Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 209 / Friday, October 27, 2000 / Notices 64473

on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT). In

addition, Belgium’s administration of its

customs regime for imported rice

appears to be inconsistent with

Belgium’s obligations under the

Agreement on Implementation of Article

VII of the GATT 1994 (‘‘Customs

Valuation Agreement’’), the Agreement

on Technical Barriers to Trade, and the

Agreement on Agriculture. Pursuant to

Articles 1 and 4.3 of the WTO Dispute

Settlement Understanding (‘‘DSU’’),

such consultations are to take place

within a period of 30 days from the date

of the request, or within a period

otherwise mutually agreed between the

United States and Belgium. USTR

invites written comments from the

public concerning the issues raised in

this dispute.

DATES: Although the USTR will accept

any comments received during the

course of the dispute settlement

proceedings, comments should be

submitted on or before November 25,

2000 to be assured of timely

consideration by USTR.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to Sandy

McKinzy, Monitoring and Enforcement

Unit, Office of the General Counsel,

Room 122, Office of the United States

Trade Representative, 600 17th Street,

NW., Washington, DC, 20508, Attn:

Belgium Rice Dispute. Telephone: (202)

395–3582.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James M. Lyons, Associate General

Counsel, Office of the United States

Trade Representative, 600 17th Street,

NW., Washington, DC, (202) 395–3582.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

127(b) of the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act (URAA) (19 U.S.C.

3537(b)(1)) requires that notice and

opportunity for comment be provided

after the United States submits or

receives a request for the establishment

of a WTO dispute settlement panel.

Consistent with this obligation, but in

an effort to provide an earlier

opportunity for comment, USTR is

providing notice that consultations have

been requested pursuant to the WTO

Dispute Settlement Understanding. If

such consultations should fail to resolve

the matter and a dispute settlement

panel is established pursuant to the

DSU, such panel, which would hold its

meetings in Geneva, Switzerland, would

be expected to issue a report on its

findings and recommendations within

six to nine months after it is established.

Major Issues Raised by the United

States

The United States considers that

Belgium’s administration of its laws and

regulations establishing the customs

duties applicable to rice imported from

the United States appears to be

inconsistent with its WTO obligations.

Belgian customs authorities have

established customs values and import

duties using reference prices without

consideration of either the value or

characteristics of the particular rice

shipments involved. Moreover, the

measures employed by Belgian

authorities appear to have been applied

in a manner that discriminates against

rice imported from the United States.

The Belgian measures also appear to

have restricted imports of rice into

Belgium.

The United States also considers that

Belgium has failed to comply with the

requirements of Articles I, II, VII, VIII,

and X of the GATT 1994, Articles 1–6,

7, 10, 14, 16, and Annex I of the

Customs Valuation Agreement, and

Articles 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 9 of the

Agreement on Technical Barriers to

Trade.

In addition, Belgium appears to be

restricting imports in a manner that

would be inconsistent with GATT

Articles I and XI and Articles 4 of the

Agreement on Agriculture.

Public Comment: Requirements for

Submissions

Interested persons are invited to

submit written comments concerning

the issues raised in the dispute.

Comments must be in English and

provided in fifteen copies. A person

requesting that information contained in

a comment submitted by that person be

treated as confidential business

information must certify that such

information is business confidential and

would not customarily be released to

the public by the commenter.

Confidential business information must

be clearly marked ‘‘BUSINESS

CONFIDENTIAL’’ in a contrasting color

ink at the top of each page of each copy.

Information or advice contained in a

comment submitted, other than business

confidential information, may be

determined by USTR to be confidential

in accordance with section 135(g)(2) of

the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.

2155(g)(2)). If the submitter believes that

information or advice may qualify as

such, the submitter—

(1) Must so designate the information

or advice;

(2) Must clearly mark the material as

‘‘SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE’’ in a

contrasting color ink at the top of each

page of each copy; and

(3) Is encouraged to provide a nonconfidential summary of the

information or advice.

Pursuant to section 127(e) of the

URAA (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR will

maintain a file on this dispute

settlement proceeding, accessible to the

public, in the USTR Reading Room:

Room 101, Office of the United States

Trade Representative, 600 17th Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20508. The public

file will include a listing of any

comments received by USTR from the

public with respect to the dispute; if a

dispute settlement panel is convened,

the U.S. submissions to that panel, the

submissions, or non-confidential

summaries of submissions, to the panel

received from other participants in the

dispute, as well as the report of the

panel; and, if applicable, the report of

the Appellate Body. An appointment to

review the public file (Docket WTO/D–

210, Belgium—Measures Affecting

Imports of Rice) may be made by calling

Brenda Webb, (202) 395–6186. The

USTR Reading Room is open to the

public from 9:30 a.m. to 12 noon and 1

p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

A. Jane Bradley,

Assistant United States Trade Representative

for Monitoring and Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 00–27703 Filed 10–26–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3190–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

[OST Docket No. OST–2000–7538]

Test Plan for Determining Potential for

Interference From Ultra-wideband

Devices (UWB) to Global Positioning

System (GPS) Receivers; Response to

Comment

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary,

Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Response to comment.

SUMMARY: DOT announced a test

program to begin to acquire data on the

potential for interference to GPS

systems from UWB signals, and sought

comment thereon. Only one comment

was received, which warrants additional

explanation of, but no changes to, the

test program.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sally L. Frodge, Radionavigation and

Positioning , P–7, (202) 366–4894

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Department of Transportation (DOT)

became aware last year of the potential

for interference to the Global

Positioning System (GPS) and other

communications, navigation, and

surveillance systems, including actively

used aviation systems, from ultrawideband (UWB) signals. Due to the

lack of technical data on interference

available at that time, DOT decided to

64474 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 209 / Friday, October 27, 2000 / Notices

initiate a limited testing program to

begin to explore the interference

potential of UWB to GPS. Working with

the National Telecommunications and

Information Administration, the Federal

Aviation Administration, the

Interdepartment Radio Advisory

Committee, RTCA, Inc., and others, a

test plan was devised to develop data in

a technically sound and controlled

manner. The Department contracted

with Stanford University to perform the

tests. In addition, because of the

potential for wide public and industry

interest in this matter, the Department

distributed the test plan broadly and

formally solicited comment on the plan

through a notice in the Federal Register.

65 FR 38874 (June 22, 2000). Only one

party submitted comments in response

to this notice—Time Domain

Corporation (TDC).

TDC criticized the test plan and

concluded that it would not produce

valid data about the potential for

interference from UWB signals. DOT

appreciates the TDC comments.

Although DOT disagrees with TDC’s

assessment of the efficacy of the test

plan, it is clear that additional

clarification of certain points in the plan

description and an explanation of the

rationale for the plan’s basic approach

are warranted. DOT remains confident

that the test plan is methodologically

sound and will develop data that will

help support a determination about

whether and to what extent UWB

emissions will interfere with GPS

applications.

DOT’s complete response will be sent

to TDC, and to other interested parties

upon request. DOT will provide all data

and analyses available from the test

program to the FCC by October 30, 2000,

the filing date for test results in FCC ET

Docket No. OST–98–153. The test

program will be incomplete at that time

and further results will continue to be

developed into the first quarter of 2001.

Dated: October 19, 2000.

Joseph Canny,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Navigation

Systems Policy.

[FR Doc. 00–27645 Filed 10–26–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–62–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

Environmental Impact Statement:

Hillsborough and Rockingham

Counties, NH

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Intent.

SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this

notice to advise the public that an

environmental impact statement (EIS) is

being prepared for a proposed highway

project in Hillsborough and Rockingham

Counties, New Hampshire. A Notice of

Intent for the project was previously

published on February 21, 1992.

Subsequently the project was put on

hold pending development of a

Statewide Transportation Model.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

William F. O’Donnell, P.E.,

Environmental Program Manager,

Federal Highway Administration, 279

Pleasant Street, Suite 204, Concord,

New Hampshire, 03301–7502,

Telephone: (603) 228–0417, or Mr.

William R. Hauser, Administrator,

Bureau of Environment, New

Hampshire Department of

Transportation, P.O. Box 483, John O.

Morton Building, Concord, New

Hampshire 03302–0483, Telephone:

(603) 271–3226.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

FHWA, in cooperation with the New

Hampshire Department of

Transportation (NHDOT), is in the

process of preparing an environmental

impact statement (EIS) for a proposal for

construction on a section of an existing

highway facility (I–93 extending from

the Massachusetts/New Hampshire

State Line in Salem to just south of Exit

6 in Manchester) that serves as a major

transportation link for the State of New

Hampshire.

The proposed action would relieve

traffic congestion, reduce travel time,

improve safety and accommodate

projected increases in traffic demand.

Alternatives to be considered include

(1) taking no action; (2) upgrading the

existing route (approximately 18 miles

in length) to add capacity; (3)

constructing high occupancy vehicle

lanes, as well as other Transportation

Demand Management (TDM) measures

such as carpool parking lots; (4)

constructing mass transportation

facilities in or adjacent to the existing

corridor; and (5) combinations of these

alternatives. Various designs of grade,

alignment, geometry and access will be

evaluated. An Advisory Task Force has

been established with representation

from the regional planning agencies,

state and local officials, business and

industry and local citizens.

Letters describing the proposed action

and soliciting comments were

previously sent to appropriate federal,

state and local agencies, and to private

organizations and citizens who have

interest in this proposal. Public

informational, community and Advisory

Task Force meetings have been held in

study area and will continue as the

project progresses, in order to include

public input in the project development

process. A public hearing will be held

following distribution of the Draft

Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS).

Public notice will be given regarding the

time and location of this hearing. The

DEIS will be available for review and

comment by the public and interested

agencies prior to the public hearing.

Because this project has been on hold

for a substantial period of time, a second

formal scoping meeting will be held at

4:00 pm. on December 6, 2000, the 3rd

floor Auditorium of the University of

NH-Manchester Campus, 3000

Commercial Street in Manchester, New

Hampshire. The purpose of this meeting

is to (1) reaffirm the limits of the project

study area; (2) refine the study

framework and the impacts to be

analyzed; and (3) redefine a reasonable

range of alternatives to be considered.

Agencies participating as cooperating

agencies are the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers (ACOE), the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA), the New Hampshire State

Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and

the New Hampshire Wetlands Bureau.

To ensure the full range of issues

related to this proposed action are

addressed and all significant issues

identified, comments and suggestions

are invited from all interested parties.

Comments or questions concerning this

proposal and the EIS should be directed

to the FHWA or the NHDOT at the

addresses provided above. (Catalog of

Federal Domestic Assistance Program

Number 20.205, Highway Planning and

Construction. The regulations

implementing Executive Order 12372

regarding intergovernmental

consultation on federal programs and

activities apply to this program.)

Issued on: October 20, 2000.

Kathleen O. Laffey,

Division Administrator, Concord, New

Hampshire.

[FR Doc. 00–27669 Filed 10–26–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

Environmental Impact Statement;

Rutland County, VT

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Intent.

SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this

notice to advise the public that an