# + 2

(,1 1/,1(

Citation: 50 Fed. Reg. 34809 1985

Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Wed Aug 31 10:02:39 2011

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 1985 / Rules and Regulations 34809

This amendment was submitted to the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) forreview as required by Executive Order 12291.

B.RegulatoryFlexibility Act This amendment willnot have a significant economic impact on small entities. Consistent with the purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5U.S.C. 601 etseq., small manufacturers have been defined and excluded from manufacturer reporting requirements.

C. Paperwork ReductionAct The information collection requirements contained in this rulehave been approved bythe Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 etseq.and have been assigned OMB Control Number 2070- 0054.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part712

Chemicals, Envircnmental protection, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: August 20, 1985. Lee M. Thomas, Administrator.

Therefore, 40 CFR Part 712 is amended as follows:

PART 712-[AMENDED]

1.The authority citation forPart 712 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2607. 2.In §712.1by redesignating the existing text as paragraph (a) and adding a new paragraph (b)to read as follows:
§712.1 Scope and compliance.

(b) Chemical substances, mixtures, and categories ofsubstances or mixtures which havebeen recommended by the Interagency Testing Committee for testing consideration by the Agency but not designated for Agency response within 12 months, willbe added to §712.30 using the procedure specified in §712.30(c) only to the extent that the total number ofdesignated and recommended chemicals has not exceeded 50 in any 1year.Additional recommended butnot designated chemicals may be added after proposal, and consideration ofpublic comment.

3.In §712.30byrevising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§712.30 Chemical listsand reporting periods.

* *t ,* * *

(c) Chemical substances, mixtures, and categories ofsubstances ormixtures that have been added by the Interagency Testing Committee, established under section 4(e) ofTSCA, to the section 4(e) Priority List, for testing consideration by the Agency, will be added to this section 30 days after EPA issues for publication in the Federal Register a rule amendment listing these chemical substances, mixtures and categories. A Preliminary Assessment InformationManufacturer's Reportmust be submitted foreach chemical substance and mixture within 60 days after the effective date ofthe listing. Atthe discretion ofthe Assistant Administrator for Pesticides and Toxic Substances, a listed substance, mixture

or category may be withdrawn, for good
cause, from the rule's reporting requirements prior to the effective date. Any-information submitted showing why a substance, mixture or category shouldbe removed from the rulemust be received by EPA within 14 days after the date ofpublication ofthe notice under this paragraph. Ifa substance, mixture

or category is removed, a Federal Register notice announcing this decision willbe published no later than the effective date ofthe amendment. Any information submitted must be addressed to: Document Control Officer, Office ofPesticides and Toxic Substances, (TS-793),Environmental ProtectionAgency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington D.C. 20460,ATTN: 8(a) Auto-ITC.

[FR Doc. 85-20549 Filed 8-27-85; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-M

40 CFR Part 716
[OPTS-84010A; FRL 2881-8(b)]

Health and Safety Data Reporting; Submissionof Listsand Copies of Health and Safety Studies

ACENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule amends the automatic reporting provision of the Health and SafetyData Reporting rule under section 8(d) ofthe Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The amendment changes 40 CFR 716.18(b) to require, without separate proposal and comment, reporting of unpublished health and safety studies on chemicals recommended fortesting consideration by the Interagency Testing Committee (ITC) but not designated for action by EPA within 12 months.Two other amendments are also included. One allows for the removal ofITCrecommended chemicals by the Assistant Administrator forPesticides and Toxic Substances before the effective date ofan amendment adding ITC-recommended chemcials .tothe section 8(d) rule.The other amendment modifies theprocedures forrequesting reporting deadline extensions.

DATES: In accordance with 40 CFR 23.5 (50FR 7271), thisregulation shall be proriulgated for purposes ofjudicial review at 1p.m. Eastern daylight time

on September 11, 1985.This regulation shall become effective on October 11, 1985.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edward A. Klein, Director, TSCA Assistance Office (TS-799), Office of Toxic Substances, Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. E-543, 401 M Street SW., Washington, D.C. 20460.Toll free: (800-424-9065). InWashington, D.C.: (554-1404). Outside the USA: (Operator-202-554-1404).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I.Introduction

EPA issued a rule under section 8(d) ofTSCA (40 CFR Part716, Subpart A), published in the Federal Register of September 2, 1982 (47 FR 38780), which requires persons to submit unpublished health and safety studies on chemicals listed in §716.17. The Agency will use the studies to support its investigations ofthe risks posed by chemicals, and, in particular,to support its decisions whether to require industry to test chemicals under section4 ofTSCA.

Persons who have manufactured, imported orprocessed; are manufacturing, importing orprocessing; have proposed to manufacture, import or process; orwillpropose to manufacture, import or process the listed chemicals may be subject to the reporting requirements ofthe Health and Safety Data Reporting Rule. EPA advises these persons to refer to 40 CFR Part 716 for complete information on required submissions.

The September 2,1982rule required -reporting on chemicals recommended fortesting bythe Interagency Testing Committee in its First through Fifth Reports, and on a few other chemicals which were being reviewed by EPA. The Agency also included inthat rule a provision for automatically adding to the rule chemcials recommended for testing by the ITC and designated for 12- month Agency response.Thus, very time the ITCdesignates a substance in one of its reports, theAgency will automatically add the substances to §716.17(b) oftherule and require reporting within 90 days. Non-ITC Federal Register / Vol. 50,34810 Federal Register 

## / Vol. 50, No. 167 

## I Wednesday, August 28, 1985 

## I Rules and Regulations
chemicals are added to therule after a notice ofproposed amendment of §716.17 is published in the Federal Register. There willbe a 30-day public comment period on the notice; after consideration ofthe comments, a final amendment will identify the substances and mixtures added.

EPA also proposed to amend §716.17 by adding the chemicals designated for priority testing bythe ITCin its Sixth through Tenth Reports (47 FR38780). On March 30, 1983 (4Q FR 13178) the final amendment adding these chemicals to the rulewas published in the Federal Register.

Subsequent to publication ofthe original 8(d) rule, theAgency has used the automatic reporting provision described above to add chemicals designated by'the ITCin its Eleventh, Twelfth, Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Reports (47FR 54626, 48 FR 24443, 48FR 55674, 49 FR 22389, 49 FR 46931).

In addition to the chemicals designated bythe ITCin its Eleventh Report, the ITC also added to its priority list six substances which itdid not designate forEPA response within 1 year. This was the first time the ITC had recommended substances without designating them for a 12-month response period. Subsequently, one chemical recommended but not designated for a 12-month response was included in theFourteenth Report ofthe ITC. Although the language in §716.18(b) does not specifically limit the Agency to including only designated substances, EPA proposed for public comment an amendment requiring the automatic reporting on recommended (non-designated) substances, as published in the Federal Register of November 19, 1984 (49FR 45602). The comments received on that proposed rule are addressed in the document cited in Unit III ofthis final rule.

The Agency believes that the automatic addition to the section 8(d) rule ofchemical substances and mixtures that are recommended but not designated by the ITC will benefit both industry and EPA and willprovide valuable information to the Agency in a
more timely manner.

Elsewhere in today's Federal Register, the Agency is alsopromulgating similar automatic reporting requirements for non-designated ITCrecommendations under the TSCA section 8(a) Preliminary Assessment Information rule. Under that rule, persons are required to report general production, use, and exposure information to the Agency on chemicals listed in §712.30. This rule was proposed in the Federal Register ofNovember 19, 1984, (49 FR 45598).

I. Rationale for Automatic Reporting

A. Efficiency

In the past,the ITC has issued its reports containing designated -substances on a regular and predictable time schedule which allowed companies
to plan their reporting activities for certain times ofthe year. Similarly, EPA plans resource allocations for the processing and analysis of these reports when they arereceived.

When non-designated chemicals are included in ITC reports along with designated chemicals, reporting by companies to the Agency will not occur at the same time ifEPA proposes reporting requirements for the nondesignated substances, receives comment, and then promulgates a separate rule amendment adding these chemicals. That is, at the time the ITC issued a report, the Agency would simultaneously add the designated chemicals to the final 8(d) rule, but only
propose the non-designated chemicals for reporting. Thus, for one ITC report which contained both designate4 and non-designated chemicals, industry has been required to report at two different times, coincident with the ITC report publication for the designated chemicals and later for the non-designated chemicals. Some companies may not have searched for studies on nondesignated chemicals at the time the ITC recommended them because there was a chance that the Agency might never require reporting on them. Assuming that the ITC continued to recommend designated and non-designated chemicals twice a year, industry would have to plan for four file searches and reporting periods per year.

The ITC's Tenth and Eleventh Reports (47 FR 22585 and 47 FR 54626) have already produced a situation of separate reporting on both non-designated and designated substances from the same category. While not a case of simultaneous listing by the ITC of related designated and non-designated chemicals, this example is illustrative of the potential impacts ofseparate reporting schedules for two related chemicals or groups of chemicals. In its Tenth Report, the ITC designated 1,2,4- trimethylbenzene, while in its Eleventh Report the ITC recommended but did
not designate mixed trimethyl-benzenes, 1,2,3-trimethylbenzene, and 1,3,5- trimethylbenzene. The section 8(d) reporting requirement for 1,2,4- trimethylbenzene became effective on March 30, 1983 (48FR 13178) while that forthe other non-designated trimethylbenzene became effective on January 13, 1984 (49 FR 1696). Ofthe three domestic manufacturers ofthese substances (asdetermined from the TSCA Inventory), one manufacturer produced three ofthe substances (one designated and two non-designated), the second company manufactured two of the substances (one designated and one non-designated), and the remaining manufacturer produced onlythe designated member. Thus,for the first two companies, reporting at different times ofthe year eliminated the efficiencies ofreporting on the designated and non-designated substances at the same time, as willbe facilitated by this rule.

Furthermore, the Agency believes that requiring automatic reporting on ITC non-designated chemicals isjustified from an efficiency (resource) standpoint for both Government and industry. Respondents to the section 8(d) rule generally consist of a core group of companies that are large and are actively engaged in testing the chemicals they manufacture orprocess. Also, many ofthese companies have established procedures forresponding to future additions ofchemicals to the rule which usually occurs twice per year, approximately May and November. EPA believes that it would be less efficient for such companies to conduct fourfile searches per year instead ofthe two under the automatic provision. As will be discussed below, EPAwould prefer not to promulgate each section 8(d) amendment for non-designated chemicals long afterreceipt of theITC report because ofthe long delay in receiving studies essential to its
assessment process.

B. Concurrent Analysis

In some cases, the Agency will be considering designated and nondesignated members ofa category concurrently. When the Agency is evaluating data on these related substances itwill need information on all ofthe substances, whether or not they have been designated by the ITC. The Agency believes that itwould be inefficient to conduct separate testing needs, evaluations and rulemakings on different chemically related substances that in all likelihood pose similartesting issues. Therefore, to make thebest use ofits resources, EPA prefers to consider designated and non-designated substances together. Simultaneous reporting on designated and nondesignated chemicals recommended in the same ITC Report will facilitate this. 34810 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 1985 / Rules and Regulations

### No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 1985 / Rules and Regulations 34811

C.Opportunity for Withdrawing Chemicals

Although this regulation does not provide for notice and comment on the addition of ITC-recommended chemicals to the rule, it will amend the rule to allowpersons to submit requests for the removal ofspecific chemicals. A person choosing to submit a request for the removal ofa chemical added through the automatic mechanism should promptly submit to the Agency his or her reasons for that removal. The chemical may then be withdrawn from the rule at the Agency's discretion, for good cause. The Agency will issue a rule amendment forpublication in the Federal Register when withdrawing a chemical from the rule. This amendment will remove the chemical from the reporting requirements oftherule and provide the reasons for that removal.

Some possible reasons forremoval could include: (1)The chemical is no longer manufactured and has not been for the last 5years; (2)it is used entirely

as a food, drug, orpesticide; or (3)some other factorexists that would clearly warrant theremoval of the chemical from the rule. Any information submitted must be received by EPA within 14 days after the date of publication in the Federal Retister ofthe amendment adding the chemical to the 8(d) rule. Based on the submitted information, the Assistant Administrator for Pesticides and Toxic Substances cold revoke the reporting requirement for that chemical at his or her discretion. Ifa chemical is removed, a Federal Register notice announcing this decision will be published no later than the effective date ofthe amendment. This notice will explain why the chemical

was removed.

Further, because ofthe ITC's chemical selection process, there is little likelihood that a chemical willbe recommended fortesting thatis no longer manufactured or imported, orhas not been for many years, oris manufactured solely foruse as a pesticide, food or drug. Thus, the necessity ofremoving chemicals from the rule for any ofthe above reasons will be extremely remote.

In conclusion, EPAbelieves that amending the section 8(d) rule to provide for automatic reporting on chemicals recommended but not designated by theITC:

1.Will lead to an improved system of gathering information needed to evaluate suchrecommendations and the risks posed by those chemicals.

2.Will reduce reporting costs for industry and processing costs forthe Agency. 3.Will still permit subject companies the opportunity to convince the Agency that reporting on particular chemicals may not be necessary. "I11.Public Comment Thecomments received on the amendment to the TSCA section 8[a) Preliminary Assessment Information Rule (PAIR) to require automatic reporting on chemicals recommended by the ITC,but not designated for actionby EPA within 12 months, apply also to this rule and are discussed in the notice to amend thePAIR rule, found elsewhere in today's Federal Register.

IV. Chemical Limit

The Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) during its review ofthe proposed rule underExecutive Order 12291 and .the Paperwork Reduction Act, suggested that the Agency put a numerical limit on the number ofrecommended substances, mixtures and categories of chemicals that would be subject to automatic reporting under sections 8(a) and 8(d) in any one year.EPA agreed to propose for public comment such a numerical limit since EPA's capacity for evaluating candidates forthe initiation oftest rules is limited. Ifthat limit is exceeded, the Agency willbe unable to proceed with its evaluation oftesting candidates in a timely manner.Further, with such a backlog, information collected by EPA under sections 8(a) and 8(d) on those additional chemicals may go unused. Thiswould result in an unnecessary reporting burden forthe public and would be "of no practical utility" to the Agency, thus violating the Paperwork Reduction Act's standards for information collection.

Section4(e)(1)(A) ofTSCApermits the ITCto designate forEPA'sresponse within 1year no more than 50 of its recommendations at any one time. This limit was set by Congress in recognition ofthe excessive burden that adding too many chemicals would place on both EPA and the public. Thus, a limit of50 ITC-recommended substances, mixtures

or categories per year forautomatic reporting under sections 8(a) and 8(d)
appears to be reasonable and consistent with the statutory intent.This limit could be exceeded ifnecessary to obtain automatic reporting on all designated chemicals, but automatic reporting will be required on recommended chemicals only to the extent that the total number of designated and non-designated ITC recommendations does not exceed 50 in any year.

In the event that the total number of ITC-designated and non-designated recommendations exceeds 50 in a given year.EPA could still require reporting on all ofthem. All ofthe designated chemicals could be listed for automatic reporting. The Agency could require automatic reporting on the recommended chemicals until the overall limit of50 wasreached; it could require reporting on theremainder by notice and comment rulemaking if it believes itcan effectively and promptly evaluate thereported data.

EPA has included language in §716.1 ofthisrule limiting thenumber of chemicals subject to automatic reporting.

V.Additional Amendment

TheAgency is also amending the section 8(d) ruleby modifying § 716.14(c). This section provides for extensions to reporting deadlines.The section hasbeen changed to require that extension requests mustbe postmarked

on orbefore 40 days after the effective date of thelisting ofa chemical in §716.17. EPA believes that this change isneeded so that EPA will have adequate time to process therequests and notify the requester oftheAgency's decision. Also, the extension requests mustbe addressed to the Office Director, Office ofToxic Substances, who will grant or deny the requests.

VI. Who Must Report

Persons subject to the section 8(d) Health and Safety Data Reporting rule

are specified in40 CFR 716.4(b). Additional descriptions were published in theFederal Register ofSeptember 2. 1982 (47 FR38780).

Generally, a person who manufactures orprocesses a chemical or designated mixture listed in §716.17 at thetime it is listed, or who has done so during the previous 10 years, must complywith thisrule.

VII. Confidentiality

Health and safety information about a chemical that has been offered for commercial distribution or is subject to testing under section 4 or notice under section 5can be withheld from disclosure only ifcertain criteria are met.EPA advises persons wishing to assert a business confidentiality claim

on any partof the submitted material to refer to40 CFR Part 716.

VIII. Economic Impact

Companies that maybe subject to this rule mustperform a number offunctions to determine whether in factthey are in possession ofstudies and to provide them toEPA. Once thefirm determines whether it is subject to the rule, it must conduct a file search to determine what, ifany, studies are in its possession. 

### Federal Register / Vol. 50,34812 Federal Register 

## / Vol. 50, No. 167 

## I Wednesday, August 28, 1985 

## I Rules and Regulations
When studies are located, costs will be incurred to copy the studies, make lists ofstudies in progress orknown to but not inthe possession ofthe respondent, and to review the studies for confidential information.

The basic methodology used in this analysis is the same as that used inthe "Reports Impact Analysis for the Health and Safety Data Reporting Rule, Office ofToxic Substances, EPA, September 1982." Assumptions regarding the number and length ofreports submitted per 8(d) reporting rule are based on data from previous 8(d) rule submissions. Hourly wage rates usedto develop the cost estimates were updated to fourth quarter 1984 levels based on an adjustment using the GNPprice deflator.

The exact cost for each amendment (adding chemicals to the list ofthose which require reporting) will depend on the number of chemicals being added, and the number ofmanufacturers and plant sites involved. The steps performed by each company (to comply with the rule) and their unit costs per firm are estimated to be:

Initial corporate review

............................ $152 File search

................................................. 869 Title listing

.................... 19 Photocopying

............................................... 113 M

anagerial review

..................................... 836 Ongoing reporting

...................................... 304
Total

.................................................. 2,093

While thisproposed amendment to the rule may impose additional reporting
costs on companies, it may also reduce the total cost to some others.For example, a firm could do a file search at the same time forboth the designated and the recommended chemicals at the

same cost as for a search done for the designated chemicals only.Of course the company will incur additional reporting costs ifthey have data on the recommended chemicals.

EPA does not expect that the proposed amendment will result in a significant impact on a substantial number ofsmall businesses. In a study ofsubmitters reporting under the model 8(d) rule, it was found that only one of

over 30 reporting companies was below $100 million in sales. It is expected that the proposed amendment will not affect this distribution.
IX. Public Record

EPAhas established a public record (docket number OPTS-84010) for this rulemaking document which, along with

a complete index, is available for inspection in Rm. E-107, 401 M Street SW., Washington, D.C., 20460, from 8

a.m.to 4p.m., Monday through Friday, except legal holidays. This record includes basic information considered by the Agency in developing this rule. The record includes the following categories ofinformation.

.

1.Health and Safety Study Reporting Regulations (40 CFR Part 716), Public Record, Docket No. 084003.

2. Reports Impact Analysis for 40 CFR Part 716 and this rulemaking.

3.Tenth through Fifteenth Reports of the Intergency Testing Committee (ITC); Tenth Report (47 FR 22585), Eleventh Report (47 FR 54626), Twelfth Report (48 FR 24443), Thirteenth Report (48 FR 55674), Fourteenth Report (49 FR 22389), and Fifteenth Report (49 FR 46931).

EPA requests that, between the date of this notice and the effective date of this rule, persons identify and report'any perceived errors or omissions in the record.

X. Regulatory Assessment Requirements

A. Executive Order12291

Under Executive Order 12291, EPA
mustjudge whether a regulation is "major" and, therefore, requires a Regulatory Impact Analysis. EPAhas determined that these amendments are not major because they do not have an effect of$100 million or moi e on the
economy. They are expected to decrease the annual cost ofcompliance. They do
not have a significant effect on competition, cost, or prices.

These amendments were submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for review as required by Executive Order 12291.

B.RegulatoryFlexibility Act

These amendments will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities. They do not affect the size ofthe potential universe ofrespondents. The effects on small entities of reporting under the section 8(d) rule were discussed in the preamble to the September 2, 1982 rule.

C.Paperwork ReductionAct

The information collection requirements contained in thisrule have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 etseq.and have been assigned OMB control number 2070- 0004.

Listof Subjects in 40 CFR Part716

Chemicals, Health and safety, Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, Recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Dated: August 20, 1985. Lee M.Thomas, Administrator.

Therefore, 40 CFR Part 716 is amended as follows:

PART 716-[AMENDED]

1.The authority citation for Part 716 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 15U.S.C. 2607.
2.In § 716.1 by redesignating existing paragraph (b] as paragraph (c) and adding a new paragraph (b) to read as follows: §716.1 Scope and compliance.

(b)Chemical substances, mixtures, and categories ofchemicals, which have been recommended by the Interagency Testing Committee for testing consideration by the Agency but not designated for Agency response within 12 months, will be added to § 716.17 as specified in §716.18(b) only to the
extent that the total number of designated and recommended substances, mixtures and *categoriesof chemicals has not exceeded 50 in any 1
year. Additional recommended but not designated chemicals may be added after proposal, and consideration of public comment.

3. In § 716.14, by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: §716.14 Reporting schedule.

(c) Respondents who cannot meet a deadline under this section may apply for a reasonable extension oftime. Requests for extensions must be addressed to: Director, Office ofToxic Substances (TS-792), Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW., Washington, D.C. 20460, Attn: Section 8(d) extension. Extension requests must be postmarked on or before 40 days after the effective date ofthe listing ofa substance ormixture in § 716.17. The Office Director will grant or deny extension requests.

4. In § 716.18, by revising.paragraph (b), and adding paragraph (c) to read as follows: §716.18 Additionsto listsofchemicals and mixtures towhich this subpartapplies.

(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, chemical substances, mixtures and categories ofchemicals that have been added to the TSCA section 4(e) Priority List by the Interagency Testing Committee, established under section 4 ofTSCA, 34812 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 1985 / Rules and RegulationsNo. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 1985 / Rules and Regulations 34813

will be added to § 716.17 30 days after publication ofa notice to that effect in the Federal Register.

(c) Prior to the effective date of an amendment under paragraph (b) ofthis section, the Assistant Administrator for Pesticides and Toxic Substances may for good cause withdraw a chemical substance, mixture oi category of chemicals from § 716.17. Any information submitted showing why a chemical should be withdrawn from § 716.17 must be received by EPA within 14 days after the date ofpublication of the notice under paragraph (b) ofthis section. If a chemical substance, mixture

or category ofchemicals is withdrawn, a Federal Register notice announcing this decision will be published no later than the effective date ofthe amendment under paragraph (b) of this section. Any information submitted must be addressed to: Document Control Officer, Office ofPesticides and Toxic Substances, (TS-793), Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW., Washington, D.C. 20460, ATTN: 8(d) Auto-ITC.
[FR Doc. 85-20548 Filed 8-27-85: 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 65S60-50-M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Ch. I

ICC Docket No. 79-184; FCC 85-4561

Authorization of CC FacilitiesTo Meet North AtlanticTelecommunications Needs During the 1985-1995 Period

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Report and order.

SUMMARY: This report and order sets forth the Commission's policy for the distribution ofcircuits among available North Atlantic facilities during the 1986- 1991 period.'The policy adopted by the Commission specifies that no distribution guidelines are imposed on circuits used for the provision ofrecord services, circuits used by new entrants for the provision ofany service and circuits used to provide international
message telephone service by any carriers other than AT&T.AT&T is permitted, but not required, during the 1986-1988 period to increase, without de-loading either transmission medium, the number ofits message telephone and 800 Service-Overseas circuits it places

on either cable or satellite facilities by 2 percent per year up to a limit ofplacing 60 percent ofsuch circuits on either transmission medium. The Commission will review, prior to year-end 1988, the loading guidelines for AT&T to determine what,ifany, methodology should be utilized after 1988. EFFECTIVE DATE: August 28, 1985. ADDRESS: Federal Communications Commission, 1919M Street., NW., Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Gosse, International Policy Division, Common Carrier Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554, (202) 632-4047.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The second notice ofproposed rulemaking in this proceeding was published on May 6. 1985. (50 FR 19050). The third notice of inquiry was published in August 9, 1984 (49 FR 31926).

Second Report and Order

In the matter ofinquiry intothe policies to befollowed inthe authorization ofCommon Carrier Facilities to meet North Atlantic telecommunications needs during the 1985- 1995 period, CCDocket No. 79-184.

Adopted: August 7,1985. Released: August 22, 1985.

By the Commission.
Table of Contents
I.Introduction

A. Third Notice ofInquiry B.Second Notice ofProposed Rulemaking

Record Services NewEntrants AT&TIMTS C.Comments and Reply Comments

Guidelines for Other Than AT&TIMTS AT&TIMTS NTIA Proposal Multi-Tiered Proposal D.CEPTView II.Discussion

A.U.S.-CEPT Record Services B.New Entrants (Record and IMTS) C.IMTS by Other Than AT&T D. AT&TIMTS

Needfor and Period ofGuidelines Balanced Loading NTIA Proposal Multi-tiered Proposal Phase-in Proposal AT&T800 Service E.ARINC Whole-Circuit Proposal III. Ordering Clauses Appendices I and 2

Comparison ofVarious Loading Guidelines

for AT&T's IMTS Traffic onSatellite Circuit Revenues and Rates

1.Introduction

1. On April 22, 1985, we released a Second Notice ofProposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in this proceeding setting forth

our tentative conclusions regarding the loading of satellite and submarine cable facilities used for the provision of international services in the North Atlantic region during the 1986-1991 period.' In response to our NPRM, We have received comments from the American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T), the Communications Satellite Corporation (Comsat), GTE Sprint Communications Corporation (GTE Sprint), Hawaiian Telephone Company (Hawaiian), ITT World Communications Inc. (ITTWC), MCI International, Inc. (MCII), RCA Global Communications, Inc. (RCAGC), I Satellite Business Systems (SBS), The Western Union Telegraph Company (WUT), Fedex International Transmission Corporation (Fedex), the National Telecommunications and

formation Administration (NTIA) and fteronautical Radio, Inc. (ARINC).? Reply comments were filed by AT&T, Comsat, GTE Sprint and NTIA.

2. In thisReport and Order we affirm, in part, the tentative conclusions presented in the NPRM regarding the loading offacilities used forthe provision of international services in the North Atlantic region forthe 1986-1991 period between the United States and the CEPTentities.3 Specifically, we conclude that circuits used for the provision ofinternational record services, circuits used by new entrants,and circuits used toprovide
message telephone service by all international carriers other than AT&T should not be subjected to circuit distribution guidelines orloading requirements. We further conclude that AT&T should be permitted, but not required, to increase the number of
message telephone circuits it places on either cable or satellite facilities by2 percent per year for three years (1986- 1988). Prior to the end of this three year period we will review the loading question to determine what, if any,

IInquiry into the Policies tobe followed inthe Authorization ofCommon CarrierFacilities toMeet NorthAtlantic Telecommunication Needs During the 1985-1995 Period, FCC85-176,

- FCC -(1985). We had previously adopted aNotice ofInquiry onthis matter as well. FCC84-351, released August3,1984.

2ARINC is ajoint venture ofthe U.S.air transport industry organized for the purpose of providing the communications requirements ofits member airlineson anot-for-profit basis. CEPT is the Conference Europeenne des Administrations desPostes etdes Telecommunications, an organization ofthepostal andtelecommunications entities of26 European nations.Because the provision of international services is a jointundertaking between sovereign states ortheir carriers, thedevelopment ofloading guidelines for the 1986-1991 period hasbeen the subject ofmuch discussion in recent meetings of the NorthAtlantic Consultative Process. The reports of the Working Group (January, 1985) and Senior Level (May, 1985) meetings have been included in the docket, and the views and requirements ofour foreign partners have beenconsidered throughout this proceeding. Federal Register / V61. 50,