62408 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 18, 2000 / Notices

material to the docket contact LT Ryan

Murphy, Seventeenth Coast Guard

District (mor), (907) 463–2817.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

The Coast Guard encourages

interested persons to submit written

data, views, or arguments. It solicits

comments from interested groups

including oil terminal facility owners

and operators, owners and operators of

crude oil tankers calling at terminal

facilities, and fishing, aquacultural,

recreational and environmental citizens

groups, concerning the recertification

application of CIRCAC. Persons

submitting comments should include

their names and addresses, identify this

rulemaking (CGD17–00–15) and the

specific section of this document to

which each comment applies, and give

the reason for each comment. Please

provide all comments and attachments

in an unbound format, no larger than

81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying

and electronic filing. Persons wanting

acknowledgement of receipt of

comments should enclose stamped, selfaddressed postcards or envelopes.

The Coast Guard plans no public

hearing. Persons may request a public

hearing by writing to Commander (m),

Seventeenth Coast Guard District, P.O.

Box 25517, Juneau, AK, 99802–5517.

The request should include reasons why

a hearing would be beneficial. If there

is sufficient evidence to determine that

oral presentations will aid this

recertification process, the Coast Guard

will hold a public hearing at a time and

place announced by a later notice in the

Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

The Coast Guard published guidelines

on December 31, 1992 (57 FR 626000),

to assist groups seeking recertification

under the Oil Terminal and Oil Tanker

Environmental Oversight and

Monitoring Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2732)

(the Act). The Coast Guard issued a

policy statement on July 7, 1993 (58 FR

36505), to clarify the factors that the

Coast Guard would be considering in

making its determination as to whether

advisory groups should be certified in

accordance with the Act; and the

procedures which the Coast Guard

would follow in meeting its certification

responsibilities under the Act.

The Coast Guard has received an

application for recertification of

CIRCAC, the currently certified advisory

group for the Cook Inlet region. In

accordance with the review and

certification process contained in the

policy statement, the Coast Guard

announces the availability of that

application.

At the conclusion of the comment

period, the Coast Guard will review all

application materials and comments

received and will take one of the

following actions:

(a) Recertify the advisory group under

33 U.S.C. 2732(o).

(b) Issue a conditional recertification

for a period of 90 days, with a statement

of any discrepancies, which must be

corrected to qualify for recertification

for the remainder of the year.

(c) Deny recertification of the advisory

group if the Coast Guard finds that the

group is not broadly representative of

the interests and communities in the

area or is not adequately fostering the

goals and purposes of 33 U.S.C. 2732.

The Coast Guard will notify CIRCAC

by letter of the action taken on its

application. A notice will be published

in the Federal Register to advise the

public of the Coast Guard’s

determination.

Dated: October 4, 2000.

T.J. Barrett,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander,

Seventeenth Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 00–26774 Filed 10–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

[USCG 2000–8079]

Setting the Environmental Agenda of

the Coast Guard for Oil Pollution—

Prevention, Preparedness, and

Response—in the 21st Century

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting and

request for comments.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is holding at

least one public meeting to help in

setting its environmental agenda for oil

pollution—prevention, preparedness,

and response—in the 21st Century. A

decade after the Oil Pollution Act of

1990, spills of cargo oil from tank

vessels and other sources have declined;

but spills continue to occur in marine

transport and to pose new risks and

challenges. The Coast Guard hopes to

receive input from all stakeholders to

identify likely threats to the

environment, and to receive ideas on

which it may base its prevention,

preparedness, and response programs

and needs in the future.

DATES: (1) The public meeting will take

place on December 12, 2000, from 8:30

a.m. to 4 p.m., but will conclude before

4 p.m. if there are no more comments.

(2) Comments and related material must

reach the Docket Management Facility

on or before December 30, 2000. (3) If

the Coast Guard decides to hold a

second public meeting, it will announce

that meeting by a later notice in the

Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will

take place at Coast Guard Headquarters,

2100 2nd Street SW., Washington, DC

20593–0001, in room 4202. The meeting

will also be video broadcast on the

internet.

To make sure your comments and

related materials enter the docket

[USCG 2000–8079] once and only once,

please submit them by only one of the

following means:

(1) By mail to the Docket Management

Facility, U.S. Department of

Transportation, room PL–401, 400

Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC

20590–0001.

(2) By delivery to room PL–401 on the

Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400

Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC,

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

The telephone number is 202–366–

9329.

(3) By fax to the Docket Management

Facility at 202–493–2251.

(4) Electronically through the Web

Site for the Docket Management System

at http://dms.dot.gov.

The Docket Management Facility

maintains the public docket for this

notice. Comments and material received

from the public will become part of this

docket and will be available for

inspection or copying at room PL–401

on the Plaza level of the Nassif Building,

400 Seventh Street SW., Washington,

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

You may also access the public docket

on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

questions on this public meeting,

including those on how to access the

meeting on the internet, contact

Commander George H. Burns III, Office

of Response (G–MOR–1), Coast Guard,

telephone 202–267–0421, e-mail

Gburns@comdt.uscg.mil. (In particular,

we ask that those attending the meeting

notify CDR Burns so he can ensure that

adequate space is available.) For

questions on viewing or submitting

material to the docket, call Ms. Dorothy

Beard, Chief of Dockets, Department of

Transportation, telephone 202–366–

9329.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 18, 2000 / Notices 62409

Request for Comments

We encourage you to participate in

this meeting by attending it or by

submitting comments and related

material to the docket. If you do submit

comments or related material, please

include your name and address, identify

this notice [USCG 2000–8079], and the

reason for each comment. You may

submit your comments and material by

mail, delivery, fax, or electronic means

to the Docket Management Facility at

the address under ADDRESSES; but

please submit your comments and

material by only one means. The Coast

Guard will consider the comments

received from this initial meeting, and

those submitted to the docket, to

evaluate the need for subsequent

meetings, which may examine various

factors in more detail. Please submit all

comments and attachments in an

unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by

11 inches, suitable for copying and

electronic filing to the Docket

Management Facility at the address

under ADDRESSES. If you want

acknowledgement of receipt of your

comments, please enclose a stamped,

self-addressed postcard or envelope. We

will consider all comments and material

received whether submitted in writing

to the docket or presented during the

meeting.

Background and Purpose

Many factors determine the nature of

spills into our nation’s waterways and

coastal areas. One such factor is future

growth. Larger ships with greater fuel

capacities may use our navigable waters.

Increasing demand for petro-chemicals

may exert pressures on the transport

system. Offshore production of crude oil

from remoter areas will grow as the

price of oil rises. Transport of oil

through aging pipelines near or under

our waterways will pose increasing risk

of spills into aquatic and marine

environments. Further, with the

phasing-in of double-hull requirements

for tankships and tank barges over the

next several years, the Coast Guard

suspects that both the methods of

waterborne transport of oil and the risks

associated with these methods will

change. All of this will affect the

environmental services and leadership

that the Coast Guard provides.

The Coast Guard, the public, and

industry have engaged in numerous

partnerships, and conducted many

studies, over the past ten years; these

certainly point the way toward a

reasonable and coherent environmental

agenda to fit the future. This meeting

will examine ideas generated by these

efforts, as well as explore emerging

trends. It will be the first step in

reconciling the expectations of both the

public and industries engaged in marine

transport. An agenda will be provided at

the meeting based on the following

questions.

Questions: Your responses to the

following questions are solicited. Please

submit your responses as noted above

under ADDRESSES.

1. What source do you see as

presenting the biggest risk of oil

pollution?

2. How do you see that risk changing

over the next ten years?

3. How do you see the waterborne

transport of oil changing over the next

ten or twenty years?

4. What best practices for prevention,

if any, from what industry or company,

should we urge for uniform application

throughout the waterborne transport of

oil?

5. Should the Coast Guard concentrate

its efforts toward preventing oil

pollution on vessels and management,

or on measures external to the vessel,

such as Vessel Traffic Services, port risk

assessments, and the like?

6. Do you perceive the public as

becoming less tolerant of the risks of oil

pollution? If yes, how is that affecting

shipping, mariners’ practice, and efforts

toward prevention?

7. How will mariners’ roles change

with respect to preventing oil pollution

in the future?

8. Should the Coast Guard be equally

prepared for spills from foreign sources

and for those from domestic ones? If so,

how should we advance preparedness

for spills from foreign sources (perhaps

through the International Maritime

Organization or classification societies)?

9. Should response plans for other

sources of spills mirror the response

plans for vessels envisioned by OPA 90?

10. Should non-tank vessels have to

contract resources for worst cases, as

tank vessels must under OPA 90?

11. Should the scope of, frequency of,

and criteria for spill response exercises

align with those in the Preparedness for

Exercise Program (PREP)?

12. Should Qualified Individuals for

non-tank vessels meet the same

standards as those required for tank

vessels?

13. Should strategies for response to

and mitigation of other sources of spills

differ from those used for sources of

spills identified under OPA 90? How?

14. What needs improvement in

control of and assessment for response

to spills? (These comprise modeling,

remote sensing, direct-reading

instruments, and field technologies.)

How?

15. What needs improvement in

cleanup methods and technologies?

(These comprise in-situ burning,

dispersants, mechanical recovery,

shoreline cleanup, bioremediation, and

other innovations.) How?

16. How does risk of oil pollution

compare with risks from other forms of

pollution in terms of effect on the

environment? (These may comprise

hazardous materials, airborne materials,

aquatic nuisance species, or others.)

17. Should we consider specific

sources of funding for further

improvements? (These may comprise

per-barrel taxes, port tariffs, users’ fees,

or others.) Should the Oil Spill Liability

Trust Fund or a similar source be

available for preventive measures?

18. What improvements would you

make to the U.S. Marine Transportation

System to minimize the risk of

pollution?

19. Given that the costs of improving

the infrastructure of the Marine

Transportation System could be

significant, what portion of these costs

of improvement to reduce the risk of

pollution should the public bear?

Information on Services for People with

Disabilities

For information on facilities or

services for people with disabilities, or

to request special assistance at the

meeting, please contact Commander

George H. Burns III, Office of Response

(G–MOR–1), Coast Guard, telephone

202–267–0421, e-mail

Gburns@comdt.uscg.mil as soon as

possible.

Dated: October 12, 2000.

Howard L. Hime,

Acting Director of Standards, Marine Safety

and Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 00–26767 Filed 10–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Customs Service

List of Foreign Entities Violating

Textile Transshipment and Country of

Origin Rules

AGENCY: U.S. Customs Service,

Department of the Treasury.

ACTION: General notice.

SUMMARY: This document notifies the

public of foreign entities which have

been issued a penalty claim under

section 592 of the Tariff Act of 1930, for

certain violations of the customs laws.

This list is authorized to be published

by section 333 of the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act.

DATES: This document notifies the

public of the semiannual list for the 6-