68884 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 227 / Friday, November 26, 2004 / Notices 

identify EFH, establish HAPCs, and to 

the extent practicable prevent adverse 

impacts of fishing activities on coral in 

HAPCs.

DATES: The public hearing will be held 

December 7, 2004, beginning at 6 p.m. 

and concluding not later than 9 p.m. 

Public comments received by mail or email that are received in the Council 

office by 5 p.m., December 8, 2004, will 

be presented to the Council.

ADDRESSES: The public hearing will be 

held at the DoubleTree Guest Suites 

Tampa Bay, 3050 North Rocky Point 

Drive West, Tampa, FL 33607 Phone: 

(813) 888–8800.

Send written comments to: Gulf of 

Mexico Fishery Management Council, 

3018 U.S. Highway 301, North, Suite 

1000, Tampa, FL 33619.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick 

Leard, Deputy Executive Director, Gulf 

of Mexico Fishery Management Council; 

telephone: (813) 228–2815.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Following 

the judicial decision in American 

Oceans Campaign v. Daley (Civil Action 

No. 99–982), NOAA Fisheries and the 

Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management 

Council (Council) prepared a draft 

‘‘Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

for the Generic Essential Fish Habitat 

(EFH) Amendment to the Following 

Fishery Management Plans of the Gulf 

of Mexico: Shrimp, Red Drum, Reef fish, 

Stone Crab, Coral and Coral Reef in the 

Gulf of Mexico and Spiny Lobster and 

the Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources 

of the Gulf of Mexico and South 

Atlantic.’’ The draft EIS analyzes within 

each fishery a range of potential 

alternatives to: (1) describe and identify 

essential fish habitat for each fishery; (2) 

identify other actions to encourage the 

conservation and enhancement of such 

EFH; and (3) identify measures to 

minimize to the extent practicable any 

adverse effects of fishing on such EFH. 

Based on this EIS, the Council has 

subsequently developed ‘‘Draft 

Amendment 3 for Addressing EFH 

Requirements, Habitat Areas of 

Particular Concern (HAPCs), and 

Adverse Effects of Fishing in the 

Following Fishery Management Plans of 

the Gulf of Mexico: Shrimp, Red Drum, 

Reef fish, Stone Crab, Coral and Coral 

Reef in the Gulf of Mexico and Spiny 

Lobster and the Coastal Migratory 

Pelagic Resources of the Gulf of Mexico 

and South Atlantic.’’ The Amendment 

contains proposed alternatives to further 

identify EFH, establish HAPCs, and to 

the extent practicable prevent adverse 

impacts of fishing activities on coral in 

HAPCs.

This meeting is physically accessible 

to people with disabilities. Requests for 

sign language interpretation or other 

auxiliary aids should be directed to 

Dawn Aring at the Council (see 

ADDRESSES) by November 30, 2004.

Dated: November 19, 2004.

Alan D. Risenhoover,

Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. E4–3330 Filed 11–24–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S

COMMITTEE FOR THE 

IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE 

AGREEMENTS

Adjustment of Import Limits for Certain 

Man-Made Fiber Textile Products 

Produced or Manufactured in Pakistan

November 22, 2004.

AGENCY: Committee for the 

Implementation of Textile Agreements 

(CITA).

ACTION: Issuing a directive to the 

Commissioner, Bureau of Customs and 

Border Protection adjusting limits.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 26, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ross 

Arnold, International Trade Specialist, 

Office of Textiles and Apparel, U.S. 

Department of Commerce, (202) 482–

4212. For information on the quota 

status of these limits, refer to the Bureau 

of Customs and Border Protection 

website (http://www.cbp.gov), or call 

(202) 344-2650. For information on 

embargoes and quota re-openings, refer 

to the Office of Textiles and Apparel 

website at http://otexa.ita.doc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority: Section 204 of the Agricultural 

Act of 1956, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1854); 

Executive Order 11651 of March 3, 1972, as 

amended.

The current limit for Category 666-S 

is being increased for the partial 

cancellation of special shift, reducing 

the limit for 666-P to account for the 

return of the special shift to 666-S.

A description of the textile and 

apparel categories in terms of HTS 

numbers is available in the 

CORRELATION: Textile and Apparel 

Categories with the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (see 

Federal Register notice 69 FR 4926, 

published on February 2, 2004). Also 

see 68 FR 68599, published on 

December 9, 2003.

D. Michael Hutchinson,

Acting Chairman, Committee for the 

Implementation of Textile Agreements.

Committee for the Implementation of Textile 

Agreements

November 22, 2004.

Commissioner,

Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, 

Washington, DC 20229.

Dear Commissioner: This directive 

amends, but does not cancel, the directive 

issued to you on December 3, 2003, by the 

Chairman, Committee for the Implementation 

of Textile Agreements. That directive 

concerns imports of certain cotton and manmade fiber textile products produced or 

manufactured in Pakistan and exported 

during the twelve-month period which began 

on January 1, 2004 and extends through 

December 31, 2004.

Effective on November 26, 2004, you are 

directed to adjust the limits for the following 

categories, as provided for under the Uruguay 

Round Agreement on Textiles and Clothing:

Category Twelve-month restraint 

limit 1

Specific limits

666–P2 .................... 1,379,684 kilograms.

666–S3 .................... 7,107,067 kilograms.

1The limits have not been adjusted to account for any imports exported after December 

31, 2003. 2 Category 666–P: only HTS numbers 

6302.22.1010, 6302.22.1020, 6302.22.2010, 

6302.32.1010, 6302.32.1020, 6302.32.2010 

and 6302.32.2020. 3 Category 666–S: only HTS numbers 

6302.22.1030, 6302.22.1040, 6302.22.2020, 

6302.32.1030, 6302.32.1040, 6302.32.2030 

and 6302.32.2040.

The Committee for the Implementation of 

Textile Agreements has determined that 

these actions fall within the foreign affairs 

exception of the rulemaking provisions of 5 

U.S.C. 553(a)(1).

Sincerely,

D. Michael Hutchinson,

Acting Chairman, Committee for the 

Implementation of Textile Agreements.

[FR Doc. 04–26305 Filed 11–24–04 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

Civil Penalties; Notice of Adjusted 

Maximum Amounts

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of adjusted maximum 

civil penalty amounts. 

SUMMARY: In 1990 Congress enacted 

statutory amendments that provided for 

periodic adjustments to the maximum 

civil penalty amounts authorized under 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 227 / Friday, November 26, 2004 / Notices 68885

the Consumer Product Safety Act, the 

Federal Hazardous Substances Act, and 

the Flammable Fabrics Act. As 

calculated in accordance with the 

amendments, the new amounts are 

$8,000 for each violation and $1,825,000 

for any related series of violations.

DATES: The new amounts will become 

effective on January 1, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Leonard H. Goldstein, Attorney, Office 

of the General Counsel, CPSC, 

Washington, DC 20207; telephone (301) 

504–7635; e-mail lgoldstein@cpsc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Consumer Product Safety Improvements 

Act of 1990 (Improvements Act), Pub. L. 

101–608, 104 Stat. 3110 (November 16, 

1990), amended the Consumer Product 

Safety Act (CPSA), the Federal 

Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA), and 

the Flammable Fabrics Act (FFA). First, 

the Improvements Act added civil 

penalty authority to the FHSA and FFA, 

which previously contained only 

criminal penalties. 15 U.S.C. 1264(c) 

and 1194(e). Second, the Improvements 

Act increased the maximum civil 

penalty amounts applicable to civil 

penalties under the CPSA, and set the 

same maximum amounts for the newlycreated FHSA and FFA civil penalties. 

15 U.S.C. 2069(a), 1264(c)(1), and 

1194(e)(1). 

Third, the Improvements Act directed 

the Commission to adjust the maximum 

civil penalty amounts periodically for 

inflation: 

(A) The maximum penalty amounts 

authorized in paragraph (1) shall be 

adjusted for inflation as provided in this 

paragraph. 

(B) Not later than December 1, 1994, 

and December 1 of each fifth calendar 

year thereafter, the Commission shall 

prescribe and publish in the Federal 

Register a schedule of maximum 

authorized penalties that shall apply for 

violations that occur after January 1 of 

the year immediately following such 

publication. 

(C) The schedule of maximum 

authorized penalties shall be prescribed 

by increasing each of the amounts 

referred to in paragraph (1) by the costof-living adjustment for the preceding 

five years. Any increase determined 

under the preceding sentence shall be 

rounded to—

(i) In the case of penalties greater than 

$1,000 but less than or equal to $10,000, 

the nearest multiple of $1,000; 

(ii) In the case of penalties greater 

than $10,000 but less than or equal to 

$100,000, the nearest multiple of 

$5,000; 

(iii) In the case of penalties greater 

than $100,000 but less than or equal to 

$200,000, the nearest multiple of 

$10,000; and 

(iv) In the case of penalties greater 

than $200,000, the nearest multiple of 

$25,000. 

(D) For purposes of this subsection: 

(i) The term ‘‘Consumer Price Index’’

means the Consumer Price Index for allurban consumers, published by the 

Department of Labor. 

(ii) The term ‘‘cost-of-living 

adjustment for the preceding five years’’

means the percentage by which—

(I) The Consumer Price Index for the 

month of June of the calendar year 

preceding the adjustment; exceeds 

(II) The Consumer Price Index for the 

month of June preceding the date on 

which the maximum authorized penalty 

was last adjusted. 15 U.S.C. 2069(a)(3), 

1264(c)(6), and 1194(e)(5). 

The Commission’s Directorate for 

Economics has calculated that the costof-living adjustment increases the 

maximum civil penalty amounts to 

$7,737 for each violation and to 

$1,823,736 for any related series of 

violations. Rounding off these numbers 

in accordance with the statutory 

directions, the adjusted maximum 

amounts are $8,000 for each violation 

and $1,825,000 for any related series of 

violations. 

These new amounts will apply to 

violations that occur after January 1, 

2005.

Dated: November 19, 2004. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission.

[FR Doc. 04–26088 Filed 11–24–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force 

Active Duty Service Determinations for 

Civilians or Contractual Groups 

On November 4, 2004, the Secretary 

of the Air Force, acting as Executive 

Agent of the Secretary of Defense, 

determined that the service of the group 

known as ‘‘U.S. Civil Servants on 

Temporary Duty at Long Binh, Republic 

of Vietnam From about April 4, 1972, to 

about April 27, 1972, to Design a 

Commercial Carrier Commodity Tariff 

and Shipment Control System’’ shall not 

be considered ‘‘active duty’’ for 

purposes of all laws administered by the 

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

James D. Johnston at the Secretary of the 

Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC), 

1535 Command Drive, EE Wing, 3d Fl., 

Andrews AFB, MD 20762–7002.

Albert Bodnar, 

Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 04–26182 Filed 11–24–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–05–P

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force 

Notice of Intent

AGENCY: Air Combat Command, United 

States Air Force.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: The United States Air Force is 

issuing this Notice of Intent (NOI) to 

announce that it is conducting an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

to describe the proposed action for the 

Airspace Training Initiative. The 

proposed action would enhance the F–

16 aircraft training mission for Shaw 

AFB and McEntire Air National Guard 

Station (ANGS). This NOI describes the 

Air Force’s scoping process and 

identifies the Air Force’s point of 

contact. 

The Air Force conducted a series of 

scoping meetings in South Carolina and 

Georgia during September 2004 to 

receive public input on alternatives, 

concerns, and issues to be addressed in 

an environmental analysis. Based on the 

input received from the scoping 

meetings, the Air Force has determined 

that an EIS is required. The EIS will 

consider environmental issues 

identified by the public and agencies 

during the September meetings and 

received from correspondence during 

the scoping process. The Air Force has 

currently identified changes to airspace 

and aircraft noise as potential key issue 

requiring detailed analysis in the EIS. 

No additional scoping meetings are 

scheduled. However, based upon 

interest expressed during community 

outreach scoping meetings, the public 

comment period has been extended 

through December 17, 2004. All written 

comments on the scope of alternatives 

and impacts received, as a result of the 

scoping meetings, or during the 

extended scoping period will be 

considered in the preparation of this 

EIS. 

The proposed EIS will be prepared in 

compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4347), the Council 

on Environmental Quality NEPA 

Regulations (40 CFR 1500–1508); and 

the Air Force’s Environmental Impact 

Analysis Process (EIAP) (Air Force 

Instruction 32–7061 as promulgated at