Pacific Fishery Management Council; Notice of Intent, Extension of Public Scoping Period for Intersector Groundfish Allocations, 34306-34307 [E6-9309]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
34306
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 14, 2006 / Notices
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Washington DC 20230; telephone (202)
482–0414.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On November 17, 2004, the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) published its notice of
final determination of sales at less than
fair value (‘‘LTFV’’) in the investigation
of wooden bedroom furniture the
People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). See
Final Determination. On January 4,
2005, the Department published its
notice of amended final determination
in the investigation of wooden bedroom
furniture from the PRC. See Amended
Final Determination.
Decca Hospitality Furnishings, LLC
on behalf of its affiliate Decca Furniture,
Ltd. (‘‘Decca’’) challenged certain
aspects of the Department’s Final
Determination at the CIT.
In Decca Hospitality Furnishings, LLC
v. United States, 391 F. Supp. 2d 1298
(CIT 2005), the CIT remanded the
Department’s determination to reject, as
untimely, certain information submitted
by Decca. Specifically, the CIT’s order
directed that:
In its remand determination
Commerce may reopen the record
and may find a) that Decca received
actual and timely notice of the
Section A Questionnaire
requirement, b) that the evidence
Decca presented does not satisfy the
evidentiary requirements for a
separate rate, or c) that Decca is
entitled to a separate rate.
Id. at 1317.
On October 25, 2005, the Department
issued a draft results of redetermination
pursuant to remand to the interested
parties. On October 27, 2005, Decca
submitted comments in response to the
Department’s draft results of
redetermination. No other party filed
comments in response to the
Department’s draft results of
redetermination pursuant to remand. On
November 7, 2005, the Department
submitted its final results of
redetermination pursuant to remand to
the CIT. The final results of remand
redetermination explained that option
(a) of the CIT’s remand instructions was
not a viable option for the Department
to pursue because it was not possible for
the Department to determine if Decca
had received actual and timely notice of
the Section A Questionnaire
requirement. Therefore, pursuant to
options (b) and (c), the Department
reopened the record and allowed Decca
to resubmit its July 2, 2004, submission.
During the conduct of its remand, the
Department issued two supplemental
questionnaires to Decca to address some
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:47 Jun 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
deficiencies found in Decca’s July 2,
2004, submission. Decca submitted
timely and complete responses to these
questionnaires. Based on our analysis of
Decca’s evidence, we determined that
Decca qualifies for a separate rate in the
investigation of wooden bedroom
furniture from the PRC. See Final
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to
Court Remand, November 7, 2005.
On December 20, 2005, the CIT found
that the Department duly complied with
the Court’s remand order and sustained
the Department’s remand
redetermination. See Decca Order.
Within the Decca Order, the Department
granted Decca a separate rate which
changed its antidumping duty rate from
the PRC–wide rate of 198.08 percent to
the Section A respondent rate of 6.65
percent.
On January 6, 2006, consistent with
the decision in Timken Co. v. United
States, 893 F. 2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990),
the Department notified the public that
the CIT’s decision was not ‘‘in
harmony’’ with the Department’s final
determination. See Wooden Bedroom
Furniture from the People’s Republic of
China: Notice of Court Decision Not in
Harmony, 71 FR 1511 (January 10,
2006). AFMC appealed the CIT’s
decision to the CAFC. On May 16, 2006,
the CAFC granted AFMC’s motion to
voluntarily dismiss its appeal.
Because the only appeal in this case
has been dismissed, there is now a final
and conclusive court decision in the
court proceeding and we are thus
amending the Amended Final
Determination to reflect the results of
our remand determination.
The revised dumping margin is as
follows:
Weighted–Average
Margin (Percent)
Decca ............................
6.65
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
will require a cash deposit rate of 6.65
percent for subject merchandise
exported by Decca and entered or
withdrawn from warehouse from
consumption on or after the effective
date of this notice. This cash deposit
requirement shall remain in effect until
publication of the final results of an
administrative review of this order.
This notice is published in
accordance with sections 735(d) and
777(i) of the Act.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[I.D. 111505A]
Pacific Fishery Management Council;
Notice of Intent, Extension of Public
Scoping Period for Intersector
Groundfish Allocations
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Extension of public scoping
period for an environmental impact
statement (EIS); request for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS and the Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Pacific Council)
announce their intent to extend the
public scoping period for an EIS in
accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of
1969 to analyze proposals to allocate
groundfish among various sectors of the
non-tribal Pacific Coast groundfish
fishery.
Public scoping meetings will be
announced in the Federal Register at a
later date. Written comments will be
accepted at the Pacific Council office
through August 23, 2006. The public
comment period will be reopened as
part of the public comment section
under the intersector allocation agenda
item at the Pacific Council meeting in
Foster City, CA, the week of Monday,
September 11, 2006. Additional
information on the time and location for
this meeting will be provided when the
meeting is announced in the Federal
Register.
DATES:
Amended Final Determination
Company
Dated: June 7, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–9313 Filed 6–13–06; 8:45 am]
You may submit comments,
on issues and alternatives, identified by
111505A by any of the following
methods:
• E-mail:
##GFAllocationEIS.nwr@noaa.gov.
Include [111505A] and enter ‘‘Scoping
Comments’’ in the subject line of the
message.
• Fax: 503–820–2299.
• Mail: Dr. Donald McIsaac, Pacific
Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE
Ambassador Pl., Suite 200, Portland, OR
97220.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
John DeVore, Pacific Fishery
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\14JNN1.SGM
14JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 14, 2006 / Notices
Management Council, phone: 503–820–
2280, fax: 503–820–2299 and email:
john.devore@noaa.gov; or Ms. Yvonne
de Reynier NMFS, Northwest Region,
phone: 206–526–6129, fax: 206–526–
6426 and email:
yvonne.dereynier@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
This Federal Register document is
available on the Government Printing
Office’s website at: www.gpoaccess.gov/
fr/.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Description of the Proposal
The proposed action with a
description of the proposal was noticed
in the Federal Register on November 21,
2005 (70 FR 70054).
Preliminary Identification of
Environmental Issues
A principal objective of this scoping
and public input process is to identify
potentially significant impacts to the
human environment that should be
analyzed in depth in the intersector
allocation EIS. Concomitant with
identification of those impacts to be
analyzed in depth is identification and
elimination from detailed study of
issues that are not significant or which
have been covered in prior
environmental reviews. This narrowing
is intended to allow greater focus on
those impacts that are potentially most
significant. Impacts on the following
components of the biological and
physical environment will be evaluated:
(1) Essential fish habitat and
ecosystems; (2) protected species listed
under the Endangered Species Act and
Marine Mammal Protection Act and
their habitat; and (3) the fishery
management unit, including target and
non-target fish stocks. Socioeconomic
impacts are also considered in terms of
the effect changes will have on the
following groups: (1) those who
participate in harvesting the fishery
resources and other living marine
resources (for commercial, subsistence,
or recreational purposes); (2) those who
process and market fish and fish
products; (3) those who are involved in
allied support industries; (4) those who
rely on living marine resources in the
management area; (5) those who
consume fish products; (6) those who
benefit from non-consumptive use (e.g.,
wildlife viewing); (7) those who do not
use the resource, but derive benefit from
it by virtue of its existence, the option
to use it, or the bequest of the resource
to future generations; (8) those involved
in managing and monitoring fisheries;
and (9) fishing communities. Analysis of
the effects of the alternatives on these
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:47 Jun 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
groups will be presented in a manner
that allows the identification of any
disproportionate impacts on low income
and minority segments of the identified
groups, impacts on small entities, and
cumulative impacts. Additional
comment is sought on other types of
impacts that should be considered or
specific impacts to which particular
attention should be paid within these
categories.
Scoping and Public Involvement
Scoping is an early and open process
for identifying the scope of notable
issues related to proposed alternatives
(including status quo and other
alternatives identified during the
scoping process). A principal objective
of the scoping and public input process
is to identify a reasonable set of
alternatives that, with adequate
analysis, sharply define critical issues
and provide a clear basis for
distinguishing among those alternatives
and selecting a preferred alternative.
The public scoping process provides the
public with the opportunity to comment
on the range of alternatives. The scope
of the alternatives to be analyzed should
be broad enough for the Pacific Council
and NMFS to make informed decisions
on whether an alternative should be
developed and, if so, how it should be
designed, and to assess other changes to
the FMP and regulations necessary for
the implementation of the alternative.
Written comments will be accepted at
the Pacific Council office through
August 23, 2006 (see ADDRESSES). The
public comment period will be
reopened as part of the public comment
section under the intersector allocation
agenda item at the Pacific Council
meeting in Foster City, CA, the week of
September 11, 2006. Additional
information on the time and location for
this meeting will be provided when the
meeting is announced in the Federal
Register. This information will also be
posted on the Council website
(www.pcouncil.org).
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: June 8, 2006.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E6–9309 Filed 6–13–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
34307
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
[Docket No.: PTO–2005–0012]
RIN 0651–AB98
Request for Comments on Interim
Guidelines for Examination of Patent
Applications for Patent Subject Matter
Eligibility
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Request for comments;
extension of comment period.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) has, in
response to recent case law, revised its
guidelines to be used by USPTO
personnel in their review of patent
applications to determine whether the
claims in a patent application are
directed to patent eligible subject
matter. The USPTO published a notice
requesting comments from the public
regarding these interim examination
guidelines. The USPTO is extending the
period for comment on these interim
examination guidelines.
Comment Deadline Date: To be
ensured of consideration, written
comments must be received on or before
July 31, 2006. No public hearing will be
held.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent
by electronic mail message over the
Internet addressed to
AB98.Comments@uspto.gov. Comments
may also be submitted by mail
addressed to: Mail Stop Comments—
Patents, Commissioner for Patents, P.O.
Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313–1450,
or by facsimile to (571) 273–0125,
marked to the attention of Linda
Therkorn. Although comments may be
submitted by mail or facsimile, the
Office prefers to receive comments via
the Internet.
Comments may also be sent by
electronic mail message over the
Internet via the Federal eRulemaking
Portal. See the Federal eRulemaking
Portal Web site (https://
www.regulations.gov) for additional
instructions on providing comments via
the Federal eRulemaking Portal.
The comments will be available for
public inspection at the Office of the
Commissioner for Patents, located in
Madison East, Tenth Floor, 600 Dulany
Street, Alexandria, Virginia, and will be
available via the Office Internet Web site
(address: https://www.uspto.gov).
Because comments will be made
available for public inspection,
information that is not desired to be
made public, such as an address or
E:\FR\FM\14JNN1.SGM
14JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 14, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34306-34307]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-9309]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[I.D. 111505A]
Pacific Fishery Management Council; Notice of Intent, Extension
of Public Scoping Period for Intersector Groundfish Allocations
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Extension of public scoping period for an environmental impact
statement (EIS); request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS and the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Pacific
Council) announce their intent to extend the public scoping period for
an EIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
of 1969 to analyze proposals to allocate groundfish among various
sectors of the non-tribal Pacific Coast groundfish fishery.
DATES: Public scoping meetings will be announced in the Federal
Register at a later date. Written comments will be accepted at the
Pacific Council office through August 23, 2006. The public comment
period will be reopened as part of the public comment section under the
intersector allocation agenda item at the Pacific Council meeting in
Foster City, CA, the week of Monday, September 11, 2006. Additional
information on the time and location for this meeting will be provided
when the meeting is announced in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, on issues and alternatives,
identified by 111505A by any of the following methods:
E-mail: ##GFAllocationEIS.nwr@noaa.gov. Include [111505A]
and enter ``Scoping Comments'' in the subject line of the message.
Fax: 503-820-2299.
Mail: Dr. Donald McIsaac, Pacific Fishery Management
Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Pl., Suite 200, Portland, OR 97220.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John DeVore, Pacific Fishery
[[Page 34307]]
Management Council, phone: 503-820-2280, fax: 503-820-2299 and email:
john.devore@noaa.gov; or Ms. Yvonne de Reynier NMFS, Northwest Region,
phone: 206-526-6129, fax: 206-526-6426 and email:
yvonne.dereynier@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
This Federal Register document is available on the Government
Printing Office's website at: www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
Description of the Proposal
The proposed action with a description of the proposal was noticed
in the Federal Register on November 21, 2005 (70 FR 70054).
Preliminary Identification of Environmental Issues
A principal objective of this scoping and public input process is
to identify potentially significant impacts to the human environment
that should be analyzed in depth in the intersector allocation EIS.
Concomitant with identification of those impacts to be analyzed in
depth is identification and elimination from detailed study of issues
that are not significant or which have been covered in prior
environmental reviews. This narrowing is intended to allow greater
focus on those impacts that are potentially most significant. Impacts
on the following components of the biological and physical environment
will be evaluated: (1) Essential fish habitat and ecosystems; (2)
protected species listed under the Endangered Species Act and Marine
Mammal Protection Act and their habitat; and (3) the fishery management
unit, including target and non-target fish stocks. Socioeconomic
impacts are also considered in terms of the effect changes will have on
the following groups: (1) those who participate in harvesting the
fishery resources and other living marine resources (for commercial,
subsistence, or recreational purposes); (2) those who process and
market fish and fish products; (3) those who are involved in allied
support industries; (4) those who rely on living marine resources in
the management area; (5) those who consume fish products; (6) those who
benefit from non-consumptive use (e.g., wildlife viewing); (7) those
who do not use the resource, but derive benefit from it by virtue of
its existence, the option to use it, or the bequest of the resource to
future generations; (8) those involved in managing and monitoring
fisheries; and (9) fishing communities. Analysis of the effects of the
alternatives on these groups will be presented in a manner that allows
the identification of any disproportionate impacts on low income and
minority segments of the identified groups, impacts on small entities,
and cumulative impacts. Additional comment is sought on other types of
impacts that should be considered or specific impacts to which
particular attention should be paid within these categories.
Scoping and Public Involvement
Scoping is an early and open process for identifying the scope of
notable issues related to proposed alternatives (including status quo
and other alternatives identified during the scoping process). A
principal objective of the scoping and public input process is to
identify a reasonable set of alternatives that, with adequate analysis,
sharply define critical issues and provide a clear basis for
distinguishing among those alternatives and selecting a preferred
alternative. The public scoping process provides the public with the
opportunity to comment on the range of alternatives. The scope of the
alternatives to be analyzed should be broad enough for the Pacific
Council and NMFS to make informed decisions on whether an alternative
should be developed and, if so, how it should be designed, and to
assess other changes to the FMP and regulations necessary for the
implementation of the alternative.
Written comments will be accepted at the Pacific Council office
through August 23, 2006 (see ADDRESSES). The public comment period will
be reopened as part of the public comment section under the intersector
allocation agenda item at the Pacific Council meeting in Foster City,
CA, the week of September 11, 2006. Additional information on the time
and location for this meeting will be provided when the meeting is
announced in the Federal Register. This information will also be posted
on the Council website (www.pcouncil.org).
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: June 8, 2006.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E6-9309 Filed 6-13-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
