Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
Final rule.
This rule revises the handling requirements under the California olive marketing order. The olive marketing order regulates the handling of olives grown in California, and is administered locally by the California Olive Committee (committee). This rule establishes exemption, safeguard, and reporting requirements for handlers desiring to ship a small portion of their olives as new packaged olive products for test marketing and market development projects. This rule will help provide uniform procedures under the order and improve overall program administration.
This final rule becomes effective February 1, 2000.
Terry Vawter, California Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order Administration Branch, F&V, AMS, USDA, 2202 Monterey Street, suite 102B, Fresno, California 93721; telephone: (559) 487-5901, Fax: (559) 487-5906; or George Kelhart, Technical Advisor, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, room 2525-S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456; telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-5698.
Small businesses may request information on complying with this regulation by contacting Jay Guerber, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room 2525-S, Washington, DC 20090-6456; telephone (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-5698, or E-mail: Jay.Guerber@usda.gov.
This final rule is issued under Marketing Agreement No. 148 and Marketing Order No. 932, both as amended (7 CFR part 932), regulating the handling of olives grown in California, hereinafter referred to as the “order.” The marketing agreement and order are effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.”
The Department of Agriculture (Department) is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive Order 12866.
This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect. This final rule will not preempt any State or local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this rule.
The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with the Secretary a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing the Secretary would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review the Secretary's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.
This final rule revises the handling requirements under the order for olives grown in California. The revision implements procedures and reporting requirements for handlers desiring to use a small portion of their olives to test market and initiate market development projects for new packaged olive products. The procedures include completion and submission of a new form, the COC Form 155, and approval by committee staff.
Sections 932.51 and 932.52 of the olive marketing order authorize regulatory requirements regarding the handling of California packaged olives. Such requirements include incoming and outgoing handling requirements with regard to quality, size, and style of olives. Certain of these requirements are implemented under § 932.149. Styles of olives include whole, pitted, sliced, segmented (wedged), halved, chopped, and broken pitted. Handlers will be permitted to use other styles of olives and to add other ingredients to the finished product, such as flavorings, pieces of garlic, or jalapeno peppers.
Section 932.55 of the order provides authority for regulatory exemptions for olives which are used for specified purposes, including shipments of olives used to facilitate the conduct of marketing research and development projects. Section 932.55 of the order also provides authority for the committee to recommend rules, regulations, and safeguards necessary to ensure that olives exempted under the provisions of this section are handled only as authorized.
Section 932.155 of the order's rules and regulations provides specific safeguards for certain special purpose shipments of packaged olives. However, these regulations do not include requirements and procedures related to shipping packaged olives for test marketing and market development. In the past, the committee has, on occasion, approved such marketing projects. This rule revises § 932.155 for the purpose of clarifying the language and to include an exemption and safeguards in the rules and regulations for shipments of new packaged olive products for test marketing and market development. The revision clarifies existing practices in the regulations, and establishes uniform procedures for all handlers to ensure that the handling of new product packaged olives exempted under the provisions of § 932.55 will be handled only as authorized. Such new products could include packaged olives of different styles containing various ingredients or flavorings, such as pieces of garlic, or jalapeno peppers.
The rule specifies information requested on a new form, the COC 155. Prior to engaging in test marketing and initiating market development projects
Any product remaining at the end of the test-market period shall be disposed of according to paragraph (a) of § 932.155, which specifies procedures for disposing of packaged olives in the production of olive oil, donating to a charitable organization, or by dumping.
On December 10, 1998, the committee met to discuss the recommendation. Additional discussion occurred at various subcommittee meetings prior to the December 10, 1998, committee meeting.
According to the committee, demand for packaged olives has remained relatively stagnant in recent years. The committee believes that to improve returns to producers and handlers, handlers must have the flexibility to respond to shifting trends in the marketplace by test marketing new products. Handlers must be allowed the opportunity to try marketing innovative new products free from certain marketing order obligations, such as style and flavor requirements which appear to be too restrictive for these new products. Such shipments will, therefore, be exempt from the requirements of § 932.149. Because it appears that such shipments can be made in compliance with all other order requirements, they will remain applicable. This rule will allow handlers to respond to marketing opportunities and requests from buyers, which could result in increased olive sales. In addition, since handlers have large amounts of capital invested in their processing plants, any increase in the amount of olives processed yields a reduction of per unit processing costs, which is a benefit to handlers and producers.
It has been the industry's experience that the ability to ship new products for test marketing and market development helps to encourage handlers to develop new product lines. The committee believes that this option should continue to be available, allowing handlers to take advantage of additional marketing opportunities to expand the market for processed olives. Adding procedures to the rules and regulations will clarify the existing practice, and will provide uniform requirements for handlers.
Therefore, when the committee met in December, it unanimously recommended modifying the rules and regulations to specify procedures and reporting requirements to permit handlers to ship a small portion of their olives for new packaged olive products for test marketing and market development projects. In addition, the committee recommended development of a new form, the COC Form 155, that handlers interested in test marketing and market development projects for new olive products must complete and file with the committee.
The information supplied by the applicant handler will provide the committee with information necessary to ensure that the product is used for test marketing or for marketing development projects and that the Inspection Service is aware of the product.
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), AMS has considered the economic impact of this action on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this final regulatory flexibility analysis.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf. Thus, both statutes have small entity orientation and compatibility.
There are 2 handlers subject to regulation under the order and approximately 1,200 producers of olives in the regulated area. In the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, we estimated that there were three handlers subject to regulation under the order. Since publication of the proposed rule, more current information indicates that there are two handlers subject to regulation. Small agricultural service firms have been defined by the Small Business Administration (13 CFR 121.601) as those having annual receipts of less than $5,000,000, and small agricultural producers are defined as those having annual receipts of less than $500,000. Neither of the olive handlers may be classified as small entities. The majority of producers may be classified as small entities.
A review of historical and preliminary information pertaining to the 1999-2000 crop year (August 1 through July 31) indicates that total grower revenue for the 1999 crop will approximate $39,500,000, and the average grower revenue will be approximately $33,000. Thus, it can be concluded that the majority of producers of California olives may be classified as small entities.
This final rule revises § 932.155 to include requirements for handlers desiring to ship olives to test markets and initiate market development projects for small quantities of new olive products. This rule also reformats § 932.155 for the purposes of clarity.
An alternative to this action would be to maintain the status quo, whereby the regulations would not address the needs of handlers desiring to ship new products for test marketing and market development. However, the committee and the Department believe that regulations should be modified to address these needs. This will ensure that uniform guidelines and procedures are followed by handlers desiring to test market and initiate market development projects. Such activities could ultimately result in increasing sales of processed olives.
Under this rule, the committee will review written requests from handlers interested in test marketing and market development of new product lines. Such requests will be made on a new form, the COC 155, which requires uniform information from all applicant handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies. This new form is anticipated to be utilized when handlers have developed new product lines which they desire to test market.
The change in handling regulations will provide increased flexibility to handlers to respond to shifting trends in the marketplace.
The reporting and recordkeeping burden has changed from the burden in the proposed rule because the number of handlers subject to regulation under the order has dropped from three to two. Accordingly, this action imposes an additional reporting or recordkeeping requirement on two olive handlers by requiring them to complete COC Form 155 prior to the test marketing of a new canned olive product. The new form will be filed annually and will take about 20 minutes to complete. Therefore, the additional burden created by the use of this form by the two handlers is estimated to be 40 minutes. However, the committee believes that the burden of such a requirement will be outweighed by the opportunities for handlers to test market new products.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the information collection requirements that are contained in this rule have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and have been assigned OMB No. 0581-0142 for documents required under the olive marketing order. As noted in the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, the Department has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this final rule.
In addition, the committee's meeting was widely publicized throughout the olive industry and all interested persons were encouraged to attend the meeting and participate in committee deliberations on all issues. Like all committee meetings, the December 10, 1998, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both large and small, were encouraged to express views on this issue. The committee is comprised of 16 members, of which 8 are producers and 8 are handlers. Each of the two handler entities is presently represented on the committee.
A proposed rule concerning this action was published in the
A small business guide on complying with fruit vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at the following website: http://www.usda.gov/fv/moab.html. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Jay Guerber at the previously mentioned address in the
After consideration of all relevant matters presented, including the information and recommendation submitted by the committee and other available information, it is hereby found that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.
It is further found that good cause exists for not postponing the effective date of this rule until 30 days after publication in the
Marketing agreements, Olives, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
7 U.S.C. 601-674.
(a) The disposition of packaged olives covered by § 932.152(d) which are not reprocessed, and new packaged olive products covered under paragraph (b) of this section which have not been disposed of by the end of the test market period, shall be handled in conformity with the applicable provisions of this paragraph.
(1) Under the supervision of the Inspection Service, such packaged olives may be disposed of for use in the production of olive oil or dumped.
(2) Such packaged olives may be disposed of to a charitable organization for use by such organization, provided the following conditions are met:
(i) Any handler who wishes to so dispose of olives shall first file a written application with, and obtain written approval thereof, from the committee. Each such application shall contain at least:
(A) The name and address of the handler and the charitable organization;
(B) The physical location of the charitable organization's facilities;
(C) The quantity, in cases, the variety, size, can size, and can code of the packaged olives; and
(D) A certification from the charitable organization that such olives will be used by the organization and will not be sold.
(ii) Prior to approval, the committee shall perform such verification of the accuracy of the information on the application as it deems necessary. The committee may deny any application if it finds that the required information is incomplete or incorrect, or has reason to believe that the intended receiver is not a charitable organization, or that the handler or the organization has disposed of packaged olives contrary to a previously approved application. The committee shall notify the applicant and the organization in writing of its approval, or denial, of the application. Any such approval shall continue in effect so long as the packaged olives covered thereby are disposed of consistent with this section. The committee shall notify the handler and the organization of each such termination of approval. The handler shall furnish the committee, upon demand, such evidence of disposition of the packaged olives covered by an approved application as may be satisfactory to the committee.
(b) In accordance with the provisions of § 932.55(b), packaged olives to be used in marketing development projects may be handled without regard to § 932.149 provided the following conditions are met. Such olives must be identified to the satisfaction of the Inspection Service and kept separate from other packaged olives. The handler shall submit to the committee for its approval “COC Form 155” at least 10 working days prior to the shipment of such packaged olives to test markets, and report progress or changes to the committee, as requested. The applicant handler shall provide the following information on COC Form 155:
(1) The quantity of olives to be utilized (limited to not more than five percent of the handler's crop year acquisitions);
(2) Specific market outlet;
(3) Flavorings or other ingredients added to the olives;
(4) Style of olives used;
(5) Type of olives used, either black or green ripe;
(6) Container sizes;
(7) Varieties used, whether Ascolano, Barouni, Manzanillo, Mission, Sevillano, etc.;
(8) Sizes of olives utilized;
(9) Approximate dates when the new product will be packaged;
(10) Name and address of requesting handler;
(11) Place of inspection;
(12) Certification that all assessment and reporting requirements in effect under the marketing order will be met prior to shipment;
(13) Certification that all such fruit will be kept separate from other packaged olives and will be so identified by control cards or other means acceptable to the Inspection Service;
(14) Purpose and nature of the request, whether for test marketing, evaluation, market research, etc.; and
(15) An estimate of the amount of time required to complete the test. The committee shall promptly approve or deny the application, and may add limitations to any such approval. Upon approval, the applicant handler shall notify the Inspection Service. Packaged olives so identified and remaining unused at the end of the approved test-market period shall be disposed of according to paragraph (a) of this section.
Coast Guard, DOT.
Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.
The Commander, First Coast Guard District, has issued a temporary deviation from the drawbridge operation regulations for the Greenpoint Avenue Bridge, mile 1.3, across the Newtown Creek in New York City. This deviation allows the bridge owner to keep the bridge in the closed position from 6 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., on January 23, 2000, and January 30, 2000. This action is necessary to facilitate necessary repairs to the bridge lift motors.
This deviation is effective on January 23, 2000, and January 30, 2000.
Mr. Joseph Schmied, Project Officer, First Coast Guard District, at (212) 668-7195.
The Greenpoint Avenue Bridge, mile 1.3, across the Newtown Creek, has a vertical clearance of 26 feet at mean high water, and 31 feet at mean low water in the closed position. The existing operating regulations in 33 CFR 117.801(a)(4) require the bridge to open on signal at all times.
The bridge owner, the New York City Department of Transportation, notified the Coast Guard on December 10, 1999, that the bridge lift motors may fail to operate if immediate repairs were not implemented. The approval to proceed with the repairs was delayed because of the potential New York City Transit strike which was expected to occur on December 15, 1999. The New York City Transit work stoppage was avoided and as a result, the bridge owner has again requested a two-day closure to repair the bridge lift motors. The repairs are scheduled to be performed on two consecutive Sundays in late January. This decision was made because most of the commercial operators that use this waterway usually do not operate on Sundays resulting in few requests to open the bridge during that time period.
This deviation to the operating regulations allows the bridge owner to keep the Greenpoint Avenue Bridge in the closed position from 6 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., on January 23, 2000, and January 30, 2000.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(c), this work will be performed with all due speed in order to return the bridge to normal operation as soon as possible. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule; technical amendment.
This document announces a technical amendment revising the address foreign pesticide producing establishments are to use to obtain and submit forms to the Agency .
This document is effective January 31, 2000.
Foreign pesticide producing establishments should contact: FIFRA Foreign Establishment Registration Contact, Agriculture and Ecosystems Division (2225A), Office of Compliance, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20460, (202) 564-5008; Fax: (202) 564-0085.
Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) requires that pesticides subject to the Act be produced only in establishments registered with the EPA, and requires that registered establishments file annual reports with the Agency. The Agency has established regulations at 40 CFR part 167 to implement the requirement of section 7 of FIFRA. Section 167.90 of these regulations directs that applications for registration of establishments and annual reports be sent to the appropriate EPA regional office (if a registered establishment is located in the United States) or to a specified address at EPA headquarters (if a registered establishment is located in any other country). The Agency is, by this document, amending 40 CFR 167.90(b) by revising the address to be used by foreign establishments when submitting applications or annual reports to the Agency. This technical amendment to the regulations will become effective upon publication of this document in the
Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
7 U.S.C. 136(e) and (w)
(b) * * *
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, Office of Compliance, Agriculture and Ecosystems Division (2225A), Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20460, ATTN: FIFRA Foreign Establishment Registration Contact.
Federal Communications Commission.
Final rule; petition for reconsideration.
This document concerning the Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service addresses several petitioners asking for reconsideration or waiver of the Commission's contribution rules. The Commission requires carriers to contribute on the basis of prior year revenues, and the petitioners wanted to use current year revenues instead. The Commission denies the petitions.
Jack Zinman, Attorney, Common Carrier Bureau, Accounting Policy Division, (202) 418-7400.
This is a summary of the Commission's Memorandum Opinion and Order and Seventh Order on Reconsideration, CC Docket No. 96-45; FCC 99-280, released on October 13, 1999. The full text of this document is available for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room CY-A257, 445 Twelfth Street, SW, Washington, DC, 20554.
1. Affinity Corporation, Hotel Communications, Inc., LDC Telecommunications, Inc. (LDC), MobileTel, Inc., National Telephone & Communications, Inc. (MobileTel), Network Operator Services, Inc. (NOS), Operator Communications, Inc. (OCI), and U.S. Network, Inc. (collectively, Petitioners) have filed petitions for waiver or, alternatively, reconsideration of § 54.706, § 54.709, and/or § 54.711 of the Commission's rules. Specifically, Petitioners seek waiver or reconsideration of the requirement that their contributions to the universal service support mechanisms be calculated on the basis of their prior year revenues. For the reasons that follow, we deny the petitions.
2. NOS and LDC have petitioned the Commission to reconsider its decision to assess contributions on prior year revenues instead of current year revenues, and OCI has asked the Commission to consider assessing contributions on estimated future revenues with periodic reconciliations. As NOS recognizes, however, a petition for reconsideration in a rulemaking proceeding must be filed within 30 days after public notice of the Commission action. The Commission's rules provide that public notice in a rulemaking proceeding occurs upon publication of the document, or a summary thereof, in the
3. Although the petitions for reconsideration are untimely, we wish to take this opportunity to address NOS's claim that “it is not clear * * * [whether] the Commission followed the [notice] requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)” in establishing the universal service assessment methodology, and the Commission should therefore reconsider its decision. Section 553(b) of the APA requires an agency to provide published notice of its proposed rulemaking in the
4. Here, the Commission sought comment in the
5. Given that the Commission sought comment on two revenue-based contribution methods in the
6. Although we deny the petitions for reconsideration as untimely, we also take this opportunity to explain why we believe that the calculation methodologies proposed by Petitioners do not present viable alternatives to the
7. Contrary to the methodology the Commission adopted, however, NOS proposes allowing carriers to make a one-time election to base their universal service contributions on current year revenues, instead of prior year revenues. Under this plan, the Commission would estimate total industry revenues, which, according to NOS, will remain relatively constant from year to year. We find that NOS's proposal does not fulfill congressional objectives as well as the methodology the Commission adopted.
8. For example, under NOS's proposal, the Commission would have to forecast total end-user telecommunications revenues when calculating contribution factors for the universal service support mechanisms. Contrary to NOS's claim, we do not believe that such revenues are likely to remain relatively constant. Our most recent assessment of the telecommunications industry shows that, from 1992 to 1998, gross telecommunications revenues increased by approximately $93 billion. Annual increases have ranged from approximately $10 billion to $22 billion since 1992. Moreover, although the Commission has used forecasts of gross industry revenues in calculating contribution factors for the TRS fund, the universal service support mechanisms are significantly larger than the TRS fund. Thus, errors in forecasting total industry revenues will have a much greater effect on the universal service support mechanisms than on the TRS fund. Consequently, the use of forecasting increases the likelihood that universal service contributors will be overbilled in some periods and underbilled in other periods, resulting in funding surpluses or shortfalls in the universal service support mechanisms. Such a result is contrary to Congress's directive that the universal service support mechanisms be specific, predictable, and sufficient.
9. In addition, NOS's proposal allowing carriers to make a one-time election to base their contributions on current year revenues or prior year revenues would impose significant administrative burdens on USAC. Instead of a single procedure for handling contributor reporting and assessment, USAC would need to have two sets of procedures running concurrently, one for prior year contributors and one for current year contributors. Thus, we conclude that the potential for forecasting errors and the increased administrative burdens make NOS's plan less likely than the Commission's current methodology to satisfy the congressional directive that universal service support mechanisms should be specific, predictable, and sufficient.
10. We find similar problems with the proposal set forth by OCI. OCI claims that the current contribution method places a heavier burden on carriers with declining revenues, and therefore it is neither equitable, nondiscriminatory, nor competitively neutral. OCI proposes that carriers estimate their revenues for the upcoming six months and USAC calculate carriers' contributions based on those estimates. To prevent carriers from intentionally underestimating their revenues, carriers would also report their actual revenues from prior periods. USAC could then annually compare carriers' estimated revenues with their subsequently reported actual revenues and reconcile any differences between estimated revenues and actual revenues.
11. Whereas NOS's plan requires one entity (the Commission) to estimate total industry end-user telecommunications revenues, OCI's plan requires
12. Moreover, OCI's plan would increase the administrative burden on both carriers and USAC. In addition to reporting actual prior year revenues, carriers would have to semi-annually prepare and submit revenue estimates for the upcoming six months. After entering, verifying, and potentially auditing the actual prior year revenue data, USAC also would have to process the carriers' six month revenue estimates. Furthermore, the reconciliation procedure suggested by OCI would complicate the billing process for USAC because bills would be based on data from multiple periods. Because of the potential negative effects of forecasting errors and the increased administrative burdens, we decline to adopt OCI's plan.
13. Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules governs petitions for waiver and provides that waiver may be granted upon “good cause shown.” Commission rules are presumed valid, however, and an applicant for waiver bears a heavy burden. The Commission may exercise its discretion to waive a rule “only if special circumstances warrant a deviation from the general rule and such deviation will serve the public interest.” The Commission may take into account considerations of hardship, equity, or more effective implementation of overall policy. Although the Commission must give meaningful consideration to waiver petitions, it should not tolerate evisceration of a rule by waivers.
14. For various reasons, each Petitioner alleges that it has experienced a decline in revenues. Each Petitioner asks for a waiver of the contribution requirements and seeks either to exclude a portion of its prior year revenues from its revenue base or to apply the contribution factor to its decreased present year revenues. Most Petitioners claim that, absent such waivers, they will have difficulty recovering their contributions from their shrinking subscriber bases.
15. We are not persuaded that Petitioners' alleged inability to recover contributions is a special circumstance warranting waiver of the prior year revenue contribution requirement. The Commission does not require carriers to recover their universal service
16. NTC, OCI, and MobileTel have attempted to explain the circumstances underlying their revenue declines, which include, respectively, regulatory action to correct improper marketing practices, increased competition, and an adverse Commission licensing decision. We are not persuaded that any of these circumstances rise to the level of the special circumstances necessary to warrant a waiver. It is not unusual for a state to take corrective action against a company that improperly markets its services, or competitors to compete for subscribers and marketshare. Furthermore, although the Commission rescinded MobileTel's Louisiana 8 and 9 RSA cellular B block licenses in 1996, the Commission granted MobileTel interim authority to continue operating until qualified applicants were licensed and ready to begin service. The grant of interim authority, while limited, allowed MobileTel to generate significant, additional revenues that it otherwise would have foregone absent such interim authority. By accepting the interim authority, however, MobileTel subjected itself to the obligations and responsibilities associated with being a provider of interstate telecommunications services in the Louisiana 8 and 9 Rural Service Areas. The fact that those obligations and responsibilities subsequently included a requirement to contribute to universal service using a methodology based on prior year revenues—a requirement applicable to all providers of interstate telecommunications services—does not constitute a special circumstance warranting waiver of our contribution rules. Accordingly, we deny Petitioners' requests for waiver.
17. The authority contained in sections 1-4, 201-205, 218-220, 254, 303(r), 403, and 405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, § 1.429 of the Commission's rules, the Memorandum Opinion and Order and Seventh Order on Reconsideration is adopted.
18. The authority contained in sections 4(i) and 405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and § 1.429 of the Commission's rules, the petitions for reconsideration are denied.
19. The authority contained in section 4(i) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and § 1.3 of the Commission's rules, the petitions for waiver are denied.
Universal service.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
Final rule, partial response to petitions for reconsideration; technical amendment.
On April 27, 1999, NHTSA published a final rule which revised the test procedure in Standard No. 216,
The Recreation Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA) petitioned for reconsideration of the rule, stating that some manufacturers of conversion vans with raised roofs must cease production of their vehicles because they are unable to demonstrate compliance with the new test procedure. Ford Motor Company (Ford) also petitioned for reconsideration of the test procedure used to test vehicles with raised roofs.
We are issuing this final rule in partial response to those petitions. The effect of this document is to stay, until October 25, 2000, the provision specifying the new test procedure as the sole test procedure. This document amends Standard No. 216 so that, for vehicles manufactured during the stay, vehicle manufacturers have an option of using either the new test procedure or the test procedure that was specified in Standard No. 216 immediately prior to October 25, 1999 (“former test procedure”). For vehicles manufactured after the stay, i.e., on or after October 25, 2000, the new test procedure will apply (unless the standard is further amended in a subsequent final rule). This stay will provide us additional time to complete our analysis of the petitions for reconsideration and decide whether the new test procedure should be amended. The agency is also amending the definition of “windshield trim” in the manner announced in the preamble, but not reflected in the regulatory text, of the April 1999 final rule.
This rule is effective Janaury 31, 2000.
In preparing a petition for reconsideration, you should refer to the docket and notice number of this final rule. You should submit the petition to: Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590.
For
For
You may send mail to both of these officials at National Highway Traffic
On April 27, 1999, NHTSA published a final rule relating to the test procedure in Standard No. 216,
The final rule addressed the problem of rounded roofs by specifying a new test procedure for all vehicles except those with certain modified roof configurations. Under the new procedure, the test plate is to be positioned so that the front edge of the plate is 254 mm (10 inches) in front of the forwardmost point of the roof. Positioned in this way, the front edge of the plate will always project slightly forward of the roof instead of contacting it. The rule addressed the problem for vehicles with raised or modified roofs by specifying that if following the new test procedure results in an initial point of contact that is rearward of the front seats, the plate is repositioned so that its rear edge is within 10 mm of the rear of those seats.
The agency received two petitions for reconsideration: one from the Recreation Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA) and another from Ford Motor Company (Ford). Both petitions suggested that the new test procedure creates problems for manufacturers of conversion vans with raised or altered roofs.
RVIA stated that following the new test procedure causes the rear edge of the test plate to significantly load the roof over the front seat areas. RVIA believed that as a consequence, this testing “will not realistically load the roof over the front seat area as intended.” RVIA suggested several approaches that petitioner believed would avoid edge loading, including two ways of repositioning the test plate. The first was by moving the plate 700 mm (about 27 inches) more rearward than that specified in the April 1999 final rule. The second was by increasing the longitudinal angle of the test device from 5 degrees up to 30 degrees following repositioning of the test device. RVIA also requested that one additional year of leadtime be provided, regardless of whether we grant or deny its petition.
By letter dated November 12, 1999, RVIA informed NHTSA that some of its members have been forced to cease production of conversion vans with raised roofs because they are unable to demonstrate compliance with Standard No. 216 using the new test procedure. Petitioner reiterated its view that the new test procedure can result in the rear edge of the test plate slicing through a raised roof. The petitioner stated that the former procedure did not normally result in such cutting by edge contact. Petitioner asked that until we answer its petition for reconsideration, we should extend the effective date of the April 1999 final rule and should allow manufacturers of conversion vehicles with raised roofs to use the former test procedure.
Ford also indicated that it believes the new test procedure can result in rear edge loading, particularly for raised or altered roof vehicles. Ford stated that “the influence of rear edge loading will have an increasingly dramatic affect on the test results as the steepness of the sloped transition between the raised roof and the lower roof is increased.” Ford also believes that the procedure is not objective. This is because the procedure uses the position of the test plate's initial contact point to the roof to determine whether to reposition the plate. Ford believes that a procedure that depends on a determination of the initial contact point is subject to variability and reproducibility problems.
The petition from Ford also asked that the definition of “windshield trim” be consistent with that used in Standard No. 201.
We are reviewing and analyzing the petitions for reconsideration from RVIA and Ford. We expect to complete our analysis of the issues in the near future. However, the new test procedure has become effective and has reportedly caused some manufacturers of altered or raised roof vehicles to cease producing vehicles, pending our resolution of the issues raised in the RVIA petition. Many of these manufacturers are small businesses. We agree with RVIA that we should allow optional use of the former test procedure for an interim period, pending our decision on the petitions. Accordingly, we are republishing (with new section numbers and a redesignated figure number) the original language of the former test procedure. We are permitting the use of the former test procedure or the new test procedure for multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks and buses with raised or altered roofs manufactured on or after October 25, 1999 and before October 25, 2000. This will permit us to complete our analysis of and take action on the petitions prior to a date on which the former test procedure ceases to be available.
With regard to the requested change to the definition of “windshield trim,” we acknowledge that the April 1999 final rule did not change the regulatory text to reflect the decision announced in the final rule preamble that the same definition used in Standard No. 201 would be incorporated into Standard No. 216.
NHTSA agrees with Ford that the term “trim” in S7.2(e) describing the proposed orientation of the test device, should be revised to say “windshield trim” because it is more specific. NHTSA also agrees that the term “windshield trim” should be defined consistently with the definition in Standard No. 201. Therefore, the same definition used in Standard No. 201 has been incorporated in this final rule.
NHTSA finds for good cause that it is in the public interest for this rule to become effective upon publication. RVIA states that some manufacturers, primarily small businesses, of vehicles with raised or altered roofs are unable to certify the compliance of their vehicles to Standard No. 216 using the test procedure adopted in the April 1999 final rule. That procedure was adopted because the agency believed to be more suitable for testing vehicles with raised or altered roofs. The agency did not intend to cause vehicles that formerly met Standard No. 216 when tested using the former test procedures to no longer meet the standard when
This document was not reviewed under Executive Order 12866,
NHTSA has also considered the impacts of this document under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (beginning at 5 U.S.C. § 601). I certify that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The following is NHTSA's statement providing the factual basis for the certification (5 U.S.C. § 605(b)). This final rule primarily affects manufacturers of truck, buses and multipurpose passenger vehicles with raised or altered roofs. It applies to a substantial number of van conversion shops, which we presume are small businesses. This rule will not have a significant economic impact. Conversion shops are already responsible for certifying compliance with Standard No. 216 if they make conversions affecting the roof structure. The rule does not impose any new requirements, but instead permits manufacturers to continue to test their vehicles as they had been testing prior to the effective date of the April 1999 rule. This rule will not have any effect on the price of new vehicles purchased by small entities.
NHTSA has analyzed this rule in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-511). There are no requirements for information collection associated with this rule.
NHTSA has analyzed this rule in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in E.O. 13132, and has determined that this rule will not establish policies with federalism implications.
This rule will not have any retroactive effect. Under 49 U.S.C. 30103, whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in effect, a State may not adopt or maintain a safety standard applicable to the same aspect of performance which is not identical to the Federal standard, except to the extent that the state requirement imposes a higher level of performance and applies only to vehicles procured for the State's use. 49 U.S.C. 30161 sets forth a procedure for judicial review of final rules establishing, amending or revoking Federal motor vehicle safety standards. That section does not require submission of a petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court.
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: (1) is determined to be “economically significant” as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental, health or safety risk that NHTSA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by us.
This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866, and does not have a disproportionate effect on children.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the cost, benefits and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by state, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually. This final rule does not meet the definition of Federal mandate because this rule simply adds a compliance alternative for one year. In no case will annual expenditures exceed the $100 million threshold.
Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles.
In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR Part 571 is amended as follows:
49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
a. by revising the definition of “windshield trim” in S4 and revising S5; and,
b. by adding S5.1, S8 through S8.4, and Figure 2 at the end of the section.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
S4. Definitions.
S5.
S5.1 For multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks and buses that have a raised roof or altered roof, manufacturers have the option of using the test procedures of S8 instead of the procedures of S7 until October 25, 2000. The option of using the test procedures of S8 ceases to be available on that date.
S8
S8.1 Place the sills or the chassis frame of the vehicle on a rigid horizontal surface, fix the vehicle rigidly in position, close all windows, close and lock all doors, and secure any convertible top or removable roof structure in place over the passenger compartment.
S8.2 Orient the test device as shown in Figure 2, so that—
(a) Its longitudinal axis is at a forward angle (side view) of 5° below the horizontal, and is parallel to the vertical plane through the vehicle's longitudinal centerline;
(b) Its lateral axis is at a lateral outboard angle, in the front view projection, of 25° below the horizontal;
(c) Its lower surface is tangent to the surface of the vehicle; and
(d) The initial contact point, or center of the initial contact area, is on the longitudinal centerline of the lower surface of the test device and 254 millimeters from the forwardmost point of that centerline.
S8.3 Apply force in a downward direction perpendicular to the lower surface of the test device at a rate of not more than 13 millimeters per second until reaching a force in Newtons of 1
S8.4 Measure the distance that the test device moves,
Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
Proposed rule.
This rule invites comments on increasing the desirable carryout used to compute the yearly trade demand for raisins covered under the Federal marketing order for California raisins (order). The order regulates the handling of raisins produced from grapes grown in California and is administered locally by the Raisin Administrative Committee (Committee). This action would ultimately make more raisins available to handlers, especially for immediate use early in the season, and would allow desirable carryout to more accurately reflect actual carryout inventory.
Comments must be received by March 31, 2000.
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this proposal. Comments must be sent to the Docket Clerk, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, room 2525-S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456; Fax: (202) 720-5698; or E-mail: moab.docketclerk@usda.gov. All comments should reference the docket number and the date and page number of this issue of the
Maureen T. Pello, Marketing Specialist, California Marketing Field Office, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 2202 Monterey Street, suite 102B, Fresno, California 93721; telephone: (559) 487-5901, Fax: (559) 487-5906; or George Kelhart, Technical Advisor, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, room 2525-S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456; telephone: (202) 720-2491, or Fax: (202) 720-5698.
Small businesses may request information on complying with this regulation by contacting Jay Guerber, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room 2525-S, Washington, DC 20090-6456; telephone (202) 720-2491; Fax: (202) 720-5698; or E-mail: Jay.Guerber@usda.gov.
This proposal is issued under Marketing Agreement and Order No. 989 (7 CFR part 989), both as amended, regulating the handling of raisins produced from grapes grown in California, hereinafter referred to as the “order.” The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.”
The Department of Agriculture (Department) is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive Order 12866.
This proposal has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect. This rule will not preempt any State or local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this rule.
The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with the Secretary a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing, the Secretary would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction in equity to review the Secretary's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.
This rule invites comments on increasing the desirable carryout used to compute the yearly trade demand for raisins regulated under the order. Trade demand is computed based on a formula specified in the order, and is used to determine volume regulation percentages for each crop year, if necessary. Desirable carryout, one factor in this formula, is the amount of tonnage from the prior crop year needed during the first part of the next crop year to meet market needs, before new crop raisins are available. This rule would increase the desirable carryout from 2
The order provides authority for volume regulation designed to promote orderly marketing conditions, stabilize prices and supplies, and improve producer returns. When volume regulation is in effect, a certain percentage of the California raisin crop may be sold by handlers to any market (free tonnage) while the remaining percentage must be held by handlers in a reserve pool (reserve) for the account of the Committee. Reserve raisins are disposed of through certain programs authorized under the order. For instance, reserve raisins may be sold by the Committee to handlers for free use or to replace part of the free tonnage raisins they exported; used in diversion programs; carried over as a hedge against a short crop the following year; or disposed of in other outlets not competitive with those for free tonnage raisins, such as government purchase, distilleries, or animal feed. Funds generated from sales of reserve raisins are also used to support handler sales to export markets. Net proceeds from sales of reserve raisins are ultimately distributed to the reserve pool's equity holders, primarily producers.
Section 989.54 of the order prescribes procedures to be followed in establishing volume regulation and includes methodology used to calculate volume regulation percentages. Trade
At one time, § 989.54(a) also specified actual tonnages for desirable carryout for each varietal type regulated. However, in 1989, these tonnages were suspended from the order, and flexibility was added so that the Committee could adopt a formula for desirable carryout in the order's rules and regulations. The formula has allowed the Committee to periodically adjust the desirable carryout to better reflect changes in each season's marketing conditions.
The formula for desirable carryout has been specified since 1989 in § 989.154. Initially, the formula was established so that desirable carryout was based on shipments for the first 3 months of the prior crop year—August, September, and October (the crop year runs from August 1 through July 31). This amount was gradually reduced to 2
In 1998, the Committee determined that, because of the reduced desirable carryout, not enough raisins were being made available for growth. Thus, the desirable carryout was increased to 2
The Committee would like to continue to bring the desirable carryout in line with handlers' actual inventory at the end of a crop year. Desirable carryout has averaged 63,364 tons at 2 months, 71,203 tons at 2
Thus, the Committee met on November 10, 1999, and recommended increasing the desirable carryout to a rolling average of 3 months of shipments (August, September, and October) over the past 5 years, dropping the high and low figures. If this formula would have been used for the current crop year (1999-2000), the desirable carryout would have equaled 94,083 tons as compared to the current 73,809 tons. The 94,083-ton figure would have thus been much closer to the actual inventory of 102,452 tons, and closer to the 5-year average level of shipments for August, September, and October of 94,147 tons. The following table illustrates this computation.
Finally, as with the 1998-99 increase in the formula, this action would result in a higher free tonnage percentage which would make more raisins available to handlers, especially for immediate use early in the season when supplies can be tight. A higher free tonnage percentage may also improve early season returns to producers (producers are paid an established field price for their free tonnage).
Much of the discussion at the Committee's meeting concerned the desirable carryout of Natural (sun-dried) Seedless raisins (Naturals). Naturals are the major commercial varietal type of raisin produced in California. With the exception of the 1998-99 crop year, volume regulation has been implemented for Naturals for the past several seasons. However, the Committee also believes that the increase in desirable carryout should apply to the other varietal types of raisins covered under the order.
The Committee's vote on this action was 24 in favor and 13 opposed. The no votes were primarily from members who favored a higher desirable carryout.
After much deliberation, the majority of Committee members supported basing desirable carryout on a rolling average of 3 months of shipments over the past 5 years, dropping the high and low figures. Thus, paragraph (a) in § 989.154 is proposed to be modified accordingly.
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact of this action on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this initial regulatory flexibility analysis.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf. Thus, both statutes have small entity orientation and compatibility.
There are approximately 20 handlers of California raisins who are subject to regulation under the order and approximately 4,500 raisin producers in the regulated area. Small agricultural service firms have been defined by the Small Business Administration (13 CFR 121.601) as those having annual receipts of less than $5,000,000, and small agricultural producers are defined as those having annual receipts of less than $500,000. Thirteen of the 20 handlers subject to regulation have annual sales estimated to be at least $5,000,000, and the remaining 7 handlers have sales less
This proposal would increase the desirable carryout used to compute the yearly trade demand for raisins regulated under the order. Trade demand is computed based on a formula specified under § 989.54(a) of the order. It is also part of another formula used to determine volume regulation percentages for each crop year, if necessary. Desirable carryout, one factor in this formula, is the amount of tonnage from the prior crop year needed during the first part of the succeeding crop year to meet market needs, before new crop raisins are available for shipment. This rule would increase the desirable carryout specified in paragraph (a) of § 989.154 from 2
The proposed desirable carryout level would apply uniformly to all handlers in the industry, whether small or large, and there would be no known additional costs incurred by small handlers. As previously mentioned, increasing the desirable carryout would increase the trade demand and free tonnage percentage which would make more raisins available to handlers early in the season. A higher free tonnage percentage may also improve early season returns to producers (producers are paid an established field price for their free tonnage).
The Committee considered a number of alternatives to the 3-month rolling shipment average in the desirable carryout level. The Committee has an appointed subcommittee which periodically holds public meetings to discuss changes to the order and other issues. The subcommittee met on November 9, 1999, and discussed desirable carryout. All of the subcommittee members agreed with increasing the desirable carryout and considered a number of alternatives. Options considered include: Basing desirable carryout on a 5-year rolling average of actual carryout inventory; an average of 3 months of prior year's shipments; or a rolling average of 3 months of shipments over the past 5 years, dropping the high and low figures. The subcommittee ultimately recommended to the full Committee that desirable carryout be based on a 5-year rolling average of actual carryout inventory.
At the Committee meeting on November 10, 1999, these options were again reviewed. After much discussion, the majority of Committee members agreed that desirable carryout should be based on shipments, not actual carryout inventory. Most Committee members concurred that basing desirable carryout on actual carryout inventory could create problems if handlers carried out large inventories. In addition, most members believed that shipments are driven by market demand, and should thus continue to be the basis for desirable carryout. The Committee ultimately recommended that the desirable carryout be based on a rolling average of 3 months of shipments for the past 5 years, dropping the high and low figures.
This rule would not impose any additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large raisin handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies. Finally, the Department has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or conflict with this rule.
In addition, the Committee's subcommittee meeting on November 9, 1999, and the Committee meeting on November 10, 1999, where this action was deliberated, were public meetings widely publicized throughout the raisin industry. All interested persons were invited to attend the meetings and participate in the industry's deliberations. Finally, all interested persons are invited to submit information on the regulatory and informational impacts of this action on small businesses.
A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at the following web site: http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/moab.html. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Jay Guerber at the previously mentioned address in the
A 60-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to respond to this proposal. All written comments timely received will be considered before a final determination is made on this matter.
Grapes, Marketing agreements, Raisins, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 989 is proposed to be amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 989 continues to read as follows:
7 U.S.C. 601-674.
2. Section 989.154 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
(a)
Securities and Exchange Commission.
Proposed rule.
The Commission is proposing to reposition certain schedule information currently required under Rule 12-09 of Regulation S-X within a new Item 302(c) of Regulation S-K to specify the disclosures to be provided by registrants concerning changes in valuation and loss accrual accounts. The Commission also is proposing to add another new Item 302(d) of Regulation S-K to elicit certain information concerning tangible and intangible long-lived assets and related accumulated depreciation, depletion, and amortization. A new Item 8C also would be added to the recently revised Form 20-F. The rule proposals are intended to provide investors with more transparent, better detailed disclosures
Comments should be received by April 17, 2000.
Please send three copies of your comment letter to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549-0609. Interested persons also may submit comments electronically at the following e-mail address:
John W. Albert, Associate Chief Accountant, or Richard L. Rodgers, Professional Accounting Fellow, Office of the Chief Accountant, at (202) 942-4400, or Louise M. Dorsey, Assistant Chief Accountant, Division of Corporation Finance, at (202) 942-2960, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549-0609.
The Commission is proposing to reposition certain schedule information currently required under Rule 12-09 of Regulation S-X
Many participants in and observers of the financial reporting process, including the Commission, have noted an apparent increase in abusive “earnings management” by public companies.
Problems attributable to lack a transparency noted by observers of the financial reporting process include, but are not limited to:
• Failure to comply with the disclosure requirements for changes in accrued liabilities for certain costs to exit an activity during periods subsequent to the initial charge;
• Grouping dissimilar items into an aggregated classification;
• Recurring “nonrecurring” charges;
• Inadequate disclosure of changes in estimates and in underlying assumptions during the period of change;
• Inconsistent application of SEC required disclosures of valuation and loss accruals, and
• Insufficient information about expected useful lives, changes in useful lives, and salvage values of long-lived assets.
The proposed amendments would create a new Item 302(c) of Regulation S-K to clarify and expand the supplemental disclosure requirements concerning activity involving valuation and loss accrual accounts so as to improve the transparency of financial reporting by registrants. The proposed requirements are patterned after Rule 12-09 of Regulation S-X which currently requires schedule disclosure of activity in an entity's valuation and qualifying accounts and reserves. The schedule (Schedule II) is structured to show beginning and ending account balances as well as activity, including any adjustments, during the year for individually significant valuation and qualifying accounts and reserves. However, compliance with the schedule requirements appears to be mixed, possibly due to a lack of general agreement as to what constitutes a valuation or reserve account. Also, diversity in practice has resulted from varying approaches to combining individually insignificant account balances.
The Financial Accounting Standards Board's Concepts Statements define a valuation account as a separate item that reduces or increases the carrying amount of an asset or liability. Examples cited include an estimate of uncollectible amounts that reduces receivables to the amount expected to be collected, or a premium on a bond receivable that increases the receivable to its amortized cost or present value. Valuation accounts are part of the asset or liability to which they relate and are neither assets nor liabilities in their own right.
In addition to detailed disclosures concerning valuation and qualifying accounts, Schedule II also currently requires disclosure of activity concerning balances in “reserve” accounts. Because the term “reserve” is
To reduce the existing diversity in practice and provide a more “level playing field,” proposed Item 302(c) sets forth a list of commonly reported loss accrual and/or valuation accounts that the Commission would expect registrants to present within that Item. The list, which was extracted from the SEC reporting guidelines of certain major accounting firms, is suggestive rather than all-inclusive and includes the following accounts:
Consistent with existing Rule 12-09 of Regulation S-X, the information called for under proposed Item 302(c) must be provided for each period for which an audited income statement is required. Consistent with the Item's income-statement focus, registrants must focus on income statement measures, such as effects on the individual line item, operating income (loss), net earnings (loss), and earnings trends, in making assessments of materiality of particular valuation and loss accrual accounts for purposes of presenting the relevant data.
Certain detailed disclosures about activity in a specific valuation and loss accrual account are required under existing generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). For example, disclosure of the net change in the valuation allowance recognized for deferred tax assets is required by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 109,
The proposed rules would reposition the required disclosures about activity in a registrant's valuation and loss accrual accounts currently furnished in a schedule to a separate item within the section of Regulation S-K captioned,
Although the proposed repositioning of the valuation and loss accrual account activity disclosures would remove these disclosures from explicit coverage in the auditors' report, a registrant's auditors would continue to have certain professional responsibilities resulting from association with these disclosures. Statement on Auditing Standards No. (SAS) 8, “Other Information in Documents Containing Audited Financial Statements,” requires the auditor to read other information, such as the supplementary financial information about valuation and loan loss account activity, in a document containing audited financial statements and consider whether such information is materially inconsistent with information appearing in the financial statements. In the event that the auditor discovers a material inconsistency, compliance with SAS 8 would require that the auditor determine whether the financial statements, the auditor's report, or both should be revised.
The Commission also is proposing to add a new Item 302(d) to provide information concerning property, plant, and equipment and related accumulated depreciation, depletion, and amortization. The proposed disclosure would be similar to the schedule information previously required under Rules 12-06 and 12-07 of Regulation S-X. Prior to 1995, registrants were required to provide detailed schedules of property, plant, and equipment and related accumulated depreciation, depletion, and amortization in cases where the property, plant, and equipment account exceeded 25 percent of total assets. Activity disclosed through the schedules included additions, retirements, and other changes in each major fixed asset account. These schedule requirements were rescinded through the Commission's issuance of Financial Reporting Release 44.
Since the issuance of Financial Reporting Release 44, financial analysts have advised the Commission staff that the rescission of the schedule requirements has resulted in a loss of useful information about depreciation methods, useful lives, and salvage values of long-lived assets. Analysts contend that this loss of information has hindered their ability to evaluate management's capital allocation decisions and to estimate future depreciation charges.
In eliminating these schedule requirements, Financial Reporting Release 44 noted the existence of certain overlapping requirements under GAAP, principally Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 12, calling for certain disclosures about major components of fixed assets and related accumulated depreciation and amortization account balances.
Financial statement users have expressed frustration due to an inability to recreate the detailed information about activity in specific fixed asset accounts that formerly was provided under Rules 12-06 and 12-07 of Regulation S-X. Experience has shown that compliance with the more general requirements imposed under APB Opinion 12 may not provide all detailed disclosures pertinent to an analysis of changes in fixed assets, and may have contributed to some lack of transparency in financial statements of public companies. Accordingly, the Commission is proposing to reinstate the informational requirements formerly called for under Rules 12-06 and 12-07 and to add disclosures about salvage values. The proposed disclosures would be required to support the account balances of any long-lived asset separately captioned on the balance sheet.
The Commission staff has noted a similar lack of specificity in the requirements under GAAP for disclosures concerning intangible assets. APB Opinion No. 17,
Therefore, to provide additional analytical data necessary to evaluate the effects of varying amortization periods for intangible assets, the Commission also is proposing to include activity involving intangible assets in new Item 302(d). Furthermore, in order to provide more useful analytical data, the proposed Item would require disclosure about the registrant's goodwill account. In circumstances where the account balance results from different business acquisitions with varying useful lives, the disclosure would need to show the amount of goodwill in the aggregate as well as the account balance of each component assigned a different estimated useful life. However, consistent with the proposed treatment of valuation and loss accrual account activity, detailed information about activity in a particular property, plant, equipment, and intangible asset and related accumulated depreciation, depletion, and amortization account may be omitted if the same information is provided to investors within the notes to financial statements.
In summary, the Commission is proposing amendments to Regulation S-K to specify disclosures of valuation and loss accrual accounts and long-lived assets and related accumulated depreciation, depletion, and amortization in response to problems attributable to a lack of transparency in financial reporting. The proposed disclosures are intended to provide sufficient analytical information so that changes in the amounts and activity in these accounts are transparent to investors.
The Commission is proposing to amend Form 20-F to include the substance of proposed Items 302(c) and (d). Foreign private issuers, therefore, would be required to provide these disclosures.
The Commission is proposing these amendments to clarify and expand certain disclosures to be provided as supplementary financial information. If you would like to submit written comments on the proposals, to suggest additional changes, or to submit comments on other matters that might have an impact on the proposals, we encourage you to do so. Besides the specific questions being asked in this release, we also solicit comments on the usefulness of the proposals to security holders, issuers, and the marketplace at large. We would like comments from the point of view of both bidders and targets, as well as security holders and market professionals involved in the mergers and acquisitions area. We also solicit comments specifically addressing whether these proposed changes adequately provide information that is useful to the analysis of financial statements. We also seek comments about whether other amendments are appropriate for that purpose.
The proposed amendments are based on the assumption that the information to be provided is readily available from each registrant's books and records. The Commission understands that some of the information called for under the proposed rules must be collected for the preparation and audit of a registrant's balance sheet and statement of cash flows. Consequently, we are interested in commentators' views as to whether they agree that the information to be provided under the proposed disclosure requirements already is collected as part of the financial statements preparation and related independent audit process.
The staff also seeks specific comments on the following elements of this rule proposal:
1. Are there other specific loss accrual or valuation accounts that should be added to the list of accounts identified within proposed Item 302(c)?
2. Should specific percentage tests be used to trigger specific account disclosures within the proposed rules? For example, should disclosure of loss accrual account activity be required only when the balance sheet item and change during the period exceeds a certain pre-established numerical
3. Should the placement of the proposed data be moved within MD&A or to some other section of the filing to enhance the prominence of the disclosures?
4. Should presentation of the proposed data be limited to the Form 10-K?
5. Should the disclosure requirements be restricted to those registrants that exceed a certain size or meet some other threshold? If so, what would be the appropriate threshold?
6. Are there circumstances where registrants may appropriately exclude disclosure about loss accruals related to litigation because of concerns about confidentiality while still conforming with GAAP? If so, please describe such circumstances in detail.
7. Should the disclosures concerning valuation and loss accrual account activity be required when interim financial statements are presented?
8. Should the disclosures concerning changes in property, plant, equipment, and intangible assets and related accumulated depreciation, depletion, and amortization be required when interim financial statements are presented?
Please send three copies of your comment letter to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, US Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549. Interested persons also may submit comments electronically at the following e-mail address: rule-comments@sec.gov. All comment letters should refer to File No. S7-03-00; please include this file number in the subject line if you use e-mail. Anyone can inspect and copy the comment letters in our public reference room at 450 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549. We will post electronically submitted comment letters on our Internet Web Site (www.sec.gov).
The proposals contain “collection of information” requirements within the meaning of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Our staff has submitted the proposals for review to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in accordance with the PRA. The title of the affected information collection is “Supplementary Financial Information.” An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. The proposals would revise a current collection of information, Regulation S-K, which currently is assigned OMB Control Number 3235-0071.
The proposals are designed to elicit improved disclosures about (1) Registrants' property, plant, equipment and intangible assets, (2) Allowances for accumulated depreciation, depletion, and amortization of property, plant, equipment, and intangible assets, and (3) Valuation and loss accrual accounts. The purpose of these disclosures is to improve investors' understanding of how these items impact the numbers in the financial statements and to reduce the potential for abuse from establishing inappropriate amounts of valuation and loss accrual accounts and similar items. The information needed for preparation of these disclosures should be readily available from the registrant's books and records. Also, as discussed elsewhere in this release, small business issuers would not be impacted by the proposals.
The likely respondents to the collection of information request include those currently filing Forms 10-K, 10, 20-F, and F-1. Registrants not eligible for incorporation by reference filing under Forms S-4 and F-4 are required to present schedule information. The information typically would be collected once a year in the Form 10-K and then incorporated by reference into other forms as appropriate. Based on a sample of Forms 10-K filed by registrants currently presenting valuation and qualifying account and reserve disclosures under Schedule II, it is estimated that approximately 2,900 respondents would be required to include the disclosures proposed under Item 302(c) in their Form 10-K filings.
The staff has received input from a diversified, multi-divisional registrant estimating that the average burden hours to begin collecting the appropriate records and report the proposed disclosures about valuation and loss accrual account activity each year would be 247 hours per registrant but that the annual, recurring burden would be only 17 hours per registrant. The cost estimates were based on the company's previous experience in complying with the requirements of Schedule II. Extending the cost burden estimates to the approximately 2,900 registrants currently estimated to be filing valuation and qualifying account schedule data after initial start up burdens results in an estimated total recurring, annual burden of 49,300 hours.
The same diversified, multi-divisional registrant also provided input concerning the estimated burden hours involved in beginning to comply with proposed Item 302(d) concerning changes in long-lived assets and related accumulated depreciation, depletion, and amortization. It is estimated that 133 burden hours per registrant would be required initially to comply with the proposed requirements under Item 302(d) but that the annual recurring burden would be approximately only 35 hours per registrant. Assuming that approximately the same number of SEC registrants required to furnish valuation and loss accrual account activity also would be impacted by the proposed long-lived asset disclosures (approximately 2,900), the total recurring annual burden would approximate 101,500 hours.
Preparing and disclosing the Supplementary Financial Information will be mandatory to the extent a registrant must file with the Commission audited annual financial statements in accordance with Regulation S-X, 17 CFR 210, and the registrant has had significant activity involving the information required by the proposed new items in Regulation S-K. The supplementary data will be public information.
Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. § 3506(c)(2)(B), the Commission solicits comments on (i) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (ii) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (iii) Whether there are ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) Whether there are ways to minimize the burden of collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Persons wishing to submit comments on the collection of information requirements should direct them to the Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503, and should also send a copy of their comments to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, US Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549-0609, with reference to File No. S7-03-00. The Office of Management and Budget is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication. Requests for materials submitted to OMB by the
The new proposals are intended to benefit investors by providing a clearer picture of how registrants may be using valuation and loss accrual accounts and estimates of the useful lives and salvage values assigned to assets to impact the amounts reported in their financial statements. Analysts have suggested, and we agree, that shedding more sunlight on these areas will assist investors in analyzing these items and discourage inappropriate “earnings management,” thus enhancing the protection of investors. We are unable to quantify this benefit.
The new disclosures will require registrants to prepare two new disclosure items, one of which calls for information that essentially is being provided in an existing schedule. Registrants will face increased costs associated with the preparation and printing of these disclosures; however, because the information should be readily available from each registrant's books and records, we do not believe these costs would be significant. In addition, small business issuers under Regulation S-B and small issuers qualifying for the exemption under Regulation A are not required currently to provide this information and would not be impacted by the proposals. For the purposes of the PRA, we estimate that, after initial start up costs, the annual average hourly burden to comply with proposed Items 302(c) and (d) would be 52 hours. Assuming costs of $125 per hour and 2,900 registrants, we estimate the average annual paperwork burden as $18,850,000. We request comment on the reasonableness of these assumptions. We solicit comment on these estimates.
The Commission requests data to quantify the costs and the value of the benefits identified. The Commission also solicits estimates and views regarding the costs and benefits for particular types of market participants, as well as any other costs or benefits that may result from the adoption of the proposed rules. In particular, we request data and analysis on whether the new proposal would result in a major increase in costs or prices for consumers or individual industries, or significant adverse effects on competition, investment, productivity, innovation, or small business. Specifically:
1. What are the expected increases in costs for:
a. Internal financial reporting costs for the necessary data accumulation and preparation?
b. Printing costs?
c. Other costs? (please explain)
2. What would be the expected impact on costs in response to 1. above if disclosure of valuation and loss accrual account activity was required on a quarterly basis?
3. What are the expected cost savings from no longer requiring schedule disclosure of valuation and loss accrual account activity subject to audit?
The Commission also is interested in the views of users of financial information as to any other costs or benefits that would result from adoption of the proposed disclosures.
Commentators are requested to provide empirical data to support their views.
For purposes of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA),
Section 23(a)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires the Commission, in adopting rules under the Act, to consider the anti-competitive effects of any rule it adopts.
Section 2(b) of the Securities Act of 1933
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
The Commission proposes to amend the “Codification of Financial Reporting Policies” announced in the Financial Reporting Release No. 1 (April 15, 1982) [47 FR 21028] to:
1. Delete Section 209, Property, Plant, and Equipment Disclosure Requirements.
2. Add new Section 217, Valuation and Loss Accrual Accounts to include the fourth and fifth paragraphs under Section II of this release captioned, Proposed Rule Changes.
The Codification is a separate publication of the Commission. It will not be published in the Code of Federal Regulations.
The Commission proposes the rule changes explained in this release pursuant to Sections 6,7,8,10 and 19(a) of the Securities Act and Sections 3,10A,12,13,14,15(d) and 23(a) of the Exchange Act.
Accounting, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.
Accordingly, the Commission proposes to amend Title 17, Chapter II of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 210 continues to read as follows:
15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s, 77z-2, 77aa(25), 77aa(26), 78j-1, 78
2. By amending § 210.5-04 as follows:
a. By revising paragraph (a)(1);
b. Removing paragraph (a)(2);
c. Redesignating paragraph (a)(3) as (a)(2); and
d. Removing and reserving Schedule II to read as follows:
(a) * * *
(l) The schedule specified in this section as Schedule III shall be filed as of the date of the most recent audited balance sheet for each person or group.
3. By amending § 210.7-05 as follows:
a. By revising paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3); and
b. Removing and reserving Schedule V to read as follows:
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(2) Schedule IV specified in this section shall be filed for each period for which an audited income statement is required to be filed.
(3) Schedules II and III in this section shall be filed as of the date and for the periods specified in the schedule.
The authority citation for part 229 continues to read in part as follows:
15 U.S.C. 77e, 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77k, 77s, 77z-2, 77aa(25), 77aa(26), 77ddd, 77eee, 77ggg, 77hhh, 77iii, 77jjj, 77nnn, 77sss, 78c, 78i, 78j, 78
5. By amending § 229.302 by adding paragraphs(c) and (d) to read as follows:
(c) Information about changes in valuation and loss accrual accounts. Registrants shall provide the following information concerning changes in each major class of valuation or loss accrual account (estimated liabilities) for each period for which an audited income statement is required. Major classes of valuation or loss accrual accounts shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, allowance for doubtful accounts or notes receivables; allowance for sales returns, discounts and contractual allowances; unamortized discount or premium; excess of estimated costs over revenues on contracts (loss contracts); inventory valuation allowance; valuation allowance for deferred tax assets; liabilities for exit and employee termination costs related to a restructuring or a business combination; liabilities for costs of discontinued operations; liabilities for environmental costs; contingent income and franchise tax liabilities recorded pursuant to FASB Statement 5; product warranty liabilities; and probable losses from pending litigation.
2. Describe the nature of any deductions or additions other than those charged to expense.
3. To the extent that a major class of valuation or loss accrual account is composed of varying elements (
4. Describe the nature of any changes in the assumptions used in estimating the amount of a valuation or loss accrual account that has a material effect on the change in the valuation or loss accrual account.
5. Registrants are reminded that if no accrual is made for a loss contingency because all of the conditions specified in FASB Statement 5 have not been met, or if an exposure to loss exists in excess of the recorded amounts, paragraph 10 of that standard requires that disclosure be provided in the financial statements when there is at least a reasonable possibility that a loss or additional loss has been incurred.
6. Use of an inventory valuation allowance to reflect a writedown of inventory to the lower of cost or market at the close of a fiscal period creates a new cost basis that cannot be marked up based on subsequent changes in market.
(d)
2. Disclose the method of depreciation, depletion, or amortization,
3. Provide an explanation as to the nature of any additions to long-lived asset accounts that are other than at cost.
4. Provide an explanation if additions to accumulated depreciation, depletion, and amortization accounts are charged against accounts other than expenses in the income statement.
5. Provide an explanation if the deduction from the asset and related allowance accounts related to assets sold or retired during the period is at an amount other than cost.
6. Provide an explanation for any significant and unusual asset additions, abandonments, retirements, or other adjustments (
6. The authority citation for Part 249 continues to read in part as follows:
15 U.S.C. 78a,
7. By amending Form 20-F (referenced in § 249.220f) as effective September 30, 2000, by adding Item 8C in Part I and removing the reference “§ 210.12-09,” in paragraph (a) of Item 17, Part IV to read as follows:
or
or
(a)
2. Describe the nature of any deductions or additions other than those charged to expense.
3. To the extent that a major class of valuation or loss accrual account is composed of varying elements (
4. Describe the nature of any changes in the assumptions used in estimating the amount of a valuation or loss accrual account that has a material effect on the change in the valuation or loss accrual account.
(b)
2. Disclose the method of depreciation, depletion, or amortization, estimated useful lives, and salvage values for each long-lived asset account. Disclosure of estimated useful lives may be provided in a range or weighted average if there is significant variance within the asset group. Separately present goodwill and corresponding accumulated amortization account balances for each significantly different useful life group.
3. Provide an explanation as to the nature of any additions to long-lived
4. Provide an explanation if additions to accumulated depreciation, depletion, and amortization accounts are charged against accounts other than expenses in the income statement.
5. Provided an explanation if the deduction from the asset and related allowance accounts related to assets sold or retired during the period is at an amount other than cost.
6. Provide an explanation for any significant and unusual asset additions, abandonments, retirements, or other adjustments (
By the Commission.
I, Arthur Levitt, Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, hereby certify, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 605(b), that the proposed amendments to rules contained in Securities Act Release No. 7793, if adopted, will not have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The proposals will not be applicable to small business issues under Regulation S-B or to small issuers using Regulation A. In addition, information to be included in the proposed disclosures should be readily available from registrants' books and records. Accordingly, the proposed schedules and amendments to rules would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
Notice of availability and request for comments.
We are advising the public that an environmental assessment has been prepared by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service relative to a proposed field test program for the control of the Asian longhorned beetle, Anoplophora glabripennis (Motschulsky). The environmental assessment documents our review and analysis of environmental impacts associated with the proposed field test program. We are making this environmental assessment available to the public for review and comment.
We will consider all comments that we receive by March 31, 2000.
Please send your comment and three copies to:Docket No. 99-093-1,Regulatory Analysis and Development,PPD, APHIS,Suite 3C03,4700 River Road, Unit 118,Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.
Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. 99-093-1.
You may read any comments that we receive on this environmental assessment in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 690-2817 before coming.
APHIS documents published in the
Mr. Ron Milberg, Operations Officer, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 135, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236; (301) 734-5255.
The Asian longhorned beetle,
The Asian longhorned beetle regulations (7 CFR 301.51-1 through 301.51.9) restrict the interstate movement of regulated articles from quarantined areas to prevent the artificial spread of Asian longhorned beetle to noninfested areas of the United States. Portions of New York City and Nassau and Suffolk Counties in the State of New York and portions of the city of Chicago, Du Page County, and the village of Summit in the State of Illinois are already designated as quarantined areas.
APHIS' current Asian longhorned beetle eradication activities are limited to the removal and destruction of trees that are determined to be infested with Asian longhorned beetle. Because the removal of host trees is time consuming and expensive, APHIS is investigating the use of prophylactic methods to prevent new infestations of healthy trees in the vicinity of infected areas.
APHIS has completed an environmental assessment that considers various methods of prophylactic protection for trees against the harmful effects of the Asian longhorned beetle. Based on our findings, we believe that the most effective prophylactic treatment available for trees appears to be the use of a soil-injected insecticide. Therefore, we are planning to conduct field tests on this method in the spring of 2000 to determine whether it can be a successful and efficient deterrent to the spread of the Asian longhorned beetle.
APHIS' review and analysis of the potential environmental impacts associated with these proposed field tests are documented in detail in an environmental assessment entitled “Asian Longhorned Beetle Field Trial” (October 1999). We are making this environmental assessment available to the public for review and comment. We will consider all comments that we receive by the date listed under the heading
The environmental assessment may be viewed on the Internet at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/ead/alb/html. You may request paper copies of the environmental assessment by calling or writing to the person listed under
The environmental assessment has been prepared in accordance with: (1) The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321
Rural Utilities Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to hold a public meeting and prepare an environmental assessment.
Notice is hereby given that the Rural Utilities Service (RUS), pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321
RUS will conduct a public meeting in an open house forum on Wednesday, February 16, 2000, from 6:30 p.m. until 8:30 p.m., at Delphos Jefferson Senior High School on Route 66 in Delphos, Ohio. All interested parties are invited to attend the meeting.
Bob Quigel, Engineering and Environmental Staff, Rural Utilities Service, at (202) 720-0468. Bob's E-mail address is: bquigel@rus.usda.gov. You can also contact Keith A. Crabtree of NPC at (614) 846-5757. Keith's email address is: kac@buckeyepower.com.
NPC, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Ohio Rural Electric Cooperatives, proposes to construct the natural gas fired electric generation plant at one of two potential sites. One site is located in Van Wert County near Convoy, just southwest of the intersection of Mentzer Road and Shaner Road. The other site is located in Allen County, east of Cairo, north of the Lincoln Highway between Stewart Road and Slabtown Road.
The proposed project will be composed of three gas fired turbine generation units with an output of 170 megawatts each. The entire plant will require approximately 30 acres. No major natural gas pipeline or electric transmission line improvements will be needed at either site beyond the proposed site boundaries. Specific details of the plant will be available at the scoping meeting.
Alternatives to be considered by RUS to constructing the generation facility proposed include: (a) No action, (b) Load management, (c) Purchased power, and (d) An alternative site location.
To be presented at the public scoping meeting will be a siting study and alternative evaluation study prepared by AEP Resources and Dames & Moore for NPC. The siting study and alternative evaluation study are available for public review at RUS in Room 2242, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC, and at the NPC headquarters located at 6677 Busch Boulevard, Columbus, Ohio. This document will also be available at the Lima Public Library, 650 W. Market St., Lima, Ohio (419-228-5113) and it's Cairo Branch, 519 Wall St., Cairo, Ohio (419-641-7744) and at the Brumback Library, 215 W. Main St. in Van Wert, Ohio (419-238-2168) and it's Convoy Branch, 116 E. Tully St., Convoy, Ohio (419-749-4000).
Government agencies, private organizations, and the public are invited to participate in the planning and analysis of the proposed project. Representatives of RUS and NPC will be available at the scoping meeting to discuss RUS' environmental review process, describe the project and alternatives under consideration, discuss the scope of environmental issues to be considered, answer questions, and accept oral and written comments. Written comments will be accepted for at least 30 days after the public scoping meeting.
From information provided in the siting study and alternative evaluation study, input that may be provided by government agencies, private organizations, and the public, NPC will prepare an environmental analysis to be submitted to RUS for review. RUS will use the environmental analysis to determine the significance of the impacts of the project and may adopt it as its environmental assessment of the project. RUS' environmental assessment of the project would be available for review and comment for 30 days.
Should RUS determine, based on the environmental assessment of the project, that the impacts of the construction and operation of the plant would not be significant, it will prepare a finding of no significant impact. Public notification of a finding of no significant impact would be published in the
Any final action by RUS related to the proposed project will be subject to, and contingent upon, compliance with environmental review requirements as prescribed by CEQ and RUS environmental policies and procedures.
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
January 31, 2000.
For Germany: Carrie Blozy or Rick Johnson at (202) 482-0165 and (202) 482-3818, respectively; for Italy, Helen Kramer or Linda Ludwig at (202) 482-0405 and (202) 482-3833, respectively; for Malaysia, Becky Hagen or Rick Johnson at (202) 482-3362 and (202) 482-3818, respectively; for the Philippines, Fred Baker or Robert James at (202) 482-2924 and (202) 482-0649, respectively, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20230.
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”) by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (“URAA”). In addition, unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are references to the provisions codified at 19 CFR part 351 (1999).
On December 29, 1999, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) received a petition on stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings from Germany, Italy, Malaysia and the Philippines filed in proper form by Alloy Piping Products, Inc., Flowline Division, Markovitz Enterprises, Inc., Gerlin, Inc., and Taylor Forge (“petitioners”). On January 6, 2000, the Department requested clarification of certain areas of the petition and received a response on January 10, 2000.
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Act, petitioners allege that imports of stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings from Germany, Italy, Malaysia and the Philippines are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring an industry in the United States.
The Department finds that petitioners filed this petition on behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as defined in sections 771(9)(C) and (D) of the Act and they have demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the antidumping duty investigations they are requesting the Department to initiate (see “Determination of Industry Support for the Petition” below).
For purposes of these investigations, the product covered is certain stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings. Certain stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings (pipe fittings) are under 14 inches in outside diameter (based on nominal pipe size), whether finished or unfinished. The product encompasses all grades of stainless steel and “commodity” and “specialty” fittings. Specifically excluded from the definition are threaded, grooved, and bolted fittings, and fittings made from any material other than stainless steel.
The fittings subject to these investigations are generally designated under specification ASTM A403/A403M, the standard specification for Wrought Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping Fittings, or its foreign equivalents (e.g., DIN or JIS specifications). This specification covers two general classes of fittings, WP and CR, of wrought austenitic stainless steel fittings of seamless and welded construction covered by the latest revision of ANSI B16.9, ANSI B16.11, and ANSI B16.28. Pipe fittings manufactured to specification ASTM A774, or its foreign equivalents, are also covered by these investigations.
These investigations do not apply to cast fittings. Cast austenitic stainless steel pipe fittings are covered by specifications A351/A351M, A743/743M, and A744/A744M.
The stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings subject to these investigations are currently classifiable under subheading 7307.23.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.
During our review of the petition, we discussed the scope with the petitioners to insure that the scope in the petition accurately reflects the product for which they are seeking relief. Moreover, as discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations (62 FR 27323), we are setting aside a period for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all parties to submit such comments by February 1, 2000. Comments should be addressed to Import Administration's Central Record Unit at Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. The period of scope consultations is intended to provide the Department with ample opportunity to consider all comments and consult with parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determination.
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (1) At least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (2) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the “industry” as “the producers of a domestic like product.” Thus, to determine whether the petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (“ITC”), which is responsible for determining whether “the domestic industry” has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product (see section 771(10) of the Act), they do so for different purposes and pursuant to separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department's determination is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may result in different definitions of the domestic like product, such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary to the law.
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as “a product that is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title.” Thus, the reference point from which the domestic like product analysis begins is “the article subject to an investigation,”
In this case, the domestic like product referred to in the petition is the single domestic like product defined in the “Scope of Investigations” section, above. The Department has no basis on the record to find the petition's definition of the domestic like product to be inaccurate. No comments were received regarding this issue. The Department has, therefore, adopted the domestic like product definition set forth in the petition.
Moreover, the Department has determined that the petition and supplemental information to the petition contain adequate evidence of sufficient industry support; therefore, polling was not necessary. (See Attachment to the Initiation Checklist Re: Industry Support, January 18, 2000.) To the best of the Department's knowledge, producers supporting the petition with respect to each of the four countries represent over 50 percent of total production of the domestic like product. Additionally, no person who would qualify as an interested party pursuant to section 771(9)(A), (C), (D), (E) or (F) of the Act has expressed opposition to the petition.
Accordingly, the Department determines that these petitions are filed on behalf of the domestic industry
The following are descriptions of the allegations of sales at less than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to initiate these investigations.
Petitioners relied upon price data (and in the case of Germany, also cost data) contained in confidential market research reports on Germany, Italy, Malaysia and the Philippines. At our request, petitioners arranged for the Department to contact the authors of the reports to verify the accuracy of the data, the methodologies used to collect the data, and the credentials of those gathering the market research. The Department's discussions with the authors of the market research reports are summarized in the following Memoranda to the File on file in the individual country case files in the Central Records Unit, Room B-099 of the Department:
• January 7, 2000, Telephone Call to Market Research Firm Regarding the AD Petition for Antidumping Investigation of Stainless Steel Butt-weld Pipe Fittings from Germany;
• January 7, 2000, Telephone Call to Market Research Firm Regarding the AD Petition for Antidumping Investigation of Stainless Steel Pipe Fittings from Italy;
• January 12, 2000, Telephone Call to Market Research Firm Regarding the AD Petition for Antidumping Investigation of Stainless Steel Pipe Fittings from Malaysia; and
• January 12, 2000, Telephone Call to Market Research Firm Regarding the AD Petition for Antidumping Investigation of Stainless Steel Pipe Fittings from the Philippines.
The Department has checked the methodologies employed by petitioners in calculating export price, constructed export price, normal value, cost and constructed value, and has not found any discrepancies between petitioners' methodologies and the Department's normal practice.
Petitioners identified Buttings Edelstahlrohre GMBH, Hage Fittings GMBH (“Hage”), Kremo-Werke Hermanns GMBH (“Kremo”), Nirobo Metal Verarbeitungs GMBH (“Nirobo”), Uhlig-Rohrbogen GMBH (“Uhlig”), and Wilh. Schulz (“Schulz”) as the known producers and exporters of subject merchandise from Germany to the United States. With respect to home market viability, credible information provided by the foreign market researcher showed that home market sales were over 64 times the volume of exports to the United States in 1998 in the aggregate, and that domestic sales by each of the producers/exporters far exceeded exports to the United States. Therefore, the Department concluded that home market sales were sufficient to form a basis for NV, pursuant to section 773(a)(1)(B)(ii)(II) of the Act.
Petitioners obtained home market prices for Schulz, Hage, Kremo, and Nirobo from foreign market research, contemporaneous with the pricing information used as the basis for constructed export price (“CEP”). However, due to the differences in German and U.S. specifications for subject merchandise, petitioners were unable to obtain any products offered for sale to customers in Germany which are either identical or similar to those sold to the United States. Additionally, as further explained below in the “Initiation of Cost Investigation” section, petitioners provided information demonstrating reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of pipe fittings sold in the home market were made at prices below the fully absorbed cost of production (“COP”), within the meaning of section 773(b) of the Act.
Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists of the cost of manufacturing (“COM”), selling, general, and administrative expenses (“SG&A”), including financial expense, and packing costs. To calculate COP, petitioners based COM on their own production experience, adjusted for known differences between costs incurred to produce stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings in the United States and in Germany using publicly available data (
Based on our analysis, certain of the home market sales reported in the petition were shown to be made at prices below the cost of production (see Initiation of Cost Investigation, below). Therefore, petitioners based NV on the constructed value (“CV”), pursuant to sections 773(a)(4) and 773(e) of the Act. Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the COM, SG&A expenses, packing costs and profit of the merchandise. To calculate the COM, SG&A expenses, and packing costs for CV, petitioners followed the same methodology used to determine COP. We confirmed that this methodology was consistent with the statute. Petitioners also added to CV an amount for profit, pursuant to section 773(e)(2) of the Act. Profit was based upon the aforementioned German producer's financial statements.
Petitioners based CEP on six contemporaneous U.S. sales by Schulz to an unaffiliated purchaser. The terms of sale were f.o.b. Schulz U.S.A.'s (Schulz's subsidiary) warehouse. Petitioners calculated a net U.S. price for each sale by subtracting estimated costs for shipment from the factory in Germany to the port of export in Germany. Also, petitioners subtracted ocean freight and insurance, an amount for import duties based on the 1999 import duty rate of five percent of dutiable value, amounts for the U.S. harbor maintenance fee of 0.125 percent of dutiable value and the U.S. merchandise processing fee of 0.21 percent of dutiable value,
Petitioners estimated dumping margins ranging from 8.35 percent to 76.24 percent. Should the need arise to use as facts available under section 776 of the Act any of this information in our preliminary or final determinations, we may re-examine the information and revise the margin calculations, if appropriate.
As noted above, pursuant to section 773(b) of the Act, petitioners provided specific factual information demonstrating reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales in the German home market were made at prices below the fully absorbed COP and, accordingly, requested that the Department conduct a country-wide sales-below-COP investigation in connection with the requested antidumping investigation for Germany. The Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the URAA, H.R. Doc.
Further, the SAA provides that:
Petitioners identified Bassi Luigi & Co., Coprosider S.p.A, Curvinox, Gam Raccordi S.p.A., Nuova Steelcom S.r.L., Rivit S.p.A., and Vignatti Fitting S.r.L. as the known producers and exporters of the subject merchandise to the United States. Petitioners based NV on Italian home market prices. The foreign market researcher provided prices for sales by Coprosider S.p.A. to unaffiliated customers in Italy contemporaneous with the U.S. sales. With respect to home market viability, credible information provided by the foreign market researcher showed that home market sales were over 46 times the volume of exports to the United States in 1998 in the aggregate, and that domestic sales by each of the producers/exporters far exceeded exports to the United States. Therefore, the Department concluded that home market sales were sufficient to form a basis for NV, pursuant to section 773(a)(1)(B)(ii)(II) of the Act.
Petitioners calculated net prices for sales in Italy by subtracting from the reported gross prices imputed credit expenses, based on the average payment period of 60 days reported by the foreign market researcher and the average lending rate in Italy during the period of investigation (“POI”) of six percent, calculated from rates published in International Financial Statistics. Given that the foreign market researcher reported that the prices did not include delivery, petitioners did not deduct inland freight rates from the reported home market gross prices. In addition, they did not adjust the reported prices for differences in packing costs, adopting the conservative position that packing costs were the same for home market and U.S. sales.
Petitioners converted home market prices quoted in lira per piece to U.S. dollars per piece by using the Euro/U.S. dollar exchange rate in effect multiplied by a fixed conversion rate for Italian lira/Euro during the period in which the U.S. sale occurred. The source for the exchange rates was the Federal Reserve Bulletin.
Petitioners based export price (“EP”) on U.S. price quotes for pipe fittings manufactured by Coprosider offered for sale to an unaffiliated U.S. purchaser during the POI, prior to the date of importation. This information was obtained from a confidential source, attested to by an affidavit. Petitioners selected pipe fittings with specifications commonly exported to the United States. The terms of sale were CIF New Jersey, import duty paid. Petitioners subtracted estimated costs incurred to transport the subject merchandise from the factory to the port of export, as provided by the foreign market researcher. In addition, petitioners deducted a sales discount granted by the importer.
Petitioners estimated the cost of international freight based upon the difference between the CIF and U.S. Customs values reported in the official import statistics for January-September 1999. In addition, petitioners subtracted an amount for import duties based on the 1999 import duty rate of five percent of dutiable value, and amounts for the U.S. harbor maintenance fee of 0.125 percent of dutiable value and the U.S. merchandise processing fee of 0.21 percent of dutiable value. See supplement to petition, dated January 11, 2000.
Petitioners estimated dumping margins ranging from 61.41 percent to 86.88 percent. See supplement to petition dated January 11, 2000. Should the need arise to use, as facts available under section 776 of the Act, any of this information in our preliminary or final determination, we may re-examine the information and revise the margin calculations, if appropriate.
Petitioners identified Amalgamated Industrial Stainless Steel, Schulz Malaysia, and Kanzen Tetsu as the known producers and exporters of the subject merchandise to the United States. Petitioners based NV on Malaysian home market prices. With respect to home market viability, petitioners concluded, based on information provided by the foreign market researcher and attested to by an affidavit, that each of the three companies had home market sales of pipe fittings greater than five percent of each company's respective exports to the United States and, therefore, the volume of home market sales was sufficient to form a basis for NV pursuant to section 773(a)(1)(B)(ii)(II) of the Act. See Declaration of (Foreign Market Researcher) Regarding Sales in Malaysia of Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings, Exhibit 1 of petitioners' January 3, 2000 submission.
The foreign market researcher provided prices for sales to unaffiliated customers in Malaysia. Petitioners calculated net prices for sales in Malaysia by subtracting from the reported gross prices average freight costs and imputed credit expenses, the latter being based on the average payment period of 30 days reported by the foreign market researcher and the average lending rate in Malaysia during the POI of 7.64 percent, calculated from rates published in International Financial Statistics. Because the home market prices were obtained from end users, petitioners also subtracted a distributor mark-up of four percent from the normal value, which was based on foreign market research. Petitioners did not adjust the reported prices for differences in packing costs. See footnote 3, above. Finally, petitioners converted the home market prices from Malaysian Ringgits to U.S. dollars based on the average exchange rate of the month in which the U.S. sale took place, as published in the Federal Reserve Bulletin.
Petitioners based U.S. price (in this case, EP) on sales to an unaffiliated U.S. purchaser by Kanzen Tetsu during the first and second quarters of 1999 prior to the date of importation, as obtained from a confidential source, attested to by an affidavit. The petitioners selected pipe fittings with specifications commonly exported to the United States. The terms of sale were delivered, duty paid, to the U.S. customers. Petitioners subtracted estimated costs
Petitioners estimated the cost of international freight based upon the difference between the CIF and U.S. Customs values reported in the official import statistics for January-September 1999. In addition, petitioners subtracted an amount for import duties based on the 1999 import duty rate of five percent of dutiable value, and amounts for the U.S. harbor maintenance fee of 0.125 percent of dutiable value and the U.S. merchandise processing fee of 0.21 percent of dutiable value. See supplement to petition dated January 10, 2000. Finally, petitioners subtracted a markup included in the reported price, as obtained from a confidential source, attested to by an affidavit.
Petitioners estimated dumping margins ranging from 39.6 to 60.1 percent. Should the need arise to use, as facts available under section 776 of the Act, any of this information in our preliminary or final determinations, we may re-examine the information and revise the margin calculations, if appropriate.
Petitioners identified two Philippine exporters and producers of stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings: Enlin Steel Corporation (“Enlin”) and Tung Fong Industrial Co., Inc. (“Tung Fong”). Petitioners noted that, to the best of their knowledge, these two companies accounted for one hundred percent of the exports of subject merchandise from the Philippines. Petitioners obtained price quotes from Enlin and Tung Fong for stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings offered for sale to customers in the Philippines which were similar to those sold to the United States. Petitioners adjusted these prices for estimated freight costs and a distributor markup of five percent, since the sales prices were obtained from end-users. Petitioners did not calculate an imputed credit expense for the home market sales because the terms of payment were payment before delivery or cash on delivery. In addition, petitioners did not adjust the reported prices for differences in packing costs. See footnote 3, above. Finally, petitioners converted the home market prices from Philippine pesos to U.S. dollars based on the average exchange rate of the month in which the U.S. sale took place, as published in International Financial Statistics.
With respect to home market viability, petitioners determined, based on information provided by a foreign market researcher, that the volume of Philippine home market sales was sufficient to form a basis for NV pursuant to section 773(a)(1)(B)(ii)(II) of the Act.
Petitioners based EP for Tung Fong on either duty-paid, CIF price quotes made by Tung Fong to unaffiliated U.S. distributors or on ex-work sales. Petitioners based EP for Enlin on duty-paid CIF price quotes. For the U.S. sales whose terms were CIF duty paid, the petitioners made deductions for foreign inland freight, international freight and insurance, U.S. import duties, and imputed credit. For the ex-works sales, petitioners made adjustments for imputed credit. For sales made through distributors, petitioners made a deduction for the U.S. distributor's markup.
Petitioners estimated foreign inland freight based on freight rate and distance information provided by a foreign market researcher. They estimated international freight and insurance by calculating the difference between the CIF and U.S. Customs values reported in the official import statistics for January through September, 1999. They calculated the import duties based on the 1999 import duty rate of five percent of dutiable value. In addition, petitioners subtracted amounts for the U.S. harbor maintenance fee of 0.125 percent of dutiable value and the U.S. merchandise processing fee of 0.21 percent of dutiable value. See supplement to petition dated January 10, 2000, Exhibit P-1.
Petitioners calculated imputed credit expenses based on the average payment period of 90 days for sales made by Tung Fong and 30 days for sales made by Enlin, and the average lending rate in the United States of 7.88 percent for the POI as published in International Financial Statistics. They calculated the distributor's percentage markup based on the domestic industry's knowledge of the channels of distribution in the United States.
Petitioners estimated dumping margins ranging from 18.24 percent to 60.17 percent. Should the need arise to use as facts available under section 776 of the Act any of this information in our preliminary or final determinations, we may re-examine the information and revise the margin calculations, if appropriate.
The petition alleges that the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product is being materially injured, and is threatened with material injury, by reason of the individual and cumulated imports of the subject merchandise sold at less than NV. Petitioners explained that the industry's injured condition is evident in the declining trends in (1) U.S. market share, (2) average unit sales values, (3) share of domestic consumption, (4) operating income, (5) employment, (6) output, (7) sales, and (8) capacity utilization.
The allegations of injury and causation are supported by relevant evidence including U.S. Customs import data, lost sales, and pricing information. The Department assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury and causation and determined that these allegations are supported by accurate and adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for initiation (see Attachments to Initiation Checklist, Re: Material Injury, January 18, 2000).
Based upon our examination of the petition on pipe fittings from Germany, Italy, Malaysia and the Philippines, we find that the petition meets the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating antidumping duty investigations to determine whether imports of pipe fittings from Germany, Italy, Malaysia and the Philippines are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Unless this deadline is extended, we will make our preliminary determinations no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation.
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, a copy of the public version of the petition has been provided to the representatives of Germany, Italy, Malaysia and the Philippines. We will attempt to provide a copy of the public versions of each petition to each exporter named in the petition, as appropriate.
We have notified the ITC of our initiations, as required by section 732(d) of the Act.
The ITC will determine, by no later than February 14, 2000, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of pipe fittings from Germany, Italy, Malaysia and the Philippines are causing material injury, or threatening to cause material injury, to a U.S. industry. A negative ITC determination will result in these investigations being terminated; otherwise, these
This notice is published pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act.
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Notice of Amendment to the Agreement Between the United States Department of Commerce and the Republic of Uzbekistan Suspending the Antidumping Investigation on Uranium from Uzbekistan.
On October 28, 1999, the Department of Commerce (the Department) and the Republic of Uzbekistan (Uzbekistan) signed an Amendment to the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Investigation on Uranium from Uzbekistan. This Amendment doubles the amount of Uzbek-origin uranium that may be imported into the United States for further processing prior to re-exportation. In addition, it lengthens the period of time uranium may remain in the United States for such processing to up to three years.
October 28, 1999.
James Doyle or Sally Gannon, AD/CVD Enforcement, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0159 or (202) 482-1374, respectively.
On October 16, 1992, the Department and Uzbekistan signed the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Investigation on Uranium from Uzbekistan (Agreement). On October 30, 1992, the Agreement was published in the
Consistent with the requirement of Section 734(l) of the U.S. Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, to prevent the suppression or undercutting of price levels of domestic products in the United States, Section IV of the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Investigation on Uranium from Uzbekistan, as amended on October 13, 1995, (the Agreement) is amended as set forth below. All other provisions of the Agreement, particularly Section VII, remain in force and apply to this Amendment.
1. The following paragraphs replace Section IV.H:
For purposes of permitting processing in the United States of uranium products from Uzbekistan, the Government of Uzbekistan may issue re-export certificates for import into the United States of Uzbek uranium products (“Uzbek Uranium”) only where such imports to the United States are not for sale or ultimate consumption in the United States and where re-exports will take place within 12 months or within 36 months of the original entry into the United States as indicated by the importer of record at the time of entry. The date of original entry for Uzbek uranium shall be the date the Uzbek uranium is released by U.S. Customs for entry into the United States.
In no event shall an export certificate be endorsed by Uzbekistan for uranium products previously imported into the United States under such re-export certificate. Such re-export certificates will in no event be issued in amounts greater than one million pounds U3O8 equivalent per re-export certificate.
The importer of record must specify at the time of entry whether it will re-export the entered material under the 12-month limitation or under the 36-month limitation (which requires additional certifications as noted below).
Re-export certificates issued under the 12-month limitation shall not exceed three million pounds U3O8 equivalent at any one time.
Additional re-export certificates may be issued under the 36-month limitation as long as the total amount of uranium products entered pursuant to re-export certificates issued (under both the 12-month and 36-month limitations) does not exceed six million pound U3O8 equivalent at any one time.
For re-exports entered under the 36-month limitation, the importer of record must provide the Department with the following at the time of entry: (1) Certification that it will ensure re-exportation within 36 months of entry into the United States; (2) certification from the end-user that the uranium products will not be sold, loaned, swapped, used as loan repayments, or utilized other than for re-export in accordance with Section IV.H of the suspension agreement; and (3) certification from the U.S. convertor and/or enricher and/
If uranium products from Uzbekistan are: (A) If subject to the 12-month limitation, not re-exported within 12 months; (B) if subject to the 36-month limitation, not re-exported within 36 months, or (C) if subject to the 36-month limitation, sold, loaned, swapped, used as loan repayments, or utilized other than for re-export in accordance with Section IV.H of the Agreement, the Department will refer the matter to Customs or the Department of Justice for further action and the United States will promptly notify the Government of Uzbekistan and the two governments shall enter into consultations. If the uranium products are not re-exported within 3 months of the referral to Customs or the Department of Justice and the problem has not been resolved to the mutual satisfaction of both the United States and the Government of Uzbekistan, the volume of the uranium products entered pursuant to the re-export certificate may be counted against the export limit in effect at such time, or, if there is insufficient quota, the first available quota. This volume may be restored to the export limit if the product is subsequently re-exported.
The Parties agree that this Amendment constitutes an integral part of the Agreement. The English language version of this Amendment shall be controlling.
For the Government of Uzbekistan:
For the United States Department of Commerce:
International Trade Administration, US Department of Commerce.
Notice of Recruitment for Additional Members for ETTAC.
The Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee (ETTAC) was established by Charter pursuant to the Jobs Through Trade Expansion Act of 1994 (22 U.S.C. 2151). The ETTAC is administered by the U.S. Department of Commerce under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). The ETTAC was established on May 31, 1994; it was rechartered on June 4, 1996, and on July 15, 1998, for two years.
The ETTAC advises the Environmental Trade Working Group of the Trade Promotion Coordination Committee (TPCC) through the Secretary of Commerce. A Recommendations Report was presented to the Secretary of Commerce in October, 1996; in March 1999, a white paper on Impediments to Environmental Trade was presented to the TPCC. Additional reports will be presented regularly.
The Department of Commerce is seeking additional candidates from medium and large sized business from the following subsectors of the environmental industry:
Committee members serve in a representative capacity, and must be able to generally represent the views and interests of a certain subsector. We are seeking CEO, President, Executive Vice President and International Management level candidates.
Please send a fact sheet on your company that details your company's activity in the subsector listed above, as well as a short biographical sketch on the executive who wishes to become a candidate. Materials can be faxed to the number listed below.
The Office of Environmental Technologies Exports, Room 1003, US Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution, NW, Washington, DC 20230; Phone 202-482-5225.
Materials may be faxed to 202-482-5665, attention Sage Chandler
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.
Notice of open meeting.
The Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee will hold a plenary meeting from 9:30 AM to 3:00 PM on February 17, 2000. The ETTAC was created on May 31, 1994, to advise the U.S. government on policies and programs to expand U.S. exports of environmental products and services.
February 17, 2000. The meeting will take place in Room 6800 of the Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.
The plenary meeting will include an update of the WTO ATL process, a full committee strategy session and review the objectives and agendas of its subcommittee working groups: Market Access, Trade Impediments, Government Resources, Finance, Water, and Energy.
This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Jane Siegel, Department of Commerce, Office of Environmental Technologies Exports. Phone: 202-482-5225
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Commerce; Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Interior.
Notice of application and availability for public comment.
This notice advises the public that the City of Tacoma, Public Utilities, Water Division (Tacoma Water), has submitted an application to NMFS and FWS (the Services) for incidental take permits (Permits) pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). As required by section 10(a)(2)(B) of the Act, Tacoma Water has also prepared a habitat conservation plan (Plan) designed to minimize and mitigate any such take of endangered or threatened species. The Permit application is related to water storage and withdrawal from the Green River, and forest management activities in the Green River Watershed, located in south King County, Washington. The proposed Permits would authorize the take of the following endangered or threatened species incidental to otherwise lawful management activities: gray wolf (
The Permit application includes the proposed Plan; and a proposed Implementing Agreement. The Services also announce the availability of a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Permit application.
This notice is provided pursuant to section 10(a) of the Act, and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations. The Services are furnishing this notice in order to allow other agencies and the public an opportunity to review and comment on these documents. All comments received will become part of the public record and will be available for review pursuant to section 10(c) of the Act.
Written comments on the Permit application, Draft EIS, Plan, and Implementing Agreement must be received from interested parties no later than March 14, 2000.
Requests for documents on CD ROM should be made by calling the Fish and Wildlife Service at 360/534-9330. Hardbound copies are also available for viewing, and partial or complete duplication, at the following libraries: Olympia Timberland Library, Reference Desk, 313 8
Comments and requests for information should be directed to Tim Romanski, Project Biologist, Fish and Wildlife Service, 510 Desmond Drive, SE., Suite 102, Lacey, WA, 98503-1273, (telephone: 360/753-5823; facsimile: 360/534-9331), or Mike Grady, Project Biologist, National Marine Fisheries Service, 510 Desmond Drive, SE., Suite 103, Lacey, WA, 98503-1273 (telephone: 360/753-6052; facsimile: 360/753-9517). Comments and materials received will also be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours by calling 360/534-9330.
Section 9 of the Act and Federal regulations prohibit the “taking” of a species listed as endangered or threatened. The term “take” is defined under the Act to mean harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. FWS defines harm to include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, and sheltering (50 CFR 17.3). NMFS defines harm to include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures fish or wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, spawning, rearing, feeding, and sheltering (64 FR 60727, November 8, 1999).
The Services may issue permits, under limited circumstances, to take listed species incidental to, and not the purpose of, otherwise lawful activities. FWS regulations governing permits for endangered species are promulgated in 50 CFR 17.22; and, regulations governing permits for threatened species are promulgated in 50 CFR 17.32. NMFS regulations governing permits for threatened and endangered species are promulgated at 50 CFR 222.307.
Tacoma Water owns and conducts management activities in the Green River Watershed, in King County, Washington. These activities are as follows: (1) a water diversion dam and associated facilities (Headworks) on the Green River; (2) approximately 14,888 acres of land upstream of the diversion dam on both sides of the River; and, (3) a well field (North Fork Well Field) located approximately 8 kilometers (5 miles) upstream of the Headworks. Tacoma Water operates and manages the Headworks, watershed lands, and the North Fork Well Field as the principal source of municipal and industrial water for the City of Tacoma and portions of Pierce and King Counties. Howard Hanson Dam (Dam) and Howard Hanson Reservoir (Reservoir), owned and operated by the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), are also located on the Green River, upstream of the Headworks. City lands in the watershed are adjacent to the Dam and Reservoir on all sides.
Current trends in population growth within the Puget Sound region create a need for Tacoma Water to explore possibilities for increasing its water supply capabilities. To meet forecasted demands, Tacoma Water has developed two separate but related proposals. The first of these, the Second Supply Project, involves improvements at the Headworks and the construction of a 33.5-mile long pipeline from the Headworks to the City of Tacoma. Upstream fish passage around the Headworks and the Dam will be provided by the City of Tacoma as partial mitigation for the Second Supply Project. This project is the subject of a State Environmental Policy Act review in the document entitled “Final
Tacoma Water's activities associated with water withdrawl and water supply, and forest management and timber harvest have the potential to impact species subject to protection under the Act. Section 10 of the Act contains provisions for the issuance of incidental take permits to non-Federal landowners for the take of endangered and threatened species, provided the take is incidental to otherwise lawful activities, and will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the species in the wild. In addition, the applicant must prepare and submit to the Services for approval a habitat conservation plan containing a strategy for minimizing and mitigating all take associated with the proposed activities to the maximum extent practicable. The applicant must also ensure that adequate funding for the habitat conservation plan will be provided.
Tacoma Water has developed a Plan with technical assistance from the Services, to obtain Permits for their activities in the Green River Watershed. Activities proposed for coverage under the Permits include the following.
(1) Water withdrawal at the Headworks for Municipal and Industrial Water Supply, which will reduce flows and have concomitant habitat effects downstream and include the bypass of fish at the Headworks intake, and inundate the small impoundment area.
(2) Water withdrawal from the North Fork Well Field for Municipal and Industrial Water Supply, which will potentially reduce flows in the North Fork Green River above the Howard Hanson Reservoir.
(3) Construction of Headworks improvements (anticipated to occur during a 2 year period). Such construction will cause: (a) bypassing of fish at the Headworks intake during construction; (b) raising the existing diversion dam by approximately 6.5, feet which will extend the inundation pool to about 2,570 feet upstream of the Headworks diversion; (c) realigning and enlarging the existing intake and adding upgraded fish screens and bypass facilities for downstream passage; (d) reshaping the Green River channel downstream of the existing diversion to accommodate the installation of an efficient trap-and-haul facility for upstream fish passage; (e) installation of a new trap-and-haul facility for upstream fish passage; and, (f) installation, monitoring and maintenance of the instream structures in the impoundment for the Headworks dam raise fisheries mitigation.
(4) Operation of a downstream fish bypass facility at the Headworks.
(5) Watershed forest management activities, consisting of: (a) watershed patrol and inspection; (b) forest road construction, maintenance, and use; (c) forest road culvert removal, replacement, and maintenance; (d) timber harvest and hauling; and, (e) silvicultural activities (e.g., planting, thinning, and inventorying trees).
(6) Monitoring of downstream fish passage through a proposed fish passage facility at the Howard Hanson Dam, associated with the AWSP.
(7) Monitoring and maintenance of AWSP fish habitat restoration projects and AWSP fish and wildlife habitat mitigation projects.
(8) Potential restoration of anadromous fish above the Howard Hanson Dam by trapping and hauling of adults returning to the Headworks, and possible planting of hatchery juveniles if found to be beneficial to restoration.
The Services formally initiated an environmental review of the project through a
The analyses in the draft EIS are done in two parts; one covering the alternatives for water withdrawal activities, and the other covering alternatives for land management activities in the upper watershed. Three water withdrawal alternatives are analyzed in detail, including: (1) the no action alternative; (2) the proposed Plan alternative; and, (3) an alternative involving the construction of a new water withdrawal facility approximately 30 miles downstream of the existing Tacoma Water's Headworks. Four additional water withdrawal options were identified during scoping, but they are not analyzed in detail as alternatives to the proposed action because they would not accomplish Tacoma Water's objective of meeting current and future water demands, and/or because highly speculative information would be required to adequately analyze impacts.
Three alternatives are analyzed for Tacoma Water's watershed land management, including: (1) the no action alternative; (2) the proposed Habitat Conservation Plan alternative; and, (3) a no commercial timber harvest alternative. One additional watershed management option was identified during public scoping, but it was not analyzed in detail as an alternative to the proposed action because it would not accomplish Tacoma Water's objective of managing its watershed lands to protect water quality.
This notice is provided pursuant to section 10(a) of the Act, and NEPA regulations. The Services will evaluate the application, associated documents, and comments submitted thereon to determine whether the application meets the requirements of the Act and NEPA. If it is determined that the requirements are met, Permits will be issued for the incidental take of all covered species. The final Permit decisions will be made no sooner than 60 days from the date of this notice.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of scoping meetings; request for comments.
The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council) will conduct scoping meetings to receive comments on a Draft Options Paper for Amendment 10 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico (Shrimp Amendment 10).
Written comments will be accepted until 5 p.m. on March 6, 2000. The scoping meetings will be held from February 2 through February 10, 2000. See
Written comments should be sent to the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 3018 U.S. Highway 301, North, Suite 1000, Tampa, Florida 33619; telephone: (813) 228-2815. Copies of the Draft Options Paper are also available from the Council.
Dr. Richard Leard, Senior Fishery Biologist, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; telephone: (813) 228-2815.
The scoping meetings will be convened to receive comments on the need for additional bycatch reduction requirements for the shrimp fishery in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) south and east of 85°30' W. long. Amendment 9 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP), approved by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on July 30, 1997, and implemented by final rule on May 14, 1998 (April 14, 1998; 63 FR 18139), required the use of a NMFS-certified bycatch reduction device (BRD) in shrimp trawls used in the EEZ from Cape San Blas, Florida (85°30' W. long.) to the Texas/Mexico border and provided for the certification of the Fisheye BRD in the 30 mesh position. The purpose of this action was to reduce the bycatch mortality of juvenile red snapper by 44 percent from the average mortality for the years 1984-89. Amendment 9 to the FMP exempted shrimp trawls fishing for royal red shrimp outside of 100 fathoms, as well as groundfish and butterfish trawls. It also excluded small try nets and no more than two ridged frame roller trawls that do not exceed 16 feet (4.9 m). Amendment 9 to the FMP did not require BRDs south and east of 85°30' West long. because few juvenile red snapper were found as bycatch in this area. Because of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act's requirement to reduce bycatch to the extent practicable, the Council is considering the need for additional measures to reduce bycatch.
Scoping meetings for the Draft Options Paper on Shrimp Amendment 10 will begin at 7:00 p.m. and end at 10:00 p.m. at all of the following locations:
1. Wednesday, February 2, 2000—Harbormaster's Office, 1407 Main Street, Palacios, TX 77465;
2. Thursday, February 3, 2000—Port Isabel Community Center, 213 Yturria, Port Isabel, TX 78578;
3. Monday, February 7, 2000—Holiday Inn La Concha Hotel, 430 Duval Street, Key West, FL 33040;
4. Tuesday, February 8, 2000—Edison Community College, Hendry Hall—K143—Parking Lot 8—Lee County Campus, 8099 College Parkway, Fort Myers, FL 33919;
5. Wednesday, February 9, City Hall Auditorium, 300 Municipal Drive, Madeira Beach, FL 33708; and
6. Thursday, February 10, 2000—Apalachicola Reserve Visitors Center, 261 7th Street, Apalachicola, FL 32320.
These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Anne Alford at the Council (see
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Louis District, DOD.
Notice of availability.
The St. Louis District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), in consultation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), propose to clean up contaminants resulting from the extrusion of uranium metal at the Madison Site. This site is one of several being addressed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Alternatives, which identify the range of cleanup options, have been developed and evaluated in the Madison Site Feasibility Study (FS). USACE has identified Alternative 4 as the preferred remediation alternative described in the Proposed Plan (PP) based on the information available at this time. The final decision on the remedy to be implemented will be documented in a Record Decision (ROD) only after consideration of all comments received and any new information presented.
Questions regarding the Madison RI/FS/PP may be directed to Mr. Lou Dell'Orco, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Louis District, FUSRAP Project Office, 9170 Latty Avenue, Berkeley, Missouri 63134, by phone (314) 524-4083, or by e-mail at
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), St. Louis District, is issuing the Remedial Investigation (RI), Feasibility Study (FS), and Proposed Plan (PP) for public comment. The site became contaminated as a result of activities in support of the nation's early atomic energy program. During the late 1950s and early 1960s, the site was used to perform extrusions of uranium metal and straightening of extruded uranium rods for the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). The cleanup of this site is being managed by the Corps of Engineers under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
Mandated by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), periodic environmental monitoring would be conducted, but no remedial action would be conducted.
Institutional controls would be implemented to prevent unacceptable exposures to site contamination.
Alternative 3 incorporates containment, institutional controls, and environmental monitoring to prevent contaminants from becoming mobilized and reduce the potential for direct exposure. Under this alternative, accessible contamination at the 25-foot and 36-foot levels and the beams in the high bay that are accessible from the windows would be fixed in place. When use of the building is discontinued, radiological controls would be provided for decontamination prior to demolition.
This alternative includes decontamination of accessible contamination at the 25-foot and 36-foot levels and the beams is the high bay that are accessible from the window. Inaccessible areas are defined as those surfaces that cannot be accessed either from the high-bay crane or through windows. Inaccessible areas include the high bay areas above the 36-foot level and select other areas around live power lines.
Federal, state and local agencies, and interested individuals are invited to participate in the scoping process to determine the range of issues and alternatives to be addressed. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will hold a public meeting to receive oral and written comments at the Madison City Hall at 615 Madison Avenue in Madison, Illinois on Thursday, February 17th, from 5 to 9 p.m. In addition, written comments will be accepted during the 30-day period following the Remedial Investigation (RI) and FS/PP release by Ms. Sharon R. Cotner, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Louis District, FUSRAP Project Office, 9170 Latty Avenue, Berkeley, Missouri 63134. Please call (314) 524-4083 for further information.
Copies of the RI/FS/PP are available for review starting on or about January 28, 2000 until February 28, 2000 during business hours at the following locations: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Louis District, FUSRAP Project Office, 9170 Latty Avenue, Berkeley, Missouri 63134; or the Madison Public Library, 1700 5th Street, Madison, Illinois 62060, (618) 876-8448.
Written comments will be accepted during the 30-day period following FS/PP release at FUSRAP Project Office at the above address. Oral comments may be provided at the Public Meeting on Thursday, February 17th, from 5 to 9 p.m. at the Madison City Hall at 615 Madison Avenue in Madison, Illinois. Please contact the Corps of Engineers, St. Louis District, FUSRAP Project Office for more information at (314) 524-4083.
Availability of RI/FS/PP.
Take notice that, pursuant to Section 3(e)(2) of the Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(2), and Section 375.204(a)(3) of the Commission's Regulations 18 CFR 375.204(a)(3), Commission meeting previously scheduled for Wednesday, January 26, 2000, at 10 a.m., Room 2C, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, has been rescheduled for 11 a.m. on Thursday, January 27, 2000, due to the closure of all Federal Government Offices in Washington, DC on January 25 and 26, 2000.
Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7167 OR www.epa.gov/oeca/ofa. Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements filed January 17, 2000 through January 21, 2000 pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.
Due to inclement weather in the Metropolitan Area (DC, MD and VA) the Federal Government was shutdown. The Federal Register (FR) Report which should have appeared in the January 28, 2000 FR was not published. The 45-day comment period and the 30-day wait period are still calculated from January 28, 2000.
Availability of EPA comments prepared January 10, 2000 Through January 14, 2000 pursuant to the Environmental Review Process (ERP), under Section 309 of the Clean Air Act and Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act as amended. Requests for copies of EPA comments can be directed to the Office of Federal Activities at (202) 564-7167. An explanation of the ratings assigned to draft environmental impact statements (EISs) was published in FR dated April 9, 1999 (63 FR 17856).
ERP No. D-AFS-L65333-OR Rating EC2, Five Rivers Watershed Landscape Management Project, To Restore Terrestrial and Aquatic Habitat, Special-Use-Permit, Siuslaw National Forest, Waldport Ranger District, Lincoln and Lane Counties, OR.
ERP No. D-BLM-G65071-NM Rating LO, Albuquerque Field Office Riparian and Aquatic Habitats Management, To Restore and Protect,Rio Puerco Resource Management Plan Amendment(RMPA), Cibola, Sandoval, McKinley, Rio Arriba,Bernalillo, Valencia and Santa Fe Counties, NM.
ERP No. D-BLM-G65073-NM Rating LO, Farmington Field Office Riparian and Aquatic Habitat Management, To Restore and Protect,Farmington Riparian and Aquatic Habitat Management Plan, San Juan, McKinley, Rio Arriba and Sandoval Counties, NM.
ERP No. D-FRC-F03007-00 Rating EO2, TriState Pipeline Project, Construction and Operation of Natural Gas Pipeline Facilities,Docket Nos.: CP99-61-000, CP99-62-000, CP99-63-000 and CP99-64-000, Presidential Permit, IL, IN and MI.
ERP No. D-FRC-J05079-00 Rating EC2, Cabinet Gorge (No. 2058-014) and Noxon Rapids(No. 2075-014) Hydroelectric Project, Relicensing,MT and ID.
ERP No. D-NPS-H65007-KS Rating LO, Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve General Management Plan, Implementation, Flint Hills Region, Chase County, KS.
ERP No. F-FHW-C40142-NY US-20/Broadway (Transit Road to Lancaster East Village Line) Reconstruction, Funding, COE Section 10 and 404 Permit, in the Villages of Depew and Lancaster, Erie County, NY.
ERP No. F-FHW-F40365-WI US 151 Highway Project, from Dickeyville to to Belmont, Improvements, Funding and COE Section 404 Permit, Grant and Lafayette Counties, WI.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice.
This notice announces EPA's receipt of test data on N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) (CAS No. 872-50-4). These data were submitted pursuant to an enforceable testing consent agreement/order issued by EPA under section 4 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
This action is directed to the public in general. This action may, however, be of interest to those persons who are concerned about data on health and/or environmental effects and other characteristics of this chemical. Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the technical person listed under “FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.”
1.
2.
Under 40 CFR 790.60, all TSCA section 4 enforceable consent agreements/orders must contain a statement that results of testing conducted pursuant to enforceable consent agreements/orders will be announced to the public in accordance with section 4(d) of TSCA.
Test data for N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) were submitted by the NMP Producers Group on behalf of the member companies: Lyondell Chemical Company (formerly ARCO Chemical Company), BASF Corporation, and ISP Management Company, Inc. These data were submitted pursuant to a TSCA section 4 enforceable consent agreement/order and were received by EPA on November 23, 1999. The submission includes a final report entitled “
EPA has initiated its review and evaluation process for this submission. At this time, the Agency is unable to provide any determination as to the completeness of the submission.
15 U.S.C. 2603.
Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, Toxic substances.
The Federal Communications Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that does not display a valid control number. Comments are requested concerning (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 estimate; (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.
Written comments should be submitted on or before March 31, 2000. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.
Direct all comments to Les Smith, Federal Communications Commissions, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1-A804, Washington, DC 20554 or via the Internet to lesmith@fcc.gov.
For additional information or copies of the information collections contact Les Smith at (202) 418-0217 or via the Internet at lesmith@fcc.gov.
Federal Election Commission.
Tuesday, January 25, 2000, 10:00 a.m., meeting closed to the public. This meeting was changed to: Thursday, January 27, 2000, after the open meeting.
Tuesday, February 1, 2000 at 10:00 a.m.
999 E Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
This meeting will be open to the public.
Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. § 437g.
Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. § 437g, § 438(b), and Title 26, U.S.C.
Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or arbitration.
Internal personnel rules and procedures or matters affecting a particular employee.
Thursday, February 3, 2000, at 10:00 a.m.
999 E Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. (ninth floor).
This meeting will be open to the public.
Correction and Approval of Minutes.
Legislative Recommendations, 2000.
Express Advocacy Rule (11 CFR 100.22).
Administrative Matters.
Mr. Ron Harris, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.
The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than February 11, 2000.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 24, 2000.
The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841
The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than February 22, 2000.
In connection with this proposal, BB-T Corporation requests permission to exercise an option to acquire up to 19.9 percent of the voting securities of First Banking Company of Southeast Georgia under certain circumstances.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 24, 2000.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
11:30 a.m., Thursday, February 3, 2000.
Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building, C Street entrance between 20th and 21st Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551.
Open.
1. Publication for comment of proposed new Regulation P (Privacy of Consumer Financial Information) to implement the provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that govern the protection and disclosure by financial institutions of nonpublic personal information about consumers.
2. Any items carried forward from a previously announced meeting. Note: This meeting will be recorded for the benefit of those unable to attend.
Cassettes will be available for listening in the Board's Freedom of Information Office, and copies may be ordered for $6 per cassette by calling 202-452-3684 or by writing to: Freedom of Information Office, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, D.C. 20551. Contact Person for More Information: Lynn S. Fox, Assistant to the Board; 202-452-3204.
You may call 202-452-3206 for a recorded announcement of this meeting; or you may contact the Board's Web site at http://www.federalreserve.gov for an electronic announcement. (The Web site also includes procedural and other information about the open meeting.)
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
Approximately 12:15 a.m., Thursday, February 3, 2000, following a recess at the conclusion of the open meeting.
Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building, 20th and C Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551.
Closed.
1. Personnel actions (appointments, promotions, assignments, reassignments, and salary actions) involving individual Federal Reserve System employees.
2. Any matters carried forward from a previously announced meeting.
Lynn S. Fox, Assistant to the Board; 202-452-3204.
You may call 202-452-3206 beginning at approximately 5 p.m. two business days before the meeting for a recorded announcement of bank and bank holding company applications scheduled for the meeting; or you may contact the Board's Web site at http://www.federalreserve.gov for an electronic announcement that not only lists applications, but also indicates procedural and other information about the meeting.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the availability of fiscal year (FY) 2000 funds for cooperative agreements to national organizations that can become a part of a national strategy to prevent and reduce sexual behaviors that result in HIV infection, other Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs), and unintended pregnancy.
These national organizations will work to strengthen the capacity of national, state, and/or local agencies to help schools and other societal institutions to prevent behaviors that place all young people, and particularly those from communities of color, at risk for HIV infection, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy.
This program addresses the “Healthy People 2000” priority area of Education and Community-Based Programs; and, the draft “Healthy People 2010” priority area of Education and Community-Based Programs; HIV; and STDs.
The purpose of this program announcement is to provide support for these national organizations to work exclusively on helping young people, particularly in communities of color, to not engage in sexual intercourse and engage a range of organizations to prevent and reduce the risk behaviors described above.
Assistance will be provided to only national health, education, and social service organizations that are nonprofit, professional, or voluntary. Proof of nonprofit status must be provided prior to receipt of an award (AR-15 included in the application package.
To meet the CDC definition of a national organization, eligible applicants must have affiliates in a minimum of 10 states and territories. Eligible organizations must also have experience strengthening the capacity of national, state, and/or local agencies to help schools and other societal institutions to prevent behaviors that place all young people at risk for HIV infection, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy with the exclusive focus of their efforts in this area being on helping young people to not engage in sexual intercourse. Eligible organizations must also have experience and established relationships with other organizations and individuals that have this same focus. Applicants must provide proof that any activity that is designed to prevent behaviors that put youth at risk for HIV, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy have the exclusive focus on helping youth to not engage in sexual intercourse. This proof shall include a statement that the organization's purpose in conducting any activity that is designed to prevent behaviors that put youth at risk for HIV, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy is to help youth not engage in intercourse.
Approximately $400,000 is available in FY 2000 to fund up to approximately three awards. It is expected that the average award will be $140,000, ranging from $120,000 to $160,000. It is expected that the awards will begin on or about June 1, 2000 and will be made for a 12-month budget period within a project period of up to 5 years. Funding estimates may vary and are subject to change. Continuation awards within an approved project period will be made on the basis of satisfactory performance as evidenced by required reports and on the availability of funds.
Funds must be used exclusively for activities that help young people not engage in sexual intercourse. Applicants must not identify any activities that would constitute research. Activities funded under this announcement are intended to build the capacity of national organizations to promote the prevention of HIV, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy among youth and should not include any formal or informal research.
In conducting activities to achieve the purpose of this program, the recipient will be responsible for conducting activities under 1. Recipient Activities, and CDC will be responsible for activities under 2. CDC Activities, below:
1. Recipient Activities
a. Work with interested CDC-funded and other national, state and local organizations to develop credible strategies to prevent sexual behaviors that result in HIV infection, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy by helping young people not engage in sexual intercourse. This work should focus on building partnerships among these different organizations at the state and local level to provide a comprehensive set of strategies to prevent behaviors that place all young people at risk for HIV infection, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy.
b. Establish and implement specific and measurable goals and objectives.
c. Evaluate the effectiveness of the program and use evaluation results for programmatic improvement and long-range planning.
d. Participate in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Adolescent and School Health's (DASH) national conferences and at least one training workshop during the budget period.
e. Share credible project-related information and materials with other interested State Education Agencies (SEAs), Local Education Agencies (LEAs), Post-secondary Institutions (PSIs), and national organizations through awareness sessions, training events, electronic communications, state and national conferences and CDC-sponsored training workshops and conferences.
f. Implement an operational plan that may include, but is not limited to, one or more of the following activities:
(1) Help interested State and local education agencies, CDC-funded and other national agencies to integrate credible strategies to help young people to not engage in sexual intercourse.
(2) Collaborate with interested CDC-funded and other national organizations to establish and maintain credible initiatives to help young people to not engage in sexual intercourse and prevent behaviors that place school-through college-aged young people at risk for HIV infection, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy.
(3) Educate and enable interested managers, who are members of CDC-funded and other national organizations, to support credible, locally determined programs designed to encourage youth not to engage in sexual intercourse.
(4) Provide technical assistance on helping young people to not engage in sexual intercourse to interested CDC-funded and other organizations, including State and local education agencies, and national organizations.
(5) Support efforts by interested State and local education agencies, health departments, and social service agencies to help young people to not engage in sexual intercourse as part of a comprehensive HIV, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy prevention effort.
2. CDC Activities
a. Provide and periodically update programmatic information.
b. Coordinate with national, state, and local education, health and social service agencies, as well as other relevant organizations, in planning and conducting national strategies designed to strengthen programs for preventing HIV infection, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy among young people.
c. Provide programmatic consultation and guidance related to program planning, implementation, and evaluation; assessment of program objectives; and dissemination of successful strategies, experiences, and evaluation reports.
d. Plan and carry out meetings of national, state, and local education agencies and other appropriate organizations and individuals to address issues and program activities related to improving coordinated school health programs and strengthening the capacity of post-secondary institutions and agencies that serve young people to prevent HIV infection, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy among young people.
e. Assist in the evaluation of program activities.
Use the information in the Program Requirements, Other Requirements, and Evaluation Criteria sections to develop the application content. Your application will be evaluated on the criteria listed, so it is important to follow them in laying out your program plan. The narrative should be no more than [40] double-spaced pages, printed on one side, with one inch margins, and unreduced font.
1. Executive Summary. The applicant should provide a concise, two to three page, summary that clearly describes:
a. Eligibility, including:
(1) Status as a national organization to include the number and geographic location of affiliates representing at least 10 states and territories,
(2) Experience and capacity to work exclusively on helping young people to not engage in sexual intercourse and engage a range of organizations to prevent and reduce the risk behaviors that place all young people at risk for HIV infection, other STDs, unintended pregnancy, and other serious health problems.
(3) Proof that the activities designed to prevent sexual risk behaviors (those behaviors that put youth at risk for HIV, STDs, unintended pregnancy and other serious health problems) focus only on helping youth to not engage in sexual intercourse. This proof shall include a statement that the organization's sole purpose in conducting any activity that is designed to prevent behaviors that put youth at risk for HIV, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy is to help youth not engage in intercourse.
(4) Documentation that supports eligibility should be submitted as an attachment to the Executive Summary. Specifically, the applicant must submit a valid tax exempt status under Section 501(c)(3) as evidenced by an Internal Revenue Service determination letter.
b. The major proposed goals, objectives, and activities for implementation of the program, as well as the total requested amount of Federal funding.
c. Applicant's capability to implement the program.
2. Background (not more than 4 pages): Applicant should describe the Organization's background and experience in addressing the needs related to the purpose of this announcement.
3. Capacity (not more than 8 pages).
a. Describe ability to address the identified needs.
b. Describe affiliates as follows:
(1) Types of affiliates.
(2) Number of affiliates.
(3) Location of affiliates.
(4) How the affiliates can work with or influence the population identified in the purpose of the announcement.
c. Describe efforts and relevant experience at the national, state, and local levels that support the purpose of the announcement, including such factors as:
(1) Current and previous experience related to the proposed program activities.
(2) Activities related to building partnerships with diverse organizations.
(3) Current and previous coordination and collaboration with national, non-governmental agencies that have an interest in helping young people to not engage in sexual intercourse.
d. Submit a copy of the organizational chart, describe the organizational structure, and describe how that structure supports health promotion and education activities.
4. Operational Plan (not more than 15 pages).
a. Goals. List goals that specifically relate to program requirements that indicate what the program will have accomplished at the end of the projected 5-year project period. The goals should relate directly to the recipient activities and project objectives.
b. Objectives. List objectives that are specific, measurable, and feasible to be accomplished during the projected 12-month budget period. The objectives should relate directly to the project goals and recipient activities.
c. Describe in narrative form and display on a 12-month timetable, specific activities that are related to each objective. Indicate when each activity will occur as well as when preparations for activities will occur. Also, indicate who will be responsible for each activity and identify staff who will work on each activity.
5. Project Management and Staffing Plan (8 pages).
a. Describe the proposed staffing for the project and provide job descriptions for existing and proposed positions.
b. Submit curriculum vitae (limited to 2 pages per person) for each professional staff member named in the proposal.
c. Submit job descriptions illustrating the level of organizational responsibility for professional staff who will be assigned to the project.
d. If other organizations will participate in proposed activities, provide the name(s) of the organization(s), as well as the applicant's staff person who will coordinate the activity and/or supervise the other staff. For each organization listed, provide a letter from that organization identifying the specific activity and the capacity of the assisting organization or subcontractor, and their role in carrying out the proposed activities.
6. Sharing experiences (1 page). Describe how materials that are developed or activities that are successful will be shared with others. Examples of such activities include, but are not limited to:
a. Sharing project related materials through newsletters, clearinghouses, workshops, and conferences.
b. Disseminating materials upon request to affiliates and CDC-funded and other national, state, and local organizations.
c. Disseminating information and materials to interested organizations within a state that employ a wide range of strategies to prevent sexual behaviors that result in HIV infection, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy.
7. Collaborating (1 page). Describe the types of proposed collaboration and the agencies and organizations with whom collaboration will be conducted. Examples of such activities include, but are not limited to:
a. Planning and implementing joint training programs or workshops.
b. Planning and convening joint conferences.
c. Participating in conferences or workshops with other recipients.
d. Identifying measures of progress.
8. Evaluation (4 pages). Describe a plan that evaluates the program's effectiveness in meeting its objectives. For each of the types of evaluation listed below, specify the evaluation question to be answered, data to be obtained, the type of analysis, to whom it will be reported, and how data will be used to improve the program. Indicate in the plan the projected staff and time lines to be used.
a. Process evaluation. Evaluate the program's progress in meeting objectives and conducting activities during the budget period.
b. Outcome evaluation. Assess the effectiveness of proposed activities, including training sessions and documents developed in attaining goal(s) at the completion of each 1-year budget period and the 5-year project period.
9. Budget and Accompanying Justification. Provide a detailed budget and line-item justification of all operating expenses for the 1-year budget period. The budget should be consistent with the stated objectives and planned activities of the project. The budget should include the cost of a 4-day trip to Atlanta for two individuals.
10. Typing and Mailing. Application pages must be numbered clearly, and a complete table of contents of the application and its appendixes must be included. Begin each separate section on a new page. The original and each copy of the application set must be submitted unstapled and unbound. All materials must be typewritten, single-spaced, using an unreduced font not less than 12 point (10 characters per inch) on 8
Submit the original and two copies of PHS 5161-1 (OMB Number 0937-0189). Forms are in the application kit. On or before March 15, 2000, submit the application to: Robert Hancock, Grants Management Specialist, Grants Management Branch, Procurement and Grants Office, Program Announcement 00026, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 2920 Brandywine Road, Room 3000, Atlanta, Georgia 30341.
Deadline: Applications shall be considered as meeting the deadline if they are either:
(a) Received on or before the deadline date or,
(b) Sent on or before the deadline date and received in time for submission to the independent review group. (Applicants must request a legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark or obtain a legibly-dated receipt from a commercial carrier or U.S. Postal Service.
Private metered postmarks shall not be acceptable as proof of timely mailing).
Late Applications: Applications which do not meet the criteria in (a) or (b) above are considered late applications, will not be considered, and will be returned to the applicant.
Each application will be evaluated individually according to the following criteria by an independent review group appointed by CDC.
1. Background (10 points). The extent to which the applicant documents their organization's experience in addressing the purpose of the program announcement, and the rationale for the proposed activities.
2. Capacity (30 points). The extent to which the applicant demonstrates the capacity and ability of their organization to carry out the required recipient activities (page 4-7) to work exclusively on helping young people to not engage in sexual intercourse, and engage a range of CDC-funded and other organizations that work to prevent the risk behaviors that place all young people, and particularly those from communities of color, at risk for HIV infection, other STDs, and unintended pregnancy.
3. Operational Plan (25 points). The extent to which the applicant:
a. Identifies Goals. The extent to which the applicant has submitted goals that are specific and feasible for the projected 5-year project period and are consistent with program requirements.
b. Identifies Objectives. The extent to which the applicant has submitted objectives for the 1-year budget period that are specific, measurable, and feasible and are related directly to the program's goals.
c. Proposes activities that are likely to achieve each objective for the budget period.
d. Addresses each recipient activity.
e. Provides a reasonable time line for conducting those activities.
4. Project Management and Staffing (15 points). The extent to which the applicant identifies staff members that have experience in activities that increase the number of young people who do not engage in sexual intercourse and that have the responsibility, capability, and authority to carry out each activity, as evidenced by job descriptions, curriculum vitae, organizational charts, and letters of support from collaborating agencies.
5. Sharing Experiences and Resources (5 points). The extent to which the applicant indicates how it will share credible materials and activities regarding strategies to help young people to not engage in sexual intercourse in an effort to prevent HIV infection, STDs, and unintended pregnancy.
6. Collaborating (5 points). The extent to which the applicant describes how they will collaborate with CDC-funded State and local education agencies, postsecondary institutions, and/or other national organizations.
7. Evaluation (10 points). The extent and method to which the applicant proposes to measure progress in meeting objectives and program effectiveness, and presents a reasonable plan for obtaining data, reporting the results, and using the results for programmatic decisions.
8. Budget (Not Scored). The extent to which the applicant provides a detailed and clear budget narrative consistent with the stated objectives, planned activities and goals of the project.
Provide CDC with original plus two copies of:
1. Annual progress reports.
2. Financial status report, no more than 90 days after the end of the budget period; and
3. Final financial and performance reports, no more than 90 days after the end of the project period.
Send all reports to:
Robert Hancock, Grants Management Specialist,Grants Management Branch, Procurement and Grants Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 2920 Brandywine Road, Room 3000,Atlanta, Georgia 30341.
The following additional requirements are applicable to this program. For a complete description of each, see Attachment I in the application kit.
This program is authorized under Sections 301(a), 311(b)and (c), and 317(k)(2) of the Public Health Service Act [42 U.S.C. section 241(a), 243(b) and (c), and 247b(k)(2)], as amended. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number is 93.938.
Please refer to Program Announcement 00026 when you request information. For a complete program description, information on application procedures, an application package, and business management technical assistance, contact:Robert Hancock, Grants Management Specialist, Grants Management Branch, Procurement and Grants Office, Program Announcement 00026, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 2920 Brandywine Road, Room 3000,Atlanta, Georgia 30341, Telephone: (404) 488-2746, E-mail address: rnh2@cdc.gov.
See also the CDC home page on the Internet: http://www.cdc.gov.
For program technical assistance, contact Mary Vernon-Smiley, Chief, Special Populations Section, Program Development and Services Branch, Division of Adolescent and School Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Mail Stop K-31, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 4770 Buford Highway, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30341-3717, E-mail address mev0@cdc.gov; phone (770) 488-3253.
To receive additional written information and to request an application kit, call 1-888-GRANTS4 (1-888-472-6874). You will be asked to leave your name and address and will be instructed to identify the announcement number of interest.
In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the following committee meeting.
Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.
Michael J. Sage, Acting Deputy Director, National Center for Environmental Health, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway, NE, (F-28), Atlanta, Georgia 30341-3724, telephone 770/488-7002, fax 770/488-7015.
The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign
In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the following committee meeting:
Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.
Gloria A. Kovach, Program Analyst, Epidemiology and Surveillance Division,National Immunization Program, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., m/s E61, Atlanta, Georgia 30333. Telephone 404/639-8096.
The Director, Management Analysis and Services office has been delegated the authority to sign
In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the following council meeting.
Paulette Ford, National Center for HIV, STD, and TB Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road, NE, M/S E-07, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, telephone 404/639-8008.
The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the regulatory review period for Certiva
Submit written comments and petitions to the Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Claudia V. Grillo, Regulatory Policy Staff (HFD-007), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-594-5645.
The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term Restoration Act (Public Law 100-670) generally provide that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item (human drug product, animal drug product, medical device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension an applicant may receive.
A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A testing phase and an approval phase. For human biological products, the testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical investigations of the biological becomes effective and runs until the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial submission of an application to market the human biological product and continues until FDA grants permission to market the biological product. Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward the actual amount of extension that the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks may award (for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human biological product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).
FDA recently approved for marketing the human biological product Certiva
FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for Certiva
1.
2.
3.
This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its application for patent extension, this applicant seeks 1,826 days of patent term extension.
Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published is incorrect may, on or before March 31, 2000, submit to the Dockets Management Branch (address above) written comments and ask for a redetermination. Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA, on or before July 31, 2000, for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period. To meet its burden, the petition must contain sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.
Comments and petitions should be submitted to the Dockets Management Branch (address above) in three copies (except that individuals may submit single copies) and identified with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document. Comments and petitions may be seen in the Dockets Management Branch between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the regulatory review period for Teslascan and is publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the determination because of the submission of an application to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks, Department of Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that human drug product.
Written comments and petitions should be directed to the Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Claudia V. Grillo, Regulatory Policy Staff (HFD-007), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-594-5645.
The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term Restoration Act (Public Law 100-670) generally provide that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item (human drug product, animal drug product, medical device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension an applicant may receive.
A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A testing phase and an approval phase. For human drug products, the testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical investigations of the drug becomes effective and runs until the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial submission of an application to market the human drug product and continues until FDA grants permission to market the drug product. Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward the actual amount of extension that the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks may award (for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human drug product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).
FDA recently approved for marketing the human drug product Teslascan (magnafodipir trisodium). Teslascan is indicated for intravenous administration as an adjunct to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients to enhance the T1
FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for Teslascan is 3,129 days. Of this time, 2,325 days occurred during the testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 804 days occurred during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the following dates:
1.
2.
3.
This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its application for patent extension,
Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published is incorrect may, on or before March 31, 2000, submit to the Dockets Management Branch (address above) written comments and ask for a redetermination. Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA, on or before July 31, 2000, for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period. To meet its burden, the petition must contain sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.
Comments and petitions should be submitted to the Dockets Management Branch (address above) in three copies (except that individuals may submit single copies) and identified with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document. Comments and petitions may be seen in the Dockets Management Branch between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the regulatory review period for Lumbar I/F Cage® and is publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the determination because of the submission of an application to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks, Department of Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that medical device.
Written comments and petitions should be directed to the Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Claudia V. Grillo, Regulatory Policy Staff (HFD-007), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-594-5645.
The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term Restoration Act (Public Law 100-670) generally provide that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item (human drug product, animal drug product, medical device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension an applicant may receive.
A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A testing phase and an approval phase. For medical devices, the testing phase begins with a clinical investigation of the device and runs until the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial submission of an application to market the device and continues until permission to market the device is granted. Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward the actual amount of extension that the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks may award (half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a medical device will include all of the testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(3)(B).
FDA recently approved for marketing the medical device Lumbar I/F Cage®. Lumbar I/F Cage® is indicated for an open posterior approach using autogenous bone graft in patients with degenerative disc disease at one or two spinal levels from L2-S1 whose condition requires the use of interbody fusion combined with posterolateral fusion and posterior pedicle screw fixation. Subsequent to this approval, the Patent and Trademark Office received a patent term restoration application for Lumbar I/F Cage® (U.S. Patent No. 4,834,757) from DePuy AcroMed, Inc., and the Patent and Trademark Office requested FDA's assistance in determining this patent's eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated May 10, 1999, FDA advised the Patent and Trademark Office that this medical device had undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval of Lumbar I/F Cage® represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use of the product. Shortly thereafter, the Patent and Trademark Office requested that FDA determine the product's regulatory review period.
FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for Lumbar I/F Cage® is 2,631 days. Of this time, 1,708 days occurred during the testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 923 days occurred during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the following dates:
1.
2.
3.
This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its application for patent extension, this applicant seeks 1,776 days of patent term extension.
Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published is incorrect may, on or before March 31, 2000, submit to the Dockets Management Branch (address above) written comments and ask for a redetermination. Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA, on or before July 31, 2000, for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period. To meet its burden, the petition must contain sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.
Comments and petitions should be submitted to the Dockets Management Branch (address above) in three copies
Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), HHS.
Notice of meeting.
In accordance with section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, this notice announces a meeting of the Advisory Panel on Medicare Education. This Committee advises and makes recommendations regarding our National Medicare Education Program as well as other programs. These programs help Medicare beneficiaries understand the expanded range of Medicare options available with the passage of the Medicare+Choice program. This meeting is open to the public, but attendance is limited to space available.
The meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, February 15, 2000, from 10 a.m. until 5:00 p.m., e.s.t. This session is open to the public in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. There will be an additional executive session from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m., not open to the public, for the processing and swearing in of the members.
The meeting will be held at the Washington Court Hotel, 525 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20001, (202) 628-2100.
Susana Perry, Executive Director, Health Care Financing Administration, Center for Beneficiary Services, Partnership Development Group, 7500 Security Boulevard, S1-08-07, Baltimore, MD 21244-1850, (410) 786-1076.
The Advisory Panel on Medicare Education (the Panel) advises us on opportunities to enhance the effectiveness of consumer education materials serving the Medicare program. The goals of the Panel are as follows:
• Developing and implementing a national Medicare education program that describes the expanding options for selecting a health plan under Medicare.
• Enhancing the Federal government's effectiveness in informing the Medicare consumer, including the appropriate use of public-private partnerships.
• Expanding outreach to vulnerable and underserved communities, including racial and ethnic minorities; in the context of a national Medicare education program.
• Assembling an information base of “best practices” for helping consumers evaluate health plan options and building a community infrastructure for information, counseling and assistance.
The agenda is as follows:
• Appointments Process and Procedural Details (closed session).
• Introductory Remarks.
• Summary of HCFA Activities in Beneficiary Education: The National Medicare Education Program and the materials, assessments, evaluations, and research efforts that support it.
• Committee Discussion.
• Committee Work Plan and Next Steps.
• Public Comment.
5 U.S.C. App. 2, section 10(a)(1) and (a)(2). (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital Insurance Program; and No. 93.774, Medicare—Supplementary Medical Insurance Program)
In
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, HUD.
Notice of funding awards.
In accordance with section 102 (a)(4)(C) of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989, this announcement notifies the public of funding decisions made by the Department in a competition for funding under the Super Notice of Funding Availability (SuperNOFA) for the Youthbuild Program. This announcement contains the names of the awardees and the amounts of the awards made available by HUD.
Mr. Donner Buchet, Director, Community and Economic Development Services, Office of Community Planning and Development, 451 7th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 708-2290 (this is not a toll-free number). Hearing-and speech-impaired persons may access this number via TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service toll-free at 1-800-877-8339. For general information on this and other HUD programs, call Community Connections at 1-800-998-9999 or visit the HUD Website at http://www.hud.gov.
The Youthbuild Program was enacted in 1992 and is authorized under Subtitle D of title IV of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing (the Act), as added by section 164 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (Pub. L. 102-550, 106 Stat. 3723, 42 U.S.C. 12899. The competition was announced in the SuperNOFA published in the
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number for this program is 14.243.
The Youthbuild Program is designed to provide disadvantaged young adults with education, employment, and leadership skills. Youthbuild provides funding to local private and public non-profit agencies, State or local housing agencies or authorities, State or local units of general local government, or any entity eligible to provide education and employment training under other Federal employment training programs, as further defined in HUD regulation 24 CFR 585.4. With HUD and other private and public funds, eligible agencies and organizations assist disadvantaged young adults between the ages of 16-24 years in completing their high school education, and provide them with construction and leadership skills to further their opportunities for gainful employment.
A total of $39,789,726 was awarded to 88 projects nationwide. In accordance with section 102(a)(4)(C) of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (103 Stat. 1987. 42 U.S.C. 3545), the Department is publishing the grantees and amounts of the awards in Appendix A to this document.
Office of the General Counsel, HUD.
Notice of revocation and redelegation of authority.
In this Notice, the General Counsel revokes and redelegates authority to dispose of claims arising under the Federal Tort Claims Act and the Military Personnel and Civilian Employees' Claims Act.
January 4, 2000.
Miniard Culpepper, Assistant General Counsel for New England, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. Federal Building, 10 Causeway Street, Room 378, Boston, MA 02222, phone: 617-565-5126. (This is not a toll-free number.) Hearing or speech-impaired individuals may access this number via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.
HUD is implementing a major agency-wide improvement effort. The details of this reform effort are set forth in the HUD 2020 Management Reform Plan, which was published in the
Previously, by Notice of Redelegation of Authority published in the
Under the HUD 2020 Management Reform Plan, all claims relating to the Federal Tort Claims Act and the Military Personnel and Civilian Employees' Claims Act will be the responsibility of HUD's Federal Tort Claims Center. This Notice redelegates to the Assistant General Counsel for New England, within HUD's Federal Tort Claims Center, the authority to adjust, determine, compromise and settle claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 2871, and the Military Personnel and Civilian Employees' Claims Act of 1964, 31 U.S.C. 3721.
Accordingly, the General Counsel revokes and redelegates authority as follows:
This Notice revokes Section A.2. of the Notice of Redelegation of Authority published in the
The General counsel redelegates to the Assistant General Counsel for New England, within HUD's Federal Tort Claims Center, the power and authority to consider, ascertain, adjust, determine, compromise, allow, deny or otherwise dispose of claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act and the Military Personnel and Civilian Employees' Claims Act of 1964.
The authority redelegated under Section B., above, may not be further redelegated.
Section 7(d), Department of Housing and Urban Development Act, 42 U.S.C. 3535(d); 24 CFR 17.7 and 17.47.
The following applicants have applied for a permit to conduct certain activities with endangered species. This notice is provided pursuant to Section 10(c) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
The applicant requests a permit to import 4.1 captive born cheetah (
The applicant requests a permit to export, re-export and re-import tigers (
The applicant requests a permit to re-export and re-import captive-born Bengal tigers (
The applicant requests a permit to import the sport-hunted trophy of one male bontebok (
The applicant requests renewal of his permit to import biological samples including feathers, eggs, bones, and blood of the California brown pelican (
The applicant requests a permit to export one male and two female Philippine crocodile (
Written data or comments should be submitted to the Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Management Authority, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 700, Arlington, Virginia 22203 and must be received by the Director within 30 days of the date of this publication.
Documents and other information submitted with the application are available for review,
Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
Notice of availability.
Evergreen Nursery has applied for an incidental take permit from the Fish and Wildlife Service pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the
The permit application includes a Habitat Conservation Plan and Implementation Agreement, both of which are available for public review and comment. The Environmental Assessment for proposed issuance of the permit also is available for review and comment. All comments on the permit application and Environmental Assessment will become part of the administrative record and may be released to the public.
Written comments should be received on or before March 1, 2000.
Comments should be addressed to Mr. Ken Berg, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2730 Loker Avenue West, Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments may be sent by facsimile to telephone 760-431-9618.
Mr. Mark Elvin, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, at the above address or telephone 760-431-9440.
If you would like copies of the documents for review, please contact the office listed above immediately. Documents also will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the above address.
Under Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act and its implementing regulations, taking of threatened and endangered wildlife species is prohibited. Under the Act, the term “take” means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, capture or collect listed wildlife, or attempt to engage in such conduct. Harm includes habitat modification that kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering. Under limited circumstances, the Service may issue permits to take threatened or endangered wildlife species if such taking is incidental to, and not the purpose of, otherwise lawful activities. Regulations governing permits for threatened and endangered species are found at 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.32.
Evergreen Nursery is seeking an incidental take permit from the Service pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The permit would authorize incidental take of the federally threatened coastal California gnatcatcher for the proposed project. The site is also occupied by the endangered least Bells vireo (
The proposed project is located in the City of Oceanside immediately south of Oceanside Boulevard, east of El Camino Real, and west of Rancho del Oro. The proposed project consists of: (1) The construction and operation of a plant nursery on 80.15 acres; and (2) implementation of a Habitat Conservation Plan over a 15-year period. The Plan would establish and provide for management of a 29.66-acre conservation area on the project site, consisting of 24.0 acres of coastal sage scrub for the gnatcatcher and 5.66 acres of riparian habitat for the least Bells vireo. Evergreen Nursery would re-vegetate or enhance approximately 7 acres of coastal sage scrub habitat within the conservation area.
Project features include two primary nursery areas where plants would be grown and sold, a sales and administration building, a maintenance building, a facility building, a compost production area, and a water collection pond. To access the south side of the site an approximately 100 foot-long bridge would be constructed over Loma Alta Creek (at the location of an existing road crossing) and over active railroad tracks. Existing flat and disturbed areas south of the railroad tracks would be used for plant growing and storage in containers. Existing dirt roads would be used for access.
The Habitat Conservation Plan and the Environmental Assessment consider three alternatives to the proposed commercial development project: the no project alternative, the alternate location alternative, and the alternate plan designs alternative. Under the proposed project alternative, a permit would be issued for incidental take of the gnatcatcher. This alternative would result in the permanent loss of 4.11 acres of habitat that currently supports 3 gnatcatchers (one breeding pair, plus an unpaired male) within the 80.15-acre project site. This alternative would permanently preserve 29.66 acres of habitat for the gnatcatcher.
Under the no project alternative, Evergreen Nursery would not apply for an incidental take permit, would not construct the proposed nursery on the site, and would not establish and manage a preserve for the threatened coastal California gnatcatcher. Present disturbance of the project area would continue in the form of trespassing in gnatcatcher-occupied habitat, illegal dumping, erosion, and periodic fire. Considering the area is zoned for commercial use, it is likely that the area would eventually be developed for another commercial use.
Under the alternate location alternative, Evergreen Nursery sought alternative sites for the proposed nursery within the county limits of San Diego County. The environmental consequences of developing some of these sites were not analyzed since none of the sites met the requirements that would allow for sale of nursery stock. The sites that did not meet the project goals would not have required a permit. One property that did meet the needs of the project was eliminated from consideration due to environmental concerns. Approximately 90 acres of the parcel lies in the San Luis Rey River basin. The remainder of the property is coastal sage scrub habitat on steep slopes. This site would have had greater impacts to sensitive and listed species than the proposed project and would have required the issuance of a permit.
Evergreen Nursery also considered alternate plan designs to its project. This alternative would have resulted in greater impacts to sensitive and listed species than the proposed project. The open space preserve would have been smaller and the benefit to the gnatcatcher and vireo would have been less than the proposed project.
This notice is provided pursuant to section 10(c) of the Endangered Species Act and pursuant to implementing regulations for the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1506.6). The Service will evaluate the permit application, associated documents, and comments submitted thereon to determine whether the application meets the requirements of National Environmental Policy Act regulations and section 10(a) of the Endangered Species Act. If we determine that the requirements are met, we will issue a permit for the incidental take of the gnatcatcher. Our final decision will not be completed until after the end of the 30-day comment period and will fully consider all public comments received during the comment period.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
Notice of Availability.
The partnership of Railroad Canyon-Lake Elsinore (the Applicant) has applied to the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for an Incidental Take Permit (Permit) pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The proposed permit would authorize take of the coastal California gnatcatcher (
The application includes: (1) The proposed Habitat Conservation Plan (Plan), which fully describes the proposed project and the measures that the Applicant would undertake to minimize and mitigate anticipated take of the California gnatcatcher, as required in Section 10(a)(2)(B) of the Act; and (2) the proposed Implementing Agreement. Activities covered by the requested Permit and addressed by the proposed Plan include the development of 120 undeveloped lots with Riversidian coastal sage scrub for residential use. This project would permanently eliminate 9.2 acres of suitable habitat for the California gnatcatcher. The Service also announces the availability of an Environmental Assessment for the permit application.
This notice is provided pursuant to section 10(a) of the Act and National Environmental Policy Act regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). The Plan, Implementing Agreement, and the Environmental Assessment are available for review and comment by other agencies and the public. All comments received, including names and addresses, will become part of the public record and will be available for review pursuant to section 10(c) of the Act.
Written comments must be received no later than March 1, 2000.
Written comments should be addressed to Mr. Jim Bartel, Assistant Field Supervisor, Fish and Wildlife Service, 2730 Loker Avenue West, Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments may also be sent by facsimile to (760) 431-5902.
Ms. Karin Cleary-Rose, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, at the above address or call (760) 431-9440.
You may obtain copies of these documents by contacting the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office at the above address and telephone number. Documents also will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office and at the Lake Elsinore City Library located at 600 W Graham Street, Lake Elsinore.
Section 9 of the Act and Federal regulation prohibit the “take” of fish or wildlife species listed as endangered or threatened, respectively. Take of listed fish or wildlife is defined under the Act to mean harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. However, the Service, under limited circumstances, may issue permits to authorize incidental take; i.e., take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, the carrying out of an otherwise lawful activity. Regulations governing incidental take permits for threatened and endangered species are found at 50 CFR 17.32 and 17.22, respectively.
The Applicant has proposed one tract for development within the Canyon Creek Specific Plan Area. The project site is located between Interstate 15 and Canyon Lake, at the mouth of Railroad Canyon in the City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California. Typical land uses in the area surrounding the project site include several residential developments, one commercial center, and undeveloped coastal sage scrub areas. The San Jacinto River is south of the project site and a 40-acre Bureau of Land Management parcel is adjacent to the north side of the project site. The Applicant proposes residential development of 120 homes on the project site.
Biologists surveyed the project site for special-status plants and wildlife in 1998. Based on these surveys and previous knowledge of the area, the Service concluded that the project may result in the take of one federally listed species, the threatened California gnatcatcher.
The Applicant proposes to implement the following measures to minimize and mitigate take of the California gnatcatcher: (1) Constructing a masonry wall between the proposed residential lots and adjacent Bureau of Land Management property with an additional barrier placed between the edge of the subdivision and the main road to minimize effects to adjacent California gnatcatcher populations; (2) placing restrictions pertaining to pets and lighting in the lot titles and using signs to educate the public and encourage protection of the adjacent biological resources; (3) attaching an information packet describing the biological values of adjacent coastal sage scrub areas as part of the recorded deed for the proposed homes; (4) revegetating 5.79 acres onsite; and (5) mitigating the loss of 9.2 acres of successional Riversidian coastal sage scrub habitat by purchasing 13.8 acres of good quality Riversidian coastal sage scrub in the Sedco Hills Mitigation Bank within the Lake Mathews/Lake Skinner gnatcatcher corridor in western Riverside County. The Applicant would endow the management of the off-site mitigation area at a cost of $2,500/acre. The mitigation site would be managed by The Environmental Trust.
The Environmental Assessment considers the environmental consequences of two alternatives in addition to the Proposed Project Alternative. The Proposed Project Alternative consists of the issuance of an incidental take permit and implementation of the Plan and its Implementing Agreement, which include measures to minimize and mitigate impacts of the project to the California gnatcatcher. Under the Reduced Project Alternative, 18 lots would be dedicated as open space to form a buffer between the subdivision and the Bureau of Land Management parcel. As there would no longer be a potential for take by excluding these lots from development, no mitigation or minimization measures would be necessary. Under the No Action Alternative, the Service would not issue a permit and the project area would continue to remain as slowly recovering Riversidian coastal sage scrub habitat fragmented by intrusions of existing paved streets. The two alternatives would result in less habitat value for the California gnatcatcher than the off-site
This notice is provided pursuant to section 10(a) of the Act and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). The Service will evaluate the application, associated documents, and comments submitted thereon to determine whether the application meets the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act regulations and section 10(a) of the Act. If it is determined that the requirements are met, a permit will be issued to the Applicant for the incidental take of the California gnatcatcher. The final permit decision will be made no sooner than 30 days from the date of this notice.
Between April 1, 1999, and September 30, 1999, Region 2 of the Fish and Wildlife Service issued six permits for the incidental take of threatened and endangered species, pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended. Of the six permits issued, four are associated with the Balcones Canyonlands Preserve and two are associated with other areas. The other two permits issued are outside of The City of Austin and Travis County, but are within the Southwest Region of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Copies of the six permits and associated decision documents are available upon request.
If you would like copies of any of the above documents, please contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, P.O. Box 1306, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Leslie Dierauf, Regional Habitat Conservation Plan Coordinator, at the above address, 505-248-6651.
Section 9 of the Act and Federal Regulation prohibits the “take” of wildlife species listed as threatened or endangered species. Under the Act, the term “take” means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect listed wildlife, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. The Service may, under limited circumstances, issue permits to authorize incidental take,
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.
Notice.
The Bureau of Indian Affairs is publishing the Education Facilities Replacement Construction Priority List as of FY 2000 in the
Questions regarding the Education Facilities Construction Priority List may be addressed to Dr. Kenneth G. Ross, Assistant Director, Office of Indian Education Programs, 201 Third St. NW, Suite 510, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102, (505) 346-6544/5/6, Fax (505) 346-6553.
Publication of the Education Facilities Replacement Construction Priority List (Priority List) in the
Schools placed on the “Education Facilities Construction Priority List as of FY 1993” that are not yet fully funded for construction, project Nos. 13, 15 and 16, did not have to submit applications for ranking on the new Priority List and are retained, in order, at the top of the FY 2000 list as project Nos. 1 through 3. The FY 1993 Priority List was published in the
The Conference Report for the FY 1992 Interior Related Agencies Appropriations Act, H. Conf. Rept. No. 102-256, p. 46 (1991), indicated that Congress wanted the Department to revise the priority ranking process for new school construction. The Bureau revised the process and developed draft revised instructions and criteria, complying with the 1991 Conference Report requirements that the BIA should emphasize tribal consultation and improve the objectivity of the ranking process, provide continuity to the priority ranking list, and provide procedures for handling emergency needs.
The Bureau published a Notice in the
Copies of the final revised instructions and criteria were sent to all BIA schools and schools that receive BIA funds under contract or grant (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number: 15.062 “Replacement and Repair of Indian Schools”), and the Bureau held tribal consultation meetings on the revised process. BIA's Office of Indian Education Programs Education Line Officers offered training to applicants at all schools under their administrative jurisdiction on how to complete applications using the revised instructions and ranking criteria. Tribes and BIA-funded school boards received advance, written notice of training session dates, times and locations for tribes and schools under their respective jurisdictions. The Bureau published another Notice in the
The Committee on Appropriations also recommended that the BIA establish a demonstration project to allow tribes with schools on the replacement list to apply for Federal funding with the guarantee of a cost share from the tribe, S. Rept. No. 106-99, p. 54 (1999). Accordingly, in the priority ranking process for the Education Facilities Replacement Construction Priority List as of FY 2000, applicants indicated whether they would cost share. Congress further stated that tribes may share the cost of construction of their school, identify non-Bureau funding to match or supplement Bureau funding, or pay future operations costs in exchange for the full funding of school construction costs earlier than they might hope to receive it under the Priority List.
Use of the term “cost share” after the name of an education facility replacement construction project on the FY 2000 Priority List means that a tribe has submitted a tribal council resolution supporting a long-term commitment to cost sharing, and has specified the exact nature of its monetary commitment or contribution by completing Section II of the application form, which commits the tribe to share in the costs of school facility replacement in order to expedite construction.
This notice is published under authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs in the Departmental Manual at 209 DM 8.
Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
Notice.
The Bureau of Reclamation proposes to withdraw 170 acres of National Forest System lands, for a period of 50 years, for protection, operation and maintenance of the Washington and Lost Lake Dams in the Upper Provo River component of the Bonneville Unit of the Central Utah Project. This notice segregates the lands for up to 2 years from location and entry under the United States mining laws. The lands will remain open to all other uses which may be made of National Forest System lands.
Comments and requests for a meeting must be received on or before May 1, 2000.
Comments and meeting requests should be sent to the Bureau of Reclamation, Area Manager, Provo Area Office, 302 East 1860 South, Provo, Utah 84606-7317.
David Krueger, Provo Area Office, 801-379-1083.
On December 1, 1999, a petition was approved allowing the Bureau of Reclamation to file an application to withdraw the following described National Forest System lands from location and entry under the United States mining laws, subject to valid existing rights:
The areas described aggregate 170 acres in Summit County.
All persons who wish to submit comments, suggestions, or objections in connection with the proposed
Notice is hereby given that an opportunity for a public meeting is afforded in connection with the proposed withdrawal. All interested persons who desire a public meeting for the purpose of being heard on the proposed withdrawal must submit a written request to the Bureau of Reclamation, Provo Area Office, within 90 days from the date of publication of this notice. Upon determination by the authorized officer that a public meeting will be held, a notice of the time and place will be published in the
The application will be processed in accordance with the regulations set forth in 43 CFR 2300.
For a period of 2 years from the date of publication of this notice in the
National Park Service, DOI.
This notice announces the revision of the boundary of Mount Rainier National Park to include one additional tract of land, effective upon this publication.
National Park Service, Chief, Land Resources Program Center, Columbia Cascades Support Office, 909 First Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104-1060, (206) 220-4065.
Public Law 104-333, authorizes minor boundary revisions of areas within the National Park System. Such boundary revisions may be made after advising the appropriate congressional committees and upon publication in the
Approximately 12.5 acres of unimproved land and underlying separate mineral interests in Pierce County, Washington are being acquired by donation.
This boundary revision accommodates and includes the property donations, which are now a part of Mount Rainer National Park, identified as Tract 01-108.
The official map depicting the boundary adjustment and the property donation(s) is “Mount Rainier National Park, Drawing No. 105-92,002, Segment 01, dated March 1990”. The map is available for inspection at the aforementioned Land Resources Program Center—Columbia Cascades Support Office.
Pursuant to § 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190, as amended) and the regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR Part 1505.2), the Department of the Interior, National Park Service has prepared and approved a Record of Decision for the Final Environmental Impact Statement Wilderness and Backcountry Management Plan for Joshua Tree National Park. The no action period was initiated November 5, 1999, with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
The National Park Service will implement wilderness stewardship actions, monitoring, research, and other elements of a comprehensive program described as the New Proposed Action (Alternative E), as soon as practical. This course of action and four alternatives were identified and analyzed in the Final and Supplemental Environmental Impacts Statements (latter issued November 2, 1998). The Draft Environmental Impact Statement was distributed on November 21, 1997.
Interested parties desiring to review the Record of Decision may obtain a copy by contacting the Superintendent, Joshua Tree National Park, 74485 National Park Dr., Twentynine Palms, California 92277-3597; or via telephone request at (760) 367-5502.
Pursuant to Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act, the National Park Service will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement to assess the potential impacts of future development and management options in conjunction with the General Management Plan (GMP) for Cane River Creole National Historical Park, Louisiana.
Preparation of a draft GMP began in 1996 and included preparation of a draft Environmental Assessment. Scoping for the plan has included interdisciplinary team meetings with the Cane River National Heritage Area Commission, interested agencies, organizations, and individuals. Meetings with the general public were conducted in January and February, 1996, March and April 1997, and March and April 1998. The scoping process has indicated that the proposals being considered may constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Therefore, the preparation of an EIS in conjunction with the plan is appropriate.
The General Management Plan and EIS will investigate alternatives ranging from no action to a variety of development and management proposals designed to guide visitor use, resource protection, and partnership relationships. Federal, state, and local agencies, and other individuals and organizations who may be interested in, or affected by, the future development of Cane River Creole National Historical Park are further invited to participate in refining or identifying issues.
Preparation of the plan and EIS is expected to take about 11 months. The draft plan and EIS should be available for public review by early spring, 2000 with the final plan and EIS and Record of Decision expected to be completed by
Written comments concerning preparation of the EIS or requests for information or to be added to the project mailing list, should be sent to: Superintendent, Cane River Creole National Historical Park, 4386 Highway 494, Natchez, Louisiana 71456. Telephone: 318-352-0383. E-mail: laura_soulliere@nps.gov.
Superintendent, Cane River Creole National Historical Park, at the above address and telephone number.
Cane River Creole National Historical Park was designated November 2, 1994. Congress established the park to: (1) Assist in the preservation and interpretation of, and education concerning, the Creole culture and diverse history of the Natchitoches region, and (2) to provide technical assistance to landowners and preservation organizations. The park includes a total of 63 acres of historic plantation properties located at two distinct sites along the Cane River in northwestern Louisiana near the city of Natchitoches: (1) 44 acres of Oakland Plantation and (2) 19 acres of Magnolia Plantation. The plantations were owned and continuously operated by the same French Creole families for eight generations. They retain an extensive number of outbuildings and have retained the appearance and integrity of modest family plantations. Most of the structures are classic Creole architecture with roots in African and early French architecture. Oakland Plantation includes the remaining core plantation infrastructure of 26 buildings, ranging from the main house and 1835 bottle garden, to numerous outbuildings, including the plantation store, pigeonniers, a large seed house, workshops, and two quarters. The Magnolia Plantation unit is comprised of 17 outbuildings and dependencies, including the slave hospital/overseer's house, a unique complex of eight brick quarters clustered in two rows, the plantation store, a blacksmith shop, and a large gin barn that houses a rare cotton press and two types of cotton gins.
The 1994 legislation also created the Cane River National Heritage Area and Commission. This national heritage area was created to complement the park and provide a culturally sensitive approach to preserving the heritage of the Cane River region through local partnerships, thereby minimizing the need for federal land acquisition or management. The Commission is advisory to the National Park Service in the preparation of the general management plan.
In accordance with NPS park planning policy, the GMP/EIS will ensure the park has a clearly defined direction for resource preservation and visitor use. It will be developed in consultation with the public and based on adequate analysis of existing and potential resource conditions and visitor experiences, environmental impacts, and costs of alternative courses of action.
Our practice is to make comments, including names and home addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their home address from the rulemaking record, which we will honor to the extent allowable by law.
There also may be circumstances in which we would withhold from the rulemaking record a respondent's identity as allowable by law. If you wish for us to withhold your name and/or address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comment. However, we will not consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety.
The environmental review of the GMP/EIS for the park will be conducted in accordance with requirements of the NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4371
National Park Service, Interior.
The Superintendent of Lake Clark National Park and Preserve and the Chair of the Lake Clark Subsistence Resource Commission announce a forthcoming meeting of the Subsistence Resource Commission for Lake Clark National Park.
The following agenda items will be discussed:
(1) Call to order.
(2) Roll call—Confirm Quorum.
(3) Introductions.
(4) Superintendent's Welcome.
(5) Additions, corrections and agenda approval.
(6) Approval of SRC meeting minutes.
(7) SRC Purpose and Role.
(8) Status of Membership.
(9) Park Subsistence Coordinator's Report.
(10) Report on October 1999 Chair Workshop.
(11) Old Business.
(a) Status of Lake Clark Subsistence Management Plan.
(b) 1999 Federal Subsistence Board Action—Proposal #35 Unit 9B Moose.
(12) New Business.
(a) Update on 2000-2001Federal Subsistence Board Proposals.
(i) Proposal #31—Unit 9B Brown Bear.
(ii) Proposal #32—Unit 9B Black Bear/Brown Bears.
(iii) Proposal #39—Unit 9B Beaver.
(13) Federal Subsistence Fisheries Management Report.
(14) Agency Reports and Public Comments.
(15) Election of Officers.
(a) Chair.
(b) Vice Chair.
(16) SRC Work Session—Prepare correspondence/recommendations.
(17) Set time and place of next meeting.
(18) Adjournment.
The meeting will begin at 10 am on Thursday, February 3, 2000 and conclude around 4:30 pm.
The meeting will be held at the Nondalton Community Hall, Nondalton, Alaska. Phone (907) 294-2288.
Lee Fink, Chief of Operations, 4230 University Drive, Suite 311, Anchorage, Alaska 99508, Phone (907) 271-3751; or Karen Stickman, Subsistence Coordinator, 1 Park Place, Port Alsworth, Alaska 99653, Phone (907) 781-2218.
The Subsistence Resource Commissions are authorized under Title VIII, Section 808, of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, Pub. L. 96-487, and operate in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committees Act. Note that under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), transcripts of any person giving public
National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Notice of Meeting.
NASA will conduct an open forum meeting to solicit questions, views and opinions of interested persons or firms concerning NASA's procurement policies, practices, and initiatives. The purpose of the meeting is to hold an open discussion between NASA's Associate Administrator for Procurement, industry, and the public. Note: This is not a meeting about doing business with NASA for new firms, nor does it focus particularly on small businesses or specific contracting opportunities.
Wednesday, March 8, 2000, from 1:00 to 2:45 p.m.
The meeting will be held at the NASA Johnson Space Center, Building 30A Auditorium/Room 1093, 2101 NASA Road 1, Houston, TX 77058. A map of the area is available at http://inspection.jsc.nasa.gov/map.html.
NASA Johnson Space Center Industry Assistance Office, Code BD35, 2101 NASA Road 1, Houston,TX 77058, (281) 483-4511.
There will be a presentation by the Associate Administrator for Procurement, followed by a question and answer period. Procurement issues will be discussed, including NASA's newest initiatives used in the award and administration of contracts. Questions for the open forum should be presented at the meeting and should not be submitted in advance. Position papers are not being solicited.
Doors to the auditorium will open at 12:30 p.m. All attendees must be U.S. citizens or have resident alien status. Attendees who do not currently hold a Johnson Space Center badge will be required to clear through the Center's Security Office in Building 110 for badging and car passes. Sufficient time should be allowed to accommodate this process. No reservations will be accepted. Seating capacity is limited to 135 persons; therefore, a maximum of two representatives per firm is requested. Admittance will be on a first-come, first-served basis.
In addition to the general discussion mentioned above, NASA invites comments or questions relative to its ongoing procurement initiatives, some of which include, but are not limited to, the following:
This initiative seeks to integrate the principles of risk management throughout the acquisition process by purposefully considering the various aspects of risk when developing the acquisition strategy, selecting sources, choosing contract type, structuring fee incentives, and conducting contractor surveillance.
The CCI initiative emphasizes developing, using, and sharing contracts to meet Agency objectives.
This initiative is focused on structuring an acquisition around the purpose of the work to be performed rather than using broad, imprecise statements or prescribing how the work is to be performed.
This initiative will assess the effectiveness of the Agency's profit/fee practices as a means for motivating and rewarding contractor performance. In addition, it will investigate other, non-traditional ways to motivate contractor performance.
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
Notice.
NARA is giving public notice that the agency has submitted to OMB for approval the information collections described in this notice. The public is invited to comment on the proposed information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Written comments must be submitted to OMB at the address below on or before March 1, 2000 to be assured of consideration.
Comments should be sent to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Ms. Virginia Huth, Desk Officer for NARA, Washington, DC 20503.
Requests for additional information or copies of the proposed information collections and supporting statements should be directed to Tamee Fechhelm at telephone number 301-713-6730 or fax number 301-713-6913.
Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13), NARA invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed information collections. NARA published a notice of proposed collection for these information collections on November 16, 1999 (64 FR 62222 and 62223). No comments were received. NARA has submitted the described information collections to OMB for approval.
In response to this notice, comments and suggestions should address one or more of the following points: (a) Whether the proposed information collections are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of NARA; (b) the accuracy of NARA's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collections; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of information technology. In this notice, NARA is soliciting comments concerning the following information collections:
1.
2.
The NSF management official having responsibility for the U.S. National Assessment Synthesis Team (#5219) has determined that renewing for an additional eight months is necessary and in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed upon the Director, National Science Foundation (NSF), by 42 U.S.C. 1861
Authority for this Committee will expire on September 30, 2000, unless renewed. For more information, please contact Karen York, NSF, at (703) 306-1182.
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following meeting.
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public Law 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following meeting:
1:00 p.m., Monday, February 7, 2000; 8:30 a.m., Tuesday, February 8, 2000.
Coral Gables, Florida, at the Biltmore Hotel, 1200 Anastasia Avenue, in the Country Club Ballroom.
February 7 (Closed); February 8 (Open).
1. Postal Rate Commission Opinion and Recommended Decision in Docket No. MC00-1, Experimental Ride-Along Periodicals Classification Change.
2. Annual Performance Report 1999.
3. Preliminary Annual Performance Plan Targets.
4. Financial Performance.
5. Eproof Service.
6. Personnel Matters.
7. Compensation Issues.
1. Minutes of the Previous Meeting, January 10-11, 2000.
2. Remarks of the Postmaster General/Chief Executive Officer.
3. Appointment of Members to Board Committees.
4. Preliminary Annual Performance Plan.
5. Fiscal Year 1999 Comprehensive Statement on Postal Operations.
6. Quarterly Report on Service Performance.
7. Quarterly Report on Financial Results.
8. Capital Investment.
a. Business Customer Support Systems (BCSS).
9. Report on the South Florida District.
10. Tentative Agenda for the March 6-7, 2000, meeting in Washington, DC.
Thomas J. Koerber, Secretary of the Board, U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza, SW, Washington, DC 20260-1000. Telephone (202) 268-4800.
The Department of State announces meetings of the U.S. International Telecommunication Advisory Committee for Radiocommunication (ITAC-R) and a joint meeting of the ITAC-R and ITAC-T the International Telecommunication Advisory Committee—Telecommunication Standardization. The purpose of the committee is to advise the Department and provide strategic planning recommendations on telecommunication and information policy matters related to the United States participation in the work of International Telecommunications Treaty Organizations. The ITAC-R will meet from 9:30 to noon on February 3, 2000 in room 5951 at the Department of State to Prepare for the ITU Radiocommunication Assembly, May 1-5, 2000. A joint meeting of ITAC-R and ITAC-T will meet from 2 PM to 4:30 PM on February 3, 2000 in room 5951 to prepare for international study group meetings of the ITU-R and ITU-T that deal with related issues concerning broadcasting and telecommunications matters, and IMT-2000 coordination between ITAC-R and ITAC-T.
Members of the general public may attend these meetings and join in the discussions, subject to the Instructions of the Chair. Admission of public members will be limited to seating available. Entrance to the Department of State is controlled; people intending to attend any of these meetings should send a fax to 202-647-7407 not later than 24 hours before the meeting. This fax should display the name of the meeting, (ITAC-R or Joint ITAC-R and ITAC-T) and date of the meeting, your name, social security number, date of birth, and organizational affiliation. One of the following valid photo identifications will be required for admittance: US driver's license, US passport, and US Government identification card. Enter From the “C” Street Main Lobby; in view of escorting requirements, non-Government attendees should plan to arrive not later than 15 minutes before the meeting begins.
Federal Transit Administration, DOT.
Notice of request for comments.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the intention of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to request the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to extend the following currently approved information collections:
(1) Nondiscrimination as it Applies to FTA Grant Programs
(2) Title VI as it Applies to FTA Grant Programs
(3) Reporting of Technical Activities by FTA Grant Recipients
(4) Bus Testing Program
Comments must be submitted before March 31, 2000.
All written comments must refer to the docket number that appears at the top of this document and be submitted to the United States Department of Transportation, Central Dockets Office, PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. All comments received will be available for examination at the above address from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Those desiring notification of receipt of
Interested parties are invited to send comments regarding any aspect of these information collections, including: (1) The necessity and utility of the information collection for the proper performance of the functions of the FTA; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the collected information; and (4) ways to minimize the collection burden without reducing the quality of the collected information. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB reinstatement of this information collection.
To determine a grantee's compliance with applicable laws and requirements, grantee submissions are evaluated and analyzed based on the following criteria. First, an EEO program must include an EEO policy statement issued by the chief executive officer covering all employment practices, including recruitment, selection, promotions, terminations, transfers, layoffs, compensation, training, benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment. Second, the policy must be placed conspicuously so that employees, applicants, and the general public are aware of the agency's EEO commitment.
The data derived from written EEO and affirmative action plans will be used by the Office of Civil Rights in monitoring grantees' compliance with applicable EEO laws and regulations. This monitoring and enforcement activity will ensure that minorities and women have equitable access to employment opportunities and that recipients of Federal funds do not discriminate against any employee or applicant because of race, color, creed, sex, national origin, age, or disability.
FTA's assessment of this requirement indicated that the formulation and implementation of the Title VI program should occur with a decrease in costs to such applicants and recipients.
All FTA grant applicants, recipients, and subrecipients are required to submit applicable Title VI information to the FTA Office of Civil Rights for review and approval. If FTA did not conduct pre-award reviews, solutions would not be generated in advance and program improvements could not be integrated into projects. FTA's experience with pre-award reviews for all projects and grants suggests this method contributes to maximum efficiency and cost effectiveness of FTA dollars and has kept post-award complaints to a minimum. Moreover, the objective of the Title VI statute can be more easily attained and beneficiaries of FTA funded programs have a greater likelihood of receiving transit services and related benefits on a nondiscriminatory basis.
The information collected by these forms is used to report annually to Congress, the Secretary, and to the Federal Transit Administrator on how grantees are responding to national emphasis areas and congressional direction, and allows FTA to track grantees' use of Federal planning and research funds.
The operator of the Bus Testing Center, the Pennsylvania Transportation Institute (PTI), has entered into a cooperative agreement with FTA. PTI operates and maintains the Center, and establishes and collects fees for the testing of the vehicles at the facility. Upon completion of the testing of the vehicle at the Center, a test report is provided to the manufacturer of the new bus model. The bus manufacturer certifies to an FTA grantee that the bus the grantee is purchasing has been tested at the Center. Also, grantees about to purchase a bus use this report to assist them in making their purchasing decisions. PTI maintains a reference file for all the test reports which are made available to the public.
The Department of Treasury has submitted the following public information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 2110, 1425 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.
Written comments should be received on or before March 1, 2000 to be assured of consideration.
The Department of Treasury has submitted the following public information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 2110, 1425 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.
Written comments should be received on or before March 1, 2000 to be assured of consideration.
United States Institute of Peace.
Notice.
The Agency announces its Upcoming Spring Unsolicited Grant Deadline, which offers support for research, education and training, and the dissemination of information on international peace and conflict resolution.
Application Material Available on Request. Receipt Date for Return of Application: March 1, 2000. Notification of Awards: June 2000.
For Application Package: United States Institute of Peace Grant Program—Unsolicited Grants, 1200 17th Street, NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20036-3011, (202) 429-3842 (phone), (202) 429-429-6063 (fax), (202) 457-1719 (TTY), Email: grant_program@usip.org
Applications also available on-line at our web site: www.usip.org
The Grant Program, Phone (202) 429-3842.
In rule document 99-33429 beginning on page 72414 in the issue of Monday, December 27, 1999, make the following correction:
On page 72414, in the table, in the first column labeled “Item”, the second Roman numeral “I” should read “II”, in sequence.
In rule document 99-33436 appearing on page 72447 in the issue of Monday, December 27, 1999, make the following corrections:
On page 72447, in the first column, under the heading
In rule document 99-33431 beginning on page 72416, in the issue of Monday, December 27, 1999, make the following corrections:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
In notice document 00-1455, beginning on page 3431, in the issue of Friday, January 21, 2000, in the third column, in the
In notice document 00-780 beginning on page 2215 in the issue of Thursday, January 13, 2000, in the third column, at the end of the first paragraph under
In rule document 99-33429 beginning on page 72414 in the issue of Monday, December 27, 1999, make the following correction:
On page 72414, in the table, in the first column labeled “Item”, the second Roman numeral “I” should read “II”, in sequence.
In rule document 99-33436 appearing on page 72447 in the issue of Monday, December 27, 1999, make the following corrections:
On page 72447, in the first column, under the heading
In rule document 99-33431 beginning on page 72416, in the issue of Monday, December 27, 1999, make the following corrections:
1. On page 72422, in the first column, in section 25.100, in the fifth line, in the introductory text, after “United States”, add “including supplies acquired under contracts set aside for small business concerns, if—
(a)The supply contract exceeds the micro-purchase threshold; or”.
2. On page 72428, in section 25.504-4(a), in the table at the bottom of the page, in the last line entry, “NEL=10,600” should read “*NEL=10,600”
3. On page 72434, in section 52.225-2(a), in the second column, in the ninth line, “and” should read “end”.
4. On page 72435, in section 52.225-4, in the third column, in the eighth line, “List as necessary)” should read “(List as necessary)”.
5. On page 72437, in section 52.225-9(b)(2), in the third column, in the fourth line, “[Contracting Officer to list applicable excepted materials or indicate “none”]” should read “
6. On page 72439, in section 52.225-11(b)(3), in the second column, in the fifth line, “[Contracting Officer to list applicable excepted materials or indicate “none”]” should read “
In notice document 00-1455, beginning on page 3431, in the issue of Friday, January 21, 2000, in the third column, in the
In notice document 00-780 beginning on page 2215 in the issue of Thursday, January 13, 2000, in the third column, at the end of the first paragraph under
Federal Communications Commission.
Final rule.
This document revises the Table of Frequency Allocations (“Table”). This action is necessary in order to more clearly display the Table and to assist the
Effective January 31, 2000.
Tom Mooring, Office of Engineering and Technology, (202) 418-2450.
This is a summary of the Commission's
1. By this action, the Commission's Office of Engineering and Technology and Office of Managing Director amends the Table and supporting sections of the Commission's rules in order to more clearly display the Table and to assist the
• The International Table in the Commission's rules is updated to reflect the [International] Table of Frequency Allocations as it is found in the 1998 International Telecommunication Union
• International footnotes in the United States Table that have not been substantively revised are re-numbered;
• Expired footnotes or portions of footnotes are removed from the United States Table;
• The special-use frequencies column of the Table is removed; and
• Various typographical errors and omissions are corrected.
2. Part 2 of the Commission's rules, IS AMENDED as set forth, effective upon publication in the
Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
47 U.S.C. 154, 302, 303, 307, 336 and 337, unless otherwise noted.
The provisions of the
(a) The International Table of Frequency Allocations is subdivided into the Region 1 Table (column 1 of § 2.106), the Region 2 Table (column 2 of § 2.106), and the Region 3 Table (column 3 of § 2.106). The International Table is included for informational purposes only.
(b)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4) The lines A, B and C are defined as follows:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(c)
(1) The term “African Broadcasting Area” means:
(i) African countries, parts of countries, territories and groups of territories situated between the parallels 40° South and 30° North;
(ii) Islands in the Indian Ocean west of meridian 60° East of Greenwich, situated between the parallel 40° South and the great circle arc joining the points 45° East, 11° 30′ North and 60° East, 15° North; and
(iii) Islands in the Atlantic Ocean east of line B, situated between the parallels 40° South and 30° North.
(2) The “European Broadcasting Area” is bounded on the west by the western boundary of Region 1, on the east by the meridian 40° East of Greenwich and on the south by the parallel 30° North so as to include the northern part of Saudi Arabia and that part of those countries bordering the Mediterranean within these limits. In addition, Iraq, Jordan and that part of the territory of Syria, Turkey and Ukraine lying outside the above limits are included in the European Broadcasting Area.
(3) The “European Maritime Area” is bounded to the north by a line extending along parallel 72° North from its intersection with meridian 55° East of Greenwich to its intersection with meridian 5° West, then along meridian 5° West to its intersection with parallel 67° North, thence along parallel 67° North to its intersection with meridian 32° West; to the west by a line extending along meridian 32° West to its intersection with parallel 30° North; to the south by a line extending along parallel 30° North to its intersection with meridian 43° East; to the east by a line extending along meridian 43° East to its intersection with parallel 60° North, thence along parallel 60° North to its intersection with meridian 55° East and thence along meridian 55° East to its intersection with parallel 72° North.
(4) The “Tropical Zone” (see Figure 1 of this section) is defined as:
(i) The whole of that area in Region 2 between the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn.
(ii) The whole of that area in Regions 1 and 3 contained between the parallels 30° North and 35° South with the addition of:
(A) The area contained between the meridians 40° East and 80° East of Greenwich and the parallels 30° North and 40° North; and
(B) That part of Libya north of parallel 30° North.
(iii) In Region 2, the Tropical Zone may be extended to parallel 33° North, subject to special agreements between the countries concerned in that Region.
(5) A sub-Region is an area consisting of two or more countries in the same Region.
(d)
(i) Services the names of which are printed in “capitals” (example: FIXED); these are called “primary” services; and
(ii) Services the names of which are printed in “normal characters” (example: Mobile); these are called “secondary” services (see paragraph (d)(3) of this section).
(2) Additional remarks shall be printed in normal characters (example: MOBILE except aeronautical mobile).
(3) Stations of a secondary service:
(i) Shall not cause harmful interference to stations of primary services to which frequencies are already assigned or to which frequencies may be assigned at a later date;
(ii) Cannot claim protection from harmful interference from stations of a primary service to which frequencies are already assigned or may be assigned at a later date; and
(iii) Can claim protection, however, from harmful interference from stations of the same or other secondary service(s) to which frequencies may be assigned at a later date.
(4) Where a band is indicated in a footnote of the International Table as allocated to a service “on a secondary basis” in an area smaller than a Region, or in a particular country, this is a secondary service (see paragraph (d)(3) of this section).
(5) Where a band is indicated in a footnote of the International Table as allocated to a service “on a primary basis”, in an area smaller than a Region, or in a particular country, this is a primary service only in that area or country.
(e)
(2) If the footnote does not include any restriction on the service or services concerned apart from the restriction to operate only in a particular area or country, stations of this service or these services shall have equality of right to operate with stations of the other primary service or services indicated in the International Table.
(3) If restrictions are imposed on an additional allocation in addition to the restriction to operate only in a particular area or country, this is indicated in the footnote of the International Table.
(f)
(2) If the footnote does not include any restriction on stations of the service or services concerned, apart from the restriction to operate only in a particular area or country, these stations of such a service or services shall have an equality of right to operate with stations of the primary service or services, indicated in the International Table, to which the band is allocated in other areas or countries.
(3) If restrictions are imposed on stations of a service to which an alternative allocation is made, in addition to the restriction to operate only in a particular country or area, this is indicated in the footnote.
(g)
(2) Except if otherwise specified in a footnote, the term “fixed service”, where appearing in the International
(h)
(2) The frequency band referred to in each allocation is indicated in the left-hand top corner of the part of the Table concerned.
(3) Within each of the categories specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section, services are listed in alphabetical order according to the French language. The order of listing does not indicate relative priority within each category.
(4) In the case where there is a parenthetical addition to an allocation in the International Table, that service allocation is restricted to the type of operation so indicated.
(5) The footnote references which appear in the International Table below the allocated service or services apply to the whole of the allocation concerned.
(6) The footnote references which appear to the right of the name of a service are applicable only to that particular service.
(7) In certain cases, the names of countries appearing in the footnotes have been simplified in order to shorten the text.
(a) The United States Table of Frequency Allocations (United States Table) is subdivided into the Federal Government Table of Frequency Allocations (Federal Government Table, column 4 of § 2.106) and the Non-Federal Government Table of Frequency Allocations (Non-Federal Government Table, column 5 of § 2.106). The United States Table is based on the Region 2 Table because the relevant area of jurisdiction is located primarily in Region 2
(b) In the United States, radio spectrum may be allocated to either Federal government or non-Federal government use exclusively, or for shared use. In the case of shared use, the type of service(s) permitted need not be the same [
(c)
(i) Services, the names of which are printed in “capitals” [example: FIXED]; these are called “primary” services;
(ii) Services, the names of which are printed in “normal characters” [example: Mobile]; these are called “secondary” services.
(2) Stations of a secondary service:
(i) Shall not cause harmful interference to stations of primary services to which frequencies are already assigned or to which frequencies may be assigned at a later date;
(ii) Cannot claim protection from harmful interference from stations of a primary service to which frequencies are already assigned or may be assigned at a later date; and
(iii) Can claim protection, however, from harmful interference from stations of the same or other secondary service(s) to which frequencies may be assigned at a later date.
(d)
(2) When the Federal Government and Non-Federal Government Tables are exactly the same for a shared band, the line between columns 4 and 5 is deleted and the allocations are shown once.
(3) The Federal Government Table, given in column 4, is included for informational purposes only.
(4) In the case where there is a parenthetical addition to an allocation in the United States Table [example: FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-earth)], that service allocation is restricted to the type of operation so indicated.
(5) The following symbols are used to designate footnotes in the United States Table:
(i) Any footnote consisting of “S5.” followed by one or more digits,
(ii) Any footnote consisting of the letters US followed by one or more digits,
(iii) Any footnote consisting of the letters NG followed by one or more digits,
(iv) Any footnote consisting of the letter G following by one or more digits,
(6) If a frequency or frequency band has been allocated to a radiocommunication service in the Non-Federal Government Table, then a cross reference may be added for the pertinent FCC Rule part (column 6 of § 2.106). For example, the 849-851 MHz band is allocated to the non-Federal government aeronautical mobile service, rules for the use of the 849-851 MHz band have been added to Part 22—Public Mobile Services (47 CFR part 22), and a cross reference, Public Mobile (22), has been added in Column 6 of the Table. The exact use that can be made of any given frequency or frequency band (
a. The Table proceeding the international footnotes is revised and shall begin on a left-hand page.
b. The international footnotes section is revised.
c. United States footnotes US7, US78, US221, US256, US257, US296, US303, US311, US319, and US322 are revised.
d. United States footnotes US272, US284, US326, and US341 are removed.
e. The heading to the list of “Non-Government (NG) Footnotes” is revised and in the parenthetical following the
f. Non-Federal government footnotes NG47, NG102, NG120, NG124, NG128, and NG147 are revised.
g. Non-Federal government footnotes NG133, NG139, NG140, and NG154 are removed.
h. The heading to the list of “Government (G) Footnotes” is revised and in the parenthetical following the heading revise “Government” to read “Federal Government”.
i. Federal government footnotes G101 and G119 are removed.
j. Federal government footnote G106 is revised.
The International Telecommunication Union has recently re-numbered international footnotes using the “S” numbering scheme and has substantively revised the text of certain of these international footnotes. These international footnotes shall be listed immediately below this note in I. Until such time as the Commission has considered the substantively revised international footnotes that have previously been adopted domestically, the old international footnotes shall apply in the United States. These footnotes appear immediately after footnote S5.565 in II.
S5.53 Administrations authorizing the use of frequencies below 9 kHz shall ensure that no harmful interference is caused thereby to the services to which the bands above 9 kHz are allocated.
S5.54 Administrations conducting scientific research using frequencies below 9 kHz are urged to advise other administrations that may be concerned in order that such research may be afforded all practicable protection from harmful interference.
S5.55
S5.56 The stations of services to which the bands 14-19.95 kHz and 20.05-70 kHz and in Region 1 also the bands 72-84 kHz and 86-90 kHz are allocated may transmit standard frequency and time signals. Such stations shall be afforded protection from harmful interference. In Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Georgia, Kazakstan, Mongolia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Ukraine, the frequencies 25 kHz and 50 kHz will be used for this purpose under the same conditions.
S5.57 The use of the bands 14-19.95 kHz, 20.05-70 kHz and 70-90 kHz (72-84 kHz and 86-90 kHz in Region 1) by the maritime mobile service is limited to coast radiotelegraph stations (A1A and F1B only). Exceptionally, the use of class J2B or J7B emissions is authorized subject to the necessary bandwidth not exceeding that normally used for class A1A or F1B emissions in the band concerned.
S5.58
S5.59
S5.60 In the bands 70-90 kHz (70-86 kHz in Region 1) and 110-130 kHz (112-130 kHz in Region 1), pulsed radionavigation systems may be used on condition that they do not cause harmful interference to other services to which these bands are allocated.
S5.61 In Region 2, the establishment and operation of stations in the maritime radionavigation service in the bands 70-90 kHz and 110-130 kHz shall be subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21 with administrations whose services, operating in accordance with the Table, may be affected. However, stations of the fixed, maritime mobile and radiolocation services shall not cause harmful interference to stations in the maritime radionavigation service established under such agreements.
S5.62 Administrations which operate stations in the radionavigation service in the band 90-110 kHz are urged to coordinate technical and operating characteristics in such a way as to avoid harmful interference to the services provided by these stations.
S5.64 Only classes A1A or F1B, A2C, A3C, F1C or F3C emissions are authorized for stations of the fixed service in the bands allocated to this service between 90 kHz and 160 kHz (148.5 kHz in Region 1) and for stations of the maritime mobile service in the bands allocated to this service between 110 kHz and 160 kHz (148.5 kHz in Region 1). Exceptionally, class J2B or J7B emissions are also authorized in the bands between 110 kHz and 160 kHz (148.5 kHz in Region 1) for stations of the maritime mobile service.
S5.65
S5.66
S5.67
S5.68
S5.69
S5.70
S5.71
S5.72 Norwegian stations of the fixed service situated in northern areas (north of 60° N) subject to auroral disturbances are allowed to continue operation on four frequencies in the bands 283.5-490 kHz and 510-526.5 kHz.
S5.73 The band 285-325 kHz (283.5-325 kHz in Region 1) in the maritime radionavigation service may be used to transmit supplementary navigational information using narrow-band techniques, on condition that no harmful interference is caused to radiobeacon stations operating in the radionavigation service.
S5.74
S5.75
S5.76 The frequency 410 kHz is designated for radio direction-finding in the maritime radionavigation service. The other radionavigation services to which the band 405-415 kHz is allocated shall not cause harmful interference to radio direction-finding in the band 406.5-413.5 kHz.
S5.77
S5.78
S5.79 The use of the bands 415-495 kHz and 505-526.5 kHz (505-510 kHz in Region 2) by the maritime mobile service is limited to radiotelegraphy.
S5.79A When establishing coast stations in the NAVTEX service on the frequencies 490 kHz, 518 kHz and 4209.5 kHz, administrations are strongly recommended to coordinate the operating characteristics in accordance with the procedures of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) (see Resolution 339 (Rev. WRC-97)).
S5.80 In Region 2, the use of the band 435-495 kHz by the aeronautical radionavigation service is limited to non-directional beacons not employing voice transmission.
S5.81 The bands 490-495 kHz and 505-510 kHz shall be subject to the provisions of Appendix S13, § 15 1), Part A2.
S5.82 In the maritime mobile service, the frequency 490 kHz is, from the date of full implementation of the GMDSS (see Resolution 331 (Rev. WRC-97)), to be used exclusively for the transmission by coast stations of navigational and meteorological warnings and urgent information to ships, by means of narrow-band direct-printing telegraphy. The conditions for use of the frequency 490 kHz are prescribed in Articles S31 and S52. In using the band 415-495 kHz for the aeronautical radionavigation service, administrations are requested to ensure that no harmful interference is caused to the frequency 490 kHz.
S5.83 The frequency 500 kHz is an international distress and calling frequency for Morse radiotelegraphy. The conditions for its use are prescribed in Articles S31 and S52, and in Appendix S13.
S5.84 The conditions for the use of the frequency 518 kHz by the maritime mobile service are prescribed in Articles S31 and S52 and in Appendix S13.
S5.86 In Region 2, in the band 525-535 kHz the carrier power of broadcasting stations shall not exceed 1 kW during the day and 250 W at night.
S5.87
S5.87A
S5.88
S5.89 In Region 2, the use of the band 1605-1705 kHz by stations of the broadcasting service is subject to the Plan established by the Regional Administrative Radio Conference (Rio de Janeiro, 1988).
The examination of frequency assignments to stations of the fixed and mobile services in the band 1625-1705 kHz shall take account of the allotments appearing in the Plan established by the Regional Administrative Radio Conference (Rio de Janeiro, 1988).
S5.90 In the band 1605-1705 kHz, in cases where a broadcasting station of Region 2 is concerned, the service area of the maritime mobile stations in Region 1 shall be limited to that provided by ground-wave propagation.
S5.91
S5.92 Some countries of Region 1 use radiodetermination systems in the bands 1606.5-1625 kHz, 1635-1800 kHz, 1850-2160 kHz, 2194-2300 kHz, 2502-2850 kHz and 3500-3800 kHz, subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21. The radiated mean power of these stations shall not exceed 50 W.
S5.93
S5.96 In Germany, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Jordan, Kazakstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Moldova, Norway, Uzbekistan, Poland, Kyrgyzstan, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, the United Kingdom, Russian Federation, Sweden, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Ukraine, administrations may allocate up to 200 kHz to their amateur service in the bands 1715-1800 kHz and 1850-2000 kHz. However, when allocating the bands within this range to their amateur service, administrations shall, after prior consultation with administrations of neighbouring countries, take such steps as may be necessary to prevent harmful interference from their amateur service to the fixed and mobile services of other countries. The mean power of any amateur station shall not exceed 10 W.
S5.97 In Region 3, the Loran system operates either on 1850 kHz or 1950 kHz, the bands occupied being 1825-1875 kHz and 1925-1975 kHz respectively. Other services to which the band 1800-2000 kHz is allocated may use any frequency therein on condition that no harmful interference is caused to the Loran system operating on 1850 kHz or 1950 kHz.
S5.98
S5.99
S5.100 In Region 1, the authorization to use the band 1810-1830 kHz by the amateur service in countries situated totally or partially north of 40° N shall be given only after consultation with the countries mentioned in Nos. S5.98 and S5.99 to define the necessary steps to be taken to prevent harmful interference between amateur stations and stations of other services operating in accordance with Nos. S5.98 and S5.99.
S5.101
S5.102
S5.103 In Region 1, in making assignments to stations in the fixed and mobile services in the bands 1850-2045 kHz, 2194-2498 kHz, 2502-2625 kHz and 2650-2850 kHz, administrations should bear in mind the special requirements of the maritime mobile service.
S5.104 In Region 1, the use of the band 2025-2045 kHz by the meteorological aids service is limited to oceanographic buoy stations.
S5.105 In Region 2, except in Greenland, coast stations and ship stations using radiotelephony in the band 2065-2107 kHz shall be limited to class J3E emissions and to a peak envelope power not exceeding 1 kW. Preferably, the following carrier frequencies should be used: 2065.0 kHz, 2079.0 kHz, 2082.5 kHz, 2086.0 kHz, 2093.0 kHz, 2096.5 kHz, 2100.0 kHz and 2103.5 kHz. In Argentina and Uruguay, the carrier frequencies 2068.5 kHz and 2075.5 kHz are also used for this purpose, while the frequencies within the band 2072-2075.5 kHz are used as provided in No. S52.165.
S5.106 In Regions 2 and 3, provided no harmful interference is caused to the maritime mobile service, the frequencies between 2065 kHz and 2107 kHz may be used by stations of the fixed service communicating only within national borders and whose mean power does not exceed 50 W. In notifying the frequencies, the attention of the Bureau should be drawn to these provisions.
S5.107 Additional allocation: in Saudi Arabia, Botswana, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Iraq, Lesotho, Libya, Somalia, Swaziland and Zambia, the band 2160-2170 kHz is also allocated to the fixed and mobile, except aeronautical mobile (R), services on a primary basis. The mean power of stations in these services shall not exceed 50 W.
S5.108 The carrier frequency 2182 kHz is an international distress and calling frequency for radiotelephony. The conditions for the use of the band 2173.5-2190.5 kHz are prescribed in Articles S31 and S52 and in Appendix S13.
S5.109 The frequencies 2187.5 kHz, 4207.5 kHz, 6312 kHz, 8414.5 kHz, 12,577 kHz and 16,804.5 kHz are international distress frequencies for digital selective calling. The conditions for the use of these frequencies are prescribed in Article S31.
S5.110 The frequencies 2174.5 kHz, 4177.5 kHz, 6268 kHz, 8376.5 kHz, 12,520 kHz and 16,695 kHz are international distress frequencies for narrow-band direct-printing telegraphy. The conditions for the use of these frequencies are prescribed in Article S31.
S5.111 The carrier frequencies 2182 kHz, 3023 kHz, 5680 kHz, 8364 kHz and the frequencies 121.5 MHz, 156.8 MHz and 243 MHz may also be used, in accordance with the procedures in force for terrestrial radiocommunication services, for search and rescue operations concerning manned space vehicles. The conditions for the use of the frequencies are prescribed in Article S31 and in Appendix S13.
The same applies to the frequencies 10,003 kHz, 14,993 kHz and 19,993 kHz, but in each of these cases emissions must be confined in a band of ± 3 kHz about the frequency.
S5.112
S5.113 For the conditions for the use of the bands 2300-2495 kHz (2498 kHz in Region 1), 3200-3400 kHz, 4750-4995 kHz and 5005-5060 kHz by the broadcasting
S5.114
S5.115 The carrier (reference) frequencies 3023 kHz and 5680 kHz may also be used, in accordance with Article S31 and Appendix S13 by stations of the maritime mobile service engaged in coordinated search and rescue operations.
S5.116 Administrations are urged to authorize the use of the band 3155-3195 kHz to provide a common worldwide channel for low power wireless hearing aids. Additional channels for these devices may be assigned by administrations in the bands between 3155 kHz and 3400 kHz to suit local needs.
It should be noted that frequencies in the range 3000 kHz to 4000 kHz are suitable for hearing aid devices which are designed to operate over short distances within the induction field.
S5.117
S5.118
S5.119
S5.120 For the use of the bands allocated to the amateur service at 3.5 MHz, 7.0 MHz, 10.1 MHz, 14.0 MHz, 18.068 MHz, 21.0 MHz, 24.89 MHz and 144 MHz in the event of natural disasters, see Resolution 640. *
* This Resolution was abrogated by WRC-97.
S5.122
S5.123
S5.124
S5.125
S5.126 In Region 3, the stations of those services to which the band 3995-4005 kHz is allocated may transmit standard frequency and time signals.
S5.127 The use of the band 4000-4063 kHz by the maritime mobile service is limited to ship stations using radiotelephony (see No. S52.220 and Appendix S17).
S5.128 In Afghanistan, Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, China, Georgia, India, Kazakstan, Mali, Niger, Kyrgyzstan, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Chad, Turkmenistan and Ukraine, in the bands 4063-4123 kHz, 4130-4133 kHz and 4408-4438 kHz, stations of limited power in the fixed service which are situated at least 600 km from the coast may operate on condition that harmful interference is not caused to the maritime mobile service.
S5.129 On condition that harmful interference is not caused to the maritime mobile service, the frequencies in the bands 4063-4123 kHz and 4130-4438 kHz may be used exceptionally by stations in the fixed service communicating only within the boundary of the country in which they are located with a mean power not exceeding 50 W.
S5.130 The conditions for the use of the carrier frequencies 4125 kHz and 6215 kHz are prescribed in Articles S31 and S52 and in Appendix S13.
S5.131 The frequency 4209.5 kHz is used exclusively for the transmission by coast stations of meteorological and navigational warnings and urgent information to ships by means of narrow-band direct-printing techniques.
S5.132 The frequencies 4210 kHz, 6314 kHz, 8416.5 kHz, 12,579 kHz, 16,806.5 kHz, 19,680.5 kHz, 22,376 kHz and 26,100.5 kHz are the international frequencies for the transmission of maritime safety information (MSI) (see Appendix S17).
S5.133
S5.134 The use of the bands 5900-5950 kHz, 7300-7350 kHz, 9400-9500 kHz, 11,600-11,650 kHz, 12,050-12,100 kHz, 13,570-13,600 kHz, 13,800-13,870 kHz, 15,600-15,800 kHz, 17,480-17,550 kHz and 18,900-19,020 kHz by the broadcasting service is limited to single-sideband emissions with the characteristics specified in Appendix S11 or to any other spectrum-efficient modulation techniques recommended by ITU-R. Access to these bands shall be subject to the decisions of a competent conference.
S5.136 The band 5900-5950 kHz is allocated, until 1 April 2007, to the fixed service on a primary basis, as well as to the following services: in Region 1 to the land mobile service on a primary basis, in Region 2 to the mobile except aeronautical mobile (R) service on a primary basis, and in Region 3 to the mobile except aeronautical mobile (R) service on a secondary basis, subject to application of the procedure referred to in Resolution 21 (Rev. WRC-95). After 1 April 2007, frequencies in this band may be used by stations in the above-mentioned services, communicating only within the boundary of the country in which they are located, on the condition that harmful interference is not caused to the broadcasting service. When using frequencies for these services, administrations are urged to use the minimum power required and to take account of the seasonal use of frequencies by the broadcasting service published in accordance with the Radio Regulations.
S5.137 On condition that harmful interference is not caused to the maritime mobile service, the bands 6200-6213.5 kHz and 6220.5-6525 kHz may be used exceptionally by stations in the fixed service, communicating only within the boundary of the country in which they are located, with a mean power not exceeding 50 W. At the time of notification of these frequencies, the attention of the Bureau will be drawn to the above conditions.
S5.138 The following bands:
S5.139
S5.140
S5.141
S5.142 The use of the band 7100-7300 kHz in Region 2 by the amateur service shall not impose constraints on the broadcasting service intended for use within Region 1 and Region 3.
S5.143 The band 7300-7350 kHz is allocated, until 1 April 2007, to the fixed service on a primary basis and to the land mobile service on a secondary basis, subject to application of the procedure referred to in Resolution 21 (Rev. WRC-95). After 1 April 2007, frequencies in this band may be used
S5.144 In Region 3, the stations of those services to which the band 7995-8005 kHz is allocated may transmit standard frequency and time signals.
S5.145 The conditions for the use of the carrier frequencies 8291 kHz, 12,290 kHz and 16,420 kHz are prescribed in Articles S31 and S52 and in Appendix S13.
S5.146 The bands 9400-9500 kHz, 11,600-11,650 kHz, 12,050-12,100 kHz, 15,600-15,800 kHz, 17,480-17,550 kHz and 18,900-19,020 kHz are allocated to the fixed service on a primary basis until 1 April 2007, subject to application of the procedure referred to in Resolution 21 (Rev.WRC-95). After 1 April 2007, frequencies in these bands may be used by stations in the fixed service, communicating only within the boundary of the country in which they are located, on condition that harmful interference is not caused to the broadcasting service. When using frequencies in the fixed service, administrations are urged to use the minimum power required and to take account of the seasonal use of frequencies by the broadcasting service published in accordance with the Radio Regulations.
S5.147 On condition that harmful interference is not caused to the broadcasting service, frequencies in the bands 9775-9900 kHz, 11,650-11,700 kHz and 11,975-12,050 kHz may be used by stations in the fixed service communicating only within the boundary of the country in which they are located, each station using a total radiated power not exceeding 24 dBW.
S5.149 In making assignments to stations of other services to which the bands:
S5.150 The following bands:
S5.151 The bands 13,570-13,600 kHz and 13,800-13,870 kHz are allocated, until 1 April 2007, to the fixed service on a primary basis and to the mobile except aeronautical mobile (R) service on a secondary basis, subject to application of the procedure referred to in Resolution 21 (Rev. WRC-95). After 1 April 2007, frequencies in these bands may be used by stations in the above-mentioned services, communicating only within the boundary of the country in which they are located, on the condition that harmful interference is not caused to the broadcasting service. When using frequencies in these services, administrations are urged to use the minimum power required and to take account of the seasonal use of frequencies by the broadcasting service published in accordance with the Radio Regulations.
S5.152
S5.153 In Region 3, the stations of those services to which the band 15,995-16,005 kHz is allocated may transmit standard frequency and time signals.
S5.154
S5.155
S5.155A In Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Georgia, Hungary, Kazakstan, Moldova, Mongolia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Ukraine, the use of the band 21,850-21,870 kHz by the fixed service is limited to provision of services related to aircraft flight safety.
S5.155B The band 21,870-21,924 kHz is used by the fixed service for provision of services related to aircraft flight safety.
S5.156
S5.156A The use of the band 23,200-23,350 kHz by the fixed service is limited to provision of services related to aircraft flight safety.
S5.157 The use of the band 23,350-24,000 kHz by the maritime mobile service is limited to inter-ship radiotelegraphy.
S5.160
S5.161
S5.162
S5.162A
S5.163
S5.164
S5.165
S5.166
S5.167
S5.168
S5.169
S5.170
S5.171
S5.172
S5.173
S5.174
S5.175
S5.176
S5.177
S5.178
S5.179
S5.180 The frequency 75 MHz is assigned to marker beacons. Administrations shall refrain from assigning frequencies close to the limits of the guardband to stations of other services which, because of their power or geographical position, might cause harmful interference or otherwise place a constraint on marker beacons.
Every effort should be made to improve further the characteristics of airborne receivers and to limit the power of transmitting stations close to the limits 74.8 MHz and 75.2 MHz.
S5.181
S5.182
S5.183
S5.184
S5.185
S5.187
S5.188
S5.190
S5.192
S5.194
S5.197
S5.198
S5.199 The bands 121.45-121.55 MHz and 242.95-243.05 MHz are also allocated to the mobile-satellite service for the reception on board satellites of emissions from emergency position-indicating radiobeacons transmitting at 121.5 MHz and 243 MHz (see Appendix S13).
S5.200 In the band 117.975-136 MHz, the frequency 121.5 MHz is the aeronautical
S5.201
S5.202
S5.203 In the band 136-137 MHz, existing operational meteorological satellites may continue to operate, under the conditions defined in No. S4.4 with respect to the aeronautical mobile service, until 1 January 2002. Administrations shall not authorize new frequency assignments in this band to stations in the meteorological-satellite service.
S5.203A
S5.203B
S5.204
S5.205
S5.206
S5.207
S5.208 The use of the band 137-138 MHz by the mobile-satellite service is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A.
S5.208A In making assignments to space stations in the mobile-satellite service in the bands 137-138 MHz, 387-390 MHz and 400.15-401 MHz, administrations shall take all practicable steps to protect the radio astronomy service in the bands 150.05-153 MHz, 322-328.6 MHz, 406.1-410 MHz and 608-614 MHz from harmful interference from unwanted emissions. The threshold levels of interference detrimental to the radio astronomy service are shown in Table 1 of Recommendation ITU-R RA.769-1.
S5.209 The use of the bands 137-138 MHz, 148-150.05 MHz, 399.9-400.05 MHz, 400.15-401 MHz, 454-456 MHz and 459-460 MHz by the mobile-satellite service is limited to non-geostationary-satellite systems.
S5.210
S5.211
S5.212
S5.213
S5.214
S5.216
S5.217
S5.218
S5.219 The use of the band 148-149.9 MHz by the mobile-satellite service is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A. The mobile-satellite service shall not constrain the development and use of the fixed, mobile and space operation services in the band 148-149.9 MHz.
S5.220 The use of the bands 149.9-150.05 MHz and 399.9-400.05 MHz by the mobile-satellite service is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A. The mobile-satellite service shall not constrain the development and use of the radionavigation-satellite service in the bands 149.9-150.05 MHz and 399.9-400.05 MHz.
S5.221 Stations of the mobile-satellite service in the band 148-149.9 MHz shall not cause harmful interference to, or claim protection from, stations of the fixed or mobile services operating in accordance with the Table of Frequency Allocations in the following countries: Albania, Algeria, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Cameroon, China, Cyprus, Congo, the Republic of Korea, Croatia, Cuba, Denmark, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Eritrea, Spain, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Hungary, India, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ireland, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Latvia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Lebanon, Libya, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Moldova, Mongolia, Mozambique, Namibia, Norway, New Zealand, Oman, Uganda, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, the Netherlands, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Syria, Kyrgyzstan, Slovakia, Romania, the United Kingdom, Russian Federation, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovenia, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, Swaziland, Tanzania, Chad, Thailand, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
S5.222 Emissions of the radionavigation-satellite service in the bands 149.9-150.05 MHz and 399.9-400.05 MHz may also be used by receiving earth stations of the space research service.
S5.223 Recognizing that the use of the band 149.9-150.05 MHz by the fixed and
S5.224A The use of the bands 149.9-150.05 MHz and 399.9-400.05 MHz by the mobile-satellite service (Earth-to-space) is limited to the land mobile-satellite service (Earth-to-space) until 1 January 2015.
S5.224B The allocation of the bands 149.9-150.05 MHz and 399.9-400.05 MHz to the radionavigation-satellite service shall be effective until 1 January 2015.
S5.225
S5.226 The frequency 156.8 MHz is the international distress, safety and calling frequency for the maritime mobile VHF radiotelephone service. The conditions for the use of this frequency are contained in Article S31 and Appendix S13.
In the bands 156-156.7625 MHz, 156.8375-157.45 MHz, 160.6-160.975 MHz and 161.475-162.05 MHz, each administration shall give priority to the maritime mobile service on only such frequencies as are assigned to stations of the maritime mobile service by the administration (see Articles S31 and S52, and Appendix S13).
Any use of frequencies in these bands by stations of other services to which they are allocated should be avoided in areas where such use might cause harmful interference to the maritime mobile VHF radiocommunication service.
However, the frequency 156.8 MHz and the frequency bands in which priority is given to the maritime mobile service may be used for radiocommunications on inland waterways subject to agreement between interested and affected administrations and taking into account current frequency usage and existing agreements.
S5.227 In the maritime mobile VHF service the frequency 156.525 MHz is to be used exclusively for digital selective calling for distress, safety and calling. The conditions for the use of this frequency are prescribed in Articles S31 and S52, and Appendices S13 and S18.
S5.229
S5.230
S5.231
S5.232
S5.233
S5.234
S5.235
S5.237
S5.238
S5.240
S5.241 In Region 2, no new stations in the radiolocation service may be authorized in the band 216-225 MHz. Stations authorized prior to 1 January 1990 may continue to operate on a secondary basis.
S5.242
S5.243
S5.245
S5.246
S5.247
S5.250
S5.251
S5.252
S5.254 The bands 235-322 MHz and 335.4-399.9 MHz may be used by the mobile-satellite service, subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21, on condition that stations in this service do not cause harmful interference to those of other services operating or planned to be operated in accordance with the Table of Frequency Allocations.
S5.255 The bands 312-315 MHz (Earth-to-space) and 387-390 MHz (space-to-Earth) in the mobile-satellite service may also be used by non-geostationary-satellite systems. Such use is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A.
S5.256 The frequency 243 MHz is the frequency in this band for use by survival craft stations and equipment used for survival purposes (see Appendix S13).
S5.257 The band 267-272 MHz may be used by administrations for space telemetry in their countries on a primary basis, subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21.
S5.258 The use of the band 328.6-335.4 MHz by the aeronautical radionavigation service is limited to Instrument Landing Systems (glide path).
S5.259
S5.260 Recognizing that the use of the band 399.9-400.05 MHz by the fixed and mobile services may cause harmful interference to the radionavigation satellite service, administrations are urged not to authorize such use in application of No. S4.4.
S5.261 Emissions shall be confined in a band of ± 25 kHz about the standard frequency 400.1 MHz.
S5.262
S5.263 The band 400.15-401 MHz is also allocated to the space research service in the space-to-space direction for communications with manned space vehicles. In this application, the space research service will not be regarded as a safety service.
S5.264 The use of the band 400.15-401 MHz by the mobile-satellite service is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A. The power flux-density limit indicated in Annex 1 of Appendix S5 shall apply until such time as a competent world radiocommunication conference revises it.
S5.266 The use of the band 406-406.1 MHz by the mobile-satellite service is limited to low power satellite emergency position-indicating radiobeacons (see also Article S31 and Appendix S13).
S5.267 Any emission capable of causing harmful interference to the authorized uses of the band 406-406.1 MHz is prohibited.
S5.268 Use of the band 410-420 MHz by the space research service is limited to communications within 5 km of an orbiting, manned space vehicle. The power flux-density at the surface of the Earth produced by emissions from extra-vehicular activities shall not exceed −153 dB(W/m
S5.269
S5.270
S5.271
S5.272
S5.273
S5.274
S5.275
S5.276
S5.277
S5.278
S5.279
S5.280 In Germany, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Liechtenstein, Portugal, Slovenia, Switzerland and Yugoslavia, the band 433.05-434.79 MHz (centre frequency 433.92 MHz) is designated for industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) applications. Radiocommunication services of these countries operating within this band must accept harmful interference which may be caused by these applications. ISM equipment operating in this band is subject to the provisions of No. S15.13.
S5.281
S5.282 In the bands 435-438 MHz, 1260-1270 MHz, 2400-2450 MHz, 3400-3410 MHz (in Regions 2 and 3 only) and 5650-5670 MHz, the amateur-satellite service may operate subject to not causing harmful interference to other services operating in accordance with the Table (see No. S5.43). Administrations authorizing such use shall ensure that any harmful interference caused by emissions from a station in the amateur-satellite service is immediately eliminated in accordance with the provisions of No. S25.11. The use of the bands 1260-1270 MHz and 5650-5670 MHz by the amateur-satellite service is limited to the Earth-to-space direction.
S5.283
S5.284
S5.285
S5.286 The band 449.75-450.25 MHz may be used for the space operation service (Earth-to-space) and the space research service (Earth-to-space), subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21.
S5.286A The use of the bands 454-456 MHz and 459-460 MHz by the mobile-satellite service is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A.
S5.286B The use of the band 454-455 MHz in the countries listed in No. S5.286D, 455-456 MHz and 459-460 MHz in Region 2, and 454-456 MHz and 459-460 MHz in the countries listed in No. S5.286E, by stations in the mobile-satellite service, shall not cause harmful interference to, or claim protection from, stations of the fixed or mobile services operating in accordance with the Table of Frequency Allocations.
S5.286C The use of the band 454-455 MHz in the countries listed in No. S5.286D, 455-456 MHz and 459-460 MHz in Region 2, and 454-456 MHz and 459-460 MHz in the countries listed in No. S5.286E, by stations in the mobile-satellite service, shall not constrain the development and use of the fixed and mobile services operating in accordance with the Table of Frequency Allocations.
S5.286D
S5.286E
S5.287 In the maritime mobile service, the frequencies 457.525 MHz, 457.550 MHz, 457.575 MHz, 467.525 MHz, 467.550 MHz and 467.575 MHz may be used by on-board communication stations. Where needed, equipment designed for 12.5 kHz channel spacing using also the additional frequencies 457.5375 MHz, 457.5625 MHz, 467.5375 MHz and 467.5625 MHz may be introduced
S5.288 In the territorial waters of the United States and the Philippines, the preferred frequencies for use by on-board communication stations shall be 457.525 MHz, 457.550 MHz, 457.575 MHz and 457.600 MHz paired, respectively, with 467.750 MHz, 467.775 MHz, 467.800 MHz and 467.825 MHz. The characteristics of the equipment used shall conform to those specified in Recommendation ITU-R M.1174.
S5.289 Earth exploration-satellite service applications, other than the meteorological-satellite service, may also be used in the bands 460-470 MHz and 1690-1710 MHz for space-to-Earth transmissions subject to not causing harmful interference to stations operating in accordance with the Table.
S5.290
S5.291
S5.291A
S5.292
S5.293
S5.294
S5.296
S5.297
S5.298
S5.300
S5.302
S5.304
S5.305
S5.306
S5.307
S5.309
S5.311 Within the frequency band 620-790 MHz, assignments may be made to television stations using frequency modulation in the broadcasting-satellite service subject to agreement between the administrations concerned and those having services, operating in accordance with the Table, which may be affected (see Resolutions 33 (Rev. WRC-97) and 507). Such stations shall not produce a power flux-density in excess of the value—129 dB(W/m2) for angles of arrival less than 20° (see Recommendation 705) within the territories of other countries without the consent of the administrations of those countries.
S5.312
S5.314
S5.315
S5.316
S5.317
S5.318
S5.319
S5.320
S5.321
S5.322 In Region 1, in the band 862-960 MHz, stations of the broadcasting service shall be operated only in the African Broadcasting Area (see Nos. S5.10 to S5.13) excluding Algeria, Egypt, Spain, Libya, Morocco, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania and Zimbabwe, subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21.
S5.323
S5.325
S5.326
S5.327
S5.328 The band 960-1215 MHz is reserved on a worldwide basis for the use and development of airborne electronic aids to air navigation and any directly associated ground-based facilities.
S5.329 Use of the radionavigation-satellite service in the band 1215-1260 MHz shall be subject to the condition that no harmful interference is caused to the radionavigation service authorized under No. S5.331.
S5.330
S5.331
S5.332 In the band 1215-1300 MHz, active spaceborne sensors in the earth exploration-satellite and space research services shall not cause harmful interference to, claim protection from, or otherwise impose constraints on operation or development of the radiolocation service, the radionavigation-satellite service and other services allocated on a primary basis.
S5.333 In the bands 1215-1300 MHz, 3100-3300 MHz, 5250-5350 MHz, 8550-8650 MHz, 9500-9800 MHz and 13.4-14.0 GHz, radiolocation stations installed on spacecraft may also be employed for the earth exploration-satellite and space research services on a secondary basis. (SUP—WRC-97)
S5.334
S5.335 In Canada and the United States in the band 1240-1300 MHz, active spaceborne sensors in the earth exploration-satellite and space research services shall not cause interference to, claim protection from, or otherwise impose constraints on operation or development of the aeronautical radionavigation service.
S5.337 The use of the bands 1300-1350 MHz, 2700-2900 MHz and 9000-9200 MHz by the aeronautical radionavigation service is restricted to ground-based radars and to associated airborne transponders which transmit only on frequencies in these bands and only when actuated by radars operating in the same band.
S5.338 In Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Mongolia, Poland, Kyrgyzstan, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Romania, Turkmenistan and Ukraine, existing installations of the radionavigation service may continue to operate in the band 1350-1400 MHz.
S5.339 The bands 1370-1400 MHz, 2640-2655 MHz, 4950-4990 MHz and 15.20-15.35 GHz are also allocated to the space research (passive) and earth exploration-satellite (passive) services on a secondary basis.
S5.340 All emissions are prohibited in the following bands:
S5.341 In the bands 1400-1727 MHz, 101-120 GHz and 197-220 GHz, passive research is being conducted by some countries in a programme for the search for intentional emissions of extraterrestrial origin.
S5.342
S5.343 In Region 2, the use of the band 1435-1535 MHz by the aeronautical mobile service for telemetry has priority over other uses by the mobile service.
S5.344
S5.345 Use of the band 1452-1492 MHz by the broadcasting-satellite service, and by the broadcasting service, is limited to digital audio broadcasting and is subject to the provisions of Resolution 528 (WARC-92).
S5.347
S5.348 The use of the band 1 492-1 525 MHz by the mobile-satellite service is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A. However, no coordination threshold in Article S21 for space stations of the mobile-satellite service with respect to terrestrial services shall apply to the situation referred to in No. S5.343. With respect to the situation referred to in No. S5.343, the requirement for coordination in the band 1492-1525 MHz will be determined by band overlap.
S5.348A In the band 1 492-1 525 MHz, the coordination threshold in terms of the power flux-density levels at the surface of the Earth in application of No. S.9.11A for space stations in the mobile-satellite (space-to-Earth) service, with respect to the land mobile service use for specialized mobile radios or used in conjunction with public switched telecommunication networks (PSTN) operating within the territory of Japan, shall be—150 dB(W/m
S5.349
S5.350
S5.351 The bands 1525-1544 MHz, 1545-1559 MHz, 1626.5-1645.5 MHz and 1646.5-1660.5 MHz shall not be used for feeder links of any service. In exceptional circumstances, however, an earth station at a specified fixed point in any of the mobile-satellite services may be authorized by an administration to communicate via space stations using these bands.
S5.352A In the band 1525-1530 MHz, stations in the mobile-satellite service, except stations in the maritime mobile-satellite service, shall not cause harmful interference to, or claim protection from, stations of the fixed service in France and French overseas territories in Region 3, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Guinea, India, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Kuwait, Mali, Malta, Morocco, Mauritania, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Syria, Tanzania, Viet Nam and Yemen notified prior to 1 April 1998.
S5.353A In applying the procedures of No. S9.11A to the mobile-satellite service in the bands 1530-1544 MHz and 1626.5-1645.5 MHz, priority shall be given to accommodating the spectrum requirements for distress, urgency and safety communications of the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS). Maritime mobile-satellite distress, urgency and safety communications shall have priority access and immediate availability over all other mobile satellite communications operating within a network. Mobile-satellite systems shall not cause unacceptable interference to, or claim protection from, distress, urgency and safety communications of the GMDSS. Account shall be taken of the priority of safety-related communications in the other mobile-satellite services. (See Resolution 218 (WRC-97).)
S5.354 The use of the bands 1525-1559 MHz and 1626.5-1660.5 MHz by the mobile-satellite services is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A.
S5.355
S5.356 The use of the band 1544-1545 MHz by the mobile-satellite service (space-to-Earth) is limited to distress and safety communications (see Article S31).
S5.357 Transmissions in the band 1545-1555 MHz from terrestrial aeronautical stations directly to aircraft stations, or between aircraft stations, in the aeronautical mobile (R) service are also authorized when such transmissions are used to extend or supplement the satellite-to-aircraft links.
S5.357A In applying the procedures of No. S9.11A to the mobile-satellite service in the bands 1545-1555 MHz and 1646.5-1656.5 MHz, priority shall be given to accommodating the spectrum requirements of the aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service providing transmission of messages with priority 1 to 6 in Article S44. Aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service communications with priority 1 to 6 in Article S44 shall have priority access and immediate availability, by pre-emption if necessary, over all other mobile-satellite communications operating within a network. Mobile-satellite systems shall not cause unacceptable interference to, or claim protection from, aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service communications with priority 1 to 6 in Article S44. Account shall be taken of the priority of safety-related communications in the other mobile-satellite services. (See Resolution 218 (WRC-97).)
S5.359
S5.362A In the United States, in the bands 1555-1559 MHz and 1656.5-1660.5 MHz, the aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service shall have priority access and immediate availability, by pre-emption if necessary, over all other mobile-satellite communications operating within a network. Mobile-satellite systems shall not cause unacceptable interference to, or claim protection from, aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service communications with priority 1 to 6 in Article S44. Account shall be taken of the priority of safety-related communications in the other mobile-satellite services.
S5.363
S5.364 The use of the band 1610-1626.5 MHz by the mobile-satellite service (Earth-to-space) and by the radiodetermination-satellite service (Earth-to-space) is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A. A mobile earth station operating in either of the services in this band shall not produce a peak e.i.r.p. density in excess of −15 dB(W/4 kHz) in the part of the band used by systems operating in accordance with the provisions of No. S5.366 (to which No. S4.10 applies), unless otherwise agreed by the affected administrations. In the part of the band where such systems are not operating, the mean e.i.r.p. density of a mobile earth station shall not exceed —3 dB(W/4 kHz). Stations of the mobile-satellite service shall not claim protection from stations in the aeronautical radionavigation service, stations operating in accordance with the provisions of No. S5.366 and stations in the fixed service operating in accordance with the provisions of No. S5.359. Administrations responsible for the coordination of mobile-satellite networks shall make all practicable efforts to ensure protection of stations operating in accordance with the provisions of No. S5.366.
S5.365 The use of the band 1613.8-1626.5 MHz by the mobile-satellite service (space-to-Earth) is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A.
S5.366 The band 1610-1626.5 MHz is reserved on a worldwide basis for the use and development of airborne electronic aids to air navigation and any directly associated ground-based or satellite-borne facilities. Such satellite use is subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21.
S5.367
S5.368 With respect to the radiodetermination-satellite and mobile-satellite services the provisions of No. S4.10 do not apply in the band 1610-1626.5 MHz, with the exception of the aeronautical radionavigation-satellite service.
S5.369
S5.370
S5.371
S5.372 Harmful interference shall not be caused to stations of the radio astronomy service using the band 1610.6-1613.8 MHz by stations of the radiodetermination-satellite and mobile-satellite services (No. S29.13 applies).
S5.374 Mobile earth stations in the mobile-satellite service operating in the bands 1631.5-1634.5 MHz and 1656.5-1660 MHz shall not cause harmful interference to stations in the fixed service operating in the countries listed in No. S5.359.
S5.375 The use of the band 1645.5-1646.5 MHz by the mobile-satellite service
S5.376 Transmissions in the band 1646.5-1656.5 MHz from aircraft stations in the aeronautical mobile (R) service directly to terrestrial aeronautical stations, or between aircraft stations, are also authorized when such transmissions are used to extend or supplement the aircraft-to-satellite links.
S5.376A Mobile earth stations operating in the band 1660-1660.5 MHz shall not cause harmful interference to stations in the radio astronomy service.
S5.377 In the band 1675-1710 MHz, stations in the mobile-satellite service shall not cause harmful interference to, nor constrain the development of, the meteorological-satellite and meteorological aids services (see Resolution 213 (Rev. WRC-95)) and the use of this band shall be subject to coordination under No. S9.11A.
S5.379
S5.379A Administrations are urged to give all practicable protection in the band 1660.5-1668.4 MHz for future research in radio astronomy, particularly by eliminating air-to-ground transmissions in the meteorological aids service in the band 1664.4-1668.4 MHz as soon as practicable.
S5.380 The bands 1670-1675 MHz and 1800-1805 MHz are intended for use, on a worldwide basis, by administrations wishing to implement aeronautical public correspondence. The use of the band 1670-1675 MHz by stations in the systems for public correspondence with aircraft is limited to transmissions from aeronautical stations and the use of the band 1800-1805 MHz is limited to transmissions from aircraft stations.
S5.381
S5.382
S5.384
S5.385
S5.386
S5.387
S5.388 The bands 1885-2025 MHz and 2110-2200 MHz are intended for use, on a worldwide basis, by administrations wishing to implement International Mobile Telecommunications-2000 (IMT-2000). Such use does not preclude the use of these bands by other services to which they are allocated. The bands should be made available for IMT-2000 in accordance with Resolution 212 (Rev. WRC-97).
S5.389A The use of the bands 1980-2010 MHz and 2170-2200 MHz by the mobile-satellite service is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A and to the provisions of Resolution 716 (WRC-95). The use of these bands shall not commence before 1 January 2000; however the use of the band 1980-1990 MHz in Region 2 shall not commence before 1 January 2005.
S5.389B The use of the band 1980-1990 MHz by the mobile-satellite service shall not cause harmful interference to or constrain the development of the fixed and mobile services in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Ecuador, the United States, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Peru, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay and Venezuela.
S5.389C The use of the bands 2010-2025 MHz and 2160-2170 MHz in Region 2 by the mobile-satellite service shall not commence before 1 January 2002 and is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A and to the provisions of Resolution 716 (WRC-95).
S5.389D In Canada and the United States the use of the bands 2010-2025 MHz and 2160-2170 MHz by the mobile-satellite service shall not commence before 1 January 2000.
S5.389E The use of the bands 2010-2025 MHz and 2160-2170 MHz by the mobile-satellite service in Region 2 shall not cause harmful interference to or constrain the development of the fixed and mobile services in Regions 1 and 3.
S5.389F In Algeria, Benin, Cape Verde, Egypt, Mali, Syria and Tunisia, the use of the bands 1980-2010 MHz and 2170-2200 MHz by the mobile-satellite service shall neither cause harmful interference to the fixed and mobile services, nor hamper the development of those services prior to 1 January 2005, nor shall the former service request protection from the latter services.
S5.390 In Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador and Suriname, the use of the bands 2010-2025 MHz and 2160-2170 MHz by the mobile-satellite services shall not cause harmful interference to stations in the fixed and mobile services before 1 January 2005. After this date, the use of these bands is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A and to the provisions of Resolution 716 (WRC-95).
S5.391 In making assignments to the mobile service in the bands 2025-2110 MHz and 2200-2290 MHz, administrations shall not introduce high-density mobile systems, as described in Recommendation ITU-R SA.1154, and shall take that Recommendation into account for the introduction of any other type of mobile system.
S5.392 Administrations are urged to take all practicable measures to ensure that space-to-space transmissions between two or more non-geostationary satellites, in the space research, space operations and Earth exploration-satellite services in the bands 2025-2110 MHz and 2200-2290 MHz, shall not impose any constraints on Earth-to-space, space-to-Earth and other space-to-space transmissions of those services and in those bands between geostationary and non-geostationary satellites.
S5.392A
S5.393
S5.394 In the United States, the use of the band 2300-2390 MHz by the aeronautical mobile service for telemetry has priority over other uses by the mobile services. In Canada, the use of the band 2300-2483.5 MHz by the aeronautical mobile service for telemetry has priority over other uses by the mobile services.
S5.395 In France, the use of the band 2310-2360 MHz by the aeronautical mobile service for telemetry has priority over other uses by the mobile service.
S5.396 Space stations of the broadcasting-satellite service in the band 2310-2360 MHz operating in accordance with No. S5.393 that may affect the services to which this band is allocated in other countries shall be coordinated and notified in accordance with Resolution 33 (Rev. WRC-97). Complementary terrestrial broadcasting stations shall be subject to bilateral coordination with neighbouring countries prior to their bringing into use.
S5.397
S5.398 In respect of the radiodetermination-satellite service in the band 2483.5-2500 MHz, the provisions of No. S4.10 do not apply.
S5.399 In Region 1, in countries other than those listed in No. S5.400, harmful interference shall not be caused to, or protection shall not be claimed from, stations of the radiolocation service by stations of the radiodetermination satellite service.
S5.400
S5.402 The use of the band 2483.5-2500 MHz by the mobile-satellite and the radiodetermination-satellite services is subject to the coordination under No. S9.11A. Administrations are urged to take all practicable steps to prevent harmful interference to the radio astronomy service from emissions in the 2483.5-2500 MHz band, especially those caused by second-harmonic radiation that would fall into the 4990-5000 MHz band allocated to the radio astronomy service worldwide.
S5.403 Subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21, the band 2520-2535 MHz (until 1 January 2005 the band 2500-2535 MHz) may also be used for the mobile-satellite (space-to-Earth), except aeronautical mobile-satellite, service for operation limited to within national boundaries. The provisions of No. S9.11A apply.
S5.404
S5.405
S5.407 In the band 2500-2520 MHz, the power flux-density at the surface of the Earth from space stations operating in the mobile-satellite (space-to-Earth) service shall not exceed −152 dB(W/m
S5.408
S5.409 Administrations shall make all practicable efforts to avoid developing new tropospheric scatter systems in the band 2500-2690 MHz.
S5.410 The band 2500-2690 MHz may be used for tropospheric scatter systems in Region 1, subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21.
S5.411 When planning new tropospheric scatter radio-relay links in the band 2500-2690 MHz, all possible measures shall be taken to avoid directing the antennae of these links towards the geostationary-satellite orbit.
S5.412
S5.413 In the design of systems in the broadcasting-satellite service in the bands between 2500 MHz and 2690 MHz, administrations are urged to take all necessary steps to protect the radio astronomy service in the band 2690-2700 MHz.
S5.414 The allocation of the frequency band 2500-2520 MHz to the mobile-satellite service (space-to-Earth) shall be effective on 1 January 2005 and is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A.
S5.415 The use of the bands 2500-2690 MHz in Region 2 and 2500-2535 MHz and 2655-2690 MHz in Region 3 by the fixed-satellite service is limited to national and regional systems, subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21, giving particular attention to the broadcasting-satellite service in Region 1. In the direction space-to-Earth, the power flux-density at the Earth's surface shall not exceed the values given in Article S21, Table S21-4.
S5.415A
S5.416 The use of the band 2520-2670 MHz by the broadcasting-satellite service is limited to national and regional systems for community reception, subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21. The power flux-density at the Earth's surface shall not exceed the values given in Article S21, Table S21-4.
S5.417
S5.418
S5.419 The allocation of the frequency band 2670-2690 MHz to the mobile-satellite service shall be effective from 1 January 2005. When introducing systems of the mobile-satellite service in this band, administrations shall take all necessary steps to protect the satellite systems operating in this band prior to 3 March 1992. The coordination of mobile-satellite systems in the band shall be in accordance with No. S9.11A.
S5.420 The band 2655-2670 MHz (until 1 January 2005 the band 2655-2690 MHz) may also be used for the mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space), except aeronautical mobile-satellite, service for operation limited to within national boundaries, subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21. The coordination under No. S9.11A applies.
S5.420A
S5.421
S5.422
S5.423 In the band 2700-2900 MHz, ground-based radars used for meteorological purposes are authorized to operate on a basis of equality with stations of the aeronautical radionavigation service.
S5.424
S5.425 In the band 2900-3100 MHz, the use of the shipborne interrogator-transponder system (SIT) shall be confined to the sub-band 2930-2950 MHz.
S5.426 The use of the band 2900-3100 MHz by the aeronautical radionavigation service is limited to ground-based radars.
S5.427 In the bands 2900-3100 MHz and 9300-9500 MHz, the response from radar transponders shall not be capable of being confused with the response from radar beacons (racons) and shall not cause interference to ship or aeronautical radars in the radionavigation service, having regard, however, to No. S4.9.
S5.428
S5.429
S5.430
S5.431
S5.432
S5.433 In Regions 2 and 3, in the band 3400-3600 MHz the radiolocation service is allocated on a primary basis. However, all administrations operating radiolocation systems in this band are urged to cease operations by 1985. Thereafter, administrations shall take all practicable steps to protect the fixed-satellite service and coordination requirements shall not be imposed on the fixed-satellite service.
S5.435 In Japan, in the band 3620-3700 MHz, the radiolocation service is excluded.
S5.437
S5.438 Use of the band 4200-4400 MHz by the aeronautical radionavigation service is reserved exclusively for radio altimeters installed on board aircraft and for the associated transponders on the ground. However, passive sensing in the earth exploration-satellite and space research services may be authorized in this band on a secondary basis (no protection is provided by the radio altimeters).
S5.439
S5.440 The standard frequency and time signal-satellite service may be authorized to use the frequency 4202 MHz for space-to-Earth transmissions and the frequency 6427 MHz for Earth-to-space transmissions. Such transmissions shall be confined within the limits of ± 2 MHz of these frequencies, subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21.
S5.441 The use of the bands 4500-4800 MHz (space-to-Earth), 6725-7025 MHz (Earth-to-space) by the fixed-satellite service shall be in accordance with the provisions of Appendix S30B. The use of the bands 10.7-10.95 GHz (space-to-Earth), 11.2-11.45 GHz (space-to-Earth) and 12.75-13.25 GHz (Earth-to-space) by geostationary-satellite systems in the fixed-satellite service shall be in accordance with the provisions of Appendix S30B. The use of the bands 10.7-10.95 GHz (space-to-Earth), 11.2-11.45 GHz (space-to-Earth) and 12.75-13.25 GHz (Earth-to-space) by non-geostationary-satellite systems in the fixed-satellite service shall be in accordance with the provisions of Resolution 130 (WRC-97).
S5.442 In the bands 4825-4835 MHz and 4950-4990 MHz, the allocation to the mobile service is restricted to the mobile, except aeronautical mobile, service.
S5.443
S5.444 The band 5000-5150 MHz is to be used for the operation of the international standard system (microwave landing system) for precision approach and landing. The requirements of this system shall take precedence over other uses of this band. For the use of this band, No. S5.444A and Resolution 114 (WRC-95) apply.
S5.444A
In the band 5091-5150 MHz, the following conditions also apply:
S5.446
S5.447
S5.447A The allocation to the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space) is limited to feeder links of non-geostationary-satellite systems in the mobile-satellite service and is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A.
S5.447B
S5.447C Administrations responsible for fixed-satellite service networks in the band 5150-5250 MHz operated under Nos. S5.447A and S5.447B shall coordinate on an equal basis in accordance with No. S9.11A with administrations responsible for non-geostationary-satellite networks operated under No. S5.446 and brought into use prior to 17 November 1995. Satellite networks operated under No. S5.446 brought into use after 17 November 1995 shall not claim protection from, and shall not cause harmful interference to, stations of the fixed-satellite service operated under Nos. S5.447A and S5.447B.
S5.447D The allocation of the band 5250-5255 MHz to the space research service on a primary basis is limited to active spaceborne sensors. Other uses of the band by the space research service are on a secondary basis.
S5.448
S5.448A The use of the frequency band 5250-5350 MHz by the earth exploration-satellite (active) and space research (active) services shall not constrain the future development and deployment of the radiolocation service.
S5.448B The earth exploration-satellite (active) service operating in the band 5350-5460 MHz shall not cause harmful interference to, or constrain the use and development of, the aeronautical radionavigation service.
S5.449 The use of the band 5350-5470 MHz by the aeronautical radionavigation service is limited to airborne radars and associated airborne beacons.
S5.450
S5.451
S5.452 Between 5600 MHz and 5650 MHz, ground-based radars used for meteorological purposes are authorized to operate on a basis of equality with stations of the maritime radionavigation service.
S5.453
S5.454
S5.455
S5.456
S5.458 In the band 6425-7075 MHz, passive microwave sensor measurements are carried out over the oceans. In the band 7075-7250 MHz, passive microwave sensor measurements are carried out. Administrations should bear in mind the needs of the Earth exploration-satellite (passive) and space research (passive) services in their future planning of the bands 6425-7025 MHz and 7075-7250 MHz.
S5.458A In making assignments in the band 6700-7075 MHz to space stations of the fixed-satellite service, administrations are urged to take all practicable steps to protect spectral line observations of the radio astronomy service in the band 6650-6675.2 MHz from harmful interference from unwanted emissions.
S5.458B The space-to-Earth allocation to the fixed-satellite service in the band 6700-7075 MHz is limited to feeder links for non-geostationary satellite systems of the mobile-satellite service and is subject to coordination under No. S9.11A. The use of the band 6700-7075 MHz (space-to-Earth) by feeder links for non-geostationary satellite systems in the mobile-satellite service is not subject to No. S22.2.
S5.458C Administrations making submissions in the band 7025-7075 MHz (Earth-to-space) for geostationary-satellite systems in the fixed-satellite service after 17 November 1995 shall consult on the basis of relevant ITU-R Recommendations with the administrations that have notified and brought into use non-geostationary-satellite systems in this frequency band before 18 November 1995 upon request of the latter administrations. This consultation shall be with a view to facilitating shared operation of both geostationary-satellite systems in the fixed-satellite service and non-geostationary-satellite systems in this band.
S5.459
S5.460
S5.461
S5.461A The use of the band 7450-7550 MHz by the meteorological-satellite service (space-to-Earth) is limited to geostationary-satellite systems. Non-geostationary meteorological-satellite systems in this band notified before 30 November 1997 may continue to operate on a primary basis until the end of their lifetime.
S5.461B The use of the band 7750-7850 MHz by the meteorological-satellite service (space-to-Earth) is limited to non-geostationary satellite systems.
S5.462A In Regions 1 and 3 (except for Japan), in the band 8025-8400 MHz, the earth exploration-satellite service using geostationary satellites shall not produce a power flux-density in excess of the following provisional values for angles of arrival (θ), without the consent of the affected administration:
These values are subject to study under Resolution 124 (WRC-97).
S5.463 Aircraft stations are not permitted to transmit in the band 8025-8400 MHz.
S5.465 In the space research service, the use of the band 8400-8450 MHz is limited to deep space.
S5.466
S5.467
S5.468
S5.469
S5.469A In the band 8550-8650 MHz, stations in the earth exploration-satellite service (active) and space research service (active) shall not cause harmful interference to, or constrain the use and development of, stations of the radiolocation service.
S5.470 The use of the band 8750-8850 MHz by the aeronautical radionavigation service is limited to airborne Doppler navigation aids on a centre frequency of 8800 MHz.
S5.471
S5.472 In the bands 8850-9000 MHz and 9200-9225 MHz, the maritime radionavigation service is limited to shore-based radars.
S5.473
S5.474 In the band 9200-9500 MHz, search and rescue transponders (SART) may be used, having due regard to the appropriate ITU-R Recommendation (see also Article S31).
S5.475 The use of the band 9300-9500 MHz by the aeronautical radionavigation service is limited to airborne weather radars and ground-based radars. In addition, ground-based radar beacons in the aeronautical radionavigation service are permitted in the band 9300-9320 MHz on condition that harmful interference is not caused to the maritime radionavigation service. In the band 9300-9500 MHz, ground-based radars used for meteorological purposes have priority over other radiolocation devices.
S5.476 In the band 9300-9320 MHz in the radionavigation service, the use of shipborne radars, other than those existing on 1 January 1976, is not permitted until 1 January 2001.
S5.476A In the band 9500-9800 MHz, stations in the earth exploration-satellite service (active) and space research service (active) shall not cause harmful interference to, or constrain the use and development of, stations of the radionavigation and radiolocation services.
S5.477
S5.478
S5.479 The band 9975-10,025 MHz is also allocated to the meteorological-satellite service on a secondary basis for use by weather radars.
S5.480
S5.481
S5.482 In the band 10.6-10.68 GHz, stations of the fixed and mobile, except aeronautical mobile, services shall be limited to a maximum equivalent isotropically radiated power of 40 dBW and the power delivered to the antenna shall not exceed −3 dBW. These limits may be exceeded subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21. However, in Saudi Arabia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, China, the United Arab Emirates, Georgia, India, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Iraq, Japan, Kazakstan, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Moldova, Nigeria, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, the Philippines, Qatar, Syria, Kyrgyzstan, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Ukraine, the restrictions on the fixed and mobile, except aeronautical mobile, services are not applicable.
S5.483
S5.484 In Region 1, the use of the band 10.7-11.7 GHz by the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space) is limited to feeder links for the broadcasting-satellite service.
S5.484A The use of the bands 10.95-11.2 GHz (space-to-Earth), 11.45-11.7 GHz (space-to-Earth), 11.7-12.2 GHz (space-to-Earth) in Region 2, 12.2-12.75 GHz (space-to-Earth) in Region 3, 12.5-12.75 GHz (space-to-Earth) in Region 1, 13.75-14.5 GHz (Earth-to-space), 17.8-18.6 GHz (space-to-Earth), 19.7-20.2 GHz (space-to-Earth), 27.5-28.6 GHz (Earth-to-space), 29.5-30 GHz (Earth-to-space) by non-geostationary- and geostationary-satellite systems in the fixed-satellite service is subject to the provisions of Resolution 130 (WRC-97). The use of the band 17.8-18.1 GHz (space-to-Earth) by non-geostationary fixed-satellite service systems is also subject to the provisions of Resolution 538 (WRC-97).
S5.485 In Region 2, in the band 11.7-12.2 GHz, transponders on space stations in the fixed-satellite service may be used additionally for transmissions in the broadcasting-satellite service, provided that such transmissions do not have a maximum e.i.r.p. greater than 53 dBW per television channel and do not cause greater interference or require more protection from interference than the coordinated fixed-satellite service frequency assignments. With respect to the space services, this band shall be used principally for the fixed-satellite service.
S5.486
S5.487 In the band 11.7-12.5 GHz in Regions 1 and 3, the fixed, fixed-satellite, mobile, except aeronautical mobile, and broadcasting services, in accordance with their respective allocations, shall not cause harmful interference to broadcasting-satellite stations operating in accordance with the provisions of Appendix S30.
S5.487A
S5.488 The use of the bands 11.7-12.2 GHz by the fixed-satellite service in Region 2 and 12.2-12.7 GHz by the broadcasting-satellite service in Region 2 is limited to national and subregional systems. The use of the band 11.7-12.2 GHz by the fixed-satellite service in Region 2 is subject to previous agreement between the administrations concerned and those having services, operating or planned to operate in accordance with the Table, which may be affected (see Articles S9 and S11). For the use of the band 12.2-12.7 GHz by the broadcasting-satellite service in Region 2, see Appendix S30.
S5.489
S5.490 In Region 2, in the band 12.2-12.7 GHz, existing and future terrestrial radiocommunication services shall not cause harmful interference to the space services operating in conformity with the broadcasting-satellite Plan for Region 2 contained in Appendix S30.
S5.491
S5.492 Assignments to stations of the broadcasting-satellite service in conformity with the appropriate regional Plan in Appendix S30 may also be used for transmissions in the fixed-satellite service (space-to-Earth), provided that such transmissions do not cause more interference or require more protection from interference than the broadcasting-satellite service transmissions operating in conformity with this Plan. With respect to the space services, this band shall be used principally for the broadcasting-satellite service.
S5.493 The broadcasting-satellite service in the band 12.5-12.75 GHz in Region 3 is limited to a power flux-density not exceeding −111 dB(W/m
S5.494
S5.495
S5.496
S5.497 The use of the band 13.25-13.4 GHz by the aeronautical radionavigation service is limited to Doppler navigation aids.
S5.498A The Earth exploration-satellite (active) and space research (active) services operating in the band 13.25-13.4 GHz shall not cause harmful interference to, or constrain the use and development of, the aeronautical radionavigation service.
S5.499
S5.500
S5.501
S5.501A The allocation of the band 13.4-13.75 GHz to the space research service on a primary basis is limited to active spaceborne sensors. Other uses of the band by the space research service are on a secondary basis.
S5.501B In the band 13.4-13.75 GHz, the Earth exploration-satellite (active) and space research (active) services shall not cause harmful interference to, or constrain the use and development of, the radiolocation service.
S5.502 In the band 13.75-14 GHz, the e.i.r.p. of any emission from an earth station in the fixed-satellite service shall be at least 68 dBW, and should not exceed 85 dBW, with a minimum antenna diameter of 4.5 m. In addition the e.i.r.p., averaged over one second, radiated by a station in the radiolocation or radionavigation services towards the geostationary-satellite orbit shall not exceed 59 dBW.
S5.503 In the band 13.75-14 GHz, geostationary space stations in the space research service for which information for advance publication has been received by the Bureau prior to 31 January 1992 shall operate on an equal basis with stations in the fixed-satellite service; after that date, new geostationary space stations in the space research service will operate on a secondary basis. The e.i.r.p. density of emissions from any earth station in the fixed-satellite service shall not exceed 71 dBW in any 6 MHz band in the frequency range 13.772-13.778 GHz until those geostationary space stations in the space research service for which information for advance publication has been received by the Bureau prior to 31 January 1992 cease to operate in this band. Automatic power control may be used to increase the e.i.r.p. density above 71 dBW in any 6 MHz band in this frequency range to compensate for rain attenuation, to the extent that the power-flux density at the fixed-satellite service space station does not exceed the value resulting from use of an e.i.r.p. of 71 dBW in any 6 MHz band in clear sky conditions.
S5.503A Until 1 January 2000, stations in the fixed-satellite service shall not cause harmful interference to non-geostationary space stations in the space research and Earth exploration-satellite services. After that date, these non-geostationary space stations will operate on a secondary basis in relation to the fixed-satellite service. Additionally, when planning earth stations in the fixed-satellite service to be brought into service between 1 January 2000 and 1 January 2001, in order to accommodate the needs of spaceborne precipitation radars operating in the band 13.793-13.805 GHz, advantage should be taken of the consultation process and the information given in Recommendation ITU-R SA.1071.
S5.504 The use of the band 14-14.3 GHz by the radionavigation service shall be such as to provide sufficient protection to space stations of the fixed-satellite service.
S5.505
S5.506 The band 14-14.5 GHz may be used, within the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space), for feeder links for the broadcasting-satellite service, subject to coordination with other networks in the fixed-satellite service. Such use of feeder links is reserved for countries outside Europe.
S5.508
S5.509
S5.510 The use of the band 14.5-14.8 GHz by the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space) is limited to feeder links for the broadcasting-satellite service. This use is reserved for countries outside Europe.
S5.511
S5.511A Use of the band 15.43-15.63 GHz by the fixed-satellite service (space-to-Earth (see Resolution 123 (WRC-97)) and Earth-to-space) is limited to feeder links of non-geostationary systems in the mobile-satellite service, subject to coordination under No. S9.11A. In the space-to-Earth direction, the minimum earth station elevation angle above and gain towards the local horizontal plane and the minimum coordination distances to protect an earth station from harmful interference shall be in accordance with Recommendation ITU-R S.1341. Also in the space-to-Earth direction, harmful interference shall not be caused to stations of the radio astronomy service using the band 15.35-15.4 GHz. The threshold levels of interference and associated power flux-density limits which are detrimental to the radio astronomy service are given in Recommendation ITU-R RA.769-1. Special measures will need to be employed to protect the radio astronomy service in the band 15.35-15.4 GHz.
S5.511C Stations operating in the aeronautical radionavigation service shall limit the effective e.i.r.p. in accordance with Recommendation ITU-R S.1340. The minimum coordination distance required to protect the aeronautical radionavigation stations (No. S4.10 applies) from harmful interference from feeder-link earth stations and the maximum e.i.r.p. transmitted towards the local horizontal plane by a feeder-link earth station shall be in accordance with Recommendation ITU-R S.1340.
S5.511D Fixed-satellite service systems for which complete information for advance publication has been received by the Bureau by 21 November 1997 may operate in the bands 15.4-15.43 GHz and 15.63-15.7 GHz in the space-to-Earth direction and 15.63-15.65 GHz in the Earth-to-space direction. In the bands 15.4-15.43 GHz and 15.65-15.7 GHz, emissions from a non-geostationary space station shall not exceed the power flux-density limits at the Earth's surface of −146 dB(W/m
S5.512
S5.513
S5.513A Spaceborne active sensors operating in the band 17.2-17.3 GHz shall not cause harmful interference to, or constrain the development of, the radiolocation and other services allocated on a primary basis.
S5.514
S5.515 In the band 17.3-17.8 GHz, sharing between the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space) and the broadcasting-satellite service shall also be in accordance with the provisions of § 1 of Annex 4 of Appendix S30A/30A.
S5.516 The use of the band 17.3-18.1 GHz by geostationary-satellite systems in the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space) is limited to feeder links for the broadcasting-satellite service. For the use of the band 17.3-17.8 GHz in Region 2 by feeder links for the broadcasting-satellite service in the band 12.2-12.7 GHz, see Article S11. The use of the bands 17.3-18.1 GHz (Earth-to-space) in Regions 1 and 3 and 17.8-18.1 GHz (Earth-to-space) in Region 2 by non-geostationary-satellite systems in the fixed-satellite service is subject to the provisions of Resolution 538 (WRC-97).
S5.517 In Region 2, the allocation to the broadcasting-satellite service in the band 17.3-17.8 GHz shall come into effect on 1 April 2007. After that date, use of the fixed-satellite (space-to-Earth) service in the band 17.7-17.8 GHz shall not claim protection from and shall not cause harmful interference to operating systems in the broadcasting-satellite service.
S5.518
S5.519
S5.520 The use of the band 18.1-18.4 GHz by the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space) is limited to feeder links for the broadcasting-satellite service.
S5.521
S5.522 In making assignments to stations in the fixed and mobile services, administrations are invited to take account of passive sensors in the Earth-exploration satellite and space research services operating in the band 18.6-18.8 GHz. In this band, administrations should endeavour to limit as far as possible both the power delivered by the transmitter to the antenna and the e.i.r.p. in order to reduce the risk of interference to passive sensors to the minimum.
S5.523 In assigning frequencies to stations in the fixed-satellite service in the direction space-to-Earth, administrations are requested to limit as far as practicable the power flux-density at the Earth's surface in the band 18.6-18.8 GHz, in order to reduce the risk of interference to passive sensors in the earth exploration-satellite and space research services.
S5.523A The use of the bands 18.8-19.3 GHz (space-to-Earth) and 28.6-29.1 GHz (Earth-to-space) by geostationary and non-geostationary fixed-satellite service networks is subject to the application of the provisions of No. S9.11A and No. S22.2 does not apply. Administrations having geostationary-satellite networks under coordination prior to 18 November 1995 shall cooperate to the maximum extent possible to coordinate pursuant to No. S9.11A with non-geostationary-satellite networks for which notification information has been received by the Bureau prior to that date, with a view to reaching results acceptable to all the parties concerned. Non-geostationary-satellite networks shall not cause unacceptable interference to geostationary fixed-satellite service networks for which complete Appendix S4 notification information is considered as having been received by the Bureau prior to 18 November 1995.
S5.523B The use of the band 19.3-19.6 GHz (Earth-to-space) by the fixed-satellite service is limited to feeder links for non-geostationary-satellite systems in the mobile-satellite service. Such use is subject to the application of the provisions of No. S9.11A, and No. S22.2 does not apply.
S5.523C No. S22.2 of the Radio Regulations shall continue to apply in the bands 19.3-19.6 GHz and 29.1-29.4 GHz, between feeder links of non-geostationary mobile-satellite service networks and those fixed-satellite service networks for which complete Appendix S4 coordination information, or notification information, is considered as having been received by the Bureau prior to 18 November 1995.
S5.523D The use of the band 19.3-19.7 GHz (space-to-Earth) by geostationary fixed-satellite service systems and by feeder links for non-geostationary-satellite systems in the mobile-satellite service is subject to the application of the provisions of No. S9.11A, but not subject to the provisions of No. S22.2. The use of this band for other non-geostationary fixed-satellite service systems, or for the cases indicated in Nos. S5.523C and S5.523E, is not subject to the provisions of No. S9.11A and shall continue to be subject to Articles S9 (except No. S9.11A) and S11 procedures, and to the provisions of No. S22.2.
S5.523E No. S22.2 of the Radio Regulations shall continue to apply in the bands 19.6-19.7 GHz and 29.4-29.5 GHz, between feeder links of non-geostationary mobile-satellite service networks and those fixed-satellite service networks for which complete Appendix S4 coordination information, or notification information, is considered as having been received by the Bureau by 21 November 1997.
S5.524
S5.525 In order to facilitate interregional coordination between networks in the mobile-satellite and fixed-satellite services, carriers in the mobile-satellite service that are most susceptible to interference shall, to the extent practicable, be located in the higher parts of the bands 19.7-20.2 GHz and 29.5-30 GHz.
S5.526 In the bands 19.7-20.2 GHz and 29.5-30 GHz in Region 2, and in the bands 20.1-20.2 GHz and 29.9-30 GHz in Regions 1 and 3, networks which are both in the fixed-satellite service and in the mobile-satellite service may include links between earth stations at specified or unspecified points or while in motion, through one or more satellites for point-to-point and point-to-multipoint communications.
S5.527 In the bands 19.7-20.2 GHz and 29.5-30 GHz, the provisions of No. S4.10 do not apply with respect to the mobile-satellite service.
S5.528 The allocation to the mobile-satellite service is intended for use by networks which use narrow spot-beam antennas and other advanced technology at the space stations. Administrations operating systems in the mobile-satellite service in the band 19.7-20.1 GHz in Region 2 and in the band 20.1-20.2 GHz shall take all practicable steps to ensure the continued availability of these bands for administrations operating fixed and mobile systems in accordance with the provisions of No. S5.524.
S5.529 The use of the bands 19.7-20.1 GHz and 29.5-29.9 GHz by the mobile-satellite service in Region 2 is limited to satellite networks which are both in the
S5.530 In Regions 1 and 3, the allocation to the broadcasting-satellite service in the band 21.4-22 GHz shall come into effect on 1 April 2007. The use of this band by the broadcasting-satellite service after that date and on an interim basis prior to that date is subject to the provisions of Resolution 525 (WARC-92).
S5.531
S5.532 The use of the band 22.21-22.5 GHz by the Earth exploration-satellite (passive) and space research (passive) services shall not impose constraints upon the fixed and mobile, except aeronautical mobile, services.
S5.533 The inter-satellite service shall not claim protection from harmful interference from airport surface detection equipment stations of the radionavigation service.
S5.534
S5.535 In the band 24.75-25.25 GHz, feeder links to stations of the broadcasting-satellite service shall have priority over other uses in the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space). Such other uses shall protect and shall not claim protection from existing and future operating feeder-link networks to such broadcasting satellite stations.
S5.535A The use of the band 29.1-29.5 GHz (Earth-to-space) by the fixed-satellite service is limited to geostationary-satellite systems and feeder links to non-geostationary-satellite systems in the mobile-satellite service. Such use is subject to the application of the provisions of No. S9.11A, but not subject to the provisions of No. S22.2, except as indicated in Nos. S5.523C and S5.523E where such use is not subject to the provisions of No. S9.11A and shall continue to be subject to Articles S9 (except No. S9.11A) and S11 procedures, and to the provisions of No. S22.2.
S5.536 Use of the 25.25-27.5 GHz band by the inter-satellite service is limited to space research and Earth exploration-satellite applications, and also transmissions of data originating from industrial and medical activities in space.
S5.536A Administrations installing earth exploration-satellite earth stations cannot claim protection from fixed and mobile stations operated by neighbouring administrations. In addition, earth stations operating in the earth exploration-satellite service should take into account Recommendation ITU-R SA.1278.
S5.536B In Germany, Saudi Arabia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, China, the Republic of Korea, Denmark, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, Spain, Estonia, Finland, France, Hungary, India, Islamic Republic of Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Moldova, Norway, Oman, Uganda, Pakistan, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Syria, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Romania, the United Kingdom, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, Tanzania, Turkey, Viet Nam and Zimbabwe, earth stations operating in the Earth exploration-satellite service in the band 25.5-GHz shall not claim protection from, or constrain the use and deployment of, stations of the fixed and mobile services.
S5.537 Space services using non-geostationary satellites operating in the inter-satellite service in the band 27-27.5 GHz are exempt from the provisions of No. S22.2.
S5.538
S5.539 The band 27.5-30 GHz may be used by the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space) for the provision of feeder links for the broadcasting-satellite service.
S5.540
S5.541 In the band 28.5-30 GHz, the earth exploration-satellite service is limited to the transfer of data between stations and not to the primary collection of information by means of active or passive sensors.
S5.541A Feeder links of non-geostationary networks in the mobile-satellite service and geostationary networks in the fixed-satellite service operating in the band 29.1-29.5 GHz (Earth-to-space) shall employ uplink adaptive power control or other methods of fade compensation, such that the earth station transmissions shall be conducted at the power level required to meet the desired link performance while reducing the level of mutual interference between both networks. These methods shall apply to networks for which Appendix S4 coordination information is considered as having been received by the Bureau after 17 May 1996 and until they are changed by a future competent world radiocommunication conference. Administrations submitting Appendix S4 information for coordination before this date are encouraged to utilize these techniques to the extent practicable. These methods are also subject to review by ITU-R (see Resolution 121 (Rev.WRC-97)).
S5.542
S5.543 The band 29.95-30 GHz may be used for space-to-space links in the Earth exploration-satellite service for telemetry, tracking, and control purposes, on a secondary basis.
S5.544 In the band 31-31.3 GHz the power flux-density limits specified in Article S21, Table S21-4 shall apply to the space research service.
S5.545
S5.546
S5.547 The bands 31.8-33.4 GHz, 51.4-52.6 GHz, 55.78-59 GHz and 64-66 GHz are available for high-density applications in the fixed service (see Resolution 726 (WRC-97)).
S5.547A Use of the band 31.8-33.4 GHz by the fixed service shall be in accordance with Resolution 126 (WRC-97).
S5.547B Alternative allocation: in the United States, the band 31.8-32 GHz is allocated to the radionavigation and space research (deep space) (space-to-Earth) services on a primary basis.
S5.547C
S5.547D
S5.547E
S5.548 In designing systems for the inter-satellite and radionavigation services in the band 32-33 GHz, and for the space research service (deep space) in the band 31.8-32.3 GHz, administrations shall take all necessary measures to prevent harmful interference between these services, bearing in mind the safety aspects of the radionavigation service (see Recommendation 707).
S5.549
S5.550
S5.551 Radars located on spacecraft may be operated on a primary basis in the band 35.5-35.6 GHz. (SUP—WRC-97).
S5.551A In the band 35.5-36.0 GHz, active spaceborne sensors in the earth exploration-satellite and space research services shall not cause harmful interference to, claim protection from, or otherwise impose constraints on operation or development of the radiolocation service, the meteorological aids service and other services allocated on a primary basis.
S5.551B The use of the band 41.5-42.5 GHz by the fixed-satellite service (space-to-Earth) is subject to Resolution 128 (WRC-97).
S5.551C
S5.551D
S5.551E Use of the band 40.5-42.5 GHz by the fixed-satellite service shall be in accordance with Resolution 134 (WRC-97).
S5.551F
S5.552 The allocation of the spectrum for the fixed-satellite service in the bands 42.5-43.5 GHz and 47.2-50.2 GHz for Earth-to-space transmission is greater than that in the band 37.5-39.5 GHz for space-to-Earth transmission in order to accommodate feeder links to broadcasting satellites. Administrations are urged to take all practicable steps to reserve the band 47.2-49.2 GHz for feeder links for the broadcasting-satellite service operating in the band 40.5-42.5 GHz.
S5.552A The allocation to the fixed service in the bands 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz is designated for use by high altitude platform stations. The use of the bands 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz is subject to the provisions of Resolution 122 (WRC-97).
S5.553 In the bands 43.5-47 GHz, 66-71 GHz, 95-100 GHz, 134-142 GHz, 190-200 GHz and 252-265 GHz, stations in the land mobile service may be operated subject to not causing harmful interference to the space radiocommunication services to which these bands are allocated (see No. S5.43).
S5.554 In the bands 43.5-47 GHz, 66-71 GHz, 95-100 GHz, 134-142 GHz, 190-200 GHz and 252-265 GHz, satellite links connecting land stations at specified fixed points are also authorized when used in conjunction with the mobile-satellite service or the radionavigation-satellite service.
S5.555
S5.555A The band 50.2-50.4 GHz is also allocated, on a primary basis, to the fixed and mobile services until 1 July 2000.
S5.556 In the bands 51.4-54.25 GHz, 58.2-59 GHz, 64-65 GHz, 72.77-72.91 GHz and 93.07-93.27 GHz, radio astronomy observations may be carried out under national arrangements.
S5.556A Use of the bands 54.25-56.9 GHz, 57-58.2 GHz and 59-59.3 GHz by the inter-satellite service is limited to satellites in the geostationary-satellite orbit. The single-entry power flux-density at all altitudes from 0 km to 1000 km above the Earth's surface produced by a station in the inter-satellite service, for all conditions and for all methods of modulation, shall not exceed −147 dB(W/m
S5.556B
S5.557
S5.558 In the bands 55.78-58.2 GHz, 59-64 GHz, 66-71 GHz, 116-134 GHz, 170-182 GHz and 185-190 GHz, stations in the aeronautical mobile service may be operated subject to not causing harmful interference to the inter-satellite service (see No. S5.43).
S5.558A Use of the band 56.9-57 GHz by inter-satellite systems is limited to links between satellites in geostationary-satellite orbit and to transmissions from non-geostationary satellites in high-Earth orbit to those in low-Earth orbit. For links between satellites in the geostationary-satellite orbit, the single entry power flux-density at all altitudes from 0 km to 1000 km above the Earth's surface, for all conditions and for all methods of modulation, shall not exceed −147 dB(W/m
S5.559 In the bands 59-64 GHz and 126-134 GHz, airborne radars in the radiolocation service may be operated subject to not causing harmful interference to the inter-satellite service (see No. S5.43).
S5.560 In the band 78-79 GHz radars located on space stations may be operated on a primary basis in the Earth exploration-satellite service and in the space research service.
S5.561 In the band 84-86 GHz, stations in the fixed, mobile and broadcasting services shall not cause harmful interference to broadcasting-satellite stations operating in accordance with the decisions of the appropriate frequency assignment planning conference for the broadcasting-satellite service.
S5.562 The use of the band 94-94.1 GHz by the Earth exploration-satellite (active) and space research (active) services is limited to spaceborne cloud radars.
S5.564
S5.565 The frequency band 275-400 GHz may be used by administrations for experimentation with, and development of, various active and passive services. In this band a need has been identified for the following spectral line measurements for passive services:
459 In the Region 2 polar areas (north of 60°N and south of 60°S), which are subject to auroral disturbances, the aeronautical fixed service is the primary service in the band 160-190 kHz.
471 The bands 490-495 kHz and 505-510 kHz shall be subject to the provisions of No. 3018 until the entry into force of the reduced guardband in accordance with Resolution 210 (Mob-87).
472 The frequency 500 kHz is the international distress and calling frequency for Morse radiotelegraphy. The conditions for its use are prescribed in Articles 37, 38, N 38 and 60.
472A In the maritime mobile service, the frequency 490 kHz is, from the date of full implementation of the GMDSS (see Resolution 331 (Mob-87)), to be used exclusively for the transmission by coast stations of navigational and meteorological warnings and urgent information to ships, by means of narrowband direct-printing telegraphy. The conditions for use of the frequency 490 kHz are prescribed in Articles N 38 and 60, and Resolution 329 (Mob-87). In using the band 415-495 kHz for the aeronautical radionavigation service, administrations are requested to ensure that no harmful interference is caused to the frequency 490 kHz.
474 The conditions for the use of frequency 518 kHz by the maritime mobile service are prescribed in Articles 38, N38 and 60 (see Resolution 324 (Mob-87) and Article 14A).
480 In Region 2, the use of the band 1605-1705 kHz by stations of the broadcasting service is subject to the plan established by the Regional Administrative Radio Conference (Rio de Janeiro, 1988.)
In Region 2, in the band 1625-1705 kHz, the relationship between the broadcasting, fixed and mobile services is shown in No. 419. However, the examination of frequency assignments to stations of the fixed and mobile services in the band 1625-1705 kHz under No. 1241 shall take account of the allotments appearing in the Plan established by the Regional Administrative Radio Conference (Rio de Janeiro, 1988).
591 Subject to agreement obtained under the procedure set forth in Article 14, the band 117.975-137 MHz is also allocated to the aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service on a secondary basis and on the condition that harmful interference is not caused to the aeronautical mobile (R) service.
599A The use of the band 137-138 MHz by the mobile-satellite service is subject to the application of the coordination and notification procedures set forth in Resolution 46. However, coordination of a space station of the mobile-satellite service with respect to terrestrial services is required only if the power flux-density produced by the station exceeds—125 dB(W/m
599B The use of the bands 137-138 MHz, 148-149.9 MHz and 400.15-401 MHz by the mobile-satellite service and the band 149.9-150.05 MHz by the land mobile-satellite service is limited to non-geostationary-satellite systems.
608A The use of the band 148-149.9 MHz by the mobile-satellite service is subject to the application of the coordination and notification procedures set forth in Resolution 46 (WARC-92). The mobile-satellite service shall not constrain the development and use of fixed, mobile and space operation services in the band 148-149.9 MHz. Mobile earth stations in the mobile-satellite service shall not produce a power flux-density in excess of −150 dB(W/m
608B The use of the band 149.9-150.05 MHz by the land mobile-satellite service is subject to the application of the coordination and notification procedures set forth in Resolution 46 (WARC-92). The land mobile-satellite service shall not constrain the development and use of the radionavigation-satellite service in the band 149.9-150.05 MHz. Land mobile earth stations of the land mobile-satellite service shall not produce power flux-density in excess of −150 dB(W/m
647B The use of the band 400.15-401 MHz by the mobile-satellite service is subject to the application of the coordination and notification procedures set forth in Resolution 46. However, coordination of a space station of the mobile-satellite service with respect to terrestrial services is required only if the power flux-density produced by the station exceeds −125 dB(W/m
669 In the maritime mobile service, the frequencies 457.525 MHz, 457.550 MHz, 457.575 MHz, 467.525 MHz, 467.550 MHz and 467.575 MHz may be used by onboard communication stations. The use of these frequencies in territorial waters may be subject to the national regulations of the administration concerned. The characteristics of the equipment used shall conform to those specified in Appendix 20.
733 The bands 1610-1626.5 MHz, 5000-5250 MHz and 15.4-15.7 GHz are also allocated to the aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service on a primary basis. Such use is subject to agreement obtained under the procedure set forth in Article 14.
753F The use of the band 2483.5-2500 MHz by the mobile-satellite and the radiodetermination-satellite services is subject to the application of the coordination and notification procedures set forth in Resolution 46 (WARC-92). Coordination of space stations of the mobile-satellite and radiodetermination-satellite services with respect to terrestrial services is required only if the power flux-density produced at the Earth's surface exceeds the limits in No. 2566. In respect of assignments operating in this band, the provisions of Section II, paragraph 2.2 of Resolution 46 (WARC-92) shall also be applied to geostationary transmitting space stations with respect to terrestrial stations.
792A The use of the bands 4500-4800 MHz, 6725-7025 MHz, 10.7-10.95 GHz, 11.2-11.45 GHz and 12.75-13.25 GHz by the fixed-satellite service shall be in accordance with the provisions of Appendix 30B.
796 The band 5000-5250 MHz is to be used for the operation of the international standard system (microwave landing system) for precision approach and landing. The requirements of this system shall take precedence over other uses of this band.
797 The bands 5000-5250 MHz and 15.4-15.7 GHz are also allocated to the fixed-satellite service and the inter-satellite service, for connection between one or more earth stations at specified fixed points on the Earth and space stations, when these services are used in conjunction with the aeronautical radionavigation and/or aeronautical mobile (R) service. Such use shall be subject to agreement obtained under the procedure set forth in Article 14.
909 In the bands 54.25-58.2 GHz, 59-64 GHz, 116-134 GHz, 170-182 GHz and 185-190 GHz, stations in the aeronautical mobile service may be operated subject to not causing harmful interference to the inter-satellite service (see No. 435).
917 In the bands 140.69-140.98 GHz all emissions from airborne stations, and from space stations in the space-to-Earth direction, are prohibited.
US7 In the band 420-450 MHz and within the following areas, the peak envelope power output of a transmitter employed in the amateur service shall not exceed 50 watts, unless expressly authorized by the Commission after mutual agreement, on a case-by-case basis, between the Federal Communications Commission Engineer in Charge at the applicable district office and the military area frequency coordinator at the applicable military base. For areas (e) through (j), the appropriate military coordinator is located at Peterson AFB, CO.
(a) Those portions of Texas and New Mexico bounded on the south by latitude 31° 45′ North, on the east by longitude 104° 00′ West, on the north by latitude 34°30′ North, and on the west by longitude 107° 30′ West;
(b) The entire State of Florida including the Key West area and the areas enclosed within a 322-kilometer (200-mile) radius of Patrick Air Force Base, Florida (latitude 28°21′ North, longitude 80° 43′ West), and within a 322-kilometer (200-mile) radius of Eglin Air Force Base, Florida (latitude 30° 30′ North, longitude 86° 30′ West);
(c) The entire State of Arizona;
(d) Those portions of California and Nevada south of latitude 37° 10′ North, and the areas enclosed within a 322-kilometer (200-mile) radius of the Pacific Missile Test Center, Point Mugu, California (latitude 34° 09′ North, longitude 119° 11′ West).
(e) In the State of Massachusetts within a 160-kilometer (100-mile) radius around locations at Otis Air Force Base, Massachusetts (latitude 41° 45′ North, longitude 70° 32′ West).
(f) In the State of California within a 240-kilometer (150-mile) radius around locations at Beale Air Force Base, California (latitude 39° 08′ North, longitude 121° 26′ West).
(g) In the State of Alaska within a 160-kilometer (100-mile) radius of Clear, Alaska (latitude 64° 17′ North, longitude 149° 10′ West).
(h) In the State of North Dakota within a 160-kilometer (100-mile) radius of Concrete, North Dakota (latitude 48° 43′ North, longitude 97° 54′ West).
(i) In the States of Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina within a 200-kilometer (124-mile) radius of Warner Robins Air Force Base, Georgia (latitude 32° 38′ North, longitude 83° 35′ West).
(j) In the State of Texas within a 200-kilometer (124-mile) radius of Goodfellow Air Force Base, Texas (latitude 31° 25′ North, longitude 100° 24′ West).
US78 In the mobile service, the frequencies between 1435 and 1535 MHz will be assigned for aeronautical telemetry and associated telecommand operations for flight testing of manned or unmanned aircraft and missiles, or their major components. Permissible usage includes telemetry associated with launching and reentry into the earth's atmosphere as well as any incidental orbiting prior to reentry of manned objects undergoing flight tests. The following frequencies are shared with flight telemetry mobile stations: 1444.5, 1453.5, 1501.5, 1515.5, 1524.5 and 1525.5 MHz.
US221 Use of the mobile service in the bands 525-535 kHz and 1605-1615 kHz is limited to distribution of public service information from Travelers Information stations operating on 530 kHz and 1610 kHz.
US256 Radio astronomy observations may be made in the band 1718.8-1722.2 MHz on an unprotected basis. Agencies providing other services in this band in the geographic areas listed below should bear in mind that
US257 Radio astronomy observations may be made in the band 4950-4990 MHz at certain Radio Astronomy Observatories indicated below:
Every practicable effort will be made to avoid the assignment of frequencies in the band 4950-4990 MHz to stations in the fixed and mobile services within the geographic areas given above. In addition, every practicable effort will be made to avoid the assignment of frequencies in this band to stations in the aeronautical mobile service which operate outside of those geographic areas, but which may cause harmful interference to the listed observatories. Should such assignments result in harmful interference to these observatories, the situation will be remedied to the extent practicable.
US296 In the bands designated for ship wide-band telegraphy, facsimile and special transmission systems, the following assignable frequencies are available to non-Federal government stations on a shared basis with Federal government stations: 2070.5, 2072.5, 2074.5, 2076.5, 4154.5, 4169.5, 6235.5, 6259.5, 8302.5, 8338.5, 12370.5, 12418.5, 16551.5, 16614.5, 18847.5, 18868.5, 22181.5, 22238.5, 25123.5, and 25159.5 kHz.
US303 In the band 2285-2290 MHz, non-Federal government space stations in the space research, space operations and earth exploration-satellite services may be authorized to transmit to the Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System subject to such conditions as may be applied on a case-by-case basis. Such transmissions shall not cause harmful interference to authorized Federal government stations. The power flux density at the Earth's surface from such non-Federal government stations shall not exceed −144 to −154 dBW/m
US311 Radio astronomy observations may be made in the band 1350-1400 MHz on an unprotected basis at certain Radio Astronomy Observatories indicated below:
Every practicable effort will be made to avoid the assignment of frequencies in the band 1350-1400 MHz to stations in the fixed and mobile services which could interfere with radio astronomy observations within the geographic areas given above. In addition, every practicable effort will be made to avoid assignment of frequencies in this band to stations in the aeronautical mobile service which operate outside of those geographic areas, but which may cause harmful interference to the listed observatories. Should such assignments result in harmful interference to these observatories, the situation will be remedied to the extent practicable.
US319 In the bands 137-138 MHz, 148-149.9 MHz, 149.9-150.05 MHz, 399.9-400.05 MHz, 400.15-401 MHz, 1610-1626.5 MHz, and 2483.5-2500 MHz, Federal government stations in the mobile-satellite service shall be limited to earth stations operating with non-Federal government space stations.
US322 Use of the bands 149.9-150.5 MHz and 399.9-400.05 MHz by the mobile-satellite service (Earth-to-space) is limited to non-voice, non-geostationary satellite systems, including satellite links between land earth stations.
NG47 In Alaska, frequencies within the band 2655-2690 MHz are not available for assignment to terrestrial stations.
NG102 Use of the fixed-satellite service in the bands 2500-2655 MHz (space-to-Earth) and 2655-2690 MHz (Earth-to-space) is limited as follows:
(a) For common carrier use in Alaska, for intra-Alaska service only, and in the mid- and western-Pacific areas, including American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and Hawaii, and under the Compacts of Free Association with the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands.
(b) For educational use in the contiguous United States, Alaska, and the mid- and western-Pacific areas, including American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and Hawaii.
Such use is subject to agreement with administrations having services operating in accordance with the Table, which may be affected. In the band 2500-2655 MHz, unless such agreement includes the use of higher values, the power flux density at the Earth's surface produced by emissions from a space station in this service shall not exceed the values set forth in Part 25 of the Rules for this frequency band.
NG120 Frequencies in the band 928-960 MHz may be assigned for multiple address systems and mobile operations on a primary basis as specified in 47 CFR part 101.
NG124 Within designated segments of the bands that comprise 30.85-47.41 MHz, 150.8-159.465 MHz, and 453.0125-467.9875 MHz, police licensees are authorized to operate low power radio transmitters on a secondary, non-interference basis in accordance with the provisions of 47 CFR 2.803 and 90.20(e)(5).
NG128 In the band 535-1705 kHz, AM broadcast licensees or permittees may use their AM carrier on a secondary basis to transmit signals intended for both broadcast and non-broadcast purposes. In the band 88-108 MHz, FM broadcast licensees or permittees are permitted to use subcarriers on a secondary basis to transmit signals intended for both broadcast and non-broadcast purposes. In the bands 54-72, 76-88, 174-216, 470-608 and 614-806 MHz, TV broadcast licensees or permittees are permitted to use subcarriers on a secondary basis for both broadcast and non-broadcast purposes.
NG147 Stations in the broadcast auxiliary service and private radio services licensed as of July 25, 1985, or on a subsequent date following as a result of submitting an application for license on or before July 25, 1985, may continue to operate on a primary basis with the mobile-satellite service and the radiodetermination satellite service.
G106 The bands 2501-2502 kHz, 5003-5005 kHz, 10003-10005 kHz, 15005-15010 kHz, 19990-19995 kHz, 20005-20010 kHz and 25005-25010 kHz are also allocated, on a secondary basis, to the space research service. The space research transmissions are subject to immediate temporary or permanent shutdown in the event of interference to the reception of the standard frequency and time broadcasts.