27684 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 97 / Friday, May 18, 2001 / Notices

was designated will be managed

consistent with the National Trails

System Act; (8) The planning process

will involve American Indian tribal

governments and will provide strategies

for the protection of recognized

traditional uses; (9) Decisions in the

plan should strive to be compatible with

the existing plans and policies of

adjacent local, State and Federal

agencies as long as the decisions are in

conformance with Congressional

direction and federal laws, regulation

and policy; (10) The location of the trail

has been determined by historical

information and actual field surveys and

will be further refined using Geographic

Information Systems.

A range of alternatives, including a

No Action alternative, will be developed

to respond to the issues identified at the

outset of the process. Each alternative

will provide different solutions to the

issues and concerns brought out. The

objective in alternative formulation will

be to develop realistic, implementable

solutions that represent a complete

plan, in and of themselves. The public

will assist in the development of a range

of alternatives during the community

workshops. Preliminary issues and

management concerns include: (1) How

the historic, scenic and natural

resources of the trail will be preserved;

(2) How management of the trail will

affect activities and use by the public;

(3) How trail management will be

integrated with tribal and other

government agency and community

plans; (4) Availability of opportunities

to provide visitor services, education

and/or recreation; (5) Incorporation of

international interest in the trail; and (6)

Effect of National Historic Trail

designation on private property.

A preliminary public participation

plan has been developed and sets forth

the methods by which the public has

the opportunity to be informed and

involved so they can participate

effectively in the planning and NEPA

process. The public involvement

process will focus on an interactive

dialogue of information that will result

in the exchange of constructive ideas,

alternatives and new possibilities for

mitigating potential environmental

impact associated with this project.

The plan will also be responsive to

the requirements of Presidential

Executive Order 12898 on

Environmental Justice. This Executive

Order requires Federal agencies to

identify potential disproportionate

impacts on low income and minority

communities. In addition, the Executive

Order requires each Federal agency to

provide opportunities for community

input in the NEPA process, including

identifying potential effects and

mitigation measures in consultation

with affected communities and

improving accessibility of meetings,

crucial documents and notices.

This project impacts multiple

agencies and local governmental

jurisdictions. It is important to have

roles and responsibilities, as well as

input of the affected entities, established

at the outset. The BLM and NPS will

engage other affected or potentially

interested Federal agencies, North

American Indian tribes, state and

county government, and international

partners, early in the EIS process. Their

opinions on issues, scope of work,

decisions to be made, and process are

essential to the EIS process. Documents

pertinent to the Environmental Impact

Statement, such as Land and Resource

Management Plans, Resource

Management Plans, State codes and

regulations, County and City zoning,

and land use policies, need to be

identified during this stage. Ongoing

communication throughout the project

is vital. The Bureau of Land

Management and the National Park

Service are committed to a collaborative

planning approach.

Contact Terry Humphrey, BLM, El

Camino Real Planning Team Leader at

Taos Field Office, 226 Cruz Alta Road,

Taos, New Mexico 87571 or Harry

Myers, NPS, El Camino Real Planning

Team Leader at P.O. Box 728, Santa Fe,

New Mexico 87504–0728 for additional

information.

Dated: May 9, 2001.

Carsten F. Goff,

Acting State Director, BLM—New Mexico.

Michael D. Snyder,

Acting Director, NPS, Intermountain Region.

[FR Doc. 01–12508 Filed 5–17–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–AG–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Reclamation

Bay-Delta Advisory Council’s

Ecosystem Roundtable Amendments

Subcommittee Meeting

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meetings.

SUMMARY: The Bay-Delta Advisory

Council’s (BDAC) Ecosystem

Roundtable Amendments Subcommittee

will meet on May 23, 2001 to discuss

proposed contract modifications for

several ongoing ecosystem restoration

projects. This meeting is open to the

public. Interested persons may make

oral statements to the Amendments

Subcommittee or may file written

statements for consideration.

DATES: The BDAC’s Ecosystem

Roundtable Amendments Subcommittee

meeting will be held from 9 a.m. to 12

p.m. on Wednesday, May 23, 2001.

ADDRESSES: The Amendments

Subcommittee will meet at the

Resources Building, 1416 Ninth Street,

Room 1131, Sacramento, CA 95814.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Terry Mills, CALFED Bay-Delta

Program, at (916) 657–2666. If

reasonable accommodation is needed

due to a disability, please contact the

Equal Employment Opportunity Office

at (916) 653–6952 or TDD (916) 653–

6934 at least one week prior to the

meeting.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The San

Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin

Delta Estuary (Bay-Delta system) is a

critically important part of California’s

natural environment and economy. In

recognition of the serious problems

facing the region and the complex

resource management decisions that

must be made, the state of California

and the Federal government are working

together to stabilize, protect, restore,

and enhance the Bay-Delta system. The

State and Federal agencies with

management and regulatory

responsibilities in the Bay-Delta system

are working together as CALFED to

provide policy direction and oversight

for the process.

One area of Bay-Delta management

includes the establishment of a joint

State-Federal process to develop longterm solutions to problems in the BayDelta system related to fish and wildlife,

water supply reliability, natural

disasters, and water quality. The intent

is to develop a comprehensive and

balanced plan that addresses all of the

resource problems. This effort, the

CALFED Bay-Delta Program (Program),

is being carried out under the policy

direction of CALFED. The Program is

exploring and developing a long-term

solution for a cooperative planning

process that will determine the most

appropriate strategy and actions

necessary to improve water quality,

restore health to the Bay-Delta

ecosystem, provide for a variety of

beneficial uses, and minimize Bay-Delta

system vulnerability. A group of citizen

advisors representing California’s

agricultural, environmental, urban,

business, fishing, and other interests

who have a stake in finding long-term

solutions for the problems affecting the

Bay-Delta system has been chartered

under the Federal Advisory Committee

Act (FACA). The BDAC provides advice

CALFED on the program mission,

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 97 / Friday, May 18, 2001 / Notices 27685

problems to be addressed, and

objectives for the Program. BDAC

provides a forum to help ensure public

participation, and will review reports

and other materials prepared by

CALFED staff. BDAC has established a

subcommittee called the Ecosystem

Roundtable to provide input on annual

workplans to implement ecosystem

restoration projects and programs.

Minutes of the meeting will be

maintained by the Program, Suite 1155,

1416 Ninth Street, Sacramento, CA

95814, and will be available for public

inspection during regular business

hours, Monday through Friday within

30 days following the meeting.

Dated: May 11, 2001.

Lowell F. Ploss,

Deputy Regional Director, Mid-Pacific Region.

[FR Doc. 01–12604 Filed 5–17–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–94–M

INTERNATIONAL TRADE

COMMISSION

Summary of Commission Practice

Relating to Administrative Protective

Orders

AGENCY: International Trade

Commission.

ACTION: Summary of Commission

practice relating to administrative

protective orders.

SUMMARY: Since February 1991, the U.S.

International Trade Commission

(‘‘Commission’’) has issued an annual

report on the status of its practice with

respect to violations of its

administrative protective orders

(‘‘APOs’’) in investigations under Title

VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 in response

to a direction contained in the

Conference Report to the Customs and

Trade Act of 1990. Over time, the

Commission has added to its report

discussions of APO breaches in

Commission proceedings other than

Title VII and violations of the

Commission’s rule on bracketing

business proprietary information

(‘‘BPI’’)(the ‘‘24-hour rule’’), 19 CFR

207.3(c). This notice provides a

summary of investigations of breaches

in Title VII investigations completed

during calendar year 2000. There were

no completed investigations of breaches

for other Commission proceedings or for

24-hour rule violations during that

period. The Commission intends that

this report educate representatives of

parties to Commission proceedings as to

some specific types of APO breaches

encountered by the Commission and the

corresponding types of actions the

Commission has taken.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Carol McCue Verratti, Esq., Office of the

General Counsel, U.S. International

Trade Commission, telephone (202)

205–3088. Hearing impaired individuals

are advised that information on this

matter can be obtained by contacting the

Commission’s TDD terminal at (202)

205–1810. General information

concerning the Commission can also be

obtained by accessing its Internet server

(http://www.usitc.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Representatives of parties to

investigations conducted under Title VII

of the Tariff Act of 1930 may enter into

APOs that permit them, under strict

conditions, to obtain access to BPI of

other parties. See 19 U.S.C. 1677f; 19

CFR 207.7. The discussion below

describes APO breach investigations

that the Commission has completed,

including a description of actions taken

in response to breaches. The discussion

covers breach investigations completed

during calendar year 2000.

Since 1991, the Commission has

published annually a summary of its

actions in response to violations of

Commission APOs and the 24-hour rule.

See 56 FR 4846 (Feb. 6, 1991); 57 FR

12,335 (Apr. 9, 1992); 58 FR 21,991

(Apr. 26, 1993); 59 FR 16,834 (Apr. 8,

1994); 60 FR 24,880 (May 10, 1995); 61

FR 21,203 (May 9, 1996); 62 FR 13,164

(March 19, 1997); 63 FR 25064 (May 6,

1998); 64 FR 23355 (April 30, 1999); 65

FR 30434 (May 11, 2000). This report

does not provide an exhaustive list of

conduct that will be deemed to be a

breach of the Commission’s APOs. APO

breach inquiries are considered on a

case-by-case basis.

As part of the effort to educate

practitioners about the Commission’s

current APO practice, the Commission

Secretary issued in March 2001 a third

edition of An Introduction to

Administrative Protective Order Practice

in Import Injury Investigations (Pub. No.

3403). This document is available upon

request from the Office of the Secretary,

U.S. International Trade Commission,

500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC

20436, tel. (202) 205–2000.

I. In General

The current APO form for

antidumping and countervailing duty

investigations, which the Commission

has used since March 1995, requires the

applicant to swear that he or she will:

(1) Not divulge any of the BPI

obtained under the APO and not

otherwise available to him, to any

person other than—

(i) personnel of the Commission

concerned with the investigation,

(ii) the person or agency from whom

the BPI was obtained,

(iii) a person whose application for

disclosure of BPI under this APO has

been granted by the Secretary, and

(iv) other persons, such as paralegals

and clerical staff, who (a) are employed

or supervised by and under the

direction and control of the authorized

applicant or another authorized

applicant in the same firm whose

application has been granted; (b) have a

need thereof in connection with the

investigation; (c) are not involved in

competitive decisionmaking for the

interested party which is a party to the

investigation; and (d) have submitted to

the Secretary a signed Acknowledgment

for Clerical Personnel in the form

attached hereto (the authorized

applicant shall sign such

acknowledgment and will be deemed

responsible for such persons’

compliance with the APO);

(2) Use such BPI solely for the

purposes of the Commission

investigation [or for binational panel

review of such Commission

investigation or until superceded by a

judicial protective order in a judicial

review of the proceeding];

(3) Not consult with any person not

described in paragraph (1) concerning

BPI disclosed under this APO without

first having received the written consent

of the Secretary and the party or the

representative of the party from whom

such BPI was obtained;

(4) Whenever materials (e.g.,

documents, computer disks, etc.)

containing such BPI are not being used,

store such material in a locked file

cabinet, vault, safe, or other suitable

container (N.B.: storage of BPI on socalled hard disk computer media is to

be avoided, because mere erasure of

data from such media may not

irrecoverably destroy the BPI and may

result in violation of paragraph C of the

APO);

(5) Serve all materials containing BPI

disclosed under this APO as directed by

the Secretary and pursuant to section

207.7(f) of the Commission’s rules;

(6) Transmit such document

containing BPI disclosed under this

APO:

(i) with a cover sheet identifying the

document as containing BPI,

(ii) with all BPI enclosed in brackets

and each page warning that the

document contains BPI,

(iii) if the document is to be filed by

a deadline, with each page marked

‘‘Bracketing of BPI not final for one

business day after date of filing,’’ and

(iv) if by mail, within two envelopes,

the inner one sealed and marked

‘‘Business Proprietary Information—To