Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 58 / Monday, March 27, 1995 / Notices 15749

ADDRESSES: Address written comments

to the Commissioner of Patents and

Trademarks, Washington, DC 20231,

Attention: H. Dieter Hoinkes, Office of

Legislative and International Affairs,

Crystal Park 2, Suite 902, or by facsimile

to (703) 305–8885.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

H. Dieter Hoinkes by telephone at (703)

305–9300, by facsimile at (703) 305–

8885, or by mail marked to his attention

addressed to the Commissioner of

Patents and Trademarks, Box 4,

Washington, DC 20231.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under

section 156 of title 35, United States

Code, patent term extensions are issued

for eligible patents from the original

expiration date of the patent. Since this

provision was enacted in 1984, the PTO

has issued 195 certificates of patent

term extension in accordance with

section 156. Under the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act (‘‘URAA’’), Public Law

103–465, patents in force on June 8,

1995, are entitled to a patent term of 17

years from grant or 20 years from their

earliest filing date, whichever is greater

(see 35 U.S.C. 154(c)(1)). It is estimated

that 94 patents whose terms were

extended under section 156 are entitled

to such a longer patent term.

On February 16, 1995, the PTO held

a public hearing to elicit comments on

what action it should take regarding

patents that are entitled to a longer

patent term under the URAA and that

had previously been extended under

section 156. (See 60 Fed. Reg. 3398 (Jan.

17, 1995)). After having considered all

the comments, both written and oral,

the PTO intends to publish the new

expiration date of all patents that fall

into the category mentioned above. The

determination of the new expiration

dates will be based on the following

three considerations:

(1) A patent that would have expired

under the original 17-year patent term

before June 8, 1995, but that has

received a patent term extension for a

period beyond June 8, 1995, is a patent

‘‘in force’’ on June 8, 1995, even though

the rights derived from that patent are

circumscribed by section 156(b) of title

35.

(2) The ‘‘original expiration date of

the patent’’ referred to in section 156(a)

of title 35 is the date on which the

patent would have expired if it had not

been extended under section 156 to

expire at a later date. Therefore, the

‘‘original expiration date’’ of the patents

under consideration is the date on

which the 20-year term from filing

terminates.

(3) The extension already issued on

the basis of the 17-year term will be

added to the 20-year term, subject to the

limitation imposed by section 156(c)(3)

of title 35. That provision limits the

period remaining in the term of an

extended patent to fourteen years

counted from the date on which the

product under review received approval

for commercial marketing by the

relevant regulatory authority.

In addition, it should be noted that

under the provisions of section 155 of

title 35, 33 patents were extended, each

for a period of five years, ten months

and 17 days. Of the 32 patents in force

on June 8, 1995, 20 are entitled to the

longer term of 20 years from their

relevant filing date. Their new

expiration date, taking into account the

term of extension provided by 35 U.S.C.

155, is also intended to be published.

Comments are invited on the course

of action the PTO intends to undertake

with respect to the new expiration dates

of patents in the category discussed

above. In issuing its final determination,

the PTO will respond to significant

comments received.

Dated: March 20, 1995.

Bruce A. Lehman,

Assistant Secretary of Commerce and

Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks.

[FR Doc. 95–7388 Filed 3–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–16–M

COMMITTEE FOR THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE

AGREEMENTS

Adjustment of Import Limits for Certain

Cotton, Man-Made Fiber, Silk Blend

and Other Vegetable Fiber Textile

Products Produced or Manufactured in

the People’s Republic of China

March 21, 1995.

AGENCY: Committee for the

Implementation of Textile Agreements

(CITA).

ACTION: Issuing a directive to the

Commissioner of Customs reducing

limits.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 28, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jennifer Aldrich, 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 or

call (202) 927–6703. For information on

embargoes and quota re-openings, call

(202) 482–3715.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority: Executive Order 11651 of March

3, 1972, as amended; section 204 of the

Agricultural Act of 1956, as amended (7

U.S.C. 1854).

The current limits for certain

categories are being reduced for

carryforward used during 1994.

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 59 FR 65531,

published on December 20, 1994). Also

see 59 FR 65760, published on

December 21, 1994.

The letter to the Commissioner of

Customs and the actions taken pursuant

to it are not designed to implement all

of the provisions of the Memorandum of

Understanding dated January 17, 1994,

but are designed to assist only in the

implementation of certain of its

provisions.

Rita D. Hayes,

Chairman, Committee for the Implementation

of Textile Agreements.

Committee for the Implementation of Textile

Agreements

March 21, 1995.

Commissioner of Customs,

Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC

20229.

Dear Commissioner: This directive

amends, but does not cancel, the directive

issued to you on December 16, 1994, by the

Chairman, Committee for the Implementation

of Textile Agreements. That directive

concerns imports of certain cotton, wool,

man-made fiber, silk blend and other

vegetable fiber textile products, produced or

manufactured in the People’s Republic of

China and exported during the twelve-month

period which began on January 1, 1995 and

extends through December 31, 1995.

Effective on March 28, 1995, you are

directed to amend the directive dated

December 16, 1994 to reduce the limits for

the following categories, as provided under

the terms of the Memorandum of

Understanding dated January 17, 1994

between the Governments of the United

States and the People’s Republic of China:

Category Adjusted twelve-month

limit 1

Sublevels in Group I

340 .......................... 786,355 dozen of

which not more than

405,245 dozen shall

be in Category 340–

Z.2

617 .......................... 15,431,268 square meters.

634 .......................... 553,806 dozen.

636 .......................... 505,085 dozen.

638/639 ................... 2,272,199 dozen.

643 .......................... 463,884 numbers.

670–L 3 .................... 14,276,734 kilograms.
15750 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 58 / Monday, March 27, 1995 / Notices

Category Adjusted twelve-month

limit 1

870 .......................... 27,553,177 kilograms.

1The limits have not been adjusted to account for any imports exported after December

31, 1994. 2 Category 340–Z: only HTS numbers

6205.20.2015, 6205.20.2020, 6205.20.2050

and 6205.20.2060. 3 Category 670–L: only HTS numbers

4202.12.8030, 4202.12.8070, 4202.92.3020,

4202.92.3030 and 4202.92.9025.

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,

Rita D. Hayes,

Chairman, Committee for the Implementation

of Textile Agreements.

[FR Doc. 95–7423 Filed 3–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DR–F

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force

USAF Scientific Advisory Board

Meeting

The New World Vistas Information

Applications Panel of the USAF

Scientific Advisory Board will meet on

25–26 April 1995 at the Air Intelligence

Agency, San Antonio, TX from 8:00 a.m.

to 5:00 p.m.

The purpose of this meeting will be to

provide information applications

assessments on issues relating to New

World Vistas.

The meeting will be closed to the

public in accordance with Section 552b

of Title 5, United States Code,

specifically subparagraphs (1) and (4)

thereof.

For further information, contact the

Scientific Advisory Board Secretariat at

(703) 697–4648.

Patsy J. Conner,

Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–7456 Filed 3–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3910–01–P

Department of the Army Corps of

Engineers

Notice of Intent to Prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

for the Rancho Palos Verdes Shore

Protection Feasibility Study

AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

Los Angeles District, DOD.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: The Los Angeles District

intents to prepare an Environmental

Impact Statement (EIS) to support a

cost-shared feasibility study with the

City of Rancho Palos Verdes, California

for shoreline protection along the City of

Rancho Palos Verdes coastline. The

purpose of the feasibility study is to

evaluate alternatives for reducing

erosion, sedimentation, and turbidity

along the Rancho Palos Verdes

coastline. A Corps-recommended plan

would include construction of shoreprotection measures to reduce ongoing

damages to the shoreline from coastal

erosion by storm, wave, and tidal

events, and continued deposition of

eroded materials in the adjacent marine

environment. The EIS will analyze

potential impacts of the recommended

plan and a range of alternatives on the

environment.

ADDRESSES: Commander, U.S. Army

Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District,

Environmental Support Section, P.O.

Box 2711, Los Angeles, CA 90053–2325.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Rey Farve, Project Ecologist, (213)

894–5510, or Ms. Anna Zacher, Study

Manager, (213) 894–2028.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The study

area is located along the coastline of the

Palos Verdes Peninsula in the City of

Rancho Palos Verdes. The topography

consists primarily of a shoreline backed

by steep slopes below a pronounced sea

cliff, and is also characterized by rocky

headlands, and gravelly, narrow

beaches.

Previous shoreline surveys indicate

that the nearshore, in the recent past,

has experienced significant accretion

and a seaward advance of more than 150

feet. Since 1956, when a contemporary

landslide began, the shoreline has been

accredit and extended by earth

movement into the surf zone.

Thousands of tons of material have been

washed away from the shoreline and

deposited in the nearshore basin,

offshore, or carried downcoast. As much

as 30 inches of sediment have been

deposited over rocky bottom areas

which historically supported a rich and

diverse intertidal and subtidal biological

community near the toe of the landslide

berm. Up to 6 inches of sediment have

been measured, in certain areas, as far

offshore as 300 feet.

Proposed Action and Alternatives

The Los Angeles District will

investigate and evaluate all reasonable

alternatives to address methods to

reduce shore erosion, sedimentation,

and turbidity along the Rancho Palos

Verdes coastline. In addition to the NO

ACTION alternative, the construction of

structures such as revetments or gabions

along the shoreline or breakwaters or

dikes in the nearshore would be

evaluated as to their feasibility as shore

protection measures. It should be noted

that the Corps will not analyze or

address a solution to the landslide

problem, and will not develop Corps

position on whether the landslide is

stabilizing, or is expected to stabilize,

based on shore protection.

Scoping Process

The scoping process is on-going and

has involved preliminary coordination

with Federal, State, and local agencies.

A public scoping meeting is scheduled

at the Fred Hesse Community Park

Building, 29301 Hawthorne Blvd.,

Rancho Palos Verdes, CA at 7:30 pm,

April 26, 1995. The purpose of the

meeting is to gather information from

the general public or interested

organizations about issues and concerns

they would like to see addressed in the

EIS. Comments may be delivered in

writing or verbally at the meeting or

sent in writing to the Los Angeles

District at the address given above.

Kenneth L. Denton,

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–7457 Filed 3–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–KF–M

Department of the Navy

Office of the Deputy Assistant

Secretary of the Navy (Conversion and

Redevelopment); Community

Redevelopment Authority and

Available Surplus Buildings and Land

at Military Installations Designated for

Closure: Naval Training Center,

Orlando, FL—Herndon Annex

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DOD.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This Notice provides

information regarding the

redevelopment authority that has been

established to plan the reuse of the

Naval Training Center, Herndon Annex,

Orlando, FL, the surplus property that is

located at that base closure site, and the

timely election by the redevelopment

authority to proceed under new

procedures set forth in the Base Closure

Community Redevelopment and

Homeless Assistance Act of 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

J. Kane, Deputy Division Director,

Department of the Navy, Real Estate

Operations, Naval Facilities Engineering

Command, 200 Stovall Street,

Alexandria, VA 22332–2300, telephone

(703) 325–0474; or E. R. Nelson Real

Estate Division, Southern, Division,

Naval Facilities Engineering Command,

2155 Eagle Drive, North Charleston, SC