Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 164 / Thursday, August 25, 2005 / Notices 49909

Hazard trees would be removed from 

along Maintenance Level 3, 4 and 5 

roads (generally, surfaced roads) and 

high-use Maintenance Level 2 roads 

(generally native-surface roads). 

Identification of hazard trees would 

follow guidelines in the Plumas 

National Forest Roadside/Facility 

Hazard Tree Abatement Action Plan 

(2003). 

Lead Agency: The USDA Forest 

Service is the lead agency for this 

proposal. 

Responsible Official: Plumas National 

Acting Forest Supervisor, Robert G. 

MacWhorter is the responsible official; 

Plumas National Forest, P.O. Box 11500, 

Quincy, CA 95971. 

Nature of Decision To Be Made 

The responsible official will decide 

whether to implement this project as 

proposed, implement the project based 

on an alternative to this proposal that is 

formulated to resolve identified issues 

or not implement this project at this 

time. The responsible official will be the 

Plumas National Forest Forest 

Supervisor. 

Scoping Process 

Public questions and comments 

regarding this proposal are an integral 

part of this environmental analysis 

process. Comments will be used to 

identify issues and disqualification 

alternatives to the proposed action. To 

assist the Forest Service in identifying 

and considering issues and concerns on 

the proposed action, comments should 

be as specific as possible. 

A copy of the proposed action and/or 

a summary of the proposed action will 

be mailed to adjacent landowners, as 

well as to those people and 

organizations that have indicated a 

specific interest in the Freeman project, 

to Native American entities, and 

Federal, State and local agencies. The 

public will be notified of any meetings 

regarding this proposed by mailings and 

press releases sent to the local 

newspaper and media. There are no 

meetings planned at this time. 

Permits or Licenses Required: An Air 

Pollution Permit and a Smoke 

Management Plan are required by local 

agencies. 

Comment 

This notice of intent initiates the 

scoping process which guides the 

development of the EIS. Our desire is to 

receive substantive comments on the 

merits of the proposed action, as well as 

comments that address errors, 

misinformation, or information that has 

been omitted. Substantive comments are 

defined as comments within the scope 

of the proposal, that have a direct 

relationship to the proposal, and that 

include supporting reasons for the 

responsible official’s consideration.

Early Notice of Importance of Public 

Participation in Subsequent 

Environmental Review: A draft 

environmental impact statement will be 

prepared for comment. The comment 

period on the draft environmental 

impact statement will be 45 days from 

the date the Environmental Protection 

Agency publishes the notice of 

availability in the Federal Register. 

The Forest Service believes, at this 

early stage, it is important to give 

reviewers notice of several court rulings 

related to public participation in the 

environmental review process. First, 

reviewers of draft environmental impact 

statements must structure their 

participation in the environmental 

review of the proposal so that it is 

meaningful and alerts an agency to the 

reviewer’s position and contentions. 

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. 

NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, 

environmental objections that could be 

raised as the draft environmental impact 

statement stage but that are not raised 

until after completion of the final 

environmental impact statement may be 

waived or dismissed by the courts. City 

of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 

1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin 

Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 

1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of 

these court rulings, it is very important 

that those interested in this proposed 

action participate by the close of the 45-

day comment period so that substantive 

comments and objections are made 

available to the Forest Service at a time 

when it can meaningfully consider them 

and respond to them in the final 

environmental impact statement. 

To assist the Forest Service in 

identifying and considering issues and 

concerns on the proposed action, 

comments on the draft environmental 

impact statement should be as specific 

as possible. It is also helpful if 

comments refer to specific pages or 

chapters of the draft proposed action, 

comments on the draft environmental 

impact statement should be as specific 

as possible. It is also helpful if 

comments refer to specific pages or 

chapters of the draft statement. 

Comments may also address the 

adequacy of the draft environmental 

impact statement or the merits of the 

alternatives formulated and discussed in 

the statement. Reviewers may wish to 

refer to the Council on Environmental 

Quality Regulations for implementing 

the procedural provisions of the 

National Environmental Policy Act at 40 

CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. 

Comments received, including the 

names and addresses of those who 

comment, will be considered part of the 

public record on this proposal and will 

be available for public inspection.

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; 

Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section 

21)

Dated: August 19, 2005. 

Kathleen L. Gay, 

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 05–16898 Filed 8–24–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Economic Development Administration 

Notice of Petitions by Producing Firms 

for Determination of Eligibility To 

Apply for Trade Adjustment 

Assistance

AGENCY: Economic Development 

Administration (EDA), Commerce.

ACTION: To give all interested parties an 

opportunity to comment. 

Petitions have been accepted for filing 

on the dates indicated from the firms 

listed below.

LIST OF PETITION ACTION BY TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR PERIOD JULY 16, 2005–AUGUST 19, 2005 

Firm name Address 

Date

petition

accepted 

Product 

Source Code Corporation ....... 290 Vanderbilt Avenue Norwood, MA 02062.10–Aug–05 .... Computers and servers. 

ITA Corporation ....................... 2401 Research Boulevard 

Rockville, MD 20850.

25–Jul–05 ...... Accounting and human resource software. 

49910 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 164 / Thursday, August 25, 2005 / Notices 

1The violations charged occurred during 1999. 

The Regulations governing the violations at issue 

are found in the 1999 version of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (15 CFR parts 730–774 (1999)). The 

2005 Regulations establish the procedures that 

apply to this matter.

2From August 21, 1994 through November 12, 

2000, the Act was in lapse. During that period, the 

President, through Executive Order 12924, which 

had been extended by successive Presidential 

Notices, the last of which was August 3, 2000 (3 

CFR, 2000 Comp. 397 (2001)), continued the 

Regulations in effect under the International 

Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701–

1706 (2000)) (‘‘IEEPA’’). On November 13, 2000, the 

Act was reauthorized and it remained in effect 

through August 20, 2001. Since August 21, 2001, 

the Act has been in lapse and the President, through 

Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001 (3 CFR, 

2001 Comp. 783 (2002)), as extended by the Notice 

of August 6, 2004 (69 FR 48763, August 10, 2004), 

has continued the Regulations in effect under the 

IEEPA.

LIST OF PETITION ACTION BY TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR PERIOD JULY 16, 2005–AUGUST 19, 2005—

Continued

Firm name Address 

Date

petition

accepted 

Product 

Rolco, Inc ................................ 946 East Hill Street Kasota, 

MN 56050.

29–Jul–05 ...... Injection mold plastic components for general industrial, table 

games, medical equipment, electronics and automobiles. 

Harden Furniture, Inc .............. 8550 Mill Pond Way 

McConnellsville, NY 13401.

22–Jul–05 ...... Hardwood end tables, entertainment centers, dining room tables and chairs, and beds and bedroom furniture. 

Criterion Technology, Inc ........ 101 McIntosh Parkway 

Thomaston, GA 30286.

22–Jul–05 ...... Thermoformed or injection-molded acrylic and polycarbonate 

enclosures/castings, used primarily to protect security cameras. 

Garmat USA, Inc ..................... 1401 West Standord Avenue 

Englewood, CO 80110.

26–Jul–05 ...... Enclosure systems for process control in automotive applications. 

Whirley Industries, Inc ............. 618 Fourth Avenue Warren, 

PA 16365.

26–Jul–05 ...... Plastic cups. 

Trapper Peak Forge, Inc. 

d.b.a. Hacienda Iron Craft.

4072 Eastside Highway Stevensville, MT 59870.29–Jul–05 ...... Ornamental iron work. 

Quality Metal Products, Inc ..... 11500 West 13th Avenue 

Lakewood, CO 80215.

29–Jul–05 ...... Counters, lockers, racks, display cases, shelves, partitions 

and similar fixtures of metal. 

Sashco, Inc ............................. 10300 East 107th Place Brighton, CO 80601.10–Aug–05 .... Acrylic polymer. 

Marlin Firearms Company 

(The).

100 Kenna Drive North 

Haven, CT 06473.

16–Aug–05 .... Shotguns and rifles. 

RMO, Inc ................................. 650 West Colfax Avenue Denver, CO 80204.11–Aug–05 .... Non plastic dental fittings. 

KALD Tool and Die Corporation.3022 Highway 145 Richfield, 

WI 53076.

11–Aug–05 .... Molds for plastic injection molding and metal die casting. 

The petitions were submitted 

pursuant to section 251 of the Trade Act 

of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2341). Consequently, 

the United States Department of 

Commerce has initiated separate 

investigations to determine whether 

increased imports into the United States 

of articles like or directly competitive 

with those produced by each firm 

contributed importantly to total or 

partial separation of the firm’s workers, 

or threat thereof, and to a decrease in 

sales or production of each petitioning 

firm. Any party having a substantial 

interest in the proceedings may request 

a public hearing on the matter. A 

request for a hearing must be received 

by Trade Adjustment Assistance, Room 

7812, Economic Development 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, no 

later than the close of business of the 

tenth calendar day following the 

publication of this notice. The Catalog 

of Federal Domestic Assistance official 

program number and title of the 

program under which these petitions are 

submitted is 11.313, Trade Adjustment 

Assistance.

Dated: August 19, 2005. 

Anthony J. Meyer, 

Senior Program Analyst, Office of Strategic 

Initiatives.

[FR Doc. 05–16892 Filed 8–24–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–24–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security 

[Docket No. 04–BIS–14] 

Action Affecting Export Privileges; 

Sunford Trading, Ltd.; In the Matter of: 

Sunford Trading Ltd., Room 2208, 22/

F, 118 Connaught Road West, Hong 

Kong, China, Respondent; Order 

Relating to Sunford Trading, Ltd. 

The Bureau of Industry and Security, 

U.S. Department of Commerce (‘‘BIS’’) 

has initiated an administrative 

proceeding against Sunford Trading, 

Ltd. (‘‘Sunford’’) pursuant to Section 

766.3 of the Export Administration 

Regulations (currently codified at 15 

CFR parts 730–774 (2005)) 

(‘‘Regulations’’),1 and Section 13(c) of 

the Export Administration Act of 1979, 

as amended (50 U.S.C. app. 2401–2420 

(2000)) (‘‘Act’’),2 through issuance of a 

charging letter to Sunford that alleged 

that Sunford committed three violations 

of the Regulations. Specifically, the 

charges are:

1. One violation of 15 CFR 764.2(e)—

Ordering, Buying, Financing, and/or 

Forwarding Items to China With the 

Knowledge That a Violation of the 

Regulations Will Occur. Beginning on or 

about November 23, 1998 and 

continuing to on or about July 20, 1999, 

Sunford ordered, bought, financed, and/

or forwarded an industrial hot press 

furnace to the Beijing Research Institute 

of Materials and Technology 

(hereinafter, ‘‘BRIMT’’) in China with 

knowledge that a violation of the 

Regulations would occur. Specifically, 

at the time Sunford ordered, bought, 

financed, and/or forwarded the furnace, 

it knew or had reason to know that a 

Department of Commerce license was 

required for export to BRIMT under 

Section 744.3 of the Regulations, and 

that such license would not be obtained. 

2. One violation of 15 CFR 764.2(d)—

Conspiring To Export an Industrial 

Furnace to China Without the Required 

U.S. Government Authorization.

Beginning on or about November 23, 

1998 and continuing to on or about July 

20, 1999, Sunford conspired or acted in 

concert with others, known and