Oleoresin Paprika from India, Inv. 731-TA-923 (Preliminary)

=== USITC Determination - Preliminary === 21015Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 81 / Thursday, April 26, 2001 / Notices 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). 2 Other applicable subheadings identified in Commerce’s scope include 1301.90.90, 1302.19.90, 3203.00.80, 3205.00.05, and 3301.90.50. Dated: April 16, 2001. Maria Burks, Superintendent. [FR Doc. 01–10400 Filed 4–25–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–76–M DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations Nominations for the following properties being considered for listing in the National Register were received by the National Park Service before April 14, 2001. Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60 written comments concerning the significance of these properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation may be forwarded to the National Register, National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW., NC400, Washington, DC 20240. Written comments should be submitted by May 11, 2001. Carol D. Shull, Keeper of the National Register of Historic Places. ARKANSAS Madison County Williams House and Associated Farmstead, AR 1, St. Paul, 01000508 Marion County Oak Grove Cemetery, 7th St., Des Arc, 01000507 CALIFORNIA San Luis Obispo County Carrizo Plain Rock Art Discontiguous District, Address Restricted, California Valley, 01000509 LOUISIANA Caddo Parish Mason House, 103 Ardmore, Shreveport, 01000512 Webster Parish Fitzgerald House, 304 McDonald, Minden, 01000510 NORTH CAROLINA Caldwell County Poe, Edgar Allan, House, 506 Main St. NW, Lenoir, 01000514 Cleveland County Central School Historic District, Roughly N. Battleground Ave., N. Piedmont Ave., E. King St., E. Ridge Ave., and N. Gaston St., Kings Mountain, 01000513 Robeson County Rowland Depot, W. Main St. and W. Railroad St., Rowland, 01000511 TEXAS Jasper County Aldridge Sawmill, (Early Twentieth Century Logging Industry Historic Resources on the National Forests and Grasslands in Texas MPS), S side of Angelina National Forest, Zavalla, 01000515 Webb County Laredo US Post Office, Court House and Custom House, 1300 Matamoros, Laredo, 01000516 UTAH Uintah County Carter Road, Ashley National Forest, Ashley National Forest, 01000517 A request for removal has been made for the following resources: Beaver County Beaver High School, (Beaver MRA), 150 N. Main St., Beaver, 82004077 Salt Lake County Jordan High School, 9351 S. State St., Sandy, 84002203 Technical High School, 241 N. 300 West, Salt Lake City, 80003934 Summit County Silver King Ore Loading Station, Park Ave., Park City, 78002698 Utah County Bullock, Benjamin Kimball, Farmhouse, 1705 S. State, Provo, 85003042 Lehi Fifth Ward Meetinghouse, 121 N. 100 East, approx., Lehi, 92001688 Weber County Burch-Taylor Mill, 4287 Riverdale Rd., Ogden, 82004186 [FR Doc. 01–10290 Filed 4–25–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–70–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigations Nos. 731–TA–703 and 705 (Review)] Furfuryl Alcohol From China and Thailand Determinations On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject five-year reviews, the United States International Trade 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 orders on furfuryl alcohol from China and Thailand would 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 these reviews on May 1, 2000 (65 FR 25363) and determined on August 3, 2000, that it would conduct full reviews (65 FR 50003, August 16, 2000). Notice of the scheduling of the Commission’s reviews 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 November 6, 2000 (65 FR 66559). The hearing was held in Washington, DC, on March 1, 2001, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission transmitted its determinations in these reviews to the Secretary of Commerce on April 20, 2001. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 3412 (April 2001), entitled Furfuryl Alcohol From China and Thailand: Investigations Nos. 731–TA–703 and 705 (Review). By order of the Commission. Issued: April 20, 2001. Donna R. Koehnke, Secretary. [FR Doc. 01–10298 Filed 4–25–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 731–TA–923 (Preliminary)] Oleoresin Paprika From India Determination On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigation, the United States International Trade Commission determines, pursuant to section 733(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1673b(a)), that there is no reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or that the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of imports from India of oleoresin paprika, provided for in subheading 3301.90.10 2 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the VerDate 11<MAY>2000 18:13 Apr 25, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\26APN1.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 26APN1 21016 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 81 / Thursday, April 26, 2001 / Notices United States, that are alleged to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). Background On March 6, 2001, a petition was filed with the Commission and the Department of Commerce by Rezolex, Ltd. Co., Las Cruces, NM, alleging that an industry in the United States is materially injured and threatened with material injury by reason of LTFV imports of oleoresin paprika from India. Accordingly, effective March 6, 2001, the Commission instituted antidumping duty investigation No. 731–TA–923 (Preliminary). Notice of the institution of the Commission’s investigation and of a public conference 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 of March 14, 2001 (66 FR 14934). The conference was held in Washington, DC, on March 26, 2001, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission transmitted its determination in this investigation to the Secretary of Commerce on April 20, 2001. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 3415 (April 2001), entitled Oleoresin Paprika from India: Investigation No. 731–TA– 923 (Preliminary). Issued: April 20, 2001. By order of the Commission. Donna R. Koehnke, Secretary. [FR Doc. 01–10299 Filed 4–25–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [USITC SE–01–016] Sunshine Act Meeting AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: United States International Trade Commission. TIME AND DATE: May 3, 2001 at 11 a.m. PLACE: Room 101, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436 Telephone: (202) 205–2000. STATUS: Open to the public. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 1. Agenda for future meeting: none. 2. Minutes. 3. Ratification List. 4. Inv. No. 731–TA–702 (Review) (Ferrovanadium and Nitrided Vanadium from Russia)—briefing and vote. (The Commission is currently scheduled to transmit its determination and Commissioners’ opinions to the Secretary of Commerce on May 15, 2001.) 5. Inv. No. 731–TA–888–890 (Final) (Stainless Steel Angle from Japan, Korea, and Spain)—briefing and vote. (The Commission is currently scheduled to transmit its determination and Commissioners’ opinions to the Secretary of Commerce on May 11, 2001.) 6. Outstanding action jackets: none. In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting. By order of the Commission: Issued: April 24, 2001. Donna R. Koehnke, Secretary. [FR Doc. 01–10509 Filed 4–24–01; 12:59 pm] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Mine Safety and Health Administration Proposed Information Collection Request Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations; Hazardous Conditions Complaints AGENCY: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden conducts a preclearance consultation program to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed. A copy of the proposed information collection request can be obtained by contacting the employee listed below in the ADDRESSEE section of this notice. DATES: Submit comments on or before June 25, 2001. ADDRESSES: Send comments to Brenda C. Teaster, Acting Chief, Records Management Division, 4015 Wilson Boulevard, Room 709A, 4015, Arlington, VA 22203–1984. Commenters are encouraged to send their comments on a computer disk, or via Internet E- mail to bteaster@msha.gov, along with an original printed copy. Ms. Teaster can be reached at (703) 235–1470 (voice), or (703) 235–1563 (facsimile). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda C. Teaster, Acting Chief, Records Management Division, U.S. Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration, Room 709A, 4015 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22203–1984. Ms. Teaster can be reached at Bteaster@msha.gov (Internet E-mail), (703) 235–1470 (voice), or (703) 235– 1563 (facsimile). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Under section 103(g) of the Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Pub. L. 91–173, as amended by Pub. L. 95–164) (the Act)), a representative of miners, or any individual miner acting voluntarily as a repesentative of miners, may submit a written notification of alleged violation of the Act or a mandatory standard or of an imminent danger. Such notification requies MSHA to make an immediate inspection. A copy of the notice must be provided to the operator. Title 30, CFR, part 43, implements section 103(g) of the Act. It provides the procedures for submitting notification of the alleged violation and the actions which MSHA must take after receiving the notice. Although the regulation contains a review procedure (required by section 103(g)(2) of the Act) whereby a miner or a representative of miners may in writing request a review if no citation or order is written as a result of the original notice, the option is so rarely used that it was not considered in the burden estimates. II. Desired Focus of Comments Currently, the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is soliciting comments concerning the proposed extension of the information collection related to the Hazardous Conditions Complaints addressed by 30 CFR 43.4 and 43.7. MSHA is particularly interested in comments which: • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and VerDate 11<MAY>2000 17:10 Apr 25, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\26APN1.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 26APN1 ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── === USITC Institution === 14934 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 14, 2001 / Notices consumer organizations, wishing to participate in the final phase of this investigation as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in section 201.11 of the Commission’s rules, no later than 21 days prior to the hearing date specified in this notice. A party that filed a notice of appearance during the preliminary phase of the investigation need not file an additional notice of appearance during this final phase. The Secretary will maintain a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the investigation. Limited disclosure of business proprietary information (BPI) under an administrative protective order (APO) and BPI service list.—Pursuant to section 207.7(a) of the Commission’s rules, the Secretary will make BPI gathered in the final phase of this investigation available to authorized applicants under the APO issued in the investigation, provided that the application is made no later than 21 days prior to the hearing date specified in this notice. Authorized applicants must represent interested parties, as defined by 19 U.S.C. § 1677(9), who are parties to the investigation. A party granted access to BPI in the preliminary phase of the investigation need not reapply for such access. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO. Staff report.—The prehearing staff report in the final phase of this investigation will be placed in the nonpublic record on June 12, 2001, and a public version will be issued thereafter, pursuant to section 207.22 of the Commission’s rules. Hearing.—The Commission will hold a hearing in connection with the final phase of this investigation beginning at 9:30 a.m. on June 26, 2001, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building. Requests to appear at the hearing should be filed in writing with the Secretary to the Commission on or before June 18, 2001. A nonparty who has testimony that may aid the Commission’s deliberations may request permission to present a short statement at the hearing. All parties and nonparties desiring to appear at the hearing and make oral presentations should attend a prehearing conference to be held at 9:30 a.m. on June 21, 2001, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building. Oral testimony and written materials to be submitted at the public hearing are governed by sections 201.6(b)(2), 201.13(f), and 207.24 of the Commission’s rules. Parties must submit any request to present a portion of their hearing testimony in camera no later than 7 days prior to the date of the hearing. Written submissions.—Each party who is an interested party shall submit a prehearing brief to the Commission. Prehearing briefs must conform with the provisions of section 207.23 of the Commission’s rules; the deadline for filing is June 19, 2001. Parties may also file written testimony in connection with their presentation at the hearing, as provided in section 207.24 of the Commission’s rules, and posthearing briefs, which must conform with the provisions of section 207.25 of the Commission’s rules. The deadline for filing posthearing briefs is July 3, 2001; witness testimony must be filed no later than three days before the hearing. In addition, any person who has not entered an appearance as a party to the investigation may submit a written statement of information pertinent to the subject of the investigation on or before July 3, 2001. On July 18, 2001, the Commission will make available to parties all information on which they have not had an opportunity to comment. Parties may submit final comments on this information on or before July 20, 2001, but such final comments must not contain new factual information and must otherwise comply with section 207.30 of the Commission’s rules. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission’s rules; any submissions that contain BPI must also 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. In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission’s rules, each document filed by a party to the investigation must be served on all other parties to the investigation (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. Authority: This investigation is being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.21 of the Commission’s rules. By order of the Commission. Issued: March 8, 2001. Donna R. Koehnke, Secretary. [FR Doc. 01–6340 Filed 3–13–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 731–TA–923 (Preliminary)] Oleoresin Paprika From India AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission. ACTION: Institution of antidumping investigation and scheduling of a preliminary phase investigation. SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives notice of the institution of an investigation and commencement of preliminary phase antidumping investigation No. 731–TA–923 (Preliminary) under section 733(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1673b(a)) (the Act) to determine whether there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of imports from India of oleoresin paprika, provided for in subheading 3301.90.10 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that are alleged to be sold in the United States at less than fair value. Unless the Department of Commerce extends the time for initiation pursuant to section 732(c)(1)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673a(c)(1)(B)), the Commission must reach a preliminary determination in antidumping investigations in 45 days, or in this case by April 20, 2001. The Commission’s views are due at the Department of Commerce within five business days thereafter, or by April 27, 2001. For further information concerning the conduct of this investigation 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 and B (19 CFR part 207). EFFECTIVE DATE: March 6, 2001. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Reavis (202–205–3185), 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 (http:// VerDate 11<MAY>2000 16:27 Mar 13, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 14MRN1 14935Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 14, 2001 / Notices www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS- ON-LINE) at http://dockets.usitc.gov/ eol/public. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background.—This investigation is being instituted in response to a petition filed on March 6, 2001, by Rezolex, Ltd., Co., Las Cruces, NM. Participation in the investigation and public service list.—Persons (other than petitioners) wishing to participate in the investigation as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in sections 201.11 and 207.10 of the Commission’s rules, not later than seven days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Industrial users and (if the merchandise under investigation is sold at the retail level) representative consumer organizations have the right to appear as parties in Commission antidumping investigations. The Secretary will prepare a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to this investigation upon the expiration of the period for filing entries of appearance. Limited disclosure of business proprietary information (BPI) under an administrative protective order (APO) and BPI service list.—Pursuant to section 207.7(a) of the Commission’s rules, the Secretary will make BPI gathered in this investigation available to authorized applicants representing interested parties (as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(9)) who are parties to the investigation under the APO issued in the investigation, provided that the application is made not later than seven days after the publication of this notice in the Federal Register. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO. Conference.—The Commission’s Director of Operations has scheduled a conference in connection with this investigation for 9:30 a.m. on March 26, 2001, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC. Parties wishing to participate in the conference should contact Larry Reavis (202–205–3185) not later than March 22, 2001, to arrange for their appearance. Parties in support of the imposition of antidumping duties in this investigation and parties in opposition to the imposition of such duties will each be collectively allocated one hour within which to make an oral presentation at the conference. A nonparty who has testimony that may aid the Commission’s deliberations may request permission to present a short statement at the conference. Written submissions.—As provided in sections 201.8 and 207.15 of the Commission’s rules, any person may submit to the Commission on or before March 30, 2001, a written brief containing information and arguments pertinent to the subject matter of the investigation. Parties may file written testimony in connection with their presentation at the conference no later than three days before the conference. If briefs or written testimony contain 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. In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each document filed by a party to the investigation must be served on all other parties to the investigation (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. Authority: This investigation is being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.12 of the Commission’s rules. By order of the Commission. Issued: March 7, 2001. Donna R. Koehnke, Secretary. [FR Doc. 01–6339 Filed 3–13–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Inv. No. 337–TA–439] In the Matter of Certain HSP Modems, Software and Hardware Components Thereof,and Products Containing Same; Notice of Commission Decision Not To Review an Initial Determination Terminating the Investigation as to One Patent AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review the presiding administrative law judge’s (‘‘ALJ’s’’) initial determination (‘‘ID’’) terminating U.S. Letters Patent 5,940,459 from the above-captioned investigation, based on the withdrawal of allegations of infringement relating to that patent. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy P. Monaghan, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202– 205–3152. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server (http://www.usitc.gov). Hearing- impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 205–1810. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS- ON-LINE) at http://dockets.usitc.gov/ eol/public. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation on October 11, 2000, based on a complaint filed by PCTEL, Inc. (‘‘PCTEL’’) of Milpitas, California. The complaint named Smart Link Ltd. of Netanya, Israel and Smart Link Technologies, Inc. of Watertown, Massachusetts (collectively ‘‘Smart Link’’) and ESS Technology, Inc. (‘‘ESS’’) of Fremont, California as respondents. The complaint alleged that Smart Link and ESS had violated section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 by importing into the United States, selling for importation, and/or selling within the United States after importation certain HSP modems, software and hardware components thereof, and products containing the same by reason of infringement of claims 1–2 of U.S. Letters Patent 5,787,305, claims 1–4, 7– 8, and 11–15 of U.S. Letters Patent 5,931,950, claims 1, 2, 10, and 15–17 of U.S. Letters Patent 4,841,561, and claims 1, 6–7, 10–12, and 15–19 of U.S. Letters Patent 5,940,459 (‘‘the ‘459 patent’’). On February 5, 2001, the complainant PCTEL filed a motion for partial termination of this investigation as to its claims of infringement of the ‘459 patent. On February 15, 2001, the Commission investigative attorney filed a response supporting the motion. On February 16, 2001, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 16) granting the motion. No petitions for review of the ID were filed. The authority for the Commission’s action is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in section 210.42 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.42). Copies of the public versions of the subject IDs, and all other VerDate 11<MAY>2000 21:33 Mar 13, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 14MRN1 ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── === Initiation === 17408 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2001 / Notices shipper review is February 1, 2000, through January 31, 2001. Concurrent with publication of this notice, and in accordance with 19 CFR 351.214(e), we will instruct the Customs Service to suspend liquidation of any unliquidated entries of the subject merchandise from the relevant exporter or producer, and to allow, at the option of the importer, until the completion of the review, the posting of a bond or security in lieu of a cash deposit for each entry of the subject merchandise exported by the above-listed companies. Interested parties that need access to proprietary information in this new shipper review should submit applications for disclosure under administrative protective orders in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 and 351.306. This initiation and notice are in accordance with section 751(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)) and 19 CFR 351.214. March 23, 2001. Richard W. Moreland, Deputy Assistant Secretary Import Administration. [FR Doc. 01–7927 Filed 3–29–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–533–822] Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Oleoresin Paprika From India AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: March 30, 2001. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Ross or Karin Ryerson, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4794 or (202) 482– 3174, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Applicable Statute and Regulations Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless otherwise indicated, all citations to Department of Commerce’s (the Department’s) regulations are to the provisions at 19 CFR Part 351 (2000). The Petition On March 6, 2001, the Department received a petition on imports of oleoresin paprika filed in proper form by Rezolex, Ltd., Co. (referred to hereafter as ‘‘the petitioner’’). On March 14, 2001, the Department requested additional information and clarification of certain areas of the petition and received a response on March 19, 2001. In accordance with section 732(b) of the Act, the petitioner alleges that imports of oleoresin paprika from India are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act and that such imports are materially injuring and threaten to injure an industry in the United States. The Department finds that the petitioner filed this petition on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Furthermore, the petitioner has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the antidumping duty investigation it is requesting the Department to initiate (see ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the Petition’’ below). Scope of Investigation The merchandise subject to this investigation consists of oleoresin extracts made from red peppers (generally known as ‘‘oleoresin paprika’’), regardless of solvent content or pepper pungency. Other names that refer to this product may include, but are not limited to, paprika oleoresin, oleoresin of paprika, paprika extract, extract of paprika, and ‘‘ORP.’’ Manufacturers typically produce oleoresin paprika from the pepper variety called Capsicum Annum L., but they may produce oleoresin paprika from other red pepper varieties. Except as specified below, all products, concentrations, and qualities of oleoresin paprika regardless of pepper source are included in this investigation. The merchandise subject to this investigation may enter under 1301.90.9090, 1302.19.9040, 3203.00.8000, 3205.00.0500, 3301.90.1010, 3301.90.1050, and 3301.90.5000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), but these subheadings also cover products that are outside the scope of this investigation. Specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation are any oleoresin extracts of red peppers that have an American Spice Trade Association (ASTA) value of less than 500 ASTA or 20,000 Color Units (500 ASTA × 40 = 20,000 Color Units) as determined by spectrophotometric measurement. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive. During our review of the petition, we discussed the scope with the petitioner to ensure that it accurately reflects the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as discussed in the preamble to the Department’s regulations (62 FR 27296, 27323), we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all interested parties to submit such comments within 20 calendar days of publication of this notice. Comments should be addressed to Import Administration’s Central Records Unit at Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. The period of scope consultations is intended to provide the Department with ample opportunity to consider all comments and consult with parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determination. Determination of Industry Support for the Petition Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (1) At least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (2) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, the administering agency shall: (i) poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for the petition as required by subparagraph (A), or (ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling method. Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether the petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The International VerDate 11<MAY>2000 11:15 Mar 29, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 30MRN1 17409Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2001 / Notices 1 See Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd., v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 642–44 (CIT 1988); High Information Content Flat Panel Displays and Display Glass from Japan: Final Determination; Rescission of Investigation and Partial Dismissal of Petition, 56 FR 32376, 32380–81 (July 16, 1991). Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible for determining whether ‘‘the domestic industry’’ has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While the Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product (see section 771(10) of the Act), they do so for different purposes and pursuant to separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department’s determination is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may result in different definitions of the domestic like product, such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.1 Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ‘‘a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the reference point from which the domestic like product analysis begins is ‘‘the article subject to an investigation,’’ i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the petition. In this case, we have adopted the definition of the domestic like product defined in the ‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ section, above. That definition was developed in consultation with the petitioner. The petitioner established industry support representing over 50 percent of total production of the domestic like product. In addition, the Department received no opposition to the petition. Therefore, the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, and the requirements of section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) are met. Furthermore, the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for or opposition to the petition. Thus, the requirements of section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) are also met. Accordingly, the Department determines that the petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act (see Initiation Checklist, Re: Industry Support). Export Price and Normal Value The following is a description of the allegation of sales at less than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to initiate this investigation. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and normal value are discussed in the Initiation Checklist. Should the need arise to use any of this information as facts available under section 776 of the Act, we may reexamine the information and revise the margin calculations, if appropriate. The anticipated period of investigation is January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2000. The petitioner identified the following Indian companies as producers of oleoresin paprika in its petition: Akay Flavours & Aromatics, Ltd., Asian Herbex, Ltd., D.V. Deo, Enjay Marketing Services Pvt., Ltd., Enjayes Spices & Chemical Oils, Ltd., Flavours and Essences Pvt., Ltd., Gujarat Packaging, Indoworld Trading Corporation, Kancor Flavours & Extracts Ltd., Paprika Oleo’s (India), Ltd., Plant Lipids Ltd., and Synthite Industrial Chemicals Ltd. The petitioner determined export prices for some of these producers based on price quotes obtained by company personnel. All U.S. prices were denominated in U.S. dollars and, where appropriate, the petitioner made adjustments for movement expenses. To support the accuracy of this information the petitioner provided an affidavit from the company official that was responsible for collecting the information. As a result of our review of the petitioner’s calculation of certain export prices, we determined that it was necessary to revise certain adjustments for movement expenses (see Initiation Checklist, Re: Less-Than-Fair-Value Allegation). With respect to normal value, the petitioner stated that it could not find data regarding Indian home-market or third-country prices. In support of its claim that home-market and third- country pricing information is unavailable, the petitioner provided an affidavit from the company official that was responsible for preparing the petition. Lacking Indian home-market or third-country pricing information, the petitioner based normal value on constructed value. Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act constructed value includes cost of materials and fabrication, selling, general, and administrative expenses, packing, and profit. The petitioner calculated the cost of materials and fabrication, selling, general, and administrative expense, and packing components of constructed value based on its own production experience, using publicly available data to make adjustments for known differences between costs incurred to produce oleoresin paprika in the United States and India. For profit, the petitioner relied upon the financial statements of an Indian oleoresin paprika producer. Fair Value Comparison Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to believe that imports of oleoresin paprika from India are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. As a result of the comparison of export prices to normal value, we recalculated estimated dumping margins for imports of oleoresin paprika from India that range from 22.29 percent to 46.75 percent. Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation The petition alleges that the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product is being materially injured and is threatened with material injury by reason of the imports of the subject merchandise sold at less than normal value. The petitioner contends that the industry’s injured condition is evidenced by the loss of customers, producers leaving the industry, stagnate domestic sales volumes, and declining trends in employment and pricing. The allegations of injury and causation are supported by relevant evidence including U.S. Customs import data, lost sales, and pricing information. The Department assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury and causation and determined that these allegations are supported by accurate and adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for initiation (see Initiation Checklist, Re: Material Injury). Initiation of Antidumping Investigation Based upon our examination of the petition on oleoresin paprika from India, we find that the petition meets the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an antidumping duty investigation to determine whether imports of oleoresin paprika from India are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determination no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation. Distribution of Copies of the Petition In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, a copy of the public version of the petition has been provided to the representatives of the VerDate 11<MAY>2000 11:15 Mar 29, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 30MRN1 17410 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2001 / Notices government of India. We will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the petition to each producer named in the petition, as appropriate. International Trade Commission Notification We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 732(d) of the Act. Preliminary Determination by the ITC The ITC will preliminarily determine, no later than April 20, 2001, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of oleoresin paprika are causing material injury, or threatening to cause material injury, to a U.S. industry. A negative ITC determination will result in this investigation being terminated; otherwise, this investigation will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits. This notice is published pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act. Effective January 20, 2001, Bernard T. Carreau is fulfilling the duties of the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Dated: March 26, 2001. Bernard T. Carreau, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import Administration. [FR Doc. 01–7928 Filed 3–29–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Industry Sector Advisory Committee on Chemicals and Allied Products for Trade Policy Matters (ISAC 3); Continuation of Request for Nominations AGENCY: International Trade Administration, Trade Development. ACTION: Continuation of request for nominations. SUMMARY: The Secretary of Commerce (Commerce) and the United States Trade Representative (USTR) continue to seek nominations for appointment of an environmental representative to the Industry Sector Advisory Committee on Chemicals and Allied Products for Trade Policy Matters (ISAC 3; see Federal Register notice, Vol. 65, Number 149, 47405–47406, dated August 2, 2000, and Federal Register notice, Vol. 65, Number 189, 58264– 58265, dated September 28, 2000). Appointment will be effective for the charter term of this Committee, which expires March 17, 2002. In order to be considered for appointment to the Committee, a nominee must be a U.S. citizen, must represent a U.S. organization with an interest in environmental issues relevant to the work of the Committee, and may not be a registered foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Nominees’ special interest in and knowledge of environmental, trade and sectoral issues will be considered. This Notice will remain in effect for the duration of the current charter period; however, priority will be given to nominations received by April 30, 2000. Nominations will be considered as they are received. Recruitment information is available on the International Trade Administration website at http://www.ita.doc.gov/icp. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Further inquiries may be directed to Ingrid Mitchem, Director, Industries Consultations Program, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Room 2015–B, Washington, DC 20230 or Christina Sevilla, Acting Assistant USTR for Intergovernmental Affairs, Winder Building, Room 100, 600 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20580. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background In section 135 of the 1974 Trade Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2155), Congress established a private-sector advisory system to ensure that U.S. trade policy and trade negotiation objectives adequately reflect U.S. commercial and economic interests. Section 135(a)(1) of the 1974 Trade Act directs the President to seek information and advice from representative elements of the private sector and the non-Federal governmental sector with respect to: (A) negotiating objectives and bargaining positions before entering into a trade agreement under [title I of the 1974 Trade Act and section 1102 of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988]; (B) the operation of any trade agreement once entered into; including preparation for dispute settlement panel proceedings to which the United States is a party; and (C) other matters arising in connection with the development, implementation, and administration of the trade policy of the United States * * * Section 135(c)(2) of the 1974 Trade Act provides— (2) The President shall establish such sectoral or functional advisory committees as may be appropriate. Such committees shall, insofar as is practicable, be representative of all industry, labor, agricultural, or service interests (including small business interests) in the sector or functional areas concerned. In organizing such committees, the United States Trade Representative and the Secretaries of Commerce, Labor, Agriculture, the Treasury, or other executive departments, as appropriate, shall— (A) consult with interested private organizations; and (B) take into account such factors as— (i) patterns of actual and potential competition between United States industry and agriculture and foreign enterprise in international trade, (ii) the character of the nontariff barriers and other distortions affecting such competition, (iii) the necessity for reasonable limits on the number of such advisory committees, (iv) the necessity that each committee be reasonably limited in size, and (v) in the case of each sectoral committee, that the product lines covered by each committee be reasonably related. Pursuant to this provision, Commerce and USTR have established and co-chair seventeen Industry Sector Advisory Committees (ISACs) and four Industry Functional Advisory Committees (IFACs). The Committees’ efforts have resulted in strengthening U.S. negotiating positions by enabling the United States to display a united front when it negotiates trade agreements with other nations. This committee has a past practice of meeting on a monthly basis. Members serve without compensation and are responsible for all expenses incurred in attending committee meetings. For additional information regarding the functions and membership of this committee and general qualifications for membership, see 64 FR 10448–10449, March 4, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 42). Commerce and USTR now solicit nominations for qualified environmental representatives to serve on ISAC 3 (Chemicals and Allied Products). For further background regarding this solicitation, see Federal Register notice, Vol. 65, Number 149, 47405–47406, dated August 2, 2000, and Federal Register notice, Vol. 65, Number 189, 58264– 58265, dated September 28, 2000). Eligibility Eligibility to serve as an environmental representative on ISAC 3 is limited to U.S. citizens who are not full-time employees of a governmental entity, who represent a ‘‘U.S. entity’’ that is an organization interested in environmental issues relevant to the work of the committee, and who are not registered with the Department of Justice under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. For purposes of the preceding sentence, a ‘‘U.S. entity’’ is an organization incorporated in the United States (or, if unincorporated, having its headquarters in the United States): (1) That is controlled by U.S. citizens or by another U.S. entity. An entity is not a U.S. entity if more than 50 percent VerDate 11<MAY>2000 11:15 Mar 29, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 30MRN1