34868 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2018 / Notices 

Native Village of Wales 

Native Village of White Mountain 

Nenana Native Association 

New Koliganek Village Council 

New Stuyahok Village 

Newhalen Village 

Newtok Village 

Nikolai Village 

Ninilchik Village 

Nome Eskimo Community 

Nondalton Village 

Noorvik Native Community 

Northway Village 

Nulato Village 

Nunakauyarmiut Tribe 

Organized Village of Grayling (aka 

Holikachuk) 

Organized Village of Kake 

Organized Village of Kasaan 

Organized Village of Kwethluk 

Organized Village of Saxman 

Orutsararmiut Traditional Native 

Council (previously listed as 

Orutsararmuit Native Village (aka 

Bethel)) 

Oscarville Traditional Village 

Pauloff Harbor Village 

Pedro Bay Village 

Petersburg Indian Association 

Pilot Station Traditional Village 

Platinum Traditional Village 

Portage Creek Village (aka Ohgsenakale) 

Pribilof Islands Aleut Communities of 

St. Paul & St. George Islands 

Qagan Tayagungin Tribe of Sand Point 

Village 

Qawalangin Tribe of Unalaska 

Rampart Village 

Saint George Island (See Pribilof Islands 

Aleut Communities of St. Paul & St. 

George Islands) 

Saint Paul Island (See Pribilof Islands 

Aleut Communities of St. Paul & St. 

George Islands) 

Seldovia Village Tribe 

Shageluk Native Village 

Sitka Tribe of Alaska 

Skagway Village 

South Naknek Village 

Stebbins Community Association 

Sun’aq Tribe of Kodiak (previously 

listed as the Shoonaq’ Tribe of 

Kodiak) 

Takotna Village 

Tangirnaq Native Village (formerly 

Lesnoi Village (aka Woody Island)) 

Telida Village 

Traditional Village of Togiak 

Tuluksak Native Community 

Twin Hills Village 

Ugashik Village 

Umkumiut Native Village (previously 

listed as Umkumiute Native Village) 

Village of Alakanuk 

Village of Anaktuvuk Pass 

Village of Aniak 

Village of Atmautluak 

Village of Bill Moore’s Slough 

Village of Chefornak 

Village of Clarks Point 

Village of Crooked Creek 

Village of Dot Lake 

Village of Iliamna 

Village of Kalskag 

Village of Kaltag 

Village of Kotlik 

Village of Lower Kalskag 

Village of Ohogamiut 

Village of Red Devil 

Village of Salamatoff 

Village of Sleetmute 

Village of Solomon 

Village of Stony River 

Village of Venetie (See Native Village of 

Venetie Tribal Government) 

Village of Wainwright 

Wrangell Cooperative Association 

Yakutat Tlingit Tribe 

Yupiit of Andreafski 

[FR Doc. 2018–15679 Filed 7–20–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4337–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

[Docket No. BOEM–2018–0034] 

Public Input Requested on Potential 

Impacts to Historic Priorities: Sand 

Resource Assessment and Borrow 

Area Identification, Atlantic and Gulf of 

Mexico Outer Continental Shelf 

AGENCY: Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management, Interior. 

ACTION: Request for public input. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management (BOEM) invites public 

input on the identification of historic 

properties or potential impacts to 

historic properties from a 

comprehensive research program of 

sand resource and borrow area 

identification on the Atlantic and Gulf 

of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf 

(OCS). Sand resources are identified 

using geophysical and geological (G&G) 

surveys, which constitute undertakings 

subject to Section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act. 

DATES: BOEM must receive your 

comments by August 13, 2018 for your 

comments to be considered. BOEM 

requests comments to be postmarked or 

delivered by this same date. BOEM will 

consider only those comments received 

that conform to this requirement. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and other 

submissions of information may be 

submitted by either of the following two 

methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. In the entry 

entitled, ‘‘Enter Keyword or ID,’’ enter 

BOEM–2018–0034, and then click 

‘‘search.’’ Follow the instructions to 

submit public comments and view 

supporting and related materials 

available for this notice. 

2. Written comments may be 

delivered by hand or by mail, enclosed 

in an envelope labeled, ‘‘Sand 

Resources Assessment Section 106,’’ to 

Deputy Preservation Officer, Office of 

Environmental Programs, Bureau of 

Ocean Energy Management, 45600 

Woodland Road, Sterling, Virginia 

20166. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brandi Carrier, BOEM, Office of 

Environmental Programs, 45600 

Woodland Road (VAM–OREP), Sterling, 

Virginia 20166, (703) 787–1623 or 

brandi.carrier@boem.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority: This request for public 

input concerns an action BOEM is 

taking pursuant to 43 U.S.C. 1346. 

1 Background 

BOEM’s Marine Minerals Program 

partners with communities to address 

serious erosion along coastal beaches, 

dunes, barrier islands, and wetlands. 

Erosion affects natural resources, 

energy, defense, public infrastructure, 

and tourism. To help address this 

problem, BOEM provides sand, gravel, 

and/or shell resources from the Federal 

OCS for shore protection, beach 

nourishment, and wetlands restoration 

with vigorous safety and environmental 

oversight, as authorized by the Outer 

Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA). 

BOEM is proposing a comprehensive 

research program for sand resource and 

borrow area identification to properly 

identify and manage OCS sand 

resources, and to enable both long-term 

and emergency planning goals. The 

study will use state-of-the-art 

technology and methods to collect and 

analyze data, and will incorporate a 

rigorous mitigation strategy to minimize 

environmental effects. The field work 

will use G&G surveys to: (1) Identify 

potential OCS sand resources at a 

reconnaissance-scale; (2) delineate 

geographically focused areas as 

potential borrow areas at a design-level; 

(3) monitor specific borrow areas and 

investigate for the presence of objects of 

archaeological significance, munitions 

of explosive concern, and hard bottom 

or other sensitive benthic habitat in the 

vicinity of potential borrow areas; and 

(4) collect scientific data on changes in 

sand resources. The study could occur 

anywhere on the Atlantic or Gulf of 

Mexico OCS between the Submerged 

Lands Act Boundary to the 50 meter 

bathymetric contour; activities under 

cooperative agreements (authorized by 

43 U.S.C. 1345(e)) with Atlantic and 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2018 / Notices 34869 

Gulf states may cross the state/Federal 

boundary. Additional information is 

available at https://www.boem.gov/ 

Building-a-National-Offshore-SandInventory/. 

2 Description of the Proposed 

Undertaking 

Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. 306108), 

and the act’s implementing regulations 

(36 CFR part 800), require Federal 

agencies to consider the effects of their 

undertakings on historic properties and 

afford the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation a reasonable opportunity to 

comment. As part of this review, BOEM 

will consult with state historic 

preservation officers, tribal officials, and 

others. BOEM is now reaching out to the 

general public for comment regarding 

the potential presence of historic 

properties or potential effects on 

historic properties from the surveys and 

other activities used in the study. This 

information will allow BOEM to 

consider and document historic 

preservation concerns early, and allow 

the agency to consider the views of the 

public in the decision making process. 

This study will involve two different 

types of sand surveys, each with a 

different potential to affect historic 

properties: 

(1) Geophysical surveys are 

conducted to obtain information about 

shallow sediment stratigraphy, shallow 

hazards (such as presence of munitions 

of explosive concern or buried cables), 

archaeological resources, and sensitive 

benthic habitats. Typical equipment 

used in these surveys includes subbottom profilers, swath bathymetric 

sonars, side-scan sonars, and 

magnetometers. Geophysical surveys do 

not have the potential to affect historic 

properties. 

(2) Geological surveys involve 

seafloor-disturbing activities, such as 

sample collection through use of grab 

samples or a platform-mounted 

vibracore, which are conducted to 

evaluate the quality of mineral resources 

for their intended use as sand resources. 

Vibracores are shallow in nature, 

focusing on characterizing the sand 

layer, and penetrate to a depth of no 

more than 20 ft (6 m) or the extent of 

the sand layer. The seafloor-disturbing 

portions of the geological surveys may 

have the potential to affect historic 

properties on the OCS, so BOEM is 

requesting public input on the existence 

and location of historic properties on 

the OCS and on the potential effects 

geologic surveys could have on any 

such historic properties. 

Once beach quality sand resource 

areas have been identified, these sand 

resources could be available to local, 

state, and Federal agencies for beach 

nourishment, and coastal restoration to 

provide protection of infrastructure, 

create coastal habitat, and reduce 

damage caused by storms, currents, and 

waves. Those potential future actions 

would undergo a separate Section 106 

consultation process if they are 

determined to be undertakings under 36 

CFR part 800, with additional 

opportunities for public comment. 

3 Description of the Study Area 

The potential Study Area lies within 

the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico OCS, 

from the Submerged Lands Act 

boundary to 50 m (164 ft) deep. Sand 

survey activities will not occur across 

the entire Study Area simultaneously, 

but will be of limited spatial extent at 

any one time. The Study Area includes 

adjacent transit corridors used for 

mobilization, and demobilization, and 

access to support bases. Sensitive and 

protected areas, such as within Cape 

Cod Bay, Stellwagen Bank National 

Marine Sanctuary, and Florida Keys 

National Marine Sanctuary are 

specifically excluded. 

Prior to commencing sand survey 

activities, BOEM will coordinate with 

coastal states, Federal stakeholders, and 

relevant regional planning bodies to 

determine areas with the greatest 

potential need for OCS sand resources 

and the greatest data gaps, in order to 

identify priority survey sites. A detailed 

survey and sampling plan will be 

developed prior to undertaking any 

sand survey activities; this plan will 

define the geographic scope and relative 

timing of the proposed activities. 

Similar resource area identification 

and delineation activities could occur 

on state submerged lands, but these 

undertakings would be separately 

analyzed in project-specific 

environmental reviews, under the 

direction of the appropriate lead entity. 

BOEM may enter into cooperative 

agreements with Atlantic and Gulf states 

to assist in the inventory of offshore 

sand resources, which may cross the 

state/Federal boundaries. BOEM’s 

authorization of an agreement to use 

sand resources in a given borrow area, 

including for beach nourishment and 

wetlands reconstruction, would be 

considered a separate action. Any such 

proposed undertakings, if received by 

BOEM, would be considered 

individually and would subject to a 

separate environmental review and 

Section 106 consultation process. 

4 Requested Information From the 

Public 

BOEM requests specific and detailed 

comments from the public and other 

interested or affected parties on the 

identification of historic properties or 

potential effects to historic properties 

from the proposed G&G survey 

activities. This information will inform 

BOEM’s review of this and future 

undertakings under Section 106 of the 

NHPA. 

5 Protection of Sensitive, Privileged, 

or Confidential Information 

5.1 Freedom of Information Act 

BOEM will protect sensitive, 

privileged, or confidential information 

that you submit when required by the 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). 

5.2 Section 304 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. 

307103) 

Exemption 3 of FOIA applies to 

information specifically exempted from 

disclosure by a statute other than FOIA, 

but only if the other statute’s disclosure 

prohibition is absolute. Section 304 of 

the National Historic Preservation Act at 

54 U.S.C. 307103 requires the head of a 

Federal agency, after consultation with 

the Secretary, to withhold from 

disclosure to the public information 

about the location, character, or 

ownership of a historic property if the 

Secretary and the agency determine that 

disclosure may—(1) cause a significant 

invasion of privacy; (2) risk harm to the 

historic property; or (3) impede the use 

of a traditional religious site by 

practitioners. If you wish BOEM to 

withhold such information from 

disclosure, clearly mark it and request 

that BOEM treat it as confidential. 

BOEM will not disclose such 

information if it qualifies for exemption 

from disclosure under FOIA. Please 

label privileged or confidential 

information ‘‘Contains Confidential 

Information.’’ In particular, tribal 

entities should designate information 

that falls under Section 304 of NHPA as 

confidential. 

5.3 Personal Identifying Information 

BOEM does not consider anonymous 

comments; please include your name 

and address as part of your submittal. 

You should be aware that your entire 

comment, including your name, 

address, and your personal identifying 

information, may be made publicly 

available at any time. In order for BOEM 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from disclosure, you must 

identify any information contained in 

the submittal of your comments that, if 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
34870 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2018 / Notices 

released, would constitute a clearly 

unwarranted invasion of your personal 

privacy. You must also briefly describe 

any possible harmful consequence(s) of 

the disclosure of information, such as 

embarrassment, injury or other harm. 

Dated: July 17, 2018. 

Walter D. Cruickshank, 

Acting Director, Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15669 Filed 7–20–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–1047] 

Certain Semiconductor Devices and 

Consumer Audiovisual Products 

Containing the Same; Commission 

Determination To Review in Part a 

Final Initial Determination Finding No 

Violation of Section 337; Schedule for 

Briefing; Extension of Target Date 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has determined to review 

in part a final initial determination 

(‘‘ID’’) issued by the presiding 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’), 

finding no violation of section 337 of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended. The 

Commission has also set a schedule for 

briefing. Additionally, Commission has 

determined to extend the target date for 

the completion of the investigation to 

September 19, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert Needham, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

708–5468. Copies of non-confidential 

documents filed in connection with this 

investigation are or will be available for 

inspection during official business 

hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the 

Office of the Secretary, U.S. 

International Trade Commission, 500 E 

Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, 

telephone (202) 205–2000. General 

information concerning the Commission 

may also be obtained by accessing its 

internet server (https://www.usitc.gov). 

The public record for this investigation 

may be viewed on the Commission’s 

electronic docket (EDIS) at https://

edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired 

persons are advised that information on 

this matter can be obtained by 

contacting the Commission’s TDD 

terminal on (202) 205–1810. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Commission instituted this investigation 

on April 12, 2017, based on a complaint 

filed by Broadcom Corporation 

(‘‘Broadcom’’) of Irvine, California. 82 

FR 17688. The complaint alleges 

violations of section 337 of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 

(‘‘section 337’’), in the importation into 

the United States, the sale for 

importation, and the sale within the 

United States after importation of 

certain semiconductor devices and 

consumer audiovisual products 

containing the same that infringe U.S. 

Patent Nos. 7,310,104; 7,342,967; 

7,590,059; 8,068,171; and 8,284,844. Id. 

The Commission’s notice of 

investigation named as respondents 

MediaTek Inc. of Hsinchu City, Taiwan, 

MediaTek USA Inc. of San Jose, 

California, and MStar Semiconductor 

Inc. of ChuPei Hsinchu Hsien, Taiwan 

(together, ‘‘MediaTek’’); Sigma Designs, 

Inc. of Fremont, California (‘‘Sigma’’); 

LG Electronics Inc. of Seoul, Republic of 

Korea and LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. of 

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey (together, 

‘‘LG’’); Funai Electric Company, Ltd., of 

Osaka, Japan, Funai Corporation, Inc. of 

Rutherford, New Jersey, and P&F USA, 

Inc. of Alpharetta, Georgia (together, 

‘‘Funai’’); and Vizio, Inc., of Irvine, 

California (‘‘Vizio’’). Id. The Office of 

Unfair Import Investigations is not 

participating in this investigation. Id. 

Several parties were terminated from 

the investigation based on settlement. 

Specifically, the Commission 

terminated the investigation with 

respect to Funai, Order No. 31 (Nov. 7, 

2017), not reviewed Notice (Dec. 12, 

2017); MediaTek, Order No. 35 (Nov. 29, 

2017), not reviewed Notice (Dec. 19, 

2017); and LG, Order No. 42 (Apr. 9, 

2018), not reviewed Notice (May 4, 

2018). Accordingly, only respondents 

Sigma and Vizio (together, 

‘‘Respondents’’) remained in the 

investigation at the time of the final ID. 

The Commission also terminated two 

patents and several claims based on 

Broadcom’s partial withdrawal of the 

complaint. Specifically, the Commission 

terminated the investigation with 

respect to the ’967 patent, the ’171 

patent, claims 21–30 of the ’059 patent, 

and claim 14 of the ’844 patent. Order 

No. 24 (Oct. 10, 2017), not reviewed 

Notice (Oct. 24, 2017). Broadcom also 

elected to withdraw claims 5 and 11–13 

of the ’844 patent in its post-hearing 

brief. ID at 7. Accordingly, at the time 

of the final ID, the only remaining 

claims were 1, 10, 11, 16, 17, and 22 of 

the ’104 patent; claims 1–4, 6–10, of the 

’844 patent; and claims 11–20 of the 

’059 patent. 

On May 11, 2018, the ALJ issued a 

final ID finding no violation of section 

337. Specifically, he found that 

Respondents did not infringe any claim, 

that the asserted claims of the ’844 

patent are invalid, and that Broadcom 

did not satisfy the technical prong of the 

domestic industry requirement for the 

’104 patent. 

On May 29, 2018, Broadcom and 

Respondents each petitioned for review 

of the ID. On June 6, 2018, the parties 

opposed each other’s petitions. 

Having examined the record of this 

investigation, including the ALJ’s final 

ID, the petitions for review, and the 

responses thereto, the Commission has 

determined to review the final ID in 

part. Specifically, the Commission has 

determined to review the following 

issues: (1) The construction of ‘‘a 

processor adapted to control a decoding 

process’’ in claim 1 of the ’844 patent, 

as well as related issues of infringement, 

invalidity, and the technical prong of 

the domestic industry requirement with 

respect to the limitation; (2) the finding 

that Fandrianto satisfies the limitation 

‘‘adapted to perform a decoding 

function on a digital media stream’’ of 

claim 1 of the ’844 patent; (3) the 

construction of ‘‘the blended graphics 

image’’ in claim 1 of the ’104 patent, as 

well as related issues of infringement, 

invalidity, and the technical prong of 

the domestic industry requirement with 

respect to the limitation; (4) the 

construction of ‘‘blend the blended 

graphics image with the video image 

using the alpha values and/or at least 

one value derived from the alpha 

values’’ in claim 1 of the ’104 patent, as 

well as related issues of infringement, 

invalidity, and the technical prong of 

the domestic industry requirement with 

respect to the limitation; and (5) the 

finding that claims 1 and 10 of the ’104 

patent would be rendered obvious by 

Gloudemans in view of Porter & Duff 

under Broadcom’s proposed claim 

constructions. 

The parties are requested to brief their 

positions on the issues under view with 

reference to applicable law and the 

evidentiary record. In connection with 

its review, the Commission is interested 

in briefing on the following issues: 

1. Should the construction of the term ‘‘a 

processor adapted to control a decoding 

process’’ of the ’844 patent include the 

concept of ‘‘orchestrate,’’ and what is the 

difference between ‘‘control’’ and 

‘‘orchestrate’’ in the context of this patent? 

2. Should the construction of the term ‘‘a 

processor adapted to control a decoding 

process’’ of the ’844 patent include the 

concept of a ‘‘pipeline’’ or ‘‘stage’’? 

3. In construing the term ‘‘blend the 

blended graphics image with the video image 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1