Notices. Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Increased Depleted Uranium (DU) Use at Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR)

4,576 words·~21 min read·/register/2006/01/24/06-670·

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

BILLING CODE 3510-JT-M DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (A-122-840) Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Canada AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On July 20, 2005, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of its second administrative review of the antidumping duty order on carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod from Canada. The review covers two producers of the subject merchandise, Ivaco Inc. and Ivaco Rolling Mills

(IRM)(collectively, “Ivaco”) and Ispat Sidbec, Inc. (Ispat) (now known as Mittal Canada Inc. (Mittal) 1 ). The period of review

(POR)is October 1, 2003, through September 30, 2004. Based on our analysis of comments received, these final results differ from the preliminary results. The final results are listed below in the Final Results of Review section. 1 On June 24, 2005, we determined that Mittal was the successor-in-interest to Ispat Sidbec, Inc. *See Final Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Carbon and Certain Steel Alloy Wire Rod from Canada* , 70 FR 39484 (July 8, 2005). EFFECTIVE DATE: January 24, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Salim Bhabhrawala or David Neubacher, at

(202)482-1784 or

(202)482-5823, respectively; AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14 th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On July 20, 2005, the Department published in the **Federal Register** the preliminary results of the second administrative review of the antidumping duty order on carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod from Canada. *See Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Carbon and Certain Steel Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Canada* , 70 FR 41681 (July 20, 2005) ( *Preliminary Results* ). We invited parties to comment on the *Preliminary Results* . On August 29, 2005, we received case briefs from the respondents, Ivaco and Ispat, and the petitioners, Gerdau Ameristeel US Inc., ISG Georgetown Inc., Keystone Consolidated Industries, Inc., and North Star Steel Texas, Inc. All parties submitted rebuttal briefs on September 9, 2005. No public hearing was requested. Scope of the Order The merchandise subject to this order is certain hot-rolled products of carbon steel and alloy steel, in coils, of approximately round cross section, 5.00 mm or more, but less than 19.00 mm, in solid cross-sectional diameter. Specifically excluded are steel products possessing the above-noted physical characteristics and meeting the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) definitions for

(a)stainless steel;

(b)tool steel; c) high nickel steel;

(d)ball bearing steel; and

(e)concrete reinforcing bars and rods. Also excluded are

(f)free machining steel products ( *i.e.* , products that contain by weight one or more of the following elements: 0.03 percent or more of lead, 0.05 percent or more of bismuth, 0.08 percent or more of sulfur, more than 0.04 percent of phosphorus, more than 0.05 percent of selenium, or more than 0.01 percent of tellurium). Also excluded from the scope are 1080 grade tire cord quality wire rod and 1080 grade tire bead quality wire rod. Grade 1080 tire cord quality rod is defined as:

(i)grade 1080 tire cord quality wire rod measuring 5.0 mm or more but not more than 6.0 mm in cross-sectional diameter;

(ii)with an average partial decarburization of no more than 70 microns in depth (maximum individual 200 microns);

(iii)having no non-deformable inclusions greater than 20 microns and no deformable inclusions greater than 35 microns;

(iv)having a carbon segregation per heat average of 3.0 or better using European Method NFA 04-114;

(v)having a surface quality with no surface defects of a length greater than 0.15 mm;

(vi)capable of being drawn to a diameter of 0.30 mm or less with 3 or fewer breaks per ton, and

(vii)containing by weight the following elements in the proportions shown:

(1)0.78 percent or more of carbon,

(2)less than 0.01 percent of aluminum,

(3)0.040 percent or less, in the aggregate, of phosphorus and sulfur,

(4)0.006 percent or less of nitrogen, and

(5)not more than 0.15 percent, in the aggregate, of copper, nickel and chromium. Grade 1080 tire bead quality rod is defined as:

(i)grade 1080 tire bead quality wire rod measuring 5.5 mm or more but not more than 7.0 mm in cross-sectional diameter;

(ii)with an average partial decarburization of no more than 70 microns in depth (maximum individual 200 microns);

(iii)having no non-deformable inclusions greater than 20 microns and no deformable inclusions greater than 35 microns;

(iv)having a carbon segregation per heat average of 3.0 or better using European Method NFA 04-114;

(v)having a surface quality with no surface defects of a length greater than 0.2 mm;

(vi)capable of being drawn to a diameter of 0.78 mm or larger with 0.5 or fewer breaks per ton; and

(vii)containing by weight the following elements in the proportions shown:

(1)0.78 percent or more of carbon,

(2)less than 0.01 percent of soluble aluminum,

(3)0.040 percent or less, in the aggregate, of phosphorus and sulfur,

(4)0.008 percent or less of nitrogen, and

(5)either not more than 0.15 percent, in the aggregate, of copper, nickel and chromium (if chromium is not specified), or not more than 0.10 percent in the aggregate of copper and nickel and a chromium content of 0.24 to 0.30 percent (if chromium is specified). For purposes of grade 1080 tire cord quality wire rod and grade 1080 tire bead quality wire rod, an inclusion will be considered to be deformable if its ratio of length (measured along the axis - that is, the direction of rolling - of the rod) over thickness (measured on the same inclusion in a direction perpendicular to the axis of the rod) is equal to or greater than three. The size of an inclusion for purposes of the 20 microns and 35 microns limitations is the measurement of the largest dimension observed on a longitudinal section measured in a direction perpendicular to the axis of the rod. This measurement methodology applies only to inclusions on certain grade 1080 tire cord quality wire rod and certain grade 1080 tire bead quality wire rod that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after July 24, 2003. The designation of the products as “tire cord quality” or “tire bead quality” indicates the acceptability of the product for use in the production of tire cord, tire bead, or wire for use in other rubber reinforcement applications such as hose wire. These quality designations are presumed to indicate that these products are being used in tire cord, tire bead, and other rubber reinforcement applications, and such merchandise intended for the tire cord, tire bead, or other rubber reinforcement applications is not included in the scope. However, should petitioners or other interested parties provide a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that there exists a pattern of importation of such products for other than those applications, end-use certification for the importation of such products may be required. Under such circumstances, only the importers of record would normally be required to certify the end use of the imported merchandise. All products meeting the physical description of subject merchandise that are not specifically excluded are included in this scope. The products under review are currently classifiable under subheadings 7213.91.3010, 7213.91.3015, 7213.91.3090, 7213.91.3092, 7213.91.4510, 7213.91.4590, 7213.91.6010, 7213.91.6090, 7213.99.0031, 7213.99.0038, 7213.99.0090, 7227.20.0010, 7227.20.0020, 7227.20.0090, 7227.20.0095, 7227.90.6010, 7227.90.6051, 7227.90.6053, 7227.90.6058, 7227.90.6059, and 7227.90.6080 of the HTSUS. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received The issues raised in the case briefs by parties to this administrative review are addressed in the *Issues and Decision Memorandum* to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary ( *Decision Memorandum* ), which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues addressed in the *Decision Memorandum* is appended to this notice. The *Decision Memorandum* is on file in the Central Records Unit in Room B-099 of the main Commerce building, and can also be accessed directly on the Web at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/index.html* . The paper copy and electronic version of the *Decision Memorandum* are identical in content. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of comments received, we have made adjustments to the preliminary results calculation methodologies in calculating the final dumping margins. Brief descriptions of the company-specific changes are provided below and the changes are discussed in detail in the *Decision Memorandum* . Ivaco We have corrected ministerial errors identified by parties in Ivaco's preliminary margin calculations as follows:

(1)we included indirect selling expenses in the calculation of CEP profit;

(2)we used Ivaco's reported credit expenses for its U.S. currency denominated sales in the home market and assigned it correctly throughout the calculation program;

(3)we readjusted Ivaco's date of sale on certain U.S. sales; and

(4)we ensured that the freight expenses from the border to the further processors were counted as a further manufacturing expense for only those sales which underwent further manufacturing in the United States. Ispat We have corrected ministerial errors identified by parties in Ispat's preliminary margin calculations as follows:

(1)we included the correct database and allowed for an offset in the calculation of CEP profit within the margin program; and

(2)we have corrected the calculation of the CEP offset in the margin program. Final Results of Review As a result of our review, we determine that the following weighted-average margins exist for the period of October 1, 2003, through September 30, 2004: Producer Weighted-Average Margin (Percentage) Ivaco 3.08 Ispat/Mittal 6.13 Assessment The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department calculated importer-specific duty assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of the examined sales for that importer. Where the assessment rate is above *de minimis* , we will instruct CBP to assess duties on all entries of subject merchandise by that importer. In accordance with 19 CFR 356.8(a), the Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP on or after 41 days following the date of publication of these final results of review. Cash Deposits Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod from Canada entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of these final results, as provided by section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act):

(1)for companies covered by this review, the cash deposit rate will be the rate listed above;

(2)for previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period;

(3)if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the investigation, but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be that established for the producer of the merchandise in these final results of review, a prior review, or in the final determination; and

(4)if neither the exporter nor the producer is a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the investigation, the cash deposit rate will be 8.11 percent, the “All Others” rate established in the less-than-fair-value investigation. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review. This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402

(f)to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred, and in the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. This notice also is the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order

(APO)of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: January 17, 2006. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. APPENDIX I. General Issues *Comment 1:* Freight to Unaffiliated Processors as Further Manufacturing II. Company Specific Issues Issues Specific to Ivaco *Comment 2:* Use of Level of Trade Adjustment for IRM's and Sivaco's U.S. Sales *Comment 3:* Level of Trade Methodology Used for IRM's and Sivaco's U.S. Sales *Comment 4:* Ministerial Error Allegations Specific to Ivaco Issues Specific to Ispat *Comment 5:* Cost Averaging Periods *Comment 6:* CEP Profit *Comment 7:* Negative Net-Prices for U.S. Sales *Comment 8:* Treatment of Certain Sales as CEP Sales *Comment 9:* Offsetting for Export Sales that Exceed Normal Value *Comment 10:* Ministerial Error Allegations Specific to Ispat [FR Doc. E6-823 Filed 1-23-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (A-821-802) Extension of Time Limit for Sunset Review of the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Investigation on Uranium from the Russian Federation AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 24, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sally C. Gannon or Aishe Allen, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;

(202)482-0162 or

(202)482-0172, respectively. Extension of Time Limit for Sunset Review: On November 10, 2005, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) extended the time limit for the sunset review of the agreement suspending the antidumping investigation on uranium from the Russian Federation in accordance with section 751(c)(5)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). *See Extension of Time Limit for Sunset Review of the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Investigation on Uranium from the Russian Federation* , 70 FR 68397 (November 10, 2005) (“ *Notice of Extension* ”). The Department has now determined to conduct a full sunset review of this suspended investigation. See Memorandum from Sally C. Gannon to Ronald K. Lorentzen; “Sunset Review of Uranium from the Russian Federation: Adequacy of Domestic and Respondent Interested Party Responses to the Notice of Initiation and Decision to Conduct Full Sunset Review,” dated January 17, 2006. Pursuant to section 351.218(f) of the Department's regulations, the Department normally will issue its preliminary results in a full sunset review not later that 110 days after the date of publication in the **Federal Register** of the notice of initiation. However, as determined in *Notice of Extension* , the sunset review of the agreement suspending the antidumping investigation on uranium from the Russian Federation is extraordinarily complicated and requires additional time for the Department to complete its analysis. Therefore, the Department is extending the deadline for the preliminary results in this proceeding by additional 30 days and, as a result, intends to issue the preliminary results of the full sunset review no later than February 17, 2006. The Department will issue its final results of the full sunset review on May 30, 2006, as specified in the *Notice of Extension* . This notice is issued in accordance with sections 751(c)(5)(B) and (C)(v) of the Act. Dated: January 17, 2006. Ronald K. Lorentzen, DirectorOffice of Policy. [FR Doc. E6-825 Filed 1-23-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-489-501] Notice of Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube from Turkey AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On December 5, 2005, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) issued the final results of its administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain welded carbon steel pipe and tube (“welded pipe and tube”) from Turkey. 1 The period of review is May 1, 2003, through April 30, 2004. Based on the correction of certain ministerial errors, we have changed the margins for the Borusan Group (“Borusan”) and for the Yucel Group, which includes Cayirova Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. and its affiliate, Yucel Boru Ithalat-Ihracat ve Pazarlama A.S. (collectively referred to as “Cayirova”). 1 *See Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube from Turkey* , 70 FR 73447 (December 12, 2005). EFFECTIVE DATE: January 24, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Hargett, George McMahon, or Jim Terpstra, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-4161,

(202)482-1167 or

(202)482-3965, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On December 12, 2005, the Department published in the **Federal Register** the final results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on welded pipe and tube from Turkey. We received timely allegations of ministerial errors from Borusan and Cayirova. In its comments dated December 9, 2005, Borusan alleged that the Department erred in that it did not include certain U.S. sales in the margin program. In its comments dated December 12, 2005, Cayirova alleged that the Department erred in the revised credit calculation in the home market (CREDITH). Petitioner did not comment on the ministerial errors alleged by respondents. 2 We agree with respondents that these errors are ministerial errors and have amended the final results to correct the errors referenced herein. For a full explanation of changes made by the Department, please see the Memorandum from Melissa G. Skinner to Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, *Ministerial Error Allegations Concerning the Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review on Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube from Turkey* , available in the Central Records Unit, room B099 of the main Department building. 2 Petitioners are Allied Tube and Conduit Corporation, and Wheatland Tube Company. Amended Final Results of Review As a result of the correction of ministerial errors, the following weighted-average percentage margins exist for the period May 1, 2003, through April 30, 2004: Manufacturer/Exporter Margin (percent) Amended Margin (percent) Borusan 0.86 0.74 Cayirova 3.52 3.28 The Department shall determine, and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with section 351.212(b)(1) of the Department's regulations, we have calculated importer-specific assessment rates by dividing the dumping margin found on the subject merchandise examined by the entered value of such merchandise. Where the importer-specific assessment rate is above *de minimis* , we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on that importer's entries of subject merchandise. The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of publication of these amended final results of review. Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of these amended final results of administrative review, as provided by section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”):

(1)For the companies named above, the cash deposit rate will be the rate listed above;

(2)for merchandise exported by manufacturers or exporters not covered in this review but covered in a previous segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published in the most recent final results in which that manufacturer or exporter participated;

(3)if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or in any previous segment of this proceeding, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be that established for the manufacturer of the merchandise in these final results of review or in the most recent segment of the proceeding in which that manufacturer participated; and

(4)if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this review or in any previous segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will be 14.74 percent, the “All-others” rate established in the less-than-fair-value investigation. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review. We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: January 18, 2006. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-824 Filed 1-23-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Air Force Notice of Intent To Perform an Environmental Assessment for Increased Depleted Uranium Use at Nevada Test and Training Range, Nevada AGENCY: Department of the Air Force (AF), Air Combat Command (ACC). ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Assessment

(EA)for the Increased Depleted Uranium

(DU)Use at Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR). Authority: 42 United States Code §§ 4321-4347 40 Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR)parts 1500-1508. SUMMARY: The United States Air Force is issuing this Notice of Intent

(NOI)to announce that it is conducting an environmental assessment for the proposed action for increasing the annual number of depleted uranium

(DU)rounds fired by A-10 aircraft using the 30-millimeter GAU-8 Gatling gun at the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR), Range 63, Target 63-10. This NOI describes the Air Force's proposed scoping process and identifies the Air Force's point of contact. Target 63-10 is the Air Force's only air-to-ground target for testing and training with DU rounds. The proposed assessment will be prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), the Council on Environmental Quality NEPA regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and Air Force's Environmental Impact Analysis Process

(EIAP)(Air Force Instruction 32-7061 as promulgated at 32 CFR part 989) to determine the potential environmental effects of increasing DU rounds at the NTTR. As part of the proposal, the Air Force will analyze three alternatives: A, B, and C. Alternative A (proposed action) would increase the annual use of 30-mm DU rounds in a combat mix

(CM)from an existing 9,500 to 22,800 annually. CM contains armor-piercing incendiary

(API)DU rounds mixed with high explosive incendiary

(HEI)rounds in a 5 to 1 ratio. Alternative A would increase the annual use of DU rounds from 7,900 to 19,000 (and HEI rounds from 1,600 to 3,800) to provide the 422 Test and Evaluation Squadron

(TES)and the 66 Weapons Squadron

(WPS)graduates with sufficient DU rounds to accomplish essential testing and training requirements. Alternative B would enhance testing by increasing the use of CM to a total of 31,680 rounds (26,400 DU and 5,280 HEI) at Target 63-10. This alternative would meet test and training requirements and also allow additional testing by Tactics Development & Evaluation (TD&E) and Tactics Improvement Proposals (TIP). Alternative C (no-action) would reflect no change in current operations associated with Target 63-10 whereby 9,500 CM rounds (7,900 DU and 1,600 HEI) are deployed for test and training. This number (9,500) does not provide enough rounds for effective TES testing and WPS training. DATES: The Air Force will conduct two scoping meetings to receive public input on alternatives, concerns, and issues to be addressed in the EA and to solicit public input concerning the scope of the proposed action and alternatives. The schedule and locations of the scoping meetings are as follows: January 31, 2006: 6:30 p.m.-8:30 p.m., Sunrise Library, 5400 Harris Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada and February 1, 2006: 6:30 p.m.-8:30 p.m., Indian Springs Community Center, 719 West Gretta Lane, Indian Springs, Nevada. The Air Force will accept comments at any time during the scoping period. However, to ensure the Air Force considers relevant scoping issues in a timely fashion, all comments should be forwarded to the address below no later than March 1, 2006. If during the preparation of the EA, the Air Force concludes an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS)is warranted, comments received during this scoping period will be considered in the preparation of the EIS. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Estrada, Nellis Air Force Base Office of Public Affairs, 4430 Grissom Avenue, Ste 107, Nellis AFB, NV 89191,

(702)652-2750. Lawrence Shade, Acting Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer. [FR Doc. E6-794 Filed 1-23-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 9000-0130] Federal Acquisition Regulation; Information Collection; Buy American Act—Free Trade Agreements—Israeli Trade Act Certificate AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DOD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). ACTION: Notice of request for an extension to an existing OMB clearance (9000-0130). SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Federal Acquisition Regulation

(FAR)Secretariat will be submitting to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)a request to review and approve an extension of a currently approved information collection requirement concerning Buy American Act—Free Trade Agreements—Israeli Trade Act Certificate. The clearance currently expires on April 30, 2006. Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the FAR, and whether it will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. DATES: Submit comments on or before March 27, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of the collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat (VIR), 1800 F Street, NW, Room 4035, Washington, DC 20405. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Ms. Kimberly Marshall, Contract Policy Division, GSA,

(202)219-0986. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Purpose Under the Free Trade Agreements Acts of 1979, unless specifically exempted by statute or regulation, agencies are required to evaluate offers over a certain dollar limitation to supply an eligible product without regard to the restrictions of the Buy American Act or the Balance of Payments program. Offerors identify excluded end products and FTA end products on this certificate. The contracting officer uses the information to identify the offered items which are domestic and FTA country end products so as to give these products a preference during the evaluation of offers. Items having components of unknown origin are considered to have been mined, produced, or manufactured outside the United States. B. Annual Reporting Burden *Respondents:* 1,140. *Responses Per Respondent:* 5. *Annual Responses: 5,700.* *Hours Per Response:* .167. *Total Burden Hours:* 666. *Obtaining Copies of Proposals:* Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat (VIR), Room 4035, Washington, DC 20405, telephone

(202)501-4755. Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0130, Buy American Act—Free Trade Agreements—Israeli Trade Act Certificate, in all correspondence. Dated: January 13, 2006. Gerald Zaffos, Director, Contract Policy Division. [FR Doc. 06-670 Filed 1-23-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 4

Traces to 4 documents

CFR

2 references not yet in our index

42 USC 4321-4347
32 CFR 989

Citation graph

cites case law

Notices

Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Increased Depleted Uranium (DU) Use at Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR)

Cite42 USC 4321-4347

Cite32 CFR 989

Cites 6Cited by 0 across 0 sources