Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 237 / Monday, December 11, 1995 / Notices 63519

5 See 57 Fed. Reg. 18,344 (April 29, 1992) (text

and preamble).

6 See Northeast Doran, Inc. v. Key Bank of Maine,

15 F.3rd 1 (1st Cir. 1994); United States v. McLamb,

5 F.3d 69 (4th Cir. 1993); Waterville Indus., Inc. v.

Finance Authority of Maine, 984 F. 2d 549 (1st Cir.

1993); United States v. Fleet Factors, 901 F.2d 1150

(11th Cir. 1990), on remand, 821 F. Supp. 07 (S.D.

Ga. 1993); Kelley v. Tiscornia, 810 F. Supp. 901

(W.D. Mich. 1993); Grantors to the Silresim Site

Trust v. State Street Bank & Trust Co., 23 ELR

20428 (D. Mass. Nov. 24, 1992).

7 See Z & Z Leasing, Inc. v. Graying Reel, Inc.,

873 F.Supp. 51 (E.D. Mich. 1995); Kemp Industries,

Inc. v. Safety Light Corp., 857 F.Supp. 373 (D.N.J.

1994).

provisions of the Lender Liability Rule

as enforcement policy. EPA and DOJ

endorse the interpretations and

rationales announced in the Rule and its

preamble. The purpose of this

memorandum is to provide guidance

within EPA and DOJ on the exercise of

enforcement discretion in determining

whether particular lenders and

government entities that acquire

property involuntarily may be subject to

CERCLA enforcement actions. In

making such determinations, EPA and

DOJ personnel should consult both the

regulatory text of the Rule and the

accompanying preamble language in

exercising their enforcement discretion

under CERCLA as to lenders and

government entities that acquire

property involuntarily.5

After the promulgation of the Lender

Liability Rule, but prior to its

invalidation, several district and circuit

courts adhered to the terms of the Rule

or interpreted the statute in a manner

consistent with the Rule.6 Moreover,

notwithstanding the Rule’s invalidation

in Kelley, since that decision several

courts have also interpreted the statute

in a way that is consistent with the

Rule.7 EPA and DOJ believe that this

case law is further evidence of the

reasonableness of the agencies’

interpretation of the statute, as

embodied formerly in the Rule and now

in this policy statement.

III. Use of This Policy

The policies and procedures

established in this document and any

internal procedures adopted for its

implementation are intended solely as

guidance for employees of EPA and

DOJ. They do not constitute rulemaking

and may not be relied on to create a

right or benefit, substantive or

procedural, enforceable at law, or in

equity, by any person. EPA and DOJ

reserve the right to act at variance with

this guidance or its internal

implementing procedures.

[FR Doc. 95–29842 Filed 12–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

[IB Docket No. 95–118, FCC 95–286]

Notice of Public Information

Collections for Streamlining the

International Section 214 Authorization

Process and Tariff Requirements

submitted to OMB for Review and

Approval

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: On July 17, 1995, the Federal

Communications Commission released a

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)

to streamline the international Section

214 authorization process and tariff

requirements. This NPRM, published in

the Federal Register on July 25, 1995,

Volume 60, page 37989, contains

proposed or modified information

collections subject to the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Pub. L.

No. 104–13. It has been submitted to the

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review under Section 3507(d)

of the PRA. OMB, the general public,

and other Federal agencies are invited to

comment on the proposed or modified

information collections contained in

this proceeding.

DATES: Written comments by the public

on the proposed and/or modified

information collections are due January

10, 1996. Written comments must be

submitted by OMB on the proposed

and/or modified information collections

on or before February 9, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit all comments to

Dorothy Conway, Federal

Communications Commission, Room

234, 1919 M Street, NW., Washington,

DC 20554, or via the Internet to

dconway@fcc.gov, and to Timothy Fain,

OMB Desk Officer, 10236 NEOB, 725 -

17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503

or via the Internet to fain_t@al.eop.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

additional information concerning the

information collections contained in

this NPRM contact Dorothy Conway at

202–418–0217, or via the Internet at

dconway@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Commission, as part of its continuing

effort to reduce paperwork burdens,

invites the general public and the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB) to

comment on the information collections

contained in this NPRM. Comments

should address: (a) whether the

proposed collection of information is

necessary for the proper performance of

the functions of the Commission,

including whether the information shall

have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of

the Commission’s burden estimates; (c)

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information collected; and

(d) ways to minimize the burden of the

collection of information on the

respondents, including the use of

automated collection techniques or

other forms of information technology.

OMB Approval Number: New

Collection.

Title: Streamlining the International

Section 214 Authorization Process and

Tariff Requirements.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: New collection.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit.

Number of Respondents: 431 per year.

Estimated Time Per Response: 8

hours.

Total Annual Burden: 3448 hours.

Needs and Uses: The NPRM proposes

to streamline the international Section

214 authorization process and tariff

requirements. The proposed rules

would greatly reduce the regulatory

burdens on applicants, authorized

carriers, and the Commission. The

NPRM proposes to reduce the need for

carriers to file multiple applications by

enabling a non-dominant carrier to

obtain a global Section 214

authorization, which is not limited to

specific carrier facilities, and by

eliminating several regulatory

requirements that require carriers to file

multiple Section 214 applications. The

global Section 214 authorization would

allow carriers to provide international

services on a facilities-basis to virtually

all points in the world, using any

licensed facility. This authorization

would be subject to an exclusion list

that the Commission would publish

identifying countries or facilities for

which there are restrictions. In regard to

the regulatory requirements being

removed, Section 63.01 is proposed to

be amended to make it applicable only

to applications for domestic Section 214

authority. A new rule is proposed that

will detail the application requirements

for international Section 214 authority,

and include the provisions for filing a

global Section 214 application. In

addition, the proposed rule will enable

resellers to provide international resale

services via any authorized common

carrier, except those affiliated with the

reseller, without obtaining additional

authority. Also, private line resale

carriers would be able to resell

interconnected private lines for

switched services to all designated

‘‘equivalent’’ countries, without

obtaining additional authority to serve

each equivalent country. And, Section
63520 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 237 / Monday, December 11, 1995 / Notices

63.15 is proposed to be amended to

enable carriers to add circuits on private

satellite or cable systems, without

obtaining prior authority. The NPRM

also proposes to simplify the Section

214 and cable landing license

application process by reducing the

detailed information now required in

Sections 63.01 and 1.767. The NPRM

also proposes to encourage filing of

international Section 214 applications

electronically and on computer disk,

and to require that any information

contained in an application in a foreign

language be accompanied with a

certified translation in English.

The NPRM further reduces filing

requirements by allowing dominant

carriers to automatically convey

transmission capacity in submarine

cables to other carriers without

obtaining prior Section 214 authority.

Also, the NPRM proposes to further

streamline the tariff requirements for

non-dominant international resale and

facilities-based carriers by permitting

them to file their international tariffed

rates on one day’s notice instead of the

current 14 days’ notice, and seeks

comment, in general, on whether to

streamline the international tariff

process. However, these tariff related

proposals are not subject to the PRA.

Finally, the Commission seeks

comments on what, if any, Section 214

authorization requirements it should

forbear from applying if given

forbearance authority by Congress.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–30118 Filed 12–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

Schedule for En Banc Hearing,

Advanced Television Proceeding

December 6, 1995.

The schedule for the Federal

Communications Commission’s

December 12, 1995 en banc hearing on

Advanced Television, MM Docket No.

87–268, is as follows:

8:30–8:45 a.m.—Opening remarks from

the Commission

8:45–10:15 a.m.—Commercial

Opportunities of Digital Broadcast

The transition to digital broadcast is

fraught with risk and uncertainty yet

promises rich rewards if successful.

Panelists discuss the opportunities and

challenges created by the transition to

digital television. Issues to be explored

include whether digital technology will

allow broadcasters to compete in an

increasingly challenging video

marketplace, how will they finance the

transition, what is the impact on their

competitors?

Richard E. Wiley, Chairman, Advisory

Committee on Advanced Television

Services

Steven Rattner, Managing Director, Lazard

Freres & Co

Ed Grebow, President, TELETV Systems,

TELETV

Neil Braun, President, NBC Television

Network, NBC, Inc.

John Hendricks, Chairman and CEO,

Discovery Communications, Inc./NCTA

Stanley Hubbard, Chairman and CEO of

Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc.

Lawrence Grossman, President, Brookside

Productions & Horizons Cable

10:30 a.m.–noon—The Public Interest,

Convenience and Necessity

The Commission’s current public

interest rules, including those

mandating specific statutory

requirements, were developed for

broadcasters essentially limited by

technology to a single, analog video

programming service. Panelists discuss

the potential for more flexible and

dynamic use of the spectrum through

digital broadcast and its impact on

broadcasters’ obligation to serve the

public interest.

Gigi Sohn, Deputy Director, Media Access

Project

Alan Braverman, Vice President and General

Counsel, Cap Cities/ABC

Barry Diller, Chairman, Silver King

Communications

Faye Anderson, President, Douglass Policy

Institute

David Honig, Executive Director, Minority

Media and Telecommunications Council

John Siegel, Sr. Vice President, Chris Craft

Industries/INTV

1:30–3:00 p.m.—Digital Applications

The digital transmission system

designed by the Grand Alliance would

provide broadcasters with new

flexibility as they embark on serving the

American public with the next

generation of television. Allowing some

flexibility would increase the ability of

broadcasters to compete in an

increasingly competitive marketplace.

Panelists discuss potential for new

applications to complement broadcast

video as well as look to the future for

services made possible on recovered

channels.

Ed Horowitz, Senior Vice President of

Technology, Viacom

George Keyworth, Chairman, Progress and

Freedom Foundation

James C. McKinney, Chairman, Advanced

Television Systems Committee

Edward Reilly, President, McGraw-Hill

Broadcasting/MSTV

John Major, Senior Vice President and

Assistant Chief Corporate Staff Officer,

Motorola

James Carnes, President and CEO, Sarnoff/

Grand Alliance

Joseph A. Flaherty, Senior Vice President,

Technology, CBS Inc./ATSC Broadcast

Caucus

3:15–4:30 p.m.—Impact on Consumers

While a transition to digital broadcast

promises many benefits, the public

interest would be served by avoiding

any substantial dislocation of service to

existing viewers. With many competing

services coming on line, greater

incentives exist for broadcasters to

convert rapidly to digital broadcast.

Panelists discuss the expected impact

on consumers as it relates to

deployment of new equipment and

services, the ability of broadcasters to

continue to serve their audience during

the transition, the opportunities for

improved service and technology and

the extent to which consumers’ value is

enhanced such that analog transmission

may be terminated.

Bruce Allan, Vice President, Technology &

Business Development, Thompson

Consumer Electronics

Sherwin Grossman, President, Community

Broadcasters Association (CBA)

John Abel, President and CEO, Datacast

Partners

Ralph Gabbard, President/COO of Gray

Communications/NAB

David Liroff, Vice-President and Chief

Technology Officer, WGBH Educational

Foundation

The hearing will take place Tuesday,

December 12, 1995, from 8:30 a.m. to

4:30 p.m. in the Commission Meeting

Room, Room 856, 1919 M St., NW.,

Washington, DC, and is open to the

public. Concurrently, digital television

technology demonstrations, also open to

the public, will be presented. These

demonstrations will be available for

viewing Tuesday, December 12 from

8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. in the

Commission’s Training Center located

on the first floor of 2000 M St., NW.,

Washington, DC. The Commission may

alter the schedule of demonstrations

and panelists if necessary.

Scheduled demonstrations will be

presented by:

The Digital HDTV Grand Alliance

CBS, Inc.

Hitachi America, Ltd.

Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc.

Microsoft Corporation

Sony Corporation of America

Texas Instruments

For the hearing impaired, an ASL

interpreter will translate the hearing.

Video tapes, which will be closed

captioned, and written transcripts of the

hearing will be available for a fee.

For further information about the

hearing, please contact Saul Shapiro at

(202) 418–2600. The contacts for media

coverage are Karen Watson, David Fiske,