77390 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 26, 2006 / Notices 

1printed plain weave fabrics of cotton, 85% or 

more cotton by weight, weighing over 100g/m2 but 

not more than 200 g/m2, of yarn number 42 or 

lower 

2printed plain weave fabrics of cotton, 85% or 

more cotton by weight, weighing over 100g/m2 but 

not more than 200g/m2, of yarn numbers 43-68 

2001) and Presidential Proclamation 

7912 (June 29, 2005), the President 

authorized CITA to consult with 

beneficiary sub-Saharan African 

countries and to determine which, if 

any, particular textile and apparel goods 

shall be treated as being handloomed, 

handmade, folklore articles, or ethnic 

printed fabrics. (66 FR 7271-72 and 70 

FR 37959, 37961 & 63) 

In a letter to the Commissioner of 

Customs dated January 18, 2001, the 

United States Trade Representative 

directed Customs to require that 

importers provide an appropriate export 

visa from a beneficiary sub-Saharan 

African country to obtain preferential 

treatment under section 112(a) of the 

AGOA (66 FR 7837). The first digit of 

the visa number corresponds to one of 

nine groupings of textile and apparel 

products that are eligible for preferential 

tariff treatment. Grouping ‘‘9’’ is 

reserved for handmade, handloomed, 

folklore articles, or ethnic printed 

fabrics. 

CITA has consulted with Tanzanian 

authorities and has previously 

determined that handloomed fabrics, 

handloomed articles (e.g., handloomed 

rugs, scarves, place mats, and 

tablecloths), handmade articles made 

from handloomed fabrics, and certain 

folklore articles are eligible for 

preferential treatment (69 FR 54268). 

This directive expands Tanzania’s 

existing Category 9 treatment to include 

certain ethnic printed fabrics described 

in Annex A to this notice, if produced 

in and exported from Tanzania. These 

goods are eligible for preferential tariff 

treatment under section 112(a) of the 

AGOA, as amended. In the letter 

published below, CITA directs the 

Commissioner of Customs and Border 

Protection to allow duty-free entry of 

such products under U.S. Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule subheading 9819.11.27 

if accompanied by an appropriate 

AGOA visa in grouping ‘‘9’’. 

Philip J. Martello, 

Acting Chairman, Committee for the 

Implementation of Textile Agreements. 

Committee for the Implementation of Textile 

Agreements 

December 18, 2006. 

Commissioner, 

Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, 

Washington, DC 20229. 

Dear Commissioner: The Committee for the 

Implementation of Textiles Agreements 

(‘‘CITA’’), pursuant to Sections 112(a) and 

(b)(6) of the African Growth and Opportunity 

Act (Title I of the Trade and Development 

Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-200) (‘‘AGOA’’), 

as amended by Section 7(c) of the AGOA 

Acceleration Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-274) 

(‘‘AGOA Acceleration Act’’) (19 U.S.C. §

3721(a) and (b)(6)), Executive Order No. 

13191 of January 17, 2001, and Presidential 

Proclamation 7912 of June 29, 2005, has 

determined, effective on January 10, 2007, 

that ethnic printed fabrics described in 

Annex A are eligible for duty-free treatment 

only if entered under subheading 9819.11.27 

and accompanied by a properly completed 

visa for product grouping ‘‘9’’, in accordance 

with the provisions of the Visa Arrangement 

between the Government of the United 

Republic of Tanzania and the Government of 

the United States Concerning Textile and 

Apparel Articles Claiming Preferential Tariff 

Treatment under Section 112 of the Trade 

and Development Act of 2000. After further 

consultations with Tanzanian authorities, 

CITA may determine that additional textile 

and apparel goods shall be treated as folklore 

articles or ethnic printed fabrics. 

Sincerely, 

Philip J. Martello, 

Acting Chairman, Committee for the 

Implementation of Textile Agreements. 

ANNEX A: Tanzanian Ethnic Printed 

Fabrics: the Khanga 

Each Khanga must meet all of the criteria 

listed below: 

A) selvedge on both edges 

B) width of less than 50 inches 

C) classifiable under subheading 

5208.52.30 1 or 5208.52.40 2 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States 

D) contains designs, symbols, and other 

characteristics of African prints normally 

produced for and sold in Africa by the 

piece (each fixed length measures 

approximately 3.35 meters long by 1.15 

meters wide). 

E) each design contains a two matching 

panels with center motifs, matching 

borders, and wording representing a 

saying in Swahili or other language. 

These panels are sold in a pair. 

F) made from fabric woven in the U.S. 

using U.S. yarn or woven in one or more 

eligible sub-Saharan beneficiary 

countries using U.S or African yarn 

G) printed, including waxed, in one or 

more eligible sub-Saharan beneficiary 

countries 

H) must be manufactured by one of the 

companies listed below: 

i. Urafiki - Tanzania China Friendship 

Textile Factory 

ii. Karibu Textile Mills 

iii. Lakhani Industries 

iv. Nida Industries (Formerly 

Sunguratex) 

v. African Pride 

vi. Morogoro Polyester 

vii. Mohamed Enterprises (Formerly 

Seifee Industry) 

viii. Musoma Textile Factory 

ix. Mwanza Textile Factory 

[FR Doc. E6–21992 Filed 12–22–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

[CPSC Docket No. 07–C0001] 

Black Dog Tavern Company, Inc., 

Provisional Acceptance of a 

Settlement Agreement and Order 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: It is the policy of the 

Commission to publish settlements 

which it provisionally accepts under the 

Consumer Product Safety Act in the 

Federal Register in accordance with the 

terms of 16 CFR 1118.20(e). Published 

below is a provisionally-accepted 

Settlement Agreement with Black Dog 

Tavern Company, Inc., containing a 

civil penalty of $50,000. 

DATES: Any interested person may ask 

the Commission not to accept this 

agreement or otherwise comment on its 

contents by filing a written request with 

the Office of the Secretary by January 

10, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to 

comment on this Settlement Agreement 

should send written comments to the 

Comment 07–C0001, Office of the 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, Washington, DC 20207. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Seth 

B. Popkin, Trial Attorney, Office of 

Compliance, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, Washington, DC 20207; 

telephone (301) 504–7612. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of 

the Agreement and Order appears 

below. 

Dated: December 18, 2006. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary. 

Settlement Agreement and Order 

1. In accordance with 16 CFR 1118.20, 

Black Dog Tavern Company, Inc. 

(‘‘BDT’’) and the staff (‘‘Staff’’) of the 

United States Consumer Product Safety 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) enter into 

this Settlement Agreement 

(‘‘Agreement’’). The Agreement and the 

incorporated attached (‘‘Order’’) settle 

the Staff’s allegations set forth below. 

Parties 

2. The Commission in an independent 

federal regulatory agency established 

pursuant to, and responsible for the 

enforcement of, the Consumer Product 

Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 2051–2084 

(‘‘CPSA’’). 

3. BDT is a corporation organized and 

existing under the laws of 

Massachusetts, with its principal offices 

located in Vineyard Haven, 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 26, 2006 / Notices 77391 

Massachusetts. At all times relevant 

hereto, BDT sold apparel and 

accessories. 

Staff Allegations 

4. From May 2004 through January 

2006, BDT sold approximately 9,700 

children’s hooded sweatshirts with 

drawstrings through the hoods, style 

numbers K086, K088, K090, K062, and 

K0639 (‘‘Drawstring Sweatshirts’’). 

5. The Drawstring Sweatshirts are 

‘‘consumer product(s),’’ and, at all times 

relevant hereto, BDT was a ‘‘retailer’’ of 

those consumer product(s), which were 

‘‘distributed in commerce,’’ as those 

terms are defined in CPSA sections 

3(a)(1), (6), (11), and (12), 15 U.S.C. 

2052(a)(1), (6), (11), and (12). 

6. Although BDT reported no 

incidents or injuries from the 

Drawstring Sweatshirts, the Drawstring 

Sweatshirts did not meet ASTM F1816–

97 and posed a strangulation hazard to 

children. 

7. On February 15, 2006, the 

Commission and BDT announced a 

recall of the Drawstring Sweatshirts, 

informing consumers that they should 

immediately remove the drawstrings to 

eliminate the hazard. The recall plan, in 

part, required BDT to remove the 

drawstrings from the 7,326 Drawstring 

Sweatshirts in its inventory. 

8. On May 19, 2006, the Commission 

posted on its website a letter from the 

Commission’s Director of the Office of 

Compliance to manufacturers, 

importers, and retailers of children’s 

upper outerwear. The letter urged them 

to make certain that all children’s upper 

outerwear sold in the Untied States 

complies with the ASTM standard. The 

letter stated that the Staff considers 

children’s upper outerwear with 

drawstrings at the hood or neck area to 

be defective and to present a substantial 

risk of injury to young children under 

Federal Hazardous Substances Act 

(‘‘FHSA’’) section 15(c), 15 U.S.C. 

1274(c). The letter also noted the 

CPSA’s section 15(b) reporting 

requirements. 

9. On August 29, 2006, CPSC 

investigators listed two BDT stores, 

observed a total of 12 Drawstring 

Sweatshirts for sale, and purchased a 

total of three Drawstring Sweatshirts. 

10. BDT’s distribution in commerce of 

the Drawstring Sweatshirts through 

August 2006 failed to abide by the 

February 2006 corrective action plan 

and recall, the ASTM standard, and the 

staff’s May 2006 defect notice. 

11. BDT has presumed and actual 

knowledge that the Drawstring 

Sweatshirts distributed and sold after 

the recall posed a strangulation hazard 

and presented a substantial risk of 

injury to children under FHSA section 

15(c)(1), 15 U.S.C. 1274(c)(1). BDT had 

obtained information that reasonably 

supported the conclusion that the 

Drawstring Sweatshirts distributed and 

sold after the recall contained a defect 

that could create a substantial product 

hazard or that they created an 

unreasonable risk of serious injury or 

death. CPSA sections 15(b)(2) and (3), 

15 U.S.C. 2064(b)(2) and (3), required 

BDT to immediately inform the 

Commission of the defect and risk. 

12. BDT did not report to the 

Commission regarding the post-recall 

distribution and sale of the Drawstring 

Sweatshirts until after the Staff 

informed BDT of the CPSC’s August 29, 

2006 purchase of the Drawstring 

Sweatshirts. BDT thereby failed to 

immediately inform the Commission as 

required by CPSA sections 15(b)(2) and 

(3), 15 U.S.C. 2064(b)(2) and (3). This 

failure violated CPSA section 19(a)(4), 

15 U.S.C. 2068(a)(4). 

13. BDT knowingly failed to 

immediately inform the Commission of 

the defect and risk posed by the postrecall distribution and sale of the 

Drawstring Sweatshirts, as the term 

‘‘knowingly’’ is defined in CPSA section 

20(d), 15 U.S.C. 2069(d). Pursuant to 

CPSA section 20, 15 U.S.C. 2069, this 

failure subjected BDT to civil penalties. 

BDT Response 

14. BDT denies the Staff’s allegations 

set forth above that BDT knowingly 

violated the CPSA. 

Agreement of the Parties 

15. Under the CPSA, the Commission 

has jurisdiction over this matter and 

over BDT. 

16. The parties enter into the 

Agreement for settlement purposes only. 

The Agreement does not constitute an 

admission by BDT, or a determination 

by the Commission, that BDT has 

knowingly violated the CPSA. 

17. In settlement of the Staff’s 

allegations, BDT shall pay a civil 

penalty in the amount of fifty thousand 

dollars ($50,000.00). The civil penalty 

shall be paid in four (4) installments as 

follows: $12,500.00 shall be paid within 

twenty (20) calendar days of service of 

the Commission’s final Order accepting 

the Agreement; $12,500.00 shall be paid 

on or before the six-month anniversary 

of service of the Commission’s final 

Order accepting the Agreement; 

$12,500.00 shall be paid on or before the 

one-year anniversary of service of the 

Commission’s final Order accepting the 

Agreement; and $12,500.00 shall be 

paid on or before the eighteen-month 

anniversary of service of the 

Commission’s final Order accepting the 

Agreement. Each payment shall be by 

check payable to the order of the United 

States Treasury. 

18. Upon the Commission’s 

provisional acceptance of the 

Agreement, the Agreement shall be 

placed on the public record and 

published in the Federal Register in 

accordance with the procedures set 

forth in 16 CFR 1118.20(e). If the 

Commission does not receive any 

written request not to accept the 

Agreement within fifteen (15) days, the 

Agreement shall be deemed finally 

accepted on the sixteenth (16th) day 

after the date it is published in the 

Federal Register. 

19. Upon the Commission’s final 

acceptance of the Agreement and 

issuance of the final Order, BDT 

knowingly, voluntarily, and completely 

waives any rights it may have in this 

matter to the following: (1) An 

administrative or judicial hearing; (2) 

judicial review or other challenge or 

contest of the validity of the 

Commission’s Order or actions; (3) a 

determination by the Commission of 

whether BDT failed to comply with the 

CPSA and its underlying regulations; (4) 

a statement of findings of fact and 

conclusions of law; and (5) any claims 

under the Equal Access to Justice Act. 

20. The commission may publicize 

the terms of the Agreement and Order. 

21. The Agreement and Order shall 

apply to, and be binding upon, BDT and 

each of its successors and assigns. 

22. The Commission issues the Order 

under the provisions of the CPSA, and 

violation of the Order may subject BDT 

to appropriate legal action. 

23. The Agreement may be used in 

interpreting the Order. Understandings, 

agreements, representations, or 

interpretations apart from those 

contained in the Agreement and Order 

may not be used to vary or contradict its 

terms. The Agreement shall not be 

waived, amended, modified, or 

otherwise altered, except in a writing 

that is executed by the party against 

whom such waiver, amendment, 

modification, or alteration is sought to 

be enforced. 

24. If after the effective date hereof, 

any provision of the Agreement and 

Order is held to be illegal, invalid, or 

unenforceable under present or future 

laws effective during the terms of the 

Agreement and Order, such provision 

shall be fully severable. The balance of 

the Agreement and Order shall remain 

in full force and effect, unless the 

Commission and BDT agree that 

severing the provision materially affects 

the purpose of the Agreement and 

Order. 

Black Dog Tavern Company, Inc. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
77392 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 26, 2006 / Notices 

Dated: December 1, 2006. 

Robert S. Douglas, Sr., 

President, Black Dog Tavern Company, Inc., 

P.O. Box 2219, Beach Street Extension, 

Vineyard Haven, MA 02568. 

Dated: November 20, 2006. 

Counsel for Black Dog Tavern Company, Inc. 

Michael J. Gidding, Esq., 

Brown & Gidding, PC, 3201 New Mexico 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20016. 

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission 

Staff. 

J. Gibson Mullan, 

Assistant Executive Director, Office of 

Compliance and Field Operations. 

Ronald G. Yelenik, 

Acting Director, Legal Division, Office of 

Compliance and Field Operations. 

Dated: December 6, 2006. 

Seth B. Popkin, 

Trial Attorney, Legal Division, Office of 

Compliance and Field Operations. 

Order 

Upon consideration of the Settlement 

Agreement entered into between Black 

Dog Tavern Company, Inc. (‘‘BDT’’) and 

the U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) staff, and 

the Commission having jurisdiction 

over the subject matter and over BDT, 

and it appearing that the Settlement 

Agreement and Order is in the public 

interest, it is 

Ordered, that the Settlement 

Agreement be, and hereby is, accepted; 

and it is 

Further ordered, that BDT shall pay a 

civil penalty in the amount of fifty 

thousand dollars ($50,000.00). The civil 

penalty shall be paid in four (4) 

installments as follows: $12,500.00 shall 

be paid within twenty (20) calendar 

days of service of the final Order upon 

BDT; $12,500.00 shall be paid on or 

before the six-month anniversary of 

service of the final Order upon BDT; 

$12,500.00 shall be paid on or before the 

one-year anniversary of service of the 

final Order upon BDT; and $12,500.00 

shall be paid on or before the eighteenmonth anniversary of service of the final 

Order upon BDT. The payment shall be 

made by check payable to the order of 

the United States Treasury. Upon the 

failure of BDT to make any of the 

foregoing payments when due, interest 

on the unpaid amount shall accrue and 

be paid by BDT at the federal legal rate 

of interest set forth at 28 U.S.C. 1961(a) 

and (b). 

Provisionally accepted and 

Provisional Order issued on the 18th 

day of December, 2006. 

By Order of the Commission. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 06–9840 Filed 12–22–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–M 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army; Corps of 

Engineers 

Intent To Prepare a Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

Navigation Improvements and Airport, 

Little Diomede Island, AK 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Engineer 

District, Alaska, intends to prepare a 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

(DEIS) to evaluate the feasibility of a 

small boat harbor and, in collaboration 

with other agencies, opportunities for 

economic development and air 

transportation capability for the 

community of Little Diomede Island, 

AK. Ignaluk on Little Diomede Island, 

population 170, is a coastal community 

on the west side of Little Diomede 

Island, approximately 135 miles 

northwest of Nome. The community of 

Wales on the mainland is 27 miles from 

Little Diomede Island. Big Diomede 

Island, Russia, is 2 miles west of Little 

Diomede Island. 

The community of Ignaluk is a small 

and very remote community in the 

Bering Sea. Transportation to Little 

Diomede is by air or sea. Due to the 

normal severe weather and sea 

conditions, any method of travel can be 

risky. A landing strip constructed on sea 

ice in the winter provides fixed-wing 

airplane access approximately 3 months 

of the year. Helicopters and boats are 

used during summer. High waves and 

rocky shores often make landing by boat 

difficult. A constant wind blows 15 

knots with gusts up to 80 knots. Cloudy 

skies and fog are prevalent in the 

summer. There is no scheduled cargo 

ship schedule, and only barges and 

landing craft come close to the island; 

few actually land. There is weekly mail 

delivery by helicopter. Transportation of 

goods and services is expensive and 

medical evacuation is very difficult. The 

lack of access is a barrier to the 

economic future of the community and 

could force relocation of the entire 

community to the mainland. The draft 

EIS would also study any multi-use 

value of the airport and boat harbor 

projects for coastal storm damage 

reduction. 

The DEIS will determine whether 

Federal action is warranted and will 

define alternative actions for 

Congressional consideration. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lizette Boyer (907) 753–2637, Alaska 

District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

Environmental Resources Section 

(CEPOA–EN–CW–ER), P.O. Box 6898, 

Elmendorf AFB, AK 99506–0898. 

E-mail: 

Lizette.P.Boyer@poa02.usace.army.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This study 

is authorized under the Rivers and 

Harbors Act. The people of Little 

Diomede Island have lived on the 

Bering Sea coast for at least 2,000 years. 

Relative isolation from outside 

influences has enabled the area to retain 

its traditions and customs. 

The DEIS will consider various small 

boat harbor and investigate rock quarry 

sources for large armor stone and 

smaller sized rock for fill. The feasibility 

of the project depends on the 

availability of developing a quarry site 

on the island close to the community. A 

decision will be made if there is 

sufficient quantity and quality for the 

small boat harbor and other uses. The 

community will decide if community 

relocation is an option they want to 

take. 

Issues: The DEIS will address Ignaluk 

need to become more economically 

viable through commercial fishing and 

accessibility to the mainland. Becoming 

more accessible to the outside world 

could impact community identity by 

allowing more social contact with off 

islanders. At the same time, 

accessibility to the island is key to 

quality of life issues such as sanitary 

water and sewer, health services, and 

general goods and services to people. 

The DEIS will address the importance of 

maintaining the community’s traditional 

lifestyles, while providing modern 

infrastructure. 

The Bering Strait is an important 

habitat area for marine life. It provides 

the only passage for marine birds and 

mammals that move seasonally between 

the Bering, Chukchi and Beaufort Seas. 

The upwelling and turbulence resulting 

from the water currents passing through 

the Bering Strait produces waters 

unusually rich in crustacean plankton 

which, in turn, support a large 

population of marine birds. The steep 

slopes of Little Diomede Island rise 

abruptly from the sea and provide 

nesting habitat for 13 species of 

seabirds. The island is the site of the 

largest kittiwake colony in the Northern 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES