This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains documents other than rules or

proposed rules that are applicable to the

public. Notices of hearings and investigations,

committee meetings, agency decisions and

rulings, delegations of authority, filing of

petitions and applications and agency

statements of organization and functions are

examples of documents appearing in this

section.

Notices Federal Register

50096 

Vol. 72, No. 168 

Thursday, August 30, 2007 

AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL 

DEVELOPMENT 

Privacy Act of 1974, System of 

Records 

AGENCY: United States Agency for 

International Development. 

ACTION: Notice to delete systems of 

records. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Privacy Act of 

1974 (U.S.C. 552a), as amended, the 

United States Agency for International 

Development (USAID) is deleting nine 

systems of records notices in its existing 

inventory. 

DATES: This proposed action will be 

effective on October 1, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be 

submitted by any of the following 

methods: 

eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions on submitting comments. 

E-mail: privacy@usaid.gov 

Fax: (703) 666–1466. 

Mail: Chief Privacy Officer, United 

States Agency for International 

Development, 1300 Pennsylvania 

Avenue, NW., Suite 2.12–003, 

Washington, DC 20523–2120. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Barbara English, Office of Human 

Resources, Policy, Planning and 

Information Division either by e-mail at 

benglish@usaid.gov or by phone on 

(202) 712–1913. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: USAID 

has reviewed its Privacy Act systems of 

records. As a result of this review, 

USAID is deleting nine systems of 

records notices in its existing inventory. 

All nine systems being deleted are 

covered under government-wide 

systems of records. The specific 

deletions are set forth below. 

Dated: August 20, 2007. 

Philip M. Heneghan, 

Chief Privacy Officer, USAID. 

SYSTEM NAME: 

AID–1, Foreign Service Employee 

Personnel Records System. 

Reason: The records contained in this 

system of records are covered by OPM/ 

GOVT–1 (General Personnel Records), a 

government-wide system of record. 

SYSTEM NAME: 

AID–2, Civil Service Employee Office 

Personnel Records. 

Reason: The records contained in this 

system of records are covered by OPM/ 

GOVT–1 (General Personnel Records), a 

government-wide system of record. 

SYSTEM NAME: 

AID–6, Recruiting, Examining, 

Placement and Employee Records. 

Reason: The records contained in this 

system of records are covered by OPM/ 

GOVT–5 (Recruiting, Examining, 

Placement and Employee Records), a 

government-wide system of record. 

SYSTEM NAME: 

AID–7, Foreign Service Personnel 

Evaluation Records. 

Reason: The records contained in this 

system of records are covered by OPM/ 

GOVT–2 (Employee Performance File 

System Records), a government-wide 

system of record. 

SYSTEM NAME: 

AID–11, Employee Conduct and 

Discipline Records. 

Reason: The records contained in this 

system of records are covered by OPM/ 

GOVT–3 (Adverse Actions and Actions 

Based on Unacceptable Performance), a 

government-wide system of record. 

SYSTEM NAME: 

AID–12, Executive Assignment 

Records. 

Reason: The records contained in this 

system of records are covered by OPM/ 

GOVT–1 (General Personnel Records), a 

government-wide system of record. 

SYSTEM NAME: 

AID–13, Orientation and Training 

Records. 

Reason: The records contained in this 

system of records are covered by OPM/ 

GOVT–1 (General Personnel Records), a 

government-wide system of record. 

SYSTEM NAME: 

AID–14, Awards and Incentive 

Records. 

Reason: The records contained in this 

system of records are covered by OPM/ 

GOVT–2 (Employee Performance File 

System Records), a government-wide 

system of record. 

SYSTEM NAME: 

AID–24, Emergency Case File. 

Reason: The records contained in this 

system of records are covered by OPM/ 

GOVT–1 (General Personnel Records), a 

government-wide system of record. 

[FR Doc. E7–17180 Filed 8–29–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6116–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Plumas National Forest, Feather River 

Ranger District, CA; Flea Project 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an 

environmental impact statement. 

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will 

prepare an environmental impact 

statement to disclose the environmental 

effects resulting from construction of 

fuel breaks known as defensible fuel 

profile zones (DFPZs); harvest and 

reforestation of timber stands; 

restoration and enhancement of aquatic 

and riparian habitat; improvement of 

wildlife habitat and long term 

watershed condition; underburning to 

improve the health of unique plant 

communities; and road construction, 

reconstruction, and decommissioning. 

DATES: Comments concerning the scope 

of the analysis must be received within 

30 days of the publication of this notice 

in the Federal Register. The draft 

environmental impact statement is 

expected by January 2008, and the final 

environmental impact statement is 

expected by April 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to 

Karen Hayden, District Ranger, Plumas 

National Forest, Feather River Ranger 

District, 875 Mitchell Ave, Oroville, CA 

95965. Comments may be (1) Mailed to 

the Responsible Official; (2) handdelivered between the hours of 8 a.m.– 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding holidays; (3) faxed to (530) 

532–1210; or (4) electronically mailed 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 168 / Thursday, August 30, 2007 / Notices 50097 

to: comments-pacificsouthwest-plumasfeatherrvr@fs.fed.us. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Zarlengo, Project Leader, Feather River 

Ranger District, 875 Mitchell Avenue, 

Oroville, CA 95965, or call (530) 532–

8932. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Flea 

Project area is located within the 

Feather River Ranger District of the 

Plumas National Forest in Butte County. 

Encompassing approximately 11,000 

acres, the project area is located north 

and east of Paradise, from De Sabla in 

the northwest to Jorbo Gap in the 

southeast, and north and west of Mayaro 

and North Fork of the Feather River in 

the northeast. Treatment units range in 

elevation from 1,600 to 4,300 feet above 

sea level. Communities in and near the 

project area include Paradise, Magalia, 

DeSabla, Yankee Hill, Concow, Pulga 

and Mayaro. 

The Flea Project is proposed as part 

of a broad resource management 

program to promote the ecological 

health of lands and economic health 

and stability of communities in the 

northern Sierra Nevada under the 

authority of the Herger-Feinstein 

Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery 

Act (HFQLG Act). 

Purpose and Need for Action 

The Forest Service has identified the 

following project objectives: (1) Protect 

communities and forest ecosystems 

from high-intensity wildfires; (2) 

promote a healthy all-aged, 

multistoried, fire-resilient forest; (3) 

contribute to the stability and economic 

health of communities; (4) promote the 

health of unique plant communities; (5) 

promote healthy aquatic and riparian 

ecosystems, and improve long term 

watershed condition; and (6) improve 

wildlife habitat. 

Proposed Action 

To achieve project objectives, the 

Forest Service proposes to construct 

approximately 2,007 acres of fuelbreaks 

known as Defensible Fuel Profile Zones 

(DFPZ). A DFPZ is a strategically 

located strip of land approximately 1⁄2

mile in width on which fuels, both 

living and dead, have been modified in 

order to reduce the potential for 

sustained crown fire and to allow fire 

suppression personnel a safer location 

from which to take action against a 

wildfire. The DFPZs in the Flea Project 

would be part of a larger, strategic 

system of DFPZs on the Plumas 

National Forest, adjacent private lands, 

and other national forests. 

Proposed DFPZs are generally located 

on ridges, along roads, or adjacent to 

private property within wildland urban 

interface with tree crowns spaced at a 

distance that reduces the potential for 

crown fire spread (generally 40 percent 

canopy cover). DFPZs would be 

constructed through mechanically 

thinning and biomass removal on 

approximately 671 acres, mastication on 

approximately 456 acres, underburning 

on approximately 447 acres, and hand 

cutting, piling, and burning on 

approximately 433 acres. 

The Forest Service proposes to 

harvest up to 5 million board feet of 

timber from group selection units (228 

acres), and DFPZ mechanical thinning 

units (546 acres). Group selection 

involves harvest of trees less than 30- 

inches in diameter from small (0.5 to 2 

acres) groups. Over time, this would 

create an uneven-aged (all-aged) forest 

made up of a mosaic of small groups of 

same-aged trees. 

Use of existing and temporary roads 

would be needed to access group 

selection and DFPZ treatment areas. An 

estimated 13.4 miles of existing road 

would be reconstructed with 0.45 

additional miles of new classified road 

construction and 4.5 miles of new 

temporary spur construction. An 

estimated 9.5 miles of system roads 

would be decommissioned or closed by 

various methods, such as ripping and 

seeding, re-contouring, and installing 

barriers. Future use of all other roads 

and user-developed OHV routes in the 

Flea Project area would be determined 

by the Plumas National Forest’s travel 

management process. Improve the 

health of serpentine plant communities 

through the use of prescribed fire. 

Underburn approximately 100 acres 

included as DFPZ treatment. 

Aquatic and riparian restoration 

projects include restoring and 

enhancing aquatic, native plant, and 

riparian habitat and improving long 

term watershed condition by 

decommissioning 9.5 miles of system 

roads, replacing or upgrading three 

culverts to restore aquatic species 

passage to approximately 5 miles of 

upstream habitat; and stabilizing stream 

channels and banks. 

Habitat for northern goshawk would 

be improved by enhancing tree growth 

and health, and by creating a more 

desirable open understory on 84 acres 

included as DFPZ treatment. 

Responsible Official 

Karen L. Hayden, District Ranger, 875 

Mitchell Ave., Oroville, CA 95965 is the 

Responsible Official. The Forest Service 

intends to use Stewardship contracting 

authority to apply the value from timber 

harvest to offset costs of fuel treatments. 

Nature of Decision To Be Made 

The Responsible Official will decide 

whether to implement this proposal, an 

alternative design that moves the project 

area towards the desired conditions, or 

not to implement any project at this 

time. 

Scoping Process 

Public questions and comments 

regarding this proposal are an integral 

part of this environmental analysis 

process. Comments will be used to 

identify issues and develop alternatives 

to the proposed action. To assist the 

Forest service in identifying and 

considering issues and concerns related 

to the proposed actions, comments 

should be as specific as possible. 

Information about the proposed action 

will be mailed to the adjacent 

landowners, as well as to those people 

and organizations that have indicated a 

specific interest in the project, to Native 

American entities, and federal, state, 

and local agencies. The public will be 

notified of any meetings regarding this 

proposal by mailings and press releases 

sent to local newspapers and media. A 

community meeting in the project area 

is planned for January 2008, although 

specific information is not available at 

this time. 

Preliminary Issues 

The following preliminary issues have 

been identified for this proposal: (a) 

Impacts of ground disturbing activities 

on watershed condition, (b) impacts of 

activities on highly erodible soils, (c) 

economic feasibility of the project due 

to high treatment and regeneration 

costs, and (d) impacts of activities on 

habitat used by the California spotted 

owl and northern goshawk. Continued 

analysis will determine the relevance of 

these preliminary issues. Additional 

issues may be identified during the 

scoping process. 

Permits or Licenses Required 

No federal permits, licenses, or 

entitlements are necessary to implement 

the proposed project. State 

requirements, based on federal laws, 

and administered by the County 

Agricultural Commissioner for air 

quality management will be followed. 

These requirements include burning 

only on permissive burn days or 

receiving a special variance prior to 

ignition. Smoke permits are required 

from the Northern Sierra and Feather 

River Air Quality Management Districts 

(AQMD) prior to any understory or pile 

burning. Timber Harvest Activity 

Waivers are required from the California 

Regional Water Quality Control Board. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
50098 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 168 / Thursday, August 30, 2007 / Notices 

Comment Requested 

This notice of intent initiates the 

scoping process which guides the 

development of the environmental 

impact statement. The public is 

encouraged to take part in the process 

and is encouraged to visit with Forest 

Service officials at any time during the 

analysis and prior to the decision. The 

Forest Service will be seeking 

information, comments, and assistance 

from Federal, State, and local agencies 

and other individuals or organizations 

that may be interested in, or affected by, 

the proposed vegetation management 

activities. 

Early Notice of Importance of Public 

Participation in Subsequent 

Environmental Review: A draft 

environmental impact statement will be 

prepared for comment. The comment 

period on the draft environmental 

impact statement will be 45 days from 

the date the Environmental Protection 

Agency publishes the notice of 

availability in the Federal Register. 

The Forest Service believes, at this 

early stage, it is important to give 

reviewers notice of several court rulings 

related to public participation in the 

environmental review process. First, 

reviewers of draft environmental impact 

statements must structure their 

participation in the environmental 

review of the proposal so that it is 

meaningful and alerts an agency to the 

reviewer’s position and contentions. 

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. 

NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, 

environmental objections that could be 

raised at the draft environmental impact 

statement stage but that are not raised 

until after completion of the final 

environmental impact statement may be 

waived or dismissed by the courts. City 

of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 

1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin 

Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 

1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of 

these court rulings, it is very important 

that those interested in this proposed 

action participate by the close of the 45 

day comment period so that substantive 

comments and objections are made 

available to the Forest Service at a time 

when it can meaningfully consider them 

and respond to them in the final 

environmental impact statement. 

To assist the Forest Service in 

identifying and considering issues and 

concerns on the proposed action, 

comments on the draft environmental 

impact statement should be as specific 

as possible. It is also helpful if 

comments refer to specific pages or 

chapters of the draft statement. 

Comments may also address the 

adequacy of the draft environmental 

impact statement or the merits of the 

alternatives formulated and discussed in 

the statement. Reviewers may wish to 

refer to the Council on Environmental 

Quality Regulations for implementing 

the procedural provisions of the 

National Environmental Act at 40 CFR 

1503.3 in addressing these points. 

Comments received, including the 

names and addresses of those who 

comment, will be considered part of the 

public record on this proposal and will 

be available for public inspection. 

Dated: August 21, 2007. 

Karen L. Hayden, 

District Ranger. 

[FR Doc. 07–4253 Filed 8–29–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M 

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS 

Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting 

of the Hawaii State Advisory 

Committee; Correction 

A correction is hereby made to the 

meeting notice of the Hawaii Advisory 

Committee that appeared in the second 

column, first paragraph, at line 8, on 

August 22, 2007, in Vol. 72 of the 

Federal Register at page 46953. The 

time for convening the meeting should 

be 10 a.m. No other corrections are 

made to that notice. 

Dated at Washington, DC, August 27, 2007. 

Ivy L. Davis, 

Acting Chief, Regional Programs 

Coordination Unit. 

[FR Doc. E7–17224 Filed 8–29–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6335–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

(A–533–820) 

Certain Hot–Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 

Products From India: Extension of 

Time Limits for the Preliminary Results 

of Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Victoria Cho, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 3, Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Ave, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–5075. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On February 2, 2007, the U.S. 

Department of Commerce 

(‘‘Department’’) published a notice of 

initiation of the administrative review of 

the antidumping duty order on hot–

rolled carbon steel flat products from 

India, covering the period December 1, 

2005 to November 30, 2006. See 

Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Reviews and Request for Revocation in 

Part, 72 FR 5005 (February 2, 2007). The 

preliminary results of this review are 

currently due no later than September 2, 

2007. 

Extension of Time Limit of Preliminary 

Results 

Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), 

requires the Department to make a 

preliminary determination within 245 

days after the last day of the anniversary 

month of an order or finding for which 

a review is requested. Section 

751(a)(3)(A) of the Act further states that 

if it is not practicable to complete the 

review within the time period specified, 

the administering authority may extend 

the 245-day period to issue its 

preliminary results to up to 365 days. 

We determine that completion of the 

preliminary results of this review within 

the 245-day period is not practicable for 

the following reasons. This review 

covers four companies, and to conduct 

the sales and cost analyses for each 

company requires the Department to 

gather and analyze a significant amount 

of information pertaining to each 

company’s sales practices, 

manufacturing costs and corporate 

relationships. Given the number and 

complexity of issues in this case, and in 

accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of 

the Act, we are extending the time 

period for issuing the preliminary 

results of review by 108 days. Therefore, 

the preliminary results are now due no 

later than December 19, 2007. The final 

results continue to be due 120 days after 

publication of the preliminary results. 

This notice is issued and published in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) 

and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: August 23, 2007. 

Gary Taverman, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E7–17225 Filed 8–29–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES