DRAFT
A31-Min. EX/7
28/9/95
ASSEMBLY - 31ST SESSION
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Minutes of the SEVENTH Meeting
(Wednesday, 27 September 1995 at 0930 hours)
SUBJECTS DISCUSSED
1.	Agenda Item 17: The Instrument Landing System/Microwaye Landing System (ILS/MLS) transition
Report on technical, economic and financial aspects of the ILs/MLS transition and on
the outcome of the Special Communications/Operations Divisional Meeting (1995) (SP
COM/OPS/95)
Papers presented by the United States
Paper presented the Russian Federation
Paper presented by ACI
2.	Agenda Item 20: Environmental protection
Civil aviation and the environment
Proposed consolidation of Assembly Resolutions related to environmental protection
Paper presented by Sweden
Papers presented by the Kingdom of the Netherlands
Paper presented by Switzerland
Paper presented by the United States
Papers presented by the Airports Council International (ACI)
Paper presented by ECAC Member States
Paper presented by IATA
3.	Agenda Item 21: Enhancement of ICAO Standards
DRAFT
A31-Min. EX/7
-2-
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION
Agenda Item 17: The Instrument Landing System/Microwave Landing System (ILS/MLS)
transition
1.	The Committee had five papers before it for examination in connection with
this Agenda Item. The main paper, WP/48, contained a report on technical, economic and financial
aspects of the ILS/MLS transition and on the outcome of the Special Communications/Operations
Divisional Meeting (SP COM/OPS/95). In introducing the paper the President of the Council
presented a summary of the Council’s follow-up action pursuant to Resolution A29-10. The paper
was being submitted to the Assembly for information and noting.
2.	The Committee noted the report in WP/48 and referred it to the Technical
Commission for its views, together with related WPs/91 and 119, presented by the United States;
WP/116, presented by the Russian Federation; and WP/143 (English only), presented by the ACL
Agenda Item 20: Environmental protection
3.	There were 12 papers before the Committee for examination in connection with
this Agenda Item. The main papers were WP/39 and Corr.(E), containing the Council’s report on its
work on the subject, which had been largely based on the work in progress in the Committee on
Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP), and WP/44, containing the Council’s proposal for a
consolidation of Assembly Resolutions related to environmental protection.
4.	The Co-ordinator. Air Transport and Environmental Programmes (CO/AT).
first introduced WP/39, which was essentially a progress report for the Assembly’s information, since
the CAEP had held its last meeting in December 1991 and would be holding its next meeting
(CAEP/3) in December this year. He noted that, in the period since WP/39 was prepared, there had
been further developments in ICAO’s liaison with the those UN bodies developing policies to reduce
environmentally harmful emissions that had expressed an interest in aviation - namely, the UN
Framework Convention on Climate Control (UNFCCC) and the Commission on Sustainable
Development (CSD). Those developments tended to indicate that the interest of those bodies in
aviation matters had increased to some extent. States should be aware that there appeared to be a risk
- in both those cases and perhaps in some other UN fora - that States might find themselves entering
into commitments that might be inconsistent with commitments and policies agreed in ICAO.
5.	Responding to a query by the Delegate of Tunisia concerning paragraph 3.4.2,
СО/AT indicated that no decision had yet been taken on which body would be carrying out the study
requested by the CSD. ICAO’s position was that it would like to play a leading role in any such
study, being fully conscious of the need to bring to the attention of the CSD the various policies
ICAO had already established regarding both taxes and charges. Discussions with the CSD
Secretariat were continuing, but ICAO had not committed itself on how it wished to proceed, pending
any decisions this Assembly might take on the issues of taxes and charges. Despite the fact that some
difficulties were envisaged in co-ordinating the proposed study with ICAO’s existing policies in this
field, it was quite clear that ICAO had to give a very positive response in co-operating with the CSD
on this study.
DRAFT
A31-Min. EX/7
- 3 -
6.	The Delegate of Saudi Arabia suggested that, from a scientific point of view,
the effects of civil aviation on the environment had not been completely measured, either
quantitatively or qualitatively. The international community must recognize that imposing taxes on
everything even remotely connected to civil aviation operations was not the correct approach. No
doubt the Technical Commission, to which he understood the paper was being referred, would bear
this in mind in its discussions.
7.	The Committee noted the progress report in WP/39 and referred it to the
Technical Commission for its views, together with WP/81, presented by the Kingdom of the
Netherlands (which, however, would also be taken into account in the Committee’s discussions);
WP/89, presented by the United States; WP/161 (English only), presented by the ACI; and the
technical elements of WP/59 and Corr.(F), presented by IATA.
8.	СО/AT then introduced WP/44, noting that it stemmed from the endorsement
by the 29th Session of the Assembly of a Council proposal for "a substantive review of all Assembly
Resolutions in force with a view to assessing their continuing relevance, to streamlining and to
clarifying the current and future roles and activities of the Organization" (Doc 9595, Agenda
Item 19). He emphasized that the proposed consolidated resolution in Attachment I to the paper was
essentially an editorial exercise and did not involve any change of policy. It should be noted that two
Assembly Resolutions related to supersonic aircraft (A 164 and A22-44) had been omitted because the
Council considered it advisable to postpone action on them at least until fter the CAEP/3 Meeting in
December.
9.	The Committee having embarked on an examination of Attachment I, the
Delegate of Jamaica referred to the fourth Whereas clause of Appendix A (General Policy) and asked
which were the other international organizations that were becoming involved in activities relating to
environmental policies affecting air transport. СО/AT suggested that the most obvious example was
probably the UNFCCC. Other possibilities were the CSD and - perhaps in the future - the UN
Economic Commission for Europe, whose Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution
might begin to have an influence on aviation at some stage.
10.	In the absence of further comments the Committee approved, for transmission
to the Plenary for adoption, the draft resolution on a consolidated statement of continuing ICAO
policies and practices related to environmental protection appearing in Attachment I to WP/44. It was
understood that the resolution might need to be amplified in the light of the Technical Commission’s
consideration of the working papers on environmental protection issues referred to it earlier.
11.	At the invitation of the Chairman, the Delegate of Sweden then introduced
WP/70, on the question of using charges to achieve reductions in aircraft emissions. She noted that
increased concern on the part of the aviation industry authorities, operators and tourists about
environmental and climatic changes had been a strong force behind the development of aircraft with
improved environmental performance compared to earlier technology. The phase-out of Annex 16
Chapter 2 aircraft by environmental regulation might, however, result in the sale of aircraft with old
technologies - which in turn could distort competition between airlines. Another, and even more
serious, problem was the fact that the only incentive for an operator to choose the environmentally
best engines was his interest in maintaining his good reputation. Sweden was aware of the difficulties
DRAFT
A31-Min. EX/7
-4 -
that CAEP had encountered in studying whether charges could be an effective means of reducing the
adverse environmental consequences of aircraft engine emissions. It agreed with those who stressed
the need for further studies on the costs and benefits of specific environmental charges aimed at
reducing emission levels. On the other hand, Sweden’s position was that distorted competition should
be avoided, and that if emission charges were to be introduced by any State, that action should be
taken in accordance with ICAO’s guidelines, as outlined in paragraph 86 of the Report of the 1991
Conference on Airport and Route Facility Management (CARFM) (DOC 9579). Sweden invited the
Assembly to recommend that those principles be taken into account if emission charges were being
considered.
12.	The Delegate of the Kingdom of the Netherlands then introduced the three
working papers presented by his Delegation. In WP/80 the Netherlands expressed its support for the
preliminary conclusions of a CAEP study on emission-related charges and recommended further study
on the costs and benefits of specific environmental charges for reducing emission levels. WP/81, on
the control of international aviation emissions, in his Delegation’s view raised a policy, rather than a
technical, question - namely, which, from an aviation point of view, was the better forum to control
emissions by international civil aviation, UNFCCC or ICAO? The Netherlands firmly believed that
ICAO must play the leading role, and in that regard WP/81 recommended that the Assembly request
the Council to prepare recommendations on how ICAO could prevent duplication of CAEP’s work on
the issue of control of international aviation emissions, and suggested that this could best be done by
ICAO’S becoming more proactive in developing environmental goals with respect to aviation
emissions. Unless this was done, there was a risk that non-aviation bodies would determine policies
without taking due account of the typical characteristics of international civil aviation. Finally,
WP/160 dealt with the Government of the Netherlands policy document on world-wide air pollution
and aviation, which had been based on research by various scientific institutes. One copy of that
document, in English, had been provided to each A31 Delegation for information. According to that
policy document, world-wide aviation emissions in the year 2014 may be three times the 1990 level
and account for three to four per cent of all global emissions due to the combustion of fuel. The
Netherlands envisaged both regulatory measures and charges being applied to deal with the problem.
While it supported the preliminary conclusion of the CAEP study on engine emissions, that charges
can provide effective instruments for reducing emission levels, it felt - given the importance of the
issue - that CAEP’s conclusions did not constitute an adequate basis for concrete policy decisions and
that a more extensive study was needed, taking into account standing ICAO policies regarding taxes
and charges, including the CARFM guidelines referred to by the Delegate of Sweden.
13.	The Delegate of Switzerland noted that, like Sweden and the Kingdom of the
Netherlands, Switzerland felt that ICAO should play the leading role on the questions of
environmental protection from engine emissions and the possible use of charges. WP/82 dealt with
the very sensitive issue of taxes on fuel for environmental-protection reasons. It noted that the
imposition of energy or fuel taxes intended to encourage a reduction in energy consumption was a
strategy in use in many States, but that where such taxes were being contemplated or already in
effect, air transport was normally exempted. While such exemption avoided distortions of
competition, it gave rise to the argument that air transport was not paying its share of the cost of
damage to the environment. Switzerland believed that it was in the long-term interest of civil aviation
not to exclude itself from generally-accepted measures in the field of environmental protection. It
was accordingly inviting the Assembly to recognize that taxes are a valid means to promote fuel-
DRAFT
- 5 -	A31-Min. EX/7
efficient technologies, as well as energy consciousness in general; and to take the initiative to ensure
that it would set the rules governing the introduction of environmentally-motivated fuel taxes for civil
aviation. The essential elements of those rules, in Switzerland’s view, were the need for a
multilateral agreement to prevent distortion of competition, and confirmation that revenues from such
taxes should only be used to cover that part of the costs of environmental damage or its prevention
that was attributable to civil aviation.
14.	The Delegate of the Kingdom of the Netherlands presented, on behalf of the 33
Member States of ЁСАС, the Environmental Policy Statement attached to WP/69. That Statement
reflected the growing public and political concern for the environmental aspects of aviation; set out
ECAC’s views on the challenges facing civil aviation; outlined current and future work in the 33
States; and, finally, set out ECAC’s general strategy on environmental measures. ECAC Member
States believed that it was essential for ICAO both to retain its pre-eminent role in setting
environmental standards, collaborating as necessary with other UN organizations, and to increase
public awareness of the steps being taken to tackle environmental problems. They were accordingly
inviting the Assembly to note the ECAC Environmental Policy Statement; and to endorse the
importance of ICAO’s maintaining its role in and commitment to tackling environmental matters to
further the orderly development of international civil aviation.
15.	The Observer from ACI then introduced WP/130, dealing with an integrated,
environmentally compatible approach to airport capacity development. In that paper ACI invited the
Assembly to support the implementation of an integrated approach, consisting of reduction of noise
and emissions at source; strict land use planning control around airports; aircraft/airport operational
measures; and efficient ground access, including an inter-modal approach to transportation. Such an
integrated approach was extremely important to allow airports the necessary flexibility so that they
could deal with local situations that varied greatly from one airport to another. That was why ACI
had some difficulty with certain suggestions made by the United States in WP/89 that would, in its
view, restrict the ability of airports to deal with those situations. ACI would be participating in
CAEP/3, where it was hoped the integrated approach would be pursued and increased stringency as
regards noise would be recommended.
16.	The Delegate of the United States then introduced WP/89, in which her Government
expressed its concern over the development and implementation of local operational restrictions by
political sub-divisions of Member States, based upon aircraft noise and engine-emission
characteristics. The paper recognized that SARPs and regulations put in place by States had assured
that new aircraft manufacturers met the appropriate noise and emission standards, and that the phase-
out of Chapter 2 aircraft had already resulted in a diminution of environmental impact that was
expected to increase in the future. Orderly phase-out of Chapter 2 aircraft was critical for the
economic health and well-being of the industry. It was simply not possible to plan without knowing
with some certainty what aircraft would be acceptable in future. The draft resolution in the Appendix
to the paper proposed that localities not impose any additional operating or emission restrictions
without a full evaluation of all of the advantages and disadvantages attached to those restrictions. The
United States felt that that was the minimum needed to maintain an orderly phase-Out and to ensure
the ability of the international air transport system to operate. Commenting on WP/80, presented by
the Kingdom of the Netherlands, while she agreed that a further study by the Council was necessary,
she suggested that consideration should perhaps be given to deferring it until after CAEP had
DRAFT
A31-Min. EX/7	- 6 -
completed its work. Turning to WP/82, presented by Switzerland, her Delegation was somewhat
concerned at the proposal that ICAO abandon its standing policy against fuel taxes on international
aviation and substitute guidelines for the imposition of new taxes. She did not believe the Committee
was the proper forum to consider this and suggested that the paper should be referred to the
Economic Commission for review and comments.
17.	The Observer from IATA, speaking generally, said that IATA had some difficulty
with the Assembly’s discussing the very issues that CAEP/3 would be debating. This was tantamount
to undercutting the CAEP activity. It was also concerned that some States that had presented papers
on various aspcts of the subject were ones that had participated in the debates in CAEP on the same
issues. This seemed to give those States an unfair advantage over those that were not represented on
CAEP - particularly since CAEP’s final conclusions were not yet available. Turning to WP/59, the
IATA paper, he suggested that it raised two policy issues in addition to the technical elements that
had been referred to the Technical Commission. These concerned land-use planning and control, and
fiscal instruments. On the first, it was clear that additional ground infrastructure would have to be
provided to cope with the projected growth in air traffic. If the public was expected to accept certain
levels of disturbance around the airports, it was essential that States implement the Resolutions passed
by previous Assemblies on land-use planning and control, in order to minimize the disturbance. On
the question of using fiscal instruments, or charges, IATA was not convinced that they were
necessary and would, in fact, result in any substantial environmental gains. They would rather be
purely punitive, penalizing the airlines which, of course, had no choice in the development of new
technologies. IATA would await the report of CEAP/3 before making substantive comments on the
issue.
18.	There being no further introductions of papers, the Chairman invited general
comments on the papers that had been presented.
19.	The Delegate of Norway said that his Delegation was appreciative of the consensus
reached among States over the last years on the need for ICAO action to combat pollution, and
welcomed the statement in paragraph 3.4.1 of WP/39 that CAEP/3 was expected "to indicate that
both regulatory measures and charges can provide effective instruments for reducing emission levels
but it is not possible to make any general conclusions as to which of these is preferable". Norway
believed that the most cost-efficient way to solve regional and global environmental problems was
through the general application of financial measures on all sectors. Along with many other countries
Norway had already introduced carbon dioxide taxes on other sectors and other modes of transport.
Norway shared Switzerland’s view that it was important not to exclude civil aviation from generally-
accepted, cost-efficient measures in the field of environmental protection. It also felt that lack of
scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing cost-efficient measures to limit
emissions. Norway also supported the Swedish proposal in WP/70, concerning the need to take into
account the principles outlined in paragraph 86 of the 1991 CARFM Report. To sum up, Norway
had full confidence in the work performed by CAEP on whether charges could be an effective means
of reducing adverse environmental consequences of aircraft emissions. International recognition
depended on the thoroughness of that study. Norway would therefore again emphasize the importance
of the study covering all relevant economic aspects of charges, including both the cost base for and
the utilization of environmental charges.
DRAFT
A31-Min. EX/7
- 7 -
20.	The Delegate of France stressed the need for ICAO to play a major role in
minimizing the undesirable effects of aviation on the environment. Reducing the effects of noise
around airports was of prime importance. As was noted in both WPs/39 and 130, the noise-
certification levels in Annex 16 specifications no longer reflected current technology. Annex 16
should be amended accordingly, due account being taken of the need to balance the economic interests
of the air transport industry. ICAO should strongly encourage States and the aviation industry to
increase funding for research and development in the area of noise reduction for aircraft and
helicopters. States should also be urged to exchange information on planning policies for land use
near airports, and to agree on principles to determine levels of noise exposure that would form a basis
for clear dialogue between civil aviation and environmental interests. In essence, all available
measures should be taken that would allow civil aviation to reconcile its growth with an increased
respect for the environment.
21.	The Delegate of Mexico shared the concern expressed by the Observer from IATA at
the Assembly’s dealing with subjects that CAEP/3 would be studying in December. The Assembly
should, he suggested, proceed with caution, and in noting WP/39 take into account the need to
interact with CAEP.
22.	The Delegate of Sudan felt that it would be premature and could harm the aviation
industry for ICAO to support at this stage the levying of charges as an instrument for reducing
aircraft engine emissions. Regulations or standards relating to engine emissions were needed first and
a suitable period should be allowed for the phase-out of energy-inefficient engines.
23.	The Representative of the United Kingdom expressed his Delegation’s support for the
proposals put forward by Sweden (WP/70), the Kingdom of the Netherlands (WP/81) and Switzerland
(WP/82) on the application of charges or taxes to reduce aircraft emissions. It recognized that
application of charges to - or ending the exemption from taxes on - aviation fuel might be warranted.
However, it believed that it was imperative that any such changes should be agreed and applied
internationally. Action at regional or national levels should be avoided as that would both distort the
market and place those carriers in affected areas at a competitive disadvantage. The United Kingdom
acknowledged the need for the aviation community to play its part in global action to combat climatic
problems and believed that the ICAO Council should consider a way forward on the taxation of
aviation fuel, taking account of the deliberations of CAEP/3. It also agreed strongly that ICAO was
the proper forum for action, with other organizations such as UNFCCC having a complementary role
to play.
24.	The Delegate of Mauritius confirmed his Delegation’s belief that - as had been
recognized at the 1994 World-Wide Air Transport Conference - ICAO was and must remain the
global forum for developing integrated environmental SARPs that would appropriately address,
efficiently and effectively, environmental problems associated with international civil aviation, while
taking into account environmental needs, technical feasibility, economic consequences, and interests
of all stakeholders. Mauritius hoped that CAEP would bear those aspects in mind in pursuing its
work. It looked forward to the results of CAEP/3.
DRAFT
АЗ 1-Min. EX/7
- 8 -
25.	The President of the Council summed up the discussion and suggested that the actions
proposed in WPs/70, 80 and 82 be referred to the Council for study, taking into account ICAO’s
existing policies regarding taxes and charges. The Council should also be asked to study all aspects
of ICAO’s relationship with those UN bodies developing policies to reduce environmentally harmful
emissions that had expressed an interest in aviation (particularly UNFCCC), keeping in mind the
leadership role that ICAO should play in the field of civil aviation environment. In this regard he
would ask Delegates, upon their return home, to contact the departments of their Governments that
dealt with the UN bodies on different aspects of the environment, and to invite their attention to the
need to avoid taking any position that could be inconsistent with ICAO’s policies concerning the civil
aviation environment.
26.	The Delegates of the Russian Federation. Mauritius. Mexico and Saudi Arabia
strongly supported the approach suggested by the President of the Council, and in particular his
recommendation that, at the national level, there should be co-ordination among the various
departments concerned with environmental issues.
27.	The Delegate of Honduras affirmed his Delegation’s conviction that ICAO should
maintain its leadership role in environment-related activities affecting international civil aviation. He
noted that, three or four years ago, his small country with its limited financial resources had
established an Environmental Ministry. Honduras wanted measured economic and technical growth,
but above all it wished to avoid harm to the environment. Taxes or charges to achieve reductions in
aircraft emissions were not needed, he suggested: rather, all organizations, all humanity, had to make
a concerted effort to preserve the environment for future generations.
28.	There being no further comments, the Committee agreed to refer the proposed actions
in WPs/70, ,80 and 82 to the Council for study and report to the next Ordinary Session of the
Assembly. It also requested the Council to study all aspects of ICAO’s relationship with those UN
bodies developing policies to reduce environmentally harmful emissions that had expressed an interest
in aviation (particularly UNFCCC), keeping in mind the leadership role that ICAO should play in the
field of civil aviation environment. Finally, it endorsed the President of the Council’s request to
Delegates to encourage at the national level co-ordination among the various departments concerned
with environmental issues, so as to avoid taking any position that could be inconsistent with ICAO’S
policies concerning the civil aviation environment.
Agenda Item 21: Enhancement of ICAO Standards
29.	The Principal Legal Officer presented for the Committee’s consideration WP/56, in
which - pursuant to Resolution A29-3 on Global Rule Harmonization - the Council reported on the
statutory situation in relation to Articles 37 and 38 of the Chicago Convention, challenges in
implementing ICAO Standards, and elements for an ICAO strategy for improvement in
implementation. The Assembly was invited (a) to note the work of the Council during the triennium
on the enhancement of ICAO Standards, and more specifically in pursuance of Resolution A29-3, and
to provide the Council with additional guidance for its work as might be necessary; and (b) to note
that the Council would continue to pursue its activities to improve the awareness of States regarding
notification and implementation of ICAO Standards.
DRAFT
A31-Min. EX/7
-9-
30.	The Chairman noted that it had been decided not to refer WP/56 to the Technical
Commission, but to deal with it directly in the Executive Committee.
31.	The Delegates of Italy. Morocco. Saudi Arabia. Cuba. Canada. Mauritius. Nigeria.
Ghana, the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Lebanon. Colombia and Australia congratulated the
Secretariat on, and the Principal Legal Officer for his presentation of, this excellent and useful paper;
and commended the Council on its ongoing work on this vitally important subject - work which
should, of course, continue and indeed intensify. In so doing, the Delegate of Morocco proposed that
the concept of "greater simplicity and accessibility" mentioned in paragraphs 3.3 c) and 4.2 should
also appear in the Resolution in Appendix A - a proposal that was supported by the Delegates of
Saudi Arabia. Mauritius and Lebanon. The Delegate of Nigeria underlined the important role that
ICAO’s Regional Offices could play in these efforts - a point endorsed by the Delegate of Ghana,
who mentioned that bodies such as AFCAC and ECAC should also be involved in encouraging better
reporting. The Delegate of the Kingdom of the Netherlands felt that the Resolution might with
advantage refer in a Whereas clause to the fact that notification of differences was important to
improve the basis for the safety oversight programme. Similarly, the Delegate of Colombia suggested
that, in reiterating Resolution A29-3, reference could be included to the lack of resources that
prevented some States from meeting ICAO Standards; while the Delegrate of Greece felt that action
clause 1 should refer to the need for effective application of ICAO Standards, rather than simply
application.
32.	The President of the Council noted that Resolution A29-3 reproduced in Appendix A
to the paper could not be amended as such. It would be necessary to adopt a new A31 resolution,
superseding A29-3 which was, in fact, still in force. Assembly action could take any one of three
forms - conclusion, decision or resolution - and the Council was equally bound to implement it,
whatever form it took. That being so, rather than go through the process of adopting a new
resolution superseding one that was still in force, he suggested that a simpler and equally effective
approach would be for the Committee to decide to affirm Resolution A29-3 and confirm the future
strategy outlined in paragraph 4 (which covered, in paragraph 4.2 e), the proposal advanced by the
Delegate of Morocco, with which he fully concurred and which he suggested could be particularly
emphasized in the Committee’s decision). The Council would, of course, continue its efforts to make
States more aware of their obligations to implement and effectively apply ICAO Standards to the
fullest extent possible, and to notify promptly differences that existed in cases where they could not
do so. He further suggested that the Committee should seize the opportunity to appeal once again to
Contracting States that had not yet ratified proposed Article 83 bis to do so as quickly as possible.
Eight-eight ratifications had been deposited to date; 98 were needed for the amendment to the
Convention to come into force.
33.	The Delegates of Morocco. Tunisia. Mauritius and Canada supported the course of
action suggested by the President of the Council.
34.	The Committee accordingly noted the work of the Council during the triennium on the
enhancement of ICAO’s Standards, and more specifically in pursuance of Resolution A29-3; strongly
affirmed Resolution A29-3; confirmed the future strategy outlined in paragraph 4.2, and in particular
paragraph 4.2(e) of WP/56; and noted that the Council would continue its activities to improve the
DRAFT
АЗ 1-Min. EX/7
- 10 -
awareness of States regarding notification on, and implementation and effective application of, ICAO
Standards. It also appealed to Contracting States which had not as yet ratified proposed Article 83
bis of the Chicago Convention to do so as quickly as possible.
35.	In view of the time, consideration of Agenda Item 19 - Smoking restrictions on
international passenger flights - v/as deferred to the following meeting.
36.
The meeting adjourned at 1245 hours.
- END -