WPC_! 2MB.RK Z3|jTimes New RomanTimes New Roman BoldCG TimesXP"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxdHP LaserJet 4M ROOM 228 LPT1HPLA4MP0.PRSXj\  P6G;\ifXP2  %<] 3|aTimes New RomanTimes New Roman Bold8< v@ "i~'^:DpddȨDDDdp4D48ddddddddddDDpppd|Ld|pȐD8DtdDdpXpXDdp8Dp8pdppXLDpdddXP,PhD4htDDD4DDDDDDdDp8dddddȐXXXXXJ8J8J8J8pddddppppddpddddzpdddXXhXXXXXdddhdptL8LpLDLpphhp8ZDP8pppddƐXXXpLpLpLphfDtppppppȐhXXXpDppLDd4ddC6CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxHjdDddddddG?~|Hfootnote tex#<'p #FxX  Pg9CXP#header=Ax 4 <D  #FxX  Pg9CXP# reference>;#FxX  Pg9CXP#itemizeX1?&V 8F ` hp xr#FxX  Pg9CXP#2N@i,JA^KBOLCrBNheader2@I ` hp x`    #FxX  Pg9CXP# heading 3AF` hp x #FxX  Pg9CXP# footer!B!!#d\  PCP#a2AgendaC2QDNErxOFOGPa1AgendaAgenda ItemsD7D yP ) I. a3AgendaEHeadingx(4t'Chapter HeadingH(!RK+!P'& w9f—+!bF3  *  ׃  Right Parx(4t'Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+!P'& w9f—+!bG<@    2)SHOQIpQJqSRKeRSubheading(4t'Subheading(!8w9RK+!P'& w9f—+!bH.   2*- 'GV@6FDocument Style=(%8'GBV*%- 'G.EI56` ` ` 3*- 'GW@6FDocument Style=(%8'GBW*%- 'G.EJ7 8 . 4*- 'GX@6FDocument Style=(%8'GBX*%- 'G.EK 9: 2UULe[SMSNpSTOT5*- 'GY@6FDocument Style=(%8'GBY*%- 'G.EL ;< 6*- 'GZ@6FDocument Style=(%8'GBZ*%- 'G.EM*=>   7*- 'G[@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB[*%- 'G.EN?@` ` ` 8*- 'G\@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.EO8AB@   2XPUQ"VRVS[W9*- 'G]@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.EPACD@` `  ` ` ` 10- 'G^@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB^*%- 'G.EQ0E F    11- 'G_@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.ERJGH` ` @  ` `  12- 'G`@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.ESSIJ` `  @  2H[T:XUXVYWwZ13- 'Ga@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.ET\KL` `  @hh# hhh 14- 'Gb@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.EUeMN` `  hh#@( hh# 15- 'Gc@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.EVnOP` `  hh#(@- ( 16- 'Gd@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.EWwQR` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp 2]Xz[Y4\Z\[>]17- 'Ge@6FDocument Style=(%8'GBe*%- 'G.EXFST *  ׃  18- 'Gf@6FTechnical Document Style'GBf*%- 'G.EY&UV  . 19- 'Gg@6FTechnical Document Style'GBg*%- 'G.EZ&WX  . 20- 'Gh@6FTechnical Document Style'GBh*%- 'G.E[*YZ    2j`\ ^]^^5___21- 'Gi@6FTechnical Document Style'GBi*%- 'G.E\'[\   22- 'Gj@6FTechnical Document Style'GBj*%- 'G.E]&]^   23- 'Gk@6FTechnical Document Style'GBk*%- 'G.E^4_$`     24- 'Gl@6FTechnical Document Style'GBl*%- 'G.E_&ab  . 2Bc``a!abacb25- 'Gm@6FTechnical Document Style'GBm*%- 'G.E`&cd  . Format Downl@6FFormat Downloaded DocumentGBr*%- 'G.EaUgh XX    X\ #d6X@7@#Word222Null@6FWord222Null% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Eb1{1|#/x PX##/x PX#Normal 'G@6FNormal9% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Ec1}1~#Xj\  PG;XP##/x PX#2mdtceffhg!kHEADING 7@6F* 9% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Ed0p Zwp x (#DDDDDD#&a\  PG;&P# 4 hp x (##&a\  PG;&P# HEADING 6@6FF 9% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Ee0p Zwp x (#DDDDDD#&a\  PG;&P# 4 hp x (##&a\  PG;&P# HEADING 5@6FT 9% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Ef0p Zwp x (#DDDDDD#&a\  PG;&P# 4 hp x (##&a\  PG;&P# HEADING 4@6Fb 9% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Eg0 Zwp x (#rr#&a\  PG;&P# 4 hp x (##&a\  PG;&P# 2shmiw|ojqkrNORMAL INDEN@6Fp 9% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Eh'4 <DL!T$#&a\  PG;&P##&a\  PG;&P#enumlev1G@6F~ 9% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Ei$p  N hp x (#aa#&a\  P G;&P#4` hp x (##&a\  P!G;&P#footnote ref@6Ffootnote reference%8'GB*%- 'G.Ejz#V\  P"UP#Default Para@6FDefault Paragraph Font8'GB*%- 'G.EkPP2wlsmtnuoLyvpage number@6Fpage number% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.ElZ26- 'G@6Ffootnote text =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Emf\??USlist- 'G@6Flist 9% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Enf??endnote refe@6Fendnote reference%8'GB*%- 'G.Eozz#Xj\  P#G;XP##c P$7P#2/{pFwq=yryszline number@6Fline number% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Epww#Xj\  P%G;XP##c P&7P#Highlight@6FMiddle Article Highlight'GB*%- 'G.Eq''#G }'Y##\9> (P(YP#HeadlineG@6FHeadline for newsletter8'GB*%- 'G.Er''#> })Y##\9> (P*YP#2nd line Hea@6F2nd line headline%8'GB*%- 'G.Es''#b> }+Y##\9> (P,YP#2~ta{u |v|wPe}Graphics hea@6FHeadlines for graphics8'GB*%- 'G.Et** #o> P}-YP##\9> (P.YP# Graphics bod@6Fchart data % =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Eu** #Alo> P}/YXP##\9> (P0YP# Article head@6FHeadline for new article'GB*%- 'G.Ev*'#r"z1C# #\9> (P2YP# endnote text@6Fendnote text% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Eww#X}xP37XP##I2P4QP#2x~yz;{toc 1 'G@6Ftoc 19% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Ex.$(#`` hp x (#toc 2 'G@6Ftoc 29% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Ey.$` (#`` hp x (#toc 3 'G@6Ftoc 39% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Ez.$` (#` hp x (#toc 4 'G@6Ftoc 49% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E{.$ (#` hp x (#2|}k~toc 5 'G@6Ftoc 59% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E|.$h(#` hp x (#toc 6 'G@6Ftoc 69% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E}.$(# ` hp x (#toc 7 'G@6Ftoc 79% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E~ZPtoc 8 'G@6Ftoc 89% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E.$(# ` hp x (#2Gtoc 9 'G@6Ftoc 99% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E.$(#`` hp x (#index 1'G@6Findex 19% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E.$` (#` hp x (#index 2'G@6Findex 29% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E.$` (#`` hp x (#toa heading@6Ftoa heading% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E.$(#` hp x (#2P͝FcIcaption'G@6Fcaption9% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.Ew#X}xP57XP##I2P6QP#_Equation Ca@6F_Equation Caption%8'GB*%- 'G.Eww#X}xP77XP##I2P8QP#27- 'G@6FDefault Paragraph Font8'GB*%- 'G.E#X}xP97XP##&sxP:7&P#HEADING 9@6F 9% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E'34 <DL!T$#c P;7P##c P<7P#2%-pߥqOeHEADING 8@6F 9% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E'34 <DL!T$#c P=7P##c P>7P#28- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E` ` ` 29- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E  . 30- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E  2QeWpO31- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E  32- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E*   33- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E` ` ` 34- 'G@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.E8@   2W35- 'G@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.EA@` `  ` ` ` 36- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E0    37- 'G@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.EJ` ` @  ` `  38- 'G@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.ES` `  @  2D6s39- 'G@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.E\` `  @hh# hhh 40- 'G@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.Ee` `  hh#@( hh# 41- 'G@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.En` `  hh#(@- ( 42- 'G@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.Ew` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp 2ֱv0:43- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.EF *  ׃  44- 'G@6FTechnical Document Style'GB*%- 'G.E&  . 45- 'G@6FTechnical Document Style'GB*%- 'G.E&  . 46- 'G@6FTechnical Document Style'GB*%- 'G.E*    2f147- 'G@6FTechnical Document Style'GB*%- 'G.E'   48- 'G@6FTechnical Document Style'GB*%- 'G.E&   49- 'G@6FTechnical Document Style'GB*%- 'G.E4$     50- 'G@6FTechnical Document Style'GB*%- 'G.E&  . 2 a51- 'G@6FTechnical Document Style'GB*%- 'G.E&  . 52- 'G@6F 9% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E'4 <DL!T$#&a\  P?G;&P##&a\  P@G;&P#53- 'G@6Ffootnote reference%8'GB*%- 'G.ER#V\  PAUP#54- 'G@6FDefault Paragraph Font8'GB*%- 'G.E((2[;d55- 'G@6Ffootnote text =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E>4??US56- 'G@6Fendnote reference%8'GB*%- 'G.ERR#Xj\  PBG;XP##B\  PCUP#57- 'G@6F_Equation Caption%8'GB*%- 'G.EOO#XX2PDQXP##I2PEQP#HIGHLIGHT 1@6FItalics and Bold(%8'GB*%- 'G.E 2TccSDRAFT ONG@6FHeader A Text = DRAFT and Date*%- 'G.Eo X 8Q I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#x6X@F7X@#`v (#EDRAFTă `(#?D3 1, 4D  QDRAFT OFF@6FTurn Draft Style off8'GB*%- 'G.ED      LETTER LAND@6FLetter Landscape - 11 x 8.5B*%- 'G.E    '3   LEGAL LAND@6FLegal Landscape - 14 x 8.5GB*%- 'G.E   'A   2ccKnLETTER PORT@6FLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 11GB*%- 'G.E  3'   LEGAL PORT@6FLegal Portrait - 8.5 x 14'GB*%- 'G.E  A'   TITLE 'G@6FTitle of a Document8'GB*%- 'G.E* ăBLOCK QUOTE@6FSmall, single-spaced, indented*%- 'G.E 2idj3I HIGHLIGHT 2@6FLarge and Bold=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E HIGHLIGHT 3@6FLarge, Italicized and Underscored*%- 'G.E  LETTERHEAD@6FLetterhead - date/margins'GB*%- 'G.E!  X  3'   * 3' Ѓ   INVOICE FEE@6FFee Amount for Math InvoiceB*%- 'G.E F, $0  2<<$MEMORANDUM@6FMemo Page Format(%8'GB*%- 'G.E   * M E M O R A N D U M ă y<N dddy INVOICE EXP@6FExpense Subtotals for Math Invoice*%- 'G.E!" ,p, $0INVOICE TOT@6FTotals Invoice for Math Macro*%- 'G.E#$ p,p, $0INVOICE HEAD@6FHeading Portion of Math Invoice*%- 'G.EU%&4   p,X 9'#x6X@G7X@# XX  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#x6X@H7X@# XX  *#HHީ'  ӧ   XX #x6X@I7X@# XX  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)Ҳ#x6X@J7X@# XX  *#HHީ2[E[[[VSMALL 'G@6FSmall Typestyle=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E'(FINE- 'G@6FFine Typestyle=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E)*LARGE 'G@6FLarge Typestyle=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E+,EXTRA LARGE@6FExtra Large Typestyle8'GB*%- 'G.E-.2G[>VERY LARGE@6FVery Large Typestyle8'GB*%- 'G.E/0ENVELOPEG@6FStandard Business Envelope with Header%- 'G.Ee12 V,  X  , 8#x6X@K7X@#   I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#x6X@L7X@#    `   Style 14G@6FSwiss 8 Pt Without MarginsGB*%- 'G.E'3'4#Co> PMQP##)a [ PNQ)P#Style 12G@6FDutch Italics 11.5%8'GB*%- 'G.E'5'6#)^ `> XiOQ)X##)a [ PPQ)P#2ys+=Style 11G@6FInitial Codes for Advanced II*%- 'G.EZ78#)a [ PQQ)P# dn  #  [ b, oT9 !#)a [ PRQ)P# ## b, oT9 ! I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PSQ)P# ## b, oT9 !#)^ `> XiTQ)X#`He%)Advanced Legal WordPerfect II Learning Guide   #)a [ PUQ)P# ## b, oT9 ! I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PVQ)P# ## b, oT9 !#)^ `> XiWQ)X#Advanced Legal WordPerfect II Learning Guide   #)a [ PXQ)P# ## b, oT9 ! I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PYQ)P# ## b, oT9 !#)^ `> XiZQ)X#   Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`e%APage   I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ P[Q)P# ## b, oT9 !#)a [ P\Q)P# ## b, oT9 !#)^ `> Xi]Q)X#   Page `e%*Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Style 3'G@6FDutch Roman 11.5 with Margins/Tabs*%- 'G.E9:#)a [ P^Q)P# n  ## b, oT9 !Style 4'G@6FSwiss 8 Point with MarginsGB*%- 'G.EG;<#Co> P_QP# dd  #  Style 1'G@6FDutch Roman 11.5 Font8'GB*%- 'G.E7=>#)a [ P`Q)P# dn 2o}#Style 2'G@6FDutch Italic 11.5%8'GB*%- 'G.E'?@#)^ `> XiaQ)X#Style 5'G@6FDutch Bold 18 Point8'GB*%- 'G.E'A'B#T~> pbQTp##)a [ PcQ)P#Style 7'G@6FSwiss 11.59% =(%8'GB*%- 'G.E'C'D#)ao> PdQ)P##)a [ PeQ)P#Style 6'G@6FDutch Roman 14 Point8'GB*%- 'G.E'E'F#w [ PfQP##)a [ PgQ)P#2-{U -Style 10G@6FInitial Codes for AdvancedGB*%- 'G.EȂGH#)a [ PhQ)P# dn   #  [ b, oT9 !#)a [ PiQ)P# ## b, oT9 ! I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PjQ)P# ## b, oT9 !#)^ `> XikQ)X#`e%*Advanced Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   #)a [ PlQ)P# ## b, oT9 ! I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PmQ)P# ## b, oT9 !#)^ `> XinQ)X#Advanced Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   #)a [ PoQ)P# ## b, oT9 ! I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PpQ)P# ## b, oT9 !#)^ `> XiqQ)X#   Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`e%APage  #)a [ PrQ)P# ## b, oT9 ! I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PsQ)P# ## b, oT9 !#)^ `> XitQ)X#   Page `e%*Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Style 8'G@6FInitial Codes for BeginningB*%- 'G.EɂIJ#)a [ PuQ)P# dn  ## b, oT9  [ #)a [ PvQ)P# ## b, oT9  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PwQ)P# ## b, oT9 #)^ `> XixQ)X#`e%*Beginning Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   #)a [ PyQ)P# ## b, oT9  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PzQ)P# ## b, oT9 #)^ `> Xi{Q)X#Beginning Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   #)a [ P|Q)P# ## b, oT9  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ P}Q)P# ## b, oT9 #)^ `> Xi~Q)X#   Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`e%APage  #)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9 #)^ `> XiQ)X#   Page `e%*Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Style 9'G @6FInitial Codes for Intermediate*%- 'G.EʀKL#)a [ PQ)P# dn  ## b, oT9 Њ [ #)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9 #)^ `> XiQ)X#`=e%)Intermediate Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   #)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9 #)^ `> XiQ)X#Intermediate Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   #)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9 #)^ `> XiQ)X#   Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc.`e%APage  #)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9 #)^ `> XiQ)X#   Page `e%*Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Update 'G@6FInitial Codes for Update Module*%- 'G.EˑMN#)a [ PQ)P# dn  ##  [ b, oT9 !#)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9 ! I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9 !#)^ `> XiQ)X#`e%&Legal WordPerfect 5.0 Update Class Learning Guide   #)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9 ! I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9 !#)^ `> XiQ)X#Legal WordPerfect 5.0 Update Class Learning Guide   #)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9 ! I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9 !#)^ `> XiQ)X#   Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`e%APage  #)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9 ! I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#)a [ PQ)P# ## b, oT9 !#)^ `> XiQ)X#   Page `e%*Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 29/H-d-pY.p.58- 'G@6FFormat Downloaded DocumentGB*%- 'G.EUOP XX    #\ #d6X@7@#Bld/Und'G@6FBold and Underline Text8'GB*%- 'G.EQR  59- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.EST` ` ` 60- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.EUV` ` ` 291qk/e/eA0061- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.EW X . 62- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E YZ 63- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E [\ 64- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E*]^   23pk11m2365- 'G@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB*%- 'G.E_`` ` ` 66- 'G@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.E8ab@   67- 'G @6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.EAcd@` `  ` ` ` 68- 'G!@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB!*%- 'G.E0e f    263s4 5569- 'G"@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.EJgh` ` @  ` `  70- 'G#@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.ESij` `  @  71- 'G$@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.E\kl` `  @hh# hhh 72- 'G%@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.Eemn` `  hh#@( hh# 2967`8973- 'G&@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.Enop` `  hh#(@- ( 74- 'G'@6FRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*%- 'G.Ewqr` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp 75- 'G(@6FDocument Style=(%8'GB(*%- 'G.EFst D*  ׃  76- 'G)@6FTechnical Document Style'GB)*%- 'G.E&uv  . 2<9V::;77- 'G*@6FTechnical Document Style'GB**%- 'G.E&wx  . 78- 'G+@6FTechnical Document Style'GB+*%- 'G.E*yz    79- 'G,@6FTechnical Document Style'GB,*%- 'G.E'{|   80- 'G-@6FTechnical Document Style'GB-*%- 'G.E&}~   2?M<<=>81- 'G.@6FTechnical Document Style'GB.*%- 'G.E4$     82- 'G/@6FTechnical Document Style'GB/*%- 'G.E&  . 83- 'G0@6FTechnical Document Style'GB0*%- 'G.E&  . 84- 'G1@6F9% =(%8'GB1*%- 'G.E'4 <DL!T$#&a\  PG;&P##&a\  PG;&P#2_B?i@@A85- 'G2@6Ffootnote reference%8'GB2*%- 'G.E>#V\  PUP#86- 'G3@6FDefault Paragraph Font8'GB3*%- 'G.E87- 'G4@6Ffootnote text =(%8'GB4*%- 'G.E* ??US88- 'G5@6Fendnote reference%8'GB5*%- 'G.E>>#Xj\  PG;XP##B\  PUP#2EB_Cg DsD89- 'G6@6F_Equation Caption%8'GB6*%- 'G.E;;#XX2PQXP##I2PQP#90- 'G7@6FFormat Downloaded DocumentGB7*%- 'G.EU XX    \\ #d6X@7@#- 'G8@6FTriangle9% =(%8'GB8*%- 'G.Ea192.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers !*% 'G*%8@   2G7EEvF#Ga292.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers !*% 'G*%A@` `  ` ` ` a392.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers !*% 'G*%J` ` @  ` `  a492.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers !*% 'G*%S` `  @  a592.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers !*% 'G*%\` `  @hh# hhh 2J HHIcJa692.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers !*% 'G*%e` `  hh#@( hh# a792.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers !*% 'G*%n` `  hh#(@- ( a892.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers !*% 'G*%w` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp a193.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers%8'GB*%8@   2M'KKfLMa293.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers%8'GB*%A@` `  ` ` ` a393.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers%8'GB*%J` ` @  ` `  a493.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers%8'GB*%S` `  @  a593.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers%8'GB*%\` `  @hh# hhh 2[MNOf SPa693.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers%8'GB*%e` `  hh#@( hh# a793.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers%8'GB*%n` `  hh#(@- ( a893.E+%*-Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers%8'GB*%w` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp ",tB^ f ^;C]ddCCCdCCCCddddddddddCCY~~vCN~sk~CCCddCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddJN8ddddYYdYd4dddddCddddddddd8YYYYYY~Y~Y~Y~YC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddsdXdXXXddx|X~d~d|XdddddddC8ddddCdoddd|8|H~d<|8dtddddHHdlLlLlLkd|H|8~ddddddddXXXd~ddkd~ddxCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCYQQddddddFddddFCChhd44ddzzdddvooChdF"dhd9dCCzCddoddCdYds]zUvdYYCCCCz~ozoY~NYdYC8YooYdYzsdzdd~YYzozzz~CdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCsdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`L2eK[K6^K`Kb"i~'^#)0</>/>/>/x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxIxIxWxIx{nInInInISSSWS]a?/?]?9?]]WW]n/nKn9nCn/x]xx]x]SSxxIxIxI]?]?]?]WnUn9nax]x]x]x]x]x]xxWnInInIx]n9x]]?n9xSz+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN8HH"&H>XHH8HB8>HH^HH>"".2",2,2,"222N2222"&22H22,006"6."""""""""""2H,H,H,H,H,XAB,>,>,>,>,""""H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H,H2H1H2H2H282H,H,H,B,B,B6B,H?>,>,>,>,H2H2H2H6H2H6H2""2"""2F866H2>>(>">">H2;H2H2H2H2XHB"B"B"8&8&8&86>*>>.H2H2H2H2H2H2^HH6>,>,>,H2>"H28&>"H2?22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN$<<$.2",2222`2 LL2 LL2L"",,2d""NN&2NB^HN>NH8BHHdHHB"":2"28,8,"28"8T8288,&"82H22,((4"4:"""""""""2"8H2H2H2H2H2dHH,B,B,B,B,%%%%H8N2N2N2N2H8H8H8H8H2H2H8M2N2H2H2=8H2H2H2H,H,H4H,HJB,B,B,B,N2N2N2N4N2N8N:&&8&"&8Q844N8BB-B"B(BH8HH8H8N2N2cHH,H,H,8&8&8&84B3B"B:H8H8H8H8H8H8dHH4B,B,B,H8B"H88&B"H2I22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN$<<$52"22222`2"LL2"JJ2L""222d""A.SSxSSJJSJS+SSSSS8SSSSSSSSS.xJxJxJxJxJorJiJiJiJiJ8.8.8.8.{SxSxSxSxS{S{S{S{SxSxJ{SxSxSxS{S`SxIxSxIqIqIrSrS{dgIiSiSgIxSxSxSxSxS{S{S8.SSSS8Sz]SSuSg/gI\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\33gggQyyrg>Frgygrr>3>T\>Q\Q\Q>\\33\3\\\\>F3\\\\QX%Xc>0cT>>>0>>>>>>>>\3QQQQQwyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3\\\\\\\\\\Q\Z\\\g\QQQyQyQycyQtrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\gcc\r3rIr>r>r3\l\\\\y>y>y>gFgFgFgcrMr3rT\\\\\\crQrQrQ\r>\gFr>\t0\\=!=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBT\>Q\\\\\3;\7;\7>>QQ\??n\\pBnnBmgg>Q\7"yyyy\njc\gnn\7jC:,9Xj\  P6G;XP7nC:,|Xn4  pG;X8wC;,%Xw PE37XP D7zC;,.mXz_ pi7XW!@(#,h@\  P6G;hPy.X80,X\  P6G;P y.\80,T\4  pG;H5!,i,5\  P6G;,Px/c81,%Mc PE37P \{,W80,<0W*f9 xr G;X 6uC;,SQXu&_ x7XX 4wC;,cXw*0 x]7Xz-X80,x<X9 xOG;Dy.f81,.f_ pi7W!B(#,~hB4  pG;hV"G($,%=hG PE37hP\5hC:,<2Xh*f9 xr G;XX3m=6,%&m PE37&PH7!,,T,74  pG;,2a=5,&a\  P6G;&PDW!I($,.EhI_ pi7h nm i `Dm ts j. d)xi t)p2f(xN= '3,,4?1*,:,:+1  H--"System-  ,:-,:-%  @-% j O-%l l %  %+ + %  -c$ -% # #bb %4 4 %}" }" %E E  --Times New Roman--2 H 'COMSAT CORPORATE STRUCTURE (12/31/97)-% % 4 --B m-%mA A mm --ZTimes New Roman-- 2 N  PRESIDENT -- 2 cand  -- 2 4CEO-% --m%-%l%l% --ZTimes New Roman--2 BOARD OF DIRECTORS -- 2 oGENERAL  -- 2 f yCOUNSEL-G w-%w FwFw  ----2  FEDERAL POLICY  -- 2 AND  -- 2 1 REGULATORY  -- 2 oZ GROUP-G -%  FF  ---- 2  .FINANCE-GC 0-%0 B BF0F0  ---- 2  HUMAN -- 2 D RESOURCES-G% -% % %FF  ---- 2  U TECHNOLOGY  -- 2 DIRECTOR-G. (-%( . .F(F(  ----2  ) CONGRESSIONAL -- 2 ) RELATIONS-G7 1-%1 7 7F1F1  ---- 2  2 CORPORATE -- 2 H3AFFAIRS-%66%::%%63%----% -% $ $  ---- 2  COMSAT -- 2  RSI -- 2 7 (Non- --2  Jurisdictional)-c-%ccc ---- 2 ) COMSAT LABS --2 =(Jurisdictional)-2|1*-%*{1{11*1* ----2 *(Non-Jurisdictional) -- 2 Vj,COMSAT --2  + INTERNATIONAL-%6)6--F$!U9H9$9X88E87h76o6557544X444!4a47555o6*61h7*7E888$9aH9!U9-H%"U9H9$9X88E87h76o6557544X444!4a47555o6*61h7*7E888$9aH9!U9U9-.93-%399-3-3 ---- 2 L5BELCOM -- 2 f6INC -- 2 o5COMSAT --2 4 INTERNATIONAL -- 2 jD6INC -- 2 1)6(CII) --2 4(Holding Company) -- 2 E6(Non- --2 u5Jurisdictional)-)$F-%F($($FF ----2 eCOMSAT SATELLITE -- 2 ,n SERVICES  -- 2 @(CSS)@-%&3$&:'--F$!~*:)j*(3*?()'i)r'(#'=(&'&&&&&^%&$#'2$r'#'h#?(1#(#:)1#)h#4*#*2$+$P+^%+&+&+'+=(+(P+i)+)*3*4*j*)~*:)@-H%"~*:)j*(3*?()'i)r'(#'=(&'&&&&&^%&$#'2$r'#'h#?(1#(#:)1#)h#4*#*2$+$P+^%+&+&+'+=(+(P+i)+)*3*4*j*)~*:)~*:) ---- 2 '{$ COMMERCIAL  -- 2 L($ SATELLITE  --2 )#COMMUNICATIONS  -- 2 )$ INITIATIVE -- 2 *%(CSCI)-C$)R$@-%R$))B$R$B$R$ ---- 2 v%COMSAT -- 2 Xf$ GOVERNMENT --2  $ SYSTEMS, INC -- 2 %(CGSI) -- 2 "%&(Non- --2 #$Jurisdictional)@-%. \. %N%\% \ %.$-'%.0$$?2&--F$!/(u/_(V/ (#/'.'.H'2.'-'^-&,',',,H'+'+'f+ (F+_(;+(F+)f+e)+)+),,)*,R*,k*^-u*-k*2.R*.)*.)#/)V/e)u/)/(@-H%"/(u/_(V/ (#/'.'.H'2.'-'^-&,',',,H'+'+'f+ (F+_(;+(F+)f+e)+)+),,)*,R*,k*^-u*-k*2.R*.)*.)#/)V/e)u/)/(/(-# @-%  ## ----2 L COMSAT WORLD  -- 2 $ SYSTEMS -- 2  (CWS) --2 "(Jurisdictional)-!$17-@-%7-11 $7- $7- ---- 2 ?.COMSAT -- 2 T.GENERAL -- 2  .CORP. -- 2 G".(Non- --2 #-Jurisdictional)@-%/N M--'$g#@-%f#f#&$&$ ---- 2 u ADVANCED  --2 < APPLICATIONS  -- 2   MANAGEMENT -- 2 (AAM)@-%#z&--F$!($('i_''d&& x&Hm&x&&+&'&_' ' $( ( ) i)&)*+[***H* **d[**i)i))(@-H%"($('i_''d&& x&Hm&x&&+&'&_' ' $( ( ) i)&)*+[***H* **d[**i)i))(( ---- 2 'SPlanet I --2 '|Retail Project --2 (\(Marketing for CMC) --2 b)4(Jurisdictional)- $ @-%   $ $ ----2 \COMSAT MOBILE  --2 #COMMUNICATIONS -- 2 (CMC) --2 "(Jurisdictional)@-%$l&--F$!?(+('I')&&~&J]&R&]&~&z&&zI'#'(((#[)z) *zR****J**R*) *)[)+(?(@-H%"?(+('I')&&~&J]&R&]&~&z&&zI'#'(((#[)z) *zR****J**R*) *)[)+(?(?( ---- 2 &Direct -- 2 ' Investment -- 2 ( in ICO --2 H)(Non-Jurisdictional)-$r@-%qq$$ ---- 2 h SATELLITE  -- 2 /SYSTEMS  -- 2 l INVESTMENT  -- 2 ' MANAGEMENT -- 2 !(SSIM) -- 2 ',SPECIAL  -- 2 i(+PROJECTS -- 2 0)?,OFFICE-F$!n5(_55(75'4'4U'94'3&?3&2&$2&1&*1'0U'm0',0'05(/(0(,0;)m0)0)*1)1(*$2A*2K*?3A*3(*94)4)4)75;)_5(n5(@-H%"n5(_55(75'4'4U'94'3&?3&2&$2&1&*1'0U'm0',0'05(/(0(,0;)m0)0)*1)1(*$2A*2K*?3A*3(*94)4)4)75;)_5(n5(n5( ---- 2 'Z0 COMMERCIAL  -- 2 (0 OPERATIONS@-%/N/%&\&--'(x  Z Z j  B   66M L FFF 7 7 O 4  c?c?  c $$M H }}HmGX_!F#X0 pT6U#COMSAT CORPORATE STRUCTURE (12/31/97) P  -'FCOMSAT CORPORATE STRUCTURE (12/31/97)  & $n$ RRooE)0@##HX0 pT6U2#PRESIDENT HaP   PRESIDENT@$++##HX0 pT6U2#and HaP  and ?#*]##HX0 pT6U2#CEO HaP  CEO  ""ow  oooN29W##HX0 pT6U2#BOARD OF DIRECTORS HaP  WBOARD OF DIRECTORSD(/U>##HX0 pT6U2#GENERAL HaP  GENERAL C'.1##HX0 pT6U2#COUNSEL HaP  1COUNSEL*4 *w^ w^ **wK/6E} ##HX0 pT6U2#FEDERAL POLICY HaP  EFEDERAL POLICY @$+'##HX0 pT6U2#AND HaP  AND G+2##HX0 pT6U2#REGULATORY HaP   REGULATORY A%,xz##HX0 pT6U2#GROUP HaP  xzGROUP 4  wMwM  wC'.2 * ##HX0 pT6U2#FINANCE HaP  2 FINANCE[4 [ww[[wA%,##HX0 pT6U2#HUMAN HaP  HUMANE)0'##HX0 pT6U2#RESOURCES HaP   RESOURCES4 w w wG+2`x##HX0 pT6U2#TECHNOLOGY HaP   `TECHNOLOGY D(/'##HX0 pT6U2#DIRECTOR HaP  DIRECTOR54 5wi wi 55wI-4g ##HX0 pT6U2#CONGRESSIONAL HaP   gCONGRESSIONALE)0 '##HX0 pT6U2#RELATIONS HaP   RELATIONSJ"4 J"w~&w~&J"J"wE)0#%##HX0 pT6U2#CORPORATE HaP   #CORPORATEC'.~#'v%##HX0 pT6U2#AFFAIRS HaP  ~#AFFAIRS  %% OOs  &J  \    B&-b =##HX0 pT6U2#COMSAT HaP  b=COMSAT?#* N ##HX0 pT6U2#RSI HaP   RSIA%,b> ##HX0 pT6U2#(Non- HaP  (Non-K/62 ?##HX0 pT6U2#Jurisdictional) HaP  ?Jurisdictional)  00  G+24##HX0 pT6U2#COMSAT LABS HaP   4COMSAT LABSL07n##HX0 pT6U2#(Jurisdictional) HaP  (Jurisdictional) " >">"  P4;P#G##HX0 pT6U2#(Non-Jurisdictional) HaP  G(Non-Jurisdictional)B&-m ##HX0 pT6U2#COMSAT HaP  COMSATI-4&s!##HX0 pT6U2#INTERNATIONAL HaP   INTERNATIONAL  %4% !'. '^ ' d' 0' & & X& & % \% % $ $ y$ `$^ X$. `$ y$ $ $ %l \%V %H &C X&H &V &l 0' d' ' ' '.  !'. '^ ' d' 0' & & X& & % \% % $ $ y$ `$^ X$. `$ y$ $ $ %l \%V %H &C X&H &V &l 0' d' ' ' '. # % #'' # #B&-%- & ##HX0 pT6U2#BELCOM HaP  % BELCOM?#*% ~& ##HX0 pT6U2#INC HaP  % INCB&-$&j##HX0 pT6U2#COMSAT HaP  $jCOMSATI-4 $z'##HX0 pT6U2#INTERNATIONAL HaP   $INTERNATIONAL?#*%f&V##HX0 pT6U2#INC HaP  %VINCA%,|%g&##HX0 pT6U2#(CII) HaP  |%(CII)M18 $(C##HX0 pT6U2#(Holding Company) HaP   $C(Holding Company)A%,%_&##HX0 pT6U2#(Non- HaP  %(Non-K/6$ (;##HX0 pT6U2#Jurisdictional) HaP  $;Jurisdictional)j/ q j0j0jL07H ##HX0 pT6U2#COMSAT SATELLITE HaP   COMSAT SATELLITEE)0##HX0 pT6U2#SERVICES HaP   SERVICES A%,##HX0 pT6U2#(CSS) HaP  (CSS)  iQ!hZH4*Ha^Wna *[HN[A n}SW:0^:SH}4AZh !hZH4*Ha^Wna *[HN[A n}SW:0^:SH}4AZhG+2?W##HX0 pT6U2#COMMERCIAL HaP   ?COMMERCIAL F*1-j##HX0 pT6U2#SATELLITE HaP   SATELLITE K/6 ##HX0 pT6U2#COMMUNICATIONS HaP   COMMUNICATIONS F*1h##HX0 pT6U2#INITIATIVE HaP   INITIATIVEB&-3##HX0 pT6U2#(CSCI) HaP  3(CSCI)#^R #  _#_# B&-O ##HX0 pT6U2#COMSAT HaP  O COMSATG+21`I##HX0 pT6U2# GOVERNMENT HaP   1 GOVERNMENTI-4H<##HX0 pT6U2# SYSTEMS, INC HaP   H< SYSTEMS, INCB&-7L##HX0 pT6U2#(CGSI) HaP  7(CGSI)A%,fl##HX0 pT6U2#(Non- HaP  fl(Non-K/6|##HX0 pT6U2#Jurisdictional) HaP  Jurisdictional)   9   Z B Z  9   9   ] }u X!t"! H   q !9 Gcuf{ucGZ!+ H  +ZoI-f-9 Iq o    H ! H   q !9 Gcuf{ucGZ!+ H  +ZoI-f-9 Iq o    HmR m ^ ^ mm I-4t   ##HX0 pT6U2#COMSAT WORLD HaP   t COMSAT WORLD C'.SK##HX0 pT6U2#SYSTEMS HaP  SSYSTEMSA%,l##HX0 pT6U2#(CWS) HaP  l(CWS)L07f [##HX0 pT6U2#(Jurisdictional) HaP  [(Jurisdictional)KvDU K " "vKvK B&- !R ##HX0 pT6U2#COMSAT HaP   R COMSATC'.b!##HX0 pT6U2#GENERAL HaP  GENERALA%,L !?##HX0 pT6U2#CORP. HaP  L ?CORP.A%,b X!##HX0 pT6U2#(Non- HaP  b (Non-K/6#4##HX0 pT6U2#Jurisdictional) HaP  4Jurisdictional)  !B C rR   rr E)0Ac ##HX0 pT6U2#ADVANCED HaP   Ac ADVANCED I-4s~##HX0 pT6U2#APPLICATIONS HaP   APPLICATIONS F*1O##HX0 pT6U2#MANAGEMENT HaP   OMANAGEMENTA%,_C##HX0 pT6U2#(AAM) HaP  (AAM)  0 0 !b] 7 ok  |  n    o 7 f Y bf    U & n | k & U ]b !b] 7 ok  |  n    o 7 f Y bf    U & n | k & U ]bD(/L  y##HX0 pT6U2#Planet I HaP  L yPlanet IJ.5 ##HX0 pT6U2#Retail Project HaP   Retail ProjectO3: He##HX0 pT6U2#(Marketing for CMC) HaP   e(Marketing for CMC)L07 m##HX0 pT6U2#(Jurisdictional) HaP   (Jurisdictional) zR     J.5_  Ot ##HX0 pT6U2#COMSAT MOBILE HaP  _ t COMSAT MOBILE J.5% ##HX0 pT6U2#COMMUNICATIONS HaP  % COMMUNICATIONSA%,  a##HX0 pT6U2#(CMC) HaP   a(CMC)L07 wL##HX0 pT6U2#(Jurisdictional) HaP   L(Jurisdictional)  ~!=n0 F}1*?FR,n, R\?- *1 -}\ 0 =n !=n0 F}1*?FR,n, R\?- *1 -}\ 0 =nB&-z##HX0 pT6U2#Direct HaP  zDirectF*1o##HX0 pT6U2#Investment HaP   InvestmentC'.g##HX0 pT6U2# in ICO HaP  g in ICOP4;v##HX0 pT6U2#(Non-Jurisdictional) HaP  (Non-Jurisdictional){R   {{ F*1r Bl ##HX0 pT6U2#SATELLITE HaP   rl SATELLITE D(/|##HX0 pT6U2#SYSTEMS HaP  SYSTEMS G+25MX##HX0 pT6U2#INVESTMENT HaP   5XINVESTMENT F*1h##HX0 pT6U2#MANAGEMENT HaP   MANAGEMENTB&-E##HX0 pT6U2#(SSIM) HaP  E(SSIM)D(/ ##HX0 pT6U2#SPECIAL HaP   SPECIAL D(/K ##HX0 pT6U2#PROJECTS HaP  KPROJECTSB&-O ##HX0 pT6U2#OFFICE HaP  OFFICE!$e$$$l$>$$d#w##"Y""d!>!W!;!1!e;!'W!!!"fY"J"8#1w#8#J$$fl$$$$'$e !$e$$$l$>$$d#w##"Y""d!>!W!;!1!e;!'W!!!"fY"J"8#1w#8#J$$fl$$$$'$eG+2v!i$##HX0 pT6U2#COMMERCIAL HaP   v!COMMERCIAL F*1!m$E##HX0 pT6U2#OPERATIONS HaP   !EOPERATIONS  !B !  9   X-> X     FCC 97422 #Xw PE37H4 yO-#X\  P6G;P# ЍXxIn fact, Comsat notes, "the predecessors of CMC and CWS operated as separate lines of businesses  yO_-within a single Comsat division, consistent with the Commission's structural separation requirements. It  {O'-was not until 1991 that CMC and CWS were established as two discrete divisions." See letter from  {O-Willard R. Nichols to Donna R. Searcy, May 29, 1991. See also Comsat notification of reorganization from Warren Zeger, Vice President, General Counsel, and Secretary, to Scott Harris, Chief, International  {O-Bureau, File No. 1SATISP96 (Oct. 5, 1995). See also Provision of Aeronautical Services Via the  {OM-Inmarsat System, 4 F.C.C. Rcd. 6072 (1989) ("Aeronautical Order") which noted that there are no  yO-structural separation requirements between jurisdictional activities.  #c PE37MP#(#> Our structural separation policy is instead directed at the relationship  X-between Comsat's jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional business activities.  {O -#X\  P6G;P# čXxSee First Structure Order. #Xw PE37XP#(#ƭ MTN incorrectly  X-insists that our structural separation policy requires jurisdictional activities to be structurally separate. In any event, subsequent to MTN's petition, Comsat proposed and followed through on the elimination of CIC as a corporate division, while the individual jurisdictional business  X-units previously directed by CIC (CMC and CWS) continue as separate subsidiaries.CT  {O%-#X\  P6G;P# čXxSee Comsat Notification of Corporate Reorganization in letter from Warren Zeger, Vice President,  yO&-General Counsel, and Secretary, to Don Gips, Chief, International Bureau (January 23, 1997). (#C  X- Therefore, to the extent MTN's petition objects to the housing of both CMC and CWS in the"0*((R"  X-CIC division, that issue has been rendered moot.  X-x 13.` ` As to MTN's contention that Comsat may not combine the sales and marketing staffs of CWS and CMC, there is no restriction against it. Comsat is not required to  X-structurally separate jurisdictional functions. {O-#X\  P6G;P# čXx See supra at 12.#Xw PE37XP# (#Ư The record does not indicate whether there will now be joint marketing functions. However, if it does so, it must separately account for each  Xv-jurisdictional activity in accordance with established Commission Policy. vZ {O -#X\  P6G;P# č Xx See Implementation of requirements of the International Maritime Satellite Telecommunications Act, 91  yOK -F.C.C.2d. 245 (1982). (#   XH-x 14.` ` Additionally, we do not share MTN's view that structural separation of Comsat's Inmarsat and INTELSAT maritime services is necessary to avoid conflicts of  X -interest. Although we did caution against the possibility of a conflict of interest situation  X -between Comsat's INTELSAT and Inmarsat responsibilities in the Comsat Study, we found that structural separation would not be an appropriate means of protecting against its  X -occurrence.  {O<-#X\  P6G;P# č#X\  P6G;P#XxSee Comsat Study at  147. (#ƹ However, should a discernible conflict of interest situation arise between INTELSAT and Inmarsat we would not hesitate to take action to remedy the problem.  X - Finally, w e disagree with MTN that adequate notice of the proposed change was not provided.  X- A public notice was issued, MTN responded to it, and the Commission then considered all  X{-comments before issuing its decision .#Xw PE37XP# #Xj\  P6G;9XP#  XM-x B. Application for Review (1996 Reorganization)   X-x15.` ` On April 26, 1996, Comsat proposed the creation of a new business unit,  X-Comsat Personal Communications ("CPC"), to be "housed" within the CIC division.ZF {O-#X\  P6G;P# Ѝ#X\  P6G;P#XxSee Comsat Corporation's Notification of Corporate Reorganization, File No. 99SATISP96, Public Notice Report No. SPB46 (May 7, 1996). CPC was eliminated in the Comsat structural reorganization that became effective December 29, 1997.(#ƈ CPC's  X-role was to develop Comsat's nonjurisdictional personal mobile communication businesses, consisting of both Planet 1 (jurisdictional) and ICO Global Communications, Ltd. (non X-jurisdictional) handheld services.h  yO!-#X\  P6G;P# č#X\  P6G;P#Xx CPC handled the ICO investment and had a contract with CMC to market Comsat's miniM system. (# The International Bureau notified Comsat in writing that, because it was premature for us to make a determination as to whether the reorganization  X-complied with our structural separation requirements, Comsat could proceed with this  X~-reorganization subject to future Commission action.r~  {O'&-#X\  P6G;P# č #X\  P6G;P#Xx    See  Letter from Don Gips, Chief , International Bureau, to Warren Zeger, Vice President, General  yO&-Counsel, and Secretary of Comsat Corporation (July 25, 1996). (#r "~R 0*((2"Ԍ X-ԙx16.` ` PanAmSat Corporation ("PAS") filed an application for review asking whether the International Bureau should have allowed this reorganization to occur before determining  X-whether it violates the Comsat Structure Orders. {OK-#X\  P6G;P# čXxSee PanAmSat Application for Review, File No. 99SATISP96 (August 26, 1996). #c PE37MP#(# PAS asserts that, since Commission policy requires a substantive determination, at the time of the structural change notification, the  X-Bureau's earlier decision was in error.Z {O-#X\  P6G;P# č #X\  P6G;P#Xx See the First Structure Order, recon at  33. (# It argues that our stated position here which allowed Comsat to proceed with this corporate reorganization due to our failure to act substantively within 90days is incorrect and "violates the principle of reasoned decision  X_-making embodied in the Administrative Procedure Act." _ {O -#X\  P6G;P# čXxSee Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.  551 et. seq. (1997).#Xw PE37XP#(# PAS, further, opposes this reorganization because housing CPC within CIC would violate our structural separation requirements. We note that PAS did not, however, explicitly oppose the combination of Planet 1 (jurisdictional) and ICO Global (non jurisdictional) within CPC.  X -x17.` ` In opposition, Comsat contends that PanAmSat mischaracterizes this reorganization by describing CIC as a "jurisdictional arm" of Comsat. Instead, Comsat explains, CIC would oversee and support both jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional lines of business, a role that was made clear when it gave notice to the Commission of a structural  X-change in October 1994.c!~ {O-#X\  P6G;P# čXxSee Notice of Corporate Reorganization in letter from Warren Zeger, Vice President, General Counsel,  yO-and Secretary, to Kathleen Wallman, Chief, Common Carrier Bureau (October 11, 1994). #c PE37MP#(#c PAS counters, in reply, that Comsat has failed to address the essence of its application for review. It also insists that Comsat has the burden of demonstrating whether a particular reorganization complies with our structural separation requirements and the Bureau never established whether that burden was carried. Instead, it contends, we incorrectly permitted the "90day review period" to lapse. Furthermore, PanAmSat asserts that Comsat's combination of nonjurisdictional and jurisdictional activities (integrating CPC into CIC) is a substantive violation of the structural separation requirements and must still be addressed.   X-x18.` ` The First Structure Order requires Comsat to notify the Commission 90 days  X-prior to any change in its corporate structure, which Comsat did." {O3!-#X\  P6G;P# čXxSee First Structure Order at  109. #Xw PE37XP#(#ƹ Comsat reorganizations  X-may automatically go into effect after 90 days absent Commission action.#j  {O#-#X\  P6G;P# čXxId. #Xw PE37XP#(#Ɩ Nevertheless, any Bureau action on delegated authority, including permitting or foreclosing a reorganization, is  Xe-subject to future Commission review.$e  {O'-#X\  P6G;P# čXxId. #Xw PE37XP#(#Ɩ The Bureau letter to Comsat dated July 25, 1996,"e $0*((1" clearly stated that Comsat's reorganization creating CPC was subject to Commission action at  X-any subsequent date.G% {Ob-#X\  P6G;P# čXxSee  Letter from Don Gips, Chief, International Bureau, to Warren Zeger, Vice President, General  yO,-Counsel, and Secretary of Comsat Corporation (July 25, 1996).#Xw PE37XP#(#G Therefore, from a procedural standpoint, the Bureau correctly allowed Comsat to proceed with its reorganization following the 90day review period. If we subsequently determine that Comsat is in violation of our structural separation policy, we have authority to require Comsat to remedy the situation.  Xv-x 19.` ` The substantive issue raised by PanAmSat concerning Comsat's housing of jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional business units within the same organizational unit needs to  XH-be considered in light of Comsat's more recent structural change s that became effective in  X1-1997, discussed below.&1" {O - #X\  P6G;P#э #X\  P6G;P#XxSee "Section C"  2023.(# We also will address the housing of Planet 1 and ICO Global within CPC and whether that combination complies with our structural separation requirements.   X -x C. January 1997 Notification of Reorganization   X -x20.` ` On January 23, 1997, Comsat filed a reorganization notification proposing the elimination of CIC as a corporate division. That reorganization became effective April 23,  Xy-1997. According to this notification, the business lines previously within CIC would continue  Xb-as separate units, reporting directly to the President and CEO of Comsat, and includes CWS,  XK-CMC, and CPC. '"K {O-#X\  P6G;P# č #X\  P6G;P#XxSee Comsat Corporation Notification of Reorganization, File No. 31SATISP97 (January 23, 1997).  yOz-Comsat International, Inc. (" CII") (formerly Comsat Investments, Inc.("CIV")), will continue as a  yOB- separate subsidiary and serve as a holding company for foreign investment ventures by Comsat International ("CI").(#  Comsat asserts that this proposed structural reorganization would make moot certain objections filed by PanAmSat Corporation, William L. Whitely, and TRW, Inc.,  X-to previous reorganizations.O( yOl-#X\  P6G;P# ЍXxComsat noted the following comments specifically: Comments of PanAmSat Corporation (May 17, 1996), Response of PanAmSat Corporation (June 13, 1996), Opposition to Motion to Strike and Reply to Opposition (June 18, 1996), Application for Review of PanAmSat Corporation (August 26, 1996),  yO-Reply of PanAmSat (September 25, 1996), filed by PanAmSat under File No. 99SATISP96;  yO -Comments of TRW, Inc. (May 23, 1996); filed by TRW under File No. 99SATISP96; Petition for  yOT!-Reconsideration (February 16, 1996), Supplement to Reply Comments (May 14, 1996), filed by William  yO"-L. Whitely under File No. 1SATISP96; Request for Declaratory Ruling (January 12, 1996), Reply to  yO"-Opposition (February 8, 1996), Reply Comments of Petitioner (July 9, 1996), filed by William L.  yO#-Whitely under File No. 117SATDR96. #&m PE37&P#(#O PAS counters that this structural change would not render previous objections moot. Below, we address Comsat's assertion that the proposed reorganization renders moot particular objections to previous corporate reorganizations.  X-x21.` ` Comsat insists that the "gravamen" of various previous objections is that" n(0*((q" "Comsat [can]not create a division [like CIC] which include[s] both jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional lines of business." Therefore, it asserts, since CIC had been eliminated as a corporate division, the issue is moot. Comsat further states that any direct costs for legal, human resources, and other financial support will be charged to the business unit or subsidiary  X-benefiting from those services, just as before.a) yO-#X\  P6G;P# Ѝ #X\  P6G;P#Xx The cost allocation manual sets out the specific accounts wherein to distribute costs. Comsat is required  yO-to allocate the costs based on these account definitions. (#a  Xv-x22.` ` PAS disagrees with the assertion that these issues are now moot and states that it objects because Comsat may not provide nonjurisdictional services on a nonstructurally separated basis. In response, Comsat clarifies that it never meant to suggest that absolutely all objections have been rendered moot by the elimination of CIC. Further, it asserts that the Comsat Structure Orders do not require it to adhere to strict structural separation in any and  X -all circumstances, as is the case with Comsat Labs,2*  {O-#X\  P6G;P# ЍXxChanges in the Corporate Structure and Operations of the Communications Satellite Corporation, 97  yO-F.C.C.2d 145, 16162 (1984). #c PE37MP#(#2 and that the Comsat Structure Orders contemplated further changes by Comsat as long as it provided the Commission 90 days prior  X -notice and the Commission did not object.1+ z {O-#X\  P6G;P# ЍXxChanges in the Corporate Structure and Operations of the Communications Satellite Corporation, 90  yO-F.C.C.2d 1159, 1199 (1982). #c PE37MP#(#1  X -x23.` ` We agree with Comsat that the elimination of CIC renders moot the issue of housing the various jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional business units within CIC. Therefore, at least some of PanAmSat's, TRW's, and Whitley's contentions are rendered moot. The issue of CPC continuing to house both jurisdictional (PLANET 1) and nonjurisdictional (ICO Global) personal communication businesses is now rendered moot as well, however, it might have remained an issue had Comsat not reorganized its corporate structure again in late  X-1997.t,Z {O- #X\  P6G;P#эXxSee Comsat Corporation notification of corporate reorganization in letter from Warren Zeger, Vice President, General Counsel, and Secretary, to Regina Keeney, Chief, International Bureau (September  yO4-29, 1997).#X\  P6G;P#(#t We note that Comsat had earlier explained that dealings between Planet 1 and ICO would be at "armslength", but our policy clearly requires structural separation of these respective jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional business activities. We further note that our policy prohibits Comsat from housing jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional activities within the  X-same division and commingling staff at will.-  {Oh#-#X\  P6G;P# čXxSee First Structure Order at  3844, 6573. #Xw PE37XP#(# Accounting procedures will not substitute for  X-structural separation here. Moreover, as noted in paragraph four, not only would structural separation be required here, but "armslength" dealings between the various subsidiaries or  X|-divisions would be required so that each entity behaves as separate businesses..|  {O'-#X\  P6G;P# č #X\  P6G;P#x See Communications Satellite Corporation, 8 F.C.C. Rcd. 1531 (1993).#c PE37MP#  This applies"| .0*((2" to the flow of INTELSAT/Inmarsatderived information from jurisdictional to non X-jurisdictional business units to assure nondiscriminatory access by other competitors./Z {Ob-#X\  P6G;P# Ѝ#X\  P6G;P#XxSee First Structure Order at  7499. Our policy generally encourages broad public access to INTELSAT/Inmarsat information. This information includes facts and data about satellite technology  yO-developments and knowledge concerning markets for INTELSAT products or services. (# Comsat's latest reorganization, effective December 29, 1997, eliminates the problem of  X-housing PLANET 1 and ICO within the same division.f0 yOV-#X\  P6G;P# čXxThe Commission makes no other determinations regarding this latest structural reorganization by Comsat  yO -and reserves the right to review it in the future and take whatever action it deems necessary. #Xw PE37XP#(#f Jurisdictional PLANET 1 activities  X-are now under CMC and nonjurisdictional ICO activities are now under SSIM. 1B {O -#X\  P6G;P# čXxSee chart at  5. #X\  P6G;P#(#Ƨ  X_-x D. Declaratory Ruling Requests   X1-x24.` ` William L. Whitely and William J. Hallenbeck ("Petitioners"), acting pro se,  X -request a declaratory ruling that Comsat's stock acquisition of Belcom, Inc.,2  {O-#X\  P6G;P# čXxSee Satellite Policy Branch Information, Public Notice Report No. SPB49 (June 5, 1996).(# was executed without proper authority and Comsat's corporate organization and operation in connection  X -with Belcom violate our structural separation policy.3 f  yO-#X\  P6G;P# č #X\  P6G;P#XxBelcom is a New Yorkbased company that provides telecommunications services to Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States ("CIS") through the purchase and resale of INTELSAT and Inmarsat communication services and equipment. Comsat, through its subsidiary, CII, initially purchased a stock interest in Belcom in June 1993. (CII serves as a holding company for Comsat investments in foreign INTELSAT earth station ventures.) CII acquired a majority equity interest in  yO-Belcom in June 1994, eventually acquiring a 100% interest. Whitely has an associate who is the subject  {O-of civil action instituted by Comsat regarding Belcom, Inc. See Belcom, Inc. v. Scott Robb, C.A. No.  yO}-14663, Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. A f inal decision by the court is pending. Both Whitely and Hallenbeck were or are minority shareholders in Belcom. Hallenbeck's corporation, Mead Associates, Inc., of Waccabuc, New York, was or is a creditor and former contract consultant of Belcom.(# Petitioners also contend that since Belcom is a nonjurisdictional subsidiary offering Inmarsat equipment and services,  X -Commission precedent requires Comsat to put in place nonstructural safeguards.4  {O7!-#X\  P6G;P# ЍXxSee Communications Satellite Organization, 90 F.C.C.2d 488 (1982) ("TeleSystems").#c PE37MP#(# Petitioners specifically request an immediate investigation, sanctions, and/or corrective regulations. Comsat opposes petitioners requests. For the reasons discussed below, we deny these  Xy-petitions. Petitioners also state that Comsat's failure to heed requests to provide information sought by certain Belcom shareholders and a failure to inform private shareholders of the  XK-"significant [regulatory and statutory] limitations" placed on COMSAT violate the Satellite  X4-Act . This issue, however, is governed by corporate and securities law and is not relevant to the Satellite Act. The Commission has no basis from which to assert its authority here." Z40*(()"Ԍ  X-x` ` 1. Acquisition of Belcom  X-x25.` ` Petitioners claim that Comsat's purchase of stock in Belcom required prior Commission approval and that Comsat violated Section 201(c)(8) of the Satellite Act in  X-failing to obtain this approval. 5z {O-#X\  P6G;P# ЍXxSee Communications Satellite Act, 47 U.S.C.  721(c)(8). This section states that the Commission shall "authorize the corporation [referring to Comsat] to issue any shares of capital stock, except the initial issue of capital stock referred to in section 304(a), or to borrow any moneys, or to assume any obligation in respect of the securities of any other person, upon finding that such issuance, borrowing, or assumption is compatible with the public interest, convenience, and necessity and is necessary or appropriate for or consistent with carrying out the purposes and objectives of this Act by the  yO -corporation." #c PE37MP#(#  Comsat asserts that it was not required to secure prior Commission approval for this particular financial transaction, since its "capitalization plan" authorization had already given it the authority necessary to purchase shares of Belcom stock, including a majority interest. Petitioners contend that the capitalization plan order dealt only with the overall financing of Comsat and did not apply to transactions involving the purchase  X -of stock.6^  {O-#X\  P6G;P# ЍXxSee Communications Satellite Act, 47 U.S.C.  721(c)(8). See also The Consolidated Capitalization  {O-Plan for 19831985 of the Communications Satellite Corporation 94 F.C.C.2d 1149, 1150 (1983)  {Oi-emphasis added, modified in part, F.C.C. 83381 (August 17, 1983) ("1983 Capitalization Plan Order").#c PE37MP#(#  X -x26.` ` We find that Comsat did not violate Section 201(c)(8) of the Communications Satellite Act by purchasing stock in Belcom. No prior Commission approval was required because the acquisition of Belcom was within the parameters of its capitalization plan.  X-x27.` ` Prior to 1983, the Commission reviewed Comsat stock issuances and  Xy-borrowings as a requirement of its statutory responsibility under the Satellite Act.7y0  {OZ-#X\  P6G;P# ЍXxCommunications Satellite Act, 47 U.S.C.  721(c)(8). #c PE37MP#(# In 1983, it approved a "capitalization plan" concept to allow Comsat to take advantage of market conditions on short notice, while still providing the Commission with the means to oversee  X4-Comsat's financial activities, as required by the Satellite Act.84  {O-#X\  P6G;P# ЍXxSee 1983 Capitalization Plan Order. #c PE37MP#(# This marked a change in the way the Commission reviewed the financial activities of Comsat. Instead of evaluating its financial transactions individually, Comsat was authorized to file more longterm  X-capitalization plans, which were generally approved if there was no harmful impact on jurisdictional ratepayers. As a result, the Commission does not currently require Comsat to receive prior authorization for specific acquisitions of entities such as Belcom. The Belcom stock purchase falls within the parameters of the capitalization plan and Comsat's participation  X-in Belcom is not inconsistent with its statutory mission. Petitioners also incorrectly assert that the interagency "instructional process" is applicable to Belcom, since foreign policy concerns"| T 80*((" arise here. The "instructional process" is a formal process by which the State Department, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration ("NTIA"), and the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC"), oversee Comsat's role as the United States Signatory to INTELSAT and Inmarsat. The issues surrounding Comsat's participation in a nonjurisdictional business such as Belcom do not fall within the purview of the instructional  X-process.9 {O-#X\  P6G;P# Ѝ#X\  P6G;P#Xx See Comsat Study at 728. (#  X_-x28.` ` Petitioners further assert that, since Belcom offers Inmarsat equipment and services, Comsat must follow the policy expressed in the Comsat General TeleSystems, Inc.  X1-("TeleSystems") decision.:1Z {O< -#X\  P6G;P# Ѝ#X\  P6G;P#XxSee Communications Satellite Organization, 90 F.C.C.2d 488 (1982) ("TeleSystems"). (# However, that decision occurred in 1982, prior to the adoption of  X -the Comsat Structure Orders which now govern this issue. Therefore, it is not directly applicable and Comsat need only comply with the Comsat Structure Orders. Accordingly, Petitioners request for declaratory ruling that Comsat's stock acquisition of Belcom was executed without proper authority is denied.  X -  X -x` ` 2. Compliance with Structural Separation  Xy-x 29.` ` Petitioners also request a declaratory ruling that Comsat placed jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional business units within the same division, contrary to our structural separation policy. Petitioners allege that CIC controls and supervises the jurisdictional business units of CWS and CMC, as well as the nonjurisdictional business units of CIV and CII. However, as noted supra in paragraph 20, Comsat has eliminated CIC, rendering moot  X-the issue of housing the CWS, CMC, CIV and CII business units within the same division.Z; {O-#X\  P6G;P# č Xx See  File No. 31SATISP96 and   supra at  2023. We note that Comsat International Ventures was  yOm-renamed Comsat International. #c PE37MP#(#Z  X-x30.` ` Petitioners also charge that Comsat is illegally engaged in crosssubsidization, information transfer, providing jurisdictional staff support to Belcom, intermingling accounts and operations, and conducting business on terms that are other than "armslength". They assert that Comsat has made a "wide range of staff personnel" available to Belcom, while never billing it for the services rendered and that there "likely" was a transfer of technology and unauthorized information, such as longterm planning information, since Comsat engineers were "likely" available for consultation with CII companies and the "opportunity" to pass along information to Belcom was available. We note that our structural separation policy permits Comsat to provide corporate support services to both jurisdictional and non X -jurisdictional activities if separately accounted for at fair market value.< F {O&-#X\  P6G;P# č #Xw PE37XP#Xx#X\  P6G;P#  See First Structure Order at  65 73. (# Beyond that, Petitioners fail to support their claims with specific evidence of violations of our policy"<0*((Z" instead offering assumptions and unsupported statements. Based on the information before us, we conclude that there is no basis for further investigation, sanctions, and/or corrective actions  X-in connection with the petition.  X-x E. Petition to Enjoin Payment of Dividends from Retained Earnings   X_-x31.` ` The Committee to Restructure the International Satellite Organization  XH-("Committee"), =ZH yO - #X\  P6G;P#э#X\  P6G;P#XxWilliam J. Hallenbeck filed on behalf of this selfformed committee as the Executive Director. He has also established the Belcom Minority Shareholders and Claimants Committee and designates himself  {OQ -Committee Chairman. See infra discussion of related petition. (#ƭ filed an additional petition on December 31, 1996, requesting that the Commission: (1) issue a permanent injunction prohibiting Comsat from paying future dividends from retained earnings; (2) undertake an audit to determine what, if any, past dividends have been paid by Comsat from retained earnings; and (3) issue a permanent injunction prohibiting Comsat from realizing direct benefits from the privatization of  X -INTELSAT and Inmarsat.F>Z  {Op-#X\  P6G;P# čXxSee Petition to Enjoin Comsat's Payment of Dividends from Retained Earnings, The Committee to Restructure the International Satellite Organizations, William J. Hallenbeck, Executive Director (December 31, 1996).(#F In essence, the Committee asserts that Comsat's financial activities and nonjurisdictional ventures are jeopardizing its ability to fulfill its statutory  X -mission and it is unjustifiably relying on the capitalizationpPlan.?^  {Od-#X\  P6G;P# č#X\  P6G;P#Xx#X\  P6G;P#See Comsat Corporation Request for Approval of 1996 Capitalization Plan, 11 F.C.C. Rcd. 13231  {O.-(October 16, 1996) ("1996 Capitalization Plan"). See also Hallenbeck and Whitley petitions for  {O-declaratory ruling supra.  See also supra  2527.#Xj\  P6G;9XP#(# Further, it argues that any windfall Comsat receives through the privatization of INTELSAT and Inmarsat should be directed to the U.S. Treasury, since it was Congress that established Comsat's "monopoly" status in the first place. In opposition, Comsat maintains that the Committee's petition, including its supplement and amendment, is deficient and meritless and represents an attempt to pressure Comsat into settling litigation in a pending state court proceeding. Comsat argues that both filings should be summarily rejected and Hallenbeck sanctioned for abuse of process.  X-x32.` ` We need not address in detail each contention of the Committee. As noted above, our Comsat structure policy permits Comsat to engage in nonjurisdictional lines of business not inconsistent with its statutory mission. The capitalization plan approval process provides the Commission with the means to assure that Comsat maintains the financial posture  X-to fulfill its statutory missions.@@2  yOv$- #X\  P6G;P#э#X\  P6G;P#Xx As described in paragraph 27, the capitalization plan is the process we established to implement Commission responsibilities under Section 201(c)(8) of the Satellite Act.(#@ The Committee neither challenges Comsat's compliance with existing capitalization plans nor provides any evidence suggesting the need for further"| @0*(("  X-Commission investigation.A yOy- #X\  P6G;P#э#X\  P6G;P#XxThe Committee alleges that Comsat may have exceeded its long and shortterm debt limitation. However, the Committee provided no evidence to support this allegation. Further, the Committee is incorrect that shortterm debt may not be used to retire longterm debt. As long as Comsat follows the specific limits authorized in the capitalization plan currently effective, it may use it for this purpose.  {O-See Comsat Corporation Request for Approval of 1996 Capitalization Plan , DA 961715, (October 16,  yOc-1996). (#  X-x 33.` ` Congress created Comsat as a private corporation and did not intend for it to be managed by the Commission or any other federal agency. The Satellite Act provides for a Board of Directors elected by the stockholders and appropriate corporate officers appointed by the Board to make the types of decisions the Committee would have us make. The  Xv-Corporation Act for the District of Columbia governs Comsat's ability to distribute retained earnings to pay dividends, notwithstanding Comsat's net earnings, presently. Comsat's Articles of Incorporation, its corporation ByLaws, relevant corporate law, and the Securities and Exchange Commission are the appropriate authorities available to discontented shareholders to address issues raised by the Committee concerning the management of Comsat. The public interest standard does not entitle us, nor would we seek, to control or manage Comsat's ordinary management operations. There are other more appropriate forums available for the Committee to redress its alleged grievances.  X -x!34.` ` Thus, we deny the Committee's requests to issue a permanent injunction prohibiting Comsat from paying future dividends from retained earnings and to conduct an audit to determine what past dividends have been paid by Comsat from retained earnings. We also deny the Committee's April 7, 1997 supplement to its December 1996 petition asking the  XK-Commission to review Comsat's operations and take corrective actions.BZKB {O>-#X\  P6G;P# č #Xw PE37XP#Xx#X\  P6G;P# See Petition to Enjoin Comsat's Payment of Dividends from Retained Earnings, The Committee to Restructure the International Satellite Organizations, William J. Hallenbeck, Executive Director  yO-(December 31, 1996). #X\  P6G;P# (# On April 24, 1997, it filed an amendment to this petition. In addition to the three main requests described earlier, the Committee also requests that the Commission immediately commence an investigation to determine the circumstances surrounding Comsat's cancellation and subsequent rescheduling of its 1997 annual meeting. Further, it asks us to determine the circumstances regarding Comsat's lowering of its dividend from 19.5 cents to 5 cents per share. These issues are outside the scope of Commission authority.  X|-x F. Emergency Petition to Enjoin Comsat from Using Legal Process   XN-x"35.` ` For the same reasons, we deny the April 29, 1997 emergency petition filed by the Committee to enjoin Comsat's Board and management from using corporate resources to: (1) take actions before a judicial, administrative or other tribunal, against any of its shareholders seeking to exercise their rights as shareholders to contest or replace the current" d B0*((=" board or management; (2) undertake any action of a corporate governance nature, including but not limited to the adoption of ByLaws which would have the effect of diminishing the rights of shareholders to contest and/or replace the current Board and management; and (3) take any action with the direct or indirect purpose to campaign or electioneer or solicit shareholder support in the election of directors which will take place at the 1997 annual shareholders meeting. The Committee also requests that we enjoin Comsat from undertaking actions to obligate the corporation to pay benefits (ie., "golden parachutes") of any kind to directors, officers, and employees, in the event that a change of control takes place following the election of Directors.  X -x#36.` ` The Committee's petition focuses largely on a disagreement between the corporate hierarchy and certain shareholders. This is not a matter for FCC regulatory action. Comsat's Articles of Incorporation, its corporate ByLaws, the securities law of the state of incorporation, and corporate and contract law govern the matters subject to the Committee's petition. Furthermore, Comsat has a legal right to judicial process and its exercise of that right is governed by the courts, not this agency. The Committee's emergency petition is denied.  XK-x G. Petition for Investigation and Issuance of a Declaratory Ruling   X-x$37.` ` Finally, we deny the petition filed by the Belcom Minority Shareholders and Claimants Committee on April 12, 1996 for investigation and issuance of a declaratory ruling requiring the use of arbitration or mediation to resolve disputes between Comsat and small  X-business concerns.C yOQ-#X\  P6G;P# čXxWilliam J. Hallenbeck is the selfappointed committee Chairman. #c PE37MP#(# The petition details a number of complaints concerning the conduct of Comsat in connection with its stock interest acquisition in Belcom. It requests that we require Comsat to consent to arbitration concerning its complaints, and argues that such arbitration is compelled by Section 721(c)(1) of the Communications Satellite Act, and the general "public  X|-interest" standard of that Act.D|X yO-#X\  P6G;P# čXx47 U.S.C.  721(c)(1). #X\  P6G;P#(#Ʀ  XN-x%38.` ` The Committee's argument that the Communications Satellite Act requires Comsat to submit to arbitration or confers on the Commission authority to order arbitration is without merit. Section 721(c)(1), on which it principally relies, requires Comsat to use "competitive bidding where appropriate" and for the Commission to consult with the Small Business Administration to develop such "measures and procedures which will insure that small business concerns are given an equitable opportunity to share in the procurement program." This provision applies to procurement of equipment in connection with Comsat's participation in the INTELSAT system. It does not apply to Comsat's nonjurisdictional activities, such as Belcom, and cannot reasonably be read to grant the Commission authority to specify methods for resolving the private business disputes that are the essence of the"#D0*(("" Committee's concerns. If Congress had wished to specify such methods it could have done so specifically, as it has done in other contexts. As a general matter, the Commission does not have authority to resolve or address private contractual matters. Those matters are more  X-appropriately resolved in the courts.TE {O4-#X\  P6G;P# čXx See Regents of the University of Georgia v. Carroll, 338 U.S. 586, 602 (1950); See also MidTexas  {O-Broadcasting, Inc., 71 F.C.C.2d 1173 (1979). #c PE37MP#(#T Therefore, this Committee's petition is also denied.  Xv-x H.` ` Petition to Reopen the Comsat Structure Orders   XH-x&39.` ` PAS has filed a petition to reopen the Comsat Structure Order proceeding.XFH$ {O -#X\  P6G;P# ЍXxSee Changes in the Corporate Structure and Operations of the Communications Satellite Corporation,  yO -Petition to Reopen Proceedings, CC Docket No. 80634 (May 12, 1992). #c PE37MP#(#X In the alternative, PAS requests that we consider its filing to be a petition for rulemaking under  X -Section 1.401 of our rules.G ~ yOI-#X\  P6G;P# ЍXx47 C.F.R.  1.401. #c PE37MP#(#Ƭ PAS specifically maintains that Comsat's current structural separation requirements are obsolete because of: (1) the development of other international separate satellite systems; (2) INTELSAT's "aggressive" move into competitive markets; and (3) Comsat's immunity from antitrust scrutiny for its Signatory responsibilities. It further notes that the Comsat Structure Orders assumed Comsat's jurisdictional activities would be  X -competitive. William L. Whitely generally supports the PAS petition.H  {Of- #X\  P6G;P#эXx See William L. Whitely comments in File No. 117SATDR96. #Xw PE37XP#(# He believes Comsat to be in violation of our structural separation requirements and, thus, asserts that Comsat  Xy-needs to be examined more closely.I@y yO-#X\  P6G;P# ЍXxSee File Nos. 1SATISP96 and 117SATDR96. Comsat opposed PAS's petition and Brightstar Communications, Ltd. (opposing PanAmSat's petition), Aeronautical Radio, Inc ("ARINC"), TRW, Inc., Capital Cities/ABC, the National Broadcasting Company ("NBC"), the Columbia Broadcast System ("CBS"), Turner Broadcast System ("TBS"), Columbia Communications Corporation, Miralite Communications, Inc., Dallas Fort Worth Teleport, Crescomm Transmission Services, Inc., Orion Network Systems, Inc. ("ONS"), National Cable Satellite Corporation, IDB Communications Group, Inc., PanAmSat Corporation, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration  yOB-("NTIA") (opposing PanAmSat's petition, in part), and Comsat Corporation, again, filed replies. #c PE37MP#(#Ɩ  XK-x'40.` ` PAS contends that there should be a distinction between Comsat's monopoly jurisdictional services and its competitive jurisdictional services. It explains that before there was competition in the delivery of INTELSAT and Inmarsat space segment, the terms "jurisdictional" and "monopoly" were synonymous. Any activity that did not involve use of such space segment was, by definition, "nonjurisdictional" or "competitive" and, therefore, had to be provided by a structurally separate subsidiary. Today, notes PAS, there are services that are both jurisdictional involving the provision of INTELSAT or Inmarsat space"I0*(("  X-segment and competitive, since separate systems offer comparable services.J yOy-#X\  P6G;P# ЍXxPanAmSat submits that INTELSAT, and by association, Comsat, has achieved "the universal service and  yOA-global 'connectivity' purpose for which it was founded." It further suggests that INTELSAT has changed its priorities, partly due to insufficient oversight, to that of a competitive commercial company. Comsat has played a major role in INTELSAT's "selfprivatization" process, which PanAmSat believes  yO-will "stifle" competition and create an "irreversible dominance" in the market. #c PE37MP#(#Ƨ PAS requests that the Commission require Comsat to structurally separate its competitive jurisdictional services, which compete with separate systems, from its monopoly jurisdictional services. In support, PAS contends that structural separation of Comsat's monopoly jurisdictional and competitive jurisdictional businesses is warranted to: (1) lessen conflicts of interest; (2) distinguish between actions taken by Comsat as an INTELSAT and Inmarsat Signatory and actions taken as a common carrier (given Comsat's immunity from antitrust liability for  X_-actions it takes as the United States Signatory to INTELSAT and Inmarsat versus no  XH-immunity for actions taken as a common carrier)PKHx {Oq-#X\  P6G;P# ЍXxSee Alpha Lycra Space Communications, Inc. v. Communications Satellite Corp., 946 F.2d 168 (2 Cir.  {O;-1991), cert. denied, 60 U.S.L.W. 3578 (Feb. 24, 1992). #c PE37MP#(#P; and (3) permit Comsat to provide these services as a nondominant carrier. PAS asserts that reopening this proceeding will help address the change in circumstances.  X -x(41.` ` Comsat opposes the PAS petition. It argues in its opposition that partitioning it into a jurisdictional monopoly side and a jurisdictional competitive side "would be required only if it had a legal monopoly on any telecommunications services or continued to exercise its Signatory functions." According to Comsat, CWS is already subject to competition, particularly from fiber optic cables, and the benefits of dividing CWS into "monopoly" and "competitive" organizations would be outweighed by the inefficiencies. It also argues that the "problems" PAS refers to do not exist because it cannot crosssubsidize other services with switchedvoice revenues or vice versa. Comsat maintains that there is no conflict of interest between its Signatory roles and common carrier roles. If there were, the instructional process would ensure that Comsat act consistently with U.S. policy. Finally, insists Comsat, it has no  X-antitrust immunity regarding its provision of INTELSAT space segment service in the United States so no purpose would be served by dividing that common carrier function in half.  X-x)42.` ` Commenters generally support a broad review of Comsat,L yOF - #X\  P6G;P# #X\  P6G;P# čXxThose commenters generally supporting a broad review of Comsat include the following: PanAmSat Corporation; Aeronautical Radio, Inc. ("ARINC"); TRW, Inc.; Capital Cities/ABC; Columbia Broadcasting System ("CBS"); National Broadcasting Company ("NBC"); Turner Broadcasting System ("TBS"); Columbia Communications Corporation; Miralite Communications, Inc.; Dallas Forth Worth Teleport; Crescomm Transmission Services, Inc.; Orion Network Systems, Inc.; National Cable Satellite  yO.$-Corporation ("NCSC"); and IDB Communications Group, Inc. #Xw PE37XP#(# except for Brightstar Communications, Ltd., and the National Telecommunications and Information  X-Administration ("NTIA"). Those supporting PAS's petition generally express the following: (1) the structural separation regime is no longer adequate to protect the public and national"|L L0*((" interests in a competitive international telecommunications market; (2) Comsat still requires close scrutiny by the Commission due to its monopoly position and any "casual Commission acquiescence" to less scrutiny in regard to Comsat is irresponsible; (3) Comsat's competitive services should be structurally separate from its monopoly services to prevent Comsat from using its monopoly advantage to impede competition; and (4) accounting controls and incentivebased price cap regulations are necessary to protect against crosssubsidization.  X_-x*43.` ` We dismiss PAS's petition. The petition was filed in 1992 and the record established does not take into account market developments that have taken place since that  X1-year. We agree with PAS and other commenters, that there are important issues to be addressed in order to assure the continued development of fair competition. We believe that the record recently established in response to Comsat's April 1997 request for reclassification  X -as a nondominant carrier is a more appropriate means to consider these types of concerns.}M(  {Oe - #X\  P6G;P#э#Xw PE37XP#Xx#X\  P6G;P#See Petition of Comsat Corporation for Partial Relief filed on October 25, 1996, File No. 14SATISP {O/-97 ("Comsat Petition"). In addition, we note that legislation to revise the act is pending before  {O-Congress. See H.R. 1872, 105th Cong., 1st Sess. (1997). The proposed title of H.R. 1872 is the  {O-Communications Satellite Competition and Privatization Act of 1997. (#} Our action here in dismissing PanAmSat's petition is without prejudice to our considering the types of competitionrelated issues raised in response to that petition on the basis of a more recent record. As such, we will incorporate the comments made in the PanAmSat petition into that docket.  XK- Ordering Clauses ĐTP  X-x+44.` ` Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the petitions for reconsideration filed by Maritime Telecommunications Network, Inc. and William L. Whitley, File No. 1SATISP96, ARE DENIED and the International Bureau decision in Comsat Corporation Notification of Reorganization, DA 9612 (January 16, 1996), IS AFFIRMED.  X-x,45.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Maritime Telecommunications Network, Inc's. request to direct Comsat to cease and desist the crossmarketing of its mobile maritime facilities by Comsat Mobile Communications and Comsat World Systems, File No. 1SATISP96, IS DENIED.  X7-x-46.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that PanAmSat Corporation's application for  X -review, File No. 99SATISP96, IS DENIED.  X-x.47.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that William L. Whitley's petition for a declaratory ruling, File No. 117SATDR96, IS DENIED.  X!-x/48.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that William J. Hallenbeck's petition for a declaratory ruling, File No. 118SATDR96, IS DENIED.""M0*((!"Ԍ  X-x049.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that William L. Whitely's and William J. Hallenbeck's request for an immediate investigation, sanctions, and/or corrective regulations in regard to Comsat Corporation's acquisition of shares of stock in Belcom, Inc., File Nos. 117SATDR96 and 118SATDR96, IS DENIED.  Xv-x150.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Committee to Restructure the International Satellite Organization's request for an expedited decision of its declaratory ruling  XH-request , File No. 118SATDR96, IS DENIED AS MOOT.  X - x251.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Committee to Restructure the  X -International Satellite Organization's "conversion rights" claim and the question of relief for creditors, included with its request for an expedited decision addressed in paragraph 50, IS DENIED as a matter more appropriately reserved for the courts.  X -  X -x352.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Committee to Restructure the International Satellite Organization's petition to permanently enjoin the payment of dividends from retained earnings, as amended, File No. 64SATDR97, IS DENIED.  XK-x453.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Committee to Restructure the International Satellite Organization's request to permanently enjoin Comsat Corporation from realizing any benefit from the potential privatization of INTELSAT and Inmarsat, File No. 64SATDR97, IS DENIED.  X-x554.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Committee to Restructure the International Satellite Organization's emergency petition to enjoin Comsat Corporation from using legal process or corporate governance measures against particular shareholders, File No. 65SATDR97, IS DENIED.  Xe-x655.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Committee to Restructure the International Satellite Organization's request to enjoin Comsat Corporation from undertaking actions to obligate the corporation to pay benefits of any kind to directors, officers, or employees, File No. 65SATDR97, IS DENIED.  X-x756.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Belcom, Inc. Minority Shareholders and Claimants Committee petition for investigation and issuance of a declaratory ruling requiring the use of arbitration or mediation to resolve disputes between Comsat Corporation and small business concerns, File No. 73SATDR97, IS DENIED.  X#-x857.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Belcom, Inc. Minority Shareholders and Claimants Committee request that we require Comsat Corporation to consent to arbitration since arbitration is compelled by Section 721(c)(1) of the Communications Satellite Act, 47 U.S.C.  721(c)(1), File No. 73SATDR97, IS DENIED. "#'M0*((%"Ԍ X-x958.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition of PanAmSat Corporation to reopen the Comsat Structure Order proceeding or institute a rulemaking, CC Docket No. 80 X-634, IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, as discussed in this item. x` `  hhFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `  hhMagalie Roman Salas  X -x` `  hhSecretary#&a\  P6G;&P#