8994 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Dated: January 23, 1995.

Chuck Clarke,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–3860 Filed 2–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 102–6–6837b; FRL–5145–6]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Implementation Plans; California State

Implementation Plan Revision, Bay

Area Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve

a revision to the California State

Implementation Plan (SIP), which

concerns the control of volatile organic

compound (VOC) emissions from valves

and flanges at chemical plants.

The intended effect of proposing

approval of this rule is to regulate

emissions of VOCs in accordance with

the requirements of the Clean Air Act,

as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

In the Final Rules Section of this

Federal Register, the EPA is approving

the state’s SIP revision as a direct final

rule without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

revision amendment and anticipates no

adverse comments. A detailed rationale

for this approval is set forth in the direct

final rule. If no adverse comments are

received in response to this proposed

rule, no further activity is contemplated

in relation to this rule. If EPA receives

adverse comments, the direct final rule

will be withdrawn and all public

comments received will be addressed in

a subsequent final rule based on this

proposed rule. The EPA will not

institute a second comment period on

this document. Any parties interested in

commenting on this action should do so

at this time.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule

must be received in writing by March

20, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

action should be addressed to: Daniel A.

Meer, Rulemaking Section (A–5–3), Air

and Toxics Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105–3901.

Copies of the rule and EPA’s

evaluation report of the rule are

available for public inspection at EPA’s

Region 9 office during normal business

hours. Copies of the submitted rule are

also available for inspection at the

following locations:

California Air Resources Board, Stationary

Source Division, Rule Evaluation Section,

2020 ‘‘L’’ Street, Sacramento, CA 95812.

Bay Area Air Quality Management District,

939 Ellis Street, San Francisco, CA 94109.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Duane F. James, Rulemaking Section

(A–5–3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105–3901, Telephone:

(415) 744–1191.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

document concerns Bay Area Air

Quality Management District’s

(BAAQMD) Rule 8–22, ‘‘Valves and

Flanges at Chemical Plants,’’ submitted

to EPA on September 28, 1994, by the

California Air Resources Board. For

further information, please see the

information provided in the Direct Final

action which is located in the Rules

section of this Federal Register.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: January 17, 1995.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–3865 Filed 2–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–W

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Chapter I

[IC Docket No. 94–31; FCC No. 95–36]

Preparation for International ITU World

Radiocommunication Conferences

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Second notice of inquiry.

SUMMARY: The International

Telecommunication Union (ITU) will

convene the 1995 World

Radiocommunication Conference

(WRC–95) from October 23 to November

17, 1995, in Geneva, Switzerland. The

agenda for WRC–95 includes issues

relating to the introduction of global

mobile-satellite services (MSS);

simplification of the international Radio

Regulations; and agendas for future

conferences. This proceeding addresses

technical, regulatory, and procedural

matters related to the WRC–95 agenda

and solicits information to assist the

Federal Communications Commission

(FCC) in preparing U.S. proposals for

that conference, including proposals for

future conference agendas.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before March 6, 1995, and reply

comments must be filed on or before

March 21, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, 1919 M Street NW.,

Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Damon C. Ladson, International Bureau,

(202) 739–0510, or Audrey L. Allison,

International Bureau, (202) 739–0557.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the FCC’s Second Notice of

Inquiry, IC Docket No. 94–31, FCC No.

95–36, adopted January 30, 1995, and

released January 31, 1995. The full text

of this Second Notice of Inquiry is

available for inspection during normal

business hours in the Records Room of

the Federal Communications

Commission, Room 239, 1919 M St.

NW., Washington, DC. The complete

text may be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor, ITS, Inc.,

2100 M St. NW., Suite 140, Washington,

DC 20037, telephone (202) 857–3800.

Summary of Second Notice of Inquiry

1. The purpose of this proceeding is

to solicit comments addressing

technical, operational, regulatory and

procedural matters relating to the WRC–

95 agenda issues in order to assist the

FCC in its preparation of draft

recommended U.S. proposals for WRC–

95. In the Second Notice of Inquiry, the

FCC reviews comments and replies

submitted in response to the initial

Notice of Inquiry in this proceeding 59

FR 25873, May 18, 1994 and the interim

report of the FCC’s WRC–95 Industry

Advisory Committee. The FCC seeks

further comment on these matters and

on the FCC draft recommended U.S.

proposals for WRC–95 attached to the

Second Notice of Inquiry. Presentation

of the FCC’s preliminary views on these

topics is intended to stimulate

discussions and is part of an overall

effort to achieve early consensus on U.S.

proposals to WRC–95.

2. WRC–95 will be the first conference

under the ITU’s new accelerated

conference cycle to discuss substantive

spectrum allocation and regulatory

matters. This conference represents a

significant opportunity to build a

foundation for advancing near and longterm United States telecommunications

goals. In particular, WRC–95 is critical

to a new commercial

telecommunications industry—the

mobile-satellite services (MSS) industry,

that includes low-Earth orbit (LEO) MSS

systems. LEO systems can provide

voice, data and other services at

relatively low cost and will be a critical

component in achieving the FCC’s goals

of universal service, open access and

competition in the provision of services.

The systems will be an important part

of a new seamless, nationwide (and
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 1995 / Proposed Rules 8995

eventually global) communication

network. The new MSS industry also

promises to stimulate significant

economic growth both domestically and

abroad. The FCC’s proposals are

intended to facilitate the

implementation of competitive MSS

operations by easing international

technical and regulatory constraints and

providing additional spectrum

allocations.

3. In addition to seeking comment on

specific MSS proposals, the FCC seeks

input on other subjects raised in the first

Notice of Inquiry and relating to the

WRC–95 agenda including: space

service allocation issues; review of

Appendices 30 and 30A; availability of

high frequency broadcasting bands; the

Final Report of the Voluntary Group of

Experts on simplifying the international

Radio Regulations; and agendas for

future WRCs. The FCC also asks parties

to consider the long-range planning

aspects of the ITU’s new conference

cycle including the FCC’s conference

preparatory methods.

4. Upon review of the comments

received in response to the Second

Notice of Inquiry and a final report from

the WRC–95 Industry Advisory

Committee, the FCC will issue a Final

Report in this proceeding containing

recommended U.S. proposals for the

conference. The FCC will consult with

the Department of Commerce’s National

Telecommunications and Information

Administration and the Department of

State to develop final U.S. proposals for

WRC–95.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–3830 Filed 2–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M

47 CFR Part 1

[GC Docket No. 95–21; FCC 95–52]

Ex Parte Presentations in Commission

Proceedings

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Commission proposes to

amend its regulations concerning ex

parte presentations in Commission

proceedings. The proposed rules would

simplify the determination in particular

proceedings of whether ex parte

presentations are premissible and

whether they must be disclosed. The

proposed rules would also modify the

Commission’s ‘‘sunshine period

prohibition.’’ Additionally, the

proposed rules would modify in certain

respects the procedures for reporting

oral ex parte presentations and for

handling potential violations of the

rules. Certain other minor amendments

of the rules are proposed. The intended

effect of these proposals is to make the

rules simpler and easier with which to

comply, to enhance the fairness of the

Commission’s processes, and to

facilitate the public’s ability to

communicate with the Commission.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before March 16, 1995; reply comments

must be filed on or before March 31,

1995.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, 1919 M Street NW,

Washington D.C. 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David S. Senzel, Office of General

Counsel (202) 418–1760.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking, GC Docket No.

95–21, adopted on February 7, 1995,

and released February 7, 1995. The full

text of the notice of proposed

rulemaking is available for inspection

and copying during normal business

hours in the FCC Reference Center

(Room 239), 1919 M Street NW,

Washington D.C. The complete text may

also be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Inc., Suite 140, 2100 M Street NW,

Washington, D.C. 20037, telephone

(202) 857–3800.

Summary of Further Notice of Proposed

Rule Making

1. In this notice, the Commission

invites comment on proposals to revise

its rules governing ex parte

presentations in Commission

proceedings. The Commission believes

that the current rules continue to be

excessively complex, making

compliance difficult. Moreover, certain

specific problem areas have become

apparent.

2. The Commission proposes to revise

its system for specifying whether

proceedings are ‘‘restricted,’’ ‘‘permitbut-disclose’’ or ‘‘exempt,’’ which

determine how ex parte presentations

are treated in that proceeding (with

certain exceptions). (An ex parte

presentation is a communication to a

Commission decisionmaker concerning

the outcome or merits of a proceeding

which–if written–is not served on all

parties and–if oral–is made without

notice and the opportunity for all

parties to be present.) In restricted

proceedings, ex parte presentations are

prohibited. In non-restricted

proceedings, ex parte presentations are

permitted but must be disclosed on the

record of the proceeding. In exempt

proceedings, ex parte presentations may

be made without limitation. The

Commission is proposing a simplified

system that would permit people to rely

on broad general rules to determine the

status of a proceeding.

3. Under the proposed system, all

proceedings not restricted or exempt

would be subject to permit-but-disclose

rules. The rules would generally classify

as restricted only those proceedings

required to be so classified by the

Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

This would include proceedings

designated for hearing. Consistent with

the APA, proceedings would also be

restricted with respect to any person

with knowledge that a designation order

was in preparation. Additionally,

proceedings involving mutually

exclusive applications not subject to

auction or lottery would be restricted.

The Commission or a Bureau or Office

after consultation with OGC could also

classify individual proceedings as

restricted on a case-by-case basis.

4. A few matters would continue to be

expressly classified as exempt. These

would include notice of inquiry

proceedings and proceedings involving

complaints which are not served on the

target of the complaint.

5. All other proceedings, including

informal adjudications (such as an

application, waiver request, other filings

seeking affirmative relief) and informal

rulemakings, would be subject to

permit-but-disclose rules when ex parte

presentations are made. For the

purposes of these ex parte rules,

‘‘parties’’ would be defined as those

making filings which initiate

adjudicatory-type proceedings and those

who make written submissions

regarding the filing party which are

served on the filer. Parties also include

other persons formally given party

status, such as the subject of an order to

show cause proceeding.

6. In addition, the proposed rules deal

specifically with complaints. They

provide that generally in complaint

proceedings where the complaint is

served on the target of the complaint,

both the complainant and the target are

parties. In formal section 208

proceedings, both the complainant and

the carrier would be parties. Comment

is requested on the treatment of

informal section 208 complaints.

7. Under this proposal, a sole

applicant or other uncontested filer

could freely make presentations to the

Commission about its filing. As long as

no other party appeared, these

presentations would not be ‘‘ex parte’’