
requirements that the State fired EGUs to participate in the EPA- 75. Missouri cites Section 643.050 and
demonstrates will limit Statewide administered CAMR cap-and-trade 643.055 of the Missouri Air
annual Hg emissions from new and program. The State Plan incorporates by Conservation Law, as containing the
existing coal-fired EGUs to the amount reference the EPA model Hg trading rule legal authority for the Missouri Air
of the State’s applicable annual EGU Hg but has adopted an alternative Conservation Commission to adopt the
budget. States have the flexibility to allowance allocation methodology. State’s rule that allows for Missouri’s
choose the type of EGU control Under the Hg allowance allocation participation in the nationwide cap and
measures they will use to meet the methodology in the model rule, Hg trade program.
requirements of CAMR. EPA anticipates allowances are allocated to units that
that many States will choose to meet the have operated for 5 years, based on heat VI. Statutory and Executive Order
CAMR requirements by selecting an input data from a 3-year period that are Reviews
option that requires EGUs to participate adjusted for coal rank by using coal Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
in the EPA-administered CAMR cap- factors of 3.0 for the lignite combusted 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
and-trade program. EPA also anticipates by the unit, 1.25 for the subbituminous not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and
that many States may chose to control combusted by the unit, and 1 for other therefore is not subject to review by the
Statewide annual Hg emissions for new coal ranks combusted by the unit. The Office of Management and Budget. For
and existing coal-fired EGUs through an model rule also provides a new unit set- this reason, this action is also not
alternative mechanism other than the aside from which units without 5 years subject to Executive Order 13211,
EPA-administered CAMR cap-and-trade of operation are allocated allowances ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That
program. Each State that chooses an based on the units’ prior year emissions. Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
alternative mechanism must include States may establish in their State Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
with its plan a demonstration that the Plan submissions a different Hg 22, 2001). This action merely proposes
State Plan will ensure that the State will allowance allocation methodology that to approve State law as meeting Federal
meet its assigned State annual EGU Hg will be used to allocate allowances to requirements and would impose no
emission budget. sources in the States if certain additional requirements beyond those
A State submitting a State Plan that requirements are met concerning the imposed by State law. Accordingly, the
requires coal-fired EGUs to participate timing of submission of units’ Administrator certifies that this
in the EPA-administered CAMR cap- allocations to the Administrator for proposed rule would not have a
and-trade program may either adopt recordation and the total amount of significant economic impact on a
regulations that are substantively allowances allocated for each control substantial number of small entities
identical to the EPA model Hg trading period. In adopting alternative Hg under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
rule (40 CFR part 60, subpart HHHH) or allowance allocation methodologies, U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this action
incorporate by reference the model rule. States have flexibility with regard to: proposes to approve pre-existing
CAMR provides that States may only 1. The cost to recipients of the requirements under State law and
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS

make limited changes to the model rule allowances, which may be distributed would not impose any additional
if the States want to participate in the for free or auctioned; enforceable duty beyond that required
EPA-administered trading program. A 2. The frequency of allocations; by State law, it does not contain any
State Plan may change the model rule 3. The basis for allocating allowances, unfunded mandate or significantly or
only by altering the allowance which may be distributed, for example, uniquely affect small governments, as
allocation provisions to provide for based on historical heat input or electric described in the Unfunded Mandates
State-specific allocation of Hg and thermal output; and Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:46 Sep 26, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\27SEP1.SGM 27SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 187 / Thursday, September 27, 2007 / Proposed Rules 54875

This proposal also does not have minority or low income populations and for the District of Columbia Circuit has
Tribal implications because it would not determined it would not. issued several opinions construing
have a substantial direct effect on one or In reviewing State Plan submissions, section 112 (d) of the Clean Air Act, and
more Indian tribes, on the relationship EPA’s role is to approve State choices, one of those opinions has called into
between the Federal Government and provided that they meet the criteria of question the legality of some of the
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of the CAA. In this context, in the absence standards for hazardous waste
power and responsibilities between the of a prior existing requirement for the combusters. This notice discusses the
Federal Government and Indian tribes, State to use voluntary consensus standards that EPA promulgated in
as specified by Executive Order 13175 standards (VCS), EPA has no authority October 2005, and specifically identifies
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). to disapprove a State Plan for failure to which standards EPA believes are
This proposed action also does not use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent consistent with the Act and caselaw,
have Federalism implications because it with applicable law for EPA, when it and which standards are not and need
would not have substantial direct effects reviews a State Plan submission, to use to be reexamined through a subsequent
on the States, on the relationship VCS in place of a State Plan submission rulemaking. With respect to those
between the national government and that otherwise satisfies the provisions of standards EPA intends to retain, this
the States, or on the distribution of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of notice indicates the portions of the
power and responsibilities among the section 12(d) of the National rationale upon which EPA intends to
various levels of government, as Technology Transfer and Advancement rely, and which portions EPA would no
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not longer rely upon as a justification for the
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action apply. This proposed rule would not October 2005 standards. EPA is seeking
merely proposes to approve a State rule impose an information collection public comment on this analysis. EPA
implementing a Federal standard. It burden under the provisions of the has also placed edited versions of
does not alter the relationship or the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 various support documents in the
distribution of power and U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). public docket, edited to remove portions
responsibilities established in the CAA. of the rationale on which EPA no longer
This proposed rule also is not subject to List of Subjects in Part 62
plans to rely, and seeks public comment
Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of Environmental protection, Air on these edits.
Children from Environmental Health pollution control, Electric utilities, DATES: Comments must be received on
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, Intergovernmental relations, Mercury, or before October 18, 2007.
April 23, 1997), because it proposes to Reporting and recordkeeping.
approve a State rule implementing a ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
Dated: September 19, 2007. identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
Federal standard.
Executive Order 12898, ‘‘Federal John B. Askew, OAR–2004–0022, by one of the
Actions to Address Environmental Regional Administrator, Region 7. following methods:
Justice in Minority Populations and [FR Doc. E7–19120 Filed 9–26–07; 8:45 am] • Follow the
Low-Income Populations,’’ requires BILLING CODE 6560–50–P on-line instructions for submitting
Federal agencies to consider the impact comments.
of programs, policies, and activities on • E-mail:
minority populations and low-income ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION • Fax: 202–566–1741.
populations. EPA guidance 1 states that AGENCY • Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send
EPA is to assess whether minority or comments to: Air and Radiation Docket
low-income populations face risk or a 40 CFR Part 63 (2822T), Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
rate of exposure to hazards that is [EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0022; FRL–8474–2] 2004–0022, U.S. Environmental
significant and that ‘‘appreciably Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
RIN 2050–AG29 Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
exceed[s] or is likely to appreciably
exceed the risk or rate to the general Please include a total of two copies.
NESHAP: National Emission Standards • Hand Delivery: In person or by
population or to the appropriate for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
comparison group.’’ (EPA, 1998) courier, deliver comments to: HQ EPA
Standards for Hazardous Waste Docket Center, Public Reading Room,
Because this rule merely proposes to Combustors
approve a state rule implementing the EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Federal standard established by CAMR, AGENCY: Environmental Protection Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
EPA lacks the discretionary authority to Agency (EPA). DC 20004. Such deliveries are only
modify today’s regulatory decision on ACTION: Solicitation of comment on legal accepted during the Docket’s normal
the basis of environmental justice analysis. hours of operation, and special
considerations. However, EPA has arrangements should be made for
already considered the impact of CAMR, SUMMARY: On October 12, 2005, deliveries of boxed information. Please
including this Federal standard, on pursuant to section 112(d) of the Clean include a total of two copies.
minority and low-income populations. Air Act, EPA issued national emission Instructions: Direct your comments to
In the context of EPA’s CAMR standards for hazardous air pollutants Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–
published in the Federal Register on (NESHAP) emitted by various types of 0022. The EPA’s policy is that all
May 18, 2005, in accordance with hazardous waste combusters. EPA comments received will be included in
Executive Order 12898, the Agency has subsequently granted reconsideration the public docket without change and
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS

considered whether CAMR may have petitions relating to certain issues may be made available online at
disproportionate negative impacts on presented by the rules. 71 FR 14665,, including any
52564, but has not yet issued a final personal information provided, unless
1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1998.
determination on reconsideration. the comment includes information
Guidance for Incorporating Environmental Justice Following the close of the comment claimed to be Confidential Business
Concerns in EPA’s NEPA Compliance Analyses.
Office of Federal Activities, Washington, DC, April, period on the proposed reconsideration Information (CBI) or other information
1998. rule, the United States Court of Appeals the disclosure of which is restricted by

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:46 Sep 26, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\27SEP1.SGM 27SEP1