^** [The letters from representatives of the United States, the Republic of Korea, Canada, Japan, and Australia, requesting Security Council consideration ofthe destruction of the Korean Air Lines aircraft, are arranged on pages 1109-1113 in chronological order. Excerpts from the Security Council Provisional Verbatim Records appear at page 1114, and the Revised Draft Resolution, vetoed by the U.S.S.R., appears at page 1148.]

^* [Reproduced from U.N.Security Council Document S/PV.2470 of September 2. 1983.

^* [The T.C.A.O. Resolution of June4,1973

^* [Reproduced from U.N. Security Council Document S/PV.2471 of September 6, 1983, and S/PV.2471/Corr.1 of September 19, 1983.]

^* [Reproduced from U.N. Security Council Document S/PV.2472 of September 6, 1983.]

^* [Reproduced at I.L.M. page 1055.]

^* [Reproduced from U.N. Security Council Document S/PV.2476 of September 12, 1983.]

^* [The recorded vote appears at page 1144.]

^* [The International Civil Aviation Organization, in an ExtraordinarySession of the Council (September 15-16, 1983), considered the incident which occurred on September 1, 1983, to the Korean Air Lines Flight 007. Two resolutions were adopted by the Council on September 16, 1983. They are attached to the letter of October 5, 1983, from the I.C.A.O. Secretary General to the 151 I.C.A.O. Member States. On October 1, 1983, the Assembly (24th Session) adopted Resolution A24-5 Which endorsed the Council Resolutions and Decisions taken at the Extraordinary Session and urged all Member States to co-operate fully in their implementation. The Assembly Resolution was adopted by a vote of 65 in favor to 10 against, with 26 abstentions.

[Provisions of the Chicago Convention, referred to in the Council Resolution at I.L.M. page 1152, have been reproduced beginning at I.L.M. page 1153.

[On October 14, 1983, the Council considered the future course of action for the Amendment t o the Chicago Convention and decided to convene an Extraordinary Session of the Assembly commencing on April 24, 1984, for a maximum duration of three weeks.]

^* [The Resolution in Appendix A was adopted on September 16, 1983, by a vote of 26 in favor (Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Colomb i a , Denmark, Egypt, El Salvador, France, Federal Republic of Germany, Indonesia, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Madagascar, Mexico, Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Senegal, Spain, Uganda, United Kingdom, United Republic of Cameroon, United States, Venezuela) to 2 against (Czechos lovakia, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics), with 3 abstentions (Algeria, China, India). Iraq and Lebanon were absent at the time of the vote .]

^* [The Resolution in Appendix B was adopted on September 16, 1983, by a vote of 6 in favor (Colombia, France, Federal Republic of Germany, Madagascar, Senegal, United Republic of Cameroon) to 4 against (Australia, Jamaica, Netherlands, United States), with 17 abstentions (Algeria, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, Denmark, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Nigeria, Pakistan, Spain, Uganda, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom, Venezuela ). Czechoslovakia , Egypt, El Salvador , Iraq, Lebanon, and Mexico were absent at the time of the vote.]

^** [The text of Paragraph 2.13 of Annex 11 appears at I.L.M.page1153.]

^*** [The text of Annex 2 of the Chicago Convention appears at I.L.M. page1154.]

^* [Reproduced from the text of Annex 11, Paragraph 2.13 in force at the time of the incident. By Amendment 30, adopted by the Council on March 16, 1983, and applicable on November 24, 1983, this Paragraph has been renumbered as Paragraph 2.14.]

^* [Reproduced from the text of Annex 2 (Seventh Edition - July 1981) and includes Amendment 24. The dates of applicability appear at the bottom of each page. Appendix D on unmanned free balloons has not been reproduced.

[A supplement to Annex 2 contains three lists of Contracting States!

(1) Those that have notified I.C.A.O. that no differences exist between their national regulations and practices and the standards of Annex 2;

(2) Those from which no information has been received with respect to Annex 2; and (3) Those that have notified I.C.A.O. of differences between their national regulations and practices and the standards of Annex 2. These lists have been reproduced at I.L.M. pages 1188-89.]

^* As defined in Annex 8.

^* Unless a higher plane of division is prescribed on the basis of regional air navigation agreements or by the appropriate ATS authority.

^** When so prescribed by the appropriate ATS authority.

^*** Except that helicopters may operate with a flight visibility below 1.5 km (1 mile) if manoeuvred at a speed that will give adequate opportunity to observe other traffic or any obstructions in lime to avoid collision.

^* Clearances to land and to taxi will be given in due course.

^* Except when, on the basis of regional air navigation agreements, a modified table of cruising levels based on a nominal vertical separation minimum qfiess than 600 metres (2 000 feet) but not less than 300 metres (1 OOOfeeO is prescribed for use, under specified conditions, by aircraft operating above FL 290 within designated portions of the airspace.

^** Magnetic track, or in polar areas at latitudes higher than 70 degrees and within such extensions to those areas as may be prescribed by the appropriate A TS authorities, grid tracks as determined by a network of lines parallel to the Greenwich Meridian superimposed on a polar stenographic chart in which the direction towards the North Pole is employed as the Grid North.

^*** Except where, on the basis of regional air navigation agreements, from 090 to 269 degrees and from 270 to 089 degrees is prescribed to accommodate predominant traffic directions and appropriate transition procedures to be associated therewith are specified.

^* [Reproduced from pages 5 and 6 of Amendment No. 1 t o the Supplement to Annex 2 (Sixth Edition) , dated January 31, 1980.]

^Ø Comments only.

^* [The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics noted that with regard to Chapter 3, Paragraph 3.5.1, Moscow time, corresponding to the 30^th meridian plus one hour, is used for flights on domestic airways.]

^* [The following countries have prepared diplomatic notes submitted to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics: Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, the United Kingdom (also on behalf of Hong Kong), and the United States.

[The Canadian Note of September 8, 1983, the Japanese Note of September 14, 1983, the Thai Aide Memoire of September 5, 1983, and the United States Notes of September 16 and September 12, including the Korean Note, have been obtained from the respective embassies in Washington, D.C. and the U.S. Department of State. They are reproduced on I.L.M. pages 1190-1198.]

^* [The documents reproduced in this section are not exhaustive of national actions taken in response to the destruction of the Korean Air Lines aircraft. They are reproduced as examples of national action.

[The action taken by the International Federation of Air Line Pilots is reproduced at I.L.M. page 1218.]

^** [Reproduced from the text provided to International Legal Materials by the Embassy of Canada at Washington, D.C. The statement was made in Ottawa on September 5, 1983.]

^* [The statement of September 9, 1983, is followed by a press release September 14, 1983, announcing the suspension of flights between apan and the Soviet Union and circulating the Japanese Cabinet Undertanding of September 13 and the Resolution adopted by the Japanese iet on September 12, 1983.]

^* [The President's statement of September 5, 1983, is reproduced from Current Policy No. 507, published by the U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Public Affairs. The bilateral agreement for cooperation in the field of transportation which will not be renewed by the United States appears at 12 I.L.M. 910 (1973). The Civil Aeronautics Board Orders concerning Aeroflot appear at I.L.M. page 1208-1214. The Joint Resolution passed by the U.S. Congress appears at page 1216. The joint statement issued by the Governors of the States of New Jersey and New York denying permission to land Soviet diplomats at Newark or Kennedy airports appears at I.L.M. page 1215.]

^1/ We have appended a copy of the letter to this order.

^* [Order 83-9-43, Order to Show Cause, and Order 83-9-58 at I.L.M. page 1213 have been reproduced from the texts provided by the Civil Aeronautics Board.]

^2/ The conditions would be deemed as having been incorporated by reference into the operating authorization of any U.S. air carrier not operating pursuant to a certificate. Accordingly, it would also apply to U.S. air carriers operating pursuant to exemption authority.

^3/ Since provision is made for the filing of comments to this order, petitions for reconsideration will not be entertained.

^1/ This Order was submitted to the President on September 12, 1983. We received notification that the President did not intend to disapprove the Board's action on September 12, 1983.

^* [Reproduced from the Press Release issued by the State of New York, cecutive Chamber.]

^* [Reproduced from the Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, Volume 19, No. 37 (September 19, 1983), p. 1266.]

^* [Reproduced from the Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, Volume 19, No. 39 (October 3, 1983), p.1342.]

^* [The Joint Resolution was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives by a vote of 416 in favor to none against on September 14, 1983 The Senate passed it by a vote of 95 in favor to none against on September 15, 1983.]

^* [Reproduced from the documents provided to International Legal Materials by the International Federation of Air Line Pilots Associations. The Member Associations of Denmark, Finland, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Spa Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom carried out the ban which started on September 12.. The ban was suspended on October 3, 1983. The statement announcing the suspension and providing the Federation 's reasons appears a t I.L.M. page 1220.]