Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 75 / Tuesday, April 18, 2000 / Notices 20805

2See Treaty on Principles Governing the

Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of

Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other

Celestial Bodies.

3We note that there is a pending merger between

Comsat and Lockheed Martin Corporation.

4We also note that the ORBIT Act limits

privileges and immunities previously afforded

Comsat as the U.S. Signatory to INTELSAT. See

Pub. L. 106–180, sec. 642(b).

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.

Paper submissions should include a

version on diskette in ASCII, Word

Perfect (please specify version), or

Microsoft Word (please specify version)

format.

Comments submitted in electronic

form may be sent to

privatization@ntia.doc.gov. Electronic

comments should be submitted in the

formats specified above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Milton Brown, NTIA/OCC, (202) 482–

1816.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

INTELSAT is a treaty-based global

communications satellite cooperative

with 143 member countries. INTELSAT

was created to enhance global

communications and to spread the risks

of creating a global satellite system

across telephone operating companies

from many countries.2 Inmarsat was

created to improve the global maritime

communications satellite system that

would provide distress, safety, and

communications services to seafaring

nations in a cooperative, cost-sharing

entity. Inmarsat privatized on April 15,

1999.

As an intergovernmental satellite

organization, INTELSAT is governed by

‘‘Parties’’ and managed by ‘‘signatories.’’

The Parties are the national government

members of the organizations who have

signed the INTELSAT Agreement.

Signatories are designated by each party

to participate in the commercial

operations of the organization. They

hold ownership interests in varying

degrees. They also assist with the

operation and management of the

systems and are distributors of ISO

services in their own countries.

Signatories may be government-owned

or controlled telecommunications

monopolies or other

telecommunications service providers.

The publically traded Comsat

Corporation (Comsat) is the U.S.

Signatory to INTELSAT.3 INTELSAT is

subject to oversight by the Assembly of

Parties, and signatories are subject to

oversight by their respective

governments.

To implement public service

obligations effectively and as part of

INTELSAT’s unique treaty status as an

international organization, it benefits

from certain privileges and immunities.

As such, it is generally immune from

suit, including private or public

prosecution on antitrust charges.4

Moreover, INTELSAT does not pay

taxes on revenues, and exemptions

extend to import duties and taxes,

communications and property taxes.

Signatories, however, are subject to

national taxes, including taxes on their

share of the organization’s distributed

returns.

The International Anti-Bribery and

Fair Competition Act of 1998, Pub. L.

105–366, requires the Secretary of

Commerce to submit a report to the

House of Representatives and the Senate

that contains information regarding the

OECD Convention including the

following: (1) A list of countries that

have ratified the Convention; (2) a

description of the domestic laws

enacted by each party to the Convention

that implements commitments under

the Convention; and (3) an assessment

of the measures taken by each party to

the Convention during the previous year

to fulfill its obligations under the

Convention. See Pub. L. 105–366, sec.

6(a). Accordingly, the Secretary of

Commerce is required to report, inter

alia, on the ‘‘terms of market access,

government ownership, government

contracts or connections, privileges and

immunities, favorable treatment by

national regulatory authorities or tax

treatment * * * in the countries or

regions served by the (INTELSAT), and

the reasons for such advantages.’’ H.R.

Rep. No. 105–802, at 9 (1998). In

preparation for this report, the Secretary

of Commerce is required to seek and

incorporate comments from the private

sector, including competing satellite

companies and satellite services users.

Id. The Secretary of Commerce issued

the first report in July 1999. See

Addressing the Challenges of

International Bribery and Fair

Competition—The First Annual Report

Under Section 6 of the International

Anti-Bribery and Fair Competition Act

of 1998, July 1999. The report may be

viewed at http://www.ita.doc.gov/legal/

master.html.

We are now formally soliciting public

comment for the Secretary’s second

annual report on the advantages, in

terms of immunities, market access, or

otherwise, in the countries or regions

served by INTELSAT, the reasons for

such advantages, and an assessment of

progress toward fulfilling a procompetitive privatization of this

organization. ‘‘Pro-competitive

privatization’’ is defined as

‘‘privatization that the President

determines to be consistent with the

United States policy of obtaining full

and open competition to such

organizations (or their successors), and

nondiscriminatory market access, in the

provision of satellite services.’’ See Pub.

L. 105–366, sec. 5(a)(2). Respondents

may find it useful to review the full text

of the International Anti-Bribery and

Fair Competition Act of 1998.

On March 17, 2000, the President

signed into law the Open-market

Reorganization for the Betterment of

International Telecommunications

(ORBIT) Act. Pub. L. 106–180. The

purpose of the ORBIT Act is ‘‘to

promote a fully competitive global

market for satellite communications

services for the benefit of consumers

and providers of satellite services and

equipment by fully privatizing the

intergovernmental satellite

organizations, INTELSAT and

Inmarsat.’’ Id. at sec. 2. To achieve this

goal, the ORBIT Act provides specific

criteria for licensing and market access

for INTELSAT, Inmarsat and New Skies

Satellites, and changes the statutes

affecting Comsat. In addition, the ORBIT

Act requires the President to provide an

annual report to Congress on the

progress of privatization in relation to

the objectives, purposes, and provisions

of the Act including the ‘‘(v)iews of the

industry and consumers on

privatization’’ and the ‘‘(i)mpact

privatization has had on United States

industry, United States jobs, and United

States industry’s access to the global

marketplace.’’ See id. at section

646(b)(3) and (4). By this public notice

and RFC, we are also soliciting the

views of the industry and consumers on

the privatization of INTELSAT and

Inmarsat with respect to the goals of

achieving a pro-competitive

privatization of these organizations.

Respondents may find it useful to

review the full text of the ORBIT Act.

Kathy Smith,

Chief Counsel.

[FR Doc. 00–9628 Filed 4–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–60–P

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

Proposed Information Collection;

Comment Request

AGENCY: Deputy Under Secretary of

Defense for Program Integration, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

20806 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 75 / Tuesday, April 18, 2000 / Notices

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and

its implementing regulations, the

Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for

Program Integration (DUSD(PI)),

Department of Defense, hereby

announces that it is seeking renewal of

the following currently approved

information collection activity. Before

submitting this information collection

requirement for clearance by the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB),

DUSD (PI) is soliciting public comment

on specific aspects of the activity

identified below.

DATES: Comments are due no later than

June 19, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Forward comments to the

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense

for Personnel & Readiness, Program

Integration, Legal Policy, 4000 Defense

Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301–4000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lt

Col Karen J. Kinlin, OUSD (P&R) PI–LP,

4000 Defense Pentagon, Room 4C763,

Washington, DC 20301–4000; telephone

(703) 697–3387; facsimile (703) 693–

6708.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In

compliance with section 3506(c)(2)(A)

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

the Office of the Under Secretary of

Defense (Personnel and Readiness)

announces the following proposed

reinstatement of a public information

collection and seeks public comment on

the provisions thereof. Comments are

invited on: (a) 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; (b) the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of burden of the

proposed information collection; (c)

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the

burden of the information collection on

respondents, including through the use

of automated collection techniques or

other forms of information technology.

Under Title 10 U.S.C. 1552, the

Secretary of a Military Department may

correct any military record within their

Department when the Secretary

considers it necessary to correct an error

or remove an injustice. The DD Form

149, ‘‘Application for Correction of

Military Records Under the Provisions

of Title 10 U.S. Code, section 1552,’’

allows and applicant to request

correction of a military record. The form

provides an avenue for active duty

Service members and former Service

personnel who believe an error is

contained in their military records and/

or they have suffered an injustice to

request relief.

Title: Application for Correction of

Military Records Under the Provisions

of Title 10, United States Code, section

1552.

Applicable Form: DD Form 149.

OMB Control Number: 0704–0003.

Affected Public: Individuals or

households.

Annual Burden Hours: 14,000.

Number of Respondents: 28,000

Responses Per Respondent: 1.

Average Burden Per Response: 30

minutes.

Frequency: One-time.

Dated: April 12, 2000.

Patricia L. Toppings,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison

Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 00–9568 Filed 4–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001–10–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

Defense Intelligence Agency, Science

and Technology Advisory Board

Closed Panel Meeting

AGENCY: Defense Intelligence Agency,

Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of

subsection (d) of section 10 of Public

Law 92–463, as amended by section 5 of

Public Law 94–409, notice is hereby

given that a closed meeting of the DIA

Science and Technology Advisory

Board has been scheduled as follows:

DATES: April 25, 2000 (8 a.m. to 4 p.m.).

ADDRESSES: The Defense Intelligence

Agency, 200 MacDill Blvd., Washington,

DC 20340.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maj.

Donald R. Culp, Jr., USAF, Executive

Secretary, DIA Science and Technology

Advisory Board, Washington, DC

20340–1328 (202) 231–4930.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The entire

meeting is devoted to the discussion of

classified information as defined in

section 552b(c)(1), Title 5 of the U.S.

Code, and therefore will be closed to the

public. The Board will receive briefings

on and discuss several current critical

intelligence issues and advise the

Director, DIA, on related scientific and

technical matters.

Dated: April 12, 2000.

Patricia L. Toppings,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison

Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 00–9567 Filed 4–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001–10–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army

Advisory Committee Meeting Notice

AGENCY: U.S. Army Training and

Doctrine Command (TRADOC).

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 10

(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory

Committee Act (P.L. 92–463),

announcement is made of the following

meeting:

Name of Committee: Distance

Learning/Training Technology

Subcommittee of the Army Education

Advisory Committee.

Dates: 3–4 May 2000.

Place: University of California at Los

Angeles (UCLA).

Time: 0830–1630 on 3 May 2000;

0830–1600 on 4 May 2000.

Proposed Agenda: On May 3rd, Dr.

Maha Ashour-Abdalla, Director of

Science and Technology for UCLA’s

Center for Digital Innovation (CDI), will

conduct presentations that focus on

UCLA’s initiatives in interactive

education, administration and

management of courses, and discussions

of future programs planned for the CDI.

Updates on The Army Distance

Learning Program (TADLP) and

discussions of Student Management and

Adult Learning will complete the 2 day

program.

Purpose of the Meeting: The members

will advise the Assistant Deputy Chief

of Staff (ADCST), HQ Training and

Doctrine Command (TRADOC), on

matters pertaining to education and

training technologies.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: All

communications regarding this

subcommittee should be addressed to

Mr. Richard Karpinski, at Commander,

Headquarters TRADOC, ATTN: ATTG–

CF (Mr. Karpinski), Fort Monroe, VA

23651–5000; telephone number (757)

728–5531.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Meeting of

the advisory committee is open to the

public. Because of restricted meeting

space, attendance will be limited to

those persons who have notified the

Advisory Committee Management

Office in writing at least five days prior

to the meeting of their intention to

attend. Contact Mr. Karpinski (757–728–

5531) for meeting agenda and specific

locations.

Any member of the public may file a

written statement with the committee

before, during, or after the meeting. To

the extent that time permits, the

committee chairman may allow public