Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 14705

generally limited in scope and

identified as a lower priority than

funding remediation for existing

noncompatible development. Further,

funding for such new noncompatible

development may only be anticipated in

the latter years of an airport’s part 150

program when it may not be needed

because of shrinking noise contours

resulting from the national transition to

the use of Stage 3 aircraft.

Since part 150 is a voluntary program,

each airport operator has the discretion

to make its own determinations

regarding the impact of a revised policy

on its noise compatibility program. If an

impact is found, each operator could

determine whether to immediately

amend its program during the allowed

transition period or to wait until the

program is otherwise updated. However,

any remedial land use measures for

noncompatible development that are

allowed to occur within the area of an

airport’s noise exposure maps after the

effective date of a revised policy would

not be approved under part 150 and

would have to be funded locally, since

they would no longer be eligible for AIP

assistance from the noise set aside.

Accordingly beginning (not more than

12 months from the date of issuance of

a revised policy), the FAA will approve

under part 150 only remedial land use

measures for existing noncompatible

development and only preventive land

use measures in areas of potential new

noncompatible development. As of the

same date, criteria for determining AIP

eligibility under the noise set aside that

are consistent with this policy will be

applied by the FAA. Specifically, no

remedial land use measures for new

noncompatible development that occur

after the effective date of the revised

policy be eligible for AIP funding under

the noise set aside, regardless of

previous FAA determinations under

part 150, the status of an individual

airport’s part 150 program, or whether

the project is eligible for AIP funding

under the noise set aside without a part

150 program.

Alternatives to the Proposed Policy

Depending on the comments received

in response to this proposal, the FAA

will consider several alternatives to the

proposed policy revision, as listed

below. All comments received on these

alternatives, as well as other

suggestions, will be considered prior to

the adoption of any policy revision.

Comments should focus on the extent to

which an alternative would assist in

preventing the development of new

noncompatible land uses around

airports and in assuring cost effective

use of Federal funds spent on land use

measures for noise purposes.

1. Retain the present policy of

approving and funding under part 150

remedial land use measures without

regard to the date the noncompatible

development occurs.

2. Retain the present policy of

approving and funding under part 150

remedial land use measures for those

areas not under the control of either the

airport of the airport’s sponsor and for

which the airport operator has taken

earnest but unsuccessful steps to

persuade the controlling jurisdiction to

prevent the addition of new

noncompatible development. New

noncompatible development in areas

under the land use control jurisdiction

of either the airport or the airport

operator would not be approved under

part 150 nor be eligible for funding

under the AIP.

3. Retain the present policy only with

respect to noncompatible land uses that

will remain within the DNL 65 dB

contour after the transition to an all

Stage 3 fleet.

4. Retain the present policy with

respect to part 150 approval, but

eliminate Federal funding eligibility for

remedial measures for new

noncompatible development.

5. Implement the proposed policy on

an airport-by-airport basis, selecting

either the date of the FAA’s acceptance

of an airport’s noise exposure maps or

the date of the FAA’s approval of an

airport’s noise compatibility program

under part 150. Includes consideration

of whether implementation should be

retroactive or prospective.

Issued in Washington, DC on March 14,

1995.

Paul R. Dykeman,

Acting Director of Environment and Energy.

[FR Doc. 95–6754 Filed 3–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Customs Service

19 CFR Part 134

RIN 1515–AB68

Country of Origin Marking

Requirements for Watches

AGENCY: Customs Service, Department

of Treasury.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed

rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This document provides

advance notice of a proposal to amend

the Customs Regulations to prescribe

specific rules regarding the country of

origin marking of watches to ensure that

the marking is conspicuous and legible.

The purpose of this document is to

assist in determining whether a

rulemaking is needed to ensure a

uniform standard for conspicuous and

legible country of origin marking for

watches, and if needed, the contents of

that rulemaking.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before May 4, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments

(preferably in triplicate) may be

addressed to the Regulations Branch,

Office of Regulations and Rulings, U.S.

Customs Service, Franklin Court, 1301

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,

DC. 20229. Comments submitted may be

inspected at the Regulations Branch,

Office of Regulations and Rulings, U.S.

Customs Service, Franklin Court, 1099

14th Street, Suite 4000, Washington,

DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Burton Schlissel, Special Classification

and Marking Branch, Office of

Regulations and Rulings (202–482–

6980).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930,

as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304), provides

that, unless excepted, every article of

foreign origin (or its container) imported

into the U.S. shall be marked in a

conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly,

and permanently as the nature of the

article (or its container) will permit, in

such manner as to indicate to the

ultimate purchaser in the U.S. the

English name of the country of origin of

the article. Part 134, Customs

Regulations (19 CFR part 134),

implements the country of origin

marking requirements and exceptions of

19 U.S.C. 1304. Under § 134.41(b),

Customs Regulations (19 CFR

134.41(b)), a country of origin marking

is considered conspicuous if the

ultimate purchaser in the United States

is able to find the marking easily and

read it without strain.

It has come to the attention of the

Customs Service that over the years

watches have been imported into the

United States with very tiny country of

origin markings. Usually these markings

are in very small letters on the bottom

of the dial (face) of the watch. Generally,

these markings are exceptionally

difficult to find and read. In fact, the

country of origin markings on many

watches are so tiny that a magnifying

glass is needed in order to read them.

Country of origin markings on watches

which are so difficult to find and read
14706 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

are not conspicuous or legible and are

not acceptable country of origin marking

under 19 U.S.C. 1304. Customs is

reviewing its policy to ensure that the

country of origin marking on watches is

legible and conspicuous.

On March 10, 1993, Customs

published a general notice in the

Customs Bulletin and Decisions (27

Cust. Bull. Vol. 10, p. 31) indicating that

Customs did not intend to permit the

continued importation of watches into

the United States unless they were

conspicuously and legibly marked with

their country of origin. The document

further indicated that Customs was

proposing stricter enforcement of

conspicuous country of origin marking

requirements for watches. Customs

requested comments on proposed

stricter enforcement and when the

stricter enforcement should go into

effect. On May 5, 1993, Customs

extended the comment period in a

document published in the Customs

Bulletin and Decisions (27 Cust. Bull.

Vol. 18, p. 13). The comment period

closed on June 9, 1993. While Customs

has concluded that there should be

stricter enforcement of what is legible

and conspicuous regarding the country

of origin marking requirements for

watches on a case-by-case basis,

Customs is now considering an

amendment to the Customs Regulations

incorporating such standards in order to

ensure a uniform standard for

conspicuous and legible country of

origin marking for watches.

Factors Which May Be the Subject of a

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in

Connection With Specific Country of

Origin Marking of Watches

The Customs Service is considering

issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking

to amend the Customs Regulations to

prescribe specific rules regarding the

country of origin marking of watches. It

is noted that the special marking

requirements of U.S. Note 4, chapter 91,

Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the

United States (HTSUS), that are

applicable to watches are not the subject

of this advance notice of proposed

rulemaking. Among the factors which

may be the subject of the proposed rules

are the size of the marking, the location

of the marking, whether the marking

stands out, and the legibility of the

marking.

Size and Legibility of Marking

Generally, in determining whether a

watch is marked properly, Customs

considers, on a case-by-case basis,

whether the marking is legible and

conspicuous. Customs believes that a

marking on a watch which has a type

size of 3 points is acceptable. (A point

is a unit of measurement approximately

equal to 0.01384 inches or nearly 1⁄72

inch and all type sizes are multiples of

this unit.) Whether the marking stands

out is dependent on where it appears in

relationship to the other print on the

watch and whether it is in contrasting

letters to the background. The legibility

of the marking is determined by the

clarity of the letters and whether the

ultimate purchaser is able to read the

letters of the marking without strain.

Whether a particular marking meets the

conspicuous requirement of 19 CFR

134.41 and 19 U.S.C 1304 will depend

on a combination of these factors.

Location and Method of Marking

The marking should be in a location

where the ultimate purchaser could

expect to find the marking or where he/

she could easily notice it from a casual

inspection. Although traditionally the

country of origin marking has appeared

on the dial (face) of a watch, there is no

requirement that the marking appear in

that location.

The marking may also appear on the

back of the watch case, unless the watch

is or will be packaged for retail sale in

a manner which would prevent the

ultimate purchaser from seeing the

marking before buying the watch.

In addition, the country of origin

marking can be done through a variety

of different methods such as die

stamping, etching, engraving, or by

using a sticker or hang tag. Any method

of marking is sufficient as long as it is

permanent enough to ensure that the

marking will stay on the watch through

normal handling until it reaches the

ultimate purchaser. No matter where the

marking appears or what method of

marking is used, the marking must be

large enough and sufficiently clear so

that the ultimate purchaser of the watch

can easily find it and read it with the

unaided eye.

Whether a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking With Regard to Specific

Country of Origin Marking of Watches

Should Be Issued: Specific Issues for

Consideration

Customs is requesting interested

parties to submit comments regarding

specific standards which would ensure

that the country of origin marking on

watches is legible, conspicuous, and

permanent. Relevant comments were

received in response to the general

notice published in the Customs

Bulletin and Decisions (27 Cust. Bull.,

Vol. 10, p. 31.) However, in addition to

comments regarding the nature of

specific standards, interested parties are

also invited to comment on the

following issues before Customs decides

whether to propose rulemaking on this

matter:

(1) Is there a need for Customs to

initiate a proposed rulemaking

regarding country of origin marking of

watches or should questions of whether

watches are marked properly continue

to be determined on a case-by-case

basis?

(2) Whether there are current abuses

in the country of origin marking of

imported watches.

(3) Whether Customs should

prescribe, by regulation, certain type

size and style specifications for the

country of origin marking of watches. If

so, whether the regulations should

specify one type size for all watches, or

different type sizes depending upon the

size of the watch. If one type size is

prescribed for all watches, what type

size should be recommended and why?

(4) Whether consumer behaviors and

attitudes toward country of origin

marking of watches can be documented

with studies or surveys. If so, how much

time would be needed for a study or

survey to be conducted and for the data

to be analyzed?

(5) If Customs goes forward with a

notice of proposed rulemaking, what

should be a sufficient period of time for

public comment?

(6) If Customs issues a notice of

proposed rulemaking, should a public

hearing be held in connection with such

proposed rulemaking?

(7) If Customs proposes and adopts

new country of origin marking

regulations, what would be an

appropriate time frame between the

publication of the final rule and the

effective date of such regulations?

(8) What other issues should be

addressed in the proposed rulemaking

in order to afford a full opportunity for

public comment?

Comments

In order to assist Customs in

determining whether to proceed with a

notice of proposed rulemaking to

prescribe rules regarding the country of

origin marking for watches, and the

appropriate type size and style

specifications for such marking, this

notice invites written comments on the

issues raised in this document as well

as any other issues in connection with

this matter. Comments which were

previously submitted in response to the

general notice published in the Customs

Bulletin and Decisions need not be

resubmitted, as they will be fully

considered in any final determination in

this matter.

Comments submitted will be available

for public inspection in accordance with
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 14707

the Freedom of Information Act (5

U.S.C. 552), § 1.4, Treasury Department

Regulations (31 CFR 1.4), and

§ 103.11(b), Customs Regulations (19

CFR 103.11(b)), on regular business days

between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4:30

p.m. at the Regulations Branch, Office of

Regulations and Rulings, U.S. Customs

Service, 1099 14th Street, NW., Suite

4000, Washington, DC.

Approved: February 24, 1995

Michael H. Lane,

Acting Commissioner of Customs.

Dennis M. O’Connell,

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of the

Treasury.

[FR Doc. 95–6760 Filed 3–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4820–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND

URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Office of the Assistant Secretary for

Public and Indian Housing

24 CFR Chapter IX

[Docket No. N–95–3858; FR–3647–N–03]

RIN 2577–AB44

Vacancy Rule: Notice of Second and

Third Meeting of Negotiated

Rulemaking Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant

Secretary for Public and Indian

Housing, HUD.

ACTION: Notice of meetings.

SUMMARY: The Department has

established a Negotiated Rulemaking

Advisory Committee to discuss and

negotiate a proposed rule that would

change the current method of

determining the payment of operating

subsidies to vacant public housing

units. The Committee met for the first

time on March 7–9, 1995, in

Washington, D.C. This notice announces

the time and place of the second and

third Committee meetings, which will

be open to the public.

DATES: The second meeting of the

Committee will take place April 4–5,

1995, and the third meeting will take

place on May 2–3, 1995. On April 4,

1995, the meeting will start at 9:00 a.m.

and run until completion; on April 5,

1995, the meeting will start at 9:00 a.m.

and run until approximately 5:00 p.m.

On May 2, 1995, the meeting will start

at 9:00 a.m. and run until completion;

on May 3, 1995, the meeting will start

at 9:00 a.m. and run until approximately

5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The second and third

meetings of the Committee will be held

at the Channel Inn Hotel; 650 Water

Street, Southwest; Washington, D.C.

20024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

T. Comerford, Director, Financial

Management Division, Public and

Indian Housing, Room 4212,

Department of Housing and Urban

Development, 431 Seventh Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20410–0500; telephone

(202) 708–1872, or (202) 708–0850

(TDD). (These telephone numbers are

not toll-free.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On February 24, 1995, HUD published

a notice of establishment of a Negotiated

Rulemaking Advisory Committee to

discuss and negotiate a proposed rule

that would change the current method

of determining the payment of operating

subsidies to vacant public housing units

(60 FR 10339) (‘‘February 24 notice’’).

The February 24 notice also announced

the first meeting of this committee,

which was held on March 7–9, 1995, in

Washington, D.C.

The members of the Committee are as

follows:

Housing Agencies

• Housing Authority of the City of

Houston, TX.

• Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing

Authority, Cleveland, OH.

• Birmingham, AL Housing

Authority.

• New York City, NY Housing

Authority.

• Newark, NJ Housing Authority.

• Reno, NV Housing Authority.

• Littleton, CO Housing Authority.

• Housing Authority of the City of

South Bend, IN.

Tenant Organizations and Public

Interest Groups

• Bromley Heath Tenant Management

Corporation, Jamaica Plains, MA.

• New Jersey Association of Public

and Subsidized Housing Residents,

Newark, NJ.

• Housing and Development Law

Institute, Washington, DC.

• Illinois Association of Housing

Authorities.

Federal Government

• U.S. Department of Housing and

Urban Development.

The next two series of meetings of the

Committee have been scheduled for

April 4–5 and May 2–3, 1995 (see

information under the headings DATES

and ADDRESSES at the beginning of this

notice). The meetings are open to the

public, with limited seating available on

a first-come, first-served basis.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1437g, 3535(d).

Dated: March 13, 1995.

Michael B. Janis,

General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public

and Indian Housing.

[FR Doc. 95–6716 Filed 3–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4210–33–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Minerals Management Service

30 CFR Chapter II

Meetings of the Indian Gas Valuation

Negotiated Rulemaking Committee

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meetings.

SUMMARY: The Secretary of the

Department of the Interior (Department)

has established an Indian Gas Valuation

Negotiated Rulemaking Committee

(Committee) to develop specific

recommendations with respect to Indian

gas valuation under its responsibilities

imposed by the Federal Oil and Gas

Royalty Management Act of 1982, 30

U.S.C. 1701 et seq. (FOGRMA). The

Department has determined that the

establishment of this Committee is in

the public interest and will assist the

Agency in performing its duties under

FOGRMA.

DATES: The Committee will have

meetings on the dates and at the times

shown below:

Wednesday, April 12, 1995—9:30 a.m.

to 5:00 p.m.

Thursday, April 13, 1995—8:00 a.m. to

5:00 p.m.

Tuesday, May 9, 1995—9:30 a.m. to 5:00

p.m.

Wednesday, May 10, 1995—8:00 a.m. to

5:00 p.m.

Wednesday, June 14, 1995—9:30 a.m. to

5:00 p.m.

Thursday, June 15, 1995—8:00 a.m. to

5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: These meetings will be held

in the auditorium of Building 85 on the

Denver Federal Center, West Sixth

Avenue and Kipling Street, Lakewood,

Colorado.

Written statements may be submitted

to Mr. Donald T. Sant, Deputy Associate

Director for Valuation and Operations,

Minerals Management Service, Royalty

Management Program, P.O. Box 25165,

MS–3100, Denver, CO 80225–0165.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Donald T. Sant, Deputy Associate

Director for Valuation and Operations,

Minerals Management Service, Royalty

Management Program, P.O. Box 25165,