Nos. 96-1253, 96-1269. Consolidated Case No. 96-1269.United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
October 15, 1997.
Before: SILBERMAN, GINSBURG, and HENDERSON, Circuit Judges.
[1] ORDER
PER CURIAM.
[4] It is FURTHER ORDERED, by the Court, that respondents’ petition for rehearing is otherwise denied.Page 15, concluding paragraph, lines 4-6, [119 F.3d at 45] delete the entire last sentence of the opinion and insert in lieu thereof the following: “Accordingly, we vacate the challenged provisions of the Final Policy, paragraphs 2.4, 2.4.1, 2.4.1(a), 2.5.1, 2.5.1(a), 2.5.1(b), 2.5.1(c), 2.5.1(d), 2.5.1(e), 2.5.3, 2.5.3(a), 2.6, the Secretary’s supporting discussion in the preamble, and any other portions of the rule necessarily implicated by the holding of our opinion, and remand this proceeding to the Secretary. Our action in this case does not reinstate any part of the Secretary’s Interim Policy that the Final Policy was intended to replace.”