Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 186 / Monday, September 27, 2004 / Notices 57671

* Indicates that there are no changes to that 

paragraph of the notice.

1The EAR, which are currently codified at 15 

CFR parts 730–774 (2004, are issued under the 

Continued

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting 

of the Virginia Advisory Committee 

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to 

the provisions of the rules and 

regulations of the U.S. Commission on 

Civil Rights that a subcommittee 

conference call of the Virginia Advisory 

Committee will convene at 11 a.m. and 

adjourn at 11:45 a.m., Thursday, 

September 30, 2004. The purpose of the 

conference call is to conduct project 

planning. 

This conference call is available to the 

public through the following call-in 

number: 1–800–473–6927, access code: 

26457271. Any interested member of the 

public may call this number and listen 

to the meeting. Callers can expect to 

incur charges for calls not initiated 

using the supplied call-in number or 

over wireless lines, and the Commission 

will not refund any incurred charges. 

Callers will incur no charge for calls 

using the call-in number over land-line 

connections. Persons with hearing 

impairments may also follow the 

proceedings by first calling the Federal 

Relay Service at 1–800–977–8339 and 

providing the Service with the 

conference call number and access code. 

To ensure that the Commission 

secures an appropriate number of lines 

for the public, persons are asked to 

register by contacting Barbara de La 

Viez of the Eastern Regional Office at 

202–376–7533 by 4 p.m. on Wednesday, 

September 29, 2004. 

The meeting will be conducted 

pursuant to the provisions of the rules 

and regulations of the Commission.

Dated in Washington, DC September 21, 

2004. 

Ivy L. Davis, 

Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.

[FR Doc. 04–21597 Filed 9–24–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6335–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

[Docket No.: 040915267–4267–01] 

Privacy Act Altered System of Records

AGENCY: Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of amendment of Privacy 

Act System of Records, Commerce/

Department System 18; Employees 

Personnel files not covered by notices of 

other agencies to update the categories 

of records in the system to include 

records collected for the Workforce 

Assessment Database. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, 

as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4) and 

(11), the Department of Commerce 

(Department) is issuing notice of our 

intent to amend the system of records 

entitled Commerce Department System 

18; ‘‘Employees Personnel Files Not 

Covered By Notices of Other Agencies.’’

This amendment adds to this system 

those records compiled in conjunction 

with the Workforce Assessment 

Database under the requirements of 

section 37(d) of the Office of Federal 

Procurement Policy Act (Federal 

Acquisition Reform Act of 1995) 

amendment, 41 U.S.C. 433(d). We invite 

public comment on the proposed 

changes in this publication.

DATES: To be considered, written 

comments must be submitted on or 

before October 27, 2004. Unless 

comments are received, the new system 

of records will become effective as 

proposed on the date of publication of 

a subsequent notice in the Federal 

Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to 

Curtina Smith, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, Room 6422, 1401 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20230, 202–482–4186.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

amendment adds to the subject system 

those files containing records compiled 

in accordance with section 37(d) of the 

Office of Federal Procurement Policy 

Act (Federal Acquisition Reform Act of 

1995) amendment, 41 U.S.C. 433(d).

COMMERCE/DEPARTMENT–18 

SYSTEM NAME: 

Employees Personnel Files Not 

Covered by Notices of Other Agencies. 

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION: 

None. 

SYSTEM LOCATION: 

After m. add ‘‘n. For any records 

regarding the Workforce Assessment. 

Database: The Office of Acquisition 

Management, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, Room 6422, Washington, DC 

20230.’’

CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE

SYSTEM:*

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: 

After U.S. Foreign and Commercial 

Service employee personnel and 

security information add ‘‘employee 

certifications, warrants, education and 

contact for Workforce Assessment Tool 

Database.’’

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: 

After E.O. 13164 add ‘‘41 U.S.C. 

433(d).’’

ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE

SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND

THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES:*

DISCLOSURE TO CONSUMER REPORTING

AGENCIES:*

POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, 

RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND

DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: 

STORAGE:*

RETRIEVABILITY:*

SAFEGUARDS:*

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:*

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:*

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: 

Delete ‘‘For records at location m, 

information may be obtained from 

Departmental Privacy Act Officer, Office 

of Executive Assistance Management, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 

Washington, DC 20230.’’ Add ‘‘For 

records at location m and n, information 

may be obtained from Departmental 

Privacy Act Officer, Office of 

Management and Organization, U.S. 

Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20230.’’

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:*

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:*

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:*

EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: 

None.

Dated: September 22, 2004. 

Brenda S. Dolan, 

Department of Commerce, Freedom of 

Information/Privacy Act Officer.

[FR Doc. 04–21619 Filed 9–24–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–03–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security 

Action Affecting Export Privileges; 

Yaudat Mustafa Talyi, a.k.a. Joseph 

Talyi

In the Matter of: Yaudat Mustafa Talyi 

a.k.a. Joseph Talyi, 41 Chamale Cove East, 

Slidell, Louisiana 70460, and Oakdale FDC, 

Federal Bureau of Prisons, P.O. Box 5600, 

Oakdale, Louisiana 71463, Respondent; 

Renewal of Order Temporarily Denying 

Export Privileges.

Pursuant to section 766.24 of the 

Export Administration Regulations 

(‘‘EAR’’),1 the Bureau of Industry and 

57672 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 186 / Monday, September 27, 2004 / Notices 

Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 

U.S.C. app. 2401–2420) (2000) (the ‘‘Act’’). From 

August 21, 1994, through November 12, 2000, the 

Act was in lapse. During that period, the President, 

through Executive Order 12924, which had been 

extended by successive Presidential Notices, the 

last of which was August 3, 2000 (3 CFR, 2000 

Comp. 397 (2001)), continued the EAR in effect 

under the International Emergency Economic 

Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701–1707 (2000)) 

(‘‘IEEPA’’). On November 13, 2000, the Act was 

reauthorized and it remained in effect through 

August 20, 2001. Since August 21, 2001, the Act has 

been in lapse and the President, through Executive 

Order 13222 of August 17, 2001 (3 CFR, 2001 

Comp. 783 (2002)), as extended by the Notice of 

August 6, 2004, (69 FR 48763 (August 10, 2004), 

continued the Regulations in effect under the 

IEEPA.

2The Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export 

Enforcement (‘‘Assistant Secretary’’) initially issued 

a TDO against Talyi and his two companies on 

September 30, 2002. The Assistant Secretary 

renewed the TDO on March 29, 2003, modified it 

on July 24, 2003, to add related persons, again 

renewed it on September 24, 2003, and renewed it 

on March 19, 2004, as to Talyi alone.

3On April 28, 2004, U.S. District Court Judge Jay 

C. Zainey sentenced Talyi to five months in prison, 

five months of home confinement, one year of 

supervised release, and a $25,000 criminal fine for 

the two felony convictions. See id. at 5.

Security (‘‘BIS’’), U.S. Department of 

Commerce, through its Office of Export 

Enforcement, has requested that I renew 

the order (‘‘TDO’’) issued on March 19, 

2004, temporarily denying the export 

privileges of Yaudat Mustafa Talyi, 

a.k.a. Joseph Talyi (‘‘Tayli’’), 41 

Chamale Cove East, Slidell, Louisiana 

70460; and Oakdale FDC, Federal 

Bureau of Prisons, P.O. Box 5060, 

Oakdale, Louisiana 71463. BIS is 

requested that the TDO be renewed for 

a period of 180 days or until an 

administrative case against Talyi is 

completed, whichever occurs earlier.

In its August 26, 2004, request for 

renewal of the TDO, BIS states that 

based upon new evidence, and evidence 

previously adduced that was the basis 

for the issuance of the initial order 

temporarily denying the export 

privileges of Talyi, as well as the 

subsequent renewals,2 it believes that 

renewal of the current TDO is necessary 

to prevent further violations of the 

export control laws of the United States. 

See BIS Request for Renewal dated 

August 26, 2004, at 4.

BIS evidence attached to its request 

for renewal of the TDO indicates that 

Talyi has refused to enter into a 

settlement agreement, to which he 

previously agreed, concerning a BIS 

administrative enforcement case 

pending against him. See id. at 4–6. 

That settlement agreement was 

consistent with the criminal plea 

agreement that Talyi entered into that 

resulted in his criminal conviction. See 

id. at 7. 

Specifically, BIS evidence indicates 

that on January 29, 2004, pursuant to a 

plea agreement filed in the United 

States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Louisiana, Talyi pled guilty 

to two felony counts of violating the 

International Emergency Economic 

Powers Act for his participation in the 

export and attempted export of items to 

the United Arab Emirates that were 

violations of the initial TDO. See id. at 

5. Talyi’s plea agreement further stated 

that Talyi agreed to settle the BIS 

administrative case by paying $75,000 

civil penalty and accepting a 10-year 

denial of export privileges.3 See id. BIS 

evidence indicates the plea agreement 

stated that a copy of the settlement 

agreement for BIS’s administrative case 

was attached thereto. See id. BIS 

evidence also indicates that settlement 

documents consistent with Talyi’s 

criminal plea agreement were sent to 

Talyi’s counsel on March 2, 2004. See 

id. at 5–6. However, BIS evidence has 

established that counsel for Talyi 

ignored repeated attempts by counsel 

for BIS to discuss the administrative 

case throughout the spring of 2004 and 

refused to return a signed settlement 

agreement consistent with the terms of 

the plea agreement. See id. at 6. Based 

on the foregoing, BIS has established 

that, to date, Talyi has failed to enter 

into a settlement agreement consistent 

with his criminal plea agreement 

despite his agreement to do so. See id.

at 4–6.

BIS evidence further indicates that in 

failing to enter into a settlement 

agreement with BIS, it appears Talyi has 

breached the terms of his criminal plea 

agreement. See id. at 6. Additionally, 

due to Talyi’s failure to abide by the 

terms of his agreement, BIS was forced 

to institute a formal administrative 

proceeding against Talyi and he has 

defaulted in that matter.

See id.

In light of the above, I find that Talyi 

has demonstrated a continued pattern of 

noncompliance with the export control 

laws of the United States and terms of 

agreements with and orders of the 

United States government that 

establishes Talyi’s complete disregard 

for the export control laws of the United 

States. Specifically, despite a TDO being 

issued against him on September 30, 

2002, Talyi began violating its terms less 

than two weeks later. Then, on January 

29, 2004, Talyi pled guilty to two felony 

counts for violations of the initial TDO 

and agreed to settle the BIS 

administrative case by paying a $75,000 

civil penalty and accepting a 10-year 

denial of his export privileges. Despite 

executing the plea agreement, which 

stated the BIS settlement agreement was 

attached, Talyi has now refused to enter 

into a settlement agreement consistent 

with plea agreement and has forced BIS 

to pursue a formal administrative case 

against him due to his repeated failure 

to engage in any constructive settlement 

negotiations. Finally, Talyi has 

defaulted in the BIS administrative case 

pending against him and has apparently 

breached the terms of his criminal plea 

agreement. 

Accordingly, I am renewing the order 

temporarily denying the export 

privileges of Talyi for a period of 180 

days or until the administrative 

enforcement case against him is 

completed, whichever occurs earlier as 

I have concluded that a TDO against 

Talyi continues to be necessary, in the 

public interest, to prevent an imminent 

violation of the EAR.

It is Therefore Ordered:

First, that Yaudat Mustafa Talyi, a.k.a. 

Joseph Talyi (‘‘Talyi’’), 41 Chamale Cove 

East, Slidell, Louisiana 70460; and 

Oakdale FDC, Federal Bureau of 

Prisons, P.O. Box 5060, Oakdale, 

Louisiana 71463 (the ‘‘Denied Person’’) 

may not, directly or indirectly, 

participate in any way in any 

transaction involving any commodity, 

software of technology (hereinafter 

collectively referred to as ‘‘item’’) 

exported or to be exported from the 

United States that is subject to the 

Export Administration Regulations 

(‘‘EAR’’), or in any other activity subject 

to the EAR, including, but not limited 

to:

A. Applying for, obtaining, or using 

any license, License Exception, or 

export control document; 

B. Carrying on negotiations 

concerning, or ordering, buying, 

receiving, using, selling, delivering, 

storing, disposing of, forwarding, 

transporting, financing, or otherwise 

servicing in any way, any transaction 

involving any item exported or to be 

exported from the United States that is 

subject to the EAR, or in any other 

activity subject to the EAR; or 

C. Benefitting in any way from any 

transaction involving any item exported 

or to be exported from the United States 

that is subject to the EAR, or in any 

other activity subject to the EAR. 

Second, that no person may, directly 

or indirectly, do any of the following: 

A. Export or reexport to or on behalf 

of the Denied Person any item subject to 

the EAR; 

B. Take any action that facilitates the 

acquisition or attempted acquisition by 

the Denied Person of the ownership, 

possession, or control of any item 

subject to the EAR that has been or will 

be exported from the United States, 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 186 / Monday, September 27, 2004 / Notices 57673

including financing or other support 

activities related to a transaction 

whereby the Denied Person acquires or 

attempts to acquire such ownership, 

possession or control; 

C. Take any action to acquire from or 

to facilitate the acquisition or attempted 

acquisition from the Denied Person of 

any item subject to the EAR that has 

been exported from the United States; 

D. Obtain from the Denied Person 

order in the United States any item 

subject to the EAR with knowledge or 

reason to know that the item will be, or 

is intended to be, exported from the 

United States; or 

E. Engage in any transaction to service 

any item subject to the EAR that has 

been or will be exported from the 

United States and which is owned, 

possessed or controlled by the Denied 

Person, or service any item, of whatever 

origin, that is owned, possessed or 

controlled by the Denied Person if such 

service involves the use of any item 

subject to the EAR that has been or will 

be exported from the United States. For 

purposes of this paragraph, servicing 

means installation, maintenance, repair, 

modification or testing. 

Third, that, in addition to the related 

person named above, after notice and 

opportunity for comment as provided in 

section 766.23 of the EAR, any other 

person, firm, corporation, or business 

organization related to the denied 

person by affiliation, ownership, 

control, or position or responsibility in 

the conduct of trade or related services 

may also be made subject to the 

provisions of this Order. 

Fourth, that this Order does not 

prohibit any export, reexport, or other 

transaction subject to the EAR where the 

only items involved that are subject to 

the EAR are the foreign-produced direct 

product of U.S.-origin technology. 

In accordance with the provisions of 

section 766.24(e) of the EAR, denied 

persons may, at any time, appeal this 

Order by filing a full written statement 

in support of the appeal with the Office 

of the Administrative Law Judge, U.S. 

Coast Guard ALJ Docketing Center, 40 

South Gay Street, Baltimore, Maryland 

21202–4022. 

This Order is effective immediately 

and shall remain in effect for a period 

of 180 days or until an administrative 

enforcement case against Talyi is 

completed, whichever occurs earlier. 

A copy of this Order shall be served 

on Talyi and shall be published in the 

Federal Register.

Entered this 13th day of September, 2004. 

Julie L. Myers, 

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export 

Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 04–21558 Filed 9–24–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DT–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security 

Materials Technical Advisory 

Committee; Notice of Closed Meeting 

The Materials Technical Advisory 

Committee will meet on October 14, 

2004, at 10:30 a.m., in the Herbert C. 

Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th 

Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC. The Committee 

advises the Office of the Assistant 

Secretary for Export Administration 

with respect to technical questions that 

affect the level of export controls 

applicable to materials and related 

technology. 

The Committee will meet only in 

closed session to discuss matters 

determined to be exempt from the 

provisions relating to public meetings 

found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 10(a)(1) and 

10(a)(3). The Assistant Secretary for 

Administration, with the concurrence of 

the delegate of the General Counsel, 

formally determined on September 13, 

2004, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 

amended (5 U.S.C. app. 2 (10)(d)), that 

the portions of this meeting dealing 

with pre-decisional changes to the 

Commerce Control List and U.S. export 

control policies and the portions of this 

meeting disclosing privileged and 

confidential business information shall 

be exempt from the provisions relating 

to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. 

app. 2 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). The entire 

meeting will include discussion 

concerning these matters. 

For more information, contact Lee 

Ann Carpenter on 202–482–2583.

Dated: September 22, 2004. 

Lee Ann Carpenter, 

Committee Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 04–21564 Filed 9–24–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–JT–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–201–822]

Stainless Steel Sheet & Strip in Coils 

from Mexico; Extension of Time Limits 

for Preliminary and Final Results of 

Full (‘‘Sunset’’) Review of Antidumping 

Duty Order

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Extension of Time 

Limit for the Preliminary and Final 

Results of Full (‘‘Sunset’’) Review of 

Antidumping Duty Order: Stainless 

Steel Sheet & Strip in Coils from 

Mexico.

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(‘‘the Department’’) is extending the 

time limit for its preliminary and final 

results in the full sunset review of the 

antidumping duty order on stainless 

steel sheet & strip in coils (‘‘SSSS’’) 

from Mexico. The Department intends 

to issue preliminary results of this 

sunset review on or about November 4, 

2004. In addition, the Department 

intends to issue its final results of this 

review on or about February 28, 2005 

(120 days after the date of publication 

in the Federal Register of the 

preliminary results).

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 27, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Martha V. Douthit., Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–5050.

Extension of Preliminary and Final 

Results of Review:

On June 1, 2004, the Department 

initiated a sunset review of the 

antidumping duty order on SSSS from 

Mexico. See Initiation of Five–Year 

(Sunset) Reviews, 69 FR 30874 (June 1, 

2004). The Department, in this 

proceeding, determined that it would 

conduct a full (240 day) sunset review 

of this order based on responses to the 

notice of initiation from domestic and 

respondent interested parties. The 

Department’s preliminary results of this 

review were scheduled for September 

20, 2004. The Department, however, 

needs additional time to consider issues 

related to the appropriate margin(s) of 

dumping likely to prevail if the order is 

revoked to provide to the International 

Trade Commission. Thus, the 

Department intends to issue the 

preliminary results on or about 

November 4, 2004 and the final results