Refunds Under the Cable Statutory License, 61116-61118 [2010-24779]
Download as PDF
61116
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new AD:
Rolls-Royce plc: Docket No. FAA–2008–
1165; Directorate Identifier 2008–NE–
38–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by
November 18, 2010.
Affected Airworthiness Directives (ADs)
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc (RR)
models RB211–Trent 875–17, –Trent 877–17,
–Trent 884–17, –Trent 884B–17, –Trent 892–
17, –Trent 892B–17, and –Trent 895–17
turbofan engines, with high-pressure (HP)
compressor stage 1–4 shafts, part number
(P/N) FK32580, installed. These engines are
installed on, but not limited to, Boeing 777
series airplanes.
Reason
(d) European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) AD 2010–0087, dated May 5, 2010
(corrected May 6, 2010) states the unsafe
condition is as follows:
During manufacture of high-pressure (HP)
compressor stage 1 discs, a small number of
parts have been rejected due to a machining
defect that was found during inspection.
Analysis of the possibility of less severe
examples having been undetected and passed
into service has concluded that action is
required to reduce the risk of failure. It was
therefore necessary to reduce the life limit.
The HP compressor stage 1 disc is part of the
HP compressor stage 1–4 shaft, P/N FK32580.
We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of
the HP compressor stage 1 disc, uncontained
engine failure, and damage to the airplane.
Actions and Compliance
(e) Unless already done, do the following
actions.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Multiple Flight Profile Monitoring Parts
(1) For RB211–Trent 800 engines being
monitored by ‘‘Multiple Flight Profile
Monitoring,’’ remove the HP compressor stage
1–4 shaft, P/N FK32580, before accumulating
5,580 standard duty cycles (SDC) since-new
or within 960 SDC from the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later.
Heavy Flight Profile Parts
(2) For RB211–Trent 800 engines being
monitored by ‘‘Heavy Flight Profile,’’ remove
the HP compressor stage 1–4 shaft, P/N
FK32580, before accumulating 5,280 flight
cycles since new or within 860 flight cycles
from the effective data of this AD, whichever
occurs later.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:53 Oct 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
FAA Differences
(f) We have found it necessary to not
incorporate the June 4, 2008 compliance date
which is in EASA AD 2010–0087, dated May
5, 2010 (corrected May 6, 2010). We also
updated the compliance times in the AD
based on a more recent assessment of the
unsafe condition.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(g) The Manager, Engine Certification
Office, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Related Information
(h) Refer to EASA Airworthiness Directive
2010–0087, dated May 5, 2010 (corrected
May 6, 2010), and Rolls-Royce plc Alert
Service Bulletin No. RB.211–72–AF825,
Revision 3, dated August 25, 2009 for related
information. Contact Rolls-Royce plc, P.O.
Box 31, Derby, England, DE248BJ; telephone:
011–44–1332–242424; fax: 011–44–1332–
245418, for a copy of this service
information.
(i) Contact James Lawrence, Aerospace
Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA,
Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; e-mail: james.lawrence@faa.gov;
telephone (781) 238–7176; fax (781) 238–
7199, for more information about this AD.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts on
September 27, 2010.
Peter A. White,
Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–24745 Filed 10–1–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Office
37 CFR Part 201
[Docket No. RM 2010–3]
Refunds Under the Cable Statutory
License
Copyright Office, Library of
Congress.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Office seeks comment on
whether a cable operator may receive
refunds in situations where it has failed
to pay for the carriage of distant signals
on a system–wide basis under the
Copyright Act, before it was amended to
allow a cable system to calculate its
royalty fees on a community–by–
community basis.
DATES: Written comments must be
received in the Office of the General
Counsel of the Copyright Office no later
than November 3, 2010. Reply
comments must be received in the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Office of the General Counsel of the
Copyright Office no later than
November 3, 2010.
ADDRESSES: If hand delivered by a
private party, an original and five copies
of a comment or reply comment should
be brought to the Library of Congress,
U.S. Copyright Office, Room 401, 101
Independence Avenue, SE, Washington,
DC 20559, between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m.
E.D.T. The envelope should be
addressed as follows: Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. Copyright Office.
If delivered by a commercial courier, an
original and five copies of a comment or
reply comment must be delivered to the
Congressional Courier Acceptance Site
(‘‘CCAS’’) located at 2nd and D Streets,
NE, Washington, DC between 8:30 a.m.
and 4 p.m. The envelope should be
addressed as follows: Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. Copyright Office,
LM 403, James Madison Building, 101
Independence Avenue, SE, Washington,
DC 20559. Please note that CCAS will
not accept delivery by means of
overnight delivery services such as
Federal Express, United Parcel Service
or DHL. If sent by mail (including
overnight delivery using U.S. Postal
Service Express Mail), an original and
five copies of a comment or reply
comment should be addressed to U.S.
Copyright Office, Copyright GC/I&R,
P.O. Box 70400, Washington, DC 20024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben
Golant, Assistant General Counsel, and
Tanya M. Sandros, Deputy General
Counsel, Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box
70400, Washington, DC 20024.
Telephone: (202) 707–8380. Telefax:
(202) 707–8366.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
111 of the Copyright Act (‘‘Act’’), title 17
of the United States Code (‘‘Section
111’’), provides cable operators with a
statutory license to retransmit to the
public a performance or display of a
work embodied in a primary
transmission made by a television
station licensed by the Federal
Communications Commission (‘‘FCC’’).
Cable systems that retransmit broadcast
signals in accordance with the
provisions governing the statutory
license set forth in Section 111 are
required to pay royalty fees to the
Copyright Office (‘‘Office’’). Payments
made under the cable statutory license
are remitted semi–annually to the Office
which invests the royalties in United
States Treasury securities pending
distribution of these funds to those
copyright owners who are entitled to
receive a share of the fees. Section 111
was recently amended by the Satellite
Television Extension and Localism Act
of 2010 (‘‘STELA’’), Pub. L. No. 111–175,
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
which made some changes to the design
of the royalty payment structure, as
noted below.
Cable operators have long paid
royalties for the retransmission of non–
network programming carried by distant
broadcast television signals under the
Section 111 statutory license. The
royalties are based on a percentage of
gross receipts generated by a cable
system. Under the licensing framework
established by Congress in 1976, cable
operators had to pay for the number of
distant signals carried, even though
some such signals were not received or
made available to every subscriber of a
particular cable system. Distant
broadcast signals that were not made
available on a system–wide basis, but on
which operators were required to pay
royalties, have been called ‘‘phantom
signals.’’ The Copyright Office has been
aware of the phantom signal situation
since at least 1983, see NCTA Petition
for Issuance of Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (filed August 22, 1983), but
the matter has only recently received
legislative attention.
Section 104 of STELA, entitled
‘‘Modifications to Cable System
Secondary Transmission Rights Under
Section 111,’’ directly addresses
phantom signals. Specifically, it amends
Section 111(d)(1) of the Copyright Act
which sets forth the methodology for a
cable operator to calculate royalty fees.
Cable operators now pay royalty fees
based on the communities where the
distant broadcast signal is actually
offered rather than on a broader cable
system basis as had been the case since
1978.
Specifically, STELA amends
subparagraph (C) of Section 111(d)(1) to
state that if a cable system provides
secondary transmissions of primary
transmitters to some, but not all,
communities served by the cable
system, the gross receipts and distant
signal equivalent values for each
secondary transmission may be derived
on the basis of the subscribers in those
communities where the cable system
actually provides such secondary
transmission. Where a cable system
calculates its royalties on a community–
specific (‘‘subscriber group’’) basis, the
operator applies the methodology in
Section 111(d)(1)(B)(ii)–(iv) to calculate
a separate royalty for each subscriber
group.
The legislation also amends
subparagraph (D) of Section 111(d)(1) to
state that:
A cable system that, on a statement
submitted before the date of the
enactment of the Satellite Television
Extension and Localism Act of 2010,
computed its royalty fee consistent with
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:53 Oct 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
the methodology under subparagraph
(C)(iii), or that amends a statement filed
before such date of enactment to
compute the royalty fee due using such
methodology, shall not be subject to an
action for infringement, or eligible for
any royalty refund or offset, arising out
of its use of such methodology on such
statement.
In other words, operators who have
heretofore based royalty payments on
subscriber group calculations will not face
liability for having done so. The amendments
also make clear that cable operators who
have paid for phantom signals in the past are
not entitled to now seek refunds or offsets for
those payments in any Statement of Account
period from 2010/1 onward. With regard to
offsets, cable operators cannot deduct the
amount they paid for a phantom signal prior
to STELA (e.g., 2009/1) from the royalties
they must pay in future Statement of Account
periods.
While STELA eliminates the
possibility of an action for infringement
against those cable systems that did not
pay for the carriage of phantom signals
historically, it did not alter how a cable
system was to calculate its royalty fee
obligation for carriage of these signals
under Section 111 prior to the passage
of this legislation. Nevertheless, certain
cable systems have concluded that the
language which prevents a copyright
owner from bringing an infringement
suit against a cable system which had
computed its past royalty fee obligation
in a manner consistent with the
methodology in new Section
111(d)(1)(D) also nullifies their
obligation to have paid for carriage of all
signals on a system–wide basis for the
accounting periods ending prior to
January 1, 2010. This approach
represents one interpretation of the
effect of the new provision, but it is not
the only one. A more literal reading of
the new statutory language is that it
only shields a cable system from an
infringement action and that it does not
erase a cable system’s obligation to have
paid for the carriage of each distant
signal on a system–wide basis prior to
the 2010/1 accounting period. Under the
latter interpretation, any underpayment
for carriage of a phantom signal still
remains even though the operator
cannot be sued for infringement under
Section 111.
We raise this issue because some
cable systems which, prior to the 2010/
1 accounting period, did not pay for
carriage of phantom signals are now
requesting refunds in cases where there
are other non–related issues. In these
cases, the cable system is just now
replying to a pending Licensing
Division initiated letter and is
requesting a refund for a reporting
mistake, e.g., identifying a local signal
as a distant signal for the 2009/2
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61117
accounting period (or an earlier
accounting period), even though,
according to the Copyright Office’s
examination of the statement of account,
the cable system still has an outstanding
royalty fee obligation for the
retransmission of a phantom signal
during the same period.
At this time, the Office is not inclined
to refund any fees for a non–phantom
reporting error in the case where the
operator has an outstanding balance
owed for the carriage of a phantom
signal without accounting for that
obligation too because, prior to STELA,
section 111 required that royalty fees be
calculated on a system–wide basis.
Moreover, the language in STELA
protecting a cable system from an
infringement suit for failure to make
these payments prior to the 2010/1
accounting period does not address a
cable system’s past obligation to have
paid the royalty fees owed by the cable
system at the time it filed the statement
of accounts. Historically, cable operators
have been expected to pay for each
distant signal on a system–wide basis
and when that did not occur, the Office
would write to the cable system noting
the underpayment and record it as an
outstanding obligation. Moreover, the
Office would not provide a refund for an
overpayment for misreporting a local
signal as a distant signal or similar
reporting error until the outstanding
obligation for carriage of the phantom
signal had been satisfied. Nothing in the
legislation appears to have altered this
approach. Nevertheless, in light of the
requests from certain cable operators,
we seek comment on whether to offset
the outstanding balance owed for
carriage of phantom signals before
providing a refund for an error
unrelated to phantom signals that
occurred in an accounting period prior
to 2010/1.
List of Subjects in 37 CFR 201
Copyright
Proposed Regulation
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Copyright Office proposes
to amend part 201 of title 37 of the Code
of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 201 – GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. The authority citation for part 201
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702
2. Amend section 201.17 by
redesignating paragraphs (m)(1) through
(4) as paragraphs (m)(2) through (5) and
adding a new paragraph (m)(1) to read
as follows:
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
61118
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
§ 201.17 Statements of Account
covering compulsory licenses for
secondary transmissions by cable
systems.
*
*
*
*
(m) Corrections, supplemental
payments and refunds.
(1) Royalty fee obligations under 17
U.S.C. 111 prior to the effective date of
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:53 Oct 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
the Satellite Television Extension and
Localism Act of 2010, Pub.L. No. 111–
175 are determined based on carriage of
each distant signal on a system–wide
basis. Refunds for an overpayment of
royalty fees for an accounting period
prior to January 1, 2010, shall be made
only when all outstanding royalty fee
obligations have been met, including
PO 00000
those for carriage of each distant signal
on a system–wide basis.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: September 28, 2010
Tanya Sandros,
Deputy General Counsel,
U.S. Copyright Office.
[FR Doc. 2010–24779 Filed 10–1–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–30–S
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 191 (Monday, October 4, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61116-61118]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24779]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Office
37 CFR Part 201
[Docket No. RM 2010-3]
Refunds Under the Cable Statutory License
AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of Congress.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office seeks comment on whether a cable operator may
receive refunds in situations where it has failed to pay for the
carriage of distant signals on a system-wide basis under the Copyright
Act, before it was amended to allow a cable system to calculate its
royalty fees on a community-by-community basis.
DATES: Written comments must be received in the Office of the General
Counsel of the Copyright Office no later than November 3, 2010. Reply
comments must be received in the Office of the General Counsel of the
Copyright Office no later than November 3, 2010.
ADDRESSES: If hand delivered by a private party, an original and five
copies of a comment or reply comment should be brought to the Library
of Congress, U.S. Copyright Office, Room 401, 101 Independence Avenue,
SE, Washington, DC 20559, between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. E.D.T. The
envelope should be addressed as follows: Office of the General Counsel,
U.S. Copyright Office. If delivered by a commercial courier, an
original and five copies of a comment or reply comment must be
delivered to the Congressional Courier Acceptance Site (``CCAS'')
located at 2nd and D Streets, NE, Washington, DC between 8:30 a.m. and
4 p.m. The envelope should be addressed as follows: Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. Copyright Office, LM 403, James Madison Building,
101 Independence Avenue, SE, Washington, DC 20559. Please note that
CCAS will not accept delivery by means of overnight delivery services
such as Federal Express, United Parcel Service or DHL. If sent by mail
(including overnight delivery using U.S. Postal Service Express Mail),
an original and five copies of a comment or reply comment should be
addressed to U.S. Copyright Office, Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box 70400,
Washington, DC 20024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Golant, Assistant General Counsel,
and Tanya M. Sandros, Deputy General Counsel, Copyright GC/I&R, P.O.
Box 70400, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 707-8380. Telefax:
(202) 707-8366.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 111 of the Copyright Act (``Act''),
title 17 of the United States Code (``Section 111''), provides cable
operators with a statutory license to retransmit to the public a
performance or display of a work embodied in a primary transmission
made by a television station licensed by the Federal Communications
Commission (``FCC''). Cable systems that retransmit broadcast signals
in accordance with the provisions governing the statutory license set
forth in Section 111 are required to pay royalty fees to the Copyright
Office (``Office''). Payments made under the cable statutory license
are remitted semi-annually to the Office which invests the royalties in
United States Treasury securities pending distribution of these funds
to those copyright owners who are entitled to receive a share of the
fees. Section 111 was recently amended by the Satellite Television
Extension and Localism Act of 2010 (``STELA''), Pub. L. No. 111-175,
[[Page 61117]]
which made some changes to the design of the royalty payment structure,
as noted below.
Cable operators have long paid royalties for the retransmission of
non-network programming carried by distant broadcast television signals
under the Section 111 statutory license. The royalties are based on a
percentage of gross receipts generated by a cable system. Under the
licensing framework established by Congress in 1976, cable operators
had to pay for the number of distant signals carried, even though some
such signals were not received or made available to every subscriber of
a particular cable system. Distant broadcast signals that were not made
available on a system-wide basis, but on which operators were required
to pay royalties, have been called ``phantom signals.'' The Copyright
Office has been aware of the phantom signal situation since at least
1983, see NCTA Petition for Issuance of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(filed August 22, 1983), but the matter has only recently received
legislative attention.
Section 104 of STELA, entitled ``Modifications to Cable System
Secondary Transmission Rights Under Section 111,'' directly addresses
phantom signals. Specifically, it amends Section 111(d)(1) of the
Copyright Act which sets forth the methodology for a cable operator to
calculate royalty fees. Cable operators now pay royalty fees based on
the communities where the distant broadcast signal is actually offered
rather than on a broader cable system basis as had been the case since
1978.
Specifically, STELA amends subparagraph (C) of Section 111(d)(1) to
state that if a cable system provides secondary transmissions of
primary transmitters to some, but not all, communities served by the
cable system, the gross receipts and distant signal equivalent values
for each secondary transmission may be derived on the basis of the
subscribers in those communities where the cable system actually
provides such secondary transmission. Where a cable system calculates
its royalties on a community-specific (``subscriber group'') basis, the
operator applies the methodology in Section 111(d)(1)(B)(ii)-(iv) to
calculate a separate royalty for each subscriber group.
The legislation also amends subparagraph (D) of Section 111(d)(1)
to state that:
A cable system that, on a statement submitted before the date
of the enactment of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism
Act of 2010, computed its royalty fee consistent with the
methodology under subparagraph (C)(iii), or that amends a statement
filed before such date of enactment to compute the royalty fee due
using such methodology, shall not be subject to an action for
infringement, or eligible for any royalty refund or offset, arising
out of its use of such methodology on such statement.
In other words, operators who have heretofore based royalty payments
on subscriber group calculations will not face liability for having
done so. The amendments also make clear that cable operators who
have paid for phantom signals in the past are not entitled to now
seek refunds or offsets for those payments in any Statement of
Account period from 2010/1 onward. With regard to offsets, cable
operators cannot deduct the amount they paid for a phantom signal
prior to STELA (e.g., 2009/1) from the royalties they must pay in
future Statement of Account periods.
While STELA eliminates the possibility of an action for
infringement against those cable systems that did not pay for the
carriage of phantom signals historically, it did not alter how a cable
system was to calculate its royalty fee obligation for carriage of
these signals under Section 111 prior to the passage of this
legislation. Nevertheless, certain cable systems have concluded that
the language which prevents a copyright owner from bringing an
infringement suit against a cable system which had computed its past
royalty fee obligation in a manner consistent with the methodology in
new Section 111(d)(1)(D) also nullifies their obligation to have paid
for carriage of all signals on a system-wide basis for the accounting
periods ending prior to January 1, 2010. This approach represents one
interpretation of the effect of the new provision, but it is not the
only one. A more literal reading of the new statutory language is that
it only shields a cable system from an infringement action and that it
does not erase a cable system's obligation to have paid for the
carriage of each distant signal on a system-wide basis prior to the
2010/1 accounting period. Under the latter interpretation, any
underpayment for carriage of a phantom signal still remains even though
the operator cannot be sued for infringement under Section 111.
We raise this issue because some cable systems which, prior to the
2010/1 accounting period, did not pay for carriage of phantom signals
are now requesting refunds in cases where there are other non-related
issues. In these cases, the cable system is just now replying to a
pending Licensing Division initiated letter and is requesting a refund
for a reporting mistake, e.g., identifying a local signal as a distant
signal for the 2009/2 accounting period (or an earlier accounting
period), even though, according to the Copyright Office's examination
of the statement of account, the cable system still has an outstanding
royalty fee obligation for the retransmission of a phantom signal
during the same period.
At this time, the Office is not inclined to refund any fees for a
non-phantom reporting error in the case where the operator has an
outstanding balance owed for the carriage of a phantom signal without
accounting for that obligation too because, prior to STELA, section 111
required that royalty fees be calculated on a system-wide basis.
Moreover, the language in STELA protecting a cable system from an
infringement suit for failure to make these payments prior to the 2010/
1 accounting period does not address a cable system's past obligation
to have paid the royalty fees owed by the cable system at the time it
filed the statement of accounts. Historically, cable operators have
been expected to pay for each distant signal on a system-wide basis and
when that did not occur, the Office would write to the cable system
noting the underpayment and record it as an outstanding obligation.
Moreover, the Office would not provide a refund for an overpayment for
misreporting a local signal as a distant signal or similar reporting
error until the outstanding obligation for carriage of the phantom
signal had been satisfied. Nothing in the legislation appears to have
altered this approach. Nevertheless, in light of the requests from
certain cable operators, we seek comment on whether to offset the
outstanding balance owed for carriage of phantom signals before
providing a refund for an error unrelated to phantom signals that
occurred in an accounting period prior to 2010/1.
List of Subjects in 37 CFR 201
Copyright
Proposed Regulation
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Copyright Office
proposes to amend part 201 of title 37 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 201 - GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. The authority citation for part 201 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702
2. Amend section 201.17 by redesignating paragraphs (m)(1) through
(4) as paragraphs (m)(2) through (5) and adding a new paragraph (m)(1)
to read as follows:
[[Page 61118]]
Sec. 201.17 Statements of Account covering compulsory licenses for
secondary transmissions by cable systems.
* * * * *
(m) Corrections, supplemental payments and refunds.
(1) Royalty fee obligations under 17 U.S.C. 111 prior to the
effective date of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act
of 2010, Pub.L. No. 111-175 are determined based on carriage of each
distant signal on a system-wide basis. Refunds for an overpayment of
royalty fees for an accounting period prior to January 1, 2010, shall
be made only when all outstanding royalty fee obligations have been
met, including those for carriage of each distant signal on a system-
wide basis.
* * * * *
Dated: September 28, 2010
Tanya Sandros,
Deputy General Counsel,
U.S. Copyright Office.
[FR Doc. 2010-24779 Filed 10-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410-30-S