Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2011 / Notices 62785 

action. Therefore, NMFS has 

determined that the total taking of 

affected species or stocks would not 

have an unmitigable adverse impact on 

the availability of such species or stocks 

for taking for subsistence purposes. 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

On February 5, 2007, NMFS 

concluded consultation with MARAD 

and the USCG, under section 7 of the 

ESA, on the proposed construction and 

operation of the Northeast Gateway LNG 

facility and issued a biological opinion. 

The finding of that consultation was 

that the construction and operation of 

the Northeast Gateway LNG terminal 

may adversely affect, but is not likely to 

jeopardize, the continued existence of 

northern right, humpback, and fin 

whales, and is not likely to adversely 

affect sperm, sei, or blue whales and 

Kemp’s ridley, loggerhead, green or 

leatherback sea turtles. An incidental 

take statement (ITS) was issued 

following NMFS’ issuance of the 2007 

IHA. 

On November 15, 2007, Northeast 

Gateway and Algonquin submitted a 

letter to NMFS requesting an extension 

for the LNG Port construction into 

December 2007. Upon reviewing 

Northeast Gateway’s weekly marine 

mammal monitoring reports submitted 

under the previous IHA, NMFS 

recognized that the potential take of 

some marine mammals resulting from 

the LNG Port and Pipeline Lateral by 

Level B behavioral harassment likely 

had exceeded the original take 

estimates. Therefore, NMFS Northeast 

Region (NER) reinitiated consultation 

with MARAD and USCG on the 

construction and operation of the 

Northeast Gateway LNG facility. On 

November 30, 2007, NMFS NER issued 

a revised biological opinion, reflecting 

the revised construction time period 

and including a revised ITS. This 

revised biological opinion concluded 

that the construction and operation of 

the Northeast Gateway LNG terminal 

may adversely affect, but is not likely to 

jeopardize, the continued existence of 

northern right, humpback, and fin 

whales, and is not likely to adversely 

affect sperm, sei, or blue whales. 

NMFS’ Permits, Conservation and 

Education division has determined that 

the activities described in here are the 

same as those analyzed in the revised 

2007 biological opinion. Therefore, a 

new consultation is not required for 

issuance of this IHA. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

MARAD and the USCG released a 

Final EIS/Environmental Impact Report 

(EIR) for the proposed Northeast 

Gateway Port and Pipeline Lateral. A 

notice of availability was published by 

MARAD on October 26, 2006 (71 FR 

62657). The Final EIS/EIR provides 

detailed information on the proposed 

project facilities, construction methods 

and analysis of potential impacts on 

marine mammals. 

NMFS was a cooperating agency 

(as defined by the Council on 

Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1501.6)) 

in the preparation of the Draft and Final 

EISs. NMFS reviewed the Final EIS and 

adopted it on May 4, 2007. NMFS 

issued a separate Record of Decision for 

issuance of authorizations pursuant to 

section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA for the 

construction and operation of the 

Northeast Gateway’s LNG Port Facility 

in Massachusetts Bay. 

Determinations 

NMFS has determined that the 

operation and maintenance activities of 

the Northeast Gateway Port facility may 

result, at worst, in a temporary 

modification in behavior of small 

numbers of certain species of marine 

mammals that may be in close 

proximity to the Northeast Gateway 

LNG facility. These activities are 

expected to result in some local shortterm displacement only of the affected 

species or stocks of marine mammals. 

Taking these two factors together, NMFS 

concludes that the activity will have no 

more than a negligible impact on the 

affected species or stocks, as there will 

be no expected effects on annual rates 

of survival and reproduction of these 

species or stocks. This determination is 

further supported by the required 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 

measures described in this document. 

As a result of implementation of the 

described mitigation and monitoring 

measures, no take by injury or death 

would be requested, anticipated or 

authorized, and the potential for 

temporary or permanent hearing 

impairment is very unlikely due to the 

relatively low noise levels (and 

consequently small zone of impact 

relative to the size of Massachusetts 

Bay). 

While the number of marine 

mammals that may be harassed will 

depend on the distribution and 

abundance of marine mammals in the 

vicinity of the LNG Port facility, the 

estimated numbers of marine mammals 

to be harassed are small relative to the 

affected species or stock sizes. 

Authorization 

NMFS has issued an IHA to Northeast 

Gateway for conducting LNG Port 

facility operations in Massachusetts 

Bay, provided the previously mentioned 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 

requirements are incorporated. 

Dated: October 4, 2011. 

James H. Lecky, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–26200 Filed 10–7–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

[CPSC Docket No. 12–C0001] 

Nordica USA, 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 Nordica 

USA, containing a civil penalty of 

$214,000.00. 

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 October 

26, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to 

comment on this Settlement Agreement 

should send written comments to the 

Comment 12–C0001, Office of the 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, 4330 East West Highway, 

Room 820, Bethesda, Maryland 20814– 

4408. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dennis C. Kacoyanis, General Attorney, 

Division of Enforcement and 

Information, Office of the General 

Counsel, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, 4330 East West Highway, 

Bethesda, Maryland 20814–4408; 

telephone (301) 504–7587. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of 

the Agreement and Order appears 

below. 

Dated: October 4, 2011. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary. 

Settlement Agreement 

1. In accordance with 16 CFR 1118.20, 

Nordica USA (‘‘Nordica’’) and staff of 

the United States Consumer Product 

Safety Commission (‘‘Commission’’) 

enter into this Settlement Agreement 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

62786 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2011 / Notices 

(‘‘Agreement’’) under the Consumer 

Product Safety Act (‘‘CPSC’’). The 

Agreement and the incorporated 

attached Order (‘‘Order’’) resolve the 

allegations set forth below. 

Parties 

2. ‘‘Staff’’ is staff of the United States 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

an independent federal regulatory 

agency established pursuant to, and 

responsible for the enforcement of, the 

Consumer Product Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 

2051–2089 (‘‘CPSA’’). 

3. Nordica is a corporation organized 

and existing under the laws of New 

Hampshire, with its principal corporate 

offices located in West Lebanon, New 

Hampshire. Nordica is a division of 

Tecnica Group USA. 

Staff Allegations 

4. From August 2006 through 

December 2008, Nordica imported and 

sold to ski retailers about 4,500 pairs of 

XBI ALU Skis (‘‘Skis’’). The binding 

plates on the skis could crack or break 

causing the skier to lose control or fall 

and suffer injuries. 

5. The Skis are ‘‘consumer products,’’ 

and, at all relevant times, Nordica was 

a ‘‘manufacturer’’ of those consumer 

products, which were ‘‘distributed in 

commerce,’’ as those terms are defined 

or used in sections 3(a)(5), (8), and (11) 

of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(5), (8), 

and (11). 

6. Beginning in December 2007, one 

of Nordica’s retail customers advised 

Nordica that it had received calls with 

comments about the Skis’ binding plates 

cracking and breaking. The retail 

customer requested replacement parts 

for the broken binding plates. 

7. In March 2008, Nordica received a 

report from another retail customer 

about the Skis’ binding plates breaking. 

Also in March 2008, Nordica employees 

identified numerous incidents of the 

Skis’ binding plates cracking and 

breaking. Nordica advised the foreign 

manufacturer of the retail customers’ 

claims of the Skis’ binding plates 

cracking and breaking. Nordica asked 

the foreign manufacturer to provide 

Nordica with 25 pairs of replacement 

binding plates for the Skis. 

8. Through April 2008, Nordica 

continued to receive reports of the Skis’ 

binding plates breaking. By the end of 

April 2008, Nordica knew of at least 20 

claims of broken Skis binding plates. 

9. On or about Aug. 4, 2008, Nordica 

received an in-depth epidemiologic 

investigation report from the 

Commission about the Skis’ binding 

plates breaking. 

10. In September 2008, Nordica 

learned that the foreign manufacturer 

had redesigned the Ski’s binding plate. 

Nordica did not ask the foreign 

manufacturer until December 2008, why 

it had redesigned the Ski’s binding 

plate. At that time, Nordica learned that 

the foreign manufacturer had redesigned 

the Ski’s binding plate because of the 

cracking and breakage problem. 

11. Nordica continued to investigate 

the binding plate problem throughout 

the fall of 2008. Nordica discovered that 

it had about 200 reports of warranty 

claims related to the Skis’ binding plates 

cracking and breaking. 

12. Despite being aware of the 

information in paragraphs 7 through 12, 

Nordica did not report to the 

Commission until December 3, 2008. By 

that time, Nordica was aware of at least 

200 reports of the Skis’ binding plates 

cracking and breaking. 

13. Nordica obtained information that 

reasonably supported the conclusion 

that the Skis’ binding plates contained 

a defect that could create a substantial 

product hazard or that the Skis’ binding 

plates created an unreasonable risk of 

serious injury or death. This knowledge 

required Nordica to immediately inform 

the Commission of the defect and risk 

associated with the Skis’ binding plates, 

as required by section 15(b)(3) and (4) 

of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2064(b)(3) and 

(4). 

14. Nordica knowingly failed to 

inform the Commission immediately 

about the Skis’ binding plates, as 

required by CPSA sections 15(b)(3) and 

(4), 15 U.S.C. 2064(b)(3) and (4), and as 

the term ‘‘knowingly’’ is defined in 

CPSA section 20(d), 15 U.S.C. 2069(d). 

This failure violated CPSA section 

19(a)(4), 15 U.S.C. 2068(a)(4). Pursuant 

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

failure subjected Nordica to civil 

penalties. 

Nordica’s Response 

15. Nordica denies Staff’s allegations 

that the Skis’ binding plates contain 

defects that could create a substantial 

product hazard or create an 

unreasonable risk of serious injury or 

death, and further denies that it violated 

the reporting requirements of Section 

15(b) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2064(b). 

16. Nordica states that it is not aware 

of any reports of injury associated with 

cracking or breakage of the binding 

plates any time from the beginning of 

distribution (2006) up to and including 

the present date (2011). 

17. On or about August 4, 2008, 

Nordica received a CPSC Incident 

Report that had been submitted by a 

consumer concerning breakage of an 

XBI Alu Ski. Nordica immediately 

began investigating whether cracking or 

breakage of the XBI Alu Ski presented 

a potential safety concern. Following 

extensive investigation, and based upon 

review of the available information— 

including, but not limited to, the 

absence of any reported injuries and test 

results provided by the manufacturer— 

Nordica did not and still does not 

believe that the XBI Alu binding plate 

ski contained a defect that could present 

a substantial product hazard or created 

an unreasonable risk of serious injury or 

death. Out of an abundance of caution, 

Nordica wished to replace any binding 

plates due to potential risk of cracking. 

Nordica therefore notified CPSC in 

December 2008 of its willingness to 

conduct a Fast Track recall in full 

cooperation with CPSC. 

Agreement of the Parties 

18. Under the CPSA, the Commission 

has jurisdiction over this matter and 

over Nordica. 

19. The parties enter into the 

Agreement for settlement purposes only. 

The Agreement does not constitute an 

admission by Nordica, or a 

determination by the Commission, that 

Nordica knowingly violated the CPSA. 

20. In settlement of Staff’s allegations, 

Nordica must pay a civil penalty in the 

amount of two hundred-fourteen 

thousand dollars ($214,000.00). The 

civil penalty shall be paid within 

twenty (20) calendar days of receiving 

service of the Commission’s final Order 

accepting the Agreement. The payment 

shall be made electronically to the CPSC 

via http://www.pay.gov. 

21. The parties enter into this 

Agreement for settlement purposes. The 

Agreement does not constitute an 

admission by Nordica or a 

determination by the Commission that 

Nordica violated the CPSA’s reporting 

requirements, or that the Skis’ binding 

plates presented a substantial product 

hazard. 

22. Upon 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). Pursuant to 

16 CFR 1118.20(f), if the Commission 

does not receive any written request not 

to accept the Agreement within fifteen 

(15) calendar days, the Agreement shall 

be deemed finally accepted on the 

sixteenth (16th) calendar day after the 

date it is published in the Federal 

Register, in accordance with 16 CFR 

1118.20(f). 

23. Upon the Commission’s final 

acceptance of the Agreement and 

issuance of the final Order, Nordica 

knowingly, voluntarily, and completely 

waives any rights it may have in this 

matter to the following: (1) An 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2011 / Notices 62787 

administrative or judicial hearing; (2) 

judicial review or other challenge or 

contest of the validity of the Order or of 

the Commission’s actions; (3) a 

determination by the Commission of 

whether Nordica 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. 

24. The Commission may publicize 

the terms of the Agreement and the 

Order. 

25. The Agreement and the Order 

shall apply to, and be binding upon, 

Nordica and each of its successors and 

assigns. 

26. The Commission issues the Order 

under the provisions of the CPSA, and 

a violation of the Order may subject 

Nordica and each of its successors and 

assigns to appropriate legal action. 

27. The Agreement may be used in 

interpreting the Order. Understandings, 

agreements, representations, or 

interpretations apart from those 

contained in the Agreement and the 

Order may not be used to vary or 

contradict their terms. The Agreement 

cannot be waived, amended, modified, 

or otherwise altered without written 

agreement thereto, executed by the party 

against whom such waiver, amendment, 

modification, or alteration is sought to 

be enforced. 

28. If any provision of the Agreement 

and the Order is held to be illegal, 

invalid, or unenforceable under present 

or future laws effective during the terms 

of the Agreement and the Order, such 

provision shall be fully severable. The 

balance of the provisions in the 

Agreement and the Order shall remain 

in full force and effect, unless the 

Commission and Nordica agree that the 

severed provision materially affects the 

purpose of the Agreement and the 

Order. 

Nordica Usa 

Dated: September 6, 2011. 

By: llllllllllllllllll

Willy Booker, 

President, Nordica USA, 19 Technology 

Drive, West Lebanon, NH 03784. 

Dated: September 12, 2011. 

By: llllllllllllllllll

Eric A. Rubel, Esquire, 

Arnold & Porter, LLP, 555 Twelfth Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20004–1206, Counsel 

for Nordica USA. 

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission 

Staff. 

Cheryl A. Falvey, 

General Counsel. 

Melissa V. Hampshire, 

Assistant General Counsel, Office of the 

General Counsel. 

Dated: September 22, 2011. 

By: llllllllllllllllll

Dennis C. Kacoyanis, 

General Attorney, Division of Enforcement 

and Information, Office of the General 

Counsel. 

Order 

Upon consideration of the Settlement 

Agreement entered into between 

Nordica USA (‘‘Nordica’’) and U.S. 

Consumer Product Safety Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) staff, and the 

Commission having jurisdiction over 

the subject matter and over Nordica, and 

it appearing that the Settlement 

Agreement and the Order are in the 

public interest, it is 

Ordered, that the Settlement 

Agreement be, and hereby is, accepted; 

and it is 

Further Ordered, that Nordica shall 

pay a civil penalty in the amount of two 

hundred-fourteen thousand dollars 

($214,000.00) within twenty (20) 

calendar days of service of the 

Commission’s final Order accepting the 

Agreement. The payment shall be made 

electronically to the CPSC via http:// 

www.pay.gov. Upon the failure of 

Nordica to make the foregoing payment 

when due, interest on the unpaid 

amount shall accrue and be paid by 

Nordica 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 4th day of October, 2011. 

By Order of the Commission. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2011–26162 Filed 10–7–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

Meeting of the Department of Defense 

Military Family Readiness Council 

(MFRC); Change of Meeting Date and 

Time 

AGENCY: Office of the Under Secretary of 

Defense for Personnel and Readiness, 

Department of Defense. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 10 (a), 

Public Law 92–463, on September 26, 

2011 (76 FR 59388–59389) the 

Department of Defense Military Family 

Readiness Council (MFRC) announced a 

meeting to be held on October 17, 2011. 

This notice announces that the meeting 

date and time has been changed to 

November 21, 2011, from 2 p.m. to 4 

p.m. All other information in the 

original notice remains the same. 

The meeting is open to the public, 

subject to the availability of space. 

Persons desiring to attend may contact 

Ms. Melody McDonald at 571–256–1738 

or e-mail FamilyReadinessCouncil@osd.

mil no later than 5 p.m. on Tuesday, 

November 15, 2011 to arrange for 

parking and escort into the conference 

room inside the Pentagon. 

Interested persons may submit a 

written statement for consideration by 

the Council. Persons desiring to submit 

a written statement to the Council must 

notify the point of contact listed below 

no later than 5 p.m., Wednesday, 

November 16, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Pentagon Conference Center 

M1 (escorts will be provided from the 

Pentagon Metro entrance). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Melody McDonald or Ms. Betsy Graham, 

Office of the Deputy Under Secretary 

(Military Community & Family Policy), 

4000 Defense Pentagon, Room 2E319, 

Washington, DC 20301–4000. 

Telephones (571) 256–1738; (703) 697– 

9283 and/or e-mail: 

FamilyReadinessCouncil@osd.mil. 

Dated: October 5, 2011. 

Aaron Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2011–26166 Filed 10–7–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Air Force 

Air University Board of Visitors 

Meeting 

ACTION: Notice of Meeting of the Air 

University Board of Visitors. 

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act of 

1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), 

the Government in the Sunshine Act of 

1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 

41 CFR 102–3.150, the Department of 

Defense announces that the Air 

University Board of Visitors’ meeting 

will take place on Monday, November 

14th, 2011, from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. and 

Tuesday, November 15th, 2011, from 8 

a.m. to 5 p.m. The meeting will be held 

in the Air University Commander’s 

Conference Room located in building 

800. Please contact Mrs. Diana Bunch, 

334–953–4547 for further details of the 

meeting location. 

The purpose of this meeting is to 

provide independent advice and 

recommendations on matters pertaining 

to the educational, doctrinal, and 

research policies and activities of Air 

University. The agenda will include 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES