counter-case. Additional pleadings shall be submitted only if the tribunal determines they are necessary. (d) The proceedings shall be conducted in writing, and each side shall have the right to submit written evidence in support of its allegations of fact and law. However, oral arguments and testimony may be given if the tribunal considers it appropriate. (e) The tribunal may hear and determine counter-claims arising directly out of the subject matter of the dispute provided the counter-claims are within its jurisdiction as defined in Article 2 of this Supplementary Agreement. (f) At any time during the proceedings, the tribunal may terminate the proceedings if it decides the dispute is beyond its jurisdiction as defined in Article 2 of this Supplementary Agreement. (g) The tribunal's deliberations shall be secret and its rulings and decisions must be supported by at least two members. (h) The tribunal shall support its decision by a written opinion. A member dissenting from the decision may submit a separate written opinion. (i) The tribunal may adopt additional rules of procedure consistent with those established by this Supplementary Agreement which are necessary for the proceedings. ARTICLE 6 (a) If one side fails to present its case, the other side may call upon the tribunal to accept its case and to give a decision in its favor. Before doing so, the tribunal shall satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction and that the case is wellfounded in fact and in law. (b) Before giving the decision, the tribunal shall grant a period of grace to the side which has failed to present its case, unless it is satisfied that the party in default does not intend to present its case. ARTICLE 7 Any signatory, group of signatories, or the Committee, which considers that it has a substantial interest in the decision of the case may petition the tribunal for permission to become a party to the case. If the tribunal determines that the petitioner has a substantial interest in the decision of the case, it shall grant the petition. ARTICLE 8 Either at the request of a party, or upon its own initiative, the tribunal may appoint such experts as it deems necessary to assist it. ARTICLE 9 Each of the signatories and the Committee shall provide all information determined by the tribunal, either at the request of a party to the case or upon its own initiative, to be required for the proper handling and determination of the dispute. ARTICLE 10 During the course of its consideration of the case, the tribunal shall have power, pending the final decision, to make recommendations to the parties with a view to the protection of their respective rights. ARTICLE 11 (a) The decision of the tribunal shall be based on interpretation of the Agreement, the Special Agreement and this Supplementary Agreement in accordance with generally accepted principles of law. (b) Should the parties reach an agreement during the proceedings, the agreement shall be recorded in the form of a decision of the tribunal given by the consent of the parties. (c) The decision of the tribunal shall be binding on all the parties to the dispute and shall be carried out by them in good faith. However, if, in a case in which the Committee is a party, the tribunal decides that a decision of the Committee is null and void as not being authorized by or in compliance with the Agreement and the Special Agreement, the decision of the tribunal shall be binding on all signatories. 67-906-66– 27 ARTICLE 12 Unless the tribunal determines otherwise because of the particular circumstances of the case, the expenses of the tribunal, including the remuneration of the members of the tribunal, shall be borne in equal shares by each side. Where a side consists of more than one party, the share of that side shall be apportioned by the tribunal among the parties on that side. ARTICLE 13 This Supplementary Agreement shall enter into force when it has been signed by all signatories to the Special Agreement in respect of which the Special Agreement is in favor. Thereafter, pursuant to Article 14 of the Special Agreement, it shall enter into force for other signatories on the day on which the Special Agreement enters into force for them. It shall be in force as long as the Special Agreement continues in force. AUGUST 18, 1966. MR. JAMES J. MCCORMACK, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, 1900 L Street, NW., Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. MCCORMACK: Mr. John Johnson's letter of June 28, 1966, informed us of a question raised by foreign members of the Interim Communications Satellite Committee (ICSC) about the United States Government's position on the relationship between the Government and the Communications Satellite Corporation as manager for the International Telecommunications Satellite Consortium (INTELSAT). Mr. Johnson asked to be supplied the views of the United States Government for presentation to the Interim Committee at its July 27 meeting. Assistant Secretary Solomon sent you a statement of these views in his letter of July 26. That statement said in part that "since the last meeting my Government has established internal procedures which it is confident will avoid, in the future, any delay or adverse effect with reference to this committee's determinations." We were pleased to receive Mr. Johnson's letter of August 2 reporting that the statement was well received by all members of the Committee. The procedures referred to in the statement, which have been discussed with you on an informal basis, have now been agreed to among the Department of State, the Director of Telecommunications Management and the Federal Communications Commission. They will impose on the Corporation certain obligations with respect to its role as United States representative to the ICSC. It is our belief that their implementation will successfully carry out the United States Government's constitutional and statutory responsibilities, including those under the Communications Satellite Act of 1962, without needlessly inhibiting Comsat's freedom of action at meetings of the ICSC and without interference with Comsat's corporate responsibilities. We are also hopeful that in this manner we can avoid a implication, such as plagued you in connection with the TRW contract case, that ICSC decisions are subject to subsequent unilateral United States Government review. The procedures may be summarized as follows: (1) Comsat shall circulate copies of proposed agenda for meetings of the ICSC to the Department of State, the Director of Telecommunications Management, and the Federal Communications Commission at least four weeks before the matters on the agenda are to be considered by the ICSC. Amendments to agenda shall be circulated as soon as possible. (2) The Department will inform Comsat of those items on which prior United States Government instructions to Comsat are required, and Comsat shall not take action on such agenda items until it receives United States Government instructions. As to such items, Comsat shall furnish pertinent documentation as soon as possible. (3) On important matters Comsat should advise the Department of State, the Director of telecommunications Management, and the Federal Communications Commission of the position it desires to take well before the time such matters are placed on the agenda and as soon as meaningful consideration can be given by the agencies, so as to allow interagency consultation in arriving at a determination of instructions to Comsat. (4) In cases where Comsat is informed that consideration of certain matters by the FCC is required, Comsat's submission to the FCC shall be in such form, and with sufficient supporting data, so that the United States Government instructions may provide the flexibility required in discussions in the ICSC (5) Ordinarily, the United States Government instructions will be transmitted to Comsat by the Department of State following expeditious and non-public consideration by appropriate Government agencies. The agreed procedures do not preclude, however, that the FCC, after consultation with the Department of State and the DTM, may find it appropriate and desirable from time to time to hold public hearings relating to matters on which Comsat is to be instructed. (6) In any event, after appropriate governmental procedures have been accomplished, the Department of State will, taking into account the respective government agency determinations, issue instructions to Comsat as to the position it should take on the agenda items which require United States Government instructions. If implementation of these procedures should cause you any difficulty, or if you would like to examine more closely the precise content of the agreed interagency procedures, we will be pleased to meet with you at your convenience. Sincerely yours, FRANK E. LOY, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Economic Affairs. COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE CORPORATION, Mr. FRANK E. LOY, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. LOY: This is in response to your letter of 18 August informing Comsat of the procedures to be followed in providing guidance from the United States Government for Comsat's activity as U.S. representative in the Interim Communications Satellite Committee (ICSC) of the International Telecommunications Satellite Consortium (INTELSAT). I understand that, in earlier response to your letter, you have already received a letter from Mr. Colino, our Director of International Arrangements, which suggests some further clarification of the procedures as applied to certain levels of Comsat managerial activity. Furthermore, I believe that a meeting has already been held between members of our respective staffs at which these matters have been the subject of helpful discussion. Comsat welcomes this codification of procedures, the absence of which, as you say, has plagued us. As is normally the case with new procedures in such an important matter, we would expect these to be refined and otherwise improved in time, but you may be assured of Comsat's maximum cooperation from the outset, beginning with the procedures exactly as you have set them forth. To this assurance I would like to add a suggestion. The best of laws and policies can fail in application through lack of common dedication to their purpose, often unintended and resulting from lack of common understanding. To achieve maximum guaranty of an initial understanding of the broad as well as the specific national interests, and of the practical problems confronting Comsat in the ICSC, I propose that, as we approach the first few meetings of the ICSC in accordance with the new procedures, I join you and the other U.S. principals in timely meetings. The best time for such meetings could be a few days following the circulation of the proposed ICSC agenda in each instance. If this suggestion finds favor with you and the other principals, it would be Comsat's intention to display at these meetings not just the specific questions raised by the particular agenda but also broader questions which to Comsat seem likely candidates for future consideration in the ICSC. Sincerely, JAMES MCCORMACK, Chairman of the Board. Mr. HOLIFIELD. The next witness will be Mr. Archie W. League, Director of Air Traffic Service of the Federal Aviation Agency. Mr. League, will you please introduce your associates, and we will go ahead with your statement. STATEMENT OF ARCHIE W. LEAGUE, DIRECTOR OF AIR TRAFFIC This is Colonel May on my right, and Mr. Conerly on my left. Mr. ROBACK. Will you present your statement? Mr. LEAGUE. Yes, sir; I have a statement to present, Mr. Chairman. I am Archie W. League, Director of Air Traffic Service of the Federal Aviation Agency. With me today is Mr. Joe Conerly, Deputy Director, Systems Research and Development Service, and Col. Richard May who is Chief of the Communications Staff, Air Traffic Service. On behalf of Administrator McKee and myself I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the subcommittee today to present FAA's plan in the satellite communications field. Our interest in satellite communications at this time is based primarily upon what we believe to be a pressing requirement for improved air-ground voice communications in the control of transoceanic flights. We are also looking forward in time to the availability of satellite circuits to replace or supplement our existing long-haul, point-to-point circuitry. Colonel May will discuss this subject in a presentation following this statement. The Federal Aviation Agency controls the movement of international air traffic within 10 control areas and flight information regions located in the Atlantic, Pacific, and Caribbean areas. We will show these to you in Colonel May's presentation. To properly control this oceanic traffic, there is, in our opinion, an urgent need for more reliable, static-free communications between ground stations and aircraft in overocean flight. Improvement is required both in direct pilot-tocontroller voice channels and in controller-to-controller coordination channels between widely separated air traffic control centers. As the traffic volume continues to build, the need for better communications of this type becomes even more pressing. Air traffic, as you know, is growing at an unprecedented rate. For example, in 1965 there were 67,306 transatlantic aircraft handled, under instrument flight rules (IFR), by our Air Route Traffic Control Center at New York City. In 1975 this figure is conservatively estimated to become 121,000-a growth of almost 100 percent. Other areas in which traffic is controlled by FAA are also feeling the impact of this increased international traffic. Our San Juan center, in 1965, handled 57,000 oceanic IFR flights, with a grown expectancy of 102,000 by 1975; and our Honolulu center handled 70,561 oceanic IFR flights in 1965, with an expected 127,000 by 1975. In a study of traffic activity made by the FAA covering the period 1975-80, it is conservately estimated that by 1975 about 400 aircraft will transmit the North Atlantic on an average day in the summer months of June, August, and September. The same growth rate would bring this figure to 550 in 1980. This is to be contrasted with the present rate of traffic across the North Atlantic which approximates 224 flights a day during these same summer months. Over the oceanic routes, our current air traffic control communications suffer primarily from the inherent limitations of high frequency (HF) radio. Despite our efforts to improve the system, these limitations continue to be propagation problems which will not permit static and fade-free pilot-to-controller channels, leading to the loss of air/ground communications for periods of up to an hour or more in midocean areas. In addition, continued use of such inadequate HF communications systems will hardly be welcomed in an air traffic control environment that may one day call for implementation of automatic data transfer systems. The obvious consequence of continuing the use of the present HF communications system for overocean communications will be to compound the problems of exercising proper air traffic control and providing essential flight information services to aircraft in flight. One of our most important objectives is to furnish adequate communications service in this period of rapid growth. Although we have looked at other measures, we believe that a VHF communications satellite capability is the only immediate answer to the problem. With regard to long-haul point-to-point communications, the FAA is an active operating member of the National Communications System (NCS). In accordance with the concept and objectives of President Kennedy's memorandum of August 1, 1963, the FAA is in the position of both contributing to and sharing in the resources of the NCS. Such participation is essential since in time of war or national emergency FAA may revert to DOD control, and our communications assets can be most effectively employed by prior planning within the context of the NCS. Moreover, we believe the NCS philosophy to be basically sound and that it should result in more efficient utilization of the total communications resources of the Government. In the area of air-ground communications, the FAA is in favor of an initial program with broad Atlantic coverage, utilizing a single synchronized satellite, equatorially orbited, and requiring a minimal addition to or modification of existing aircraft equipment. We have approached Comsat Corp. on the feasibility of a leasing arrangement to provide the total service for such a system. Colonel May in his presentation will give you the current status of our Comsat Corp. efforts. The initial system we envisage would provide a long-range ground-to-satellite-to-aircraft capability using VHF frequency. Through the operational experience gained from use of this initial satellite we would adjust or modify operational procedures, if necessary, prior to recommending such a communications system for the rest of the world. It is, in a sense, a practical pioneering effort. We appreciate, of course, that the implementation of even the first system will present |