Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2006-10-23 · DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE · Notices

Notices. Notice; proposed incidental take authorization; request for comments

16,243 words·~74 min read·/register/2006/10/23/06-8824·

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

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board (Docket 41-2006) Foreign-Trade Zone 70 -- Detroit, Michigan, Application for Expansion An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones
(FTZ)Board (the Board) by the Greater Detroit Foreign Trade Zone, Inc., grantee of FTZ 70, requesting authority to expand its zone to include a site located in the Townships of Ypsilanti and Van Buren within the Detroit Customs port of entry. The application was submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the regulations of the Board (15 CFR part 400). It was formally filed on October 16, 2006. FTZ 70 was approved on July 21, 1981 (Board Order 176, 46 FR 38941, 7/30/81), reorganized on April 15, 1985 (Board Order 299, 50 FR 16119, 4/24/85), and expanded on November 27, 1989 (Board Order 453, 54 FR 50258, 12/5/89), on April 20, 1990 (Board Order 471, 55 FR 17775, 4/27/90), on February 20, 1996 (Board Order 802, 61 FR 7237, 2/27/96), on August 26, 1996 (Board Order 843, 61 FR 46763, 9/5/96), on April 5, 2001 (Board Order 1162, 66 FR 19423, 4/16/01), and on May 23, 2005 (Board Order 1395, 70 FR 32570, 6/3/05). The general-purpose zone currently consists of eighteen sites in the greater Detroit area: *Site 1* (5 acres) -- located at 4485 West Jefferson Avenue, Detroit; *Site 2* (45 acres) -- Nicholson Terminal and Dock Company's port terminal and warehouse facility located along the Detroit River on Great Lakes Avenue in Ecorse; *Site 3* (72 acres, 2 parcels) -- located within the Metro Airport Center Industrial Park located west of Wayne Road between Grant Road and the Norfolk Southern Railroad Line and located at 6850 Middlebelt Road, Romulus; *Site 4* (300,000 sq. ft.) -- located within the Westside Industrial Park, Detroit; *Site 5* (22 acres, 3 parcels) -- located within the Lynch Road Industrial Park Condominium at 6490 Lynch Road, Detroit; at 6307 West Fort Street, Detroit; and, at 214 East Maple Road, Troy; *Site 6* (32 acres, 3 parcels) -- located at two parcels between Clark and Swain Streets near the Detroit River; at 36501 Van Born Road in Romulus; and, at 308 Antoine Street in Wyandotte (expires 7/1/2007); *Site 7* (3.45 acres) -- located at 36501 Van Born Road, Romulus; *Site 8* (380,803 sq. ft.) -- located at 17423 West Jefferson Avenue, Riverview; *Site 9* (46,560 sq. ft.) -- Trans Overseas Corporation's facility, 28000 Goddard Road, Romulus; *Site 10* (308,596 sq. ft.) -- Central Detroit Warehouse, 18765 Seaway Drive, Melvindale; *Site 11* (31,675 sq. ft.) -- located at 14933 Keel Street, Plymouth; *Site 12* (86 acres) -- Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport's fuel system; *Site 13* (47,000 sq. ft.) -- located at 13542 Helen Street, Detroit; *Site 14* (37 acres, 3 parcels) -- located at Ambassador Bridge adjacent to Interstates 75 and 96 spanning the Detroit River; at 3333 West Fort Street, Detroit; and, at 2301 West Lafayette Street, Detroit; *Site 15* (28 acres) -- Buske Lines Logistics complex, 17300 Allen Road, Brownstown Township; *Site 15A* (114,000 sq. ft.) -- located at 12240 Oakland Park Boulevard, Building 6, Highland Park; *Site 16* (108,321 sq. ft.) -- located at 8625 Inkster Road, Taylor; *Site 17* (101,404 sq. ft.) -- located at 26980 Trolley Drive, Taylor; and, *Site 18* (52 acres) -- located at 7111 Crabb Road, Temperance (expires 6/1/2010). The applicant is now requesting authority to expand the general-purpose zone to include an additional site at the Willow Run Airport ( *Proposed Site 19* - 2,340 acres) located at 801 Willow Run Airport, Ypsilanti. The site is owned by Wayne County and includes airport jet fuel storage/distribution facilities. No specific manufacturing authority is being requested at this time. Such requests would be made to the Board on a case-by-case basis. In accordance with the Board's regulations, a member of the FTZ Staff has been designated examiner to investigate the application and report to the Board. Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions (original and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is December 22, 2006. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period to January 8, 2007. A copy of the application and accompanying exhibits will be available for public inspection at each of the following locations: U.S. Department of Commerce, Export Assistance Center, 8109 East Jefferson Avenue, Suite 110, Detroit, MI 48213; and, Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 1115, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230. Dated: October 16, 2006. Pierre V. Duy, Acting Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17716 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A-570-863 Honey from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Rescission of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On July 31, 2006, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) published in the **Federal Register** (71 FR 43109) a notice announcing the initiation of new shipper reviews of the antidumping duty order on honey from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”). The period of review (“POR”) is December 1, 2005, to June 30, 2006. This review is now being rescinded for Qingdao Aolan Trade Co., Ltd., and Hangzhou Golden Harvest Health Industry Co., Ltd., because the requesting parties withdrew their requests in a timely manner. EFFECTIVE DATE: October 23, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine Bertrand or Anya Naschak, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14 th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room 4003, Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone:
(202)482-3207 or
(202)482-6375, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On December 10, 2001, the Department published in the **Federal Register** an antidumping duty order covering honey from the PRC. *See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Honey from the People's Republic of China* , 66 FR 63670 (December 10, 2001). On June 21, 2006, Qingdao Aolan Trade Co., Ltd. (“Qingdao Aolan”), and Hangzhou Golden Harvest Health Industry Co., Ltd. (“Golden Harvest”), requested, in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), and 19 CFR 351.214(d) of the Department's regulations, that the Department conduct new shipper reviews of the antidumping duty order on honey from the PRC for their respective companies covering the period December 1, 2005, through June 30, 2006. On July 20, 2006, the Department initiated new shipper reviews of Qingdao Aolan and Golden Harvest. *See Honey from the People's Republic of China: Initiation of New Shipper Anti-Dumping Duty Reviews* , 71 FR 43109 (July 31, 2006). On September 15, 2006, Qingdao Aolan filed a letter withdrawing its request for a new shipper review. On September 27, 2006, Golden Harvest filed a letter withdrawing its request for a new shipper review. Rescission of Review 19 CFR 351.214(f)(1) states that if a party that requested a new shipper review withdraws the request within 60 days of the publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review, the Secretary will rescind the review. Qingdao Aolan and Golden Harvest withdrew their review requests within the 60-day deadline, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.214(f)(1). Accordingly, we are rescinding these new shipper reviews of the antidumping duty order on honey from the PRC covering the period December 1, 2005, through June 30, 2006, with respect to Qingdao Aolan and Golden Harvest. Notification of Interested Parties This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) 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 the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (“APOs”) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. 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 terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction. This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(f)(3). Dated: October 16, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-17714 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (A-485-806) Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from Romania: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from Romania. The period of review is November 1, 2004, through October 31, 2005. We preliminarily determine that sales of subject merchandise by Mittal Steel Galati, S.A. (MS Galati), have not been made below normal value. If these preliminary results are adopted in our final results, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)to assess no antidumping duties on appropriate entries. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results. Parties that submit comments are requested to submit with each argument
(1)a statement of the issue(s) and
(2)a brief summary of the argument(s). We will issue the final results no later than 120 days from the publication of this notice. EFFECTIVE DATE: October 20, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Dirstine at
(202)482-4033, AD/CVD Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14 th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On November 29, 2001, the Department published an antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from Romania. See *Notice of Amended Final Antidumping Duty Determination and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From Romania* , 66 FR 59566 (November 29, 2001). On November 1, 2005, the Department published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from Romania for the period November 1, 2004, through October 31, 2005. See *Notice of Opportunity to Request Administrative Review of Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation* , 70 FR 65883 (November 1, 2005). On November 30, 2005, the Department received three timely requests for an administrative review of this order on behalf of MS Galati, Nucor Corporation (a domestic interested party), and United States Steel Corporation (USSC), the petitioner in this proceeding. On December 22, 2005, the Department initiated an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from Romania for the period November 1, 2004, through October 31, 2005 ( *Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part* , 70 FR 76024 (December 22, 2005)). On July 27, 2006, due to the complexity of the case and pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department extended the deadline for the completion of the preliminary results in this administrative review until October 16, 2006. See *Notice of Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from Romania* , 71 FR 42630 (July 27, 2006). Scope of the Order For purposes of this order, the products covered are certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products of a rectangular shape, of a width of 0.5 inch or greater, neither clad, plated, nor coated with metal and whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances, in coils (whether or not in successively superimposed layers), regardless of thickness, and in straight length, of a thickness of less than 4.75 mm and of a width measuring at least 10 times the thickness. Universal mill plate ( *i.e.* , flat-rolled products rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 mm, but not exceeding 1250 mm, and of a thickness of not less than 4.0 mm, not in coils and without patterns in relief) of a thickness not less than 4.0 mm is not included within the scope of this order. The merchandise subject to this order is classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States (HTSUS) at the following subheadings: 7208.10.15.00, 7208.10.30.00, 7208.10.60.00, 7208.25.30.00, 7208.25.60.00, 7208.26.00.30, 7208.26.00.60, 7208.27.00.30, 7208.27.00.60, 7208.36.00.30, 7208.36.00.60, 7208.37.00.30, 7208.37.00.60, 7208.38.00.15, 7208.38.00.30, 7208.38.00.90, 7208.39.00.15, 7208.39.00.30, 7208.39.00.90, 7208.40.60.30, 7208.40.60.60, 7208.53.00.00, 7208.54.00.00, 7208.90.00.00, 7211.14.00.90, 7211.19.15.00, 7211.19.20.00, 7211.19.30.00, 7211.19.45.00, 7211.19.60.00, 7211.19.75.30, 7211.19.75.60, and 7211.19.75.90. Certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products are covered by this order, including vacuum degassed fully stabilized, high strength low alloy, and the substrate for motor lamination steel which may also enter under the following tariff numbers: 7225.11.00.00, 7225.19.00.00, 7225.30.30.50, 7225.30.70.00, 7225.40.70.00, 7225.99.00.90, 7226.11.10.00, 7226.11.90.30, 7226.11.90.60, 7226.19.10.00, 7226.19.90.00, 7226.91.50.00, 7226.91.70.00, 7226.91.80.00, and 7226.99.00.00. Subject merchandise may also enter under 7210.70.30.00, 7210.90.90.00, 7211.14.00.30, 7212.40.10.00, 7212.40.50.00, and 7212.50.00.00. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise subject to this proceeding is dispositive. For further information on the scope of the order, see Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from Romania: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 69 FR 70644 (December 7, 2004). Date of Sale Based on our analysis of U.S. sales in the 2003-2004 review, we concluded that all substantive terms of sale, *i.e.* , price, quantity, terms of delivery, and payment, were fixed and not susceptible to change after the date on the customer order acknowledgment issued by MS Galati's U.S. subsidiary, INA. Therefore, we determined that the date of INA's customer-order acknowledgment represents the appropriate date of sale for reporting U.S. sales. See *Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From Romania: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Rescission in Part of Administrative Review* , 71 FR 30656 (May 30, 2006) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 7. Fair-Value Comparisons To determine whether MS Galati's sales of the subject merchandise from Romania to the United States were made at prices below normal value, we compared the constructed export price
(CEP)to the normal value as described in the “Constructed Export Price” and “Normal Value” sections of this notice. Therefore, pursuant to section 777A(d)(2) of the Act, we compared the CEPs of individual U.S. transactions to the monthly weighted-average normal value of the foreign like product where there were sales made in the ordinary course of trade. Product Comparisons In accordance with section 771(16) of the Act, we considered all products within the “Scope of the Order” section above which were produced and sold by MS Galati in the home market during the period of review to be foreign like product for the purpose of determining appropriate product comparisons to U.S. sales of subject merchandise. We relied on the following eleven characteristics to match U.S. sales of subject merchandise to comparison sales of the foreign like product:
(1)painted;
(2)quality;( 3) carbon content;
(4)yield strength;
(5)thickness;
(6)width;
(7)form;
(8)temper rolled;
(9)pickled;
(10)edge trim; and
(11)patterns in relief. Where there were no sales of identical merchandise in the home market to compare to U.S. sales, we compared U.S. sales to the most similar foreign like product on the basis of the characteristics and reporting instructions we identified in our questionnaire. See Appendix III and IV of the Department's antidumping duty questionnaire to MS Galati dated December 22, 2005. Constructed Export Price In accordance with section 772(b) of the Act, CEP is the price at which the subject merchandise is first sold (or agreed to be sold) in the United States before or after the date of importation by or for the account of the producer or exporter of such merchandise or by a seller affiliated with the producer or exporter to a purchaser not affiliated with the producer or exporter, as adjusted under sections 772(c) and
(d)of the Act. For purposes of this administrative review, we have treated sales by MS Galati as CEP transactions because MS Galati's U.S. affiliate, INA, made the first sale to an unaffiliated party in the United States. Therefore, we based CEP on the packed duty-paid prices to unaffiliated purchasers in the United States in accordance with sections 772(b), (c), and
(d)of the Act. We made deductions for movement expenses in accordance with section 772(c)(2)(A) of the Act. These deductions included foreign inland freight from the plant to the port of export, foreign brokerage and handling, international freight, marine insurance, U.S. brokerage and handling, other U.S. transportation expenses ( *i.e.* , U.S. stevedoring, wharfage, and surveying), and U.S. customs duty. In accordance with section 772(d)(1) of the Act, we deducted those selling expenses associated with economic activities occurring in the United States, including direct selling expenses ( *i.e.* , imputed credit expenses) and indirect selling expenses. We revised the calculation of U.S. credit expense from the amount MS Galati claimed to reflect the seller's cost of extending credit between the date of shipment from Romania and final payment from the first unaffiliated customer. Credit expense is the interest expense incurred (or interest revenue foregone) between shipment of merchandise to a customer and receipt of payment from the customer. Inventory carrying costs are the interest expenses incurred (or interest revenue foregone) between the time the merchandise leaves the production line at the factory to the time the goods are shipped to the first unaffiliated customer. In CEP cases where the merchandise does not enter the inventory of a U.S. affiliate in the United States prior to sale to an unaffiliated U.S. customer, the Department calculates the credit period from the time the merchandise is shipped from the producer's country to the date of payment. See, *e.g.* , *Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and Tobago* , 70 FR 12648 (March 15, 2005), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 6. For these CEP sales, we also made an adjustment for profit in accordance with section 772(d)(3) of the Act. We deducted the profit allocated to expenses deducted under sections 772(d)(1) and 772(d)(2) in accordance with sections 772(d)(3) and 772(f) of the Act. In accordance with section 772(f) of the Act, we computed profit based on total revenue realized on sales in both the U.S. and home markets, less all expenses associated with those sales. We then allocated profit to expenses incurred with respect to U.S. economic activity based on the ratio of total U.S. expenses to total expenses for both the U.S. and home markets. Normal Value A. Home-Market Viability We compared the aggregate volume of all home-market sales of the foreign like product and the U.S. sales of the subject merchandise to determine whether the volume of the foreign like product sold in Romania was sufficient, pursuant to section 773(a)(1)(c) of the Act, to form a basis for normal value. Because the volume of home-market sales of the foreign like product was greater than five percent of the U.S. sales of subject merchandise, in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we have based the determination of normal value on the home-market sales of the foreign like product. Thus, we used as normal value the prices at which the foreign like product was first sold for consumption in Romania, in the usual commercial quantities, in the ordinary course of trade, and, to the extent possible, at the same level of trade as the CEP sales, as appropriate. After testing home-market viability, we calculated normal value as discussed in the “Price-to-Price Comparisons” section of this notice. B. Cost-of-Production Analysis On July 11, 2006, Nucor Corporation submitted an allegation that MS Galati's home-market sales were made at prices below the cost of production and requested that the Department initiate a cost investigation of MS Galati's home-market sales of the foreign like product. Upon review of Nucor's allegation, we found reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that MS Galati made sales at below the cost of production so we initiated a sales-below-cost investigation on August 3, 2006, and instructed MS Galati to provide cost-of-production information concerning its sales. MS Galati provided cost-of-production information in response to our request. Because home-market sales during the 2003-2004 period were the only candidates for use as normal value due to the date of sale reported for U.S. sales (see discussion under “Date of Sale”), we have conducted the cost-of-production test using the 2003-2004 home-market sales. In accordance with section 773(b)(3) of the Act, we calculated a weighted-average cost of production based on the sum of the cost of materials and fabrication for the foreign like product plus amounts for home-market general and administrative (G&A) expenses, interest expenses, and packing expenses. We relied on the cost-of-production data MS Galati submitted in its questionnaire responses. On a model-specific basis, we compared the cost of production to the home-market prices, less any applicable movement charges and direct and indirect selling expenses. We disregarded below-cost sales where 20 percent or more of MS Galati's sales of a given product were made at prices below the cost of production and, thus, such sales were made within an extended period of time in substantial quantities in accordance with sections 773(b)(2)(B) and
(c)of the Act and where, based on comparisons of the price to the weighted-average cost of production, we determined that the below-cost sales of the product were at prices which would not permit recovery of all costs within a reasonable time period, in accordance with section 773(b)(2)(D) of the Act. C. Arm's-Length Test MS Galati reported that it made sales in the home market to affiliated and unaffiliated customers. The Department did not require MS Galati to report downstream sales by its affiliated party because these sales represented less than five percent of total home-market sales. We excluded sales to affiliated customers in the home market not made in the ordinary course of trade from our analysis pursuant to section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act. To determine whether sales to affiliated customers were made in the ordinary course of trade, we tested whether sales to each affiliated customer were made at arm's length. As such, we compared the starting prices of sales to affiliated and unaffiliated customers net of all billing adjustments, movement charges, direct selling expenses, discounts, and packing. Where the price to that affiliated party was, on average, within a range of 98 to 102 percent of the price of the same or comparable merchandise sold to the unaffiliated parties at the same level of trade, we determined that the sales made to the affiliated party were at arm's length, consistent with *Antidumping Proceedings: Affiliated Party Sales in the Ordinary Course of Trade* , 67 FR 69186 (November 15, 2002). D. Price-to-Price Comparisons We based normal value on the home-market sales to unaffiliated purchasers and sales to affiliated customers that passed the arm's-length test. We adjusted gross unit price for reported freight revenue. We made adjustments for physical differences in the merchandise in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act. We made adjustments for movement expenses ( *i.e.* , inland freight from plant to distribution warehouse and warehousing expenses) in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(B) of the Act. We made circumstance-of-sale adjustments for imputed credit, where appropriate, in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act. In accordance with section 773(a)(6) of the Act, we deducted home-market packing costs and added U.S. packing costs. Level of Trade In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, to the extent practicable, we determine normal value based on sales in the comparison market at the same level of trade as the CEP transaction. See also 19 CFR 351.412. The normal-value level of trade is the level of the starting-price sales in the comparison market or, when normal value is based on constructed value, the level of the sales from which we derive selling, general and administrative expenses and profits. For CEP sales, the U.S. level of trade is the level of the constructed sale from the exporter to the affiliated importer. See 19 CFR 351.412(c)(1). To determine whether home-market sales are at a different level of trade than CEP sales, we examined stages in the marketing process and selling functions along the chain of distribution between the producer and the unaffiliated customer. If the home-market sales are at a different level of trade than CEP sales and the difference affects price comparability, as manifested in a pattern of consistent price differences between sales on which normal value is based and home-market sales at the level of trade of the export transaction, we make a level-of-trade adjustment under section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act. For CEP sales, if the normal-value level is more remote from the factory than the CEP level and there is no basis for determining whether the difference in levels between normal value and CEP affects price comparability, we adjust normal value under section 773(a)(7)(B) of the Act (the CEP offset). See *Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from South Africa* , 62 FR 61731 - 61733 (November 19, 1997). In this review, MS Galati reported that it sells to unaffiliated distributors and end-users in Romania as well as to affiliated end-users for consumption and affiliated distributors. In the United States, MS Galati had sales to an affiliate, INA, that resold the merchandise to unaffiliated customers. MS Galati reported one level of trade in the home market with the following three channels of distribution:
(1)direct sales to customers;
(2)consignment sales;
(3)sales through its affiliated warehouse. Home-market sales were made to two classes of customers, end-users and distributors. Along with MS Galati's home-market sales of merchandise stored at its affiliated warehouse, MS Galati also had sales to affiliated end-users for consumption. Based on our review of evidence on the record, we find that home-market sales through the three channels of distribution to both customer categories, whether affiliated or not, were substantially similar with respect to selling functions and stages of marketing. MS Galati performed the same selling functions at the same level for sales to all home-market customers. Accordingly, we preliminarily find that MS Galati had only one level of trade for its home-market sales. MS Galati reported one CEP level of trade with one channel of distribution in the United States which consists of its U.S. affiliate's direct sales to end-users and distributors of merchandise shipped directly from Romania. As such, we preliminarily determine that MS Galati made CEP sales to the United States through one channel of distribution -- direct sales to end-users and distributors. For CEP sales, we consider only the selling activities reflected in the price after the deduction of expenses and CEP profit under section 772(d) of the Act. Accordingly, we reviewed the selling functions and services MS Galati reported it performed on CEP sales and we have determined that the selling functions performed on all CEP sales were identical. Therefore, we preliminarily determine that there is one CEP level of trade in the U.S. market. We then compared the selling functions performed by MS Galati on its CEP sales (after deductions) to the selling functions it provided in the home market. We found that MS Galati performs more selling functions for its home-market sales than those it provides to its U.S. affiliate, INA. MS Galati reported that it provided minimal selling functions and services for the CEP level of trade and that, therefore, the home-market level of trade is more advanced than the CEP level of trade. Based on our analysis of the channels of distribution and MS Galati's selling functions for sales in the home market and CEP sales in the U.S. market, we preliminarily find that the home-market level of trade is at a more advanced stage of distribution when compared to CEP sales because MS Galati provides many selling functions in the home market at a higher level of service as compared to selling functions it performed for its CEP sales. We examined whether a level-of-trade adjustment or CEP offset may be appropriate. In this case, MS Galati sold at one level of trade in the home market. Therefore, there is no information available to determine a pattern of consistent price differences between the sales on which we base normal value and the home-market sales at the level of trade of the export transaction, in accordance with our normal methodology as described above. See 19 CFR 351.412(d). We do not have record information which would allow us to examine pricing patterns based on MS Galati's sales of other products, and there are no other respondents or other record information on which such as analysis could be based. Accordingly, because the data available do not provide an appropriate basis for making a level-of-trade adjustment but the level of trade in the home market is at a more advanced state of distribution than the level of trade of the CEP transactions, we made a CEP-offset adjustment to normal value in accordance with section 773(a)(7)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.412(f). To calculate the CEP offset, we deducted the home-market indirect selling expenses from normal value for home-market sales that we compared to U.S. CEP sales. As such, we limited the deduction for home-market indirect selling expenses by the amount of the indirect selling expenses we deducted in calculating the CEP as required under section 772(d)(1)(D) of the Act. Currency Conversion We made currency conversions pursuant to 19 CFR 351.415 based on the rates certified by the Federal Reserve Bank. Preliminary Results of Review We preliminarily determine that the weighted-average dumping margin for MS Galati during the period November 1, 2004, through October 31, 2005, is 0.00 percent. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(b), the Department will disclose to parties calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results within five days of the date of publication of this notice. Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of publication of this notice. If requested, a hearing will be held at the main Department building. We will notify parties of the exact date, time, and place for any such hearing. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case and rebuttal briefs. Case briefs from interested parties may be filed no later than 30 days after publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to the issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline for filing case briefs. Parties who submit case or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are requested to submit with each argument a statement of the issue and a brief summary of the argument with an electronic version included. The Department will publish a notice of final results of this administrative review, which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised in the case briefs, within 120 days from the date of publication of these preliminary results. Assessment Rate The Department will determine and U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)shall assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. We intend to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of publication of the final results of review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated an importer-specific assessment rate of 0.00 percent. In our final results we will direct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries at this rate. See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). The Department clarified its “automatic assessment” regulation on May 6, 2003. See *Notice of Policy Concerning Assessment of Antidumping Duties* , 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment-Policy Notice). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the period of review produced by MS Galati for which MS Galati did not know that the merchandise it sold to an intermediary ( *e.g.* , a reseller, trading company, or exporter) was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the 17.84 percent all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediary involved in the transaction. See the Assessment-Policy Notice for a full discussion of this clarification. Cash-Deposit Requirements The following cash-deposit rates will be effective upon publication of the final results of this review for all shipments of certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from Romania entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after publication date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act:
(1)for MS Galati, the cash-deposit rate will be the rate established in the final results of this review;
(2)for previously reviewed or investigated companies not covered in this review, 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 original antidumping duty investigation but the manufacturer is, the cash-deposit rate will be the rate established in the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise;
(4)if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or any previous administrative review or in the original less-than-fair-value investigation, the cash-deposit rate will be 17.84 percent, the “All Others” rate made effective on June 14, 2005. See *Certain Hot- Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From Romania: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 70 FR 34448 (June 14, 2005). These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review. Notification to Importers This notice also serves as a preliminary 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 the review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: October 16, 2006. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-17717 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A-570-879 Polyvinyl Alcohol from the People's Republic of China; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On July 7, 2006, the Department of Commerce (Department) published the preliminary results of its 2004-2005 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on polyvinyl alcohol
(PVA)from the People's Republic of China (PRC). *See Polyvinyl Alcohol from the People's Republic of China; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 71 FR 38612 (July 7, 2006) ( *Preliminary Results* ). We have now completed that review. For these final results, as in the *Preliminary Results* , we determine that sales have not been made below normal value (NV). EFFECTIVE DATE: October 23, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill Pollack, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202)482-4593. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On July 7, 2006, the Department published in the **Federal Register** the preliminary results of administrative review of the antidumping duty order on PVA from the PRC. *See Preliminary Results* . Interested parties were invited to comment on the preliminary results. On August 7, 2006, we received case briefs from Sinopec Sichuan Vinylon Works (SVW), the respondent in this administrative review, and Solutia Inc. (Solutia), a domestic interested party. No party filed a rebuttal brief. On September 15 and 28, 2006, respectively, SVW and Solutia withdrew their case briefs and requested that the Department issue the final results. SVW also requested that the Department issue the final results on an expedited basis. The Department has conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (Act). Period of Review The period of review
(POR)is October 1, 2004, through September 30, 2005. Scope of Order The merchandise covered by this order is PVA. This product consists of all PVA hydrolyzed in excess of 80 percent, whether or not mixed or diluted with commercial levels of defoamer or boric acid, except as noted below. The following products are specifically excluded from the scope of this order: 1) PVA in fiber form. 2) PVA with hydrolysis less than 83 mole percent and certified not for use in the production of textiles. 3) PVA with hydrolysis greater than 85 percent and viscosity greater than or equal to 90 cps. 4) PVA with a hydrolysis greater than 85 percent, viscosity greater than or equal to 80 cps but less than 90 cps, certified for use in an ink jet application. 5) PVA for use in the manufacture of an excipient or as an excipient in the manufacture of film coating systems which are components of a drug or dietary supplement, and accompanied by an end-use certification. 6) PVA covalently bonded with cationic monomer uniformly present on all polymer chains in a concentration equal to or greater than one mole percent. 7) PVA covalently bonded with carboxylic acid uniformly present on all polymer chains in a concentration equal to or greater than two mole percent, certified for use in a paper application. 8) PVA covalently bonded with thiol uniformly present on all polymer chains, certified for use in emulsion polymerization of non-vinyl acetic material. 9) PVA covalently bonded with paraffin uniformly present on all polymer chains in a concentration equal to or greater than one mole percent. 10) PVA covalently bonded with silan uniformly present on all polymer chains certified for use in paper coating applications. 11) PVA covalently bonded with sulfonic acid uniformly present on all polymer chains in a concentration level equal to or greater than one mole percent. 12) PVA covalently bonded with acetoacetylate uniformly present on all polymer chains in a concentration level equal to or greater than one mole percent. 13) PVA covalently bonded with polyethylene oxide uniformly present on all polymer chains in a concentration level equal to or greater than one mole percent. 14) PVA covalently bonded with quaternary amine uniformly present on all polymer chains in a concentration level equal to or greater than one mole percent. 15) PVA covalently bonded with diacetoneacrylamide uniformly present on all polymer chains in a concentration level greater than three mole percent, certified for use in a paper application. The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable under subheading 3905.30.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this order is dispositive. Surrogate Country In the *Preliminary Results* , we stated that we treat the PRC as a non-market economy
(NME)country and, therefore, we calculated NV in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act, which applies to NME countries. Also, we stated that we selected India as the appropriate surrogate country to use in this review for the following reasons:
(1)it is a significant producer of comparable merchandise; and
(2)it is at a similar level of economic development, pursuant to 773(c)(4) of the Act. *See Preliminary Results* , 71 FR at 38613. For the final results, we made no changes to our findings with respect to the selection of a surrogate country. Separate Rates In proceedings involving NME countries, the Department begins with a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are subject to government control and, thus, should be assigned a single antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the Department's policy to assign all exporters of merchandise subject to review in an NME country this single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is sufficiently independent so as to be entitled to a separate rate. In the *Preliminary Results* , we found that SVW demonstrated its eligibility for separate-rate status. For these final results, we continue to find that the evidence placed on the record of this review by SVW demonstrates an absence of government control, both in law and in fact, with respect to its exports of the merchandise under review and, thus, determine SVW is eligible for separate-rate status. Weighted-Average Dumping Margin The weighted-average dumping margin is as follows: Manufacturer/producer/exporter Margin percentage Sinopec Sichuan Vinylon Works 0.00 percent Assessment Rates The Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)within 15 days of publication of these final results of administrative review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated importer-specific assessment rates for the merchandise subject to this review. We note that SVW did not report the entered value for its U.S. sales in question. Accordingly, we have calculated importer-specific assessment rates for the merchandise in question by aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S. sales to each importer and dividing this amount by the total quantity of those sales. To determine whether the duty assessment rates were *de minimis* , in accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we calculated importer-specific *ad valorem* ratios based on the estimated entered value. Where an importer-specific *ad valorem* rate is *de minimis* , we will order CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. Cash-Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of this notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of PVA from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act:
(1)because the cash deposit rate for SVW is *de minimis* , no cash deposit shall be required for SVW;
(2)the cash deposit rate for all other PRC exporters will be 97.86 percent, the current PRC-wide rate; and
(3)the cash deposit rate for all non-PRC exporters will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review. Notification to Importers This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) 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 the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. This notice also serves as a 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 terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction. This determination and notice are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213. Dated: October 17, 2006. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-17712 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 101706E] Incidental Takes of Marine Mammals During Specified Activities; Black Abalone Research Surveys at San Nicolas Island, Ventura County, CA AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental take authorization; request for comments. SUMMARY: NMFS has received an application from Dr. Glenn VanBlaricom (Dr. VanBlaricom) for an Incidental Harassment Authorization
(IHA)to take small numbers of marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to the assessment of black abalone populations at San Nicolas Island (SNI), CA. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposed IHA for these activities. DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than November 22, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments on the application should be addressed to Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3225. The mailbox address for providing email comments is *PR1.101706E@noaa.gov* . NMFS is not responsible for e-mail comments sent to addresses other than the one provided here. Comments sent via e-mail, including all attachments, must not exceed a 10-megabyte file size. A copy of the application containing a list of the references used in this document may be obtained by writing to the address specified above, telephoning the contact listed below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ), or visiting the internet at: *http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm* . Documents cited in this notice may be viewed, by appointment, during regular business hours, at the aforementioned address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jolie Harrison, NMFS,
(301)713-2289. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and
(D)of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 *et seq.* ) direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the public for review. Authorization shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses, and that the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth. NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as ”...an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.” Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process by which citizens of the United States can apply for an authorization to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA defines “harassment” as: any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which
(i)has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or
(ii)has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering [Level B harassment]. Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day time limit for NMFS review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and comment period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental harassment of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the close of the comment period, NMFS must either issue or deny issuance of the authorization. Summary of Request On August 10, 2006, NMFS received a letter from Dr. VanBlaricom, of the Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, requesting renewal of an IHA that was first issued to him on September 23, 2003 (68 FR 57427, October 3, 2003), and was last reissued on November 30, 2005 (70 FR 73732, December 13, 2005). The requested IHA would authorize the take, by harassment, of small numbers of California sea lions ( *Zalophus californianus* ), Pacific harbor seals ( *Phoca vitulina* ), and northern elephant seals ( *Mirounga angustirostris* ) incidental to research surveys performed for the purpose of assessing trends in black abalone (Haliotis cracherodii) populations at SNI, Ventura County, California. The proposed research consists of 2 researchers, on foot, counting abalone at nine permanent sites (1 m 2 each) on SNI twice a year, with one brief additional visit to each site for maintenance. Population trend data for black abalone populations have become important in a conservation context because of:
(a)the reintroduction of sea otters to SNI in 1987, raising the possibility of conflict between otter conservation and abalone populations (abalones are often significant prey for sea otters);
(b)the appearance of a novel exotic disease, abalone withering syndrome, at SNI in 1992, resulting in dramatically increased rates of abalone mortality at the Island; and,
(c)the recent designation of California populations of black abalones as a species of concern in the context of listing pursuant to the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Research is done under the auspices of the Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, the University of Washington, and the U.S. Navy (owner of SNI), with additional logistical support from the University of California, Santa Cruz. Since the abalone are not handled or removed in the course of the research, neither a state nor federal permit is needed. Additional information on the research is contained in the application and proposed IHA **Federal Register** notice (69 FR 70249), which are available upon request (see ADDRESSES ). Project Description Nine permanent abalone research study areas are located in rocky intertidal habitats on SNI in Ventura County, CA. The applicant has made 106 separate field trips to SNI from September 1979 through March 2006, participating in abalone survey work on 564 different days at nine permanent study sites. Under the latest authorization, Dr. VanBlaricom made five different visits and conducted work for 30 total days in the one year period. Quantitative abalone surveys on SNI began in 1981, at which point permanent research sites were chosen based on the presence of dense patches of abalone in order to monitor changes over time in dense abalone aggregations. Research is conducted by counting black abalone in plots of 1 m 2 (3.3 ft 2 ) along permanent transect lines in rocky intertidal habitats at each of the nine study sites on the island. Permanent transect lines are demarcated by stainless steel eyebolts embedded in the rock substrata and secured with marine epoxy compound. Lines are placed temporarily between bolts during surveys and are removed once surveys are completed. Survey work is done by two field biologists working on foot (sites are accessed by hiking to water from vehicle parked inland) and monitoring of black abalone populations at SNI can be done only during periods of extreme low tides. The exact date of a visit to any given site is difficult to predict because variation in surf height and sea conditions can influence the safety of field biologists as well as the quality of data collected. In most years survey work is done during the months of January, February, March, July, November, and December because of optimal availability of low tides. All work is done during daylight hours due to of safety considerations. During the year, each of the nine permanent study sites at SNI will be visited three times. Abalone surveys, which take no more than 4 hours at each site, are conducted during two of the three visits to each of the nine sites. The third, and final, visit is a maintenance visit, which takes less than half of an hour at each site and is used to take measurements and make necessary repairs to plots and is conducted in a month when smaller numbers of pinnipeds are present. The affected marine mammal populations at SNI, especially California sea lions and northern elephant seals, have grown substantially since the beginning of abalone research in 1979 and have occupied an expanded distribution on the island due to population growth. Sites previously accessible with no risk of marine mammal harassment are now being utilized by marine mammals at levels such that approach without the possibility of harassment is difficult. An IHA is warranted for this study because of the nine study sites used for the abalone surveys, only two sites can be occupied without the possibility of disturbing at least one species of pinniped. Description of Habitat and Marine Mammals in the Activity Area San Nicolas is one of the eight Channel Islands, located in the Santa Barbara Channel off Southern California. Nine miles long (14.5 km) and about three and a half miles (5.6 km) across at its widest point, it is the farthest island from the mainland, more than 60 miles (96.6 km) offshore and about 85 miles (136.8 km) southwest of Los Angeles, California. SNI is owned and operated by the U.S. Navy and is off-limits to civilians without specific permission. Many of the beaches in the Channel Islands provide resting, molting or breeding places for species of pinnipeds. On SNI, three pinniped species (northern elephant seal, Pacific harbor seal, and California sea lion) can be expected to occur on land in the vicinity of abalone research sites either regularly or in large numbers during certain times of the year. In addition, a single adult male Guadalupe fur seal ( *Arctocephalus townsendi* ) (federally listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act) was seen at one abalone research site on two occasions during the summer months in the mid-1980's. However, none have been seen since those original sightings. Further information on the biology and distribution of these species and others in the region can be found in Dr. VanBlaricom's application, which is available upon request (see ADDRESSES ), and the Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Reports, which are available online at * http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ prot_res/PR2/Stock_Assessment_Program/individual_sars.html * . California Sea Lions The U.S. stock of California sea lions extends from the U.S./Mexico border north into Canada. Breeding areas of the sea lion are on islands located in southern California, western Baja California, and the Gulf of California and they primarily use the central California area to feed during the non-breeding season. Population estimates for the U.S. stock of California sea lions, which are based on counts conducted in 2001 and extrapolations from the number of pups, range from a minimum of 138,881 to an average of 244,000 animals, with a current growth rate of 5.4 to 6.1 percent per year (Carretta *et al.* , 2005). The California sea lion is not listed under the ESA and the U.S. stock is not considered depleted under the MMPA. California sea lions haul out at many sites on SNI and are by far the most common pinniped on the island. Over the course of a year, up to 100,000 sea lions may use SNI. Numbers of sea lions at SNI increased by about 21 percent per year between 1983 and 1995 (NMFS, 2003) and sea lions have recently started occupying areas that were not formerly used. Pupping occurs on the beaches of SNI from mid-June to mid-July. Females nurse their pups for about eight days and then begin an alternating pattern of foraging at sea vs. attending and nursing the pup on land, which lasts for about eight months, and sometimes up to a year. California sea lions also haul out at SNI during the molting period in September, and smaller numbers of females and juveniles haul out during most of the year. Pacific Harbor Seals Harbor seals are widely distributed in the North Atlantic and North Pacific. In California, approximately 400-500 harbor seal haul-out sites are distributed along the mainland and on offshore islands, including intertidal sandbars, rocky shores and beaches (Hanan, 1996). A complete count of all harbor seals in California is impossible because some are always away from the haul-out sites. A complete pup count (as is done for other pinnipeds in California) is also not possible because harbor seals are precocious, with pups entering the water almost immediately after birth. Based on the most recent harbor seal counts (2004 and 2005) and including a correction factor for the above, the estimated population of harbor seals in California is 34,233 (Caretta *et al.* , 2005), with an estimated minimum population of 31,600 for the California stock of harbor seals. Counts of harbor seals in California showed a rapid increase from 1972 to 1990, but since 1990 there has been no net population growth along the mainland or the Channel Islands. Though no formal determination of Optimal Sustainable Population
(OSP)has been made, the decrease in the growth rate may indicate that the population has reached its carrying capacity. The harbor seal is not listed under the ESA and the California stock is not considered depleted under the MMPA. Harbor seals haul out at various sandy, cobble, and gravel beaches around SNI and pupping occurs on the beaches from late February to early April, with nursing of pups extending into May. Harbor seals may also haul out during molting period in late Spring, and smaller numbers haul out at other times of year. Harbor seal abundance increased at SNI from the 1960s until 1981, but since the average counts have not changed significantly. From 1982 to 1994, numbers of harbor seals have fluctuated between 139 and 700 harbor seals based on both peak ground counts and annual photographic survey photos. The most recent aerial count on SNI was of 457 harbor seals in 1994. Northern Elephant Seals Northern elephant seals breed and give birth in California (U.S.) and Baja California primarily on offshore islands, from December to March (Stewart *et al.* , 1994). The California breeding stock, which includes the animals on SNI, is now demographically separated from the Baja California population. Based on trends in pup counts, northern elephant seal colonies appeared to be increasing in California through 2001. The population size of northern elephant seals in California is estimated to be 101,000 animals, with a minimum population estimate of 60,547 (Carretta *et al.* , 2005). A continuous average growth rate (though it has declined a bit in recent years) of 8.3 percent has seen numbers of this species increase from 100 in 1900 to the current population size (Caretta *et al.* , 2005). The northern elephant seal is not listed under the ESA and the California stock is not considered depleted under the MMPA. Increasing numbers of elephant seals haul out at various sites around SNI. Based on a pup count in 1995 that found 6,575 pups, scientists estimated that over 23,000 elephant seals may use SNI in a year (NMFS, 2003). From 1988 to 1995 the pup counts on SNI increased at an average rate of 15.4 percent per year, however, the growth rate of the population as a whole seems to have declined in recent years (NMFS, 2003). Pupping occurs on the beaches of SNI from January to early February, with nursing of pups extending into March. Northern elephant seals also haul out during the molting periods in the spring and summer, and smaller numbers haul out at other times of the year. Potential Effects of Activities on Marine Mammal Variable numbers of sea lions, harbor seals, and elephant seals typically haul out near seven of the nine study sites used for abalone research, with breeding activity occurring at four of these seven sites. Pinnipeds likely to be affected by abalone research activity are those that are hauled out on land at or near study sites. Incidental harassment may result if hauled animals move away from the abalone researchers. For the purpose of estimating numbers of pinnipeds taken by these activities, NMFS conservatively estimates that pinnipeds that move or change the direction of their movement in response to the presence of researchers are taken by Level B Harassment. Animals that raise their head and look at the researcher are not considered to have been taken. Although marine mammals will not be deliberately approached by abalone survey personnel, approach may be unavoidable if pinnipeds are hauled out directly upon the permanent abalone study plots. In almost all cases, shoreline habitats near the abalone study sites are gently sloping sandy beaches or horizontal sandstone platforms with unimpeded and non-hazardous access to the water. If disturbed, hauled animals may move toward the water without risk of encountering significant hazards. In these circumstances, the risk of serious injury or death to hauled animals is very low. The risk of marine mammal injury or mortality associated with abalone research increases somewhat if disturbances occur during breeding season, as it is possible that mothers and dependent pups could become separated. If separated pairs don't reunite fairly quickly, risks of mortality to pups (through starvation) may increase. Also, adult northern elephant seals may trample elephant seal pups if disturbed, which could potentially result in the of injury or death of pups. However, the IHA will include time of year restrictions intended to limit the presence of researchers to months that California sea lion and harbor seal dependent pups are not present at the survey sites. Additionally, though elephant seal pups are occasionally present at abalone surveys, risk of pup mortalities are very low because elephant seals are far less reactive to researcher presence than the other two species (an estimated 30 total elephant seals have been disturbed in the last three years out of 1594 present around the study site). Last, researchers use great care approaching sites and pups are on the sand while the permanent study sites are on rocks, which leaves the two always separated by at least 50 m (164 ft). Because of the circumstances and the IHA requirements discussed above, NMFS believes it highly unlikely that the proposed activities would result in the injury or mortality of pinnipeds (and none have been recorded in the 27 years that the researcher has been conducting this research). The results of Dr. VanBlaricom's monitoring under the previous IHA are summarized in Table 1, which shows the numbers of each species present at Dr. VanBlaricom's survey sites as well as the numbers disturbed during his visits in the last year. As part of the required monitoring, Dr. VanBlaricom records the numbers of disturbed animals that flush into the water, the number that move more than 1 m, but do not enter the water, and the number that become alert and move, but not move more than 1 m (see the application for these numbers). Animals that raised their head and looked at the researcher without moving were not considered disturbed (or harrassed pursuant to the MMPA). For the purposes of estimating take in the IHA, NMFS conservatively estimates take as the total of all three categories of disturbed behavior recorded. As indicated in Table 1, approximately 25 percent of the total animals harassed by this activity responded by flushing into the water (221 sea lions, 46 harbor seals, and 0 elephant seals) and the rest responded to a lesser degree by moving some distance on land when the researchers approached. Though the researchers have not stayed to find how soon pinnipeds return after flushing (leaving as soon as possible minimizes the effects), increasing numbers at some of the sites and pinniped presence at sites where they were not present before suggest that the research is not having any long-term detrimental effects on the population of any of these three species. Older, weaned sea lion pups were seen and disturbed at sites 6, 7, and 8, however, none were flushed into the water or injured in any way. Year Month Date Site# California Sea Lions Present at site Disturbed Pacific Harbor Seals Present at site Disturbed Northern Elephant Seals Present at site Disturbed 2006 January 2 1 54 1 0 0 0 0 2006 January 12 1 50 3 0 0 1 0 2006 February 25 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 2006 February 26 1 32 28 0 0 0 0 2005 December 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 December 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 January 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 January 15 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 January 29 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 February 24 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 December 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 January 16 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 January 30 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 January 31 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 February 28 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 December 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 January 25 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 January 30 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 March 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 January 26 5 27 5 27 25 88 4 2006 January 14 6 86 69 13 13 216 7 2006 January 26 6 97 90 17 12 203 2 2006 January 27 7 610 386 0 0 60 0 2005 December 30 8 226 195 0 0 3 0 2006 January 13 8 241 227 0 0 5 0 2006 January 28 8 140 40 0 0 14 0 2005 December 29 9 0 0 0 0 14 1 2005 December 31 9 0 0 0 0 19 0 Totals 1564 1045 57 50 623 14 # that flushed into water 221 (21%) 46 (92%) 0 # moved >1m, but not into water 680 (65%) 3 (6%) 11 (79%) # came alert, but did not move >1 m 144 (14%) 1 (2%) 3 (21%) Table 1. Results from 2006 monitoring. Number of “disturbed” animals indicates total of the three categories of recorded reactions which include: animals that flushed into the water; animals that moved more than 1 m, but did not enter the water; and, animals that moved or changed direction, but did not move more than 1 m. Mitigation Several mitigation measures to reduce the potential for harassment from population assessment research surveys will be implemented as part of the SNI abalone research activities. Primarily, mitigation of the risk of disturbance to pinnipeds requires that researchers are judicious in the route of approach to abalone study sites, avoiding close contact with pinnipeds hauled out on shore. In no case will marine mammals be deliberately approached by abalone survey personnel, and in all cases every possible measure will be taken to select a pathway of approach to study sites that minimizes the number of marine mammals harassed. Each visit to a given study site will last for a maximum of 4 hours, after which the site is vacated and can be re-occupied by any hauled marine mammals that may have been disturbed by the presence of abalone researchers. The potential risk of injury or mortality will be avoided with measures required under the authorization. Disturbances to females with dependent pups (in the cases of California sea lions and Pacific harbor seals) will be mitigated to the greatest extent practicable by avoiding visits to the four black abalone study sites with resident pinnipeds during periods of breeding and lactation from mid-February through the end of October. During this period, abalone research would be confined to the other five sites where pinniped breeding and post-partum nursing does not occur. Limiting visits to the four breeding and lactation sites (5, 6, 7, and 8) to periods when these activities do not occur (November, December, January, and the first half of February) will reduce the possibility of incidental harassment and the potential for serious injury or mortality of dependent California sea lion pups and Pacific harbor seal pups to near zero. Northern elephant seal pups are present at four sites during winter months. Risks of injury or mortality of elephant seal pups by mother/pup separation or trampling are limited to the period from January through March when pups are born, nursed, and weaned, ending about 30 days post-weaning when pups depart land for foraging areas at sea. However, elephant seals have a much higher tolerance of nearby human activity than sea lions or harbor seals. Also, elephant seal pupping typically occurs on the sandy beaches at SNI, approximately 50 m (164 ft) or more away from the abalone study sites. Possible take of northern elephant seal pups will be minimized by using a very careful approach to the study sites and avoiding the proximity of hauled seals and any seal pups during collection of abalone population data. One individual Guadalupe fur seal was seen at study site 8 on two separate occasions during the summer months in the mid-1980's. Since the original sightings, no individuals of this species have been seen during abalone research. However, to ensure that Gaudelupe fur seals are not affected by these activities and that authorization is not needed pursuant to the MMPA or the ESA, researchers will only visit site 8 from November through January and work will be immediately suspended and researchers vacated if an individual is seen. Guadalupe fur seals are distinctive in appearance and behavior, and can be readily identified at a distance without any disturbance. Sea otters, which are federally listed as threatened under the ESA and managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, are not expected ashore during the time periods when the research activities would be conducted. However, if sea otters are sighted ashore during the abalone research, Dr. VanBlaricom would follow similar procedures in place for fur seals to avoid impacts, suspending research activities in any areas California sea otters are occupying. Monitoring Currently, all biological research activities at SNI are subject to approval and regulation by the Environmental Planning and Management Department (EPMD), U.S. Navy. The U.S. Navy owns SNI and closely regulates all civilian access to and activity on the island, including biological research. Therefore, monitoring activities will be closely coordinated with Navy marine mammal biologists located on SNI. In addition, status and trends of pinniped aggregations at SNI are monitored by the NMFS Southwest Fisheries Science Center. Also, long-term studies of pinniped population dynamics, migratory and foraging behavior, and foraging ecology at SNI are conducted by staff at Hubbs-Sea World Research Institute (HSWRI). Monitoring requirements in relation to Dr. VanBlaricom's abalone research surveys will include observations made by the applicant and his associates. Information recorded will include species counts (with numbers of pups), numbers of observed disturbances, and descriptions of the disturbed behaviors during the abalone surveys. Observations of unusual behaviors, numbers, or distributions of pinnipeds on SNI will be reported to EPMD, NMFS, and HSWRI so that any potential follow-up observations can be conducted by the appropriate personnel. In addition, observations of tag-bearing pinniped carcasses as well as any rare or unusual species of marine mammals will be reported to EPMD and NMFS. If at any time injury or death of any marine mammal occurs that may be a result of the proposed abalone research, Dr. VanBlaricom will suspend research activities and contact NMFS immediately to determine how best to proceed to ensure that another injury or death does not occur and to ensure that the applicant remains in compliance with the MMPA. Reporting A draft final report must be submitted to NMFS within 60 days after the conclusion of the year-long field season. The report will include a summary of the information gathered pursuant to the monitoring requirements set forth in the IHA. A final report must be submitted to the Regional Administrator within 30 days after receiving comments from NMFS on the draft final report. If no comments are received from NMFS, the draft final report will be considered to be the final report. Dr. VanBlaricom has already submitted the final report required by the current IHA and it may be viewed on the NMFS website (see ADDRESSES ). Numbers of Marine Mammals Expected to be Harassed NMFS has determined that small numbers, relative to population estimates, of California sea lions, Pacific harbor seals, and northern elephant seals may be taken by harassment as a result of this activity (1.3, 0.2, and .04 percent of the minimum population, respectively). The distribution of pinnipeds hauled out on beaches is not even between sites or at different times of the year. The number of marine mammals disturbed will vary by month and location, and, compared to animals hauled out on the beach farther away from survey activity, only those animals hauled out closest to the actual survey transect plots contained within each research site are likely to be disturbed by the presence of researchers and alter their behavior or attempt to move out of the way. Table 2 depicts the total numbers of animals encountered and disturbed by Level B Harasssment in Dr. VanBlaricom's 2004, 2005, and 2006 abalone survey field seasons. As discussed earlier, NMFS considers an animal to have been harassed if it moved any distance in response to the researcher's presence or if the animal was already moving and changed direction. Animals that raised their head and looked at the researcher without moving were not considered disturbed. Based on past observations and assuming a maximum level of incidental harassment of marine mammals at each site during periods of visitation, NMFS estimates that the maximum total possible numbers of individuals that will be incidentally harassed during the effective dates of the proposed IHA would be 1770 California sea lions, 75 Pacific harbor seals, and 25 northern elephant seals. Three visits to each site are anticipated during the year-long validity of the IHA. California sea Lions Present around Site Est. Harassed Pacific Harbor Seals Present around Site Est. Harassed Northern Elephant Seals Present around Site Est. Harassed 2004 2239 1472 108 99 562 7 2005 1383 983 99 88 409 9 2006 1564 1045 57 50 623 14 Potential Effects of Activities on Marine Mammal Habitat NMFS anticipates that the action will result in no impacts to marine mammal habitat beyond rendering the areas immediately around each of the nine study sites less desirable as haulout sites for a total of 8.5 hours per year. ESA For the reasons already described in this **Federal Register** Notice, NMFS has determined that the described abalone research and the accompanying IHA will have no effect on species or critical habitat protected under the ESA (specifically, the Guadelope fur seal). Therefore, consultation under Section 7 was not required. National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)NMFS prepared an Environmental Assessment
(EA)of the Issuance of an IHA to Take Marine Mammals, by Harassment, During Black Abalone Research at SNI, California, which analyzed the issuance of multiple IHAs over several years for these activities, and subsequently issued a Finding of No Significant Impact on November 21, 2005. A copy of the EA and FONSI are available upon request (see ADDRESSES ). Conclusions Based on Dr. VanBlaricom's application and monitoring reports for previous field seasons, as well as the analysis contained herein, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the impact of the described abalone research at SNI will result, at most, in a temporary modification in behavior by small numbers of California sea lions, Pacific harbor seals, and northern elephant seals, in the form of head alerts, movement away from the researchers and/or flushing from the beach. In addition, no take by injury or death is anticipated, and take by harassment will be at the lowest level practicable due to incorporation of the mitigation measures mentioned previously in this document. NMFS has further preliminarily determined that, dependent upon the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the anticipated takes will have a negligible impact on the affected species. Proposed Authorization NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to Dr. Glenn R. VanBlaricom for the harassment of California sea lions, Pacific harbor seals, and northern elephant seals incidental to black abalone population trend research, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. Dated: October 17, 2006. James H. Lecky, Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-17704 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 101806B] Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of closed session Advisory Panel
(AP)Selection Committee conference call. SUMMARY: The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council) will convene its Advisory Panel Selection Committee via Conference Call to review AP Member Violations Material for recommendation to the Council. DATES: The Conference Call will be held on Tuesday, November 7, 2006, from 11 a.m. EDT to 11:30 a.m. EDT. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held via Closed Session conference call. *Council address* : Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 2203 North Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, Tampa, FL 33607. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Wayne Swingle, Executive Director, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; telephone:
(813)348-1630. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council) will convene its Advisory Panel Selection Committee via Conference Call to review AP Member Violations Material in a closed session conference call on Tuesday, November 7, 2006, at 11 a.m. EDT. The Committee recommendations will be presented to the Council at the November 13 - 17, 2006 Council Meeting in Galveston, TX. Special Accommodations This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Tina Trezza at the Council (see ADDRESSES ) at least 5 working days prior to the meeting. Dated: October 18, 2006. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-17685 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 101806C] Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. SUMMARY: The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council) will convene its Standing Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC). DATES: The meeting will begin at 8 a.m. on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 and conclude by 4 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Quorum Hotel, 700 North Westshore Boulevard, Tampa, FL 33607. *Council address* : Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 2203 N. Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, Tampa, FL 33607. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Swingle, Executive Director, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; telephone:
(813)348-1630. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Council will convene the Standing SSC to address the Marine Recreational Fishing Statistic Survey (MRFSS) with emphasis on its reliability and uses. This review will include recommendations of the National Research Council
(NRC)study of the MRFSS, its use in state administered programs, NOAA response to the NRC recommendations, and NOAA planned redesign of some of the survey methodology. The SSC will develop its recommendations to the Council on these issues. The SSC will address issues and SSC operation procedures related to use of the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process. The administrator of the SEDAR program will brief the SSC on the operational procedures of the program, responding to the SSC's questions on the process. The SSC will review the current SEDAR databases on goliath grouper and the recommendations of the NMFS Southeast Fisheries Science Center personnel on whether the current database is adequate to develop a benchmark assessment of the status of the goliath grouper stock. The SSC will develop their recommendations to the Council. A copy of the agenda and related materials can be obtained by calling the Council office at
(813)348-1630. Although other non-emergency issues not on the agendas may come before the Standing SSC, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Actions of the Standing SSC will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in the agendas and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Tina Trezza at the Council (see ADDRESSES ) at least 5 working days prior to the meeting. Dated: October 18, 2006. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-17687 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 101806E] New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is scheduling a public meeting of its Whiting Committee in November, 2006, to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Recommendations from this group will be brought to the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate. DATES: The meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 8, 2006, at 10 a.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Hampton Inn, 2100 Post Road, Warwick, RI 02886: telephone:
(401)739-8888; fax:
(401)739-1550. *Council address* : New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone:
(978)465-0492. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee will discuss goals, objectives and purposes for management action. The committee will also review recent Advisory Panel meeting discussions. In addition, the committee will have a presentation of preliminary data for various management options as well as recommend measures to be included in the management action. Other topics may be covered at the committee's discretion. Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, at
(978)465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* Dated: October 18, 2006. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-17689 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 101806D] North Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Council) Crab Plan Team will meet in Seattle, WA. DATES: The meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 8, 2006, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Alaska Fisheries Science Center, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Building 4, Traynor Room, Seattle, WA. Council address: North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 605 W. 4th Avenue, Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99501-2252. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diana Stram, Council staff, telephone:
(907)271-2809. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The committee will review and comment on the draft analysis to revise Overfishing Definitions for Bering Sea Aleutian Island crab. Special Accommodations This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Gail Bendixen at
(907)271-2809 at least 7 working days prior to the meeting date. Dated: October 18, 2006. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-17686 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 101806H] North Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of public meetings. SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery Management Council's (NPFMC) Gulf of Alaska
(GOA)and Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands (BS/AI) groundfish plan teams will meet in Seattle, WA. DATES: The meetings will be held on November 13-17, 2006. The meetings will begin at 1 p.m. on Monday, November 13, and continue through Friday November 17. ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at the Alaska Fisheries Science Center, 7600 Sand Point Way N.E., Building 4, Observer Training Room (BS/AI Plan Team) and Traynor Room (GOA Plan Team), Seattle, WA. *Council address* : North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 605 W. 4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99501-2252. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane DiCosimo or Diana Stram, NPFMC; telephone:
(907)271-2809. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda: Principal business is to prepare and review the Economic Report, the Ecosystem Considerations Chapter, groundfish stock assessments, and recommend final groundfish catch specifications for 2007/08. Agenda is listed on our website at: *http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/npfmc/cmteemtg.htm* Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the NPFMC's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Gail Bendixen,
(907)271-2809, at least 5 working days prior to the meeting date. Dated: October 18, 2006. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-17688 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 101806A] Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of public meeting. SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Council) Ad Hoc Groundfish Trawl Individual Quota Committee
(TIQC)will hold a working meeting which is open to the public. DATES: The TIQC working meeting will begin Monday, November 6, 2006, at 8:30 a.m. and may go into the evening, if necessary, to complete business for the day. On Tuesday, November 7, 2006, the meeting will reconvene from 8:30 a.m. and continue until business for the day is complete. On Wednesday, November 8, 2006, the meeting will reconvene from 8:30 a.m. and continue until 3 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in Room 1052, Building 4, National Marine Fisheries Service, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115; telephone:
(206)526-4656. *Council address* : Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 200, Portland, OR 97220-1384. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jim Seger, Staff Officer (Economist); telephone:
(503)820-2280. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Council is considering an individual quota program to cover limited entry trawl landings in the West Coast groundfish fishery. The purpose of the TIQC working meeting is to review and further develop alternatives under analysis, with particular emphasis on co-op alternatives for whiting sectors and review of Groundfish Management Team comments from the September Council meeting. Although non-emergency issues not contained in the TIQC meeting agenda may come before the TIQC for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal TIQC action during these meetings. TIQC action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and to any issues arising after publication of this notice requiring emergency action under Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the TIQC's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Ms. Carolyn Porter at
(503)820-2280 at least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Dated: October 18, 2006. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-17645 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 101106F] Schedule for Protected Species Safe Handling, Release, and Identification Workshops AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: NMFS announces the first round of Protected Species Safe Handling, Release, and Identification Workshops. The workshops will be held in November and December 2006 and are mandatory for vessel owners and operators who use bottom longline, pelagic longline, or shark gillnet gear, and have also been issued shark or swordfish limited access permits. Vessel owners and operators whose permits expire in January 2007 must attend a workshop in 2006. Additional workshops will be held throughout 2007; however, vessel owners and operators whose permits expire in the winter or spring of 2007 are welcome to attend the first round of workshops in 2006. DATES: Six workshops will be held between November 6, 2006, and December 14, 2006. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for further details. ADDRESSES: The workshops will be held in Dedham, MA; Manahawkin, NJ; Manteo, NC; Seminole, FL; Daytona Beach, FL; and Kenner, LA. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for further details on workshop locations. The workshop schedule and a list of frequently asked questions regarding these workshops are posted on the internet at: *http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/workshops/* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information regarding the workshop requirement, please contact Greg Fairclough by phone:
(727)824-5399, or by fax:
(727)824-5398. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Effective January 1, 2007, shark limited access and swordfish limited access permit holders must submit a copy of their Safe Handling, Release, and Identification Workshop certificate in order to renew either permit (71 FR 58057; October 2, 2006). As such, vessel owners whose permits expire in January 2007 must attend one of the six free workshops offered in 2006. Vessel owners and operators whose permits expire in the winter or spring of 2007 may attend a workshop in 2007 or one of the six workshops offered in 2006 (see schedule below). New shark and swordfish limited access permit applicants must attend a Safe Handling, Release, and Identification Workshop and submit a copy of their workshop certificate before such permits will be issued. Workshop Dates, Times, and Locations 1. November 6, 2006 from 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. Holiday Inn- Terrace Room, 55 Ariadne Rd. (US 1a and I95/128), Dedham, MA 02026. 2. November 8, 2006 from 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. Holiday Inn- Main Ballroom, 151 Route 72 East, Manahawkin, NJ 08050. 3. November 15, 2006 from 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. Outer Banks Welcome Center on Roanoke Island- Curtis H. Creech Memorial Boardroom. One Visitor's Circle Center, Manteo, NC 27954. 4. December 6, 2006 from 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. Seminole Community Library at St. Petersburg College, Seminole Campus, 9200 113 th Street N., Seminole, FL 33772. 5. December 8, 2006 from 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. Aquatic Release Conservation, 1870 Mason Ave., Daytona Beach, FL 32117. 6. December 14, 2006 from 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. New Orleans Airport Garden Inn. 4535 Williams Blvd., Kenner, LA 70065. Registration To sign up for a scheduled workshop, please contact Aquatic Release Conservation
(877)411-4272, 1870 Mason Ave., Daytona Beach, FL 32117. In addition to certifying permit holders, all longline and gillnet vessel operators fishing with a limited access swordfish or limited access shark permit are required to attend the Safe Handling, Release, and Identification workshops. Vessels that have been issued a limited access swordfish or limited access shark permit may not fish unless both the vessel owner and operator have valid workshop certificates. Vessel operators must possess on board the vessel valid workshop certificates for both the vessel owner and the operator at all times. To ensure the workshop certificate is linked to the correct permit, you will need to bring the following items with you to the workshop: Individual vessel owners must bring: proof of identification, a copy of the appropriate permit(s), and a copy of the vessel registration or documentation. Representatives of a business owned or co-owned vessel must bring: proof that the individual is an agent of the business, a copy of the applicable permit(s), and proof of identification. Vessel operators must bring proof of identification. Participants in the industry-sponsored workshops on safe handling and release of sea turtles that were held in Orlando, FL (April 8, 2005) and New Orleans, LA (June 27, 2005) will be issued a workshop certificate in December 2006 that will be valid for three years. Grandfathered permit holders must include a copy of this certificate when renewing limited access shark and limited access swordfish permits each year. Failure to provide a valid workshop certificate may result in a permit denial. The Safe Handling, Release, and Identification Workshops are designed to teach longline and gillnet fishermen the required techniques for the safe handling and release of entangled and/or hooked protected species, such as sea turtles, marine mammals, and smalltooth sawfish. Identification of protected species will also be taught at these workshops in an effort to improve reporting. Additionally, individuals attending these workshops will gain a better understanding of the requirements for participating in these fisheries. The overall goal for these workshops is to provide participants the skills needed to reduce the mortality of protected species, which may prevent additional regulations on these fisheries in the future. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 *et seq.* and 1801 *et seq.* Dated: October 18, 2006. James P. Burgess, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-17697 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Base Closure and Realignment AGENCY: Department of Defense, Office of Economic Adjustment. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This Notice is provided pursuant to section 2905(b)(7)(B)(ii) of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. It provides a partial list of military installations closing or realigning pursuant to the 2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment
(BRAC)Report. It also provides a corresponding listing of the Local Redevelopment Authorities
(LRAs)recognized by the Secretary of Defense, acting through the Department of Defense Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA), as well as the points of contact, addresses, and telephone numbers for the LRAs for those installations. Representatives of state and local governments, homeless providers, and other parties interested in the redevelopment of an installation should contact the person or organization listed. The following information will also be published simultaneously in a newspaper of general circulation in the area of each installation. There will be additional Notices providing this same information about LRAs for other closing or realigning installations where surplus government property is available as those LRAs are recognized by the OEA. DATES: *Effective Date:* October 23, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Director, Office of Economic Adjustment, Office of the Secretary of Defense, 400 Army Navy Drive, Suite 200, Arlington, VA 22202-4704,
(703)604-6020. Local Redevelopment Authorities
(LRAs)for Closing and Realigning Military Installations Alabama *Installation Name:* BG William P. Screws USARC. *LRA Name:* City of Montgomery. *Point of Contact:* Ken Groves, Director, Planning & Development Department, City of Montgomery. *Address:* P.O. Box 1111, Montgomery, AL 36101-1111. *Phone:*
(334)241-2712. Ohio *Installation Name:* Fort Hayes Memorial USARC. *LRA Name:* City of Columbus Local Redevelopment Authority. *Point of Contact:* Vince Papsidero, AICP, Planning Administrator, City of Columbus. *Address:* 109 N. Front Street, Columbus, OH 43215. *Phone:*
(614)645-8502. Pennsylvania *Installation Name:* Lycoming Memorial USARC. *LRA Name:* Lycoming Memorial Local Redevelopment Authority. *Point of Contact:* Bill Burdett, Township Manager, Loyalsock Township Board of Supervisors. *Address:* 2501 E. Third St., Williamsport, PA 17701. *Phone:*
(570)323-6151. October 17, 2006. L.M. Bynum, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. E6-17691 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary National Defense University Board of Visitors
(BOV)Open Meeting AGENCY: Department of Defense, National Defense University. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The President, National Defense University
(NDU)has scheduled a meeting of the Board of Visitors. Request subject notice be published in the **Federal Register** . The National Defense University Board of Visitors is a Federal Advisory Board. The Board meets twice a year in proceedings that are open to the public. DATES: The meeting will be held on November 15-16, 2006 from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the 15th and continuing on the 16th from 8:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. location: The Board of Visitors meeting will be held at Building 62, Marshall Hall, Room 155, National Defense University, 300 5th Avenue, Fort McNair, Washington, DC 20319-5066. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The point of contact for this notice of an “Open Meeting” is Mr. Roy Austin @
(202)685-2649, Fax
(202)685-3935 or *AustinR4@ndu.edu* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The School for National Security Executive Education (SNSEE) progress toward Master of Arts degree in Strategic Security Studies, Center for Technology and National Security Policy (CTNSP) latest research project Fiscal Overview/Budget, Facilities Overview (Tour of Marshall Hall and brief on ongoing repairs), Health of the University (Self Assessment/DIOMI Survey), NDU Information Technology, Transition of National Defense University to National Security University (NSU), as well as other operational issues and areas of interest affecting the day-to-day operations of the National Defense University and its components. The meeting is open to the public; limited space made available for observers will be allocated on a first come, first served basis. Dated: October 17, 2006. L.M. Bynum, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, DoD. [FR Doc. 06-8824 Filed 10-20-06; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 12
Traces to 12 documents
CFR
3 references not yet in our index
  • 19 USC 81a-81u
  • 15 CFR 400
  • 50 CFR 216.103
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice; proposed incidental take authorization; request for comments
C.F.R.§ 351.214
C.F.R.§ 351.402
C.F.R.§ 351.305
C.F.R.§ 351.412
C.F.R.§ 351.415
C.F.R.§ 351.224
C.F.R.§ 351.212
C.F.R.§ 351.106
C.F.R.§ 351.213
Cite19 USC 81a-81u
Cite15 CFR 400
Cite50 CFR 216.103
Cites 15 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.