Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 12, 2000 / Notices 77591

networks and services. For example, a

user might have an e-mail address, a

telephone number, and a fax number,

among others. The ENUM protocol, the

result of work of the Internet

Engineering Task Force’s (IETF’s)

Telephone Number Mapping working

group (<http://www.ietf.org/

html.charters/enum-charter.html>), is

designed to allow communications

users to be reachable using standard

telephone numbers (E.164 numbers) as

a universal communications identifier.

The ENUM protocol uses the Internet

domain name system (DNS) to resolve

E.164 numbers into the specific routing

information needed to connect users

through a chosen communication path.

E.164 is an International

Telecommunications Union (ITU)

Recommendation that provides the

number structure used for international

public telecommunication numbering

plan. The ENUM protocol itself is

defined in IETF document ‘‘E.164

number and DNS’’ (RFC 2916) (see

website above).

As part of the its work, the IETF

engaged the ITU to consider how

number resolution using ENUM might

be affected by public switched

telephone network infrastructure and

telephone numbering plans, such as the

ITU E.164 standard. Work in the ITU

has been undertaken in ITU

Telecommunication Standardization

Sector (ITU-T) Study Group 2 (SG 2)

Working Party 1 (WP1), which recently

held a meeting in Berlin, Germany on

October 16–26, 2000. Among other

issues, SG2/WP1 meeting discussed

issues raised by ENUM, and

particularly, the method for

administering and maintaining ENUM

E.164-based resources in the DNS. The

SG2/WP1 meeting resulted in the

issuance of a liaison statement to the

IETF that set forth a view on how E.164

resources should be administered, as

well identifying other issues for further

consideration (See <http://www.itu.int/

infocom/enum/wp1–39_rev1.htm>).

The December 18 meeting intends to

explore and stimulate discussion on

issues raised by ENUM, including those

raised by recent ITU work. To facilitate

an exchange of views, the meeting will

be structured as a roundtable

discussion. The tentative agenda for the

meeting (subject to change) is as

follows:

1. Welcome.

2. Technical overview of ENUM and

examples of possible services enabled

by the ENUM protocol.

3. Exploration and discussion of

issues raised by ENUM and ENUM

numbering administration.

4. Discussion of ITU SG2/WP1

meeting results and possible US

approaches to SG2/WP1 to the issue

going forward.

5. Discussion on additional steps for

progressing consideration of the issue.

6. Summary.

Public Participation

The meeting will be open to the

public an is physically accessible to

people with disabilities. Individuals

wishing to attend should send an e-mail

with the participants name,

organizational affiliation, and telephone

number to <krose@ntia.doc.gov> with a

subject line entitled ENUM

ROUNDTABLE or call Ms. Rose at (202)

482–1866 with this information. To

facilitate entry into the Department of

Commerce building, please have a photo

identification and/or a U.S. Government

building pass, if applicable. Any

member of the public wishing to attend

and requiring special services, such as

sign language interpretation or other

ancillary aids, should contact Ms. Rose

at least three (3) days prior to the

roundtable at the above-listed e-mail

address or telephone number.

Kathy D. Smith,

Chief Counsel.

[FR Doc. 00–31630 Filed 12–11–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–60–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

United States Patent and Trademark

Office

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

The United States Patent and

Trademark Office (USPTO) has

submitted to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) for clearance the

following proposal for collection of

information under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

Chapter 35).

Agency: United States Patent and

Trademark Office (USPTO).

Title: Secrecy, License to Export.

Form Number(s): N/A.

Agency Approval Number: 0651–

0034.

Type of Request: Extension of a

currently approved collection.

Burden: 1,298 hours annually.

Number of Respondents: 1,862

responses per year. Of this total, the

USPTO expects that approximately 6

per year for petition for rescission of

secrecy order, 3 per year for permit to

disclose or modification of secrecy

order, 1 per year for general and group

permits, 1,625 per year for petition for

foreign filing license without a

corresponding application on file, 128

per year for petition for foreign filing

with a corresponding U.S. application

on file, and 99 per year for a petition for

retroactive license will be filed.

Avg. Hours Per Response: It is

estimated to take an average of 3.0 hours

for permit for rescission of secrecy

order; 2.0 hours for permit to disclose or

modification of secrecy order; 1.0 hours

for general and group permits; 0.5 hours

each for foreign filing license: petition

for foreign filing license without a

corresponding United States

application, and petition for license

with a corresponding United States

patent; and 4.0 hours for a petition for

retroactive license for the public to

gather, prepare and submit the various

petitions.

Needs and Uses: In the interest of

national security, patent laws and rules

place certain limitations on the

disclosure of information contained in

patents and patent applications and on

the filing of applications for patents in

foreign countries. When an invention is

determined to be detrimental to national

security, the Commissioner of Patents

must issue a secrecy order and withhold

the grant of a patent for such period as

the national interest requires. The

USPTO collects information to

determine whether the patent laws and

rules have been complied with, and to

grant or revoke licenses to file abroad

when appropriate. This collection of

information is required by 35 U.S.C.

181–188 and administered through 37

CFR Ch. 1, Part 5, 5.1–5.3. There are no

forms associated with this collection of

information.

Affected Public: Individuals or

households; business or other for-profit;

not-for-profit institutions; farms; the

federal Government; and state, local or

tribal Government.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent’s Obligation: Required to

obtain or retain benefits.

OMB Desk Officer: David Rostker,

(202) 395–3897.

Copies of the above information

collection proposal can be obtained by

calling or writing Susan K. Brown,

Records Officer, Office of Data

Management, Data Administration

Division, (703) 308–7400, USPTO, Suite

310, 2231 Crystal Drive, Washington,

DC 20231, or by e-mail at

susan.brown@uspto.gov.

Written comments and

recommendations for the proposed

information collection should be sent on

or before January 11, 2001 to David

Rostker, OMB Desk Officer, Room

10202, New Executive Office Building,

Washington, DC 20503.

77592 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 12, 2000 / Notices

Dated: December 1, 2000.

Susan K. Brown,

Records Officer, USPTO, Office of Data

Management, Data Administration Division.

[FR Doc. 00–31505 Filed 12–11–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P

COMMITTEE FOR THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE

AGREEMENTS

New Transshipment Charges for

Certain Cotton, Wool, Man-Made Fiber,

Silk Blend and Other Vegetable Fiber

Textiles and Textile Products

Produced or Manufactured in the

People’s Republic of China

December 6, 2000.

AGENCY: Committee for the

Implementation of Textile Agreements

(CITA).

ACTION: Issuing a directive to the

Commissioner of Customs charging

transshipments to 2000 limits.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 15, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roy

Unger, International Trade Specialist,

Office of Textiles and Apparel, U.S.

Department of Commerce, (202) 482–

4212.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority: Section 204 of the Agricultural

Act of 1956, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1854);

Executive Order 11651 of March 3, 1972, as

amended.

In a notice published in the Federal

Register on September 11, 1996 (61 FR

47892), CITA announced that Customs

would be conducting investigations of

transshipments of textiles produced in

China and exported to the United States.

Based on these investigations, the U.S.

Customs Service has determined that

textile products in certain categories,

produced or manufactured in China and

entered into the United States with the

incorrect country of origin, were entered

in circumvention of the Bilateral Textile

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

dated February 1, 1997 between the

Governments of the United States and

the People’s Republic of China.

Consultations were held between the

Governments of the United States and

the People’s Republic of China on this

matter on June 28–29, 2000 and October

30–31, 2000. In the letter published

below, the Chairman of CITA directs the

Commissioner of Customs to charge

certain amounts to the 2000 quota

levels.

U.S. Customs continues to conduct

other investigations of such

transshipments of textiles produced in

China and exported to the United States.

Any charges resulting from these

investigations will be published in the

Federal Register.

The U.S. Government is taking this

action pursuant to the February 1, 1997

MOU between the Governments of the

United States and the People’s Republic

of China.

A description of the textile and

apparel categories in terms of HTS

numbers is available in the

CORRELATION: Textile and Apparel

Categories with the Harmonized Tariff

Schedule of the United States (see

Federal Register notice 64 FR 71982,

published on December 22, 1999). Also

see 64 FR 69228, published on

December 10, 1999.

Richard B. Steinkamp,

Chairman, Committee for the Implementation

of Textile Agreements.

Committee for the Implementation of Textile

Agreements

December 6, 2000.

Commissioner of Customs,

Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC

20229.

Dear Commissioner: To facilitate

implementation of the Bilateral Textile

Memorandum of Understanding dated

February 1, 1997, between the Governments

of the United States and the People’s

Republic of China, you are directed, effective

on December 15, 2000, to charge the

following amounts to the following categories

for the 2000 restraint period (see directive

dated December 6, 1999):

Category Amounts to be

charged

237 ........................... 76 dozen.

239 ........................... 25,582 kilograms.

331 ........................... 23,206 dozen pairs.

336 ........................... 79 dozen.

338/339 .................... 29,743 dozen.

338–S/339–S ........... 37,766 dozen.

340 ........................... 468 dozen.

340–Z ...................... 781 dozen.

341 ........................... 1,505 dozen.

341–Y ...................... 85 dozen.

345 ........................... 281 dozen.

347/348 .................... 8,536 dozen.

350 ........................... 150 dozen.

352 ........................... 6,784 dozen.

359–O ...................... 11,763 kilograms.

433 ........................... 435 dozen.

435 ........................... 42 dozen.

438 ........................... 360 dozen.

442 ........................... 45 dozen.

445/446 .................... 1,021 dozen.

448 ........................... 37 dozen.

459 ........................... 2,010 kilograms.

634 ........................... 559 dozen.

635 ........................... 1,211 dozen.

636 ........................... 41 dozen.

638/639 .................... 942 dozen.

640 ........................... 238 dozen.

641 ........................... 11,425 dozen.

642 ........................... 24 dozen.

645/646 .................... 1,355 dozen.

647 ........................... 211 dozen.

Category Amounts to be

charged

648 ........................... 712 dozen.

649 ........................... 2,457 dozen.

652 ........................... 12,026 dozen.

659–H ...................... 2,955 kilograms.

659–O ...................... 118 kilograms.

670–L ....................... 18,274 kilograms.

835 ........................... 25 dozen.

836 ........................... 14 dozen.

838 ........................... 1,863 dozen.

840 ........................... 221 dozen.

842 ........................... 1 dozen.

845 ........................... 1,603 dozen.

847 ........................... 552 dozen.

859 ........................... 7 kilograms.

The Committee for the Implementation of

Textile Agreements has determined that

these actions fall within the foreign affairs

exception to the rulemaking provisions of 5

U.S.C.553(a)(1).

Sincerely,

Richard B. Steinkamp,

Chairman, Committee for the

Implementation of Textile Agreements.

[FR Doc. 00–31456 Filed 12–11–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DR–F

COMMITTEE FOR THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE

AGREEMENTS

Adjustment of Import Limits for Certain

Cotton and Man-Made Fiber Textile

Products Produced or Manufactured in

the Dominican Republic

December 5, 2000.

AGENCY: Committee for the

Implementation of Textile Agreements

(CITA).

ACTION: Issuing a directive to the

Commissioner of Customs adjusting

limits.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 12, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Naomi Freeman, International Trade

Specialist, Office of Textiles and

Apparel, U.S. Department of Commerce,

(202) 482–4212. For information on the

quota status of these limits, refer to the

Quota Status Reports posted on the

bulletin boards of each Customs port,

call (202) 927–5850, or refer to the U.S.

Customs website at http://

www.customs.gov. For information on

embargoes and quota re-openings, call

(202) 482–3715.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority: Section 204 of the Agricultural

Act of 1956, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1854);

Executive Order 11651 of March 3, 1972, as

amended.

The current limit for Categories 339/

639 is being increased for special shift,

reducing the limit for Categories 338/