Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 146 / Wednesday, July 30, 2014 / Notices 44191 

wide survey of archeological sites 

would be the goal as well as individual 

cultural resource surveys as needed for 

specific projects or sites. Partnerships 

would be developed with other 

agencies, institutions, and cultural 

groups (e.g., Choctaw Nation, African 

American groups, etc.), to seek ideas 

and possible share staff positions. The 

refuge would improve management and 

interpretation of the refuge’s cultural 

resources. Conservation partnerships 

would be developed with neighboring 

landowners and worked through 

partnerships to have the greatest impact 

on maintaining or restoring the 

biological integrity of the local 

community. Fee title acquisition from 

willing sellers will focus on lands 

within the existing approved acquisition 

boundary that will most efficiently 

assist the refuge in meeting the purposes 

for which it was established and the 

mission of the Service. Under this 

alternative the two RNAs would no 

longer remain under this designation 

and would be managed as part of the 

larger surrounding units of similar type 

and managed for their historic 

conditions. A second Wildlife Law 

Enforcement Officer would be 

established in combination with 

possible collateral duty officer positions 

to assist in protecting natural and 

cultural resources along with public 

safety. 

The current level of visitor services 

programs would be expanded for the 

general public and attempts made to 

provide more access for users with 

disabilities and youth. The Service 

would develop a week-long, large game 

(turkey and deer) hunt program to 

provide increased opportunities for 

disabled hunters in exchange for a week 

reduction in the general gun deer and 

turkey seasons. Deer hunting 

opportunities overall would be 

increased. The Service would work with 

the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, 

Fisheries, and Parks to develop family 

hunting and fishing opportunities. 

Fishing opportunities would be 

expanded to include year-round 

designated bank fishing areas on Bluff 

and Loakfoma Lakes. Other wildlifedependent uses and their supporting 

facilities would be maintained and 

enhanced through upgrades or 

additional facilities. Alternative funding 

mechanisms, such as a general user fee 

under the Fee Program, and 

partnerships would be used to spread 

costs of programs across all users 

possibly eliminating the need for 

separate hunting related fees. The 

existing visitor services programs would 

be increased. This alternative would 

establish a ‘‘Connecting People with 

Nature’’ area to consolidate activities 

and users requiring greater support to 

enjoy wildlife observation activities. 

Existing activities that are not 

considered wildlife dependent uses 

such as a picnicking area and off-road 

mountain biking, would not be allowed 

but more opportunities for bicycling, 

walking and connecting with nature 

would be offered through designed trails 

with increased accessibility for disabled 

Americans. All existing wildlife 

dependent uses and the supporting 

facilities would be maintained and, if 

resources are available, enhanced 

through possible increase and better 

maintenance in overlooks, boardwalks, 

and trails. An effort would be made to 

increase visitor safety and enjoyment 

through establishment of parking areas, 

improved management of vehicle flow, 

creation of paved walking and biking 

trails, and roadside bike lanes along 

Bluff Lake and Loakfoma Roads. Refuge 

regulatory and informational signs 

would receive priority. Partnerships to 

conduct environmental education and 

off-site activities and increase volunteer 

involvement in all its programs would 

be established. More effort would be 

placed toward developing cooperative 

programs sponsored through the 

Friends. 

The current staff of 13 employees 

would be reorganized under this goal of 

reaching an optimal staff level of 18 as 

recommended within the 2008 Final 

Report for the Staffing Model for Field 

Stations. This alternative would 

continue participation in the existing 

Fee Program. Changes within the 

program would include establishment of 

a general access pass for all users to 

assist in the maintenance and 

development of public use programs 

and facilities (e.g., Daily Pass, Weekly 

Pass or Annual Pass). Current federal 

duck stamps and other congressionally 

authorized entrance fee passes would be 

accepted as a refuge access pass. 

Next Step 

After the comment period ends, we 

will analyze the comments and address 

them. 

Public Availability of Comments 

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. 

Authority 

This notice is published under the 

authority of the National Wildlife 

Refuge System Improvement Act of 

1997 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.). 

Dated: June 24, 2014. 

Jeffrey M. Fleming, 

Acting Regional Director. 

[FR Doc. 2014–17788 Filed 7–29–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

[OMB Number 1010—New] 

Information Collection: Social 

Indicators in Coastal Alaska: Arctic 

Communities Survey; Submitted for 

OMB Review; Comment Request 

MMAA104000 

ACTION: 30-Day notice. 

SUMMARY: To comply with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA), the Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management (BOEM) is notifying the 

public that we have submitted an 

information collection request (ICR) to 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for review and approval. The ICR 

pertains to a new survey to be 

conducted in northern coastal Alaska 

communities. This notice provides the 

public a second opportunity to 

comment on the paperwork burden of 

this collection. 

DATES: Submit written comments by 

August 29, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments on this 

ICR to the Desk Officer for the 

Department of the Interior at OMB– 

OIRA at (202) 395–5806 (fax) or OIRA_

submission@omb.eop.gov (email). Please 

provide a copy of your comments to the 

BOEM Information Collection Clearance 

Officer, Arlene Bajusz, Bureau of Ocean 

Energy Management, 381 Elden Street, 

HM–3127, Herndon, Virginia 20170 

(mail) or arlene.bajusz@boem.gov 

(email). Please reference ICR 1010–New 

in your comment and include your 

name and return address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Arlene Bajusz, Office of Policy, 

Regulations, and Analysis at 

arlene.bajusz@boem.gov (email) or (703) 

787–1025 (phone). You may review the 

ICR online at http://www.reginfo.gov. 

Follow the instructions to review 

Department of the Interior collections 

under review by OMB. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

44192 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 146 / Wednesday, July 30, 2014 / Notices 

OMB Control Number: 1010–New. 

Title: Social Indicators in Coastal 

Alaska: Arctic Communities Survey. 

Abstract: This is a new collection that 

involves a survey of the Alaska coastal 

area along the Arctic. Section 20 of the 

Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Lands 

Act (OCSLA) requires the Secretary of 

the Department of the Interior (DOI) to 

monitor and assess the impacts of 

resource development activities in 

Federal waters on human, marine, and 

coastal environments. The OCSLA 

authorizes the Secretary of the Interior 

to conduct studies in areas or regions of 

lease sales to ascertain the 

‘‘environmental impacts on the marine 

and coastal environments of the outer 

Continental shelf and the coastal areas 

which may be affected by oil and gas 

development’’ (43 U.S.C. 1346) (Pub. L. 

95–372). 

The National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321– 

4347) requires that all Federal agencies 

use a systematic, interdisciplinary 

approach to ensure the integrated use of 

the natural and social sciences in any 

planning and decision making that may 

have an effect on the human 

environment. The Council on 

Environmental Quality’s Regulations for 

Implementing Procedural Provisions of 

NEPA (40 CFR 1500–1508) state that the 

‘‘human environment’’ is to be 

‘‘interpreted comprehensively’’ to 

include ‘‘the natural and physical 

environment and the relationship of 

people with that environment’’ (40 CFR 

1508.14). An action’s ‘‘aesthetic, 

historic, cultural, economic, social or 

health’’ effects must be assessed, 

‘‘whether direct, indirect, or 

cumulative’’ (40 CFR 1508.8). 

The BOEM is the DOI agency that 

conducts OCS lease sales and monitors 

and mitigates adverse impacts that 

might be associated with offshore 

resource development. The BOEM 

Environmental Studies Program 

implements and manages the 

responsibilities of research. This new 

survey will facilitate the meeting of 

DOI/BOEM information needs by 

quantifying measures of well-being and 

the living conditions of residents in 

coastal Alaska areas, with specific focus 

on six In ̃upiat coastal Alaska Native 

communities in the North Slope 

Borough (Barrow, Point Hope, 

Wainwright, Nuiqsut, Kaktovik, Point 

Lay). 

The BOEM will use the information 

collected from this survey to learn about 

local social systems and well-being in a 

way that may shape development 

strategies and serve as an interim 

baseline for impact mitigation and/or 

monitoring to compare against future 

research in these areas. With these data, 

BOEM will improve information to 

make informed oil and gas leasing and 

development decisions for these areas. 

The studies will help BOEM identify 

and mitigate impacts of offshore oil and 

gas exploration and development on 

Alaska Native communities. 

Survey Instrument: The survey 

instrument was developed through 

collaborative discussions with key 

community members tasked to serve on 

the North Slope Management Board, 

specifically established to deal with this 

study. 

Interview Methods: The interviews 

will be conducted in person in a setting 

most comfortable for the respondents. 

This personal method is more expensive 

and time consuming for the researchers, 

but these drawbacks are outweighed by 

improvements in the quality of 

information obtained and the rapport 

established between the surveyor and 

the person interviewed. Telephone 

interviews have not proven to be 

broadly successful in obtaining useful 

information on the North Slope. Each 

respondent will be paid an honorarium 

for taking part in the study. Responses 

are voluntary. 

Frequency: One-time event. 

Description of Respondents: 

Respondents are members of the 

Alaskan coastal communities in the 

North Slope Borough. We plan to 

contact 1,001 individuals and estimate 

801 will complete the survey. 

Estimated Reporting and 

Recordkeeping Hour Burden: We 

estimate 834 hours for this collection. 

Activity Number of 

responses Completion time per response Total annual burden hours 

Initial Contact ................................................................ 1,001 2 minutes ...................................................................... 33 

Survey ........................................................................... 801 1 hour ........................................................................... 801 

Total ....................................................................... 1,802 ....................................................................................... 834 

Estimated Reporting and 

Recordkeeping Non-Hour Cost Burden: 

We have identified no non-hour 

paperwork cost burdens for this 

collection. 

Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA 

(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an 

agency may not conduct or sponsor a 

collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. Until OMB approves a 

collection of information, you are not 

obligated to respond. 

Comments: We invite comments 

concerning this information collection 

on: 

• Whether or not the collection of 

information is necessary, including 

whether or not the information will 

have practical utility; 

• The accuracy of our burden 

estimates; 

• Ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

• Ways to minimize the burden on 

respondents. 

To comply with the public 

consultation process, on March 14, 

2014, BOEM published a Federal 

Register notice (79 FR 14533) 

announcing that we would submit this 

ICR to OMB for approval. This notice 

provided the required 60-day comment 

period. We received one comment in 

response to this notice. The Mayor’s 

Office of the North Slope Borough posed 

several questions and concerns about 

aspects of the survey. A summary of 

each and the response are outlined 

below. The Social Indicators study has 

been under construction and planned by 

the Environmental Studies Program of 

BOEM for more than 5 years and 

reported in annual Study Development 

Plans provided to the North Slope 

Borough (NSB) for review and comment. 

It is directly linked to Arctic Social 

Indicator domain identification 

undertaken by the Arctic Council and is 

responsive to the Arctic Research Plan, 

issued by the Executive Office of the 

President, National Science and 

Technology Council in February 2013. 

BOEM believes this pioneering effort is 

a way to monitor impacts for oil and gas 

exploration and development in that the 

study meets the information needs to 

identify and monitor broad social 

changes in the Arctic. We appreciate 

this opportunity to respond to specific 

questions raised by the Mayor of the 

North Slope Borough, Alaska. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 146 / Wednesday, July 30, 2014 / Notices 44193 

Need for the Survey 

1. Is this collection a result of the HIA 

in the EIS? 

This survey collection is not a result 

of the Health Impact Assessment (HIA) 

in an EIS. The collection is linked to the 

Arctic Social Indicators Project, an 

outgrowth of the Arctic Human 

Development Report of 2004 conducted 

under the auspices of the Arctic 

Council’s Sustainable Development 

Working Group (Arctic Social Indicators 

2010). HIA involves a more specific set 

of questions about health status in the 

communities, whereas the Social 

Indicators study, designed to assess 

respondents’ sense of well-being, 

explores six domains, one of which is 

health. 

2. BOEM Should Use the NSB’s Baseline 

Community Health Analysis Report in 

the Social Indicators and Acknowledge 

That the Health Environment is Already 

Impacted by Resource Development 

The NSB Baseline Community Health 

Analysis Report was not completed 

until June 2012, after the Social 

Indicators contract was awarded. The 

designs of both the Baseline Community 

Health Analysis Report and the Social 

Indicators survey are complementary 

because they are derived from the same 

parent document, the NSB Census of 

2010. The Social Indicators survey 

results will be shared with the NSB. 

Some of the survey questions will 

correspond with the NSB Community 

Health Analysis Report and will support 

decision making at all levels of 

government. The 2010 NSB Census 

includes the same overall health 

questions that were asked by the Survey 

of Living Conditions in the Arctic 

(SLiCA) conducted by Dr. Kruse in 

collaboration with the NSB in 2003. 

These same questions were approved by 

the North Slope Management Board 

(NSMB) for the BOEM Social Indicators 

survey. The project report will be the 

venue to address emerging trends, 

including if the health environment has 

been impacted by resource 

development, not the survey 

instrument. 

Survey Design 

3. Who are the members of the NSMB, 

how were they selected, and how was 

the survey developed? 

The chair and the members of the 

NSMB are serving on a voluntary basis. 

Representatives are from the 

communities of Barrow, Kaktovik, 

Nuiqsut, Wainwright, Point Lay, and 

Point Hope. Since the members of the 

NSMB are volunteers, the BOEM prefers 

not to disclose their names in this 

document. As for the survey design, the 

contractor, Stephen R. Braund & Assoc. 

(SRBA), held a workshop for the NSMB 

in Barrow in April 2012 to discuss 

survey content and design. The Social 

Indicators survey is based upon a pool 

of questions derived from previous 

research conducted in collaboration 

with the NSB (e.g., SLiCA). The 

questions correlate directly with 

domains identified in the Arctic Social 

Indicators Report, 2010, an outgrowth of 

the Arctic Human Development Report 

of 2004 conducted under the auspices of 

the Arctic Council’s Sustainable 

Working Group, and the BOEM Social 

Indicators contract. Subsequently, SRBA 

generated a survey instrument for 

review by OMB to obtain a control 

number. SRBA consulted again with the 

NSMB in September 2012 before the 

survey instrument was provided to 

BOEM for the OMB submission. This 

submission was delayed for a year to 

perform a Privacy Act Impact 

Assessment, now completed. 

4. Why address only the ‘‘head of the 

household’’? 

BOEM is concerned about the burden 

of effort and therefore limits the survey 

to heads of households (HH), as the HH 

is the individual with the knowledge 

and authority to address all of the 

questions asked. The HH may be an 

adult male or female of any age over 18. 

This is the standard best practice among 

social scientists conducting surveys, 

including Dr. Gary Kofinas’s ‘‘The Study 

of Sharing Networks to Assess the 

Vulnerabilities of Local Communities to 

Oil & Gas Development in Arctic 

Alaska,’’ also funded by BOEM. 

5. It is Important To Have a Variety of 

People From the North Slope Involved 

in Helping To Pick the Contractor/

Review the Survey Questions 

A variety of individuals from each 

North Slope coastal community and the 

Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission 

were involved in selecting the survey 

questions. BOEM selected the contractor 

through a competitive bidding process 

based on the merits of the technical 

proposal and expertise of the contractor. 

6. Survey Fatigue: Suggest BOEM 

Coordinate With the Other Agencies/

Industry. 

BOEM and its project contractors are 

highly concerned about survey fatigue 

and the importance of coordinating with 

others who conduct research among the 

In ̃upiat of the North Slope. BOEM has 

coordinated with other entities doing 

research. However, BOEM has found 

that even though there are surveys that 

may ask a similar question, none fully 

address the sense of well-being as this 

Social Indicators survey is designed to 

assess. BOEM and SRBA are leaders in 

the field of social research and well 

understand and are sensitive to the 

problems of public burden and survey 

fatigue. Once BOEM receives OMB 

approval, BOEM and SRBA will 

coordinate with local and regional 

authorities to schedule the Social 

Indicators survey implementation. 

In this notice, BOEM is also 

responding to a comment received on a 

Federal Register notice (78 FR 25473) 

published May 1, 2013, requesting 

public comment on a survey renewal 

collection (1010–0184) that we have 

since discontinued. In that notice, we 

introduced this new Social Indicators 

survey and received a comment; 

therefore, we are addressing that 

comment in this new collection now. 

The commenter suggested the use of 

Dillman’s Tailored Design Method as 

being a superior alternative to random 

sampling. BOEM agrees with the 

Dillman strategy and has used similar 

elements in designing our face-to-face 

surveys. Dillman’s strategies target 

improving response rates for mail, 

telephone, and internet surveys, which 

can have response rates lower than 50 

percent. In contrast, prior experience in 

applying the proposed sample design 

and face-to-face interviews in northern 

Alaska has shown response rates above 

80 percent. Several opportunities of 

advance survey notice have been 

achieved through the NSMB 

participation in the survey design 

process. Upon OMB approval, the 

design team will work with the NSMB 

to extend community involvement to 

the city councils, tribal governments, 

and village corporations. In addition, 

Dillman’s approach concerns how the 

interview process is designed, not how 

people are sampled from the population 

to be described. The sampling approach 

used in our surveys is termed ‘‘area 

probability sampling,’’ developed by the 

Institute for Social Research, University 

of Michigan, to meet the statistical goals 

of producing valid estimates and 

confidence intervals. A probability 

sample means that each person/

household in the population to be 

sampled has a known probability of 

being selected. A probability sample is 

commonly referred to as a ‘‘random 

sample.’’ In accordance with Dillman’s 

approach, BOEM incorporates specific 

procedures to maintain the validity of 

the probability sample by making 

repeated contacts to interview the 

selected respondent. We also train 

interviewers to build trust and 

engagement in the study and engage 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

44194 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 146 / Wednesday, July 30, 2014 / Notices 

community leaders and secure their 

approval. The addition of a 

remuneration provides additional 

incentive for participation. 

Public Availability of Comments: 

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. 

Dated: July 3, 2014. 

Deanna Meyer-Pietruszka, 

Chief, Office of Policy, Regulations, and 

Analysis. 

[FR Doc. 2014–17929 Filed 7–29–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Reclamation 

[14XR0687NA, RX.18527901.3000000, 

RR02054000] 

Central Valley Project Improvement 

Act, Water Management Plans 

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: The following Water 

Management Plans are available for 

review: 

• Patterson Irrigation District 

• Central San Joaquin Water 

Conservation District 

• Madera Irrigation District 

• Panoche Water District 

• Sacramento County Water Agency 

• City of Redding 

• Sacramento Municipal Utility District 

• Stockton East Water District 

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). For the purpose of this 

announcement, Water Management 

Plans (Plans) are considered the same as 

Water Conservation Plans. The above 

entities have each developed a Plan, 

which Reclamation has evaluated and 

preliminarily determined to meet the 

requirements of these Criteria. 

Reclamation is publishing this notice in 

order to allow the public to review the 

Plans and comment on the preliminary 

determinations. Public comment on 

Reclamation’s preliminary (i.e., draft) 

determination of Plan adequacy is 

invited at this time. 

DATES: All public comments must be 

received by August 29, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Please mail comments to 

Ms. Melissa Crandell, Bureau of 

Reclamation, 2800 Cottage Way, MP– 

410, Sacramento, California 95825, or 

email at mcrandell@usbr.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

be placed on a mailing list for any 

subsequent information, please contact 

Ms. Crandell at the email address above 

or 916–978–5208 (TDD 978–5608). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are 

inviting the public to comment on our 

preliminary (i.e., draft) 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. Crandell. 

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. 

Dated: July 22, 2014. 

Richard J. Woodley, 

Regional Resources Manager, Mid-Pacific 

Region, Bureau of Reclamation. 

[FR Doc. 2014–17948 Filed 7–29–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–MN–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–894] 

Certain Tires and Products Containing 

Same: Commission Determination To 

Issue a Limited Exclusion Order and 

Cease and Desist Orders Against 

Respondents Found in Default; 

Termination of Investigation 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has issued (1) a limited 

exclusion order against infringing 

products of respondents previously 

found in default, i.e., WestKY Customs, 

LLC of Benton, Kentucky (‘‘WestKY’’); 

Tire & Wheel Master, Inc. of Stockton, 

California (‘‘Tire & Wheel Master’’); 

Vittore Wheel & Tire of Asheboro, North 

Carolina (‘‘Vittore’’); RTM Wheel & Tire 

of Asheboro, North Carolina (‘‘RTM’’); 

Turbo Wholesale Tires, Inc. of 

Irwindale, California (‘‘Turbo’’); Lexani 

Tires Worldwide, Inc. of Irwindale, 

California (‘‘Lexani’’); WTD Inc. of 

Cerritos, California (‘‘WTD’’); and 

Simple Tire of Cookeville, Tennessee 

(‘‘Simple Tire’’) (collectively, 

‘‘Defaulting Respondents’’); and (2) 

cease and desist orders directed against 

each of the Defaulting Respondents. The 

investigation is terminated. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the 

General Counsel, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–3115. 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES