Rules and Regulations. Notice; request for comment

8,499 words·~39 min read·/register/2006/11/01/06-9013

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

71 211 Wednesday, November 1, 2006 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Farm Service Agency Information Collection; Online Registration for FSA-Sponsored Events and Conferences AGENCY: Farm Service Agency, USDA. ACTION: Notice; request for comment. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Farm Service Agency is seeking comments from all interested individuals and organizations on an extension without revision of the information collection associated with online registration for FSA-sponsored events and conferences.

The information collection is needed for FSA to obtain information from the respondents who register on the Internet to make payment and reservations to attend any FSA-sponsored conferences and events. DATES: Comments must be received in writing on or before January 2, 2007 to be assured of consideration. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent practicable. ADDRESSES: Comments concerning this notice should be addressed to Farm Service Agency, USDA, Office of External Affairs, Jeff Kerby, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250.

Comments also may be submitted via facsimile to

(202)720-2979 or by e-mail to: *jeff.kerby@wdc.usda.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Kerby, Office of External Affairs,

(202)720-1593. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Description of Information Collection *Title:* Online Registration for FSA-sponsored Events and Conferences. *OMB Number:* 0560-0226. *Expiration Date of Approval:* 04/30/07. *Type of Request:* Extension with no revision. *Abstract:* The collection of information is necessary for people to register online to make payment and reservations to attend conferences and events. They can register on FSA's Online Registration site on the Internet. Respondents who do not have access to the Internet can register by mail or fax. The information is collected by the FSA employees who sponsor the conferences and events. The FSA is collecting common elements from interested respondents such as name, organization, address, country, phone number, State, city or town, payment options (cash, credit card, check) and special accommodations requests. The respondents are mainly individuals who are interested in attending the FSA-sponsored conferences or events. The information is used to collect payment from the respondents and make hotel reservations and other special arrangements as necessary. *Estimate of Annual Burden:* 15 minutes. *Type of Respondents:* Individuals. *Estimated Annual Number of Respondents:* 900. *Estimated Annual Number of Responses per Respondent:* 1. *Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents:* 225. Comment is invited on:

(1)Whether this collection of information is necessary for the stated purposes and the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. All comments received in response to this notice, including names and addresses when provided, will be a matter of public record. Comments will be summarized and included in the submission for Office of Management and Budget approval. Signed at Washington, DC, October 20, 2006. Teresa C. Lasseter, Administrator, Farm Service Agency. [FR Doc. E6-18370 Filed 10-31-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-05-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Idaho Cobalt Project Plan of Operations, Salmon-Challis National Forest, Lemhi County, ID AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Revised Notice of Intent to Prepare Environmental Impact Statement. SUMMARY: The Forest Service, as the lead Federal agency, previously published in the **Federal Register** (66 FR 46992-46994, September 10, 2001) a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS)to disclose the environmental effects of the Idaho Cobalt Project. The Idaho Cobalt Project is a proposed plan of operations to develop an underground cobalt-copper-gold mine on the Salmon/Cobalt Ranger District of the Salmon-Challis National Forest in Lemhi County, Idaho. The Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Chapter 21.2, requires this revised notice in the **Federal Register** to inform the public of a major change to the applicant's plan and provide revised dates of when the draft and final EIS will be completed. The major plan change is described in the following paragraph. The revised dates of when the draft and final EIS will be available can be found in the DATES section of this notice. The project proponent, Formation Capital Corporation U.S. (Formation), submitted its proposed plan of operation

(Plan)to the Forest Service in January 2001. That Plan described the major components of the project, including production adits and declines, waste rock disposal areas, processing plant, process water and tailings disposal methods, haul roads, and ancillary support facilities on National Forest System Lands. Since 2001, Formation has provided the Forest Service with a number of clarifications and minor revisions to their Plan, which, for the most part, did not alter the basic project description contained in the initial **Federal Register** notice. However, one proposed revision to the Plan's handling of mine and process water constituted a major change, which necessitated publishing this revised notice. Instead of land-applying the water as originally proposed, Formation plans to install a water treatment system and discharge the mine/process water into Big Deer Creek under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. This change would reduce the surface area affected by mining operations from 251 acres to 149 acres. Formation submitted an NPDES permit application to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA)on May 25, 2006 to discharge treated water into Big Deer Creek. The permit is a new source subject to the requirements of 40 CFR Part 440. As described in 40 CFR Part 122.29 and EPA's NEPA implementing regulations in 40 CFR Part 6, a new source is subject to compliance with NEPA prior to taking a final action on the NPDES permit. EPA entered into a Memorandum of Understanding

(MOU)with the Forest Service on August 8, 2006 as a cooperating agency in the EIS process. The MOU describes the roles, responsibilities, and NEPA coordination amongst the two agencies. Given the public scoping that has already been conducted for this project, the extensive list of significant issues generated as a result of that scoping, and the impending completion of the Draft EIS, the Forest Service will not initiate additional public scoping for this notice. Public comments will be accepted and considered following publication of the Draft EIS. DATES: The Draft EIS is expected to be available for a 45-day public review and comment period the first quarter of 2007. EPA will inform the public of the start of the review and comment period by publishing a Notice of Availability of the Draft EIS in the **Federal Register** . Completion of the Final EIS is anticipated by July 31, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ray Henderson, Project Coordinator, Salmon-Challis National Forest, 1206 S. Challis Street, Salmon, Idaho 83467, Phone

(208)756-5100. Questions on the NPDES permit should be directed to Rob Rau, EPA Region 10, 1200 6th Ave., Seattle, Washington 98101, Phone

(206)553-6285. If you wish to be placed on the project mailing list or receive additional information, contact the Salmon-Challis National Forest Project Coordinator identified above. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Project Description:* Formation Capital Corporation U.S. (Formation) submitted a Plan of Operations for the proposed Idaho Cobalt Project to the Salmon-Challis National Forest in January 2001. The Plan, which has subsequently been modified by Formation on a number of occasions, most recently in a June 2006 revision, is summarized as follows: The proposed Idaho Cobalt Project would consist of developing an 800-ton per day mine and mill complex. The project would involve mining cobalt-copper-gold reserves with an annual production rate of 280,000 tons of ore at full production. Current reserves and resources would allow for a ten-year mine life. The ore would be mined from two deposits, the Ram and the Sunshine and conveyed to a mill situated on the nearby Big Flat plateau. Underground mining methods are proposed, and a flotation mill would be used to process ore from the mine. At full production, the mill would produce approximately 32 tons of concentrate and 768 tons of tailings per day. The concentrate would be shipped to an off-site hydrometallurgical facility for metal recovery. Ram and Sunshine ore would be hauled to the mill with trucks, where the ore would be stockpiled. The approximate haul distance to the proposed site of the mill from the Ram portal is 2.8 miles and 1.5 miles from the Sunshine portal. In the latter years of the mine life an overhead tram from the Ram portal may be used to transport ore to the mill. The tram would consist of suspended car traveling on track cables, driven by a haul cable and suspended on towers. The tramcar would be loaded from a hopper at the Ram portal, and the car would discharge into a hopper at the mill crusher. The proposed tailings disposal facility and the water management reservoir are also located on the Big Flat, east of the mill. Disposal of tailings in this area via a dry stacking method was proposed by Formation to take advantage of relatively flat topography, avoidance of wetlands, suitable foundation soils, elimination of the need for a tailings dam, and distance from active drainages and streams. Approximately 60 percent of the tailings produced would be required underground as backfill. The backfill tailings would be dewatered to produce a paste and have cement added for strength. The paste would be pumped from the mill site to the Ram in a pipeline. Mine and mill process waters would be managed and recycled in the process circuit using a lined water management reservoir as storage. Excess precipitation and mine water would be treated and discharged in accordance with an NPDES permit. Treatment would consist of pH adjustment, precipitation and filtration for metals removal followed by reverse osmosis membrane separation as a polishing step and to remove nitrate, sulfate and other constituents. Treated water is projected to meet effluent limits at the end of the discharge pipe. The project as proposed by Formation would disturb 149 acres of National Forest Land. Power for the project would be secured from an existing power line delivering power to the nearby Blackbird Mine. Emergency power would be supplied with diesel generating equipment located at the main portals and at the mill. It is anticipated that most of the project employees would live in the Salmon area. Employees would be transported to the project site by buses or vans assigned to personnel. The proposed transportation route for the employees is via the Williams Creek Summit, along the Williams Creek road, the Deep Creek road, the Panther Creek road and the Blackbird Creek road. The transportation route for mine supplies and the concentrates would also be via Williams Creek Summit. The West Panther and South Panther Roadless Areas lie to the north, west and east of the ICP. Proposed activities in the company and agency alternatives would utilize upgraded existing and to a lesser degree new roads within the designated roadless area. Up to eight acres of disturbance within the designated roadless area would occur under the action alternatives. There would be three main phases in the life of the Idaho Cobalt Project: the construction phase, the production phase, and the reclamation phase. There would also be concurrent reclamation in the construction and production phases as existing disturbed areas or new disturbance is reclaimed post-use. The construction phase would include upgrading 23.2 miles of existing roads, and construction of 2.7 miles of new roads, construction of the portals and waste rock dumps, the mill site, power line and substation and the tailings disposal site. Soil stockpile areas, stormwater diversion ditches and borrow areas would also be included in the surface disturbance. The production phase would bring the mill on line at 400-tons per day increasing to 800-tons per day as the underground Ram mine expands. Each of the project components is integral to the whole operation and therefore there would be limited opportunities for concurrent reclamation. However, there would be concurrent reclamation in some areas when active use stops. The reclamation phase would include final shaping of waste rock dumps, sealing mine portals, mill demolition, power line and substation dismantling, tailings disposal area shaping and revegetation, water management reservoir reclamation, and road reclamation. Cobalt is a strategic and industrial metal with a diverse range of uses. The largest single use is in alloys for air and land-based gas turbine engines. The fastest growing usage is in the battery industry for cell phones, pagers, portable computers and gasoline-electric hybrid power automobiles. Cobalt is used in computer hard disk drives, semiconductors, magnetic data storage and solar collectors. It is also used as a component in the effort to reduce air pollution, as it is a catalyst for removing sulfur from oil to provide for clean burning fuels and has important medical uses as well. *Proposed Action and Regulatory Requirements:* The Forest Service decision to be made in response to Formation's Plan is described by regulation at 36 CFR 228.5 and includes:

(a)Approve the project as proposed,

(b)Notify the operator of changes or additions to the plan of operations deemed necessary to meet the purpose of the regulations. These regulations also direct the Forest Service to comply with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)in connection with each Plan of Operation. In this regard, the Salmon-Challis Forest Supervisor has determined that an EIS is required to support a decision on the Idaho Cobalt Project. The EIS will analyze the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects of the proposed Plan of Operation and other reasonable alternatives including mitigation, monitoring and reclamation measures designed to minimize adverse effects. In order to implement the project, the proponent, Formation, must obtain approval or conduct consultation with several other federal, state, and local regulatory agencies. These agencies include: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, Army Corps of Engineers, Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, Idaho Department of Water Resources, Idaho State Historic Preservation Officer and Lemhi County, Idaho. The Salmon Forest Plan provides guidance for management activities within the potentially affected area through its goals, objectives, standards and guidelines, and management area direction. The proposal would occur within Management Area 5B. Management emphasis in this area is on producing long-term timber outputs through a moderate level of investment in regeneration and thinning. It recognizes the potential for high-value locatable mineral occurrence and probable development. The Forest Plan directs that exploration, location, leasing and development of energy and non-energy minerals resources be coordinated with other resources. Under the United States Mining Laws of May 10, 1872, as amended (30 U.S.C. 22), United States citizens and corporations have the right to search for and develop minerals upon public lands, including National Forest Systems lands, open to mineral entry. Forest Service regulations (36 CFR 228, Subpart A) require that the agency work with mineral operators to minimize or eliminate adverse environmental impacts from mineral activities on National Forest System lands. *Public Participation:* The Forest Service held an initial public meeting to provide information on the Idaho Cobalt Project on July 20, 2001, at the City Center in Salmon, Idaho. The Forest issued a Notice of Intent

(NOI)to prepare an EIS for the proposed mining project in the **Federal Register** on September 10, 2001. The NOI invited comments on FCC's proposed Plan of Operations and the Forest's environmental analysis process for the proposed Project. The Forest held public scoping meetings on October 10, 2001, in Challis, Idaho and October 11, 2001 in Salmon, Idaho. The scoping process and subsequent environmental analysis, to date, have identified the following significant issues: 1. *Blackbird Mine CERCLA Remediation & Restoration* —What is the relationship between the proposed Idaho Cobalt Project and the current program to remediate the environmental damage at the Blackbird Mine and to re-establish an anadromous fishery in Panther Creek? 2. *Surface Water Quality* —What is the potential for adverse impacts to water quality downstream of project facilities from the proposed mining activities, including development of acid mine drainage and mobilization of heavy metals from geologic materials exposed by the proposed mining activities, and how would water quality be maintained and beneficial uses protected? 3. *Groundwater Quality* —What is the relationship of the aquifer systems between the proposed project and surrounding areas, particularly the Blackbird Mine and receiving streams? What is the existing quality of groundwater in the project area and how would the project affect existing groundwater quality? 4. *Water Use, Management, Treatment and Disposal* —How would surface water and groundwater quality monitoring be conducted to detect and allow for the correction of any water quality problems resulting from the proposed mining activities? What water management and treatment systems would be in place to assure no adverse impacts to water quality or quantity? 5. *Sediment Delivery (Storm Water Management)* —What are the potential effects on water quality from accelerated erosion and sedimentation, in consideration of surface disturbance associated with the proposed mining operations and the existing effects of the Clear Creek wildfire of the summer of 2000? 6. *Roads and Access* —Opportunities exist to improve the transportation system on the project site and the access roads including reclamation of existing roads not meeting Forest standards. 7. *Transportation of Product, Chemicals, and Fuel* —What is the potential for adverse impacts to water quality from accidental spills of hazardous materials along the transportation route? 8. *Socio-Economics* —What are the potential impacts to local communities, tax base and infrastructure from the proposed project? 9. *Vegetation/Reclamation* —What effects would the Idaho Cobalt Project have on vegetation, particularly the natural recovery of the area following the 2000 Clear Creek fire? 10. *Wetlands and Other Waters of the U.S.* —What are the impacts to wetlands from the Idaho Cobalt Project? 11. *Fish Populations and Habitat of Concern* —Would special status fish species and their habitat (threatened, endangered, sensitive) or species whose populations or habitat are present be adversely affected by the proposed mining activities? 12. *Air Quality/Visual Resource/Wilderness Resources* —Would there be impacts to air quality, visual resources or the nearby wilderness? 13. *Wildlife Populations and Habitat of Concern* — 14. *Cultural Resources and Tribal Trust Responsibilities* —Are there cultural, historical or heritage resources in project area and would they be affected by the proposed Plan. 15. *Planning and Land Use* —How would the proposed mining activities affect other Forest activities and would any changes be required to the Forest Plan. The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will be 45-days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the **Federal Register** . The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must structure their participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and contentions. *Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.* v. *NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978).* Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may be waived or dismissed by the courts. *City of Angoon* v. *Hodel* , 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and *Wisconsin Heritages, Inc.* v. *Harris* , 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings, it is very important that those interested in this proposed action participate by the close of comment period so that substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to them in the final environmental impact statement. To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. *Alternatives:* The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives in the EIS including a no action alternative and modifications to the proponent's Plan that would minimize risk of impacts to the environment, improve public safety and mitigate potential effects to water quality, wetlands, wildlife and other resources. Analysis of alternatives will evaluate alternative facility locations, facility design components, operational procedures and technologies. For example alternatives to the location for the tailings disposal facility, to operational and post closure water management and to water treatment technologies will be evaluated. Mitigation measures that would improve access road safety, increase monitoring requirements and modify reclamation methods will also be considered. The range of alternatives would result in surface disturbance of up to approximately 328 acres. *Responsible Official:* I am the responsible official for this Environmental Impact Statement. My address is Salmon-Challis National Forest, 1206 S. Challis Street, Salmon, Idaho 83467. Dated: October 24, 2006. William A. Wood, Forest Supervisor, Salmon-Challis National. [FR Doc. E6-18362 Filed 10-31-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of Opportunity to Request Administrative Review of Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sheila E. Forbes, Office of AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230, *telephone:*

(202)482-4697. Background Each year during the anniversary month of the publication of an antidumping or countervailing duty order, finding, or suspension of investigation, an interested party, as defined in section 771(9) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, may request, in accordance with section 351.213

(2002)of the Department of Commerce (the Department) Regulations, that the Department conduct an administrative review of that antidumping or countervailing duty order, finding, or suspended investigation. *Opportunity to Request a Review:* Not later than the last day of November 2006, 1 interested parties may request administrative review of the following orders, findings, or suspended investigations, with anniversary dates in November for the following periods: 1 Or the next business day, if the deadline falls on a weekend, federal holiday or any other day when the Department is closed. Periods Antidumping Duty Proceedings *Argentina:* Barbed Wire & Barbless Fencing Wire, A-357-405 11/1/05-10/31/06 *Brazil:* Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe, A-351-809 11/1/05-10/31/06 *Hungary:* Sulfanilic Acid, A-437-804 11/1/05-10/31/06 *Kazakhstan:* Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products, A-834-806 11/1/05-10/31/06 *Mexico:* Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe, A-201-805 11/1/05-10/31/06 *Netherlands:* Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products, A-421-807 11/1/05-10/31/06 *Portugal:* Sulfanilic Acid, A-471-806 11/1/05-10/31/06 *Republic of Korea:* Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe, A-580-809 11/1/05-10/31/06 *Romania:* Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products, A-485-806 11/1/05-10/31/06 *Taiwan:* Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products, A-583-835 11/1/05-10/31/06 *Taiwan:* Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe, A-583-814 11/1/05-10/31/06 *Thailand:* Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products, A-549-817 11/1/05-10/31/06 *The People's Republic of China:* Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products, A-570-865 11/1/05-10/31/06 Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel, A-570-849 11/1/05-10/31/06 Fresh Garlic, A-570-831 11/1/05-10/31/06 Paper Clips, A-570-826 11/1/05-10/31/06 Pure Magnesium in Granular Form, A-570-864 11/1/05-10/31/06 Refined Brown Aluminum Oxide, A-570-882 11/1/05-10/31/06 *Ukraine:* Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products, A-823-811 11/1/05-10/31/06 Countervailing Duty Proccedings *Hungary:* Sulfanilic Acid, C-437-805 1/1/05-12/31/05 Suspension Agreements *Ukraine:* Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel, A-823-808 11/1/05-10/31/06 In accordance with § 351.213(b) of the regulations, an interested party as defined by section 771(9) of the Act may request in writing that the Secretary conduct an administrative review. For both antidumping and countervailing duty reviews, the interested party must specify the individual producers or exporters covered by an antidumping finding or an antidumping or countervailing duty order or suspension agreement for which it is requesting a review, and the requesting party must state why it desires the Secretary to review those particular producers or exporters. 2 If the interested party intends for the Secretary to review sales of merchandise by an exporter (or a producer if that producer also exports merchandise from other suppliers) which were produced in more than one country of origin and each country of origin is subject to a separate order, then the interested party must state specifically, on an order-by-order basis, which exporter(s) the request is intended to cover. 2 If the review request involves a non-market economy and the parties subject to the review request do not qualify for separate rates, all other exporters of subject merchandise from the non-market economy country who do not have a separate rate will be covered by the review as part of the single entity of which the named firms are a part. As explained in *Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties,* 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003), the Department has clarified its practice with respect to the collection of final antidumping duties on imports of merchandise where intermediate firms are involved. The public should be aware of this clarification in determining whether to request an administrative review of merchandise subject to antidumping findings and orders. See also the Import Administration Web site at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov.* Six copies of the request should be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. The Department also asks parties to serve a copy of their requests to the Office of Antidumping/Countervailing Operations, Attention: Sheila Forbes, in room 3065 of the main Commerce Building. Further, in accordance with § 351.303(f)(l)(i) of the regulations, a copy of each request must be served on every party on the Department's service list. The Department will publish in the **Federal Register** a notice of “Initiation of Administrative Review of Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation” for requests received by the last day of November 2006. If the Department does not receive, by the last day of November 2006, a request for review of entries covered by an order, finding, or suspended investigation listed in this notice and for the period identified above, the Department will instruct the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to assess antidumping or countervailing duties on those entries at a rate equal to the cash deposit of (or bond for) estimated antidumping or countervailing duties required on those entries at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption and to continue to collect the cash deposit previously ordered. This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community. Dated: October 26, 2006. Thomas F. Futtner, Acting Office Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-18414 Filed 10-31-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Advance Notification of Sunset Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of upcoming Sunset Reviews. Background Every five years, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) and the International Trade Commission automatically initiate and conduct a review to determine whether revocation of a countervailing or antidumping duty order or termination of an investigation suspended under section 704 or 734 would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or a countervailable subsidy (as the case may be) and of material injury. Upcoming Sunset Reviews for December 2006 The following Sunset Reviews are scheduled for initiation in December 2006 and will appear in that month's Notice of Initiation of Five-Year Sunset Reviews. Antidumping Duty Proceedings Department Contact Folding Gift Boxes from the People's Republic of China (A-570-866). Juanita Chen,

(202)482-1904. Countervailing Duty Proceedings No countervailing duty proceedings are scheduled for initiation in December 2006. Suspended Investigations No suspended investigations are scheduled for initiation in December 2006. The Department's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth in 19 CFR 351.218. Guidance on methodological or analytical issues relevant to the Department's conduct of Sunset Reviews is set forth in the Department's Policy Bulletin 98.3—Policies Regarding the Conduct of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders; Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 1998) (“Sunset Policy Bulletin”). The Notice of Initiation of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Reviews provides further information regarding what is required of all parties to participate in Sunset Reviews. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), the Department will maintain and make available a service list for these proceedings. To facilitate the timely preparation of the service list(s), it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding contact the Department in writing within 15 days of the publication of the Notice of Initiation. Please note that if the Department receives a Notice of Intent to Participate from a member of the domestic industry within 15 days of the date of initiation, the review will continue. Thereafter, any interested party wishing to participate in the Sunset Review must provide substantive comments in response to the notice of initiation no later than 30 days after the date of initiation. This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community. Dated: October 25, 2006. Thomas F. Futtner, Acting Office Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-18440 Filed 10-31-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Initiation of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: In accordance with section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) is automatically initiating a five-year (“Sunset Review”) of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders listed below. The International Trade Commission (“the Commission”) is publishing concurrently with this notice its notice of *Institution of Five-Year Review* which covers these same order. *Effective Date:* November 1, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Department official identified in the *Initiation of Review(s)* section below at AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th & Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230. For information from the Commission contact Mary Messer, Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission at

(202)205-3193. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Department's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth in its *Procedures for Conducting Five-Year (“Sunset”) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders,* 63 FR 13516 (March 20, 1998) and 70 FR 62061 (October 28, 2005). Guidance on methodological or analytical issues relevant to the Department's conduct of Sunset Reviews is set forth in the Department's Policy Bulletin 98.3— *Policies Regarding the Conduct of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders; Policy Bulletin,* 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 1998) ( *“Sunset Policy Bulletin”* ). Initiation of Reviews In accordance with 19 CFR 351.218(c), we are initiating the Sunset Review of the following antidumping and countervailing duty orders: DOC case No. ITC case No. Country Product Department contact A-357-812 731-TA-892 Argentina Honey Dana Mermelstein,

(202)482-1391. A-570-863 731-TA-893 PRC Honey Dana Mermelstein,

(202)482-1391. A-588-857 731-TA-919 Japan Welded Large Diameter Line Pipe Dana Mermelstein,

(202)482-1391. A-201-828 731-TA-920 Mexico Welded Large Diameter Line Pipe Dana Mermelstein,

(202)482-1391. Countervailing Duty Proceedings C-357-813 701-TA-402 Argentina Honey Dana Mermelstein,

(202)482-1391. Suspended Investigations No suspended investigations are scheduled for initiation in November 2006. Filing Information As a courtesy, we are making information related to Sunset proceedings, including copies of the Department's regulations regarding Sunset Reviews (19 CFR 351.218) and *Sunset Policy Bulletin* , the Department's schedule of Sunset Reviews, case history information ( *i.e.* , previous margins, duty absorption determinations, scope language, import volumes), and service lists available to the public on the Department's sunset Internet Web site at the following address: “ *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/sunset/.* ” All submissions in these Sunset Reviews must be filed in accordance with the Department's regulations regarding format, translation, service, and certification of documents. These rules can be found at 19 CFR 351.303. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), the Department will maintain and make available a service list for these proceedings. To facilitate the timely preparation of the service list(s), it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding contact the Department in writing within 10 days of the publication of the Notice of Initiation.Because deadlines in Sunset Reviews can be very short, we urge interested parties to apply for access to proprietary information under administrative protective order (“APO”) immediately following publication in the **Federal Register** of the notice of initiation of the sunset review. The Department's regulations on submission of proprietary information and eligibility to receive access to business proprietary information under APO can be found at 19 CFR 351.304-306. Information Required From Interested Parties Domestic interested parties (defined in section 771(9)(C), (D), (E), (F), and

(G)of the Act and 19 CFR 351.102(b)) wishing to participate in these Sunset Reviews must respond not later than 15 days after the date of publication in the **Federal Register** of this notice of initiation by filing a notice of intent to participate. The required contents of the notice of intent to participate are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(ii). In accordance with the Department's regulations, if we do not receive a notice of intent to participate from at least one domestic interested party by the 15-day deadline, the Department will automatically revoke the orders without further review. *See* 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(iii). For sunset reviews of countervailing duty orders, parties wishing the Department to consider arguments that countervailable subsidy programs have been terminated must include with their substantive responses information and documentation addressing whether the changes to the program were

(1)limited to an individual firm or firms and

(2)effected by an official act of the government. Further, a party claiming program termination is expected to document that there are no residual benefits under the program and that substitute programs have not been introduced. *Cf* . 19 CFR 351.526(b) and (d). If a party maintains that any of the subsidies countervailed by the Department were not conferred pursuant to a subsidy program, that party should nevertheless address the applicability of the factors set forth in 19 CFR 351.526(b) and (d). Similarly, parties wishing the Department to consider whether a company's change in ownership has extinguished the benefit from prior non-recurring, allocable, subsidies must include with their substantive responses information and documentation supporting their claim that all or almost all of the company's shares or assets were sold in an arm's length transaction, at a price representing fair market value, as described in the *Notice of Final Modification of Agency Practice Under Section 123 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act* , 68 FR 37125 (June 23, 2003) ( *Modification Notice* ). * See Modification Notice* for a discussion of the types of information and documentation the Department requires. If we receive an order-specific notice of intent to participate from a domestic interested party, the Department's regulations provide that *all parties* wishing to participate in the Sunset Review must file complete substantive responses not later than 30 days after the date of publication in the **Federal Register** of this notice of initiation. The required contents of a substantive response, on an order-specific basis, are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3). Note that certain information requirements differ for respondent and domestic parties. Also, note that the Department's information requirements are distinct from the Commission's information requirements. Please consult the Department's regulations for information regarding the Department's conduct of Sunset Reviews. 1 Please consult the Department's regulations at 19 CFR Part 351 for definitions of terms and for other general information concerning antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings at the Department. 1 In comments made on the interim final sunset regulations, a number of parties stated that the proposed five-day period for rebuttals to substantive responses to a notice of initiation was insufficient. This requirement was retained in the final sunset regulations at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(4). As provided in 19 CFR 351.302(b), however, the Department will consider individual requests for extension of that five-day deadline based upon a showing of good cause. This notice of initiation is being published in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c). Dated: October 26, 2006. Thomas F. Futtner, Acting Office Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-18441 Filed 10-31-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-588-707] Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin From Japan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On May 11, 2006, the Department of Commerce published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on granular polytetrafluoroethylene resin from Japan. The review covers one manufacturer/exporter. The period of review is August 1, 2004, through July 31, 2005. We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the preliminary results. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made changes in the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping margin for the reviewed firm is listed below in the section entitled “Final Results of the Review.” EFFECTIVE DATE: November 1, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine Cartsos or Richard Rimlinger, 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; telephone:

(202)482-1757 or

(202)482-4477. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On May 11, 2006, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on granular polytetrafluoroethylene resin

(PTFE)from Japan. See *Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin From Japan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 71 FR 27459 (May 11, 2006). The period of review is August 1, 2004, through July 31, 2005. The company for which we are conducting the administrative review is Asahi Glass Fluoropolymers, Ltd. (Asahi). We invited interested parties to comment on the preliminary results. We received comments from Asahi. The petitioner in this case did not comment. Asahi also submitted an untimely request for a hearing which we denied. The Department has conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Scope of Order The merchandise covered by the antidumping duty order is PTFE, filled or unfilled. The order excludes PTFE dispersions in water, fine powders, and reprocessed PTFE powder. PTFE is currently classifiable under subheading 3904.61.00 of the *Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States* (HTSUS). This order covers all PTFE, regardless of its tariff classification. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the order remains dispositive. Analysis of the Comments Received All issues raised in the case brief submitted by Asahi in the context of this administrative review are addressed in the “Issues and Decision Memorandum” (Decision Memo) from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary, dated October 23, 2006, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which the respondent raised and to which we have responded is in the Decision Memo and attached to this notice as an Appendix. The Decision Memo, which is a public document, is on file in the Central Records Unit, main Commerce building, Room B-099, and is accessible on the Web at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/index.html* . The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Changes from the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of the comments we received from Asahi, we find that Asahi's two home-market channels of distribution constitute one level of trade. Our analysis on the level of trade is discussed in detail in the Decision Memo. We made no other changes to our analysis. Final Results of the Review As a result of our review, we determine that a margin of 0.00 percent exists for Asahi for the period August 1, 2004, through July 31, 2005. 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 these 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. 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 Asahi for which Asahi 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 91.74 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 deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of this notice of final results of the administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Act:

(1)the cash-deposit rate for Asahi will be 0.00 percent;

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

(3)if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original less-than-fair-value

(LTFV)investigation but the manufacturer is, the cash-deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise;

(4)if neither the exporter nor the producer is a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the LTFV investigation, the cash-deposit rate shall be 91.74 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation. See *Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin From Japan* , 53 FR 25191 (July 5, 1988). These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review. This notice serves as a 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 Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order

(APO)of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: October 23, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix Comments and Responses Level of Trade [FR Doc. E6-18405 Filed 10-31-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-337-806] Certain Individually Quick Frozen Red Raspberries from Chile: Extension of the Time Limit for the Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: November 1, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yasmin Bordas or Brandon Farlander, AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone

(202)482-3813 or

(202)482-0182, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Statutory Time Limits Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires the Department of Commerce (the Department) to complete the final results of an administrative review within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary results are published. However, if it is not practicable to complete the review within this time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the time limit for the final results to 180 days from the date of publication of the preliminary results. Background On August 29, 2005, the Department published a notice of initiation of administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain individually quick frozen red raspberries from Chile, covering the period July 1, 2004, through June 30, 2005. *See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Requests for Revocation in Part* , 70 FR 51009 (August 29, 2005). On August 8, 2006, the Department published the preliminary results of the antidumping duty administrative review. *See Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Notice of Intent to Revoke in Part: Individually Quick Frozen Red Raspberries from Chile* , 71 FR 45000 (August 8, 2006). Extension of Time Limits for Final Results The Department requires additional time to verify the cost information submitted by a respondent in this administrative review. Moreover, the Department requires additional time to analyze complex cost issues relating to direct material purchases. Thus, it is not practicable to complete this review within the original time limit ( *i.e.* , December 6, 2006). Therefore, the Department is extending the time limit for completion of the final results of this administrative review until no later than February 4, 2007, which is 180 days from the date of publication of the preliminary results. However, February 4 falls on Sunday, and it is the Department's long-standing practice to issue a determination the next business day when the statutory deadline falls on a weekend, federal holiday, or any other day when the Department is closed. *See Notice of Clarification: Application of “Next Business Day” Rule for Administrative Determination Deadlines Pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended* , 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005). Accordingly, the deadline for completion of the final results is February 5, 2007. We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: October 25, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-18406 Filed 10-31-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-533-809] Notice of Extension of Time Limit for the Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Stainless Steel Flanges From India AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: *Effective Dates:* November 1, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Baker or Robert James, AD/CVD Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-2924 or

(202)482-0649, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On February 9, 1994, the Department published the antidumping duty order on stainless steel flanges from India. *See Amended Final Determination and Antidumping Duty Order; Certain Forged Stainless Steel Flanges from India,* 59 FR 5994 (February 9, 1994). On February 28, 2006, we received requests for an administrative review for the period February 1, 2005, through January 31, 2006, from Echjay Forgings Pvt. Ltd. (Echjay) and Shree Ganesh Forgings, Ltd. (Shree Ganesh). We also received requests for a new shipper review and, failing that, an administrative review, from Kunj Forgings Pvt. Ltd. (Kunj), Micro Forge (India) Ltd. (Micro), Pradeep Metals Limited (Pradeep), and Rollwell Forge, Ltd. (Rollwell). On April 5, 2006, we initiated administrative reviews of the six companies. *See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Deferral of Administrative Reviews,* 71 FR 17077 (April 5, 2006). 1 The preliminary results of the administrative review are currently due no later than October 31, 2006. 1 On April 6, 2006, the Department published a notice initiating new shipper reviews of Kunj, Micro, Pradeep, and Rollwell. *See Stainless Steel Flanges from India: Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews,* 71 FR 17439 (April 6, 2006). On September 29, 2006, we rescinded the new shipper reviews with respect to Micro, Pradeep, and Rollwell. *See Certain Forged Stainless Steel Flanges from India: Notice of Partial Rescission of New Shipper Reviews,* 71 FR 57468 (September 29, 2006). Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results The Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), at section 351(a)(3)(A), provides that the Department will issue the preliminary results of an administrative review of an antidumping duty order within 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of the date of publication of the order. The Act provides further that if the Department determines that it is not practicable to complete the review within this time period, the Department may extend the 245-day period to 365 days. The Department has determined that it is not practicable to complete the preliminary results by the current 245-day deadline of October 31, 2006. Rollwell has reported several new model types of flanges that the Department has not analyzed in previous segments of this proceeding. We require additional time to make a thorough analysis of these model types and to determine appropriate model match weighting criteria. Therefore, in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2), the Department is extending the time limit for the preliminary results by 120 days to February 28, 2007. This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: October 25, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-18407 Filed 10-31-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Marine Protected Areas Federal Advisory Committee AGENCY: National Ocean Service, NOAA, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Extension of deadline for nominations for the Marine Protected Areas Federal Advisory Committee. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce published a notice in the **Federal Register** on September 26, 2006 (71 FR 45107) seeking nominations for membership on the Marine Protected Areas Federal Advisory Committee (Committee). The deadline for nominations by qualified persons to the Committee is hereby extended. DATES: The extended deadline for nominations to the Committee is November 30, 2006. ADDRESSES: Nominations should be sent to Lauren Wenzel, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National marine Protected Areas Center, 1305 East West Highway, Station #12227, Silver Spring, MD 20910. E-mail: *Lauren.wenzel@noaa.gov.* E-mail nominations are acceptable. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Refer to the **Federal Register** notice of September 26, 2006, or contact Lauren Wenzel,

(301)713-3100 x136, *Lauren.wenzel@noaa.gov.* Dated: October 26, 2006. Elizabeth R. Scheffler, Associate Assistant Administrator for Management, National Ocean Service. [FR Doc. 06-9013 Filed 10-31-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 12

Traces to 12 documents

CFR