North American Free-Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Article 1904 Binational Panel Reviews, 38882-38883 [E5-3551]

Download as PDF 38882 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 6, 2005 / Notices entity.’’ However, for the purposes of eligibility, a U.S. entity shall be defined as a firm incorporated in the United States (or an unincorporated firm with its principal place of business in the United States) that is controlled by U.S. citizens or by another U.S. entity. An entity is not a U.S. entity if 50 percent plus one share of its stock (if a corporation, or a similar ownership interest of an unincorporated entity) is controlled, directly or indirectly, by non-U.S. citizens or non-U.S. entities. Priority may be given to chief executive officers or a similarly-situated officer of a tourism-related entity. Priority may also be given to individuals with international tourism marketing experience. Officers or employees of state and regional tourism marketing entities are also eligible for consideration for Board membership. A state and regional tourism marketing entity, may include, but is not limited to, state government tourism office, state and/or local government supported tourism marketing entities, or multi-state tourism marketing entities. Again, priority may be given to chief executive officers or a similarly-situated officer. Secondary selection criteria will ensure that the board has a balanced representation of the tourism-related industry in terms of point of view, demographics, geography and company size. The Board members will be selected on the basis of their experience and knowledge of the tourism industry. Members will serve at the discretion of the Secretary of Commerce. Board members shall serve in a representative capacity presenting the views and interests of the particular tourism-related sector in which they operate. Board members are not special government employees, and will receive no compensation for their participation in Board activities. Members participating in Board meetings and events will be responsible for their travel, living and other personal expenses. Meetings will be held regularly, usually in Washington, DC. To be considered for membership, please provide the following: 1. Name and title of the individual requesting consideration. 2. A letter containing a brief statement of why the applicant should be considered for membership on the Board. This letter should include the applicant’s tourism-related experience. 3. The applicant’s personal resume. 4. An affirmative statement that the applicant is not required to register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended. 5. If a state or regional tourism marketing entity, the functions VerDate jul<14>2003 16:35 Jul 05, 2005 Jkt 205001 and responsibilities of the entity. 6. The company’s size and ownership, product or service line and major markets in which the company operates. ADDRESSES: Submit application information to Lindsey Dickinson, Director, Office of Advisory Committees, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 4043, Washington, DC 20230. Deadline: All applications must be received by the Office of Advisory Committees, by close of business on July 29, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lindsey Dickinson, (202) 482–0087. Dated: June 30, 2005. Lindsey Dickinson, Director, Office of Advisory Committees. [FR Doc. E5–3552 Filed 7–5–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration North American Free-Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Article 1904 Binational Panel Reviews NAFTA Secretariat, United States Section, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of decision of panel. AGENCY: SUMMARY: On June 24, 2005 the binational panel issued its decision in the review of the five year review made by the International Trade Commission, respecting Gray Portland Cement and Clinker from Mexico, NAFTA Secretariat File Number USA–MEX– 2000–1904–10. The binational panel affirmed in part and remanded in part the International Trade Commission’s determination. Copies of the panel decision are available from the U.S. Section of the NAFTA Secretariat. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Caratina L. Alston, United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite 2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue, Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482–5438. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter 19 of the North American Free-Trade Agreement (‘‘Agreement’’) establishes a mechanism to replace domestic judicial review of final determinations in antidumping and countervailing duty cases involving imports from a NAFTA country with review by independent binational panels. When a Request for Panel Review is filed, a panel is established to act in place of national courts to review expeditiously the final determination to determine whether it PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 conforms with the antidumping or countervailing duty law of the country that made the determination. Under Article 1904 of the Agreement, which came into force on January 1, 1994, the Government of the United States, the Government of Canada and the Government of Mexico established Rules of Procedure for Article 1904 Binational Panel Reviews (‘‘Rules’’). These Rules were published in the Federal Register on February 23, 1994 (59 FR 8686). The panel review in this matter has been conducted in accordance with these Rules. Panel Decision: The panel affirmed in part and remanded in part the International Trade Commission’s determination respecting Gray Portland Cement and Clinker from Mexico. The panel remanded on the following issues: 1. On remand the Commission is to apply the ‘‘probable’’ or ‘‘more likely than not’’ standard announced by the CIT in Siderca when making its determination regarding likely volume, likely price effects, and likely impact on the industry. 2. With regard to the likely volume of subject imports if the antidumping duty order is revoked, the Commission is to (a) explain how it is probable that subject imports would increase if the antidumping duty order is revoked, and (b) render a complete analysis of how the various third-country antidumping duty orders would affect the likely volume of subject imports to the United States. 3. With regard to the likely price effects of subject imports on the industry if the order is revoked, the Commission is to (a) explain the price implications of revocation of the antidumping duty order with sufficient clarity to show how the record supports the Commission findings that revocation of the order would be likely to lead to significant negative price effects on the domestic industry, (b) explain how revocation of the antidumping duty order would be likely to lead to significant price underselling by subject imports of the domestic product, and (c) explain how subject imports are likely to enter the United States at prices that otherwise would have a significant price depressing or suppressing effect on the domestic product. 4. With regard to the likely impact on the domestic industry if the antidumping duty order is revoked, the Commission is to (a) explain how it reached the conclusion that the order should remain in place in order to protect the highly-profitable, regional industry, given the continuing solid demand in the region and a substantial increase in non-Mexican cement E:\FR\FM\06JYN1.SGM 06JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 6, 2005 / Notices imports; (b) explain how it reached the conclusion that the regional industry would be likely to suffer material injury, having found that the regional industry is not in a vulnerable states; and (c) explain how the decreasing market share of the regional industry, due to a substantial increase in demand, was not attributed to imports of non-Mexican cement. 5. With regard to the Commission’s conclusion that the producers of all or almost all of the production in the Southern Tier region would likely suffer material injury be reason of the dumped imports if the order is revoked, the Commission is to (a) explain why producers of all or almost all of the production in the Southern Tier region would likely be materially injured if the order is revoked, (b) explain what percentage of regional production would likely suffer material injury, and (c) explain what its aggregate and individual plant analyses consisted of and what anomalies, if any, the individual plant analysis revealed. 6. The Commission is to fully evaluate the information concerning the proposed Southdown acquisition. The Commission was directed to issue it’s determination on remand within 60 days of the issuance of the panel decision or not later than August 23, 2005. The Panel affirmed the Commission’s determination in all other respects. Dated: June 30, 2005. Caratina L. Alston, U.S. Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat. [FR Doc. E5–3551 Filed 7–5–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–GT–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Institute of Standards and Technology Judges Panel of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of closed meeting. AGENCY: SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app. 2, notice is hereby given that the Judges Panel of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award will meet Thursday, July 28, 2005. The Judges Panel is composed of ten members prominent in the field of quality management and appointed by the Secretary of Commerce. The purpose of this meeting is to review the stage 1 process, consideration for moving applicants forward, review of VerDate jul<14>2003 16:35 Jul 05, 2005 Jkt 205001 stage 1 data and selection of applicants for consensus, pre-site visit conference call with team leaders, review of Stage 3 process documentation, update on revisions to Judges’ survey, and summary of Improvements Day. The applications under review contain trade secrets and proprietary commercial information submitted to the Government in confidence. All visitors to the National Institute of Standards and Technology site will have to preregister to be admitted. Anyone wishing to attend this meeting must register 48 hours in advance in order to be admitted. Please submit your name, time of arrival, e-mail address and phone number to Virginia Davis no later than Friday, July 22, 2005, and she will provide you with instructions for admittance. Ms. Davis’ e-mail address is virginia.davis@nist.gov and her phone number is 301/975–2361. The meeting will convene July 28, 2005, at 9 a.m. and adjourn at 4:30 p.m. on July 28, 2005. The entire meeting will be closed. DATES: The meeting will be held at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, Administration Building, Lecture Room A, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899. ADDRESSES: Dr. Harry Hertz, Director, National Quality Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899, telephone number (301) 975–2361. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the General Counsel, formally determined on December 20, 2004, that the meeting of the Judges Panel will be closed pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app. 2, as amended by section 5(c) of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Pub. L. 94–409. The meeting, which involves examination of Award applicant data from U.S. companies and a discussion of this data as compared to the Award criteria in order to recommend Award recipients, may be closed to the public in accordance with section 552b(c)(4) of title 5, United States Code, because the meetings are likely to disclose trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person which is privileged or confidential. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dated: June 27, 2005. Hratch G. Semerjian, Acting Director. [FR Doc. 05–13261 Filed 7–5–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–13–M PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 38883 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 062805A] Marine Mammals; File No. 932–1489 National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Issuance of permit amendment. AGENCY: SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Marine Mammal Health and Stranding and Response Program (MMHSRP), National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD, has been issued an amendment to Permit No. 932–1489 to continue stranding response activities for marine mammal species under NMFS jurisdiction. DATES: Written, telefaxed, or e-mail comments must be received on or before August 5, 2005. ADDRESSES: The amendment and related documents are available for review upon written request or by appointment: See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ruth Johnson or Amy Sloan, (301)713– 2289. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Permit No. 932–1489–00 was issued on July 2, 1999 (64 FR 37933). The requested amendment has been granted under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the Regulations Governing the Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals (MMPA; 50 CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR 222–226), and the Fur Seal Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1151 et seq.). The permit has been amended to extend the expiration date of the permit by two years; allow aerial surveys as a method for finding injured or entangled marine mammals or to survey the extent of a disease outbreak or die-off of marine mammals; allow harassment of marine mammals on land incidental to other MMHSRP activities authorized by the permit; and allow development and maintenance of marine mammal cell lines for diagnostic testing. The objectives of the permit amendment remain the same as the original permit: to implement the Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response Program E:\FR\FM\06JYN1.SGM 06JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 128 (Wednesday, July 6, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38882-38883]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-3551]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


 North American Free-Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Article 1904 
Binational Panel Reviews

AGENCY: NAFTA Secretariat, United States Section, International Trade 
Administration, Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of decision of panel.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On June 24, 2005 the binational panel issued its decision in 
the review of the five year review made by the International Trade 
Commission, respecting Gray Portland Cement and Clinker from Mexico, 
NAFTA Secretariat File Number USA-MEX-2000-1904-10. The binational 
panel affirmed in part and remanded in part the International Trade 
Commission's determination. Copies of the panel decision are available 
from the U.S. Section of the NAFTA Secretariat.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Caratina L. Alston, United States 
Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite 2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue, 
Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482-5438.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter 19 of the North American Free-Trade 
Agreement (``Agreement'') establishes a mechanism to replace domestic 
judicial review of final determinations in antidumping and 
countervailing duty cases involving imports from a NAFTA country with 
review by independent binational panels. When a Request for Panel 
Review is filed, a panel is established to act in place of national 
courts to review expeditiously the final determination to determine 
whether it conforms with the antidumping or countervailing duty law of 
the country that made the determination.
    Under Article 1904 of the Agreement, which came into force on 
January 1, 1994, the Government of the United States, the Government of 
Canada and the Government of Mexico established Rules of Procedure for 
Article 1904 Binational Panel Reviews (``Rules''). These Rules were 
published in the Federal Register on February 23, 1994 (59 FR 8686). 
The panel review in this matter has been conducted in accordance with 
these Rules.
    Panel Decision: The panel affirmed in part and remanded in part the 
International Trade Commission's determination respecting Gray Portland 
Cement and Clinker from Mexico. The panel remanded on the following 
issues:
    1. On remand the Commission is to apply the ``probable'' or ``more 
likely than not'' standard announced by the CIT in Siderca when making 
its determination regarding likely volume, likely price effects, and 
likely impact on the industry.
    2. With regard to the likely volume of subject imports if the 
antidumping duty order is revoked, the Commission is to (a) explain how 
it is probable that subject imports would increase if the antidumping 
duty order is revoked, and (b) render a complete analysis of how the 
various third-country antidumping duty orders would affect the likely 
volume of subject imports to the United States.
    3. With regard to the likely price effects of subject imports on 
the industry if the order is revoked, the Commission is to (a) explain 
the price implications of revocation of the antidumping duty order with 
sufficient clarity to show how the record supports the Commission 
findings that revocation of the order would be likely to lead to 
significant negative price effects on the domestic industry, (b) 
explain how revocation of the antidumping duty order would be likely to 
lead to significant price underselling by subject imports of the 
domestic product, and (c) explain how subject imports are likely to 
enter the United States at prices that otherwise would have a 
significant price depressing or suppressing effect on the domestic 
product.
    4. With regard to the likely impact on the domestic industry if the 
antidumping duty order is revoked, the Commission is to (a) explain how 
it reached the conclusion that the order should remain in place in 
order to protect the highly-profitable, regional industry, given the 
continuing solid demand in the region and a substantial increase in 
non-Mexican cement

[[Page 38883]]

imports; (b) explain how it reached the conclusion that the regional 
industry would be likely to suffer material injury, having found that 
the regional industry is not in a vulnerable states; and (c) explain 
how the decreasing market share of the regional industry, due to a 
substantial increase in demand, was not attributed to imports of non-
Mexican cement.
    5. With regard to the Commission's conclusion that the producers of 
all or almost all of the production in the Southern Tier region would 
likely suffer material injury be reason of the dumped imports if the 
order is revoked, the Commission is to (a) explain why producers of all 
or almost all of the production in the Southern Tier region would 
likely be materially injured if the order is revoked, (b) explain what 
percentage of regional production would likely suffer material injury, 
and (c) explain what its aggregate and individual plant analyses 
consisted of and what anomalies, if any, the individual plant analysis 
revealed.
    6. The Commission is to fully evaluate the information concerning 
the proposed Southdown acquisition.
    The Commission was directed to issue it's determination on remand 
within 60 days of the issuance of the panel decision or not later than 
August 23, 2005.
    The Panel affirmed the Commission's determination in all other 
respects.

    Dated: June 30, 2005.
Caratina L. Alston,
U.S. Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat.
[FR Doc. E5-3551 Filed 7-5-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-GT-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.