Notices. Notice

5,315 words·~24 min read·/register/2004/12/29/04-28471·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 8010-01-M SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-50901; File No. SR-Phlx-2004-84] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. to Eliminate the Public Order Exposure System Functionality From Phlx Rule 229 December 21, 2004. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on November 26, 2004, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.

(“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Phlx. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Phlx proposes to eliminate the Public Order Exposure System (“POES”) functionality from Phlx Rule 229.

The text of amended Exchange Rule 229 is set forth below. Brackets indicate deletions; *italics* indicate additions. Rule 229. Philadelphia Stock Exchange Automated Communication and Execution System

(PACE)Supplementary Material: * * * .01—.04 No Change. .05—[Public Order Exposure System—]Subject to Supplementary Material Section .07, all round-lot market orders up to 500 shares and PRL market orders up to 599 shares *entered after the opening will be automatically executed at the PACE Quote.* [Will be stopped at the PACE Quote at the time of entry into the system (“Stop Price”) and be subject to a delay of up to 30 seconds from being executed in order to receive an opportunity for price improvement. If such market order is not executed within the 30 second window, the order will be automatically executed at the Stop Price. If the PACE Quote at the time of order entry into the system reflects a point spread (the difference between the best bid and offer) of $.05 or less for equities trading in decimals, pursuant to Rule 134 or 125, that order will be executed immediately without the 30 second delay.] * * * .06—No Change. .07—(a)-(b) No Change.

(c)Price Improvement for PACE Orders.

(i)Automatic Price Improvement—Where the specialist voluntarily agrees to provide automatic price improvement to all customers and all eligible market orders in a security, automatically executable market and marketable limit orders in New York Stock Exchange and American Stock Exchange listed securities received through PACE for 599 shares or less shall be provided with automatic price improvement from the PACE Quote when received either $.01 or a percentage of the PACE Quote when the order is received for equities trading in decimals beginning at 9:30 A.M., except where:

(A)A buy order would be improved to a price less than the last sale (except as provided in ([F] *E* ) below) or a sell order would be improved to a price higher than the last sale (except as provided in ([E] *D* ) below); or

(B)A buy order would be improved to the last sale price which is a downtick (except as provided in ([F] *E* ) below) or a sell order would be improved to the last sale price which is an uptick (except as provided in ([E] *D* ) below). The PACE System will determine whether the last sale price is a downtick or an uptick. The PACE System does not recognize changes from the previous day's close. In these situations, the order is not eligible for automatic price improvement, and is, instead, automatically executed at the PACE Quote. A specialist may voluntarily agree to provide automatic price improvement to larger orders in a particular security to all customers under this provision. A specialist may choose to provide automatic price improvement of:

(i)$.01 where the PACE Quote is either $.05 or greater, or $.03 or greater, or

(ii)where the PACE Quote is $.02 or greater, a percentage of the PACE Quote when the order is received, up to 50%, rounded to the nearest penny, and at least $.01, in a particular security to all customers.

(C)Automatic price improvement will not occur for odd-lot orders, nor where the execution price before or after the application of automatic price improvement would be outside the primary market high/low range for the day, if so elected by the entering member organization.

(D)[The POES window of Supplementary Material .05 above does not apply where an order is subject to automatic price improvement or manual price protection. (E)] Sell Order Enhancement I—A specialist may choose to give automatic price improvement to all sell orders of 100 shares or more, as determined by the specialist, in a particular security which would be improved to the last sale on an uptick; or Sell Order Enhancement II—A specialist may choose to give automatic price improvement to all sell orders of 100 shares or more, as determined by the specialist, in a particular security which would be improved to a price higher than the last sale. ([F] *E* ) Buy Order Enhancement—A specialist may choose to give automatic price improvement to all buy orders, as determined by the specialist, in any security that is exempted from or otherwise not subject to Securities Exchange Act Rule 10a-1. (c)(ii)-(iv)—No Change .08—.22—No Change II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Phlx included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Phlx has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of the proposed rule change is to reduce the time between order receipt and execution for market orders, thereby improving order turnaround time, and to reduce the number of manual orders. Currently, Phlx Rule 229, Supplementary Material .05, provides that if the PACE 3 Quote 4 at the time of order entry into the system reflects a point spread (the difference between the best bid and offer) of more than $.05, round-lot market orders up to 500 shares and PRL 5 market orders up to 599 shares will be stopped at the PACE Quote at the time of entry into the system (“Stop Price”) and be subject to a delay of up to 30 seconds from being executed in order to receive an opportunity for price improvement. During that time, specialists may, but are not required to, improve the execution price of the order to a price better than the Stop Price. If such market order is not executed within the 30-second window, the order will be automatically executed at the Stop Price. If the PACE Quote at the time of order entry into the system reflects a point spread of $.05 or less, that order would be executed immediately without the 30-second delay. 3 PACE is the Exchange's automated order routing, delivery, execution and reporting system for equities. *See* Phlx Rule 229. 4 The PACE Quote means the best bid/ask quote among the American, Boston, National, Chicago, New York, Pacific, or Philadelphia Stock Exchanges, or the Intermarket Trading System/Computer Assisted Execution System (“ITS/CAES”) quote, as appropriate. *See* Phlx Rule 229. 5 PRL means a combined round-lot and odd-lot order. *See* Phlx Rule 229. Since the creation of POES, 6 the Exchange has adopted other means of price improvement known as automatic price improvement (“API”) and manual price protection that may apply in certain situations. 7 Pursuant to Phlx Rule 229, Supplementary Material .07(c)(i)(D), the POES window does not apply where an order is subject to API or manual price protection. However, some orders are still subject to the window, which means that these otherwise automatically executable orders drop to manual for a period of 30 seconds waiting for specialists to manually price improve them, after which they are executed. Eliminating the POES functionality will eliminate the 30 second waiting time for automatic execution and allow such orders to be automatically executed at the PACE quote. Specialists who are interested in offering automatic price improvement will still have the Exchange's API available to them on a symbol-by-symbol basis, as they do today. 8 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35283 (January 26, 1995), 60 FR 6333 (February 1, 1995) (SR-Phlx-94-58). 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 39548 (January 13, 1998), 63 FR 3596 (January 23, 1998) (SR-Phlx-97-23). 8 Additionally, manual price improvement will continue to be available to specialists when certain conditions are met. *See* Phlx Rule 229, Supplementary Material .07(c)(ii). According to the Phlx, because of the existence of these other means of price improvement (API and manual), the POES system is rarely used by the specialists as a method of price improvement. Telephone conversation between John Dayton, Assistant Secretary and Counsel, Phlx, and Angela Muehr, Attorney, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, on December 9, 2004. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 9 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 10 in particular, in that it should promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market, and protect investors and the public interest by improving order turnaround time and reducing the number of manual orders. 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any inappropriate burden on competition. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received from Members, Participants or Others No written comments were either solicited or received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period

(i)as the Commission may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or

(ii)as to which the Exchange consents, the Commission will:

(A)By order approve such proposed rule change, or

(B)Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: *Electronic comments:* • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-Phlx-2004-84 on the subject line. *Paper comments:* • Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549-0609. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2004-84. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Phlx. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2004-84 and should be submitted on or before January 19, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 11 11 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E4-3876 Filed 12-28-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-475-825] Stainless Steel Sheet & Strip in Coils from Italy; Preliminary Results of the Full Sunset Review of the Countervailing Duty Order AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On June 1, 2004, the Department initiated a sunset review of the countervailing duty (“CVD”) order on stainless steel sheet & strip in coils (“SSSS”) from Italy pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). *See Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews* , 69 FR 30874 (June 1, 2004). On the basis of substantive responses filed by domestic and respondent interested parties, the Department is conducting a full sunset review. As a result of this review, the Department preliminarily finds that revocation of the countervailing duty order would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of countervailable subsidies at the levels indicated in the *Preliminary Results of Review* section of this notice. EFFECTIVE DATE: December 29, 2004. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hilary Sadler, Esq., Office of Policy for Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone:

(202)482-4340. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On June 1, 2004, the Department initiated a sunset review of the countervailing duty (“CVD”) order on SSSS from Italy pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). *See Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews* , 69 FR 30874 (June 1, 2004). The Department received a notice of intent to participate from Allegheny Ludlum Corp. (“Allegheny Ludlum”), North America Stainless (“NAS”), Nucor Corporation, Local 3303 United Auto Workers, Zanesville Armco Independent Organization, and the United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO/CLC (“USWA”), the domestic interested parties (collectively “domestic interested parties”), within the applicable deadline (June 16, 2004) specified in section 351.218(d)(1)(i) of the *Sunset Regulations* . However, NAS does not support continuation of this countervailing duty order. *See* Notice of Intent to Participate from the Domestic Interested Parties at footnote 1 (June 16, 2004). All domestic interested parties claimed interested-party status under section 771(9)(C) and

(D)of the Act, as a U.S. producer of the domestic like product or a certified union whose workers are engaged in the production of the subject merchandise in the United States. On July 1, 2004, we received a complete substantive response from the domestic interested parties within the 30-day deadline specified in section 351.218(d)(3)(i) of the Department's Regulations. *See* Substantive Response of the Domestic Interested Parties (July 1, 2004). The Department received a complete substantive response to the notice of initiation on behalf of three respondent interested parties: the Government of Italy (“GOI”), the Delegation of the European Commission (“EC”), and TKAST. We received substantive responses from all respondent interested parties expressing their willingness to participate in this review. *See* Responses of the GOI (unpaginated), June 30, 2004, (“GOI Response”); EC (unpaginated), June 30, 2004, (“EC Response”). TKAST, a foreign producer and exporter of the subject merchandise claimed interested party status under section 771(9)(A) of the Act. See Substantive Response of TKAST at 2 (July 1, 2004) (“TKAST Response”). All respondent interested parties note that they have participated in this proceeding. We received rebuttal comments from the domestic interested parties on July 9, 2004; however, we did not receive rebuttal comments from the respondent interested parties. In a sunset review, the Department normally will find that there is adequate response to conduct a full sunset review where respondent interested parties account for more than 50 percent, by volume, of total exports of subject merchandise to the United States. *See* 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(A). TKAST accounted for more than the 50 percent threshold that the Department normally considers to be an adequate response under 19 CFR section 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(A). On July 13, 2004, the Department determined that the responses by TKAST, the only respondent company in this review, the GOI, and the EC provided an adequate basis for a full review. *See* Memorandum for James J. Jochum, Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, from Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Director, Office of Policy, Re: Sunset Review of Stainless Steel Sheet & Strip in Coils from Italy; Adequacy of Respondent Interested Party Response to the Notice of Initiation, July 21, 2004. Therefore, the Department is conducting a full sunset review in accordance with 19 CFR 351.218(e)(2)(i). Scope of Review For purposes of this review, the product covered by this order is certain stainless steel sheet and strip in coils. Stainless steel is an alloy steel containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with or without other elements. The subject sheet and strip is a flat-rolled product in coils that is greater than 9.5 mm in width and less than 4.75 mm in thickness, and that is annealed or otherwise heat treated and pickled or otherwise descaled. The subject sheet and strip may also be further processed (e.g., cold-rolled, polished, aluminized, coated, etc.) provided that it maintains the specific dimensions of sheet and strip following such processing. The merchandise subject to these orders is classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) at the following subheadings: 7219.13.00.30, 7219.13.00.50, 7219.13.00.70, 7219.13.00.80, 7219.14.00.30, 7219.14.00.65, 7219.14.00.90, 7219.32.00.05, 7219.32.00.20, 7219.32.00.25, 7219.32.00.35, 7219.32.00.36, 7219.32.00.38, 7219.32.00.42, 7219.32.00.44, 7219.33.00.05, 7219.33.00.20, 7219.33.00.25, 7219.33.00.35, 7219.33.00.36, 7219.33.00.38, 7219.33.00.42, 7219.33.00.44, 7219.34.00.05, 7219.34.00.20, 7219.34.00.25, 7219.34.00.30, 7219.34.00.35, 7219.35.00.05, 7219.35.00.15, 7219.35.00.30, 7219.35.00.35, 7219.90.00.10, 7219.90.00.20, 7219.90.00.25, 7219.90.00.60, 7219.90.00.80, 7220.12.10.00, 7220.12.50.00, 7220.20.10.10, 7220.20.10.15, 7220.20.10.60, 7220.20.10.80, 7220.20.60.05, 7220.20.60.10, 7220.20.60.15, 7220.20.60.60, 7220.20.60.80, 7220.20.70.05, 7220.20.70.10, 7220.20.70.15, 7220.20.70.60, 7220.20.70.80, 7220.20.80.00, 7220.20.90.30, 7220.20.90.60, 7220.90.00.10, 7220.90.00.15, 7220.90.00.60, and 7220.90.00.80. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the Department's written description of the merchandise covered by these orders is dispositive. Excluded from the scope of these orders are the following:

(1)sheet and strip that is not annealed or otherwise heat treated and pickled or otherwise descaled;

(2)sheet and strip that is cut to length;

(3)plate (i.e., flat-rolled stainless steel products of a thickness of 4.75 mm or more);

(4)flat wire (i.e., cold-rolled sections, with a prepared edge, rectangular in shape, of a width of not more than 9.5 mm); and

(5)razor blade steel. Razor blade steel is a flat-rolled product of stainless steel, not further worked than cold-rolled (cold-reduced), in coils, of a width of not more than 23 mm and a thickness of 0.266 mm or less, containing, by weight, 12.5 to 14.5 percent chromium, and certified at the time of entry to be used in the manufacture of razor blades. *See* Chapter 72 of the HTSUS, “Additional U.S. Note” 1(d). In response to comments by interested parties the Department has determined that certain specialty stainless steel products are also excluded from the scope of these orders. These excluded products are described below: Flapper valve steel is defined as stainless steel strip in coils containing, by weight, between 0.37 and 0.43 percent carbon, between 1.15 and 1.35 percent molybdenum, and between 0.20 and 0.80 percent manganese. This steel also contains, by weight, phosphorus of 0.025 percent or less, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of 0.020 percent or less. The product is manufactured by means of vacuum arc remelting, with inclusion controls for sulphide of no more than 0.04 percent and for oxide of no more than 0.05 percent. Flapper valve steel has a tensile strength of between 210 and 300 ksi, yield strength of between 170 and 270 ksi, plus or minus 8 ksi, and a hardness

(Hv)of between 460 and 590. Flapper valve steel is most commonly used to produce specialty flapper valves in compressors. Also excluded is a product referred to as suspension foil, a specialty steel product used in the manufacture of suspension assemblies for computer disk drives. Suspension foil is described as 302/304 grade or 202 grade stainless steel of a thickness between 14 and 127 microns, with a thickness tolerance of plus-or-minus 2.01 microns, and surface glossiness of 200 to 700 percent Gs. Suspension foil must be supplied in coil widths of not more than 407 mm and with a mass of 225 kg or less. Roll marks may only be visible on one side, with no scratches of measurable depth. The material must exhibit residual stresses of 2 mm maximum deflection and flatness of 1.6 mm over 685 mm length. Certain stainless steel foil for automotive catalytic converters is also excluded from the scope of these orders. This stainless steel strip in coils is a specialty foil with a thickness of between 20 and 110 microns used to produce a metallic substrate with a honeycomb structure for use in automotive catalytic converters. The steel contains, by weight, carbon of no more than 0.030 percent, silicon of no more than 1.0 percent, manganese of no more than 1.0 percent, chromium of between 19 and 22 percent, aluminum of no less than 5.0 percent, phosphorus of no more than 0.045 percent, sulfur of no more than 0.03 percent, lanthanum of less than 0.002 or greater than 0.05 percent, and total rare earth elements of more than 0.06 percent, with the balance iron. Permanent magnet iron-chromium-cobalt alloy stainless strip is also excluded from the scope of these orders. This ductile stainless steel strip contains, by weight, 26 to 30 percent chromium and 7 to 10 percent cobalt, with the remainder of iron, in widths 228.6 mm or less, and a thickness between 0.127 and 1.270 mm. It exhibits magnetic remanence between 9,000 and 12,000 gauss, and a coercivity of between 50 and 300 oersteds. This product is most commonly used in electronic sensors and is currently available under proprietary trade names such as “Arnokrome III.” 1 1 “Arnokrome III” is a trademark of the Arnold Engineering. Certain electrical resistance alloy steel is also excluded from the scope of these orders. This product is defined as a non-magnetic stainless steel manufactured to American Society of Testing and Materials

(ASTM)specification B344 and containing, by weight, 36 percent nickel, 18 percent chromium, and 46 percent iron, and is most notable for its resistance to high-temperature corrosion. It has a melting point of 1390 degrees Celsius and displays a creep rupture limit of 4 kilograms per square millimeter at 1000 degrees Celsius. This steel is most commonly used in the production of heating ribbons for circuit breakers and industrial furnaces, and in rheostats for railway locomotives. The product is currently available under proprietary trade names, such as “Gilphy 36.” 2 2 “Gilphy 36” is a trademark of Imphy, S.A. Certain martensitic precipitation-hardenable stainless steel is also excluded from the scope of these orders. This high-strength, ductile stainless steel product is designated under the Unified Numbering System

(UNS)as S45500-grade steel, and contains, by weight, 11 to 13 percent chromium and 7 to 10 percent nickel. Carbon, manganese, silicon and molybdenum each comprise, by weight, 0.05 percent or less, with phosphorus and sulfur each comprising, by weight, 0.03 percent or less. This steel has copper, niobium, and titanium added to achieve aging and will exhibit yield strengths as high as 1700 Mpa and ultimate tensile strengths as high as 1750 Mpa after aging, with elongation percentages of 3 percent or less in 50 mm. It is generally provided in thicknesses between 0.635 and 0.787 mm, and in widths of 25.4 mm. This product is most commonly used in the manufacture of television tubes and is currently available under proprietary trade names, such as “Durphynox 17.” 3 3 “Durphynox 17” is a trademark of Imphy, S.A. Finally, three specialty stainless steels typically used in certain industrial blades and surgical and medical instruments are also excluded from the scope of these orders. These include stainless steel strip in coils used in the production of textile cutting tools (e.g., carpet knives). 4 This steel is similar to AISI grade 420 but containing, by weight, 0.5 to 0.7 percent of molybdenum. The steel also contains, by weight, carbon of between 1.0 and 1.1 percent, sulfur of 0.020 percent or less, and includes between 0.20 and 0.30 percent copper and between 0.20 and 0.50 percent cobalt. This steel is sold under proprietary names, such as “GIN4 Mo.” The second excluded stainless steel strip in coils is similar to AISI 420-J2 and contains, by weight, carbon of between 0.62 and 0.70 percent, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, manganese of between 0.45 and 0.80 percent, phosphorus of no more than 0.025 percent, and sulfur of no more than 0.020 percent. This steel has a carbide density on average of 100 carbide particles per 100 square microns. An example of this product is “GIN5” steel. The third specialty steel has a chemical composition similar to AISI 420 F, with carbon of between 0.37 and 0.43 percent, molybdenum of between 1.15 and 1.35 percent, but lower manganese of between 0.20 and 0.80 percent, phosphorus of no more than 0.025 percent, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of no more than 0.020 percent. This product is supplied with a hardness of more than Hv 500 guaranteed after customer processing, and is supplied as, for example, “GIN6”. “GIN4 Mo,” “GIN5” and “GIN6” are the proprietary grades of Hitachi Metals America, Ltd. 4 This list of uses is illustrative and provided for descriptive purposes only. Analysis of Comments Received: All issues raised in the substantive responses and rebuttals by parties to this sunset review are addressed in the “Issues and Decision Memorandum” (“Decision Memo”) from Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Director, Office of Policy, Import Administration, to James J. Jochum, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated December 17, 2004, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The issues discussed in the accompanying Decision Memo include the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of countervailable subsidies, the net subsidy likely to prevail were the order revoked, and the nature of the subsidy. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room B-099, of the main Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at www.ia.ita.doc.gov/frn, under the heading “Italy.” The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Preliminary Results of Review: The Department notes that on November 7, 2003, the U.S. Trade Representative requested the Department, pursuant to section 129(b)(4) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, to implement the determination in the Section 129 Memo. *See Notice of Implementation Under Section 129 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act: Countervailing Measures Concerning Certain Steel Products From the European Communities* , 68 FR 64858, (November 17, 2003). Accordingly, the Department revised the cash deposit rates for TKAST and “all others” to reflect the impact that privatization had on non-recurring, allocable subsidies for the countervailing duty order on SSSS from Italy. *Id* . We have preliminarily determined to report these revised rates to the ITC. We preliminarily determine that revocation of the countervailing duty order on SSSS from Italy would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of countervailable subsidies at the rates listed below: Producers/Exporters Net Countervailable Subsidy (percent) TKAST 0.80 Arinox 0.34 All Others 1.61 Nature of the Subsidy Consistent with section 752(a)(6) of the Act, the Department will provide to the ITC information concerning the nature of the subsidy, and whether the subsidy is a subsidy described in Article 3 or Article 6.1 of the Subsidies Agreement. No receipt of benefits under these countervailable programs are contingent upon exports or the substitution of domestic over imported goods; therefore, these programs do not fall within the definition of a subsidy under Article 3 of the Subsidies Agreement. Furthermore, our review of the determinations on the record does not lead us to conclude that these programs fall within the definition of a subsidy under Article 6.1. We note that as of January 1, 2000, Article 6.1 has ceased to apply (see Article 31 of the Subsidies Agreement). Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.310(d)(i). Any hearing, if requested, will be held on February 16, 2004. Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than February 8, 2005, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(i). Rebuttal briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than February 14, 2004, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(d)(i). The Department will issue a notice of final results of this sunset review, which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised in any such briefs, not later than April 27, 2005. This five-year (“sunset”) review and notice are in accordance with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: December 17, 2004. James J. Jochum, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E4-3863 Filed 12-28-04; 8:45 am] Billing Code: 3510-DS-S SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Work Incentives Assistance Program: Grants to State Protection and Advocacy Systems To Provide Protection and Advocacy Services to Social Security Beneficiaries With Disabilities; Awards Notification AGENCY: Social Security Administration. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Social Security Administration announces the awarding of Work Incentives Assistance Program Grants to State Protection and Advocacy Systems for the period December 1, 2004 through November 30, 2005. The purpose of this program is to provide individuals with disabilities who receive Social Security Disability Insurance or Supplemental Security Income benefits, information and advice about obtaining vocational rehabilitation and employment services. The purpose is also to provide advocacy or other services that beneficiaries with a disability may need to secure, maintain, or regain gainful employment. The following grants are being awarded for Fiscal Year 2005: State or Territory Award Alabama $107,243 Alaska 100,000 Arizona 100,000 Arkansas 100,000 California 439,035 Colorado 100,000 Connecticut 100,000 Delaware 100,000 Florida 245,288 Georgia 130,301 Hawaii 100,000 Idaho 100,000 Illinois 167,305 Indiana 100,000 Iowa 100,000 Kansas 100,000 Kentucky 115,761 Louisiana 100,000 Maine 100,000 Maryland 100,000 Massachusetts 104,768 Michigan 163,605 Minnesota 100,000 Mississippi 100,000 Missouri 100,000 Montana 100,000 Nebraska 100,000 Nevada 100,000 New Hampshire 100,000 New Jersey 100,000 New Mexico 100,000 New York 319,006 North Carolina 146,570 North Dakota 100,000 Ohio 177,910 Oklahoma 100,000 Oregon 100,000 Pennsylvania 203,256 Rhode Island 100,000 South Carolina 100,000 South Dakota 100,000 Tennessee 117,012 Texas 237,941 Utah 100,000 Vermont 100,000 Virginia 100,000 Washington 100,000 West Virginia 100,000 Wisconsin 100,000 Wyoming 100,000 District of Columbia 100,000 Puerto Rico 100,000 American Samoa 50,000 Guam 50,000 Northern Mariana Islands 50,000 Virgin Islands 50,000 Native American Program 50,000 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer DeBoy, 410-965-8658. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Request for Applications was originally published as Program Announcement No. SSA-OESP-04-1. The authority for these grants is found in section 1150 of the Social Security Act, as added by section 122 of Public Law 106-170 (the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999), and amended by sections 404 and 477 of Public Law 108-203. This section, State Grants for Work Incentives Assistance to Disabled Beneficiaries, authorized the Commissioner to make payments only to the designated Protection and Advocacy Systems established under title I of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act (subsequently replaced by title I of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000, Public Law 106-402). Formula-based award amounts are derived from the Social Security Administration's disability population statistics for each State and Territory. Dated: December 21, 2004. Martin H. Gerry, Deputy Commissioner for Disability and Income Security Programs. [FR Doc. 04-28471 Filed 12-28-04; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 7

Traces to 7 documents

U.S. Code

CFR

4 references not yet in our index