Notices. Notice of open meeting

7,464 words·~34 min read·/register/2006/11/27/06-9408·

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

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-489-502] Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe From Turkey AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) is conducting an administrative review of the countervailing duty (“CVD”) order on certain welded carbon steel standard pipe from Turkey for the period January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005.

We preliminarily find that the net subsidy rate for the company under review is *de minimis* . *See* the “Preliminary Results of Review” section of this notice, *infra.* Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results. ( *See* the “Public Comment” section, *infra.* ) EFFECTIVE DATE: November 27, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristen Johnson, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-4793. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On March 7, 1986, the Department published in the **Federal Register** the CVD order on certain welded carbon steel pipe and tube products from Turkey. *See Countervailing Duty Order: Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube Products from Turkey* , 51 FR 7984 (March 7, 1986). On March 2, 2006, the Department published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of this CVD order. *See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review* , 71 FR 10642 (March 2, 2006). On March 23, 2006, we received a timely request for review from the Borusan Group (“Borusan”), a Turkish producer and exporter of the subject merchandise. On April 28, 2006, the Department initiated an administrative review of the CVD order on certain welded carbon steel standard pipe from Turkey, covering the period January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005. *See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews* , 71 FR 25145 (April 28, 2006). On May 2, 2006, the Department issued a questionnaire to Borusan and the Government of the Republic of Turkey (“the GOT”); we received the GOT's questionnaire response on July 14, 2006, and Borusan's response on July 17, 2006. On September 20, 2006, we issued supplemental questionnaires to Borusan and the GOT. We received the supplemental questionnaire response from Borusan and the GOT on October 4, 2006. On October 25, 2006, we issued a second supplemental questionnaire to Borusan and received the company's response on October 31, 2006. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), this review covers only those producers or exporters of the subject merchandise for which a review was specifically requested. The only company subject to this review is Borusan. During the period of review (“the POR”), Borusan was comprised of Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (“BMB”) and Borusan Istikbal Ticaret T.A.S. (“Istikbal”). This review covers 11 programs. Scope of the Order The products covered by this order are certain welded carbon steel pipe and tube with an outside diameter of 0.375 inch or more, but not over 16 inches, of any wall thickness (pipe and tube) from Turkey. These products are currently provided for under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) as item numbers 7306.30.10, 7306.30.50, and 7306.90.10. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise is dispositive. Period of Review The period for which we are measuring subsidies is January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005. Company History As noted above, Borusan is composed of BMB and Istikbal. BMB was previously known as Borusan Birlesik Boru Fabrikalari A.S. (“BBBF”). On December 13, 2004, BBBF changed its name to BMB subsequent to its merger with Mannesmann Boru Endustrisi T.A.S. (“MB”) on November 30, 2004. 1 *See Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review Certain Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe from Turkey* , 71 FR 43111 (July 31, 2006) (“ *2004 Pipe Final* ”), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, at “Calculation of *Ad Valorem* Rate” under “Subsidies Valuation Information” (“ *2004 Pipe Memorandum* ”). 1 As of November 30, 2004, MB ceased to exist as a separate company. However, during the POR, MB filed its 2004 income tax return for the period January 1, 2004, through November 30, 2004. With regard to its 2004 income taxes, MB utilized the “Deduction from Taxable Income for Export Revenue” program. For more information, *see* “Deduction from Taxable Income for Export Revenue” under “Programs Preliminarily Determined To Be Countervailable,” *infra.* During the POR, BMB produced the subject merchandise, which was first sold to Istikbal, an affiliated export sales company, and then resold to unaffiliated customers in the United States. BMB's shares are held by Borusan Mannesmann Boru Yatirim Holding A.S., a holding company owned by Borusan Holding A.S. 2 and Mannesmannrohren-Werke, A.G., a publicly traded company in Germany. Istikbal is majority-owned by Borusan Holding A.S. 2 Borusan Holding A.S. is owned by the family of Asim Kocabiyik, the company's founder. Subsidies Valuation Information Benchmark Interest Rates To determine whether government-provided loans under review conferred a benefit, the Department uses, where possible, company-specific interest rates for comparable commercial loans. *See* 19 CFR 351.505(a). Borusan provided the interest rates it paid on short-term U.S. dollar (“US$”)-denominated commercial loans. We preliminarily find that the company-specific US$-denominated short-term loans are comparable to the export credit US$-denominated loans, provided by the Export Credit Bank of Turkey (“Export Bank”), against which Borusan paid interest during the POR. During the POR, Borusan, however, did not pay interest against short-term Turkish Lira (“YTL”)-denominated commercial loans, which are comparable to the maturity of the export financing loans provided by the Export Bank. Where no company-specific benchmark interest rates are available, the Department's regulations direct us to use a national average interest rate as the benchmark. *See* 19 CFR 351.505(a)(3)(ii). According to the GOT, however, there is no official national average short-term interest rate available. 3 Therefore, we have calculated the benchmark interest rate for short-term YTL-denominated loans based on short-term interest rate data for 2005, as reported by *The Economist.* 4 3 *See* GOT's Questionnaire Response, at 20 (July 14, 2006). 4 In each issue, *The Economist* reports short-term interest data on a percentage per annum basis for select countries. To calculate the benchmark, we sourced short-term interest rates to represent quarterly rates for Turkey in 2005. Specifically, we sourced the interest rate reported in the last weekly publication of *The Economist* for each quarter of 2005, *i.e.* , the March 26, 2005, June 25, 2005, September 24, 2005, and December 24, 2005 editions. We then simple averaged those rates to calculate an annual short-term interest rate for Turkey. 5 We then compared the nominal average interest rate with the interest rates that the company paid against the YTL-denominated Foreign Trade Companies Short-Term Export Credits and Pre-Export Credits. *See* Memorandum to the File concerning the Calculations for the Preliminary Results of the 2005 Review of the Countervailing Duty Order on Certain Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe from Turkey, at 2 (November 17, 2006). This methodology is consistent with the Department's practice. *See 2004 Pipe Memorandum* , at “Benchmark Interest Rates” under “Subsidies Valuation Information” and “Comment 1: Benchmark Interest Rate for Turkish Lira Loans.” 5 The short-term TL interest rates sourced from *The Economist* do not include commissions or fees paid to commercial banks, *i.e.* , they are nominal rates. *See Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Turkey; Final Negative Countervailing Duty Determination* , 67 FR 55815 (August 30, 2002) (“ *Wire Rod* ”), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, at “Benchmark Interest Rates” (“ *Wire Rod Memorandum* ”). Analysis of Programs I. Programs Preliminarily Determined To Be Countervailable A. Deduction From Taxable Income for Export Revenue Addendum 4108 of Article 40 of the Income Tax Law allows companies that operate internationally to claim, directly on their corporate income tax returns, a tax deduction equal to 0.5 percent of the foreign exchange revenue earned from exports and other international activities. 6 The income tax deduction for export earnings may either be taken as a lump sum or be used to cover certain undocumented expenses, which were incurred through international activities, that would otherwise be non-deductible for tax purposes ( *e.g.* , expenses paid in cash, such as for lodging, gasoline, and food). 6 These actions include construction, repair, installation, and transportation activities that occur abroad. Consistent with the *2004 Pipe Final* , we preliminarily find that this tax deduction is a countervailable subsidy. *See 2004 Pipe Memorandum* , at “Deduction from Taxable Income for Export Revenue” under “Programs Determined To Be Countervailable.” The deduction provides a financial contribution within the meaning of section 771(5)(D)(ii) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), because it represents revenue forgone by the GOT. The deduction provides a benefit in the amount of the tax savings to the company pursuant to section 771(5)(E) of the Act. It is specific under section 771(5A)(B) of the Act because its receipt is contingent upon export performance. In this review, no new information or evidence of changed circumstances has been submitted to warrant reconsideration of the Department's prior findings. During the review period, BMB, MB, 7 and Istikbal filed separate corporate income tax returns for tax year 2004. Each company utilized the deduction for export earnings with respect to its 2004 income taxes. 7 *See* “Company History” section, *supra* , for MB's company information. The Department typically treats a tax deduction as a recurring benefit in accordance with 19 CFR 351.524(c)(1). To calculate the countervailable subsidy rate for this program, we calculated the tax savings realized by BMB, MB, and Istikbal in 2005, as a result of the deduction for export earnings. We then divided that benefit by Borusan's total export sales for 2005. On this basis, we preliminarily determine the net countervailable subsidy for this program to be 0.21 percent *ad valorem.* B. Foreign Trade Companies Short-Term Export Credits The Foreign Trade Company (“FTC”) loan program was implemented to assist large export trading companies with their export financing needs. This program is specifically designed to benefit Foreign Trade Corporate Companies (“FTCC”) and Sectoral Foreign Trade Companies (“SFTC”). 8 An FTCC is a company whose export performance was at least US$75 million in the previous year. For eligible companies, the Export Bank will provide short-term export credits based on their past export performance. Under this credit program, the Export Bank extends short-term export credits directly to exporters in Turkish Lira and foreign currency (“FX”), up to 100 percent of the FOB export commitment. The program's interest rates are set by the Export Bank and the maturity of the loans is usually 180 days for YTL-denominated loans and 360 days for FX-denominated loans. To qualify for a FTC loan, in addition to submitting the necessary application documents, a company must provide a bank letter of guarantee, equivalent to the loan's principal and interest amount. 8 An SFTC is a grouping of small- and medium-sized companies that operate together in a similar sector. Istikbal, whose FTCC status was renewed in March 2005, was the only Borusan company to receive FTC credits during the POR. Istikbal paid interest against FTC loans denominated in Turkish Lira. Consistent with previous determinations, we preliminarily find that these loans confer a countervailable subsidy within the meaning of section 771(5) of the Act. *See* , *e.g.* , *2004 Pipe Memorandum* at “Foreign Trade Companies Short-Term Export Credits” under “Programs Determined To Be Countervailable.” The loans constitute a financial contribution in the form of a direct transfer of funds from the GOT, under section 771(5)(D)(i) of the Act. A benefit exists under section 771(5)(E)(ii) of the Act in the amount of the difference between the payments of interest that Istikbal made on its loans during the POR and the payments the company would have made on comparable commercial loans. The program is also specific in accordance with section 771(5A)(B) of the Act because receipt of the loans is contingent upon export performance. Further, the FTC loans are not tied to a particular export destination. Therefore, we have treated this program as an untied export loan program which renders it countervailable regardless of whether the loans were used for exports to the United States. *See id.* Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.505(a)(1), we have calculated the benefit as the difference between the payments of interest that Istikbal made on its FTC loans during the POR and the payments the company would have made on comparable commercial loans. 9 In accordance with section 771(6)(A) of the Act, we subtracted from the benefit amount the fees which Istikbal paid to commercial banks for the required letters of guarantee. We then divided the resulting benefit by Borusan's total export value for 2005. On this basis, we preliminarily find that the net countervailable subsidy for this program is 0.01 percent *ad valorem.* 9 *See* “Benchmark Interest Rates,” *supra* , (discussing the benchmark rates used in these preliminary results). C. Pre-Export Credits This program is similar to the FTC credit program described above; however, companies classified as either FTC or SFTC are not eligible for pre-export loans. Under the pre-export credit program, a company's past export performance is considered in evaluating a company's eligibility and establishing the company's credit limit. Like FTC loans, the Export Bank directly extends to companies pre-export loans, which are denominated in either Turkish Lira or foreign currency and have a maximum maturity of 360 and 540 days, respectively. 10 To quality for a pre-export loan, in addition to submitting the necessary application documents, a company must provide a bank letter of guarantee, equivalent to the loan's principal and interest amount. During the POR, BMB paid interest against pre-export loans that were denominated in both Turkish Lira and U.S. dollars. 10 The Export Bank also sets the interest rates for this export loan program. Consistent with previous determinations, we preliminarily find that these loans confer a countervailable subsidy within the meaning of section 771(5) of the Act. *See* , *e.g.* , *2004 Pipe Memorandum* at “Pre-Export Credits” under “Programs Determined To Be Countervailable.” The loans constitute a financial contribution in the form of a direct transfer of funds from the GOT, under section 771(5)(D)(i) of the Act. A benefit exists under section 771(5)(E)(ii) of the Act in the amount of the difference between the payments of interest that BMB made on its loans during the POR and the payments the company would have made on comparable commercial loans. The program is also specific in accordance with section 771(5A)(B) of the Act because receipt of the loans is contingent upon export performance. Further, like the FTC loans, these loans are not tied to a particular export destination. Therefore, we have treated this program as an untied export loan program rendering it countervailable regardless of whether the loans were used for exports to the United States. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.505(a)(1), we have calculated the benefit as the difference between the payments of interest that BMB made on its pre-export loans during the POR and the payments the company would have made on comparable commercial loans. 11 In accordance with section 771(6)(A) of the Act, we subtracted from the benefit amount the fees which BMB paid to commercial banks for the required letters of guarantee. We then divided the resulting benefit by Borusan's total export value for 2005. On this basis, we preliminarily find that the net countervailable subsidy for this program is 0.01 percent *ad valorem.* 11 *See* “Benchmark Interest Rates,” *supra* (discussing the benchmark rates used in these preliminary results). II. Program Preliminary Determined To Not Confer Countervailable Benefits A. Inward Processing Certificate Exemption Under the Inward Processing Certificate (“IPC”) 12 program, companies are exempt from paying customs duties and value added taxes (“VAT”) on raw material imports to be used in the production of exported goods. Companies may choose whether to be exempted from the applicable duties and taxes or have them refunded upon export. Under the exemption system, companies provide a letter of guarantee that is returned to the companies upon fulfillment of the committed export. 12 The IPC program is governed by the following Turkish provisions: Customs Code No. 4458 (Articles 80, 108, 111, 115, and 121), IPC Council of Ministers' Decree No. 2005/8391, and Communique of IPR No. Export 2005/1. To participate in this program, a company must hold an IPC, which lists the amount of raw materials to be imported and the amount of product to be exported. There are two types of IPCs: A D-1 certificate and D-3 certificate. During the POR, Borusan utilized D-1 certificates associated with imports of raw materials for use in the production of carbon steel pipe and tube. Borusan did not utilize any D-3 certificates during the POR. 13 13 For more information on D-3 certificates, *see 2004 Pipe Memorandum,* at “Inward Processing Certificate Exemption” under “Programs Determined To Not Confer Countervailable Benefits,” and GOT's Questionnaire Response, at 45-48 (July 14, 2006). An IPC specifies the maximum quantity of inputs that can be imported under the program. Under the IPC program, the value of imported inputs may not exceed the value of the exported products. Input/output usage rates listed on an IPC are set by the GOT working in conjunction with Turkey's Exporter Associations, which are quasi-governmental organizations, whose leadership are subject to GOT approval. The input/output usage rates vary by product and industry and are determined using data from capacity reports submitted by companies that apply for IPCs. The input/output usage rates are subject to periodic review and verification by the GOT. The GOT uses the input/output usage rates to ensure that a company's expected export quantities are sufficient to cover the quantity of inputs imported duty-free under the program. 14 14 For more information on how waste/usage rates are set by the GOT, *see 2004 Pipe Memorandum,* at “Inward Processing Certificate Exemption” under “Programs Determined To Not Confer Countervailable Benefits” and GOT's Questionnaire Response, at Exhibit 5, pages 10-11 (July 14, 2006). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.519(a)(1)(ii), a benefit exists to the extent that the exemption extends to inputs that are not consumed in the production of the exported product, making normal allowances for waste, or if the exemption covers charges other than imported charges that are imposed on the input. In regard to the VAT exemption granted under this program, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.517(a), in the case of the exemption upon export of indirect taxes, a benefit exists to the extent that the Department determines that the amount exempted exceeds the amount levied with respect to the production and distribution of like products when sold for domestic consumption. In the *2004 Pipe Final,* the Department found that, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.519(a)(4)(i), the GOT has a system in place to confirm which inputs are consumed in the production of the exported product and in what amounts, and that the system is reasonable for the purposes intended. *See 2004 Pipe Memorandum,* at “Inward Processing Certificate Exemption” under “Programs Determined To Not Confer Countervailable Benefits.” During the POR, under D-1 certificates, Borusan received duty and VAT exemptions on certain imported inputs used in the production of steel pipes and tubes and not duty or VAT refunds. There is no evidence on the record of this review that indicates the amount of exempted inputs imported under the program were excessive or that Borusan used the imported inputs for any other product besides those exported. Therefore, consistent with the *2004 Pipe Final,* we preliminarily determine that the tax and duty exemptions, which Borusan received on imported inputs under D-1 certificates of the IPC program, did not confer countervailable benefits as Borusan consumed the imported inputs in the production of the exported product, making normal allowance for waste. We further preliminarily find that the VAT exemption did not confer countervailable benefits on Borusan because the exemption does not exceed the amount levied with respect to the production and distribution of like products when sold for domestic consumption. Further, because Borusan did not import any goods under a D-3 certificate during the POR, we preliminarily determine that this aspect of the IPC program was not used. III. Programs Preliminarily Determined To Not Be Used We examined the following programs and preliminarily determine that Borusan did not apply for or receive benefits under these programs during the POR: A. VAT Support Program (Incentive Premium on Domestically Obtained Goods) 15 . 15 Although we found this program to be terminated in *Wire Rod,* residual payments for purchases made prior to the program's termination were permitted. *See Wire Rod Memorandum,* at “VAT Support Program” under “Programs Determined To Be Countervailable.” B. Pre-Shipment Export Credits. C. Post-Shipment Export Loans. D. Pre-Shipment Rediscount Loans. E. Subsidized Turkish Lira Credit Facilities. F. Subsidized Credit for Proportion of Fixed Expenditures. G. Regional Subsidies. Preliminary Results of Review In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we have calculated a subsidy rate for Borusan for the period January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005. We preliminarily determine that the total net countervailable subsidy rate is 0.23 percent *ad valorem,* which is *de minimis* , pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c). The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review. If the final results remain the same as these preliminary results, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to countervailing duties all shipments of subject merchandise produced by Borusan entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005. The Department will also instruct CBP not to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties on all shipments of the subject merchandise produced by Borusan, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this review. We will also instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits for non-reviewed companies at the most recent company-specific or country-wide rate applicable to the company. Accordingly, the cash deposit rates that will be applied to companies covered by this order, but not examined in this review, are those established in the most recently completed administrative proceeding for each company. These rates shall apply to all non-reviewed companies until a review of a company assigned these rates is requested. Public Comment Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(b), the Department will disclose to parties to the proceeding any calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results within five days after the date of the public announcement of this notice. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309, interested parties may submit written comments in response to these preliminary results. Unless otherwise indicated by the Department, case briefs must be submitted within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to arguments raised in case briefs, must be submitted no later than five days after the time limit for filing case briefs, unless otherwise specified by the Department. Parties who submit argument in this proceeding are requested to submit with the argument:

(1)A statement of the issues, and

(2)a brief summary of the argument. Parties submitting case and/or rebuttal briefs are requested to provide the Department copies of the public version on disk. Case and rebuttal briefs must be served on interested parties in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f). Also, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310, within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice, interested parties may request a public hearing on arguments to be raised in the case and rebuttal briefs. Unless the Secretary specifies otherwise, the hearing, if requested, will be held two days after the date for submission of rebuttal briefs, that is, 37 days after the date of publication of these preliminary results. Representatives of parties to the proceeding may request disclosure of proprietary information under administrative protective order no later than 10 days after the representative's client or employer becomes a party to the proceeding, but in no event later than the date the case briefs, under 19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii), are due. *See* 19 CFR 351.305(b)(3). The Department will publish the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of arguments made in any case or rebuttal briefs. This administrative review is issued and published in accordance with section 751(a)(1), 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: November 17, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-20008 Filed 11-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Institute of Standards and Technology National Construction Safety Team Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology, United States Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. SUMMARY: The National Construction Safety Team

(NCST)Advisory Committee (Committee), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), will meet via teleconference Thursday, December 14, 2006, from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. The meeting will be audio Webcast so that the public may listen to the meeting as it takes place. The primary purpose of this meeting is for the NCST Advisory Committee to discuss its annual report to the Congress and to discuss the status of the investigation of World Trade Center 7. The agenda may change to accommodate Committee business. The final agenda will be posted on the NIST Web site at *www.nist.gov/ncst.* DATES: The meeting will convene on December 14, at 9 a.m. and will adjourn at 11 a.m. The meeting will be conducted via teleconference. The live audio Webcast will be available to the public via a link on the NIST WTC Web site, *http://wtc.nist.gov.* ADDRESS: The meeting will be held via teleconference. A live audio Webcast of the meeting will be available via a link on the NIST WTC Web site, *http://wtc.nist.gov.* Please refer to the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice for additional information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Cauffman, National Construction Safety Team Advisory Committee, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, MS 8611, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8611. Mr. Cauffman's e-mail address is *stephen.cauffman@nist.gov* and his phone number is

(301)975-6051. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee was established pursuant to Section 11 of the National Construction Safety Team Act (15 U.S.C. 7310 et seq.). The Committee is composed of seven members appointed by the Director of NIST who were selected for their technical expertise and experience, established records of distinguished professional service, and their knowledge of issues affecting teams established under the NCST Act. The Committee will advise the Director of NIST on carrying out investigations of building failures conducted under the authorities of the NCST Act that became law in October 2002 and will review the procedures developed to implement the NCST Act and reports issued under section 8 of the NCST Act. Background information on the NCST Act and information on the NCST Advisory Committee is available at *www.nist.gov/ncst.* Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app. 2, notice is hereby given that the National Construction Safety Team

(NCST)Advisory Committee (Committee), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), will meet Thursday, December 14, at 9 a.m. and will adjourn at 11 a.m. The meeting will be conducted by teleconference with a live audio Webcast available to the public. The primary purpose of this meeting is for the NCST Advisory Committee to discuss its annual report to the Congress and to discuss the status of the investigation of World Trade Center 7. The meeting will be conducted via teleconference with a live audio Webcast. The final agenda will be posted on the NIST Web site at *www.nist.gov/ncst.* Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions related to the Committee's affairs, or the WTC Investigation are invited to request a place on the agenda. Approximately one-half hour will be reserved for public comments, and speaking times will be assigned on a first-come, first-served basis. The amount of time per speaker will be determined by the number of requests received, but is likely to be 5 minutes each. Questions from the public will not be considered during this period. Speakers who wish to expand upon their oral statements, those who had wished to speak but could not be accommodated on the agenda, and those who were unable to attend in person are invited to submit written statements to the National Construction Safety Team Advisory Committee, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, MS 8611, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8611, via fax at

(301)975-6122, or electronically by e-mail to *ncstac@nist.gov.* Since the meeting will be held by teleconference, all those wishing to speak must submit their request by e-mail to the attention of Mr. Stephen Cauffman, *cauffman@nist.gov* by 5 p.m. EST on December 12, 2006. Instructions on how and when to call in for the public comment period will be provided to registered speakers by e-mail on December 13, 2006. Dated: November 16, 2006. James E. Hill, Deputy Director. [FR Doc. E6-20010 Filed 11-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-13-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Institute of Standards and Technology National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program Workshop for Laboratories Interested in the Personal Body Armor Testing Program AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology, Commerce. ACTION: Notice of Public Workshop. SUMMARY: The National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) will hold a public workshop on December 8, 2006, at the National Institute of Standards and Technology

(NIST)headquarters in Gaithersburg, MD. The purpose of the workshop is the exchange of information among NVLAP, the NIST Office of Law Enforcement Standards (OLES), the National Institute of Justice's

(NIJ)National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC), laboratories interested in seeking accreditation for the testing of personal body armor, and other interested parties. The results of the workshop discussions will be used in the development of the NVLAP Personal Body Armor Program. There is no charge for the workshop; however, because of security regulations, advance registration is mandatory. There will be no on-site, same-day registration. The registration deadline is Wednesday, December 6, 2006. Please note admittance instructions under the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice. DATES: The workshop will be held on Friday, December 8, 2006, from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. ADDRESSES: The workshop will be held in the Administration Building (Building 101), Lecture Room B, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hazel M. Richmond,

(301)975-3024, e-mail: *hazel.richmond@nist.gov.* The mailing address is 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 2140, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899-2140. Information regarding NVLAP and the accreditation process can be viewed at *http://www.nist.gov/nvlap.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In response to a request from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), National Institute of Justice

(NIJ)and Office of Science and Technology, the NIST National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) is considering establishing an accreditation program for laboratories that test ballistic- and stab-resistant body armor models. NVLAP accreditation criteria are established in accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR, title 15, Part 285), NVLAP Procedures and General Requirements. To be accredited by NVLAP, laboratories conducting testing of personal body armor will be required to meet ISO/IEC International Standard 17025, general requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories. In addition, for each new laboratory accreditation program (LAP), NVLAP works with the affected testing community to develop program-specific technical requirements. These requirements tailor the general accreditation criteria referenced in Sections 4 and 5 of the NIST Handbook 150 to the test and services in the new LAP. Program-specific requirements include the details of the scope of accreditation, test and measurement equipment, personnel requirements, validation of test methods, and reporting of test results. NVLAP accreditation does not imply any guarantee (certification) of laboratory performance or test/calibration data. NVLAP accreditation is a finding of laboratory competence. All visitors to the NIST site are required to pre-register to be admitted. Anyone wishing to attend this meeting must register by close of business Wednesday, December 6, 2006, in order to attend. Please submit your name, time of arrival, e-mail address and phone number to Hazel M. Richmond and she will provide you with instructions for admittance. Non-U.S. citizens must also submit their country of citizenship, title, employer/sponsor, and address. Ms. Richmond's e-mail address is *hazel.richmond@nist.gov* and her phone number is

(301)975-3024. Dated: November 16, 2006. James E. Hill, Acting Deputy Director. [FR Doc. E6-19958 Filed 11-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-13-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [I.D. 110206F] Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Final Green Diamond Resource Company Aquatic Habitat Conservation Plan/Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances, Del Norte and Humboldt Counties, CA AGENCIES: National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Commerce; Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the National Marine Fisheries Service

(NMFS)and the Fish and Wildlife Service

(FWS)(together, the Services) advise the public of the availability of the Final EIS on the applications by Simpson Resource Company, now Green Diamond Resource Company (Green Diamond), for a Section 10 incidental take permit and an enhancement of survival permit (together, the Permits), and a Final multi-species Aquatic Habitat Conservation Plan/ Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances (AHCP/CCAA, or Plan) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA). The Services and Green Diamond also have developed an Implementation Agreement. The applicant seeks the Permits to authorize incidental take of specified covered species, including some that may become listed during the term of the Permits. The Permits are sought to authorize incidental take of the covered species during forest management and timber harvest in Del Norte and Humboldt Counties, CA, where Green Diamond owns lands or harvesting rights, during the term of the proposed 50 year Permits and Plan. This notice is provided pursuant to applicable NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6) to inform the public of the proposed action, and to make available for 30 days' review the Final EIS, Plan, and Implementation Agreement. The Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA)also is publishing a similar notice. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 27, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent by any of the following methods: • Mail: Please sed comments to Mr. John Clancy, National Marine Fisheries Service, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, California 95521. • E-mail: Comments can be submitted by e-mail to *GDR.FEIS@noaa.gov* . • Fax: You may fax comments to

(707)822-8411. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Amedee Brickey, Fish and Wildlife Service, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521,

(707)822-7201; or Mr. John P. Clancy, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521,

(707)825-5175. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Availability of Documents Copies of the Final EIS, Plan, Applications for Permits and Implementation Agreement are available for public inspection during regular business hours at the Arcata National Marine Fisheries Office and Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ). The documents can also be downloaded from the World Wide Web at *http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov* . Copies are also available for viewing in each of the following libraries: 1. Eureka Main Library, 1313 3rd Street, Eureka, CA; Telephone:

(707)269-1900 2. Fortuna Branch, Humboldt County Library, 775 14th Street, Fortuna, CA; Telephone:

(707)725-3460 3. Arcata Branch, Humboldt County Library, 500 7th Street, Arcata, CA; Telephone:

(707)822-5924 4. Crescent City Library, 190 Price Mall, Crescent City, CA; Telephone:

(707)464-9793 Background Information Section 9 of the ESA and Federal regulation prohibit the taking of an animal species listed as endangered or threatened. The term “take” is defined under the ESA to mean harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. “Harm” has been defined by FWS to include “significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, and sheltering.” Consistent with FWS, NMFS has defined “harm” as an act which actually kills or injures fish or wildlife, and emphasizes that such acts may include “significant habitat modification or degradation which actually kills or injures fish or wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, spawning, rearing, migrating, feeding, or sheltering.” The Services may issue two types of permits under section 10(a) of the ESA to non-federal landowners to take listed species, under certain terms and conditions. FWS' regulations governing permits for threatened and endangered species are promulgated at 50 CFR 17.32 and 50 CFR 17.22; NMFS' regulations governing permits for threatened and endangered species are promulgated at 50 CFR 222.307. Green Diamond has prepared their Plan to satisfy the application requirements for a section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit under the ESA for, listed and non-listed, covered species under the jurisdiction of NMFS. Green Diamond's Plan was also prepared to satisfy the application requirements for a section 10(a)(1)(A) enhancement of survival permit under the ESA for non-listed covered species under the jurisdiction of the FWS. Though the names of these two permitting tools are different, the goals are similar, and the strategies for achieving those goals can overlap. Green Diamond's conservation strategy was designed to fulfill section 10(a)(1)(A) and section 10(a)(1)(B) permit requirements in a single Plan. If the Plan is approved and the Permits issued, take authorization of covered listed species would be effective at the time of permit issuance. Take of the currently non-listed species would be authorized concurrent with species' listing under the ESA, should they be listed during the duration of the Permits. Green Diamond owns and manages approximately 439,000 acres of commercial timberland in Del Norte and Humboldt Counties, CA. Approximately 417,000 acres of this property occurs in watersheds with habitat important to the conservation of salmonid species in the North Coast region of California, including, but not limited to, the Winchuck River, Smith River, Klamath River and its tributaries, Redwood Creek, Little River, Mad River, tributaries to Humboldt Bay, Eel River, the Van Duzen River and others. Some forest management and timber harvest activities have the potential to impact species subject to protection under the ESA. Green Diamond has developed a Plan, with technical assistance from the Services, to obtain Permits for take incidental to specified covered activities on approximately 417,000 acres of its commercial timberlands. Activities proposed for Permit coverage include the following: timber-product harvest; forest product transportation; road and landing construction, use, maintenance and decommissioning; site preparation; tree planting; silvicultural thinning; controlled burns; rock quarries and borrow pit operations; aquatic habitat restoration; and the management, harvest, and sale of minor forest products. The Plan also covers certain monitoring activities and related scientific experiments in the Plan area. The proposed duration of the Plan is 50 years. Green Diamond seeks a section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit from NMFS that would authorize the take of fish in two Evolutionarily Significant Units

(ESUs)and one Distinct Population Segment (DPS), which are listed as threatened, incidental to otherwise lawful management activities: California Coastal Chinook salmon ( *Oncorhynchus tshawytscha* ) ESU, Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon ( *O. kisutch* ) ESU, and Northern California steelhead ( *O. mykiss* ) DPS. Green Diamond also is seeking coverage of fish in three unlisted ESUs (Klamath Mountains Province steelhead ESU, Upper Klamath/Trinity Rivers Chinook salmon ESU, and Southern Oregon and Northern California Coastal Chinook salmon ESU) under specific provisions of the incidental take permit, should these species be listed in the future. Green Diamond also has requested a section 10(a)(1)(A) enhancement of survival permit from FWS that would authorize the take of the non-listed coastal cutthroat trout ( *O. clarki clarki* ), rainbow trout ( *O. mykiss* ), southern torrent salamander ( *Rhyacotriton variegatus* ), and tailed frog (Ascaphus truei) under specific provisions of the enhancement of survival permit, should these species be listed in the future. On July 11, 2000, the Services formally initiated an environmental review of the project through a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS in the **Federal Register** (65 FR 42674). The project proponent was Simpson Timber Company. In December of 2001, Simpson Timber Company transferred all of its timberlands to Simpson Resource Company, and Simpson Resource Company became the project proponent. The Notice of Intent also announced a 30-day public scoping period, during which other agencies, tribes, and the public were invited to provide comments and suggestions regarding issues and alternatives to be included in the EIS. Four public scoping meetings were held over a two-day period on July 11 and July 12, 2000, in Eureka and Crescent City, California, and a series of six informational meetings with cooperating agencies and local tribal groups also were held in August and September 2000. On August 16, 2002, the Services published a Notice of Availability of the Draft Simpson Resource Company Aquatic Habitat Conservation Plan/Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances and Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Del Norte and Humboldt Counties, California in the **Federal Register** (67 FR 53567). The public review period was scheduled for 90 days from August 16, 2002, to November 14, 2002. Two public meetings were held on September 4, 2002, in Eureka, California. A total of 20 oral questions and comments were received from two public meetings, and 25 comment letters were received, comprising 1,267 separate comments. A response to each of these comments is included in the Final EIS. Effective May 1, 2004, Simpson Resource Company, the project proponent, changed its name to Green Diamond Resource Company, and the Final EIS reflects that change. The Final EIS is intended to accomplish the following: Inform the public of the proposed action and alternatives; disclose the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects of the proposed action and each of the alternatives; and indicate any irreversible commitment of resources that would result from implementation of the proposed action. Alternatives The Final EIS analyzes Green Diamond's proposal and four alternatives. Under the Proposed Action, the Services would issue the Permits and Green Diamond would implement their proposed Plan on approximately 417,000 acres of Green Diamond 's California timberlands. Under the No Action Alternative, Permits would not be issued and Green Diamond would remain subject to the prohibition on unauthorized taking of listed species. Under a Listed Species Only Alternative (Alternative A), the Services would issue Permits only for currently listed species. The Simplified Prescriptions Alternative (Alternative B) would provide coverage for the same species as the Proposed Action, with modified management obligations. The Expanded Species/Geographic Area Alternative (Alternative C) would expand the area of coverage and the number of species covered under the Permits. National Environmental Policy Act Proposed permit issuance triggers the need for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)and accordingly the Services have prepared a joint NEPA document. The Services are Co-Leads responsible for compliance under NEPA. As NEPA Co-Lead agencies, the Services are providing notice of the availability of the Final EIS and are making available for public review the responses to comments on the Draft EIS. Public Review The Services invite the public to review the Final EIS, Plan, and Implementing Agreement during a 30-day waiting period [see DATES]. Any comments received, including names and addresses, will become part of the administrative records and may be made available to the public. Our practice is to make comments, including names, home addresses, home phone numbers, and email addresses of respondents, available for public review. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their names and /or homes addresses, etc., but if you wish us to consider withholding this information you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. In addition, you must present a rationale for withholding this information. This rationale must demonstrate that disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy. Unsupported assertions will not meet this burden. In the absence of exceptional, documentable circumstances, this information will be released. We will always make submissions from organization or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives of or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety. The Services will evaluate the application, associated documents, and comments submitted to them in preparation of the two Records of Decision. Permit decisions will be made no sooner than 30 days after the publication of the Final EIS and completion of the Records of Decision. This notice is provided pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal ESA and the applicable regulations for implementing NEPA, as amended (40 CFR 1506.6). We provide this notice in order to allow the public, agencies, or other organizations the opportunity to review these documents. Dated: November 16, 2006. Angela Somma, Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. Dated: November 7, 2006. Ken McDermond, Deputy Operations Manager, California/Nevada Operations Office, Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento, California. [FR Doc. 06-9408 Filed 11-24-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 13

Traces to 13 documents

CFR