Pacific Fishery Management Council; Notice of Intent, Extension of Public Scoping Period for Intersector Groundfish Allocations, 34306-34307 [E6-9309]

Download as PDF 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/index/html. 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 (http:// 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: http://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/index/html.

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