Notices. Notice of re-chartering of Committee

10,998 words·~50 min read·/register/2007/11/06/07-5502

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

BILLING CODE 3410-03-M DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Food Safety and Inspection Service [Docket No. FSIS-2007-0032] National Advisory Committee on Meat and Poultry Inspection; Re-establishment AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of re-chartering of Committee. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, this notice announces that the Secretary of Agriculture signed the charter of the National Advisory Committee on Meat and Poultry Inspection (NACMPI) on July 25, 2007.

The charter for the NACMPI is available for viewing on the NACMPI homepage at *http://www.fsis.usda.gov/About_FSIS/NACMPI_Charter/index.asp* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Loraine Cannon, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), Room 405 Aerospace Center, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-3700. Telephone number:

(202)690-6647. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The National Advisory Committee on Meat and Poultry Inspection provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary on meat and poultry inspection programs, pursuant to sections 7(c), 24, 205, 301(a)(3), and 301(c) of the Federal Meat Inspection Act [21 U.S.C. 607(c), 624, 645, 661(a)(3), and 661(c)] and to sections 5(a)(3), 5(c), 8(b), and 11(e) of the Poultry Products Inspection Act [21 U.S.C. 454(a)(3), 454(c), 457(b), and 460(e)]. The complexity of the issues to be addressed requires that the Committee meet at least twice per year. Members are appointed by the Secretary of USDA. Background materials are available on the Web at the address noted above or by contacting the person listed above. Additional Public Notification Public awareness of all segments of rulemaking and policy development is important. Consequently, in an effort to ensure that minorities, women, and persons with disabilities are aware of this notice, FSIS will announce it online through the FSIS Web page located at *http://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations/2007_Notices_Index/* . FSIS will also make copies of this **Federal Register** publication available through the FSIS Constituent Update, which is used to provide information regarding FSIS policies, procedures, regulations, **Federal Register** notices, FSIS public meetings, and other types of information that could affect or would be of interest to constituents and stakeholders. The Update is communicated via Listserv, a free electronic mail subscription service for industry, trade groups, consumer interest groups, health professionals, and other individuals who have asked to be included. The Update is also available on the FSIS Web page. Through the Listserv and Web page, FSIS is able to provide information to a much broader and more diverse audience. In addition, FSIS offers an electronic subscription service which provides automatic and customized access to selected food safety news and information. This service is available at *http://www.fsis.usda.gov/news_and_events/email_subscription/* . Options range from recalls to export information to regulations, directives and notices. Customers can add or delete subscriptions themselves, and have the option to password protect their accounts. Done in Washington, DC on: October 29, 2007. Alfred V. Almanza, Administrator. [FR Doc. E7-21748 Filed 11-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Foreign Agricultural Service Notice of Request for Revision of a Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY: Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Foreign Agricultural Service's intention to request a renewal of current information collection processes currently used in support of Exporter Assistance programs. This request to renew is based on estimates of the public burden set forth in the abstract. DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by January 7, 2008 to be assured of consideration. *Requests for Comments:* Send comments regarding

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

(b)the accuracy of the agency's 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 automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments and questions regarding the Export Assistance Programs registration forms, surveys and qualification criteria should be send to: Maria Nemeth-Ek, Branch Chief, Overseas Trade Support Group, Market Development and Grants Management Division, Office of Trade Programs, Foreign Agricultural Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Stop 1052, Washington, DC 20250-1052. All written comments received will be available for public inspection at the above address during business hours from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.—Phone

(202)720-6343, Fax:

(202)690-0193. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Export Services. *OMB Number:* 0551-0031. *Expiration Date of Approval:* March 31, 2008. *Type of Request:* Renewal of a currently approved information collection process. *Abstract:* The major objective of the Overseas Trade Support Group is to expand U.S. agricultural exports by helping U.S. companies to sell their products outside the United States. U.S. companies use the Foreign Buyer List service to learn of 20,000 buyers in more than 25 countries who specialize in the importation and distribution of U.S. products in their country. Specific program and form information is available at: *http://www.fas.usda.gov/agx/buying_us/foreign_buyers_exporters.asp* . Each year a certain number of trade shows are selected in the best prospective markets to host a U.S.A. pavilion where U.S. companies can promote their products to buyers. A list of USDA endorsed shows is available at: *http://www.fas.usda.gov/agx/trade_events/trade_events.asp* . The Exporter Assistance section of the FAS Web site *http://www.fas.usda.gov/,* a one-stop-shop for either the experienced or novice exporter offers information about exporting and easy access to register for these services. Customer service surveys are collected at various trade shows and evaluations of Foreign Buyers List data are downloaded annually in order to improve the effectiveness of these services. The information is necessary to manage, plan and evaluate the effectiveness of these services, which are intended to help U.S. companies to market and sell their products in overseas markets. Authority to collect this information falls under 7 U.S.C. part 1761 and is voluntary for U.S. companies to participate. A small fee is charged for some of the services. *Estimate of Burden:* The burden to U.S. exporters is estimated to average 0.25 hours per response. *Respondents:* U.S. agricultural exporters of food, farm, and forest products. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 3000 per annum. *Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent:* 4 per annum. *Estimated Total Annual Burden of Respondents:* 3000 hours per annum. Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Tamoria Thompson-Hall, the Agency Information Collection Coordinator, at

(202)720-1690. 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. Signed at Washington, DC. Michael W. Yost, Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service. [FR Doc. E7-21785 Filed 11-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-10-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY: Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration, USDA. ACTION: Notice of advisory committee meeting. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, this constitutes notice of the upcoming meeting of the Grain Inspection Advisory Committee. The Grain Inspection Advisory Committee meets twice annually to advise GIPSA on the programs and services we deliver under the U.S. Grain Standards Act. Recommendations by the committee help us to better meet the needs of our customers who operate in a dynamic and changing marketplace. DATES: November 28, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.; and November 29, 2007, 8 a.m. to 1 p.m. ADDRESSES: The Advisory Committee meeting will take place at the Westin Tabor Center, 1672 Lawrence Street, Denver, Colorado 80202. Requests to address the Advisory Committee at the meeting or written comments may be sent to: Administrator, GIPSA, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 3601, Washington, DC 20250-3601. Requests and comments may also be faxed to

(202)690-2173. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Terri Henry,

(202)205-8281 or by e-mail at *Terri.L.Henry@usda.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of the Advisory Committee is to provide advice to the Administrator of the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration with respect to the implementation of the U.S. Grain Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 71 *et seq.* ). Relevant information about the Advisory Committee is available on the GIPSA Web site. Go to *http://www.gipsa.usda.gov* and under the section “I Want To * * *,” click on “Learn about the Grain Inspection Advisory Committee.” The agenda will include discussions about the agency's financial status, organizational and technological enhancements that are improving service delivery; the pilot study to contract for export service provision and supplemental labor; improvements in the issuance of phytosanitary certification; the Agency's work in assessing wheat functionality, GIPSA's role in the ethanol market, and the relevance of the official standards for soybeans and other products. For a copy of the agenda please contact Terri Henry,

(202)205-8281 or by e-mail *Terri.L.Henry@usda.gov.* Public participation will be limited to written statements, unless permission is received from the Committee Chairman to orally address the Advisory Committee. The meeting will be open to the public. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication of program information or related accommodations should contact Terri Henry, at the telephone number listed above. David R. Shipman, Acting Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration. [FR Doc. E7-21747 Filed 11-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-KD-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service Dry Fork Station and Hughes Transmission Project AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of Termination of Environmental Impact Statement. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Rural Utilities Service (RUS), an agency delivering the United States Department of Agriculture

(USDA)Rural Development Utilities Programs, hereinafter referred to as Rural Development, is terminating further preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS)for the Dry Fork Station and Hughes Transmission Project in Campbell and Sheridan Counties, Wyoming. The purpose of the EIS was to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of and alternatives to the Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. (Basin Electric) application for a Rural Development loan guarantee to construct and operate a coal-fired electric generation facility referred to as the Dry Fork Station. Basin Electric did not request a loan guarantee from Rural Development for the Hughes Transmission Line, but it was being evaluated as a connected action for the EIS. Basin Electric withdrew their application to Rural Development on October 17, 2007. A Draft EIS was filed with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on August 24, 2007, and notice of an extension of the public comment period to November 19, 2007, appeared in the **Federal Register** on October 17, 2007 (“Notice of Extension of Public Comment Period, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Dry Fork Station and Hughes Transmission Line, Wyoming”, 72 FR 59071). Public hearings on the Draft EIS were held in Sheridan, Wyoming on September 25, 2007, and in Gillette, Wyoming on September 26, 2007. ADDRESS AND FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: For more information, contact: Richard Fristik, USDA, Rural Development, Utilities Programs, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Mail Stop 1571, Room 2240, Washington, DC 20250-1571, telephone

(202)720-5093, fax

(202)690-0649, or e-mail: *Richard.Fristik@wdc.usda.gov.* Dated: October 31, 2007. James R. Newby, Assistant Administrator, USDA Rural Development, Utilities Programs. [FR Doc. E7-21749 Filed 11-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-15-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A-580-836, C-580-837 Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate Products From the Republic of Korea: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Countervailing Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: November 6, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yang Jin Chun or Minoo Hatten at

(202)482-5760 and

(202)482-1690, respectively (antidumping), and Jolanta Lawska or Eric Greynolds at

(202)482-8362 and

(202)482-6071, respectively (countervailing duty), Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background At the request of interested parties, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate products from the Republic of Korea for the period February 1, 2006, through January 31, 2007. See *Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews* , 72 FR 14516 (March 28, 2007) ( *March Initiation Notice* ), for Dongkuk Steel Mill Co., Ltd. (DSM), and *Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews* , 72 FR 20986 (April 27, 2007), for DSEC Co., Ltd., a subsidiary of Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering (DSEC), and Tae Chang Steel Co., Ltd. (TC Steel). The Department initiated an administrative review of the countervailing duty order on certain cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate products from the Republic of Korea for the period January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2006. See *March Initiation Notice* for DSM, DSEC, and TC Steel. We rescinded the review of TC Steel. See *Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate from the Republic of Korea: Notice of Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review* , 72 FR 36962 (July 6, 2007). The preliminary results of both reviews are currently due no later than October 31, 2007. Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires the Department to make a preliminary determination within 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of an order for which a review is requested and a final determination within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary determination is published. If it is not practicable to complete the review within these time periods, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the time limit for the preliminary determination to a maximum of 365 days after the last day of the anniversary month. See also 19 CFR 351.213(h). We determine that it is not practicable to complete the preliminary results of these reviews by the current deadline of October 31, 2007. Specifically, for the antidumping review, there are a number of complex factual issues such as one respondent's corporate affiliations, whether certain of its sales are outside the ordinary course of trade, and selection of an adverse facts-available rate for an uncooperative respondent which affect the calculations for the preliminary results. For the countervailing duty review, we need to resolve a question concerning shipments by one of the respondents. Therefore, we are extending the time period for issuing the preliminary results of these reviews by 15 days until November 15, 2007. This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2). Dated: October 31, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-21802 Filed 11-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A-570-910 Postponement of Preliminary Determination of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: November 6, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Martin, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone

(202)482-3936. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Postponement of Preliminary Determination On June 27, 2007, the Department of Commerce (“Department”) initiated the antidumping duty investigation of circular welded carbon quality steel pipe from the People's Republic of China. *See Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China* , 72 FR 36663 (July 5, 2007) (“ *Initiation Notice* ”). The notice of initiation stated that the Department would make its preliminary determination for this antidumping duty investigation no later than 140 days after issuance. *See Initiation Notice* , 72 FR at 36667. On October 2, 2007, Allied Tube & Conduit, Sharon Tube Company, IPSCO Tubulars, Inc., Western Tube & Conduit Corporation, Northwest Pipe Company, Wheatland Tube Co., *i.e.* , the Ad Hoc Coalition For Fair Pipe Imports From China, and the United Steelworkers (collectively “Petitioners”) made a timely request pursuant to 19 CFR 351.205(e) and section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), for a postponement of the preliminary determination. Petitioners requested postponement of the preliminary determination because it needs additional time to evaluate the questionnaire responses filed by respondents, and, if warranted, prepare an allegation of targeted dumping. *See* 19 CFR 351.301(d)(5). For the reasons identified by the Petitioners, and because there are no compelling reasons to deny the request, the Department is postponing the preliminary determination under section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act, by fifty days from November 14, 2007, to January 3, 2008. The deadline for the final determination will continue to be 75 days after the date of the preliminary determination, unless extended. This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 733(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1). Dated: October 31, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-21800 Filed 11-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-868] Folding Metal Tables and Chairs From the People's Republic of China: Continuation of Antidumping Duty Order AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: As a result of the determinations by the Department of Commerce (“Department”) and the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) that revocation of the existing antidumping duty order on folding metal tables and chairs from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, the Department is publishing this notice of continuation of the antidumping duty (“AD”) order. DATES: *Effective Dates:* November 6, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Riggle or Matthew Quigley, AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202-482-0650 202-482-4551, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On May 1, 2007, the Department published the notice of initiation of the sunset review of the antidumping duty order on folding metal tables and chairs from the PRC pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). * See Initiation of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Reviews, 72 FR 23799 (May 1, 2007) (“Initiation Notice”); see also, Antidumping Duty Order: Folding Metal Tables and Chairs From the People's Republic of China * , 67 FR 43277 (June 27, 2002) (“ *Order* ”). As a result of its review, the Department found that revocation of the AD order would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and notified the ITC of the margins likely to prevail were the order revoked. *See Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order* , 72 FR 51409 (September 7, 2007). On September 20, 2007, the ITC determined, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, that revocation of the AD order on folding metal tables and chairs from the PRC would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. *See Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from China* , 72 FR 60389 (October 24, 2007), and USITC Publication 3952 Inv. No. 731-TA-932 (Review) (September 2007). Scope of the Order The products covered by this order consist of assembled and unassembled folding tables and folding chairs made primarily or exclusively from steel or other metal, as described below:

(1)Assembled and unassembled folding tables made primarily or exclusively from steel or other metal (“folding metal tables”). Folding metal tables include square, round, rectangular, and any other shapes with legs affixed with rivets, welds, or any other type of fastener, and which are made most commonly, but not exclusively, with a hardboard top covered with vinyl or fabric. Folding metal tables have legs that mechanically fold independently of one another, and not as a set. The subject merchandise is commonly, but not exclusively, packed singly, in multiple packs of the same item, or in five piece sets consisting of four chairs and one table. Specifically excluded from the scope of folding metal tables are the following: Lawn furniture; Trays commonly referred to as “TV trays”; Side tables; Child-sized tables; Portable counter sets consisting of rectangular tables 36″ high and matching stools; and Banquet tables. A banquet table is a rectangular table with a plastic or laminated wood table top approximately 28″ to 36″ wide by 48″ to 96″ long and with a set of folding legs at each end of the table. One set of legs is composed of two individual legs that are affixed together by one or more cross-braces using welds or fastening hardware. In contrast, folding metal tables have legs that mechanically fold independently of one another, and not as a set.

(2)Assembled and unassembled folding chairs made primarily or exclusively from steel or other metal (“folding metal chairs”). Folding metal chairs include chairs with one or more cross-braces, regardless of shape or size, affixed to the front and/or rear legs with rivets, welds or any other type of fastener. Folding metal chairs include: those that are made solely of steel or other metal; those that have a back pad, a seat pad, or both a back pad and a seat pad; and those that have seats or backs made of plastic or other materials. The subject merchandise is commonly, but not exclusively, packed singly, in multiple packs of the same item, or in five piece sets consisting of four chairs and one table. Specifically excluded from the scope of folding metal chairs are the following: • Folding metal chairs with a wooden back or seat, or both; • Lawn furniture; • Stools; • Chairs with arms; and • Child-sized chairs. The subject merchandise is currently classifiable under subheadings 9401.71.0010, 9401.71.0030, 9401.79.0045, 9401.79.0050, 9403.20.0015, 9403.20.0030, 9403.70.8010, 9403.70.8020, and 9403.70.8030 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”). 1 Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and U.S. Customs and Border Protection purposes, the Department's written description of the merchandise is dispositive. 1 Originally the scope included 9403.20.0010, but effective July 1, 2003, 9403.20.0010 (metal household furniture) was eliminated from the HTS code. 9403.20.0011 (ironing boards) and 9403.20.0015 (other) were added in its place. 9403.20.0015 contains merchandise in 9403.20.0010 except for ironing boards. On January 13, 2003, the Department issued a scope ruling determining that “Poly-Fold” chairs consisting of steel frames (20-gauge steel) with polypropylene seats and backs, zinc-plated rivets coated with an epoxy polyester powder coating, three drainage holes in the seat, specially designed back leg cross bar, four oversized leg stoppers with drainage holes, and a frame with hybrid coating are within the scope of the antidumping duty order. 2 2 *See* “Final Scope Ruling on Whether RPA International Pty. Ltd.'s Poly-Fold Chairs Are Excluded from the Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People's Republic of China” (January 13, 2003). On May 5, 2003, the Department issued a scope ruling with respect to the “Complete Office-To-Go” set, which consists of a single chair and a table with a monitor stand and legs that fold as a set. The Department ruled that the chair component is within the scope of the antidumping duty order because the chair component is identical to the chairs described in the order, but the Department ruled that table component is outside the scope of the AD order because it has legs that fold in sets. 3 3 *See* “Final Scope Ruling on Whether Staples, The Office Superstore, Incorporated's ‘Complete Office-To-Go’ is Excluded from the Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People's Republic of China” (May 5, 2003). On September 7, 2004, the Department issued a scope ruling determining that folding tables with tops made of blow-molded plastic and frames made of steel are within the scope of the AD order. 4 4 *See* “Final Scope Ruling on Whether Lifetime Tables 4600 and 4606 Are Excluded from the Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People's Republic of China” (September 7, 2004). On July 13, 2005, the Department issued a scope ruling determining that folding metal chairs, with wooden seats that have been padded with foam and covered with fabric or polyvinyl chloride and attached to a tubular steel seat frame with screws, are within the scope of the AD order. 5 5 *See* “Final Scope Ruling of the Antidumping Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People's Republic of China (A-570-868); Korhani of America, Inc.” (July 13, 2005). Also on July 13, 2005, the Department issued a scope ruling determining that “butterfly” chairs are outside the scope of the AD order. Butterfly chairs are described as consisting of a collapsible metal rod frame and a cover, such that when the chair frame is spread open, the pockets of the cover are slipped over the upper ends of the frame and the cover provides both the seating surface and back of the chair. The frame consists of eight s-shaped pieces (with the ends offset at almost a 90-degree angle) made from metal rod that are connected by hinges. The frame is collapsed by moving the four legs inward until they meet in the center, similar to the folding mechanism of a pocket umbrella. Although butterfly chairs, as described by the requester have supports made of steel or other metal, they do not have cross-braces affixed to the front and/or rear legs. The seat and back is one piece of cloth, which also serves as the carrying bag for the chair frame when not in use, and is therefore not affixed to the frame with screws, rivets, welds or any other type of fastener. 6 6 *See* “Final Scope Ruling of the Antidumping Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People's Republic of China (A-570-868); Spencer Gifts, LLC” (July 13, 2005). On May 1, 2006, the Department issued a scope ruling determining that the “moon chair” was outside the scope of the antidumping duty order because it collapses rather than folds as a chair subject to the order would fold, and it does not have a back pad or seat pad commonly found in folding chairs. Moon chairs are described as containing circular, fabric-padded, concave cushions that envelope the user at approximately a 105-degree reclining angle. The fabric cushion is ringed and supported by two curved 16-mm steel tubes. The cushion is attached to this ring by nylon fabric. The cushion is supported by a 16-mm steel tube four-sided rectangular cross-brace mechanism that constitutes the moon chair's legs. This mechanism supports and attaches to the encircling tubing and enables the moon chair to be folded. To fold the chair, the user pulls on a fabric handle in the center of the seat cushion of the chair. 7 7 *See* “Final Scope Ruling of the Antidumping Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People's Republic of China (A-570-868); Mac Industries (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., Jiaxing Yinmao International Trading Company, Ltd and Fujian Zenithen Consumer Products Company Ltd.” (May 1, 2005). Continuation of Order As a result of the determinations by the Department and the ITC that revocation of the AD order on folding metal tables and chairs from the PRC would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act, the Department hereby orders the continuation of the AD order on folding metal tables and chairs from the PRC. U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue to collect antidumping duty cash deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise. This review covers imports from all manufacturers and exporters of folding metal tables and chairs from the PRC. The effective date of continuation of this AD order will be the date of publication in the **Federal Register** of this Continuation Notice. Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, the Department intends to initiate the next five-year review of this order not later than September 2012. This five-year or “sunset” review and notice are in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: October 31, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-21798 Filed 11-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-868] Folding Metal Tables and Chairs From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Extension of Time Limit for the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review October 29, 2007. AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: *Effective Dates:* November 6, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laurel LaCivita or Matthew Quigley, AD/CVD Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone

(202)482-4243 or

(202)482-4551, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On July 27, 2006, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) published the initiation of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on folding metal tables and chairs from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”). *See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part* , 71 FR 42626 (July 27, 2006). On July 11, 2007, the Department published the preliminary results. *See Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 72 FR 37703 (July 11, 2007). This review covers the period June 1, 2005, through May 31, 2006. The final results are currently due by November 8, 2007. Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Review Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), the Department shall make a final determination in an administrative review of an antidumping duty order within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary results are published. The Act further provides, however, that the Department may extend that 120-day period to 180 days after the preliminary results if it determines it is not practicable to complete the review within the foregoing time period. The Department finds that it is not practicable to complete the final results of the administrative review of folding metal tables and chairs from the PRC within the 120-day period due to complex issues the parties have raised regarding surrogate financial statements. In accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Department is extending the time period for completion of the final results of this review by 30 days to 150 days after the date on which the preliminary results were published. Therefore, the final results are now due no later than December 7, 2007. This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: October 29, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-21809 Filed 11-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-489-807] Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final Results of New Shipper Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On September 10, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on certain steel concrete reinforcing bars (rebar) from Turkey. This review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise to the United States, Ege Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S./Ege Dis Ticaret A.S. (Ege Celik). The period of review

(POR)is April 1, 2006, through September 30, 2006. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made no changes to the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results do not differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping margin for Ege Celik is listed below in the section entitled “Final Results of Review.” EFFECTIVE DATE: November 6, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irina Itkin, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230; telephone

(202)482-0656. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background This new shipper review covers one producer/exporter, Ege Celik. On September 10, 2007, the Department published in the **Federal Register** the preliminary results of the new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on rebar from Turkey. *See Notice of Preliminary Results of New Shipper Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey* , 72 FR 51598 (Sep. 10, 2007) ( *Preliminary Results* ). We invited parties to comment on our preliminary results of this review. In October 2007, we received a case brief with respect to the preliminary results from the domestic industry ( *i.e.* , Gerdau AmeriSteel Corporation, Commercial Metals Company (SMI Steel Group), and Nucor Corporation), and we received a rebuttal brief with respect to the preliminary results from Ege Celik. Scope of the Order The product covered by this order is all stock deformed steel concrete reinforcing bars sold in straight lengths and coils. This includes all hot-rolled deformed rebar rolled from billet steel, rail steel, axle steel, or low-alloy steel. It excludes

(i)plain round rebar,

(ii)rebar that a processor has further worked or fabricated, and

(iii)all coated rebar. Deformed rebar is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers 7213.10.000 and 7214.20.000. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive. Period of Review The POR is April 1, 2006, through September 30, 2006. Bona Fide Sale Analysis In the preliminary results, we found that Ege Celik's reported U.S. sale during the POR was a *bona fide* sale, as required by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv)(c), based on the totality of the facts on the record. *See* the Memorandum to James Maeder from Irina Itkin entitled, “Analysis of Ege Celik Endustrisi Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S./Ege Dis Ticaret A.S.'s *Bona Fides* As A New Shipper in the New Shipper Review of Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey,” dated September 4, 2007, for further discussion of our price and quantity analysis. For the final results, the Department continues to find that Ege Celik's sole U.S. sale during the POR was a *bona fide* commercial transaction. Turkish Government Competition Board's Report In this review, the domestic interested parties submitted a report by the Turkish Government Competition Board (the Competition Board) regarding the Turkish steel industry. The domestic interested parties argued that this report demonstrates that Ege Celik, as well as the vast majority of the Turkish rebar industry, engaged in anti-competitive behavior prior to and during the POR by colluding with other producers to manipulate home market and export prices and to suppress costs. As noted in our preliminary findings with respect to the Competition Board's report, we did not rely on the evidence or conclusions in the Competition Board's report as the basis for any findings in this review. Rather, we investigated whether the facts during the POR would cause us to dismiss reported home market prices or costs within the confines of U.S. antidumping duty law and regulations. *See* the August 31, 2007, Memorandum from Shawn Thompson, Irina Itkin, and Brianne Riker to David M. Spooner, entitled “Preliminary Finding on Issues Related to the Turkish Government Competition Board's Reports in Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey.” For purposes of the final results, the domestic industry neither provided any new arguments with respect to the information on the record pertaining to the Competition Board's report or the respondents' reported costs, prices, and affiliations that were not already addressed in our preliminary findings, nor commented on specific sections of our preliminary findings with which it disagreed. Rather, the domestic industry merely stated its opposition to our preliminary findings and reiterated its previous arguments. Therefore, we continue to find that: 1) there is no basis to find that Ege Celik is affiliated with any other Turkish rebar producers; 2) there is no basis to conclude that the sales and cost data in this review are distorted by non-market considerations and, thus, it is appropriate to rely on this data for purposes of the final results; and 3) Ege Celik is entitled to a new shipper review because it has met the requirements set forth under 19 CFR 351.214(b). For further discussion, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum (Decision Memo) at Comment 1. Cost of Production As discussed in the *Preliminary Results* , we conducted an investigation to determine whether Ege Celik made home market sales of the foreign like product during the POR at prices below its cost of production

(COP)within the meaning of section 773(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). We performed the cost test for these final results following the same methodology as in the *Preliminary Results* . We found 20 percent or more of Ege Celik's sales of a given product during the reporting period were at prices less than the weighted-average COP for this period. Thus, we determined that these below-cost sales were made in “substantial quantities” within an extended period of time and at prices which did not permit the recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time in the normal course of trade. *See* sections 773(b)(2)(B) -

(D)of the Act. Therefore, for purposes of these final results, we found that Ege Celik made below-cost sales not in the ordinary course of trade. Consequently, we disregarded these sales and used the remaining sales as the basis for determining normal value pursuant to section 773(b)(1) of the Act. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case briefs by parties to these reviews, and to which we have responded, are listed in the Appendix to this notice and addressed in the Decision Memo, which is adopted by this notice. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in these reviews and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room B-099, of the main Department building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/.* The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of comments received, we have made no changes to the margin calculations. Because the margin calculations for Ege Celik have not changed from the preliminary results, the preliminary calculations placed on the record of this review are adopted as the final margin calculations. Final Results of Review We determine that the following weighted-average margin percentage exists for the period April 1, 2006, through September 30, 2006: Manufacturer/Producer/Exporter Margin Percentage Ege Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S./Ege Dis Ticaret A.S. 0.00 Assessment The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), because we have the reported entered value of Ege Celik's U.S. sale, we have calculated an importer-specific assessment rate based on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sale to the total entered value of that sale. We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review if the importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above *de minimis* ( *i.e.* , at or above 0.50 percent). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to antidumping duties any entries for which the assessment rate is *de minimis* ( *i.e.* , less than 0.50 percent). *See* 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1). The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of 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). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by Ege Celik for which it did not know its merchandise 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 intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. Cash Deposit Requirements Further, the following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of rebar from Turkey entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: 1) the cash deposit rate for merchandise produced by Ege Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S. and exported by Ege Dis Ticaret A.S. will be the rate shown above, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent, *de minimis* within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), the cash deposit will be zero; 2) for previously investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; 3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, or the less-than-fair-value

(LTFV)investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and 4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 16.06 percent, the All Others rate established in the LTFV investigation. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. 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. This new shipper review is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, as well as 19 CFR 351.214(i). Dated: October 31, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix - Issues in Decision Memorandum General Issues Issues Related to the Turkish Government Competition Board's Report [FR Doc. E7-21805 Filed 11-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A-489-807 Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Review and Determination To Revoke in Part AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On May 4, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative review and new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on certain steel concrete reinforcing bars (rebar) from Turkey. These reviews cover six producers/exporters of the subject merchandise to the United States. The period of review

(POR)is April 1, 2005, through March 31, 2006. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made certain changes in the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled “Final Results of Review.” Finally, we have determined to revoke the antidumping duty order with respect to Turkish rebar produced and exported by Colakoglu Metalurji A.S. and Colakoglu Dis Ticaret A.S. (collectively “Colakoglu”) and Diler Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S., Yazici Demir Celik Sanayi ve Turizm Ticaret A.S., and Diler Dis Ticaret A.S. (collectively “Diler”). EFFECTIVE DATE: November 6, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irina Itkin, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230; telephone

(202)482-0656. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The administrative review covers the following five producers/exporters: Colakoglu; Diler; Ekinciler Demir ve Celik Sanayi A.S. and Ekinciler Dis Ticaret A.S. (collectively “Ekinciler”); Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi A.S. (Habas); and Kaptan Metal Dis Ticaret ve Nakliyat A.S. and Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S. (collectively “Kaptan”). The new shipper review covers one producer/exporter, Kroman Celik Sanayii A.S. and Yucelboru Ihracat Ithalat ve Pazarlama A.S. (collectively “Kroman”). On May 4, 2007, the Department published in the **Federal Register** the preliminary results of the administrative review and new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on rebar from Turkey. *See Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Review and Notice of Intent to Revoke in Part* , 72 FR 25253 (May 4, 2007) ( *Preliminary Results* ). In August 2007, based on the information on the record, we preliminarily found that there is no evidence that the respondents in these reviews engaged in anti-competitive practices in Turkey during the POR, as alleged by the domestic industry ( *i.e.* , Gerdau AmeriSteel Corporation, Commercial Metals Company (SMI Steel Group), and Nucor Corporation). For further discussion, see the August 31, 2007, Memorandum from James Maeder, Shawn Thompson, Irina Itkin, and Brianne Riker to David M. Spooner, entitled “Preliminary Finding on Issues Related to the Turkish Government Competition Board's Reports in Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey” (the Competition Board memo). *See also* the “Turkish Government Competition Board's Report” section of this notice, below. We invited parties to comment on our preliminary results of these reviews, as well as on the preliminary findings set forth in the Competition Board memo. In August 2007, we received case briefs with respect to the preliminary results from the domestic industry and four of the six respondents ( *i.e.* , Colakoglu, Ekinciler, Habas, and Kaptan), and we received rebuttal briefs with respect to the preliminary results from all parties participating in these administrative reviews. In addition, in September 2007, we received case briefs with respect to the preliminary findings in the Competition Board memo from the domestic industry, and we received rebuttal briefs from all respondents. The Department has conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Scope of the Order The product covered by this order is all stock deformed steel concrete reinforcing bars sold in straight lengths and coils. This includes all hot-rolled deformed rebar rolled from billet steel, rail steel, axle steel, or low-alloy steel. It excludes

(i)plain round rebar,

(ii)rebar that a processor has further worked or fabricated, and

(NV)in the current review period and that the company will not sell subject merchandise at less than NV in the future; 2) a certification that the company sold commercial quantities of the subject merchandise to the United States in each of the three years forming the basis of the request; and 3) an agreement to immediate reinstatement of the order if the Department concludes that the company, subsequent to the revocation, sold subject merchandise at less than NV. *See* 19 CFR 351.222(e)(1). Upon receipt of such a request, the Department will consider: 1) whether the company in question has sold subject merchandise at not less than NV for a period of at least three consecutive years; 2) whether the company has agreed in writing to its immediate reinstatement in the order, as long as any exporter or producer is subject to the order, if the Department concludes that the company, subsequent to the revocation, sold the subject merchandise at less than NV; and 3) whether the continued application of the antidumping duty order is otherwise necessary to offset dumping. *See* 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2)(i). *See Sebacic Acid From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Determination To Revoke Order in Part* , 67 FR 69719, 69720 (Nov. 19, 2002). We have determined that the requests from Colakoglu and Diler meet all of the criteria under 19 CFR 351.222. With regard to the criteria of subsection 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2), our final margin calculations show that Colakoglu and Diler sold rebar at not less than NV during the current review period. In addition, Colakoglu and Diler sold rebar at not less than NV in the two previous administrative reviews in which they were involved ( *i.e.* , their dumping margins were zero or *de minimis* ). *See Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final Results and Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part* , 71 FR 65082, 65084 (Nov. 7, 2006) and *Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final Results, Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part, and Determination To Revoke in Part* , 70 FR 67665, 67667 (Nov. 8, 2005). Also, we find that application of the antidumping duty order to Colakoglu and Diler is no longer warranted for the following reasons: 1) the companies had zero or *de minimis* margins for a period of at least three consecutive years; 2) each company has agreed to immediate reinstatement of the order if the Department finds that it has resumed making sales at less than NV; and 3) the continued application of the order is not otherwise necessary to offset dumping. Therefore, we find that Colakoglu and Diler qualify for revocation of the antidumping duty order on rebar under 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2). Accordingly, we are revoking the order with respect to subject merchandise produced and exported by Colakoglu, as well as with respect to subject merchandise produced and exported by Diler. For further discussion, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum (Decision Memo) accompanying this notice at Comment 1. Effective Date of Revocation This revocation applies to all entries of subject merchandise that are produced and exported by Colakoglu and Diler, and are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after April 1, 2006. The Department will order the suspension of liquidation ended for all such entries and will instruct U.S. Customer and Border Protection

(CBP)to release any cash deposits or bonds. The Department will further instruct CBP to refund with interest any cash deposits on entries made on or after April 1, 2006. Bona Fide Sale Analysis In the preliminary results, we found that Kroman's reported U.S. sale during the POR was a *bona fide* sale, as required by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv)(c), based on the totality of the facts on the record. *See* the Memorandum to James Maeder from Irina Itkin entitled, “Analysis of Kroman Celik Sanayii A.S.'s *Bona Fides* As A New Shipper in the New Shipper Review of Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey,” dated April 30, 2007, for further discussion of our price and quantity analysis. For the final results, the Department continues to find that Kroman's sole U.S. sale during the POR was a *bona fide* commercial transaction. Turkish Government Competition Board's Report As noted in our preliminary findings with respect to the Competition Board's report, we did not rely on the evidence or conclusions in the Competition Board's report as the basis for any findings in these reviews. Rather, we investigated whether the facts during the POR would cause us to dismiss reported home market prices or costs within the confines of U.S. antidumping duty law and regulations. *See* the “Competition Board Memo.” For purposes of the final results, the domestic industry neither provided any new arguments with respect to the information on the record pertaining to the Competition Board's report or the respondents' reported costs, prices, and affiliations that were not already address in our preliminary findings, nor commented on specific sections of our preliminary findings with which it disagreed. Rather, we find that the domestic industry merely stated its opposition to our preliminary findings and reiterated its previous arguments. Therefore, we continue to find that: 1) there is no basis to find that the respondents are affiliated, and a collapsing analysis is neither warranted nor necessary; 2) there is no basis to conclude that the sales and cost data in these reviews are distorted by non-market considerations and, thus, it is appropriate to rely on this data for purposes of the final results; 3) Kroman is entitled to a new shipper review because it has met the requirements set forth under 19 CFR 351.214(b); and 4) the use of adverse facts available, pursuant to sections 776(a) and

(b)of the Act, is not warranted for any of the respondents in the administrative review or new shipper review because the respondents provided all requested information and have cooperated fully in these segments of the proceeding. For further discussion, see the Decision Memo at Comment 1. Cost of Production As discussed in the *Preliminary Results* , we conducted an investigation to determine whether Colakoglu, Diler, Ekinciler, Habas, Kaptan, and Kroman made home market sales of the foreign like product during the POR at prices below their costs of production

(COP)within the meaning of section 773(b)(1) of the Act. We performed the cost test for these final results following the same methodology as in the *Preliminary Results* , except as discussed in the Decision Memo. We found 20 percent or more of each respondent's sales of a given product during the reporting period were at prices less than the weighted-average COP for this period. Thus, we determined that these below-cost sales were made in “substantial quantities” within an extended period of time and at prices which did not permit the recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time in the normal course of trade. *See* sections 773(b)(2)(B) -

(D)of the Act. Therefore, for purposes of these final results, we found that Colakoglu, Diler, Ekinciler, Habas, Kaptan, and Kroman made below-cost sales not in the ordinary course of trade. Consequently, we disregarded these sales for each respondent and used the remaining sales as the basis for determining NV pursuant to section 773(b)(1) of the Act. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case briefs by parties to these reviews, and to which we have responded, are listed in the Appendix to this notice and addressed in the Decision Memo, which is adopted by this notice. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in these reviews and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room B-099, of the main Department building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/* . The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of comments received, we have made certain changes in the margin calculations. These changes are discussed in the relevant sections of the Decision Memo. Because the margin calculations for Habas and Kaptan have not changed from the preliminary results, the preliminary calculations placed on the records of these reviews are adopted as the final margin calculations. Final Results of Review We determine that the following weighted-average margin percentages exist for the period April 1, 2005, through March 31, 2006: Manufacturer/Producer/Exporter Margin Percentage Colakoglu Metalurji A.S. and Colakoglu Dis Ticaret A.S. 0.32 ( *de minimis* ) Diler Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S./ Yazici Demir Celik Sanayi ve Turizm Ticaret A.S./ Diler Dis Ticaret A.S. 0.14 ( *de minimis* ) Ekinciler Demir ve Celik Sanayi A.S./Ekinciler Dis Ticaret A.S. 1.66 Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istithsal Endustrisi A.S. 0.22 ( *de minimis* ) Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S./ Kaptan Metal Dis Ticaret ve Nakliyat A.S. 0.00 Kroman Celik Sanayii A.S./ Yucelboru Ihracat Ithalat ve Pazarlama A.S. 0.00 Assessment The Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), for all sales made by Colakoglu, Habas, Kaptan, and Kroman, as well as for certain sales made by Ekinciler, because we have the reported entered value of the U.S. sales, we have calculated importer-specific assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of those sales. Moreover, for all sales by Diler, as well as for the remaining sales made by Ekinciler, these companies did not report entered values for the U.S. sales in question. Accordingly, we have calculated importer-specific assessment rates for each respondent's merchandise by aggregating the dumping margins calculated for its U.S. sales to each importer and dividing this amount by the total quantity of those sales. To determine whether the duty assessment rates were *de minimis* , in accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we calculated importer-specific *ad valorem* ratios based on the estimated entered value. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to antidumping duties any entries for which the assessment rate is *de minimis* ( *i.e.* , less than 0.50 percent). The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review. Because we have revoked the order with respect to subject merchandise produced and exported by Colakoglu, as well as with respect to subject merchandise produced and exported by Diler, we will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation for exports of such merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after April 1, 2006, and to refund all cash deposits collected. 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). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by companies included in these final results of review for which the reviewed companies did not know their merchandise was destined for the United States. This clarification will also apply to POR entries of subject merchandise produced by companies for which we are rescinding the review based on certifications of no shipments, because these companies certified that they made no POR shipments of subject merchandise for which they had knowledge of U.S. destination. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the All-Others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. Cash Deposit Requirements Further, the following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of rebar from Turkey (except shipments from Colakoglu and Diler, as noted above) entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: 1) the cash deposit rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates shown above, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent, *de minimis* within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), the cash deposit will be zero; 2) for merchandise produced by Kroman Celik Sanayii A.S. and exported by Yucelboru Ihracat Ithalat ve Pazarlama A.S., the combination cash deposit rate will be 0.00 percent; 3) for previously investigated companies not listed above, 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, or the less-than-fair-value

(LTFV)investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and 5) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 16.06 percent, the All Others rate established in the LTFV investigation. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. 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. We are issuing and publishing these results of review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: October 31, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix - Issues in Decision Memorandum General Issues 1. Issues Related to the Turkish Government Competition Board's (the Competition Board's) Report 2. Date of Sale for Colakoglu Metalurji A.S. and Colakoglu Dis Ticaret A.S. (collectively “Colakoglu”) and Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi A.S. (Habas) 3. Model Matching 4. Methodology for Determining Contemporaneous Sales in the Home Market Company-Specific Issues 5. General and Administrative (G&A) Expenses for Colakoglu 6. Depreciation Expenses for Ekinciler Demir ve Celik Sanayi A.S. and Ekinciler Dis Ticaret A.S. (collectively “Ekinciler”) 7. G&A Expenses for Ekinciler 8. Subcontracted Rolling Costs for Habas 9. Affiliation Issue for Kaptan Metal Dis Ticaret ve Nakliyat A.S. and Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S. (collectively “Kaptan”) 10. Affiliated-Party Loading Services for Kaptan [FR Doc. E7-21808 Filed 11-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Notice; Preparation of a Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument Natural Resources Science Plan AGENCY: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce (DOC). SUMMARY: This notice advises the public that the Co-Trustees of the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument (Monument) in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands

(NWHI)and surrounding marine areas intend to prepare a Natural Resources Science Plan (Science Plan) and associated environmental assessment

(EA)for the Monument. The Science Plan is being developed concurrently with the comprehensive Monument Management Plan

(MMP)[Notice of Intent to Prepare Monument Management Plan and EA, **Federal Register** April 4, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 64)]. The Science Plan will identify management needs, highlight priority thematic areas designed to meet these needs, and describe the current and proposed research projects housed under these themes. The Co-Trustees are seeking public input on the development of the plan. There will be a public scoping meeting to solicit comments on November 15, 2007. DATES: The public meeting will be held on Thursday, November 15, 2007, 6 p.m.-8 p.m. at the Japanese Cultural Center of Hawaii, in Honolulu, HI. Written comments will be accepted through November 30, 2007. ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at the Japanese Cultural Center located at 2454 South Beretania Street, Honolulu, Hawaii 96826. Meeting materials will be posted on the Monument Web site ( *http://www.hawaiireef.noaa.gov* ) from November 15-November 30, 2007. Written comments may be provided in person at the public meeting, via fax at 808-397-2662, or E-mail via E-mail at *NWHIComments@noaa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Prior to the creation of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Marine National Monument by President George W. Bush on June 15, 2006, NOAA was engaged in management planning and environmental impact assessment development to support the public process for the NWHI to be designated as a National Marine Sanctuary through the public sanctuary designation process. As part of that planning process a 3-day workshop was held in May 2003 to discuss critical scientific information needs related to long term conservation and management of the NWHI. Over 100 research scientists and resource managers attended the workshop representing agencies, universities, and organizations nationwide. The workshop resulted in the identification of five priority research areas to support management in the NWHI. These are described in detail in a document called the final Information Needs for Conservation and Management of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Report, which is available at *http://hawaiireef.noaa.gov/research/2002Workshop/NWHI_Summary.pdf.* On June 15, 2006, President Bush signed Presidential Proclamation 8031 (Proclamation) establishing the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Marine National Monument, subsequently renamed the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument. The Monument is administered by the U.S. Department of Commerce through NOAA, U.S. Department of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the State of Hawaii through the Department of Land and Natural Resources

(DLNR)(collectively, the Co-Trustees). The Proclamation provides the authority for the Co-Trustees to issue research permits for activities designed to further understanding of Monument resources and qualities, and to assist in conservation and management of the Monument. The Science Plan will be used to guide these research activities. It will be based on the results from the information needs workshop, a multi-agency archipelagic research plan (under development), agency expertise and identified management needs, and public input. It will contain five themes relevant to natural resources research:

(1)Ecological Processes and Connectivity,

(2)Biodiversity and Habitats,

(3)Human Impacts,

(4)Indicators and Monitoring of Ecosystem Change, and

(5)Modeling and Forecasting Ecosystem Change. The Co-Trustees are seeking public input on the development of the draft Science Plan. Input is requested on the themes proposed in the draft plan, as well as the type of research to be conducted under each theme. A public scoping meeting will be held in Honolulu to solicit comments. A presentation will highlight the Science Plan development process, including sources of information utilized to date. Following the presentation, the public will be invited to provide written or oral comment on the five thematic research areas and projects that should be conducted under each thematic area. Written comments will also be accepted at the dates and locations specified in the DATES and ADDRESSES sections above. Dated: October 24, 2007. Daniel J. Basta, Director, Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. [FR Doc. 07-5502 Filed 11-5-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 11

Traces to 11 documents

U.S. Code

CFR