62562 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 12, 2010 / Notices 

the unique ability to quickly jettison 

their spoils cargo and regain thousands 

of tons of buoyancy. Therefore, the full 

freeboard for unrestricted ocean 

operation is unnecessary during 

dredging operations. Permitting the 

dredge to operate at a reduced freeboard 

(i.e., to submerge its marks) under 

relatively benign weather conditions 

allows it to safely carry more spoils per 

run, thereby increasing its efficiency. 

Based on that consideration, there are 

two special reduced freeboard 

exemption regimes that have been 

developed for qualified hopper dredges. 

The first regime was established in 

1989 for United States dredges operating 

in domestic waters, when the Coast 

Guard promulgated the ‘‘working 

freeboard’’ load line regulations in 46 

CFR 44.300 through 44.340. In order to 

qualify for the reduced ‘‘working 

freeboard’’ assignment, a dredge must 

meet several design and equipment 

requirements: intact and twocompartment damage stability, remote 

draft indicators, ability to jettison spoils 

under emergency conditions, etc. When 

dredging at the reduced freeboard, it is 

operationally restricted to locations 

within 20 nautical miles from a place of 

refuge, seas not exceeding 10 feet and 

winds not exceeding 35 knots. Under 

these conditions, the dredge can be 

assigned a reduced ‘‘working freeboard’’ 

of 50% of its normal freeboard 

assignment. 

Several United States hopper dredges 

have qualified for this domestic 

‘‘working freeboard’’ assignment over the 

20 years that the regime has been in 

existence. The Coast Guard has now 

reviewed this domestic regime and 

determined that it is equally suitable for 

international service. For purposes of 

ICLL assignment, dredges that meet the 

‘‘working freeboard’’ criteria of 46 CFR 

44.300 embody ‘‘novel features’’ as 

contemplated by ICLL Article 6(2) 

(discussed above). When operated in 

conjunction with appropriate weather 

restrictions, they may safely operate at 

the reduced freeboard. Therefore, in 

accordance with the ICLL Article 6(2) 

and 46 CFR 42.03–30, and on a case-bycase basis, the Coast Guard will 

authorize an ICLL Exemption Certificate 

that exempts the dredges from ICLL 

Article 12, which otherwise prohibits 

submersion of the load line marks. 

DR–67 and DR–68 

The second reduced freeboard regime 

for hopper dredges was established in 

2001 by a joint European working group 

of classification societies, the dredging 

industry, the shipbuilding industry, and 

regulatory officials from Belgium, 

France, Germany, the Netherlands, and 

the United Kingdom. Their exemption 

regime is titled ‘‘Guidelines for the 

Construction and Operation of Dredges 

Assigned Reduced Freeboards,’’ but is 

generally referred to as ‘‘DR–67.’’ Like 

the United States ‘‘working freeboard’’ 

regime, DR–67 sets out similar design 

and equipment requirements. However, 

DR–67 differs from the United States 

regime in that it is more flexible in its 

weather restrictions, and can allow up 

to a 66% reduction in freeboard under 

sufficiently benign conditions. 

The European working group has 

revised and updated DR–67; the new 

revision is referred to as ‘‘DR–68.’’ The 

Coast Guard participated in this revision 

effort to ensure that DR–68 is consistent 

with United States safety concerns and 

in order to provide United States dredge 

operators with an alternative approach 

for reduced freeboard assignment. 

Therefore, in accordance with the ICLL 

Article 6(2) and 46 CFR 42.03–30, and 

on a case-by-case basis, the Coast Guard 

will authorize an ICLL Exemption 

Certificate that exempts the dredges 

from ICLL Article 12, which otherwise 

prohibits submersion of the load line 

marks. 

ICLL Equivalents for Hopper Dredges 

and Barges: Hatch Covers 

Ordinarily, load line regulations 

require hatch openings to be closed by 

weathertight hatch covers, since 

conventional cargo ships cannot survive 

extensive flooding of their cargo holds. 

However, some open hopper vessels 

(such as dredges, dump scows, etc.) can 

be designed to maintain adequate 

buoyancy and stability even with 

flooded hoppers. For such vessels, this 

stability characteristic provides an 

equivalent level of safety to the hatch 

covers; therefore, hatch covers are 

unnecessary and may actually interfere 

with other aspects of the vessel design. 

In accordance with the ICLL Article 8 

and 46 CFR 42.03–20, the Coast Guard 

will, on a case-by-case basis, approve 

equivalent arrangements from ICLL 

Regulation 14 (requirement for hatch 

covers). 

Coast Guard Notifications to IMO 

As required by the Convention, the 

Coast Guard has already submitted the 

requisite notifications to IMO. These 

documents, as well as copies of DR–67 

and DR–68, are posted on-line at: 

http://www.regulations.gov (docket ID 

number USCG–2010–0618). 

Requesting Exemptions and 

Equivalencies 

Owners/operators of hopper dredges 

or barges desiring an exemption or 

equivalency using any of the above 

three standards should contact their 

load line issuing authority 

(classification society), who will review 

the vessel for compliance with the Coast 

Guard’s criteria for the exemption or 

equivalency. The classification society 

will then make a recommendation to the 

Coast Guard Naval Architecture 

Division (CG–5212) for approval. The 

mailing address is Commandant (CG– 

5212), U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 2nd 

Street, SW., Stop 7126, Washington, DC 

20593–7126. 

This notice is issued under authority 

of 5 U.S.C. 552 and 46 U.S.C. 5108. 

Dated: September 15, 2010. 

J.G. Lantz, 

Director, Office of Commercial Regulations 

and Standards, U.S. Coast Guard. 

[FR Doc. 2010–25500 Filed 10–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R7–ES–2010–N192; 70120–1113– 

0000–C4] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Notice of Availability of 

Draft Recovery Plan for the Southwest 

Alaska Distinct Population Segment of 

the Northern Sea Otter 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of document availability 

for review and public comment. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

availability of our draft recovery plan 

for the southwest Alaska Distinct 

Population Segment (DPS) of the 

northern sea otter (Enydra lutris 

kenyoni), listed as threatened under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). Our recovery plan 

describes the status, current 

management, recovery objectives and 

criteria, and specific actions needed to 

enable us to delist the southwest Alaska 

DPS. We request review and comment 

on our plan from local, State, and 

Federal agencies and the public. We 

will also accept any new information on 

the species’ status throughout its range. 

DATES: We must receive written 

comments on or before February 9, 

2011. However, we will accept 

information about any species at any 

time. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the draft recovery 

plan are available by request from the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Marine 

Mammals Management Office, 1011 East 

Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK 99503; 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 12, 2010 / Notices 62563 

telephone 907/786–3800; facsimile 907/ 

786–3816. If you use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD), call the Federal Information 

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

An electronic copy of the draft recovery 

plan is also available at: http:// 

alaska.fws.gov/fisheries/mmm/ 

seaotters/recovery.htm. 

For how to submit comments, see 

‘‘Request for Public Comments’’ under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Douglas M. Burn, Wildlife Biologist, at 

the above address or telephone number. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Recovery of endangered or threatened 

animals and plants to the point where 

they are again secure, self-sustaining 

members of their ecosystems is a 

primary goal of our endangered species 

program and the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq.). To help guide the recovery effort, 

we are working to prepare recovery 

plans for most listed species native to 

the United States. The Act requires that 

we develop recovery plans for listed 

species, unless such a plan would not 

promote the conservation of a particular 

species, and that we provide public 

notice and an opportunity for public 

review and comment during recovery 

plan development. Recovery plans 

describe actions considered necessary 

for the conservation and survival of the 

species, establish criteria for 

reclassifying or delisting listed species, 

and estimate time and cost for 

implementing needed recovery 

measures. 

We listed the southwest Alaska DPS 

of the northern sea otter as threatened 

on August 9, 2005 (70 FR 46366). For 

description, taxonomy, distribution, 

status, breeding biology and habitat, and 

a summary of factors affecting the 

species, please see the final listing rule. 

Critical habitat was designated for this 

DPS on October 8, 2009 (74 FR 51988). 

The southwest Alaska population 

ranges from Attu Island at the western 

end of Near Islands in the Aleutians, 

east to Kamishak Bay on the western 

side of lower Cook Inlet, and includes 

waters adjacent to the Aleutian Islands, 

the Alaska Peninsula, the Kodiak 

archipelago, and the Barren Islands (see 

Figure 3 of the February 11, 2004, 

Proposed Listing Rule; 69 FR 6605). 

Within this range, sea otters generally 

occur in nearshore, shallow waters less 

than 100 meters (m) (328 ft) in depth. 

This population experienced a rapid 

decline in abundance of more than 50 

percent since the late 1980s. At the time 

of our 2005 final listing rule, we 

estimated that the DPS consisted of 

approximately 42,000 sea otters. 

The magnitude of the population 

decline has varied over the range. In 

some areas, numbers have declined by 

more than an order of magnitude, while 

in other areas no decline has been 

detected. To address such differences, 

this recovery plan identifies five 

management units (MUs) within the 

DPS: (1) Western Aleutian Islands; (2) 

Eastern Aleutian Islands; (3) South 

Alaska Peninsula; (4) Bristol Bay; and 

(5) Kodiak, Kamishak, Alaska Peninsula. 

The cause of the overall decline is not 

known with certainty, but the weight of 

evidence points to increased predation, 

most likely by the killer whale (Orcinus 

orca), as the most likely cause. 

Predation is therefore considered a 

threat to the recovery of this DPS; 

however, other threats—including 

infectious disease, biotoxins, 

contaminants, oil spills, food limitation, 

disturbance, bycatch in fisheries, 

subsistence harvest, loss of habitat, and 

illegal take—are also considered in this 

recovery plan. Threats are summarized 

in general, and their relative importance 

is assessed for each of the five MUs. 

Most threats are assessed to be of low 

importance to recovery of the DPS; the 

threats judged to be most important are 

predation (moderate to high importance) 

and oil spills (low to moderate 

importance). Threats from subsistence 

harvest, illegal take, and infectious 

disease are assessed to be of moderate 

importance in the Kodiak, Kamishak, 

Alaska Peninsula MU, but of low 

importance elsewhere. 

The goal of the recovery program is to 

control or reduce threats to the 

southwest Alaska DPS of the northern 

sea otter to the extent that this DPS no 

longer requires the protections afforded 

by the Act and therefore can be delisted. 

To achieve this goal, the recovery plan 

identifies three objectives: (1) Achieve 

and maintain a self-sustaining 

population of sea otters in each MU; (2) 

maintain enough sea otters to ensure 

that they are playing a functional role in 

their nearshore ecosystem; and (3) 

mitigate threats sufficiently to ensure 

persistence of sea otters. Each of these 

objectives includes explicit criteria to 

determine if the objective has been met; 

these are known as ‘‘delisting criteria.’’ 

They stipulate that in order for the DPS 

to be removed from the Endangered and 

Threatened Species List, at least three of 

the five MUs must have met the 

delisting criteria. Delisting should not 

be considered, however, if any MU 

meets the criteria specified for uplisting 

to endangered. The plan also contains 

criteria to determine if the DPS should 

be considered for reclassification as 

endangered; these are known as 

‘‘uplisting criteria.’’ 

Specific actions to achieve recovery 

and delisting of the DPS are specified in 

the recovery action outline and 

narrative. As demographic 

characteristics of the population 

constitute one of the three types of 

delisting criteria, population monitoring 

and population modeling are high 

priorities. Monitoring the status of the 

kelp forest ecosystem in the Western 

Aleutian and Eastern Aleutian MUs is 

also a high priority, as results from such 

monitoring will be needed to evaluate 

the ecosystem-based delisting criteria. 

Other high-priority actions include 

identifying characteristics of sea otter 

habitat, and ensuring that adequate oil 

spill response capability exists in 

southwest Alaska. As predation is 

considered to be the most important 

threat to recovery, additional research 

on that topic is also a high priority. The 

recovery implementation schedule 

provides details regarding the timing, 

cost, and agencies or entities 

responsible for implementing each 

recovery action. The full cost of 

implementing this recovery plan over 

the next 5 years is approximately $15M, 

of which $2.815M is for Priority 1 

actions. Securing adequate funding to 

implement the plan is therefore also a 

high priority. 

Request for Public Comments 

We request written comments on the 

draft recovery plan. All comments 

received by the date specified in DATES

will be considered prior to finalization 

of this recovery plan. If you wish to 

comment, you may submit your 

comments and materials concerning this 

recovery plan by one of these methods: 

(1) You may submit written comments 

and information by mail or facsimile or 

in person to the Alaska Regional Office 

at the above address (see ADDRESSES). 

(2) You may send comments by 

electronic mail (e-mail) to 

r7_mmm_comment@fws.gov. Please 

include your name and return address 

in your e- mail message. 

Comments and materials received, as 

well as supporting documentation used 

in preparation of the recovery plan, will 

be available for inspection, during 

normal business hours at the above 

Anchorage address (see ADDRESSES). 

We specifically seek comments on the 

following: 

(1) Biological, commercial trade, or 

other relevant data concerning any 

threat (or lack thereof) to the species; 

(2) Additional information concerning 

the range, distribution, and population 

size of these species, including the 

location of any additional populations; 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
62564 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 12, 2010 / Notices 

(3) Current or planned activities in the 

subject area and their possible impacts 

on these species; and 

(4) The suitability and feasibility of 

the recovery criteria, strategies, or 

actions described in the draft recovery 

plan. 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail 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: We developed our draft 

recovery plan under the authority of section 

4(f) of the Act, 16 U.S.C. 1533(f). We publish 

this notice under section 4(f) Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq.). 

Dated: September 8, 2010. 

Gary Edwards, 

Acting Regional Director, Alaska Region, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–25538 Filed 10–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Inv. No. 337–TA–740] 

In the Matter of: Certain Toner 

Cartridges and Components Thereof; 

Notice of Investigation 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Institution of investigation 

pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a 

complaint was filed with the U.S. 

International Trade Commission on 

August 20, 2010, under section 337 of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 

U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of Lexmark 

International, Inc. of Lexington, 

Kentucky. The complaint alleges 

violations of section 337 based upon the 

importation into the United States, the 

sale for importation, and the sale within 

the United States after importation of 

certain toner cartridges and components 

thereof by reason of infringement of 

certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 

5,337,032 (‘‘the ’032 patent’’); U.S. 

Patent No. 5,634,169 (‘‘the ’169 patent’’); 

U.S. Patent No. 5,758,233 (‘‘the ’233 

patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 5,768,661 (‘‘the 

’661 patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 5,802,432 

(‘‘the ’432 patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 

5,875,378 (‘‘the ’378 patent’’); U.S. 

Patent No. 6,009,291 (‘‘the ’291 patent’’); 

U.S. Patent No. 6,078,771 (‘‘the ’771 

patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 6,397,015 (‘‘the 

’015 patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 6,459,876 

(‘‘the ’876 patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 

6,816,692 (‘‘the ’692 patent’’); U.S. 

Patent No. 6,871,031 (‘‘the ’031 patent’’); 

U.S. Patent No. 7,139,510 (‘‘the ’510 

patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 7,233,760 (‘‘the 

’760 patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 7,305,204 

(‘‘the ’204 patent’’). The complaint 

further alleges that an industry in the 

United States exists as required by 

subsection (a)(2) of section 337. 

The complainant requests that the 

Commission institute an investigation 

and, after the investigation, issue an 

exclusion order and cease and desist 

orders. 

ADDRESSES: The complaint, except for 

any confidential information contained 

therein, is 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., Room 

112, Washington, DC 20436, telephone 

202–205–2000. Hearing impaired 

individuals are advised that information 

on this matter can be obtained by 

contacting the Commission’s TDD 

terminal on 202–205–1810. Persons 

with mobility impairments who will 

need special assistance in gaining access 

to the Commission should contact the 

Office of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. 

General information concerning the 

Commission may also be obtained by 

accessing its internet server at 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rett 

Snotherly, Esq., Office of Unfair Import 

Investigations, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, telephone (202) 205–2599 

Authority: The authority for 

institution of this investigation is 

contained in section 337 of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended, and in section 

210.10 of the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 

(2010). 

Scope of Investigation: Having 

considered the complaint, the U.S. 

International Trade Commission, on 

October 5, 2010, ordered that— 

(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of 

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended, an investigation be instituted 

to determine whether there is a 

violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of 

section 337 in the importation into the 

United States, the sale for importation, 

or the sale within the United States after 

importation of certain toner cartridges 

and components thereof that infringe 

one or more of claim 1 of the ’032 

patent; claims 1–3, 32, 33, 36, and 42 of 

the ’169 patent; claims 1 and 2 of the 

’233 patent; claims 1 and 2 of the ’661 

patent; claims 1–3 of the ’432 patent; 

claims 1, 2, and 14 of the ’378 patent; 

claims 1 and 2 of the ’291 patent; claims 

1, 2, 5, 6, 10, and 15 of the ’771 patent; 

claims 1, 2, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15, 17, 22, and 

24 of the ’015 patent; claims 1–3 and 28 

of the ’876 patent; claim 1 of the ’692 

patent; claims 1, 3, 5, 8, and 10 of the 

’031 patent; claims 1 and 6 of the ’510 

patent; claims 11, 12, and 14 of the ’760 

patent; and claims 1, 7, 14, and 15 of the 

’204 patent, and whether an industry in 

the United States exists as required by 

subsection (a)(2) of section 337; 

(2) For the purpose of the 

investigation so instituted, the following 

are hereby named as parties upon which 

this notice of investigation shall be 

served: 

(a) The complainant is: 

Lexmark International, Inc., 740 W. New 

Circle Road, Lexington, KY 40550. 

(b) The respondents are the following 

entities alleged to be in violation of 

section 337, and are the parties upon 

which the complaint is to be served: 

Ninestar Image Co. Ltd., (a/k/a Ninestar 

Technology Co., Ltd.), No. 63 

Mingzhubei Road, Zhuhai 519075, 

Guangdong, China. 

Ninestar Image Int’l, Ltd., No. 63 

Mingzhubei Road, Zhuhai 519075, 

Guangdong, China. 

Seine Image International Co. Ltd., Rm. 

18, 9/F New Commercial Ctr., 9 on Lai 

St, Sha Tin, New Territories, Hong 

Kong. 

Ninestar Technology Company, Ltd., 

150 Abbott Court, Piscataway, NJ 

08854. 

Ziprint Image Corporation, 19805 

Harrison Avenue, Walnut, CA 91789. 

Nano Pacific Corporation, 377 Swift 

Avenue, South San Francisco, CA 

94080. 

IJSS Inc. (d/b/a TonerZone.com Inc. and 

Inkjet Superstore), 1880 Century Park 

East, #200, Los Angeles, CA 90067. 

Chung Pal Shin (d/b/a Ink Master), 

16635 Valley View, Cerritos, CA 

90703. 

Nectron International, Inc., 725 Park 

Two Drive, Sugarland, TX 77478. 

Quality Cartridges Inc., 162 44th Street, 

Brooklyn, NY 11232. 

Direct Billing International 

Incorporated, (d/b/a Office Supply 

Outfitter and d/b/a The Ribbon 

Connection), 5910 Sea Lion Place, 

Suite 100, Carlsbad, CA 92010. 

E-Toner Mart, Inc., 1718 Potrero 

Avenue, Suite #A, South El Monte, 

CA 91733. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES