10712 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Notices 

Center, 15 Burnett Court, Durango, CO 

81301. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gina 

Jones, Southwest District NEPA 

Coordinator; telephone 970–240–5381; 

address 2465 South Townsend Avenue, 

Montrose, CO 81401; email gmjones@

blm.gov. Persons who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 

to contact the above individual during 

normal business hours. The FIRS is 

available 24 hours a day, seven days a 

week, to leave a message or question 

with the above individual. You will 

receive a reply during normal business 

hours. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The RMP 

provides management for 503,589 acres 

of BLM land in southwest Colorado. The 

RMP describes the actions to meet 

desired resource conditions for upland 

and riparian vegetation; fish and 

wildlife habitat; water resources; air 

quality; cultural, paleontological and 

visual resources; as well as livestock 

grazing; mineral and alternative energy; 

and recreation. 

The BLM and the U.S. Forest Service 

initiated scoping for the RMP in 1999. 

The agencies sought public input via 

meetings and interviews, including an 

intensive year of facilitated public 

meetings in 2005, in order to develop 

the Draft Land and Resource 

Management Plan (LRMP)/

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). 

The Draft was published for a 90-day 

public comment period in December 

2007. Based on public comments, the 

agencies identified the need to prepare 

a Supplement to the Draft EIS to 

consider the Reasonable Foreseeable 

Development potential of oil and gas in 

the Gothic Shale Gas Play, which was 

published in August 2011. The 

preferred alternative for the Draft LRMP 

was carried forward into the Proposed 

LRMP/Final EIS, which was published 

in September 2013, initiating the protest 

period and Governor’s Consistency 

Review. During the protest period for 

the Proposed LRMP, the BLM received 

14 valid protest submissions. The BLM 

granted one protest in part and 

dismissed the remaining protests. The 

BLM granted in part one protest 

regarding 15 potential Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern (ACEC) that 

BLM determined met both the relevance 

and importance criteria, but were not 

analyzed in the range of alternatives in 

the Draft EIS due to a procedural error. 

The BLM will evaluate these areas, as 

well as the two existing ACECs that will 

continue to be designated as ACECs in 

the Approved RMP, in a future plan 

amendment. The decisions in the 

Approved RMP will protect these areas 

from impairment of their identified 

relevant and important values. 

As a result of the Governor’s 

Consistency Review, the BLM modified 

its direction to maintain minimum 

instream flow levels for the benefit of 

fisheries from a standard to a guideline. 

The BLM has also made minor editorial 

modifications to the Approved RMP to 

provide further clarification of some of 

the decisions. 

The ROD also serves as the BLM’s 

decision to adopt the U.S. Forest Service 

oil and gas leasing decision for Federal 

mineral estate administered by the San 

Juan National Forest. The U.S. Forest 

Service outlined its decision in the San 

Juan National Forest’s September 2013 

Record of Decision, Oil and Gas Leasing 

Availability. The BLM concurs with the 

selection of Alternative B as described 

in the U.S. Forest Service Record of 

Decision. In the Approved RMP, the 

BLM also designates routes for 

mechanized travel in the Phil’s World 

and Mud Springs portion of the 

planning area that were analyzed in the 

2008 Cortez-Mancos Travel 

Management Plan Environmental 

Assessment (CO–800–2006–090–EA). 

These route designations are 

implementation decisions and are 

appealable under 43 CFR part 4. These 

decisions are contained in Section 2.13 

of the Approved RMP. Any party 

adversely affected by the proposed route 

designations may appeal within 30 days 

of publication of this Notice of 

Availability pursuant to 43 CFR part 4, 

subpart E. The appeal should state the 

specific route(s), as identified in 

Appendix A of the Approved RMP, for 

which the decision is being appealed. 

The appeal must be filed with the Tres 

Rios Field Manager at the above listed 

address. Please consult the appropriate 

regulations (43 CFR part 4, subpart E) 

for further appeal requirements. 

Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 

1506.10. 

Ruth Welch, 

BLM Colorado State Director. 

[FR Doc. 2015–04075 Filed 2–26–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–JB–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Reclamation 

[RR02054000, 15XR0687NA, 

RX.18527901.3000000] 

Central Valley Project Improvement 

Act Water Management Plans 

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Reclamation 

has made available to the public the 

Water Management Plans for 10 entities. 

For the purpose of this announcement, 

Water Management Plans (Plans) are 

considered the same as Water 

Conservation Plans. Reclamation is 

publishing this notice in order to allow 

the public an opportunity to review the 

Plans and comment on the preliminary 

determinations. 

DATES: Submit written comments on the 

preliminary determinations on or before 

March 30, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to 

Ms. Angela Anderson, Bureau of 

Reclamation, 2800 Cottage Way, MP– 

410, Sacramento, California 95825; or 

email at aanderson@usbr.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

be placed on a mailing list for any 

subsequent information, please contact 

Ms. Anderson at the email address 

above or 916–978–5215 (TDD 978– 

5608). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: To meet 

the requirements of the Central Valley 

Project Improvement Act of 1992 and 

the Reclamation Reform Act of 1982, the 

Bureau of Reclamation developed and 

published the Criteria for Evaluating 

Water Management Plans (Criteria). 

Each of the 10 entities listed below has 

developed a Plan that has been 

evaluated and preliminarily determined 

to meet the requirements of these 

Criteria. The following Water 

Management Plans are available for 

review: 

• City of Fairfield 

• City of Vacaville 

• City of Vallejo 

• Glide Water District 

• Kanawha Water District 

• San Joaquin River Exchange 

Contractors: Consisting of Central 

California Irrigation District, 

Columbia Canal Company, Firebaugh 

Canal Water District, and San Luis 

Canal Company 

• Solano County Water Agency 

• Suisun-Solano Water Authority 

• West Stanislaus Irrigation District 

• City of West Sacramento 

We are inviting the public to 

comment on our preliminary (i.e., draft) 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Notices 10713 

1The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 

CFR 207.2(f)). 

determination of Plan adequacy. Section 

3405(e) of the Central Valley Project 

Improvement Act (Title 34 Pub. L. 102– 

575), requires the Secretary of the 

Interior to establish and administer an 

office on Central Valley Project water 

conservation best management practices 

that shall ‘‘develop criteria for 

evaluating the adequacy of all water 

conservation plans developed by project 

contractors, including those plans 

required by Section 210 of the 

Reclamation Reform Act of 1982.’’ Also, 

according to Section 3405(e)(1), these 

criteria must be developed ‘‘with the 

purpose of promoting the highest level 

of water use efficiency reasonably 

achievable by project contractors using 

best available cost-effective technology 

and best management practices.’’ These 

criteria state that all parties 

(Contractors) that contract with 

Reclamation for water supplies 

(municipal and industrial contracts over 

2,000 acre-feet and agricultural 

contracts over 2,000 irrigable acres) 

must prepare a Plan that contains the 

following information: 

1. Description of the District; 

2. Inventory of Water Resources; 

3. Best Management Practices (BMPs) 

for Agricultural Contractors; 

4. BMPs for Urban Contractors; 

5. Plan Implementation; 

6. Exemption Process; 

7. Regional Criteria; and 

8. Five-Year Revisions. 

Reclamation evaluates Plans based on 

these criteria. A copy of these Plans will 

be available for review at Reclamation’s 

Mid-Pacific Regional Office, 2800 

Cottage Way, MP–410, Sacramento, 

California 95825. Our practice is to 

make comments, including names and 

home addresses of respondents, 

available for public review. If you wish 

to review a copy of these Plans, please 

contact Ms. Anderson. 

Public Disclosure 

Before including your address, phone 

number, email address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

Richard J. Woodley, 

Regional Resources Manager, Mid-Pacific 

Region, Bureau of Reclamation. 

[FR Doc. 2015–03950 Filed 2–26–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4332–90–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation Nos. 701–TA–458 and 731– 

TA–1154 (Review)] 

Certain Kitchen Appliance Shelving 

and Racks From China: Determination 

On the basis of the record 1 developed 

in the subject five-year reviews, the 

United States International Trade 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) 

determines, pursuant to section 751(c) 

of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 

1675(c)), that revocation of the existing 

antidumping and countervailing duty 

orders on certain kitchen appliance 

shelving and racks from China would be 

likely to lead to continuation or 

recurrence of material injury to a U.S. 

industry producing refrigeration 

shelving and a U.S. industry producing 

oven racks within a reasonably 

foreseeable time. 

Background 

The Commission instituted these 

reviews on August 1, 2014 (79 FR 

44862) and determined on November 4, 

2014 that it would conduct expedited 

reviews (79 FR 69525, November 21, 

2014). 

The Commission completed and filed 

its determinations in these reviews on 

February 24, 2015. The views of the 

Commission are contained in USITC 

Publication 4520 (February 2015), 

entitled Certain Kitchen Appliance 

Shelving and Racks from China: 

Investigation Nos. 701–TA–458 and 

731–TA–1154 (Review). 

Issued: February 24, 2015. 

By order of the Commission. 

Lisa R. Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2015–04114 Filed 2–26–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–924] 

Certain Light Reflectors and 

Components, Packaging, and Related 

Advertising Thereof; Notice of 

Commission Determination Not To 

Review Initial Determinations Granting 

Motions To Terminate the Investigation 

as to the Remaining Respondents; 

Termination of the Investigation in Its 

Entirety 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has determined not to 

review: (1) An initial determination 

(‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 17) issued by the 

presiding administrative law judge 

(‘‘ALJ’’) on January 22, 2015, granting a 

motion to terminate the investigation as 

to respondents Sinowell (Shanghai) Co. 

Ltd. and Sinohydro Ltd. (collectively, 

‘‘Sinowell’’), based on a settlement 

agreement; and (2) an ID (Order No. 18) 

issued by the ALJ on January 27, 2015, 

granting a motion to terminate the 

investigation as to the remaining 

respondents based on withdrawal of the 

amended complaint. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cathy Chen, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–2392. 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 (http://www.usitc.gov). 

The public record for this investigation 

may be viewed on the Commission’s 

electronic docket (EDIS) at http://

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 August 12, 2014, based on a 

complaint filed on June 20, 2014, 

amended on July 11, 2014, and 

supplemented on July 18, 2014, on 

behalf of Sunlight Supply, Inc. of 

Vancouver, Washington and IP 

Holdings, LLC of Vancouver, 

Washington (collectively, ‘‘Sunlight’’). 

79 FR 47156 (Aug. 12, 2014). The 

amended complaint alleged violations 

of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 

as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the sale 

for importation, importation, and sale 

within the United States after 

importation of certain light reflectors 

and components, packaging, and related 

advertising thereof by reason of 

infringement of certain claims of U.S. 

Patent Nos. 7,641,367; D634,469; 

D644,185; D545,485; and by reason of 

infringement of U.S. Trademark 

Registration Nos. 3,871,765; and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES