It may have been -- I missed it, if so.

It does -- I enjoy cave sites.

That wraps up the new nominations for this session. There were 25 new inscriptions and one newly-formulated/extended site (The Colonial Transisthmian Route of Panamá which added new sites to the existing Archaeological Site of Panamá Viejo and Historic District of Panamá).

Now we move onto boundary modifications.

Thanks Colvin for being the Chair / Vice Chair of this Session!

I am not going to cover the minor boundary modifications...

Blanket approval given to six sites. No amendments.

Bulgaria wants to thank the advisory bodies for the process of clarification on the boundary modifications to Bulgarian properties (Boyana Church, Madara Rider, and the Thracian Tomb of Sveshtari).

Proposed boundary modification for Galapagos Islands includes a new marine reserve. IUCN would rather have this submitted as a significant boundary modification rather than a minor boundary modification, so that it can be properly evaluated.

The committee agrees.

Proposed boundary modification for the Rock Art in the Hail Region of Saudi Arabia. ICOMOS would like this modification to be sent back to the state party to include the Jabal Umm Sinman component in the buffer zone.

The committee agrees.

Proposed boundary modification for the Kakatiya Rudreshwara (Ramappa) Temple. ICOMOS recommends the minor modification of the inscribed property be approved, but wants the examination of the minor modification of the buffer zone be sent back to the state party (India) for more information.

The committee agrees.

Proposed boundary modifications for the Fortifications of Vauban. The buffer zones were originally deemed as too small and insignificant. The state party has expanded the buffer zones. ICOMOS wants to send the nomination back to the state party (France) to clearly set out the OUV of the buffer zones and to provide photographic and cartographic documentation.

The committee agrees.

Proposed boundary modification for Via Appia: Regina Viarum. New modification includes a sheep track that was part of the original Via Appia nomination. ICOMOS did not include it in the original inscription because they didn't believe it met OUV. They still don't believe OUV has been met, and don't think it should be added.

The committee agrees.

The committee seems to have little interest in these minor boundary modifications.

Proposed boundary modification for The Vineyard Landscape of Piedmont: Langhe-Roero and Monferrato to extend the buffer zone to improve the aesthetic value of the cultural landscape. ICOMOS recognizes the value of the extended buffer zone, but does not believe that proper documentation has been sent over, so they recommend referring the modification back to the state party (Italy) to expand on their documentation, addressing the value of the viewsheds, and how it will be protected, as well as providing maps.

The committee agrees.

This is going so much quicker!

Proposed boundary modification of The Historic Centre of Odesa. They would like to enlarge the buffer zone, as recommended by ICOMOS. However, ICOMOS believes the buffer zone is not sufficient, and would refer it to the state party (Ukraine) to extend the boundaries, address how the buffer zone will be managed, give consideration to development zones.

The committee agrees.

Proposed boundary modification for The Fortifications on the Caribbean Side of Panama: Portobelo-San Lorenzo. They would like to better define the boundaries of the buffer zones. While ICOMOS believes the boundaries for the properties of San Lorenzo and Portobelo are sufficient, but want further modifications for the buffer zones (evaluate impact of the buffer zone around San Lorenzo and improve boundaries around Portabelo). They recommend returning this to the state party.

The committee agrees.