20946 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 82 / Friday, April 28, 1995 / Proposed Rules

applicable principles of Federal Indian

law, to enforce its laws against existing

and potential pollution sources within

any geographical area for which it seeks

program approval, that such approval

would constitute sound administrative

practice, and that those sources are not

subject to the jurisdiction of any Indian

Tribe.

This interim approval, which may not

be renewed, extends for a period of up

to 2 years. During the interim approval

period, the State is protected from

sanctions for failure to have a program,

and EPA is not obligated to promulgate

a Federal permits program in the State.

Permits issued under a program with

interim approval have full standing with

respect to Part 70, and the 1-year time

period for submittal of permit

applications by subject sources begins

upon interim approval, as does the 3-

year time period for processing the

initial permit applications.

Requirements for approval, specified

in 40 CFR 70.4(b), encompass section

112(l)(5) requirements for approval of a

program for delegation of section 112

standards as promulgated by EPA as

they apply to part 70 sources. Section

112(l)(5) requires that the State’s

program contain adequate authorities,

adequate resources for implementation,

and an expeditious compliance

schedule, which are also requirements

under part 70. Therefore, EPA is also

proposing to grant approval under

section 112(l)(5) and 40 CFR part 63.91

of the State’s program for receiving

delegation of section 112 standards that

are unchanged from Federal standards

as promulgated. This program for

delegations applies to sources covered

by the part 70 program, as well as nonpart 70 sources.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Request for Public Comments

The EPA is requesting comments on

all aspects of this proposed interim

approval. Copies of the State’s submittal

and other information relied upon for

the proposed interim approval are

contained in a docket maintained at the

EPA Regional Office. The docket is an

organized and complete file of all the

information submitted to, or otherwise

considered by, EPA in the development

of this proposed interim approval. The

principal purposes of the docket are:

(1) To allow interested parties a

means to identify and locate documents

so that they can effectively participate

in the approval process, and

(2) To serve as the record in case of

judicial review. The EPA will consider

any comments received by May 30,

1995.

B. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this action from Executive

Order 12866 review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The EPA’s actions under section 502

of the Act do not create any new

requirements, but simply address

operating permits programs submitted

to satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR

Part 70. Because this action does not

impose any new requirements, its does

not have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Operating permits, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–76719.

Dated: April 19, 1995.

William P. Yellowtail,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–10504 Filed 4–27–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Parts 180, 185 and 186

[PP 1F3992, 2F4109, 2F4114, 7F3488,

7F3560, 9F3770, FAP 7H3560 and 7H5543/

P615; FRL–4951–9]

RIN 2070–AC18

Pesticide Tolerances for LambdaCyhalothrin

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to establish

time-limited tolerances with an

expiration date of November 15, 1997,

for residues of the synthetic pyrethroid

lambda-cyhalothrin in or on the raw

agricultural commodities (RACs)

soybeans, wheat, forage, hay, straw,

grain dust; sweet corn; sunflower, seeds

and forage; sorghum grain and dust;

corn (grain field and pop); corn fodder

and forage; peanuts; meat, fat, and meat

byproducts (mbyp) and eggs of poultry

and increase tolerances in milk, fat,

meat and mbyp of cattle, goats, hogs,

horses and sheep; and in or on the

processed food/feed items corn grain

flour, sunflower hulls, sunflower oil,

and wheat bran. Zeneca Ag Products,

Inc., and Coopers Animal Health, Inc.,

submitted petitions to EPA under the

Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act

(FFDCA) proposing tolerances and

regulations to establish maximum

permissible levels for residues of the

insecticide.

DATES: Comments, identified by the

document control numbers, [PP 1F3992,

2F4109, 2F4114, 7F3488, 7F3560,

9F3770, FAP 7H3560 and 7H5543/

P615], must be received on or before

May 30, 1995.

ADDRESSES: By mail, submit written

comments to: Public Response and

Program Resources Branch, Field

Operations Division (7506C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M

St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. In

person, bring comments to: Rm. 1132,

CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy.,

Arlington, VA 22202.

Information submitted as a comment

concerning this document may be

claimed confidential by marking any

part or all of that information

as‘‘Confidential Business Information’’

(CBI). Information so marked will not be

disclosed except in accordance with

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

A copy of the comment that does not

contain CBI must be submitted for

inclusion in the public record.

Information not marked confidential

may be disclosed publicly by EPA

without prior notice. All written

comments will be available for public

inspection in Rm. 1132 at the address

given above, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays.

Comments and data may also be

submitted electronically by sending

electronic mail (e-mail) to: oppdocket@epamail.epa.gov. Electronic

comments must be submitted as an

ASCII file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

Comments and data will also be

accepted on disks in WordPerfect in 5.1

file format or ASCII file format. All

comments and data in electronic form

must be identified by the docket number

[1F3992, 2F4109, 2F4114, 7F3488,

7F3560, 9F3770, FAP 7H3560 and

7H5543/P615]. No CBI should be

submitted through e-mail. Electronic

comments on this proposed rule may be

filed online at many Federal Depository

Libraries. Additional information on

electronic submissions can be found

below in this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: George T. LaRocca, Product

Manager (PM) 13, Registration Division

(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.

Office location and telephone number:

Second Floor, Crystal Mall #2, 1921

Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA

22202, (703)-305-6100; e-mail:

larocca.george@epamail.epa.gov.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 82 / Friday, April 28, 1995 / Proposed Rules 20947

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA

issued notices, published in the Federal

Registers of March 18, 1987 (52 FR

8527), November 25, 1987 (52 FR

45238), November 1, 1989 (54 FR

46119), December 13, 1991 (56 FR

65080), and June 10, 1992 (57 FR

24644), which announced that Zeneca,

Inc. (formerly ICI Americas, Inc.), 1800

Concord Pike, Wilmington, DE 19897,

had submitted pesticide petitions

7F3488, 7F3560, 1F3992, 2F4109,

2F4114, 7H3560, and 7H5543 and that

Coopers Animal Health, Inc., P.O. Box

419167, Kansas City, MO 64141-0167,

had submitted PP 9F3770 to EPA

requesting that the Administrator,

pursuant to sections 408(d) and 409(b)

of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d) and

348(e), establish tolerances and food/

feed additive regulations for residues of

the pyrethroid lambda-cyhalothrin in or

on the raw agricultural commodities

(RACs) soybeans at 0.01 part per million

(ppm); poultry meat, fat, and meat

byproducts (mbyp) (PP 7F3488); wheat

grain at 0.01 ppm, sunflower seeds at

0.03 ppm; sweet corn at 0.01 ppm;

poultry meat and mbyp at 0.01 ppm (PP

7F3560); sorghum grain at 0.2 ppm;

milk at 0.1 ppm; meat of cattle, goats,

horses, and sheep at 0.04 ppm, fat at 2.0

ppm, liver at 0.1 ppm and kidney at 0.1

ppm (PP 1F3992); corn grain (field, pop,

and seed) at 0.05 ppm, corn fodder at

3.0 ppm, corn silage at 1.0 ppm and

corn grain dust at 0.1 ppm (PP 2F4109);

peanut hulls and peanut nutmeats at

0.05 ppm; peanut hulls and peanut nut

meats at 0.05 (PP 2F4114); cattle meat

and mbyp at 0.1 ppm; cattle fat at 1.0

ppm from direct dermal treatment of

cattle (PP 9F3770); sunflower hulls at

0.7 ppm; and sunflower oil at 0.05 ppm

(PP 7H5543).

The tolerance expression for lambdacyhalothrin has been revised and now

includes combined residues of parent

compound and its epimer. (See the

Federal Register of March 27, 1995 (60

FR 15683).) The correct commodity

expression for peanut nut meat is

peanuts. Corn silage is covered under

the commodities for corn fodder and

forage. Based upon submitted residue

data and because residues in corn grain

were nondetected, EPA concluded that

a tolerance in/on corn grain dust is not

required. Since residues concentrate

when corn grain is processed into flour,

EPA concluded that a food additive

tolerance of 0.15 ppm for corn grain

flour is required.

At the request of Zeneca Ag products,

EPA issued in the Federal Register of

March 5, 1992 (57 FR 10353), an

amendment to PP 7F3560 to increase

the proposed tolerance level for the

insecticide in or on wheat grain to 0.03

and proposed establishing tolerances for

residues of the insecticide lambda

cyhalothrin in or on the RACs wheat

forage at 2.0 ppm and wheat straw at 2.0

ppm, and the document amended FAP

7H5543 by adding the processed

commodity wheat bran at 0.2 ppm and

wheat shorts, germ at 0.05 ppm.

After evaluation of the wheat

processing study, EPA concluded that

the residues in midlings, shorts, germs

resulting from the product use rate are

no greater than the proposed tolerance

on whole wheat grain, and thus no food/

feed additive tolerances are required for

the processed commodities wheat,

shorts and germs.

In June 29, 1994, Zeneca, Inc.,

requested that certain petitions be

amended by increasing the proposed

tolerances for the RACs corn, forage (PP

2F4109) to 6.0 ppm; corn, sweet (kernel

+ kernel with husk removed (k + kwhr))

(PP 7F3560) to 0.05 ppm; sorghum,

grain (PP 1F3992) to 0.2 ppm; establish

tolerance for sorghum, grain dust (PP

1F3992) at 1.5 ppm; corn grain flour

(FAP 7H5543) at 0.15 ppm; increase

tolerance for sunflower, seeds (PP

7F3560) to 0.2 ppm; establish proposed

tolerance in or on wheat hay and grain

dust (PP 7F3560) at 2.0 ppm; increase

the tolerance for milk, fat (reflecting 0.2

ppm in whole milk) to 5.0 ppm; meat

mbyp of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and

sheep to 0.2 ppm; fat of cattle, goats,

hogs, horses, and sheep to 3.0 ppm;

meat, fat, mbyp and eggs of poultry to

0.01 ppm, and processed food/feed

items sunflower, hulls (FAP 7H5543) to

0.5 ppm and sunflower, oil (7H5543) to

0.3 ppm.

In a letter dated February 10, 1995,

Zeneca Ag Products requested that a

tolerance be established in or on

sunflower, forage (PP 7F3560) at 0.2

ppm.

The scientific data submitted in the

petitions and other relevant material

have been evaluated. The toxicological

data considered in support of the

tolerances have been discussed in the

Federal Register published March 29,

1995 (58 FR 15683).

The acceptable Reference Dose (RfD)

based on a NOEL of 0.1 mg/kg/body

weight/day from the chronic dog study

and a safety factor of 100 is 0.001 mg/

kg/body weight/day. A chronic dietary

exposure/risk assessment has been

performed for lambda-cyhalothrin using

the above RfD. Available information on

anticipated residues and percent crop

treated was incorporated into the

analysis to estimate the Anticipated

Residue Contribution (ARC). The ARC is

generally considered a more realistic

estimate than an estimate based on

tolerance level residues. The ARC from

established tolerances and pending

action are estimated to be 0.000192 mg/

kg/bwt/day and utilize 19.24 per cent of

the RfD for the U.S. population. The

ARC for children, aged 1 to 6 years old,

and nonnursing infants (subgroups most

highly exposed) utilizes 32 and 58

percent of the RfD, respectively.

Generally speaking, the Agency has no

cause for concern if anticipated residues

contribution for all published and

proposed tolerances is less than the RfD.

The metabolism of the chemical in

plants and livestock is adequately

understood for this use. Any secondary

residues occurring in meat and meat byproducts will be covered by the existing

tolerances. There is no reasonable

expectation of finite residues in poultry

commodities; therefore, no tolerances

are necessary at this time. An adequate

analytical method (gas liquid

chromatography with an electron

capture detector) is available for

enforcement purposes. The enforcement

methodology has been submitted to the

Food and Drug Administration for

publication in the Pesticide Analytical

Manual, Vol. II (PAM II). Because of the

long lead time for publication of the

method in PAM II, the analytical

methodology is being made available in

the interim to anyone interested in

pesticide enforcement when requested

from: Calvin Furlow, Public Response

and Program Resources Branch, Field

Operations Divisions (7506C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St.,

Washington, DC 20460. Office location

and telephone number: Rm. 1132, CM

#2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington VA 22202, (703) 305-5232.

The Agency issued a conditional

registration for lambda-cyhalothrin for

use on cotton with an expiration date of

August 30, 1990 (see the Federal

Register of May 24, 1988 (53 FR 18558)).

The conditional registration was

subsequently amended and extended to

November 15, 1996 (see the Federal

Register of February 22, 1995 (60 FR

9783)). The registrations were amended

and extended to allow time for

submission and evaluation of additional

environmental effects data. To evaluate

the effects of the synthetic pyrethroids

on fish and aquatic organisms and its

fate in the environment, additional data

were required to be collected and

submitted during the period of

conditional registration. Such

requirements included a sediment

bioavailability and toxicity study and a

small-plot runoff study that must be

submitted to the Agency by July 1, 1996.

Because of the conditional status of the

registration, tolerances have been

established for lambda-cyhalothrin on a
20948 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 82 / Friday, April 28, 1995 / Proposed Rules

time-limited basis (until November 15,

1997) on cottonseed, meat, fat and meatbyproducts of hogs, horses, cattle, goats,

sheep, and milk to cover residues

expected to present from use during the

period of conditional registration. To be

consistent with the conditional

registration and extension on cotton, the

Agency is proposing to issue a

conditional registration with an

expiration date of November 15, 1996,

and establishing a time-limited

tolerance on field corn, peanuts,

sorghum, soybeans, sweet corn,

sunflowers, wheat including livestock

meat, fat and milk and processed

commodities with an expiration date of

November 15, 1997, to cover residues

expected to result from use during the

period of conditional registration.

There are currently no actions

pending against the continued

registration of this chemical and its

epimer. The pesticide is considered

useful for the purposes which it is

sought and capable of achieving the

intended physical or technical effect.

Based on the information and data

considered, the Agency has determined

that the tolerances established by

amending 40 CFR parts 180, 185, and

186 would protect the public health.

Therefore, it is proposed that the

tolerances be established as set forth

below.

Any person who has registered or

submitted an application for registration

of a pesticide, under the Federal

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide

Act (FIFRA) as amended, which

contains any of the ingredients listed

herein, may request within 30 days after

publication of this notice in the Federal

Register that this rulemaking proposal

be referred to an Advisory Committee in

accordance with section 408(e) of the

FFDCA.

Interested persons are invited to

submit written comments on the

proposed regulation. Comments must

bear a notation indicating the document

control numbers, [PP 1F3992, 2F4109,

2F4114, 7F3488, 7F3560, 9F3770, and

FAP 7H3560 and 7H5543/P615]. All

written comments filed in response to

this petition will be available in the

Public Response and Program Resources

Branch, at the address given above from

8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except legal holidays.

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency

must determine whether the regulatory

action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore

subject to all the requirements of the

Executive Order (i.e., Regulatory Impact

Analysis, review by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB)). Under

section 3(f), the order defines

‘‘significant’’ as those actions likely to

lead to a rule (1) having an annual effect

on the economy of $100 million or

more, or adversely and materially

affecting a sector of the economy,

productivity, competition, jobs, the

environment, public health or safety, or

State, local or tribal governments or

communities (also known as

‘‘economically significant’’); (2) creating

serious inconsistency or otherwise

interfering with an action taken or

planned by another agency; (3)

materially altering the budgetary

impacts of entitlement, grants, user fees,

or loan programs; or (4) raising novel

legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President’s priorities, or

the principles set forth in this Executive

Order.

Pursuant to the terms of this

Executive Order, EPA has determined

that this rule is not ‘‘significant’’ and is

therefore not subject to OMB review.

Pursuant to the requirements of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-

354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601-612),

the Administrator has determined that

regulations establishing new tolerances

or raising tolerance levels or

establishing exemptions from tolerance

requirements do not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. A certification

statement to this effect was published in

the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46

FR 24950).

A record has been established for this

rulemaking under docket number

[1F3992, 2F4109, 2F4114, 7F3488,

7F3560, 9F3770, FAP 7H3560 and

7H5543/P615] (including any comments

and data submitted electronically as

described below). A public version of

this record, including printed, paper

versions of electronic comments, which

does not include any information

claimed as CBI, is available for

inspection from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays. The public record is located in

Rm. 1132 of the Public Response and

Program Resources Branch, Field

Operations Division (7506C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, Crystal Mall #2,

1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, VA.

Electronic comments can be sent

directly to EPA at:

opp-Docket@epamail.epa.gov

Electronic comments must be

submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form

of encryption.

The official record for this

rulemaking, as well as the public

version, as described above will be kept

in paper form. Accordingly, EPA will

transfer all comments received

electronically into printed, paper form

as they are received and will place the

paper copies in the official rulemaking

record which will also include all

comments submitted directly in writing.

The official rulemaking record is the

paper record maintained at the address

in ‘‘ADDRESSES’’ at the beginning of

this document.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 180,

185, 186

Environmental Protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Food

additives, Feed additives, Pesticides and

pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: April 21, 1995.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, it is proposed that chapter

I of title 40 of the Code of Federal

Regulations be amended as follows:

PART 180—[AMENDED]

1. In part 180:

a. The authority citation for part 180

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371.

b. By amending § 180.438, by revising

the table therein, to read as follows:

§ 180.438 Lambda-cyhalothrin; tolerance

for residues.

* * * * *

Commodity Parts per

million

Broccoli ..................................... 0.4

Cabbage ................................... 0.4

Cattle, fat .................................. 3.0

Cattle, meat .............................. 0.2

Cattle, mbyp .............................. 0.2

Corn, grain (field and pop) ....... 0.05

Corn, fodder .............................. 1.0

Corn, forage .............................. 6.0

Corn, sweet (K + kwhr) ............. 0.05

Cottonseed ................................ 0.05

Dry bulb onion .......................... 0.1

Eggs .......................................... 0.01

Garlic ......................................... 0.02

Goats, fat .................................. 3.0

Goats, meat .............................. 0.2

Goats, mbyp ............................. 0.2

Hogs, fat ................................... 3.0

Hogs, meat ............................... 0.2

Hogs, mbyp ............................... 0.2

Horses, fat ................................ 3.0

Horses, meat ............................ 0.2

Horses, mbyp ............................ 0.2

Lettuce, head ............................ 2.0

Milk, fat (reflecting 0.2 ppm in

whole milk) ............................ 5.0

Peanuts ..................................... 0.05

Peanut, hulls ............................. 0.05
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 82 / Friday, April 28, 1995 / Proposed Rules 20949

Commodity Parts per

million

Poultry, fat ................................. 0.01

Poultry, meat ............................. 0.01

Poultry, mbyp ............................ 0.01

Sheep, fat ................................. 3.0

Sheep, meat ............................. 0.2

Sheep, mbyp ............................. 0.2

Soybeans .................................. 0.01

Sorghum, grain ......................... 0.2

Sorghum, grain dust ................. 1.5

Sunflower, seeds ...................... 0.2

Sunflower, forage ...................... 0.20

Tomatoes .................................. 0.1

Wheat, grain ............................. 0.05

Wheat, forage ........................... 2.0

Wheat, hay ................................ 2.0

Wheat, straw ............................. 2.0

Wheat, grain dust ..................... 2.0

PART 185—[AMENDED]

2. In part 185:

a. The authority citation for part 185

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 348.

b. By redesignating § 185.1310 as

§ 185.3765, by revising the heading, and

by adding new paragraph (c), to read as

follows:

§ 185.3765 Lambda-cyhalothrin.

* * * * *

(c) A tolerance, to expire on

November 15, 1997, is established for

the combined residues of the insecticide

lambda-cyhalothrin and its epimer

expressed as lambda-cyhalothrin, a 1:1

mixture of (S)-α-cyano-3-

phenoxybenzyl-(Z)-(1R,3R)-3-(2-chloro3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-enyl)-2,2-

dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and

(R)-α-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl-(Z)-

(1S,3S)-3-(2-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop1-enyl)-2,2-

dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and

its epimer of lambda-cyhalothrin, a 1:1

mixture of (S)-α-cyano-3-

phenoxybenzyl-(Z)-(1S,3S)-3-(2-chloro3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-enyl)-2,2-

dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and

(R)-α-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl-(Z)-

(1R,3R)-3-(2-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop1-enyl)-2,2-

dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate in or

on the following food commodities:

Food Parts per

million

Corn, grain flour ........................ 0.15

Sunflower, oil ............................ 0.30

Wheat, bran .............................. 0.2

PART 186—[AMENDED]

3. In part 186

a. The authority citation for part 186

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 348.

b. By revising § 186.3765, to read as

follows:

§ 186.3765 Lambda-cyhalothrin.

A tolerance, to expire on November

15, 1997, is established for the

combined residues of the insecticide

lambda-cyhalothrin and its epimer

expressed as lambda-cyhalothrin, a 1:1

mixture of (S)-α-cyano-3-

phenoxybenzyl-(Z)-(1R,3R)-3-(2-chloro3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-enyl)-2,2-

dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and

(R)-α-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl-(Z)-

(1S,3S)-3-(2-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop1-enyl)-2,2-

dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and

its epimer of lambda-cyhalothrin, a 1:1

mixture of (S)-α-cyano-3-

phenoxybenzyl-(Z)-(1S,3S)-3-(2-chloro3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-enyl)-2,2-

dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and

(R)-α-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl-(Z)-

(1R,3R)-3-(2-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop1-enyl)-2,2-

dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate in or

on the following feed commodities:

Food Parts per

million

Sunflower, hulls ........................ 0.50

Tomato pomace (dry or wet) .... 6.0

Wheat, bran .............................. 0.2

[FR Doc. 95–10612 Filed 4–26–95; 3:36 pm]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Chapter I

[CC Docket No. 94–54, FCC 95–149]

Interconnection and Resale

Obligations of Commercial Mobile

Radio Service Providers

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Second notice of proposed rule

making.

SUMMARY: This action invites comment

to assist the Commission in formulating

broad policy guidelines involving the

common carrier obligations of

commercial mobile radio service

(CMRS) providers with respect to

CMRS-to-CMRS interconnection. The

NPRM also tentatively concludes that its

policy regarding the resale obligations of

cellular carriers should be extended to

most CMRS providers. This NPRM was

issued to continue the proceeding

initiated by the Commission last year in

a Notice of Inquiry regarding

interconnection and resale obligations

of CMS providers.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before June 14, 1995, and reply

comments on or before July 14, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Judy Argentieri or Barbara Esbin,

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau,

Policy Division, (202) 418–1310.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20554.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Second

Notice of Proposed Rule Making

(Notice) in CC Docket No. 94–54, FCC

95–149, adopted April 5, 1995, and

released April 20, 1995.

The complete text of this Notice is

available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC Dockets Branch (Room 230), 1919

M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and

also may be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service, Inc.

(ITS, Inc.), at (202) 857–3800, 1919 M

Street, N.W., Room 246, Washington,

D.C. 20554.

Synopsis of Notice

1. The Notice concludes that at

present it would be premature for the

Commission to propose or adopt rules of

general applicability requiring direct

interconnection arrangements between

CMRS providers. The Notice also finds

that present market conditions fail to

indicate that it is necessary to impose a

general CMRS-to-CMRS interconnection

obligation at this time. The Notice seeks

comment on several potential relevant

product and geographic market

definitions for purposes of analyzing the

interconnection obligations of CMRS

providers under Section 201(a) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended (the Act). The Notice also

seeks comment on criteria to consider in

resolving interconnection disputes

under Sections 201(a), 208, and 332 of

the Act. Finally, the Notice seeks

additional comment on the question of

preemption of state-imposed

interconnection obligations.

2. The Notice makes similar

conclusions regarding the prematurity

of imposing the sort of general

interconnection obligations needed to

support roaming services. The Notice

seeks comment on several technical

issues related to the provision of

roaming service.

3. In addition, the Notice seeks

comment on whether Section 22.901 of

the Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR

§ 22.901 requires cellular carriers to

provide service to other CMRS roamers.

4. The Notice also tentatively

concludes that the existing obligation