57736 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 186 / Monday, September 27, 2004 / Notices 

price and characteristics desired by 

growers—for example, traits that lower 

production costs, offer higher yield per 

acre or provide resistance to diseases 

and pests prevalent in the growers’

geographic region.

IV. The Relevant Markets 

17. A small but significant increase in 

the price of sugar beet seeds would not 

cause growers of sugar beets in the 

United States to shift to other crops and 

use sufficiently fewer sugar beet seeds 

so as to make such a price increase 

unprofitable. Accordingly, sugar beet 

seeds suitable for growing in the United 

States is a line of commerce and a 

relevant product market within the 

meaning of Section 7 of the Clayton Act. 

The United states is a relevant 

geographic market within the meaning 

of Section 7 of the Clayton Act. 

V. Anticompetitive Effects 

18. The market for sugar beet seeds 

suitable for growing in the United States 

is highly concentrated. Only three major 

companies—Syngenta, Advanta, and 

one other—breed sugar beet seeds for 

cultivation in the United States. 

19. Syngenta-developed sugar beet 

seeds account for nearly 20% of all the 

sugar beet seeds sold in the United 

States. 

20. Advanta-developed sugar beet 

seeds account for more than 16% of the 

sugar beet seeds sold in the United 

States. 

21. Purchasers of sugar beet seeds 

have benefited from competition 

between Syngenta and Advanta through 

lower prices and improved products. 

22. The sugar beet seed market in the 

United States will become substantially 

more concentrated if Syngenta acquires 

Advanta. The number of significant 

sugar beet seed developers will be 

reduced from three to two. Using a 

measure of market concentration called 

the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index 

(‘‘HHI’’) (defined and explained in 

appendix A), the proposed transaction 

will increase the HHI in sugar beet seeds 

by more than 600 points to a postacquisition level of over 5000. 

23. The proposed transaction will 

substantially lessen competition for the 

research and development of sugar beet 

seeds suitable for cultivation in the 

United States. With only two major 

companies competing to develop new 

and better seeds, less innovation is 

likely. 

24. The proposed transaction would 

make it more likely that the two 

remaining major seed companies will 

engage in anticompetitive coordination 

to increase prices or reduce production. 

VI. Entry 

25. Successful entry would not be 

timely, likely, or sufficient to thwart 

these anticompetitive effects. 

26. Developing a new sugar beet seed 

variety takes five to ten years. 

Completing the trial tests required by 

sugar beet processing companies can 

take two to three additional years. 

VII. Violation Alleged 

27. The effect of Syngenta’s proposed 

acquisition of Advanta may be to lessen 

competition substantially and tend to 

create a monopoly in interstate trade 

and commerce in violation of Section 7 

of the Clayton Act. 

28. Unless restrainted, the transaction 

likely will have the following effects, 

among others: 

a. Competition generally in sugar beet 

seeds suitable for growing in the United 

States will be substantially lessened; 

b. Actual competition between 

Syngenta and Advanta will be 

eliminated; 

c. Innovation in development of sugar 

beet seeds will be reduced; and 

d. Prices for sugar beet seeds will 

increase. 

29. Unless prevented, the acquisition 

of Advanta by Syngenta would violate 

section 7 of the Clayton Act, as 

amended, 15 U.S.C. 18. 

VIII. Requested Relief 

Wherefore, Plaintiff requests: 

1. That the proposed acquisition by 

Syngenta of Advanta be adjudged and 

decreed to be unlawful and to violate 

section 7 of the Clayton Act, as 

amended, 15 U.S.C. 18; 

2. That defendants and all persons 

acting on their behalf be permanently 

enjoined from and restrained from 

carrying out the agreement dated May 

11, 2004, or from entering into or 

carrying out any contract, agreement, 

understanding, or plan, the effect of 

which would be to combine the 

businesses or assets of Syngenta and 

Advanta; 

3. That plaintiff be awarded its costs 

of this action; and 

4. That plaintiff have such other relief 

as the Court may deem just and proper.

Dated: August 25, 2004.

Respectfully submitted,

R. Hewitt Pate (DC Bar #473598) 

Assistant Attorney General.

J. Bruce McDonald 

Deputy Assistant Attorney General.

Dorothy B. Fountain 

Deputy Director of Operations and Civil 

Enforcement.

Roger W. Fones (DC Bar #303255) 

Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture 

Section.

Donna N. Kooperstein 

Assistant Chief, Transportation, Energy & 

Agriculture Section.

Angela L. Hughes (DC Bar #303420)

Jill Ptacek

J. David McDowell 

Trial Attorneys, United States Department of 

Justice, Antitrust Division, Transportation, 

Energy & Agriculture Section, 325 7th 

Street, NW., Suite 500, Washington, DC 

20530 Telephone: (202) 307–6410, 

Facsimile: (202) 307–2784.

Appendix A—Definition of HHI 

The term ‘‘HHI’’ means the 

Herfindahl-Hirschman Index, a 

commonly accepted measure of market 

concentration. The HHI is calculated by 

squaring the market share of each firm 

competing in the market and then 

summing the resulting numbers. For 

example, for a market consisting of four 

firms with shares of 30, 30, 20, and 20 

percent, the HHI is 2,600 (30 2 + 30 2 + 

20 2 + 20 2 = 2,600). The HHI takes into 

account the relative size and 

distribution of the firms in a market. It 

approaches zero when a market is 

occupied by a large number of firms of 

relatively equal size and reaches its 

maximum 10,000 when a market is 

controlled by a single firm. The HHI 

increases both as the number of firms in 

the market decreases and as the 

disparity in size between those firms 

increases. 

Markets in which the HHI is between 

1000 and 1800 are considered to be 

moderately concentrated, and markets 

in which the HHI is in excess of 1800 

points are considered to be highly 

concentrated. Transactions that increase 

the HHI by more than 100 points in 

highly concentrated markets 

presumptively raise significant antitrust 

concerns under the Department of 

Justice and Federal Trade Commission 

1992 Horizontal Merger Guidelines. 

[FR Doc. 04–21548 Filed 9–24–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Office of the Secretary 

Proposed Collection; Comment 

Request

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, as 

part of its continuing effort to reduce 

paperwork and respondent burden 

conducts a pre-clearance 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 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 186 / Monday, September 27, 2004 / Notices 57737

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [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. 

Currently, the Civil Rights Center within 

the Office of the Assistant Secretary for 

Administration and Management is 

soliciting comments concerning the 

proposed extension of the collection of 

the Compliance Information Report—29 

CFR part 31 (Title VI of the Civil Rights 

Act), Nondiscrimination—Disability—

29 CFR part 32 (section 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act), and 

Nondiscrimination—Workforce 

Investment Act—29 CFR part 37 

(section 188 of the Workforce 

Investment Act). A copy of the proposed 

information collection request (ICR) can 

be obtained by contacting the office 

listed below in the addresses section of 

this notice. In addition, a copy of the 

ICR in alternate formats of large print 

and electronic file on computer disk are 

available upon request.

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted to the office listed in the 

addresses section below on or before 

November 26, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to 

Annabelle T. Lockhart, Director of the 

Civil Rights Center. Electronic mail is 

the preferred method of submittal of 

comments. Comments by electronic 

mail must be clearly identified as 

pertaining to the ICR and sent to 

civilrightscenter@dol.gov. Brief 

comments (maximum of five pages), 

clearly identified as pertaining to the 

ICR, may be submitted by facsimile 

machine (Fax) to (202) 693–6505. Where 

necessary, hard copies of comments, 

clearly identified as pertaining to the 

ICR, may also be delivered to the Civil 

Rights Center Director at the U.S. 

Department of Labor, 200 Constitution 

Ave., NW., Room N–4123, Washington, 

DC 20210. Because of problems with 

U.S. Postal Service mail delivery, the 

Civil Rights Center suggests that those 

submitting comments by means of the 

U.S. Postal Service should place those 

comments in the mail well before the 

deadline by which comments must be 

received. 

Receipt of submissions, whether by 

U.S. Postal Service, e-mail, fax 

transmittal, or other means will not be 

acknowledged; however, the sender may 

request confirmation that a submission 

has been received, by telephoning the 

Civil Rights Center at the telephone 

numbers listed below. 

Comments received will be available 

for public inspection during normal 

business hours at the above address. 

Persons who need assistance to review 

the comments will be provided with 

appropriate aids such as readers or print 

magnifiers. Copies of the ICR will be 

made available, upon request, in large 

print or electronic file on computer 

disk. Provision of the rule in other 

formats will be considered upon 

request. To schedule an appointment to 

review the comments and/or obtain the 

ICR in an alternate format contact the 

Civil Rights Center at (202) 693–6500 

(Voice) or (202) 693–6515/16 (TTY). 

Please note that these are not toll free 

telephone numbers.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gregory T. Shaw, Civil Rights Center, 

(202) 693–6501 (Voice) or (202) 693–

6515/16 (TTY). Please note that these 

are not toll free telephone numbers.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Compliance Information Report 

and its information collection is 

designed to ensure that programs or 

activities funded in whole or in part by 

the Department of Labor operate in a 

nondiscriminatory manner. The Report 

requires such programs and activities to 

collect, maintain and report upon 

request from the Department, race, 

ethnicity, sex, age and disability data for 

program applicants, eligible applicants, 

participants, terminees, applicants for 

employment and employees. 

II. Desired Focus of Comments 

The Department of Labor 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 a 

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 

• Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology, 

e.g., permitting electronic submissions 

of responses. 

III. Current Actions 

The Department of Labor seeks an 

extension of the current OMB approval 

of the paperwork requirements in the 

Compliance Information Report. 

Extension is necessary to ensure 

nondiscrimination in programs or 

activities funded in whole or in part by 

the Department of Labor. 

Type of Review: Extension. 

Agency: Civil Rights Center, Office of 

the Assistant Secretary for 

Administration and Management. 

Title: Compliance Information 

Report—29 CFR part 31 (Title VI), 

Nondiscrimination-Disability—29 CFR 

part 32 (section 504), 

Nondiscrimination-Job Training 

Partnership Act—29 CFR part 34 

(section 167). 

OMB Number: 1225–0077. 

Affected Public: State, local or Tribal 

governments. 

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):

$0.00. 

Total Burden Cost (operating/

maintenance): $83,409.86. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this comment request will be 

summarized and included in the request 

for Office of Management and Budget 

approval of the information collection 

request; they will also become a matter 

of public record.

Signed in Washington, DC, this 21st day of 

September, 2004. 

Annabelle T. Lockhart, 

Director, Civil Rights Center.

[FR Doc. 04–21562 Filed 9–24–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–23–P

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE 

ARTS AND HUMANITIES 

Study of IMLS Funded Digital 

Collections and Content—Collection 

Registry Entry/Edit Form, Submission 

for OMB Review, Comment Request

AGENCY: Institute of Museum and 

Library Services.

ACTION: Notice of requests for new 

information collection approval. 

SUMMARY: The Institute of Museum and 

Library Services announces the 

following information collection has 

been submitted to the Office of 

Management and Budget for review and 

approval in accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. 

L. 104–13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). A 

copy of this proposed form, with 

applicable supporting documentation, 

may be obtained by calling the Institute 

of Museum and Library Services, 

Director of Research and Technology,