Federal Register Notice - SSA - Limited Reopening of Comment Period

64702

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2004 / Proposed Rules

FCRA Section 609 through nonconsumer reporting agency subsidiaries?
(5) Consumer reporting agencies can
fulfill FCRA Section 609’s requirement
by providing consumers with mortgage
or educational scores. How will
consumer reporting agencies choose to
fulfill this requirement and what type of
score are they most likely to provide to
consumers? Why?
(6) Among the potential approaches
available to the Commission is
determining a fee based on the market
for scores. In that context, what is the
appropriate market to consider: the
market for stand-alone mortgage and
educational scores sold by consumer
reporting agencies, or the market for all
credit scores sold by consumer reporting
agencies and non-consumer reporting
agencies? If a market-based approach is
appropriate, are these two markets
appropriate reference points? Are there
other markets that should be
considered? Overall, what is the
appropriate market, and what are the
factors that the Commission should
consider in determining the appropriate
market?
(7) The Commission welcomes
comment on whether other factors, in
addition to prices charged in a
competitive market, should be taken
into account in determining a fair and
reasonable fee for required disclosures
(e.g., cost data, revenue data, other
market conditions). Comments should
discuss the pragmatic aspects of each
factor advanced for consideration; for
example, whether data underlying a
given factor are readily available or
difficult to obtain.
(8) For any determination involving a
specified dollar amount for a fair and
reasonable fee, should the Commission
include within a final determination a
mechanism for periodic adjustment of
the specified amount? If so, what
approach is desirable for such
adjustment and what entity or entities
should determine the specific
adjustment? Should the Commission
initiate new assessments of all of the
factors underlying its determination at a
fixed time interval, or only when a
factor changes significantly? Should the
Commission’s determination include an
‘‘automatic’’ adjustment keyed to the
consumer price index or similar
economic index? Should periodic
adjustments be required to be both
determined and implemented by the
regulated entities based on a formula set
forth within the Commission’s
determination? Are there other bases for
periodic adjustment that might be
appropriate?

VerDate jul<14>2003

11:49 Nov 05, 2004

Jkt 205001

By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 04–24841 Filed 11–5–04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–P

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
20 CFR Part 404
[Regulation No. 4]
RIN 0960–AF28

Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating
Impairments of the Digestive System
Social Security Administration.
Proposed rules; limited
reopening of comment period.

AGENCY:
ACTION:

SUMMARY: We are reopening for limited
purposes the comment period for the
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
that we published in the Federal
Register on November 14, 2001 (66 FR
57009). We have decided to reopen the
comment period for 60 days to solicit
additional public comments on our
proposal to revise and remove several of
the chronic liver disease listings from
the Listing of Impairments (the listings)
because we believe that the revisions we
propose are significant. We are
reopening the comment period only to
accept comments about chronic liver
disease. Due to the limited reopening of
the NPRM, we will not consider any
comments on other aspects of the
proposed listings for the digestive
system.

To be sure your comments are
considered, we must receive them by
January 7, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may give us your
comments by: using our Internet site
facility (i.e., Social Security Online) at:
http://policy.ssa. gov/pnpublic.nsf/
LawsRegs or the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov; email to [email protected]; telefax to
(410) 966–2830; or by letter to the
Commissioner of Social Security, P.O.
Box 17703, Baltimore, Maryland 21235–
7703. You may also deliver them to the
Office of Regulations, Social Security
Administration, 107 Altmeyer Building,
6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore,
Maryland 21235–6401, between 8 a.m.
and 4:30 p.m. on regular business days.
Comments are posted on our Internet
site, at http://policy.ssa. gov/
pnpublic.nsf/LawsRegs or you may
inspect them on regular business days
by making arrangements with the
contact person shown in this preamble.
Electronic Version: The electronic file
of this document is available on the date
DATES:

PO 00000

Frm 00014

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

of publication in the Federal Register at
http://www.gpoaccess. gov/fr/
index.html. It is also available on the
Internet site for SSA (i.e., Social
Security Online) at: http://policy.ssa.
gov/pnpublic.nsf/LawsRegs.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Suzanne DiMarino, Social Insurance
Specialist, Office of Regulations, Social
Security Administration, 107 Altmeyer
Building, 6401 Security Boulevard,
Baltimore, Maryland 21235–6401, (410)
965–1767 or TTY (410) 966–5609. For
information on eligibility or filing for
benefits, call our national toll-free
number, 1–800–772–1213 or TTY 1–
800–325–0778, or visit our Internet Web
site, Social Security Online, at
www.socialsecurity.gov.

On
November 14, 2001, we published
‘‘Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating
Impairments of the Digestive System’’ as
an NPRM in the Federal Register (66 FR
57009). You may find this document at
our Web site: http://policy.ssa.gov/erm/
rules.nsf/5da82b031
a6677dc85256b41006b7f8d/
a37bb476cb 227bdd85256b410067a74d?
OpenDocument.
This NPRM proposed to revise the
criteria in the Listings that we use to
evaluate claims involving impairments
of the digestive system. We explained in
the proposed rules that we were revising
and removing several of the chronic
liver disease listings because of the
progress in medical and surgical
advancements in treating these diseases.
When we published the NPRM, we
provided a 60-day comment period that
ended January 14, 2002. We have
reviewed and considered all the
comments we received during the
comment period. However, we received
few comments regarding our proposed
revisions to the listings that specifically
involve chronic liver disease. Because
we believe that the revisions we propose
are significant, we want to ensure that
the public has another opportunity to
review and comment on those proposals
involving the evaluation of chronic liver
disease. In order to allow the public
sufficient time to review and comment
on our proposals, we have decided to
provide an additional 60-day comment
period within which to comment on our
proposal to revise and remove several of
the listings for evaluating chronic liver
disease. If you have already provided
comments on the proposals, your
comments will be considered and you
do not need to resubmit them.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

E:\FR\FM\08NOP1.SGM

08NOP1

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2004 / Proposed Rules
Dated: November 1, 2004.
Jo Anne B. Barnhart,
Commissioner of Social Security.
[FR Doc. 04–24782 Filed 11–5–04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191–02–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[R05–OAR–2004–IN–0004; FRL–7820–5]

Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Indiana
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to
approve revisions to volatile organic
compound (VOC) requirements for Eli
Lilly and Company (Eli Lilly). This
facility is in Marion County, Indiana.
The Indiana Department of
Environmental Management (IDEM)
submitted a Commissioner’s Order
requesting the revision on February 11,
2004 as an amendment to the Indiana
State Implementation Plan (SIP).
Eli Lilly operates a synthesized
pharmaceutical manufacturing facility
in Marion County. This SIP revision
covers new and existing sources in Eli
Lilly’s Building 110 pilot plant. Eli Lilly
is seeking an exemption from 326
Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 8–5–
3, control requirements for synthesized
pharmaceutical manufacturing, under
the site-specific reasonably available
control technology (RACT) rule, 326
IAC 8–1–5. Eli Lilly is seeking this
exemption for reactors, filters,
centrifuges, and vacuum dryers. Other
Building 110 sources such as air dryers,
in-process tanks, and storage tanks
comply with 326 IAC 8–5–3. The total
VOC annual emissions from Building
110 are limited to less than 10 tons per
year (TPY).
DATES: The EPA must receive written
comments by December 8, 2004.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by Docket ID No. R05–OAR–
2004–IN–0004 by one of the following
methods: Federal eRulemaking Portal:
http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments. E-mail: [email protected].,
Fax: (312) 886–5824. Mail: You may
send written comments to: J. Elmer
Bortzer, Chief, Air Programs Branch,
(AR–18J), Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Hand delivery: Deliver your
comments to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,

VerDate jul<14>2003

11:49 Nov 05, 2004

Jkt 205001

Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
18th floor, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office’s normal
hours of operation. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. R05–OAR–2004–IN–
0004. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through regulations.gov, or email. The Federal regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an e-mail
comment directly to EPA without going
through regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to Section I of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the EDOCKET index at
http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Publicly available
docket materials are available either
electronically in EDOCKET or in hard
copy at Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation
Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. (We recommend
that you telephone Matt Rau,
Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886–
6524 before visiting the Region 5 office.)
This Facility is open from 8:30 AM to

PO 00000

Frm 00015

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

64703

4:30 PM, Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays.
Matt
Rau, Environmental Engineer, Criteria
Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604, Telephone: (312) 886–6524.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document wherever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used we mean
the EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Table of Contents
I. What Actions Are the EPA Taking Today?
II. General Information.
III. Where Can I Find More Information
About This Proposal and the
Corresponding Direct Final Rule?

I. What Actions Are the EPA Taking
Today?
EPA is proposing to approve revisions
to VOC requirements for the Eli Lilly
pharmaceutical manufacturing facility
in Marion County, Indiana. The
revisions include an exemption from the
control requirements of 326 IAC 8–5–3
for reactors, centrifuges, filters, and
vacuum dryers in Building 110, the
pilot plant for Eli Lilly. This exemption
can be approved under Indiana’s sitespecific RACT rule, 326 IAC 8–1–5.
Another revision is that Eli Lilly can
now add research and development
equipment to Building 110 without a
new SIP revision. Eli Lilly will follow
the appropriate RACT plan for any new
equipment and keep the total annual
VOC limit for Building 110 to less than
10 TPY.
II. General Information
What Should I Consider as I Prepare My
Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through EDOCKET,
regulations.gov, or e-mail. Clearly mark
the part or all of the information that
you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD ROM the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:

E:\FR\FM\08NOP1.SGM

08NOP1