Gray Portland Cement and Cement Clinker From Japan, 5069-5070 [E6-1178]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2006 / Notices The decision to cancel this previously scheduled meeting has been made due to efforts to fill a vacancy among the RAC members, as well as ongoing informational agenda items waiting for future decisional periods. Further scheduled meeting will still be held and published in upcoming notices of the Federal Register. A news release announcing the meeting cancellation will also be sent to Twin Falls area media outlets, thus complying with the steps indicated in the RAC charter to achieve such a cancellation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sky Buffat, Twin Falls District, Idaho 2536 Kimberly Road, Twin Falls, Idaho 83301, (208) 735–2068. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dated: January 25, 2006. Bill Baker, Twin Falls District Associate Manager. [FR Doc. E6–1185 Filed 1–30–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–GG–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Reclamation North Sonoma County Agricultural Reuse Project Sonoma County, CA Bureau of Reclamation, Interior. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS/ Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and notice of public scoping meeting. hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES AGENCY: SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and Public Resources Code, Section 21000–21178.1 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), the lead Federal agency, and the Sonoma County Water Agency (Agency), the lead State agency, propose to prepare a joint EIS/EIR for the proposed North Sonoma County Agricultural Reuse Project (Project). The purpose of the proposed Project is to: (1) Reduce agricultural reliance on natural regional water supplies; (2) provide an alternative source of water for agricultural irrigation; and (3) address potential regulatory issues. DATES: A scoping meeting will be held on February 16, 2006 from 5:30 p.m. to 8 p.m. in Healdsburg, California to solicit comments from interested parties to assist in determining the scope of the environmental analysis and to identify the significant issues related to the proposed Project. Written comment forms will be supplied for those who wish to submit written comments at the scoping meeting. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:34 Jan 30, 2006 Jkt 208001 The public scoping meeting will be held at Alexander Valley Community Hall, 5512 Highway 128, Healdsburg, California. Send written comments on the scope of the project to Mr. David Cuneo, Sonoma County Water Agency, P.O. Box 11628, Santa Rosa, California 95406, no later than March 15, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Cuneo at telephone number: (707) 547–1935 or e-mail address: david@scwa.ca.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Agency, in its continuing efforts to develop a recycled water supply for agricultural water users in the Russian River, Alexander, and Dry Creek valley areas (North Sonoma County area) has identified up to 25,000 acres of agricultural lands that could potentially use recycled water. Based on this estimate, the Agency developed the Project. The Project would include the design and construction of storage reservoirs, conveyance and distribution pipelines, and pump stations. The water for the Project would be tertiary-treated municipal wastewater generated and conveyed primarily through the City of Santa Rosa’s (City) Geysers Pipeline to the project areas. Reclamation is the federal lead agency because the Agency has entered into a cooperative funding agreement with Reclamation to provide matching funds up to $500,000 for the Project. The purpose of the Project is to provide a reliable alternative source of agricultural water to reduce reliance on natural regional water supplies and address regional water supply and regulatory issues. The Project is needed to address current and future regulatory concerns and regional water supply issues. The public would also benefit from this project through the reduction of use of natural regional water supplies, the reduction of wastewater discharges to regional waterways, and from the resulting environmental benefit to fish and wildlife. Two local groups, the Coalition for Sustainable Agriculture (CSA) and the Dry Creek Agricultural Water Users, Inc. (DCAWU) have expressed significant interest in participating in a recycled water project to develop alternative sources of water for existing agricultural use. The CSA and the DCAWU both recognize that increased instream demands for environmental purposes within the Russian River watershed will compete with agriculture and other uses for available water supplies in the region. The CSA and the DCAWU also recognize that the agricultural use of recycled water may benefit the ADDRESSES: PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 5069 environment, and consider the Project to be part of a regional water supply solution that balances the needs of municipalities, agricultural interests, and the environment. Presently, agricultural entities divert water directly from the Russian River and its tributaries, from the underflow of the Russian River and its tributaries, and from groundwater wells. Use of recycled water for agricultural purposes on project lands would reduce reliance on the Russian River and its tributaries as well as on local groundwater wells. Additionally, Federal and State regulatory agencies have expressed concern regarding potential impacts to fisheries resources and habitat within the Russian River and its tributaries. Providing agricultural lands with an alternative source of water would allow water to remain in the Russian River and its tributaries, thus providing benefits to listed fish species and their habitat. The recycled water would be used for agricultural purposes consistent with the California Code of Regulations, Title 22 pertaining to the use of tertiary-treated recycled water. Our practice is to make comments, including names and home addresses of respondents, available for public review. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their home addresses from public disclosure, which we will honor to the extent allowable by law. There also may be circumstances in which we would withhold a respondent’s identity from public disclosure, as allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and/or address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comment. We will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public disclosure in the entirety. Dated: December 2, 2005. Frank Michny, Regional Environmental Officer, Mid-Pacific Region. [FR Doc. E6–1189 Filed 1–30–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–MN–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 731–TA–461 (Second Review)] Gray Portland Cement and Cement Clinker From Japan International Trade Commission. AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\31JAN1.SGM 31JAN1 5070 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2006 / Notices Scheduling of an expedited 5year review concerning the antidumping duty order on gray portland cement and cement clinker from Japan. hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES ACTION: SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives notice of the scheduling of an expedited review pursuant to section 751(c)(3) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(3)) (the Act) to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty order on gray portland cement and cement clinker from Japan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. For further information concerning the conduct of this review and rules of general application, consult the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part 207). DATES: Effective Date: January 6, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim McClure (202–205–3191), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearingimpaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 205–1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server (https:// www.usitc.gov). The public record for this review may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background.—On January 6, 2006, the Commission determined that the domestic interested party group response to its notice of institution (70 FR 57617, October 3, 2005) of the subject 5-year review was adequate and that the respondent interested party group response was inadequate. The Commission did not find any other circumstances that would warrant conducting a full review.1 Accordingly, the Commission determined that it would conduct an expedited review pursuant to section 751(c)(3) of the Act. Staff report.—A staff report containing information concerning the subject matter of the review will be 1 Chairman Stephen Koplan and Commissioner Charlotte R. Lane dissenting. A record of the Commissioners’ votes, the Commission’s statement on adequacy, and any individual Commissioner’s statements will be available from the Office of the Secretary and at the Commission’s Web site. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:34 Jan 30, 2006 Jkt 208001 placed in the nonpublic record on April 27, 2006, and made available to persons on the Administrative Protective Order service list for this review. A public version will be issued thereafter, pursuant to section 207.62(d)(4) of the Commission’s rules. Written submissions.—As provided in section 207.62(d) of the Commission’s rules, interested parties that are parties to the review and that have provided individually adequate responses to the notice of institution,2 and any party other than an interested party to the review may file written comments with the Secretary on what determination the Commission should reach in the review. Comments are due on or before May 3, 2006 and may not contain new factual information. Any person that is neither a party to the 5-year review nor an interested party may submit a brief written statement (which shall not contain any new factual information) pertinent to the review by May 3, 2006. However, should the Department of Commerce extend the time limit for its completion of the final results of its review, the deadline for comments (which may not contain new factual information) on Commerce’s final results is three business days after the issuance of Commerce’s results. If comments contain business proprietary information (BPI), they must conform with the requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission’s rules. The Commission’s rules do not authorize filing of submissions with the Secretary by facsimile or electronic means, except to the extent permitted by section 201.8 of the Commission’s rules, as amended, 67 FR 68036 (November 8, 2002). Even where electronic filing of a document is permitted, certain documents must also be filed in paper form, as specified in II (C) of the Commission’s Handbook on Electronic Filing Procedures, 67 FR 68168, 68173 (November 8, 2002). In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each document filed by a party to the review must be served on all other parties to the review (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will 2 The Commission has found the responses submitted by the Committee for Fairly Traded Japanese Cement ; the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers; the United Steel, Paper & Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union; the International Union of Operating Engineers; and Local Lodge 93, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers to be individually adequate. Comments from other interested parties will not be accepted (see 19 CFR 207.62(d)(2)). PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service. Determination.—The Commission has determined to exercise its authority to extend the review period by up to 90 days pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(5)(B). Authority: This review is being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.62 of the Commission’s rules. Issued: January 25, 2006. By order of the Commission. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E6–1178 Filed 1–30–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 731–TA–377 (Second Review)] Internal Combustion Industrial Forklift Trucks From Japan Determination On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject five-year review, the United States International Trade Commission (Commission) determines, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)) (the Act), that revocation of the antidumping duty order on internal combustion industrial forklift trucks from Japan would not be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. Background The Commission instituted this review on March 1, 2005 (70 FR 9971) and determined on June 6, 2005 that it would conduct a full review (70 FR 36657, June 24, 2005). Notice of the scheduling of the Commission’s review and of a public hearing to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register on July 7, 2005 (70 FR 39333). The hearing was held in Washington, DC, on November 1, 2005, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission transmitted its determination in this review to the 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). E:\FR\FM\31JAN1.SGM 31JAN1

Agencies

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 20 (Tuesday, January 31, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5069-5070]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-1178]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 731-TA-461 (Second Review)]


Gray Portland Cement and Cement Clinker From Japan

AGENCY: International Trade Commission.

[[Page 5070]]


ACTION: Scheduling of an expedited 5-year review concerning the 
antidumping duty order on gray portland cement and cement clinker from 
Japan.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives notice of the scheduling of an 
expedited review pursuant to section 751(c)(3) of the Tariff Act of 
1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(3)) (the Act) to determine whether revocation 
of the antidumping duty order on gray portland cement and cement 
clinker from Japan would be likely to lead to continuation or 
recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. For 
further information concerning the conduct of this review and rules of 
general application, consult the Commission's Rules of Practice and 
Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 
207, subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part 207).

DATES: Effective Date: January 6, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim McClure (202-205-3191), Office of 
Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information 
on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-
1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special 
assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the 
Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning 
the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server 
(https://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this review may be viewed 
on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background.--On January 6, 2006, the Commission determined that the 
domestic interested party group response to its notice of institution 
(70 FR 57617, October 3, 2005) of the subject 5-year review was 
adequate and that the respondent interested party group response was 
inadequate. The Commission did not find any other circumstances that 
would warrant conducting a full review.\1\ Accordingly, the Commission 
determined that it would conduct an expedited review pursuant to 
section 751(c)(3) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Chairman Stephen Koplan and Commissioner Charlotte R. Lane 
dissenting. A record of the Commissioners' votes, the Commission's 
statement on adequacy, and any individual Commissioner's statements 
will be available from the Office of the Secretary and at the 
Commission's Web site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Staff report.--A staff report containing information concerning the 
subject matter of the review will be placed in the nonpublic record on 
April 27, 2006, and made available to persons on the Administrative 
Protective Order service list for this review. A public version will be 
issued thereafter, pursuant to section 207.62(d)(4) of the Commission's 
rules.
    Written submissions.--As provided in section 207.62(d) of the 
Commission's rules, interested parties that are parties to the review 
and that have provided individually adequate responses to the notice of 
institution,\2\ and any party other than an interested party to the 
review may file written comments with the Secretary on what 
determination the Commission should reach in the review. Comments are 
due on or before May 3, 2006 and may not contain new factual 
information. Any person that is neither a party to the 5-year review 
nor an interested party may submit a brief written statement (which 
shall not contain any new factual information) pertinent to the review 
by May 3, 2006. However, should the Department of Commerce extend the 
time limit for its completion of the final results of its review, the 
deadline for comments (which may not contain new factual information) 
on Commerce's final results is three business days after the issuance 
of Commerce's results. If comments contain business proprietary 
information (BPI), they must conform with the requirements of sections 
201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. The Commission's 
rules do not authorize filing of submissions with the Secretary by 
facsimile or electronic means, except to the extent permitted by 
section 201.8 of the Commission's rules, as amended, 67 FR 68036 
(November 8, 2002). Even where electronic filing of a document is 
permitted, certain documents must also be filed in paper form, as 
specified in II (C) of the Commission's Handbook on Electronic Filing 
Procedures, 67 FR 68168, 68173 (November 8, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission has found the responses submitted by the 
Committee for Fairly Traded Japanese Cement ; the International 
Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, 
Forgers and Helpers; the United Steel, Paper & Forestry, Rubber, 
Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers 
International Union; the International Union of Operating Engineers; 
and Local Lodge 93, International Association of Machinists and 
Aerospace Workers to be individually adequate. Comments from other 
interested parties will not be accepted (see 19 CFR 207.62(d)(2)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each 
document filed by a party to the review must be served on all other 
parties to the review (as identified by either the public or BPI 
service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The 
Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate 
of service.
    Determination.--The Commission has determined to exercise its 
authority to extend the review period by up to 90 days pursuant to 19 
U.S.C. 1675(c)(5)(B).

    Authority: This review is being conducted under authority of 
title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published 
pursuant to section 207.62 of the Commission's rules.

    Issued: January 25, 2006.

    By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
 [FR Doc. E6-1178 Filed 1-30-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P

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