Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 19, 2004 / Notices 61467

determination that an article should not 

be regulated under 7 CFR part 340. 

Paragraphs (b) and (c) of § 340.6 

describe the form that a petition for a 

determination of nonregulated status 

must take and the information that must 

be included in the petition. 

On November 19, 2003, APHIS 

received a petition (APHIS Petition 

Number 03–323–01p) from Monsanto 

Company of St. Louis, MO, and KWS 

SAAT AG of Einbeck, Germany 

(Monsanto/KWS), requesting a 

determination of nonregulated status 

under 7 CFR part 340 for sugar beet 

(Beta vulgaris ssp. vulgaris) designated 

as event H7–1, which has been 

genetically engineered for tolerance to 

the herbicide glyphosate. The 

Monsanto/KWS petition states that the 

subject sugar beet should not be 

regulated by APHIS because it does not 

present a plant pest risk. As described 

in the petition, sugar beet event H7–1 

has been genetically engineered to 

express a 5-enolpyruvyshikimate-3-

phosphate synthase protein from 

Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4 (CP4 

EPSPS), which confers tolerance to the 

herbicide glyphosate. Expression of the 

added genes is controlled in part by the 

35S promoter derived from the plant 

pathogen figwort mosaic virus. The 

Agrobacterium tumefaciens

transformation method was used to 

transfer the added genes into the KWS 

proprietary sugar beet line 3S0057. 

Sugar beet event H7–1 has been 

considered a regulated article under the 

regulations in 7 CFR part 340 because it 

contains gene sequences from plant 

pathogens. In the process of reviewing 

the notifications for field trials of the 

subject sugar beet, APHIS determined 

that the vectors and other elements were 

disarmed and that the trials, which were 

conducted under conditions of 

reproductive and physical confinement 

or isolation, would not present a risk of 

plant pest introduction or 

dissemination.

In § 403 of the Plant Protection Act (7 

U.S.C. 7701–7772), plant pest is defined 

as any living stage of any of the 

following that can directly or indirectly 

injure, cause damage to, or cause 

disease in any plant or plant product: A 

protozoan, a nonhuman animal, a 

parasitic plant, a bacterium, a fungus, a 

virus or viroid, an infectious agent or 

other pathogen, or any article similar to 

or allied with any of the foregoing. 

APHIS views this definition very 

broadly. The definition covers direct or 

indirect injury, disease, or damage not 

just to agricultural crops, but also to 

plants in general, for example, native 

species, as well as to organisms that 

may be beneficial to plants, for example, 

honeybees, rhizobia, etc. 

The U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is responsible for the 

regulation of pesticides under the 

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 

Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended (7 

U.S.C. 136 et seq.). FIFRA requires that 

all pesticides, including herbicides, be 

registered prior to distribution or sale, 

unless exempt by EPA regulation. In 

cases in which genetically modified 

plants allow for a new use of a pesticide 

or involve a different use pattern for the 

pesticide, EPA must approve the new or 

different use. Accordingly, EPA has 

granted a registration for the use of 

glyphosate on glyphosate-tolerant sugar 

beet. 

When the use of the pesticide on the 

genetically modified plant would result 

in an increase in the residues in a food 

or feed crop for which the pesticide is 

currently registered, or in new residues 

in a crop for which the pesticide is not 

currently registered, establishment of a 

new tolerance or a revision of the 

existing tolerance would be required. 

Residue tolerances for pesticides are 

established by EPA under the Federal 

Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 

as amended (21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.), and 

the Food and Drug Administration 

(FDA) enforces tolerances set by EPA 

under the FFDCA. EPA has determined 

that the existing residue tolerance for 

glyphosate-tolerant sugar beet is 

sufficient to support future use of 

glyphosate on event H7–1. 

FDA published a statement of policy 

on foods derived from new plant 

varieties in the Federal Register on May 

29, 1992 (57 FR 22984–23005). The FDA 

statement of policy includes a 

discussion of FDA’s authority for 

ensuring food safety under the FFDCA, 

and provides guidance to industry on 

the scientific considerations associated 

with the development of foods derived 

from new plant varieties, including 

those plants developed through the 

techniques of genetic engineering. 

Monsanto/KWS has begun consultation 

with FDA on the subject sugar beet 

event. 

To provide the public with 

documentation of APHIS’ review and 

analysis of the environmental impacts 

and plant pest risk associated with a 

proposed determination of nonregulated 

status for the Monsanto/KWS event H7–

1 sugar beet, an environmental 

assessment (EA) has been prepared. The 

EA was prepared in accordance with (1) 

The National Environmental Policy Act 

of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 

4321 et seq.), (2) regulations of the 

Council on Environmental Quality for 

implementing the procedural provisions 

of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), (3) 

USDA regulations implementing NEPA 

(7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS’ NEPA 

Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 

372). 

In accordance with § 340.6(d) of the 

regulations, we are publishing this 

notice to inform the public that APHIS 

will accept written comments regarding 

the petition for a determination of 

nonregulated status from interested 

persons for a period of 60 days from the 

date of this notice. We are also soliciting 

written comments from interested 

persons on the EA prepared to examine 

any environmental impacts of the 

proposed determination for the subject 

sugar beet event. The petition and the 

EA and any comments received are 

available for public review, and copies 

of the petition and the EA are available 

as indicated in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

notice. 

After the comment period closes, 

APHIS will review the data submitted 

by the petitioner, all written comments 

received during the comment period, 

and any other relevant information. 

After reviewing and evaluating the 

comments on the petition and the EA 

and other data and information, APHIS 

will furnish a response to the petitioner, 

either approving the petition in whole 

or in part, or denying the petition. 

APHIS will then publish a notice in the 

Federal Register announcing the 

regulatory status of the Monsanto/KWS 

glyphosate-tolerant sugar beet event H7–

1 and the availability of APHIS’ written 

decision.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622n and 7701–7772; 

31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.

Done in Washington, DC, this 14th day of 

October 2004. 

Kevin Shea, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. E4–2710 Filed 10–18–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service 

Madera County Resource Advisory 

Committee

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Resource Advisory 

Committee Meeting. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the authorities in 

the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 

1972 (Pub. L. 92–463) and under the 

secure Rural Schools and Community 

Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 

106–393) the Sierra National Forest’s 

61468 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 19, 2004 / Notices 

Resource Advisory Committee for 

Madera County will meet on Monday, 

October 18, 2004. The Madera Resource 

Advisory Committee will meet at the 

Forest Service Office, North Fork, CA 

93643. The purpose of the meeting is: 

new member orientation and review FY 

2004 RAC proposals.

DATES: The Madera Resource Advisory 

Committee meeting will be held 

Monday, October 18, 2004. The meeting 

will be held from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The Madera County RAC 

meeting will be held at the Forest 

Service Office, 57003 Road 225, North 

Fork, CA 93644.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dave Martin, U.S.D.A., Sierra National 

Forest, Bass Lake Ranger District, 57003 

Road 225, North Fork, CA 93643 (559) 

877–2218 ext. 3100; e-mail: 

dmartin05fs.fed.us.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda 

items to be covered include: (1) New 

member orientation and (2) review of 

FY 2004 RAC proposals.

Dated: October 11, 2004. 

David W. Martin, 

District Ranger, Bass Lake Ranger District.

[FR Doc. 04–23363 Filed 10–18–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–846] 

Brake Rotors From the People’s 

Republic of China: Notice of Initiation 

of Changed Circumstances Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of initiation of changed 

circumstances review. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

has received information sufficient to 

warrant initiation of a changed 

circumstances review of the 

antidumping order on brake rotors from 

the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). 

The review will be conducted to 

determine whether Shanxi Fengkun 

Foundry Ltd., Co. (‘‘Fengkun Foundry’’) 

is the successor-in-interest to Shanxi 

Fengkun Metallurgical Ltd., Co. 

(‘‘Fengkun Metallurgical’’).

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 19, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steve Winkates, Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–1904.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On April 17, 1997, the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

antidumping duty order on brake rotors 

from the PRC (62 FR 18740). On August 

27, 2004, Fengkun Foundry submitted 

information and documentation in 

support of its claim that it is the 

successor-in-interest to Fengkun 

Metallurgical and requested that the 

Department conduct a changedcircumstances review to determine 

whether Fengkun Foundry is the 

successor-in-interest to Fengkun 

Metallurgical and whether it should 

receive the same antidumping duty 

treatment as is accorded to Fengkun 

Metallurgical with respect to the subject 

merchandise. 

On September 7, 2004, we informed 

Fengkun Foundry that in order to 

further consider its August 27, 2004, 

request for a changed circumstances 

review, it was required to provide a 

response to the Department’s separate 

rates questionnaire for purposes of 

determining whether it was entitled to 

a separate rate (see September 7, 2004, 

memorandum from the team leader to 

the file, entitled ‘‘Telephone 

Conversation with Counsel for Fengkun 

Foundry and Fengkun Metallurgical). 

On September 14, 2004, Fengkun 

Foundry provided its response to the 

Department’s separate rates 

questionnaire. 

On September 14, 2004, the petitioner 

requested that the Department publish a 

separate notice of initiation and refrain 

from simultaneously issuing a 

preliminary finding because (1) it 

claimed that the data provided in the 

public version of Fengkun Foundry’s 

August 27, 2004, request did not 

provide the Department with sufficient 

information to conduct an expedited 

review; and (2) the petitioner was 

denied the ability to comment fully on 

Fengkun Foundry’s initiation request 

until it is granted access to the business 

proprietary data contained in Fengkun 

Foundry’s initiation request pursuant to 

an administrative protective order 

(‘‘APO’’). 

Scope of Review 

The products covered by this review 

are brake rotors made of gray cast iron, 

whether finished, semifinished, or 

unfinished, ranging in diameter from 8 

to 16 inches (20.32 to 40.64 centimeters) 

and in weight from 8 to 45 pounds (3.63 

to 20.41 kilograms). The size parameters 

(weight and dimension) of the brake 

rotors limit their use to the following 

types of motor vehicles: automobiles, 

all-terrain vehicles, vans, recreational 

vehicles under ‘‘one ton and a half,’’

and light trucks designated as ‘‘one ton 

and a half.’’

Finished brake rotors are those that 

are ready for sale and installation 

without any further operations. Semifinished rotors are those rotors which 

have undergone some drilling and on 

which the surface is not entirely 

smooth. Unfinished rotors are those 

which have undergone some grinding or 

turning. 

These brake rotors are for motor 

vehicles and do not contain in the 

casting a logo of an original equipment 

manufacturer (‘‘OEM’’) which produces 

vehicles sold in the United States (e.g., 

General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, 

Toyota, and Volvo). Brake rotors 

covered in this review are not certified 

by OEM producers of vehicles sold in 

the United States. The scope also 

includes composite brake rotors that are 

made of gray cast iron which contain a 

steel plate but otherwise meet the above 

criteria. Excluded from the scope of the 

review are brake rotors made of gray 

cast iron, whether finished, 

semifinished, or unfinished, with a 

diameter less than 8 inches or greater 

than 16 inches (less than 20.32 

centimeters or greater than 40.64 

centimeters) and a weight less than 8 

pounds or greater than 45 pounds (less 

than 3.63 kilograms or greater than 

20.41 kilograms).

Brake rotors are currently classifiable 

under subheading 8708.39.5010 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the 

HTSUS subheading is provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of the scope of this 

review is dispositive. 

Separate Rates 

In proceedings involving non-market 

economy (‘‘NME’’) countries, the 

Department begins with a rebuttable 

presumption that all companies within 

the country are subject to government 

control and thus should be assessed a 

single antidumping duty deposit rate. 

Based on information contained in its 

September 14, 2004, submission, 

Fengkun Foundry is registered in the 

PRC as a limited liability company 

owned by private individuals. Thus, a 

separate rates analysis is necessary to 

determine whether Fengkun Foundry is 

independent from government control 

(see Notice of Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Bicycles 

From the People’s Republic of China, 61 

FR 19026 (April 30, 1996)). 

To establish whether a firm is 

sufficiently independent from