Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 219 / Monday, November 15, 2004 / Proposed Rules 65565

have broad investigative or oversight 

authority, and the Service has implied 

that the amended rules are an attempt 

by the Commission to expand its 

authority and oversee operations in a 

manner not contemplated by the statute. 

Second, the Postal Service contends 

that Congress does not want it to have 

to make information of this nature 

public ‘‘indiscriminately.’’ The Act 

includes a special test applicable to 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 

requests. The Postal Service does not 

have to provide ‘‘information of a 

commercial nature’’ which ‘‘under good 

business practice would not be publicly 

disclosed’’ in response to a FOIA 

request. 39 U.S.C. 410(c)(2). The Postal 

Service correctly observes that private 

businesses in the United States seldom 

disclose detailed information about 

their operating costs. 

The Postal Service argues that because 

it is standard Commission practice to 

post public documents on its Web site, 

including data received as periodic 

reports, the Service should not provide 

such detailed information to the 

Commission. The Postal Service seems 

to concede that the Commission might 

have use for these materials, and for 

explanations of changes since the most 

recent rate case, but it contends that 

allowing internet access to this 

information would be contrary to 

Congress’ vision of the Postal Service 

following good business practices. 

The Current Commission Position 

The Commission has not found either 

Postal Service argument persuasive, as 

explained fully in Order No. 1386. The 

Commission has concluded that its 

responsibility under section 3603 to 

establish rules to carry out its functions 

under the Act does provide the 

authority to assure that sufficient 

information is available in a timely 

fashion to facilitate meaningful public 

participation and to enable the 

Commission to provide informed 

recommendations in response to Postal 

Service rate and classification requests. 

The Commission also has concluded 

that information required by its rules is 

not equivalent to a citizen’s FOIA 

request. While citizens can file a FOIA 

request seeking information on any 

topic without any showing of need, the 

Commission’s rules focus on 

information needed to carry out its 

statutory functions. The Act requires 

public participation in all Commission 

proceedings, and thus contemplates 

public access to relevant data. In past 

rate cases, the Postal Service has made 

all of the contested information 

available without suggesting that there 

was any need to restrict public access to 

it. 

The Commission always has 

recognized that when the Postal Service 

or any other participant provides items 

for use in a Commission proceeding that 

it shows to be trade secrets or other 

sensitive business information, and that 

disclosure of this information could 

result in commercial harm, such items 

should be made subject to appropriate 

protective conditions. Similarly, the 

Commission has been willing to 

accommodate in its periodic reporting 

rules, Postal Service requests that 

specific information be protected as 

commercially sensitive, after balancing 

the asserted risk of harm against the 

needs of the public to remain informed. 

See Docket No. RM89–3, Order No. 839, 

at 7–8 (deferring filing dates for billing 

determinants of competitive products). 

Comments 

The Postal Service has indicated its 

interest in further exploring the 

possibility of ways to refine procedures 

for controlling dissemination of 

information provided as periodic 

reports. This might be accomplished 

through additions to rule 102. Those 

responding to this notice are invited to 

advise on the most important policies 

and principles that should guide the 

Commission in evaluating potential 

action in regard to this situation. 

Commenters also may suggest 

procedures for obtaining a desired 

outcome or specific proposals for 

changes to Commission rules. 

Ordering Paragraphs 

It is ordered: 

1. Interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on the Commission’s 

Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking on or before December 6, 

2004. Any reply comments should be 

submitted by January 6, 2005. 

2. The Secretary shall cause this 

Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking to be published in the 

Federal Register. 

Attachment 

Materials Required by Rule 102 That the 

Postal Service Has Not Provided 

1. The In-Office Cost System (IOCS) 

data for FY 2003 used to distribute 

attributable mail processing and inoffice carrier costs to classes of mail in 

the Cost and Revenue Analysis (CRA) 

report. 

2. The City Carrier Cost System 

(CCCS) data for FY 2003 used to 

distribute attributable city carrier costs 

to classes of mail in the CRA. 

3. The Rural Carrier Cost System 

(RCCS) data for 2003 used to distribute 

attributable rural carrier costs to classes 

of mail in the CRA. 

4. The National Mail Count data for 

2003. These data are used to determine 

attributable rural carrier costs. 

5. MODS input data used to estimate 

mail processing cost variabilities by 

activity. 

6. SAS computer programs showing 

how FY 2003 attributable mail 

processing costs were estimated and 

distributed to mail classes in the CRA. 

7. Revenue, Pieces, and Weight 

reports by rate category for the first 

three quarters of FY 2004.

By the Commission.

Issued: November 8, 2004. 

Steven W. Williams, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 04–25298 Filed 11–12–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 720

[OPPT–2003–0058; FRL–7342–2]

RIN 2070–AJ04

TSCA Inventory Nomenclature for 

Enzymes and Proteins

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (ANPRM).

SUMMARY: This ANPRM alerts interested 

parties that EPA is considering new 

procedures and regulations for naming 

enzymes and proteins when listing such 

substances on the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA) Chemical 

Substances Inventory (Inventory). More 

specifically, this ANPRM outlines four 

identification elements that EPA 

currently believes are appropriate for 

use in developing unique TSCA 

Inventory nomenclature for 

proteinaceous enzymes. This ANPRM 

also solicits public comment on several 

specific questions relating to this 

initiative.

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 15, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket ID number OPPT–

2003–0058, by one of the following 

methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting 

comments.

• Agency Website: http://

www.epa.gov/edocket/. EDOCKET, 

EPA’s electronic public docket and 

65566 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 219 / Monday, November 15, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

comment system, is EPA’s preferred 

method for receiving comments. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments.

• E-mail: oppt.ncic@epa.gov.

• Mail: Document Control Office 

(7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention 

and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–

0001.

• Hand delivery/courier: OPPT 

Document Control Office (DCO), EPA 

East Bldg., Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC, Attention: 

Docket ID number OPPT–2003–0058. 

The DCO is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

DCO is (202) 564–8930. Such deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

docket ID number OPPT–2003–0058. 

EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available on-line at http://

www.epa.gov/edocket/, 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 EDOCKET, 

regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA 

EDOCKET and the Federal 

regulations.gov websites are 

‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, 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 

EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your email 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 information 

about EPA’s public docket visit 

EDOCKET on-line or see the Federal 

Register of May 31, 2002 (67 FR 38102) 

(FRL–7181–7).

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., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in EDOCKET or in hard 

copy at the OPPT Docket, EPA Docket 

Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Rm. B102, 

1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC. The Public Reading 

Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

legal holidays. The EPA Docket Center 

Reading Room telephone number is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the OPPT Docket, which is 

located in the EPA Docket Center, is 

(202) 566–0280.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

general information contact: Colby 

Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, 

Environmental Assistance Division 

(7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention 

and Toxics, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (202) 554–1404; e-mail address: 

TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov.

For technical information contact: 

James Alwood, Chemical Control 

Division, (7405M), Office Pollution 

Prevention and Toxics, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–

0001; telephone number: (202) 564–

8974; e-mail address: 

alwood.jim@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you manufacture, import, 

process, or use chemical substances 

which are subject to TSCA jurisdiction. 

Potentially affected entities may 

include, but are not limited to:

• Chemical manufacturers (NAICS 

325), e.g., persons manufacturing, 

importing, processing, or using 

chemicals for commercial purposes. 

• Petroleum and coal product 

industries (NAICS 324), e.g., persons 

manufacturing, importing, processing, 

or using chemicals for commercial 

purposes.

This listing is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this unit could also 

be affected. The North American 

Industrial Classification System 

(NAICS) codes have been provided to 

assist you and others in determining 

whether this action might apply to 

certain entities. To determine whether 

you or your business may be affected by 

this action, you should carefully 

examine the applicability provisions in 

title 40 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR 720.22. If 

you have any questions regarding the 

applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult the technical 

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies 

of this Document and Other Related 

Information?

In addition to EDOCKET (http://

www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the EPA Internet 

under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. A 

frequently updated electronic version of 

40 CFR part 720 is available on E-CFR 

Beta Site Two at http://

www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/.

C. 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:

i. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

ID number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number).

ii. Follow directions—The Agency 

may ask you to respond to specific 

questions or organize comments by 

referencing a CFR part or section 

number.

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 219 / Monday, November 15, 2004 / Proposed Rules 65567

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes.

iv. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/

or data that you used.

v. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced.

vi. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives.

vii. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats.

viii. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified.

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

This ANPRM is alerting stakeholders 

that EPA is considering changing 

procedures and requirements for 

naming enzymes and proteins for the 

purpose of listing those substances on 

the TSCA Inventory. Specifically, EPA 

has identified four elements that it 

currently believes are appropriate for 

use in creating unique and 

unambiguous identities for 

proteinaceous enzymes on the TSCA 

Inventory. Through this ANPRM, EPA is 

also soliciting public comment on the 

scientific appropriateness and technical 

feasibility of using the identification 

elements summarized herein.

B. What is the Agency’s Authority for 

Taking this Action?

Section 8(b) of TSCA requires EPA to 

‘‘compile, keep current, and publish a 

list of each chemical substance which is 

manufactured or processed in the 

United States’’ (the TSCA Inventory). In 

order to fulfill this requirement, EPA 

must continuously update and keep 

current various types of information, 

including, but not limited to, the 

information used to identify any new 

chemical substance that is reported to 

be manufactured or processed in the 

United States. EPA also makes 

corrections, when necessary, of 

previously reported information on the 

TSCA Inventory.

C. TSCA Inventory Background

As stated above, TSCA section 8(b) 

requires EPA to compile, keep current, 

and publish a list of chemical 

substances which are manufactured 

(including imported) or processed in the 

United States. This listing, known as the 

‘‘TSCA Inventory,’’ informs the public 

of which chemical substances are being 

manufactured, imported, or processed 

in the United States for commercial 

purposes. For the TSCA Inventory to 

accurately inform the public, it must be 

continuously and accurately updated as 

new information becomes available. The 

updating process includes adding to the 

Inventory the identities of new chemical 

substances that are being introduced 

into U.S. commerce and corrections 

when necessary of the identities of 

previously reported substances. The 

Agency has developed policies 

regarding the identification of chemical 

substances for the purpose of assigning 

a unique description of each substance 

on the TSCA Inventory. Published 

nomenclature guidance is currently 

available for polymeric substances, 

substances containing varying carbon 

chain lengths, complex reaction 

products, mixtures, and chemical 

substances of unknown or variable 

compositions. Approximately 81,500 

chemical substances, as defined in 

section 3 of TSCA, are on the TSCA 

Inventory at this time.

In its implementation of TSCA, EPA 

defines chemical substances as either 

‘‘existing’’ chemicals or ‘‘new’’

chemicals. The only way to determine if 

a substance is new or existing is by 

consulting the TSCA Inventory. Any 

substance that is listed on the TSCA 

Inventory is an existing chemical, 

otherwise it is a new chemical. If a 

substance is a new chemical, generally 

it can be manufactured or imported for 

non-exempt commercial purposes only 

when a Premanufacture Notice (PMN) is 

submitted at least 90 days before the 

manufacture or import of such 

substance begins (see section 5(a) of 

TSCA and 40 CFR part 720). During this 

90-day review period EPA will evaluate 

the proposed manufacture, processing, 

use, distribution in commerce, and 

disposal of the substance, and if 

necessary, prohibit or limit any activity 

that may result in an unreasonable risk 

of injury to human health or the 

environment. A new chemical substance 

also can be manufactured or imported if 

it is subject to an exemption from full 

premanufacture reporting, for example a 

Low Volume Exemption or a Test 

Marketing Exemption (see 40 CFR part 

723 and 40 CFR 720.38). In addition a 

new chemical substance is excluded 

from premanufacture reporting under 

certain conditions such as manufacture 

or import of small quantities for 

research and development or if the 

substance does not meet the TSCA 

definition of chemical substance as 

defined in 40 CFR part 720.3(e) (see 40 

CFR 720.30).

D. Inventory Listings of Enzymes

When EPA promulgated the TSCA 

Inventory Reporting Regulations of 1977 

(42 FR 64572, December 23, 1977), the 

Agency did not provide specific 

guidance regarding how complex 

biological compounds should be 

identified. However, EPA did publish 

the TSCA Candidates List to provide 

examples of the types of substances that 

would be reportable for the Inventory. 

That list included enzymes. As a result, 

approximately 150 enzymes were 

reported and listed on the TSCA 

Inventory without specific agency 

guidance regarding how they should be 

unambiguously identified. The original 

Inventory listings for non-enzymatic 

proteins and other complex biological 

compounds are based on information 

originally reported to EPA that varies 

widely in the type and specificity of 

information included.

The enzymes currently on the TSCA 

Inventory are identified by a Chemical 

Abstract Services (CAS) Registry 

Number and Chemical Abstracts 9th

Collective Index Name. The names 

assigned to these enzymes by EPA vary 

in the type and specificity of 

information included due to wide 

variation in the type and amount of 

information originally reported to EPA. 

For some enzymes, the name is broad, 

defining only the most generic catalytic 

activity of the enzyme (e.g., proteinase).

As a result of the existing broad and 

generic TSCA Inventory enzyme 

listings, it has been difficult for EPA to 

determine whether enzyme substances 

are new and distinct, or covered under 

existing listings. In most cases, newly 

developed enzymes appear to be 

subsumed under one of the current 

broad and generic TSCA Inventory 

enzyme listings, which means that, 

although they are newly developed, 

they appear to be existing chemicals. 

This, in turn, means that EPA is 

reviewing very few new enzymes under 

section 5 of TSCA, despite the ongoing 

innovation in this field as to the 

specificity and functions of 

commercially available enzymes. Under 

the existing nomenclature system, 

therefore, EPA may not be addressing all 

of the newly developed enzymes and 

considering the potential risks that may 

be associated with these substances 

under section 5 of TSCA. A more 

specific nomenclature system would 

allow EPA to assess newly developed 

enzymes and take actions needed to 

prevent potential unreasonable risks to 

health and the environment that may be 

associated with these substances under 

section 5 of TSCA before they occur.

65568 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 219 / Monday, November 15, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

In addition, the broad TSCA 

Inventory enzyme listings, the lack of 

clear reporting guidelines, and the 

absence of policy concerning what 

structural variation or changes trigger 

reporting, also make it difficult for 

manufacturers to determine whether 

enzyme substances are new or covered 

under existing listings. Recognizing that 

enzyme listings on the Inventory were 

broad, EPA developed an interim policy 

that manufacturers of enzymes should 

contact EPA regarding submission of a 

bona fide intent to manufacture before 

producing any enzyme. EPA also 

routinely advised submitters of a Notice 

of Bona Fide Intent to Manufacture that 

the Agency may modify the method of 

listing enzymes on the Inventory and 

that this could require reporting at a 

higher level of detail than is required at 

present. This case-by-case 

determination creates uncertainty and 

an unnecessary burden for both the 

Agency and PMN submitters. More 

specific guidelines for identifying 

enzymes on the TSCA Inventory would 

make the process of deciding whether 

an enzyme is new or existing more 

predictable and transparent.

In order to more effectively meet its 

statutory obligation under TSCA to 

prevent unreasonable risk to human 

health and the environment and to 

maintain a complete and accurate list of 

all chemical substances manufactured, 

imported, or processed, EPA believes it 

is necessary to refine its policies with 

regard to enzyme identification 

reporting requirements. The timely 

development of identification reporting 

guidelines for enzymes is essential, 

given the increasing use of enzymes in 

commerce, the wide variety of enzymes 

that are being produced, and the 

development of new and different 

manufacturing techniques.

III. Identification Elements

A. Description of Identification 

Elements

EPA has identified four elements that 

it currently believes are appropriate to 

use in combination to create 

unambiguous listings for proteinaceous 

enzymes on the TSCA Inventory:

1. Function.

2. Source.

3. Processing.

4. Amino acid sequence.

EPA believes that no individual element 

provides sufficient identification 

information by itself. Rather, EPA 

anticipates that all four elements will 

provide useful and necessary 

information for the unambiguous 

identification of proteinaceous enzymes 

and that some combination of these 

and/or additional identification 

elements may be appropriate for other 

enzymes and proteins.

The function of an enzyme refers to 

its catalytic activity. The internationally 

accepted nomenclature conventions of 

the Nomenclature Committee of the 

International Union of Biochemistry and 

Molecular Biology (NC-IUBMB) describe 

and differentiate enzymes based on 

catalytic activity. Function, or catalytic 

activity, could be incorporated as an 

element of chemical identity of an 

enzyme on the TSCA Inventory using 

this standard enzyme nomenclature.

Source refers to the organism from 

which the gene encoding the enzyme 

was derived and the organism or 

manufacturing platform (e.g., tissue 

culture) in which the enzyme is 

produced. The two sources may be the 

same or differ when the enzyme gene 

from one organism is introduced 

through genetic engineering into a 

different organism or through the use of 

a synthetic sequence.

Processing refers to procedures used 

to isolate the enzyme from the 

production organism or manufacturing 

platform, procedures used to purify it, 

or any chemical reactions to which the 

enzyme is subjected to produce the final 

product.

The amino acid sequence of an 

enzyme or protein is known as its 

primary structure. The amino acid 

sequence is a systematic representation 

of the linear chain of amino acids 

connected via amide bonds that produce 

a polypeptide.

An example of enzyme nomenclature 

using these identification elements 

would be neopullulanase (Enzyme 

Commission 3.2.1.135), produced by 

Bacillus stearothermophilus, treated 

with acetic acid, with amino acid 

sequence:

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 219 / Monday, November 15, 2004 / Proposed Rules 65569

BILLING CODE 6560–50–C

This is one version of enzyme 

nomenclature using these four 

identification elements. Actual 

nomenclature would vary widely 

depending on use of all four elements, 

nomenclature used for each element, 

and the level of detail ultimately used 

for each element.

B. Issues for Public Comment

EPA is soliciting comments on all 

aspects of the discussion presented in 

this document regarding nomenclature 

issues for enzymes and proteins, for 

purposes of listing these chemical 

substances on the TSCA Inventory. EPA 

is particularly interested in receiving 

comments on the following topics.

EPA has identified four elements 

(listed in Unit III.A.), that it currently 

believes are appropriate to derive 

unique nomenclature for the purpose of 

unambiguously listing proteinaceous 

enzymes on the TSCA Inventory. EPA is 

seeking comments on the scientific 

appropriateness of using these 

identification elements, the level of 

detail necessary to create specific, 

unambiguous TSCA Inventory listings, 

the technical feasibility of providing 

such information, and any additional or 

alternative elements that could be used 

to identify proteinaceous enzymes on 

the TSCA Inventory.

Are the identification elements 

proposed for proteinaceous enzymes 

scientifically appropriate and 

sufficiently comprehensive for nonproteinaceous enzymes and nonenzymatic proteins? Are there 

additional or alternative identification 

elements that should be used in creating 

TSCA Inventory listings for nonproteinaceous enzymes and nonenzymatic proteins?If so, what are these 

alternatives, and why is it believed that 

these alternatives are preferable.

IV. Do Any Statutory or Executive 

Order Reviews Apply to this Action?

Under Executive Order 12866, 

entitled Regulatory Planning and 

Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), 

it has been determined that this ANPRM 

is a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under section 3(f) of the Executive 

order. The Agency therefore submitted 

this document to OMB for the 10-day 

review period afforded under this 

Executive order. Any changes made in 

response to OMB comments during that 

review have been documented in the 

docket as required by the Executive 

order.

Since this ANPRM does not impose or 

propose any requirements, and instead 

seeks comments and suggestions for the 

Agency to consider in developing a 

subsequent notice of proposed 

rulemaking, the various other review 

requirements that apply when an agency 

imposes requirements do not apply to 

this action.

As part of your comments on this 

ANPRM you may include any 

comments or information that you have 

regarding these requirements. In 

particular, any comments or information 

that would help the Agency to assess 

the potential impact of a rule on small 

entities pursuant to the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 

seq.); to consider voluntary consensus 

standards pursuant to section 12(d) of 

the National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 

Public Law 104–113, section 12(d) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note); or to consider 

environmental health or safety effects 

on children pursuant to Executive Order 

13045, entitled Protection of Children 

from Environmental Health Risks and 

Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 

1997). The Agency will consider such 

comments during the development of 

any subsequent notice of proposed 

rulemaking as it takes appropriate steps 

to address any applicable requirements.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 720

Environmental protection, Chemicals, 

Hazardous substances, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements.


EP15no04a.055</GPH>
65570 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 219 / Monday, November 15, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Dated: November 1, 2004.

Michael O. Leavitt,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 04–25307 Filed 11–12–04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 2 and 80 

[WT Docket No. 04–344; RM–10821; FCC 

04–207] 

Maritime Communications

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Commission initiates a rulemaking 

proceeding to identify the 

electromagnetic spectrum that should be 

used for maritime Automatic 

Identification Systems (AIS) in the 

United States and its territorial waters. 

AIS is an important tool for enhancing 

maritime safety and homeland security, 

and the Commission is concerned that 

recent developments may have created 

uncertainty in the maritime community 

regarding the very high frequency (VHF) 

channels to be used for AIS, and that 

this in turn could impede efforts to 

expedite the broad deployment of AIS. 

The Commission has received 

conflicting petitions and other pleadings 

on this subject from the National 

Telecommunications and Information 

Administration (NTIA), which is 

representing the interests of the Federal 

Government, including the United 

States Coast Guard (USCG or Coast 

Guard) and the Department of 

Transportation (including the Saint 

Lawrence Seaway Development 

Corporation) in this matter, and from 

MariTEL, Inc. (MariTEL), the licensee of 

all nine of the maritime VHF Public 

Coast (VPC) station service areas. Based 

on these petitions and pleadings, as well 

as responsive comments from other 

stakeholders in the maritime 

community, the Commission proposes 

to designate VHF maritime Channels 

87B and 88B for exclusive AIS use 

domestically, in keeping with the 

international allocation of those 

channels for AIS, because the 

Commission tentatively concludes that 

the use of those channels will best 

secure to the United States the maritime 

safety and homeland security benefits of 

AIS. In addition, the Commission 

tentatively concludes that it should 

deny MariTEL’s pending petitions that 

conflict with this proposal.

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

December 30, 2004, and reply comments 

are due on or before January 31, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeffrey Tobias, Jeff.Tobias@FCC.gov, 

Public Safety and Critical Infrastructure 

Division, Wireless Telecommunications 

Bureau, (202) 418–0680, or TTY (202) 

418–7233.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Federal 

Communications Commission’s Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’) in 

WT Docket No. 04–344, FCC 04–207, 

adopted on August 26, 2004, and 

released on October 15, 2004. The full 

text of this document is available for 

inspection and copying during normal 

business hours in the FCC Reference 

Center, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. The complete 

text may be purchased from the 

Commission’s copy contractor, Best 

Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, 

SW., Room CY–B402, Washington, DC 

20554. The full text may also be 

downloaded at: http://www.fcc.gov.

Alternative formats are available to 

persons with disabilities by contacting 

Brian Millin at (202) 418–7426 or TTY 

(202) 418–7365 or at bmillin@fcc.gov.

1. Section 80.371(c)(3) of the 

Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR 

80.371(c)(3), directs the licensee of VHF 

Public Coast Service Areas (VPCSAs) 1–

9, i.e., MariTEL, and the Coast Guard to 

negotiate in good faith to select two 

narrowband offset channel pairs to be 

dedicated to AIS use, and specifies that 

if an agreement cannot be reached, the 

Coast Guard may petition the 

Commission to select the channel pairs. 

Although MariTEL and the Coast Guard 

did in fact reach an agreement to 

designate frequencies 157.375 MHz and 

161.975 MHz for AIS and executed a 

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to 

that effect, MariTEL later exercised its 

right to terminate the MOA. Following 

termination of the MOA, NTIA 

petitioned the Commission on behalf of 

the Coast Guard to select Channels 87B 

and 88B for AIS and to work with NTIA 

to reallocate the channels for exclusive 

AIS use nationwide on a shared Federal 

Government/non-Federal Government 

basis. After reviewing various proposals 

submitted by MariTEL and NTIA, 

including their technical submissions, 

and the comments filed in response to 

a number of public notices relating to 

this matter, the Commission tentatively 

agrees with NTIA and the Coast Guard, 

as well as the vast majority of 

commenters, that the public interest 

would be served by designating 

Channels 87B and 88B for exclusive AIS 

use in the nine maritime VPCSAs. The 

Commission therefore grants the 

petition for rulemaking filed by NTIA 

on October 24, 2003, RM–10821 to the 

extent that it seeks initiation of a 

rulemaking proceeding to consider this 

issue, denies the Emergency Petition for 

Declaratory Ruling filed by MariTEL on 

October 15, 2003, and adopts the instant 

Notice of Proposed Rule Making in 

which it proposes to designate Channels 

87B and 88B for exclusive AIS use in 

the nine maritime VPCSAs. 

2. Designating Channels 87B and 88B 

for AIS in the United States and its 

territorial waters would permit seamless 

worldwide AIS operations. If the United 

States were to designate channels other 

than 87B and 88B for AIS, vessels 

entering United States waters would 

have to switch to those alternative 

channels, instead of being able to use 

the same channels that were employed 

in international waters. Commenters 

indicate that requiring such switching 

would increase the risk of vessel 

collisions. If ships must switch channels 

as they approach and transit an AIS 

‘‘fence’’ between international and 

United States waters, there is a risk that 

they will disappear temporarily from 

the screens of vessel traffic management 

systems as well as from the screens of 

AIS receivers located on the bridges of 

vessels. 

3. Further, domestic use of Channels 

87B and 88B for AIS would facilitate the 

speedy and efficient deployment of AIS, 

allowing the United States to take full 

advantage of existing AIS standards and 

infrastructure. Mandating the use of 

other channels could prolong 

implementation schedules for future 

PAWSS installations and delay full 

implementation of AIS as a component 

of homeland security because of the 

need for additional technical analysis, 

possible design changes, and 

conceivably more extensive shore 

infrastructure to accommodate AIS 

channel shifting. In addition, AIS 

operations on Channels 87B and 88B 

already have been deployed in, for 

example, the Saint Lawrence Seaway. A 

switch to other channels on the United 

States side would not only necessitate a 

costly reconfiguration of the AIS 

network on the Seaway but, more 

importantly, would compromise the 

ability of the United States to coordinate 

with Canada in monitoring vessel traffic 

on the Seaway and in other areas, since 

Canada uses Channels 87B and 88B for 

AIS. In addition to implementation 

delays and coordination difficulties, the 

use of channels other than 87B and 88B 

would affect the United States adversely 

because it would cause the U.S. 

Government to expend considerably 

more time, money and resources to