Extension of Time Limits for Preliminary Results and Final Results of the Full Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand, 42082-42083 [E6-11839]

Download as PDF sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES 42082 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 142 / Tuesday, July 25, 2006 / Notices Title: Survey of Foreign Airline Operators’ Revenues and Expenses in the United States. Form Number(s): BE–9. Agency Approval Number: 0608– 0068. Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection. Burden: 1,920 hours. Number of Respondents: 60 per quarter; 240 annually. Average Hours Per Response: 8 hours. Needs and Uses: The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) is responsible for the compilation of the U.S. international transactions accounts (ITA), which it publishes quarterly in news releases, on its Web site, and in its monthly journal, the Survey of Current Business. These accounts provide a statistical summary of all U.S. international transactions and, as such, are one of the major statistical products of BEA. They are used extensively by both government and private organizations for national and international economic policy formulation and for analytical purposes. The information collected in this survey is used to develop the ‘‘transportation’’ portion of the ITA. Without this information, an integral component of the ITA would be omitted. No other Government agency collects comprehensive quarterly data on foreign airline operators’ revenues and expenses in the United States. The survey requests information from U.S. agents of foreign air carriers operating in the United States. The information is collected on a quarterly basis from foreign air carriers with annual total covered revenues or annual total covered expenses incurred in the United States of $5,000,000 or more. Foreign air carriers with annual total covered revenues and annual total covered expenses each below $5,000,000 are exempt from reporting. Affected Public: U.S. agents of foreign air carriers. Frequency: Quarterly. Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory. Legal Authority: The International Investment and Trade in Services Survey Act, 22 U.S.C. 3101–3108, as amended. OMB Desk Officer: Paul Bugg, (202) 395–3093. You may obtain copies of the above information collection proposal by writing Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230, or via e-mail at dhynek@doc.gov. VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:02 Jul 24, 2006 Jkt 208001 Send written comments on the proposed information collection within 30 days of publication of this notice to the Office of Management and Budget, O.I.R.A., Attention PRA Desk Officer for BEA, via e-mail at pbugg@omb.eop.gov, or by FAX at 202–395–7245. Dated: July 20, 2006. Madeleine Clayton, Management Analyst, Office of Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E6–11814 Filed 7–24–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–06–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign–Trade Zones Board Order No. 1465 Grant of Authority for Subzone Status, Eastman Kodak Company, (X–ray Film, Color Paper, Digital Media, Inkjet Paper, Entertainment Imaging, and Health Imaging), Lawrenceville, Georgia Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign–Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), the Foreign– Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order: WHEREAS, the Foreign–Trade Zones Act provides for ‘‘ . . . the establishment . . . of foreign–trade zones in ports of entry of the United States, to expedite and encourage foreign commerce, and for other purposes,’’ and authorizes the Foreign–Trade Zones Board to grant to qualified corporations the privilege of establishing foreign–trade zones in or adjacent to U.S. Customs ports of entry; WHEREAS, the Board’s regulations (15 CFR Part 400) provide for the establishment of special–purpose subzones when existing zone facilities cannot serve the specific use involved, and when the activity results in a significant public benefit and is in the public interest; WHEREAS, Georgia Foreign–Trade Zone, Inc., grantee of Foreign–Trade Zone 26, has made application to the Board for authority to establish special– purpose subzone status at the warehousing, processing and distribution facility (X–ray film, color paper, digital media, inkjet paper, entertainment imaging, and health imaging) of the Eastman Kodak Company, located in Lawrenceville, Georgia (FTZ Docket 47–2005, filed 9/ 26/2005; amended 5/15/2006); WHEREAS, notice inviting public comment has been given in the Federal Register (70 FR 57556–57557, 10/3/ 2005); and, WHEREAS, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 examiner’s report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations would be satisfied, and that approval of the application would be in the public interest; NOW, THEREFORE, the Board hereby grants authority for subzone status for activity related to X–ray film, color paper, digital media, inkjet paper, entertainment imaging, and health imaging at the warehousing, processing and distribution facility of the Eastman Kodak Company, located in Lawrenceville, Georgia (Subzone 26J), as described in the amended application and Federal Register notice, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations, including Section 400.28, and further subject to a restriction that privileged foreign status (19 CFR Part 146.41) shall be elected: 1. On foreign merchandise that falls under HTSUS headings or subheadings 2821, 2823, all of Chapter 32 or 3901.20 or where the foreign merchandise in question is described as a ‘‘pigment, pigment preparation, masterbatch, plastic concentrate, flush color, paint dispersion, coloring preparation, or colorant.’’ 2. On foreign merchandise that falls under HTSUS heading 4202, with the exception of merchandise classified in HTSUS categories 4202.91.0090 and 4202.92.9060. Signed at Washington, DC, this 14th day of July 2006. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary of Commercefor Import Administration,Alternate ChairmanForeign– Trade Zones Board. ATTEST: Andrew McGilvray, Acting Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E6–11873 Filed 7–24–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (A–549–813) Extension of Time Limits for Preliminary Results and Final Results of the Full Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: July 25, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zev Primor, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\25JYN1.SGM 25JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 142 / Tuesday, July 25, 2006 / Notices Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230; telephone: 202– 482–4114. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES Background The Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) initiated the second sunset review of canned pineapple fruit (‘‘CPF’’) from Thailand on April 3, 2006. See Initiation of Five–year ‘‘Sunset’’ Reviews, 71 FR 16551 (April 3, 2006). On April 17, 2006, we received notification of intent to participate from the domestic interested party, Maui Pineapple Co., Ltd., (‘‘Maui’’) in accordance with 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3). On May 3, 2006, Maui and the respondent interested parties filed substantive comments with the Department.1 On May 22, 2006, the Department issued a preliminary adequacy determination stating that the respondents in the ongoing sunset review did not meet the adequacy requirements. See Memorandum from Zev Primor to Tom Futtner, ‘‘Adequacy Determination in Antidumping Duty Sunset Review of Canned Pineapple from Thailand’’ (May 22, 2006). On May 30, 2006, and June 8, 2006, we received timely comments pertaining to our adequacy calculation methodology from the respondent interested parties and Maui, respectively. Upon review of the parties’ comments, we modified our calculation methodology and determined that the respondent interested parties meet the adequacy requirements. See Memorandum from Zev Primor to Tom Futtner, ‘‘Correction to the Adequacy Calculation in the Antidumping Duty Sunset Review of Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand’’ (July 12, 2006). Consequently, the Department determined to conduct a full sunset review of the antidumping duty order on CPF from Thailand as provided at section 751(c)(5)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), and at 19 CFR 351.218(e)(2)(i) because: (1) the parties’ substantive responses met the requirements of 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3), and (2) both the information on the record and our review of the proprietary Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) data indicated that the respondent interested parties account for more than 50 percent 1 The respondent interested parties are: Pineapple Processors Group; the Thai Food Processors Association; Thai Pineapple Canning Industry Corp. Ltd.; Malee Sampran Public Co., Ltd.; The Siam Agro Industry Pineapples and Others Public Co., Ltd.; Great Oriental Food Products Co. Ltd.; Thai Pineapple Products and Other Fruits Co., Ltd.; The Tipco Foods (Thailand) PCL; Pranburi Hotei Co., Ltd.; and Siam Fruit Canning (1988) Co., Ltd. VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:02 Jul 24, 2006 Jkt 208001 of the exports to the United States, the level that the Department normally considers to be an adequate response to the notice of initiation by respondent interested parties under 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(A). Id. Extension of Time Limits With respect to the preliminary results of a sunset review, the Department’s regulations, at 19 CFR 351.218(f)(1), provide that the Department normally will issue its preliminary results in a full sunset review not later than 110 days after the date of publication of initiation in the Federal Register. However, in accordance with section 751(c)(5)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(f)(3)(ii), the Department may extend the period of time for making its final determination by not more than 90 days, if it determines that the review is extraordinarily complicated. Because some of the issues are complex, the Department has determined, pursuant to section 751(c)(5)(C)(ii) of the Act, that the sunset review is extraordinarily complicated and will require additional time for the Department to complete its analysis. Due to the complex nature of the CPB and shipment data, revocation of a number of companies during the period of review, and the change from the expedited to a full sunset review, the Department will require additional time to conduct the analysis necessary for the preliminary results. The Department’s preliminary results of the full sunset review of the antidumping duty order on CPF from Thailand are currently scheduled for July 22, 2006, and the final results are currently scheduled for November 29, 2006. As a result of our decision to extend the deadline for the preliminary results of review, the Department intends to issue the preliminary results of the full sunset review of the antidumping duty order on CPF from Thailand no later than October 20, 2006, and the final results of the review no later than February 27, 2007. These dates are 90 days from the originally scheduled dates of the preliminary and final results of this sunset review. This notice is issued in accordance with sections 751(c)(5)(B) and (C)(ii) of the Act. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6–11839 Filed 7–24–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 42083 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (A–122–840) Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Canada: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: July 25, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Damian Felton or Brandon Farlander, AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0133 or (202) 482– 0182, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background On October 3, 2005, the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) published an opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod from Canada for the period October 1, 2004, to September 30, 2005. See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Filing, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request an Administrative Review, 70 FR 57558 (October 3, 2005). On May 25, 2006, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice extending the time limit for the preliminary results of the administrative review from July 3, 2006, to August 2, 2006. See Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Canada: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 30116 May 25, 2006). The preliminary results of this administrative review are currently due August 2, 2006. 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 issue preliminary results within 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of an order. However, if it is not practicable to complete the review within this time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the time period to a maximum of 365 days. We determine that completion of the preliminary results of this review by August 2, 2006, is not practicable E:\FR\FM\25JYN1.SGM 25JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 142 (Tuesday, July 25, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42082-42083]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-11839]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

(A-549-813)


Extension of Time Limits for Preliminary Results and Final 
Results of the Full Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on 
Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 25, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zev Primor, Office 4, Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th

[[Page 42083]]

Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230; telephone: 
202-482-4114.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') initiated the 
second sunset review of canned pineapple fruit (``CPF'') from Thailand 
on April 3, 2006. See Initiation of Five-year ``Sunset'' Reviews, 71 FR 
16551 (April 3, 2006). On April 17, 2006, we received notification of 
intent to participate from the domestic interested party, Maui 
Pineapple Co., Ltd., (``Maui'') in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.218(d)(3). On May 3, 2006, Maui and the respondent interested 
parties filed substantive comments with the Department.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The respondent interested parties are: Pineapple Processors 
Group; the Thai Food Processors Association; Thai Pineapple Canning 
Industry Corp. Ltd.; Malee Sampran Public Co., Ltd.; The Siam Agro 
Industry Pineapples and Others Public Co., Ltd.; Great Oriental Food 
Products Co. Ltd.; Thai Pineapple Products and Other Fruits Co., 
Ltd.; The Tipco Foods (Thailand) PCL; Pranburi Hotei Co., Ltd.; and 
Siam Fruit Canning (1988) Co., Ltd.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 22, 2006, the Department issued a preliminary adequacy 
determination stating that the respondents in the ongoing sunset review 
did not meet the adequacy requirements. See Memorandum from Zev Primor 
to Tom Futtner, ``Adequacy Determination in Antidumping Duty Sunset 
Review of Canned Pineapple from Thailand'' (May 22, 2006). On May 30, 
2006, and June 8, 2006, we received timely comments pertaining to our 
adequacy calculation methodology from the respondent interested parties 
and Maui, respectively. Upon review of the parties' comments, we 
modified our calculation methodology and determined that the respondent 
interested parties meet the adequacy requirements. See Memorandum from 
Zev Primor to Tom Futtner, ``Correction to the Adequacy Calculation in 
the Antidumping Duty Sunset Review of Canned Pineapple Fruit from 
Thailand'' (July 12, 2006). Consequently, the Department determined to 
conduct a full sunset review of the antidumping duty order on CPF from 
Thailand as provided at section 751(c)(5)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 
as amended (``the Act''), and at 19 CFR 351.218(e)(2)(i) because: (1) 
the parties' substantive responses met the requirements of 19 CFR 
351.218(d)(3), and (2) both the information on the record and our 
review of the proprietary Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') data 
indicated that the respondent interested parties account for more than 
50 percent of the exports to the United States, the level that the 
Department normally considers to be an adequate response to the notice 
of initiation by respondent interested parties under 19 CFR 
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(A). Id.

Extension of Time Limits

    With respect to the preliminary results of a sunset review, the 
Department's regulations, at 19 CFR 351.218(f)(1), provide that the 
Department normally will issue its preliminary results in a full sunset 
review not later than 110 days after the date of publication of 
initiation in the Federal Register. However, in accordance with section 
751(c)(5)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(f)(3)(ii), the Department 
may extend the period of time for making its final determination by not 
more than 90 days, if it determines that the review is extraordinarily 
complicated. Because some of the issues are complex, the Department has 
determined, pursuant to section 751(c)(5)(C)(ii) of the Act, that the 
sunset review is extraordinarily complicated and will require 
additional time for the Department to complete its analysis. Due to the 
complex nature of the CPB and shipment data, revocation of a number of 
companies during the period of review, and the change from the 
expedited to a full sunset review, the Department will require 
additional time to conduct the analysis necessary for the preliminary 
results.
    The Department's preliminary results of the full sunset review of 
the antidumping duty order on CPF from Thailand are currently scheduled 
for July 22, 2006, and the final results are currently scheduled for 
November 29, 2006. As a result of our decision to extend the deadline 
for the preliminary results of review, the Department intends to issue 
the preliminary results of the full sunset review of the antidumping 
duty order on CPF from Thailand no later than October 20, 2006, and the 
final results of the review no later than February 27, 2007. These 
dates are 90 days from the originally scheduled dates of the 
preliminary and final results of this sunset review.
    This notice is issued in accordance with sections 751(c)(5)(B) and 
(C)(ii) of the Act.

Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6-11839 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S