Notices. Notice; request for comment

11,480 words·~52 min read·/register/2007/05/07/07-2244

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

BILLING CODE 4310-K6-M AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT Notice of Meeting Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Voluntary Foreign Aid (ACVFA). *Date:* Wednesday, May 23, 2007 (9 a.m. to 3 p.m.) *Location:* National Press Club Ballroom, 529 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20045. Please note that this is the anticipated agenda and is subject to change. *ACVFA Working Groups:* The ACVFA has created three working groups to reflect the U.S. foreign assistance reforms framework:

Economic growth, governing justly and democratically, and implementation mechanisms. The working groups will present papers with recommendations and lessons learned. Following this, respondents from the foreign assistance community will provide feedback. In addition, the general public will be given the opportunity to provide comments and pose questions. The working groups' final recommendations will be made available on the ACVFA Web site after the public meeting: *http://www.usaid.gov/about_usaid/acvfa.* *Africom:* Rear Admiral Robert T.

Moeller, Special Assistant to the Commander of U.S. CENTCOM has been invited to speak on the new U.S. Command for Africa (Africom). The presentation will include a discussion of the Command's mandate and its ongoing relationship with USAID and partners in the field. Michael Hess, USAID's Assistant Administrator for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance will join the Admiral for the discussion and questions. *Keynote:* Acting Deputy Administrator James Kunder has been invited to address the ACVFA on USAID's mission in support of Transformational Diplomacy. *Appreciation:* Benjamin Homan will be recognized for his service as Chairman of the ACVFA from August 2005 to December 2006.

The meeting is free and open to the public. Persons wishing to attend the meeting can register online at *http://www.usaid.gov/about_usaid/acvfa* or contact Ellen Blankenstein at *ellen@websterconsulting.com* or 202-237-0090 extension 19 or Jocelyn Rowe at *jrowe@usaid.gov* or 202-712-4002. Dated: April 30, 2007. Jocelyn M. Rowe, Executive Director, Advisory Committee on Voluntary Foreign Aid (ACVFA), U.S. Agency for International Development. [FR Doc. E7-8667 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6116-01-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Information Collection;

Homeowner Response to Wildfire Hazard Mitigation Incentives: What Works and What Doesn't AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice; request for comment. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Forest Service is seeking comments from all interested individuals and organizations on a new information collection, Homeowner Response to Wildfire Hazard Mitigation Incentives: What Works and What Doesn't. DATES: Comments must be received in writing on or before July 6, 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 Lynne M. Westphal, PhD, Project Leader & Research Social Scientist Natural Environments for Urban Populations, Northern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 1033 University Place, Ste 360, Evanston, IL 60201. Comments also may be submitted via facsimile to 847-866-9506 or by e-mail to: *lwestphal@fs.fed.us.* The public may inspect comments received at Northern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 1033 University Place, Ste 360, Evanston, IL during normal business hours.

Visitors are encouraged to call ahead to 847-866-9311 to facilitate entry to the building. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynne M. Westphal, PhD, Project Leader & Research Social Scientist Natural Environments for Urban Populations, Northern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 847-866-9311 extension 11. Individuals who use TDD may call the Federal Relay Service

(FRS)at 1-800-877-8339, 24 hours a day, every day of the year, including holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title* : Homeowner Response to Wildfire Hazard Mitigation Incentives: What Works and What Doesn't. *OMB Number:* 0596-NEW. *Type of Request:* New. *Abstract* : The cost of protecting private property in areas near public forests, the wildland-urban interface (WUI), is growing rapidly. Rising costs are largely due to efforts of the Forest Service and other Federal agencies to protect private property, even when the fires pose little threat to public land. The Forest Service would like to find ways to help local communities share responsibility for community fire protection. Some local communities have programs designed to encourage homeowners to create fire-safe landscapes. In this way, these communities and homeowners help protect private property. The Forest Service is requesting Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)approval to study a range of current community programs designed to encourage homeowner participation in wildfire protection. Researchers will collect information from community residents living in high-risk wildfire areas in four communities: Grand Haven, Michigan; Ruidoso, New Mexico; Larimer County, Colorado; and Oakland, California. These sites were chosen based on differences in defensible space policy approaches and wildfire risk levels. Two researchers (one from a university and one from the Forest Service Northern Research Station) will analyze the data collected. These researchers are experts in applied social psychology and survey research. A random sample of homeowners who live in high-risk wildfire areas in the four communities will be mailed survey questionnaires. The homeowners will be told that the participation in the survey is voluntary. Participating homeowners will first complete a questionnaire, sharing perceptions and beliefs about the local wildfire hazard and local government response. Specifically, homeowners will be asked about their knowledge and understanding of local wildfire programs, their own efforts to protect their homes from wildfires, and reasons why they do or do not comply with local wildfire guidelines and laws. In addition, homeowners will be asked for their opinions about the risk of wildfires and the effectiveness and fairness of local wildfire protection programs and programs used by other communities. This information will assist the Forest Service in its efforts to implement the Healthy Forest Restoration Act by supporting development of Community Wildfire Protection Plans as required under this Act (Pub. L. 108-148). The Agency will use the collected information to help communities develop wildfire protection programs most appropriate for local conditions. Development of programs by local homeowners may increase local support, participation, and compliance with the programs. Local community and homeowner participation in wildfire protection activities are critical components of a comprehensive strategy to protect private property. *Estimate of Annual Burden:* 15 minutes. *Type of Respondents:* Individuals. *Estimated Annual Number of Respondents:* 2,000. *Estimated Annual Number of Responses per Respondent:* 1. *Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents:* 500 hours. 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 or scientific 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 request for Office of Management and Budget approval. Dated: May 1, 2007. Ann M. Bartuska, Deputy Chief, Research and Development. [FR Doc. E7-8704 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Business-Cooperative Service Notice of Request for Extension of a Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY: Rural Business-Cooperative Service, USDA. ACTION: Proposed collection; comments requested. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Rural Business-Cooperative Service's

(RBS)intention to request an extension for a currently approved information collection in support of the program for 7 CFR Part 4284, subpart G. DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by July 6, 2007 to be assured of consideration. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Mason, Loan Specialist, Rural Business-Cooperative Service, USDA, STOP 3225, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250, Telephone:

(202)690-1433. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Rural Business Opportunity Grants. *OMB Number:* 0570-0024. *Expiration Date of Approval:* October 31, 2007. *Type of Request:* Extension of a currently approved information collection. *Abstract:* The objective of the Rural Business Opportunity Grant

(RBOG)program is to promote sustainable economic development in rural areas. This purpose is achieved through grants made by the RBS to public and private non-profit organizations and cooperatives to pay costs of economic development planning and technical assistance for rural businesses. The regulations contain various requirements for information from the grant applicants and recipients. The information requested is necessary for RBS to be able to process applications in a responsible manner, make prudent program decisions, and effectively monitor the grantees' activities to ensure that funds obtained from the Government are used appropriately. Objectives include gathering information to identify the applicant, describe the applicant's experience and expertise, describe the project and how the applicant will operate it, and other material necessary for prudent Agency decisions and reasonable program monitoring. *Estimate of Burden:* Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 9 hours per response. *Respondents:* Non-profit corporations, public agencies, and cooperatives. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 248. *Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent:* 8. *Estimated Number of Responses:* 1863. *Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents:* 17,104. Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Cheryl Thompson, Regulations and Paperwork Management Branch, Support Services Division at

(202)692-0043. Comments Comments are invited on:

(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of RBS, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of RBS' estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to Cheryl Thompson, Regulations and Paperwork Management Branch, Support Services Division, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, STOP 0742, Washington, DC 20250. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record. Dated: April 27, 2007. Jackie J. Gleason, Administrator, Rural Business-Cooperative Service. [FR Doc. E7-8636 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-XY-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Business-Cooperative Service Maximum Dollar Amount on Awards Under the Rural Economic Development Loan and Grant Program for Fiscal Year 2007; Correction AGENCY: Rural Business-Cooperative Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice; correction. SUMMARY: The Rural Business-Cooperative Service

(RBS)published a document in the **Federal Register** of Friday, December 8, 2006, [71 FR 71128] concerning the announcement of the maximum dollar amount under the Rural Economic Development Loan and Grant Program (REDLG). This document announces the actual amount available and the expanded eligibility requirements. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Mason, Loan Specialist, USDA Rural Development, STOP 3225, Room 6866, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-3225. Telephone:

(202)690-1433, FAX:

(202)720-2213. Correction In the **Federal Register** of December 8, 2006, in FR Doc. E6-20871, on page 71128, in the third column, correct the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION caption to read: RBS published a Notice of Funds Availability

(NOFA)on December 8, 2006. Based on the Revised Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (2007 Appropriation), (Public Law 110-5), the total amount available for zero-interest loans is $24,752,477. As stated in the NOFA, the maximum loan and grant awards pursuant to 7 CFR 1703.28 is 3.0 percent of the program level rounded to the nearest $10,000, but no less than $200,000. Thus, the maximum dollar amount available per loan is $740,000. Total amount available for grants is $10,000,000. Thus, the maximum amount available per grant is $300,000. Additionally, the 2007 Appropriation continued the REDLG eligibility requirements implemented in FY 2006. Therefore, an organization is considered to be eligible to participate in the REDLG program if it can be described as: 1. Any former Rural Utilities Service borrower that has repaid or prepaid an insured, direct, or guaranteed loan under the Rural Electrification Act; 2. Any not-for-profit utility that is eligible to receive an insured or direct loan under such act; or 3. Any borrower under such act. The Regulations for these programs are at 7 CFR part 1703, subpart B. The maximum loan and grant awards are determined in accordance with 7 CFR 1703.28. The maximum loan and grant awards are calculated at 3.0 percent of the projected program levels, rounded to the nearest $10,000; however, as specified in 7 CFR 1703.28(b), regardless of the projected total amount that will be available, the maximum size may not be lower than $200,000. The projected program level during FY 2007 for zero-interest loans is $25,215,484.47, and the projected level for grants is $10,000,000. Applying the 3.0 percent to the program level for loans, rounded to the nearest $10,000, results in a projected maximum loan award of $740,000. Applying the specified 3.0 percent to the program level for grants results in an amount higher than $200,000. Therefore, the projected grant award for FY 2007 is $300,000. Dated: May 1, 2007. Jackie J. Gleason, Administrator, Rural Business-Cooperative Service. [FR Doc. E7-8682 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-XY-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). *Agency:* Office of the Secretary, Office of Civil Rights (OCR). *Title:* Reasonable Accommodation for Employees and Applicants with Disabilities. *Form Number(s):* CD-575. *OMB Approval Number:* 0690-0022. *Type of Request:* Regular submission. *Burden Hours:* 17. *Number of Respondents:* 100. *Average Hours per Response:* 10 minutes. *Needs and Uses:* Under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, Federal agencies must provide reasonable accommodation (such as an interpreter, reader, assistive technology, etc.) to qualified applicants and employees with disabilities. The information collected will ensure that reasonable accommodation requests are processed in a fair, timely, and equitable manner. *Affected Public:* Federal government, and individual or households. *Frequency:* On occasion. *Respondent's Obligation:* Required to obtain or retain benefits. *OMB Desk Officer:* David Rostker,

(202)395-3897. Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained by calling or writing Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer,

(202)482-0266, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at *dHynek@doc.gov* ). Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to David Rostker, OMB Desk Officer, FAX number

(202)395-7258 or via the Internet at *David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov* . Dated: May 1, 2007. Gwellnar Banks, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E7-8628 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-BP-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). *Agency:* National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). *Title:* Evaluation of Whole-Body Detector Response of Virtual Gamma-Ray System—Administered Radioactive Material. *Form Number(s):* None. *OMB Approval Number:* None. *Type of Request:* Regular submission. *Burden Hours:* 5. *Number of Respondents:* 50. *Average Hours Per Response:* 6 minutes. *Needs and Uses:* This collection of information is necessary to allow Investigators to make the appropriate corrections to relate the radioactivity measured to the content in the volunteer at the time of the measurement. The project will evaluate the system's response to a variety of body geometries, and relate the system's response to handheld *in vivo* gamma-ray detectors readings that would be used during radiological emergency response. Physical parameters of the volunteers such as height, weight will be needed to assess the correlation with counting response that is expected to have uncertainties as large as 50 percent. It is an objective of the project to provide guidance to the radiological consequence management community to better be able to estimate internal contamination of exposed people, and make decisions of their care. *Affected Public:* Federal government, and individual or households. *Frequency:* Annually. *Respondent's Obligation:* Voluntary. *OMB Desk Officer:* Jasmeet Seehra,

(202)395-3123. Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained by calling or writing Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer,

(202)482-0266, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at *dHynek@doc.gov* ). Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to Jasmeet Seehra, OMB Desk Officer, Fax number

(202)395-5806 or via the Internet at *Jasmeet_K._Seehra@omb.eop.gov* . Dated: May 1, 2007. Gwellnar Banks, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E7-8631 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-13-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Submission for OMB Review: Comment Request The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. *Bureau:* International Trade Administration (ITA). *Title:* International Buyer Program: Application and Exhibitor Data Form. *Agency Form Number:* ITA-4014P and ITA-4102P. *OMB Number:* 0625-0151. *Type of Request:* Regular submission. *Burden Hours:* 1,400. *Number of Respondents:* 7,250. *Average Hours per Response:* 3 hours and 10 minutes. *Needs and Uses:* The International Trade Administration's International Buyer Program

(IBP)encourages international buyers to attend selected domestic trade shows in high export potential industries and to facilitate contact between U.S. exhibitors and foreign visitors. The program has been successful, having substantially increased the number of foreign visitors attending these selected shows as compared to the attendance when not supported by the program. The number of shows selected to the program increased from 28 in FY 2001 to 32 in FY 2004 and will increase to 36 in 2007. Among the criteria used to select these shows are: Protection of intellectual property rights, export potential, international interest, scope of show, stature of show, exhibitor interest, overseas marketing, logistics, and cooperation of show organizers. Form ITA-4014P, Exhibitor Data, is used to determine which U.S. firms are interested in meeting with international business visitors and the overseas business interest of the exhibitors. The exhibitor data form is completed by U.S. exhibitors participating in an IBP domestic trade show and is used to list the firm and its U.S.-made products in an Export Interest Directory, which is distributed worldwide for use by Foreign Commercial Officers in recruiting delegations of international buyers to attend the show. The Form ITA-4102P, Application, is used by a potential show organizer to provide

(1)his/her experience,

(2)ability to meet the special conditions of the IBP, and

(3)information about the domestic trade show such as the number of U.S. exhibitors and the percentage of net exhibit space occupied by U.S. companies vis-a-vis non-U.S. exhibitors. *Affected Public:* Business or other for profit organizations, and not-for-profit institutions. *Frequency:* On occasion. *Respondent's Obligation:* Required to obtain or retain a benefit, voluntary. *OMB Desk Officer:* David Rostker,

(202)395-3897. Copies of the above information collection can be obtained by calling or writing Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer,

(202)482-0266, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th & Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. E-mail: *dHynek@doc.gov* . Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of the publication of this notice to David Rostker, OMB Desk Officer, via the Internet *David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov* or Fax

(202)395-7285. Dated: May 1, 2007. Gwellnar Banks, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E7-8632 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-FP-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Census Bureau Generic Clearance for Customer Satisfaction Research ACTION: Proposed collection; comment request. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before July 6, 2007. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at *dHynek@doc.gov* ). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument(s) and instructions should be directed to Joanne C. Dickinson, 301-763-4094, U.S. Census Bureau, HQ-8H187, Washington, DC 20233-0800 (or via the Internet at *joanne.dickinson@census.gov* ). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract The Census Bureau is requesting an extension of the generic clearance to conduct customer satisfaction research which may be in the form of mailed or electronic questionnaires and/or focus groups, telephone interviews, or personal interviews. The Census Bureau has ranked a customer-focused environment as one of its most important strategic planning objectives. The Census Bureau routinely needs to collect and analyze customer feedback about its products and services to better align them to its customers' needs and preferences. Several programs, products, and distribution channels have been designed/redesigned based on feedback from its various customer satisfaction research efforts. Each research design is reviewed for content, utility, and user-friendliness by a variety of appropriate staff (including research design and subject-matter specialists). The concept and design are tested by internal staff and a select sample of respondents to confirm its appropriateness, user-friendliness, and to estimate burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information. Collection techniques are discussed and included in the research concept design discussion to define the most time-, cost-efficient and accurate collection media. The clearance operates in the following manner: a block of hours is reserved at the beginning of each year, and the particular activities that will be conducted under the clearance are not specified in advance. The Census Bureau provides information to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)about the specific activities on a flow basis throughout the year. OMB is notified of each activity in a letter that gives specific details about the activity, rather than by means of individual clearance packages. At the end of each year, a report is submitted to OMB that summarizes the number of hours used as well as the nature and results of the activities completed under the clearance. Some modifications of the clearance from previous years are planned. The number of burden hours will increase to 7,500 due to the anticipation of additional activities due to the 2010 Census. II. Method of Collection This research may be in the form of mailed or electronic questionnaires and/or focus groups, telephone interviews, or personal interviews. III. Data *OMB Number:* 0607-0760. *Form Number:* Various. *Type of Review:* Regular submission. *Affected Public:* Individuals or households, State or local governments, farms, business or other for-profit organizations, federal agencies or employees, and not-for-profit institutions. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 90,000. *Estimated Time Per Response:* 5 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 7,500. *Estimated Total Annual Cost:* There is no cost to respondents, except for their time to answer the questions. *Respondent's Obligation:* Voluntary. *Legal Authority:* Executive Order 12862. IV. Request for Comments Comments are invited on:

(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information;

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

(POR)October 4, 2004 through March 31, 2006. The review covers two respondents, PSC VSMPO-AVISMA Corporation (formerly known as JSC AVISMA Titianium-Magnesium Works, *see* “Successor-In-Interest” section below) and its affiliated U.S. reseller VSMPO-Tirus, U.S. Inc. (collectively Avisma), and Solikamsk Magnesium Works (SMW). The Department preliminarily determines that Avisma and SMW made sales to the United States at less than normal value (NV). If these preliminary results are adopted in the final results of this administrative review, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)to assess antidumping duties on entries of Avisma's and SMW's merchandise during the POR. The preliminary results are listed below in the section titled “Preliminary Results of Review.” EFFECTIVE DATE: May 7, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gene Calvert or Jun Jack Zhao, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-3586 or

(202)482-1396, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Department of Commerce (the Department) published the antidumping duty order on magnesium metal from the Russian Federation on April 15, 2005. *See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Magnesium Metal from the Russian Federation* , 70 FR 19930 (April 15, 2005) (Antidumping Duty Order). On April 3, 2006, the Department published in the **Federal Register** a notice of “Opportunity to Request Administrative Review” of the antidumping duty order on magnesium metal from the Russian Federation. *See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review* , 71 FR 16549 (April 3, 2006). On April 4, 2006 and April 6, 2006, respectively, Avisma and SMW, Russian producers of the subject merchandise, requested that the Department conduct an administrative review. On April 28, 2006, U.S. Magnesium Corporation LLC, petitioner, also requested that the Department conduct an administrative review of Avisma and SMW. On May 31, 2006, the Department published the notice of initiation of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on magnesium metal from the Russian Federation, for the period October 4, 2004, through March 31, 2006. 1 *See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part* , 71 FR 30864 (May 31, 2006). 1 The first administrative review covers approximately an 18-month period from the date of suspension of liquidation (generally the date the preliminary determination in the investigation was published) to the end of the month immediately preceding the anniversary month in which the review was requested. *See* 19 CFR 351.213(e)(1)(ii). On June 2, 2006, the Department issued sections A through E of the questionnaire to SMW. 2 SMW submitted its section A response on July 10, 2006, and submitted its sections B through D response on July 24, 2006. The Department issued a section A through D supplemental questionnaire on September 15, 2006, and SMW responded on October 19, 2006. On December 1, 2006, the Department issued a second section D supplemental questionnaire to SMW; SMW responded on December 29, 2006. Finally, on January 24, 2007, the Department issued a second section A through C supplemental questionnaire to SMW, and SMW responded on February 12, 2007. 2 Pursuant to section 733(d) of the Act and the expiration of so called "provisional measures," the Department instructed CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation on all shipments entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption on or after April 2, 2005, and to release any securities and refund any cash deposits on such entries. The Department instructed CBP to once again begin suspending liquidation and collecting securities or cash deposits effective April 15, 2005, the date the antidumping duty order on Russian magnesium metal was published in the Federal Register (70 FR 19930). Thus, there are no entries currently suspended or subject to assessment of antidumping duties during this 14-day period of the POR. On June 2, 2006, the Department issued sections A through D of the questionnaire to Avisma. Avisma submitted its section A questionnaire response on July 10, 2006, and submitted its responses to sections B through D on July 25, 2006. The Department issued a sections A through D supplemental questionnaire on September 15, 2006, and Avisma responded on October 18, 2006. On November 30, 2006, the Department issued a second section D supplemental questionnaire to Avisma; Avisma responded on December 29, 2006. On January 24, 2007, the Department issued a second sections A through C supplemental questionnaire to Avisma, and Avisma responded on February 14, 2007. Finally, on March 29, 2007, the Department issued a third section D supplemental questionnaire, and Avisma responded on April 12, 2007. On December 13, 2006, the Department extended the deadline for the preliminary results of this antidumping duty administrative review from December 31, 2006 to April 30, 2007. *See Notice of Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Magnesium Metal From the Russian Federation* , 71 FR 74897 (December 13, 2006). Period of Review This review covers the period October 4, 2004 through March 31, 2006. Scope of the Order The merchandise covered by this order is magnesium metal (also referred to as magnesium), which includes primary and secondary pure and alloy magnesium metal, regardless of chemistry, raw material source, form, shape, or size. Magnesium is a metal or alloy containing by weight primarily the element magnesium. Primary magnesium is produced by decomposing raw materials into magnesium metal. Secondary magnesium is produced by recycling magnesium-based scrap into magnesium metal. The magnesium covered by this order includes blends of primary and secondary magnesium. The subject merchandise includes the following pure and alloy magnesium metal products made from primary and/or secondary magnesium, including, without limitation, magnesium cast into ingots, slabs, rounds, billets, and other shapes, and magnesium ground, chipped, crushed, or machined into raspings, granules, turnings, chips, powder, briquettes, and other shapes:

(1)Products that contain at least 99.95 percent magnesium, by weight (generally referred to as “ultra-pure” magnesium);

(2)products that contain less than 99.95 percent but not less than 99.8 percent magnesium, by weight (generally referred to as “pure” magnesium); and

(3)chemical combinations of magnesium and other material(s) in which the magnesium content is 50 percent or greater, but less that 99.8 percent, by weight, whether or not conforming to an “ASTM Specification for Magnesium Alloy”. The scope of this order excludes:

(1)magnesium that is in liquid or molten form; and

(2)mixtures containing 90 percent or less magnesium in granular or powder form by weight and one or more of certain non-magnesium granular materials to make magnesium-based reagent mixtures, including lime, calcium metal, calcium silicon, calcium carbide, calcium carbonate, carbon, slag coagulants, fluorspar, nephaline syenite, feldspar, alumina (Al203), calcium aluminate, soda ash, hydrocarbons, graphite, coke, silicon, rare earth metals/mischmetal, cryolite, silica/fly ash, magnesium oxide, periclase, ferroalloys, dolomite lime, and colemanite. 3 3 This second exclusion for magnesium-based reagent mixtures is based on the exclusion for reagent mixtures in the 2000-2001 investigations of magnesium from China, Israel, and Russia. *See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Pure Magnesium in Granular Form From the People's Republic of China* , 66 FR 49345 (September 27, 2001); *Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Pure Magnesium From Israel* , 66 FR 49349 (September 27, 2001); *Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Not Less Than Fair Value: Pure Magnesium From the Russian Federation* , 66 FR 49347 (September 27, 2001). These mixtures are not magnesium alloys, because they are not chemically combined in liquid form and cast into the same ingot. The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable under items 8104.11.00, 8104.19.00, 8104.30.00, and 8104.90.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS item numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise covered by this order is dispositive. On November 9, 2006, in response to U.S. Magnesium's request for scope rulings, the Department issued final scope rulings in which we determined that the processing of pure magnesium ingots, imported from Russia by Timminco, a Canadian company, into pure magnesium extrusion billets constitutes substantial transformation. Therefore, such alloy magnesium extrusion billets produced and exported by Timminco are a product of Canada, and thus not included within the scope of the order. *See* November 9, 2006 Memorandum for Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, from Barbara E. Tillman, Director, Office 6, and Wendy Frankel, Director, Office 8, China/NME Group, AD/CVD Operations: *Pure Magnesium from the People's Republic of China (A-570-832), Magnesium Metal from the People's Republic of China (A-570-896), and Magnesium Metal from Russia (A-821-819): Final Ruling in the Scope Inquiry on Russian and Chinese Magnesium Processed in Canada.* Succesor-In-Interest On July 1, 2005, JSC Avisma Titanium-Magnesium Works (ATMW), a respondent in the investigation, merged with VSMPO, a controlling shareholder in ATMW since 1998, forming PSC VSMPO-AVISMA (referred to throughout this notice as “Avisma”), the respondent in this review. Because entries have been made under the name of the new company during the POR, the Department must make a successorship determination in order to apply the appropriate and necessary company-specific cash deposit rates. In determining whether Avisma is the successor to ATMW for purposes of applying the antidumping duty law, the Department examines a number of factors including, but not limited to, changes in:

(1)Management,

(2)production facilities,

(3)suppliers, and

(4)customer base. *See, e.g., Brass Sheet and Strip from Canada; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 57 FR 20460 (May 13, 1992) *(Brass from Canada); Steel Wire Strand for Prestressed Concrete from Japan: Final Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 55 FR 28796 (July 13, 1990); and *Industrial Phosphoric Acid From Israel; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review* , 59 FR 6944 (February 14, 1994). While examining these factors alone will not necessarily provide a dispositive indication of succession, the Department will generally consider one company to have succeeded another if that company's operations are essentially inclusive of the predecessor's operations. *See Brass from Canada* . Thus, if the evidence demonstrates, with respect to the production and sale of the subject merchandise, that the new company is essentially the same business operation as the former company, the Department will assign the new company the cash deposit rate of its predecessor. The evidence on the record, particularly Avisma's response to our questionnaire specifically addressing its claimed successorship (Appendix III of the October 19, 2006 supplemental questionnaire response), demonstrates that, with respect to the production and sale of the subject merchandise, Avisma is the successor to ATMW. Specifically, the evidence shows that Avisma uses the same magnesium production facilities ( *id* . at 16), and the same customers and suppliers (except for VSMPO, which previously was both a customer and a supplier), as ATMW had ( *id* . at 16-17). We reviewed Avisma's organizational structure before and after the merger and confirmed that there were only minimal changes. *See id* . at Exhibit SA-6. Therefore, we preliminary find that Avisma is the successor to ATMW for purposes of this proceeding, and for the application of the antidumping law. Analysis Home Market Viability In order to determine whether there was a sufficient volume of sales in the home market to serve as a viable basis for calculating NV ( *i.e.* , the aggregate volume of home market sales of the foreign like product is five percent or more of the aggregate volume of U.S. sales), we compared the volume of each respondent's home market sales of the foreign like product during the POR to the volume of U.S. sales of subject merchandise during the POR. *See* section 773(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Based on this comparison, we determined for both Avisma and SMW that the quantity of sales in the home market exceeded five percent of their sales of magnesium to the United States. *See* 19 CFR 351.404(b). Product Comparisons In accordance with section 771(16)(A) of the Act, we considered all products produced by respondents that are covered by the description in the “Scope of the Order” section, above, and that were sold in the home market during the POR, to be foreign like products for purposes of determining appropriate product comparisons to U.S. sales. In accordance with sections 771(16)(B) and

(C)of the Act, where there were no sales of identical merchandise in the home market to compare to U.S. sales, we compared U.S. sales to the most similar foreign like product on the basis of the characteristics determined by the Department in the investigation to be the most appropriate for purposes of product matching. Date of Sale It is the Department's practice to use invoice date as the date of sale. However, 19 CFR 351.401(i) states that the Secretary may use a date other than the invoice date if the Secretary is satisfied that the material terms of the sale were established on some other date. *See Allied Tube and Conduit Corp. v. United States* , 127 F. Supp. 2d 207, 217-219 (CIT 2000). Both Avisma and SMW reported invoice date as the date of sale for all sales in both markets, consistent with our conclusions in the investigation regarding both spot sales and sales made according to short- and long-term agreements. *See Magnesium Metal from the Russian Federation: Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value* , 70 FR 9041 (February 24, 2005), and accompanying *Issues and Decision Memorandum* at *Comment 14* . After analyzing the responses of both parties and the sample sales documents provided, we preliminarily determine that invoice date is the appropriate date of sale for all sales under review. Export Price and Constructed Export Price In its questionnaire responses, Avisma identified all of its sales to the United States as constructed export price

(CEP)sales, except one, which it identified as an export price

(EP)sale. With the exception of that one EP sale, all of Avisma's sales are properly classified as CEP sales because they were made for the account of Avisma, by Avisma's U.S. affiliate, VSMPO-Tirus, U.S., Inc. (Tirus US), to unaffiliated purchasers in the United States. U.S. sales to the first unaffiliated party were made in the United States, by the U.S. affiliate, thus satisfying the Department's requirements for treating sales as CEP sales. *See* section 772(b) of the Act. Avisma and Tirus US are affiliated through common control. *See* section 771(33)(F) of the Act. In accordance with section 772(c)(2) of the Act, for Avisma's CEP sales and the single EP sale we made deductions from price for movement expenses and discounts, where appropriate. More specifically, after reviewing the terms of delivery for Avisma's sales to the United States, we deducted early payment discounts, Russian inland freight from plant to port, freight insurance, Russian brokerage, handling, and port charges, international freight and marine insurance, U.S. customs duties, U.S. brokerage, handling, and port charges, and U.S. warehousing and inland freight. Section 772(d)(1) of the Act provides for additional adjustments to calculate CEP. Accordingly, we deducted direct selling expenses and indirect selling expenses related to commercial activity in the United States. Pursuant to section 772(d)(3) of the Act, we made an adjustment for CEP profit. *See Analysis Memorandum for Magnesium Metal from the Russian Federation: PSC VSMPO-AVISMA Corporation* (April 30, 2007) ( *Avisma Analysis Memorandum* ). SMW identified all of its U.S. sales as CEP sales in its questionnaire responses. During the POR, all sales of SMW's subject merchandise to the United States were made through its U.S. affiliates, Solimin and Cometals. As in the investigation, we find that Cometals is affiliated with SMW by virtue of an agency agreement, in which Cometals acts as a North American distributor of pure and alloy magnesium products. *See* section 771(33)(G) of the Act; *see also Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Engineered Process Gas Turbo-Compressor Systems, Whether Assembled or Unassembled, and Whether Complete or Incomplete, from Japan* , 62 FR 24394, 24403 (May 5, 1997). We also find that Solimin is affiliated with SMW under section 771(33)(F) of the Act because it is wholly owned and controlled by SMW. All of SMW's sales are properly classified as CEP sales because they were made for the account of SMW, by SMW's U.S. affiliates, Solimin and Cometals, to unaffiliated purchasers in the United States. U.S. sales to the first unaffiliated party were made in the United States, by the U.S. affiliates, thus satisfying the Department's requirements for characterizing sales as CEP sales, pursuant to section 772(b) of the Act. In accordance with section 772(c)(2) of the Act, for SMW's CEP sales, we made deductions from U.S. price for movement expenses and billing adjustments, where appropriate. More specifically, after reviewing the terms of delivery for SMW's CEP sales to the United States, we deducted Russian inland freight from plant to port, Russian brokerage, handling, and port charges, international freight and insurance, U.S. brokerage, handling, and port charges, U.S. warehousing, U.S. customs duties, and U.S. inland freight. In accordance with section 772(d)(1) of the Act, we deducted direct selling expenses and indirect selling expenses related to commercial activity in the United States. Pursuant to section 772(d)(3) of the Act, we made an adjustment for CEP profit. *See Analysis Memorandum for Magnesium Metal from the Russian Federation: Solikamsk Magnesium Works* (April 30, 2007) ( *SMW Analysis Memorandum* ). Normal Value In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we have based NV on the price at which the foreign like product was first sold for consumption in the home market, in the usual commercial quantities, in the ordinary course of trade, and, to the extent practicable, at the same level of trade

(LOT)as the EP or CEP sale. *See* “Level of Trade” section below. Where appropriate, we determined NV for Avisma and SMW based on home market prices. We did not deduct home market movement expenses, pursuant to section 773(a)(6)(A) of the Act, as both respondents billed their customers separately for these expenses. For SMW, we deducted billing adjustments. As in the U.S. market, Avisma did not have billing adjustments, and neither company had discounts or rebates in the home market. For home market sales compared to Avisma's EP sale, we made circumstances of sale

(COS)adjustments for Avisma's transactions reflecting differences between direct selling expenses (credit expense) incurred on domestic (home market) and U.S. sales, in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.410. For home market sales compared to CEP sales, we only deducted domestic direct selling expenses from home market price, as U.S. direct selling expenses were deducted from U.S. price, as noted above. We also made adjustments for any differences in packing between domestic and U.S. sales, pursuant to section 773(a)(6)(B)(ii) of the Act, and any differences between the variable costs of the U.S. product and the matching home market product (the “DIFMER” adjustment), pursuant to section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.411. Section 773(a)(4) of the Act provides that, where NV cannot be based on comparison-market sales, NV may be based on constructed value (CV). Accordingly, for sales of magnesium for which we could not determine the NV based on comparison-market sales, either because there were no useable sales of a comparable product or all sales of the comparable products failed the sales-below-cost test, we based NV on CV. *See* “Cost of Production Analysis” section below. Section 773(e) of the Act provides that CV shall be based on the sum of the cost of materials and fabrication for the imported merchandise, plus amounts for selling, general, and administrative expenses (SG&A), interest expense, profit, and U.S. packing costs. We calculated the cost of materials and fabrication based on the methodology described in the “Cost of Production Analysis” section below. We based SG&A, interest expense, and profit on the actual amounts incurred and realized by Avisma and SMW in connection with the production and sale of the foreign like product in the ordinary course of trade for consumption in the comparison market, in accordance with section 773(e)(2)(A) of the Act. For Avisma's EP sale, we made adjustments to CV for differences in COS in accordance with sections 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) and 773(a)(8) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.410. For CV compared to CEP sales, we only deducted domestic direct selling expenses from home market price, as U.S. direct selling expenses were deducted from U.S. price, as noted above. Cost of Production Analysis In accordance with section 773(b)(3) of the Act, we calculated a weighted-average COP based on the sum of the cost of materials and fabrication for the foreign like product, plus amounts for the home market SG&A expenses, interest expense, and packing expenses. We relied on the COP data submitted by Avisma and SMW in their cost questionnaire responses, with the following changes. We relied upon Avisma's December 29, 2006 cost database, which incorporated the company's revised depreciation expense based on the revaluation of its fixed assets. We revised the reported general and administrative (G&A) and financial expense ratios to reflect the company's fiscal year, rather than the 18 months of the POR. Additionally, we included certain auxiliary services in the G&A expense ratio. *See* Memorandum to Neal M. Halper, Director, Office of Accounting, through Michael P. Martin, Lead Accountant, from Heidi Schriefer, Senior Accountant, *Cost of Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Preliminary Results for Magnesium Metal from the Russian Federation - PSC VSMPO-AVISMA Corporation* , dated concurrently with this notice. For SMW, we did not make any adjustments to the cost of production. Affiliated Party Transactions and Arm's-Length Test We used sales to affiliated customers in the home market only where we determined such sales were made at arm's-length prices ( *i.e.* , at prices comparable to the prices at which the respondent sold identical merchandise to unaffiliated customers). *See* 19 CFR 351.403(c). To test whether the sales to affiliates were made at arm's-length prices, the Department compares the unit prices of sales to affiliated and unaffiliated customers net of all movement charges, direct selling expenses, discounts and rebates, and packing. See id. In accordance with the Department's practice, if the prices charged to an affiliated party were, on average, between 98 and 102 percent of the prices charged to unaffiliated parties for merchandise identical or most similar to that sold to the affiliated party, we consider the sales to be at arm's-length prices. *See* 19 CFR 351.403(c); *Antidumping Proceedings: Affiliated Party Sales in the Ordinary Course of Trade* , 67 FR 69186 (November 15, 2002). Where the affiliated party transactions do not pass the arm's-length test, all sales to that affiliated party are excluded from the NV calculation. When the aggregate volume of the sales to these affiliates that do not pass the arm's-length test is more than 5 percent of total home market sales, we request downstream sales. *See* 19 CFR 351.403(d). As such, SMW provided downstream sales information for sales to its affiliate, Solikamsk Desulphurizer Works (SZD). For Avisma, all of its sales to affiliates that failed the arm's length test were consumed by the affiliates and incorporated into merchandise that is outside of the scope of the order. Thus, there were no downstream sales to report. Level Of Trade Section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act states that, to the extent practicable, the Department will calculate NV based on sales at the same LOT as the EP or CEP sale. Sales are made at different LOTs if they are made at different marketing stages (or their equivalent). *See* 19 CFR 351.412(c)(2). Substantial differences in selling activities are a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for determining that there is a difference in the stages of marketing. *Id.; see also Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate From South Africa* , 62 FR 61731, 61732 (November 19, 1997) ( *South African Plate Final* ). In order to determine whether the comparison sales were at different stages in the marketing process than the U.S. sales, we reviewed the distribution system in each market ( *i.e.* , the chain of distribution), 4 including selling functions, 5 class of customer (customer category), and the level of selling expenses for each type of sale. Pursuant to section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, in identifying levels of trade for EP and comparison market sales ( *i.e.* , NV based on either home market or third-country prices), we consider the starting prices before any adjustments. With respect to CEP sales, *Micron Technology, Inc. v. United States* , 243 F.3d 1301, 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2001), requires the Department to remove the selling activities set forth in section 772(d) of the Act from the CEP starting price prior to performing its LOT analysis. As such, for CEP sales, the U.S. LOT is based on the starting price of the sales, as adjusted under section 772(d) of the Act. When the Department is unable to match U.S. sales to sales of the foreign like product in the comparison market at the same LOT as the EP or CEP sale, the Department may compare the U.S. sale to sales at a different LOT in the comparison market. However, in this case, the Department preliminarily determines that only one LOT existed in both markets for each respondent, consistent with what the parties reported and with our determination in the investigation. (SMW reported two LOTs in the home market, but one LOT consisted exclusively of sales to an affiliate. These sales were disregarded after failing the arm's length test. The Department determines that the downstream sales reported by SMW are at the same level of trade as the rest of the home market because the functions being performed by the affiliate, SZD, are essentially the same as those performed by SMW.) For further details on the LOT analysis, *see Avisma Analysis Memorandum* and *SMW Analysis Memorandum* . Currency Conversion For purposes of the preliminary results, in accordance with section 773A of the Act, we made currency conversions based on the official exchange rates in effect on the dates of the U.S. sales as certified by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Preliminary Results of Review As a result of this review, we preliminarily find that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist: Manufacturer/Exporter Margin PSC VSMPO-AVISMA Corporation 2.34 % Solikamsk Magnesium Works 3.77 % Cash Deposit Requirements If these preliminary results are adopted in the final results of review, the following deposit requirements will be effective upon completion of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication of the final results of this administrative review, as provided in section 751(a)(1) of the Act: 1) the cash deposit rate for Avisma will be that established in the final results of this review; 2) the cash deposit rate for SMW will be that established in the final results of this review; 3) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not covered in this review, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; 4) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the less-than-fair-value

(LTFV)investigation, but the manufacturer is a firm covered in this review, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the subject merchandise; and 5) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or any previous proceeding conducted by the Department, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the “all others” rate established in the LTFV investigation, which is 21.01 percent. *See Antidumping Duty Order* . These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Duty Assessment Upon publication of the final results of this review, the Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), the Department calculates an assessment rate for each importer of the subject merchandise for each respondent. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we will calculate importer-specific *ad valorem* assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales and the total entered value of the examined sales. These rates will be assessed uniformly on all entries of the respective importers made during the POR if these preliminary results are adopted in the final results of review. The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review. The Department clarified its “automatic assessment” regulation on May 6, 2003. *See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 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 companies included in the final results of review for which the reviewed companies did not know that the merchandise it sold to the 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 all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediary involved in the transaction. *See Assessment Policy Notice* for a full discussion of this clarification. Public Comment Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(b), the Department will disclose to any party to the proceeding the calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results within five days after the date of publication of this notice. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309, interested parties may submit written comments in response to these preliminary results. Unless extended by the Department, case briefs are to be submitted within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to arguments raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the time limit for filing case briefs. Parties who submit arguments in this proceeding are requested to submit with the argument: 1) a statement of the issues; 2) a brief summary of the argument; and 3) a table of authorities. 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(c), 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. Parties will be notified of the time and location. The Department will publish the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of issues raised in any case brief, rebuttal brief, or hearing no later than 120 days after publication of these preliminary results, unless extended. *See* 19 CFR 351.213(h). Notification to Importers This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. The preliminary results of this administrative review and this notice are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: April 30, 2007. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-8688 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-580-825] Oil Country Tubular Goods, Other than Drill Pipe, from Korea: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: May 7, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Lindsay or Dara Iserson, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-0780 or

(202)482-4052, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On August 31, 2006, the Department of Commerce (the Department) received timely requests for an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on oil country tubular goods, other than drill pipe

(OCTG)from Korea, with respect to SeAH Steel Corporation, Husteel Co., Ltd, and Nexteel Co., Ltd. On September 29, 2006, the Department published a notice of initiation of this administrative review for the period of August 1, 2005 through July 31, 2006. See Notice of Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 71 FR 57465 (September 29, 2006). Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department shall issue preliminary results in 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 further provides, however, that the Department may extend that 245-day period to 365 days if it is not practicable to complete the review within the foregoing time period. The Department finds that it is not practicable to complete the preliminary results by the current deadline of May 3, 2007 because this is Nexteel Co., Ltd.'s first appearance under this antidumping duty order and additional time is needed to analyze this company's information. We have also requested additional information from the respondents and we will need more time to analyze the responses and issue any supplemental questionnaires, if necessary. Therefore, in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Department is extending the time limit for the preliminary results until no later than August 31, 2007, which is 365 days after the last day of the anniversary month of the date of publication of the order. Unless extended, the final results continue to be due 120 days after the publication of the preliminary results, pursuant to section 351.213(h) of the Department's regulations. This notice is issued and published in accordance to sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: April 30, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-8690 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; South Pacific Tuna Act AGENCY: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before July 6, 2007. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at *dHynek@doc.gov* ). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Raymond P. Clarke, National Marine Fisheries Service, 808-944-2205 or *raymond.clarke@noaa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract The Treaty on Fisheries Between the Governments of Certain Pacific Island States and the Government of the United States, signed in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea, in 1987, and its annexes, schedules and implementing agreements, as amended (Treaty), authorize U.S. tuna vessels to fish within fishing zones of a large region of the Pacific Ocean. The South Pacific Tuna Act (16 U.S.C. 973g and 973f) and U.S. implementing regulations (50 CFR 282.3 and 282.5) authorize the collection of information from participants in the Treaty fishery. Vessel operators who wish to participate in the Treaty fishery must submit annual license and registration applications and periodic written reports of catch and unloading of fish from a licensed vessel. The information collected is submitted to the Forum Fisheries Agency

(FFA)through the U.S. government (National Marine Fisheries Service). The license and registration application information is used by FFA to determine the operational capability and financial responsibility of a vessel operator interested in participating in the Treaty fishery. Information obtained from vessel catch and unloading reports is used by FFA to assess fishing effort and fishery resources in the region and to track the amount of fish caught within each Pacific island state's exclusive economic zone for fair disbursement of Treaty monies. If the information is not collected, the U.S. government will not meet its obligations under the Treaty, and the lack of fishing information will result in poor management of the fishery resources. II. Method of Collection All forms are to be submitted in hard copy, via mail. III. Data *OMB Number:* 0648-0218. *Form Number:* None. *Type of Review:* Regular submission. *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit organizations. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 22. *Estimated Time per Response:* License application, 15 minutes; 45 minutes for a registration application, 45 minutes; catch report, 1 hour; and unloading log sheet, 30 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 242. *Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public:* $36,000. IV. Request for Comments Comments are invited on:

(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information;

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record. Dated: May 1, 2007. Gwellnar Banks, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E7-8633 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Statement of Financial Interests, Regional Fishery Management Councils AGENCY: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before July 6, 2007. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at *dHynek@doc.gov* ). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to William Chappell,

(301)713-2337 or *william.chappell@noaa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act

(Act)authorizes the establishment of Regional Fishery Management Councils to exercise sound judgment in the stewardship of fishery resources through the preparation, monitoring, and revision of such fishery management plans under circumstances,

(a)which will enable the States, the fishing industry, consumers, environmental organizations, and other interested persons to participate in the development of such plans, and

(b)which take into account the social and economic needs of fishermen and dependent communities. Section 302(j) of the Act requires that Council members appointed by the Secretary, Scientific and Statistical Committee

(SSC)members appointed by a Council under Section 302(g)(1), or individuals nominated by the Governor of a State for possible appointment as a Council member disclose their financial interest in any Council fishery. These interests include harvesting, processing, lobbying, advocacy, or marketing activity that is being, or will be, undertaken within any fishery over which the Council concerned has jurisdiction, or with respect to an individual or organization with a financial interest in such activity. In 2008, the Secretary is required to submit an annual report to Congress for 2007 on action taken by the Secretary and the Councils to implement the disclosure of financial interest and recusal requirements, including identification of any conflict of interest problems with respect to the Councils and SSCs and recommendations for addressing any such problems. Seated Council members appointed by the Secretary, including the Tribal Government appointee and SSC members, must file a financial interest form within 45 days of taking office and must provide an update of their statements at any time any such financial interest is acquired, or substantially changed. The Act further provides that a member shall not vote on a Council decision that would have a significant and predictable effect on a financial interest if there is a close causal link between the Council decision and an expected and substantially disproportionate benefit to the financial interest of the affected individual relative to the financial interest of other participants in the same gear type or sector of the fishery. However, an affected individual who is declared ineligible to vote on a Council action may participate in Council deliberations relating to the decision after notifying the Council of his/her recusal and identifying the financial interest that would be affected. II. Method of Collection Respondents submit paper forms. III. Data *OMB Number:* 0648-0192. *Form Number:* NOAA Form 88-195. *Type of Review:* Regular submission. *Affected Public:* Individuals or households. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 306. *Estimated Time Per Response:* 35 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 179. *Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public:* $54. IV. Request for Comments Comments are invited on:

(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information;

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

(CCSP)Synthesis and Assessment Products for public comments. This draft Prospectus addresses the following CCSP Topic: Product 4.2: Thresholds of Change in Ecosystems. After consideration of comments received on the draft Prospectus, the final Prospectus along with the comments received will be published on the CCSP web site. DATES: Comments must be received by June 6, 2007. ADDRESSES: The draft Prospectus is posted on the CCSP Program Office web site. The web address to access the draft Prospectus is: Product 4.2 *http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap4-2/default.php* Detailed instructions for making comments on the draft Prospectus is provided with the Prospectus. Comments should be prepared in accordance with these instructions. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Fabien Laurier, Climate Change Science Program Office, 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 250, Washington, DC 20006, Telephone: (202)419-3481. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CCSP was established by the President in 2002 to coordinate and integrate scientific research on global change and climate change sponsored by 13 participating departments and agencies of the U.S. Government. The CCSP is charged with preparing information resources that support climate-related discussions and decisions, including scientific synthesis and assessment analyses that support evaluation of important policy issues. The Prospectus addressed by this notice provides a topical overview and describes plans for scoping, drafting, reviewing, producing, and disseminating one of 21 final synthesis and assessment Products that will be produced by the CCSP. Dated: May 1, 2007. William J. Brennan, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for International Affairs, and Acting Director, Climate Change Science Program. [FR Doc. 07-2244 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 16

Traces to 16 documents

U.S. Code