64590 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 214 / Friday, November 5, 2004 / Notices 

1 It is well-recognized that agencies need to 

provide some cut-off for submissions so ‘‘the debate 

does not go on indefinitely.’’ Avesta AB v. United 

States, 689 F. Supp. 1173, 1188 (Ct. Int’l Trade 

1988). See also Chefline Corp. v. United States, 219 

F. Supp. 2d 1303, 1308, n. 5 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2002); 

General Motors Corp. v. United States, 827 F. Supp. 

774, 781–783 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1993) (upholding the 

Commission’s reliance on data submitted late in the 

proceeding when other parties were not allowed to 

respond, noting ‘‘material injury investigations are 

not adversarial in a formal sense, and it is 

ultimately ITC’s responsibility to evaluate the data 

it gathers.’’).

investigation, (5) responses to the 

Commission’s questionnaire, (6) 

argument and information in prehearing 

briefs, (7) testimony and argument at the 

hearing, (8) argument and information 

in posthearing briefs, and information in 

response to Commissioner or staff 

questions and (9) final comments, 

though without submission of new 

factual data, after posthearing briefs 

have been submitted. (Petitioners have 

an initial additional opportunity to 

provide factual information in the form 

of the petition filed at the beginning of 

the investigation.) 

The Commission understands the 

desire for parties to have ‘‘one more 

opportunity’’ to make their case, and 

particularly the desire to rebut factually 

the latest iteration of other parties’

arguments or the latest data submissions 

by other parties or other persons. 

However, in light of the statutory 

deadlines in these investigatory 

proceedings, which the Commission 

cannot extend, adding another brief or 

opportunity for more factual 

submissions late in the investigative 

process would create problems in light 

of the need for the Commission and staff 

to evaluate, summarize, and consider 

the information and argument provided. 

The Commission also needs to allot 

sufficient time before the impending 

statutory deadline to write an opinion 

that explains its determination(s).

In light of this concern, the 

Commission wishes to restate its current 

practice and to clarify that normally no 

new factual information volunteered by 

a party after the filing of its posthearing 

brief will be considered by the 

Commission unless the information is in 

response to a specific request for that 

information by a Commissioner or 

member of the Commission staff. If a 

party comes into possession of some 

highly relevant fact that was not 

available for submission to the 

Commission earlier, it must seek leave 

to file such new factual information, 

justifying both why the ‘‘new’’ factual 

information could not have been 

submitted at an earlier date (normally, 

because it would represent such a recent 

occurrence that it could not have been 

provided earlier), and why the new 

information is sufficiently significant to 

warrant adding to the factual record of 

the case this late. 

Such requests for leave will not be 

routinely granted. Simply wishing to 

rebut or respond to a factual assertion 

made in another party’s posthearing 

brief is not a sufficient justification, nor 

is, for example, the proffered 

submission of a ‘‘new’’ affidavit that 

could have been provided at an earlier 

stage of the proceeding (unless the 

affidavit was specifically requested by a 

Commissioner or Commission staff).1 In 

the past, the Commission has only on 

rare instances ‘‘reopened’’ the factual 

record on its own initiative to allow 

consideration of (and party comment 

on) late developments. For example, it 

did so in response to a significant 

correction by the Commerce Department 

of its final determination that resulted 

in the exclusion from its affirmative 

determination of a major subject 

exporter, and in response to a 

modification by the President of import 

relief measures under section 201 of the 

Trade Act of 1974 that potentially had 

a major effect on conditions of 

competition for the domestic industry.

Questionnaires 

While questionnaires for specific 

investigations reflect the unique issues 

pertinent to individual investigations, 

the following are among the changes the 

Commission has made to its ‘‘generic’’

questionnaires:

—A checklist will be provided with U.S. 

producer and importer questionnaires 

to assist recipients in providing 

complete responses. 

—When requesting capacity figures, 

questionnaires will request that 

capacity be allocated between 

products produced on the same 

equipment. 

—Foreign producers will be requested 

to supply the basis for any projections 

of capacity, production, shipments, 

and inventories. 

—In five-year review questionnaires to 

foreign producers, a question will be 

added seeking a comparison of prices 

in the U.S. with prices for the same 

product in foreign markets. 

—Purchaser questionnaires will be 

mailed to purchasers listed in lost 

sale/revenue allegations by domestic 

producers. Also, purchasers listed in 

lost sales/revenue allegations by 

domestic producers will be asked 

whether the purchaser switched from 

a domestic supplier to a subject 

import supplier, or obtained a price 

reduction from a domestic supplier 

based on subject import competition 

during the period of investigation, 

even if the specific lost sale/revenue 

allegation could not be confirmed.

The Commission has also completed 

an internal review of its questionnaires, 

which resulted in the elimination of 

redundant or marginally relevant 

questions, and the revision of some 

ambiguous questions to clarify the data 

being sought. The Commission is also 

including a question in all 

questionnaires seeking comment on any 

changes that the recipient believes may 

improve the clarity, ease of response, or 

usefulness of the questionnaire. 

Staff Reports 

Reports will now include (in Chapter 

1) a description of the major firms 

supplying the market for the product(s) 

at issue. In investigations involving 

multiple countries, it was suggested that 

the Commission report import pricing 

data on a weight-averaged cumulated 

basis in assessing the degree of 

underselling by subject imports. The 

Commission has decided to add this 

aggregated data, but will continue to 

provide country-specific pricing data as 

well in its reports. 

Staff reports will also include more 

detailed information concerning lost 

sale/revenue allegations.

By Order of the Commission.

Issued: November 1, 2004. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission.

[FR Doc. 04–24703 Filed 11–4–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Coordinating Council on Juvenile 

Justice and Delinquency Prevention 

[OJP (OJJDP) Docket No. 1410] 

Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Coordinating Council on 

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Coordinating Council on 

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention (Council) is announcing the 

December 3, 2004, meeting of the 

Council.

DATES: Friday, December 3, 2004, 9 

a.m.–12 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place 

at the Frances Perkins Department of 

Labor Building, Room N–4437, 200 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC. (Enter at 3rd and C Streets, NW.).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Timothy Wight, Designated Federal 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 214 / Friday, November 5, 2004 / Notices 64591

Official for the Coordinating Council on 

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention, by telephone at 202–514–

2190, or by e-mail at 

Timothy.Wight@usdoj.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Coordinating Council on Juvenile 

Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 

established pursuant to section 3(2)A of 

the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 

U.S.C. App. 2), will meet to carry out its 

advisory functions under Section 206 of 

the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention Act of 2002, 42 U.S.C. 5601, 

et seq. Documents such as meeting 

announcements, agendas, minutes, and 

interim and final reports will be 

available on the Council’s Web page at 

http://www.JuvenileCouncil.gov. (You 

may also verify the status of the meeting 

at that Web address.) 

Although designated agency 

representatives attend, the Council is 

composed of the Attorney General 

(Chair), the Secretary of Health and 

Human Services, the Secretary of Labor, 

the Secretary of Education, the Secretary 

of Housing and Urban Development, the 

Administrator of the Office of Juvenile 

Justice and Delinquency Prevention 

(Vice Chair), the Director of the Office 

of National Drug Control Policy, the 

Chief Executive Officer of the 

Corporation for National and 

Community Service, and the Assistant 

Secretary for Homeland Security, 

Immigrations and Customs 

Enforcement. Nine additional members 

are appointed by the Speaker of the 

House of Representatives, the Senate 

Majority Leader, and the President of 

the United States. 

The agenda for this meeting will 

include: (a) Review of past Council 

actions, (b) discussion of the Final 

Report of the White House Task Force 

for Disadvantaged Youth, (c) discussion 

and Council recommendations 

regarding Federal agencies that hold 

juvenile offenders, nonoffenders, and 

undocumented juveniles, (d) the 

National Youth Anti-Drug Media 

Campaign, and (e) discussion and 

Council recommendations regarding 

youth employment training programs. 

For security purposes, members of the 

public who wish to attend the meeting 

must pre-register by calling the Juvenile 

Justice Resource Center at 301–519–

6473 (Daryel Dunston) or 301–519–5790 

(Karen Boston), no later than November 

23, 2004. To register online, please go to 

http://www.JuvenileCouncil.gov/

meetings.html. Space is limited.

Note: Photo identification will be required 

for admission to the meeting.

Written Comments 

Interested parties may submit written 

comments by November 23, 2004, to 

Timothy Wight, Designated Federal 

Official for the Coordinating Council on 

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention, at 

Timothy.Wight@usdoj.gov. The 

Coordinating Council on Juvenile 

Justice and Delinquency Prevention 

expects public statements presented at 

its meetings will not be repetitive of 

previously submitted statements. No 

oral comments will be permitted at this 

meeting.

Dated: November 1, 2004. 

J. Robert Flores, 

Vice-Chair, Coordinating Council on Juvenile 

Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

[FR Doc. 04–24698 Filed 11–4–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–18–P

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–55,789] 

Boston Scientific, Murrieta, CA; Notice 

of Termination of Investigation 

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade 

Act of 1974, as amended, an 

investigation was initiated on October 

14, 2004 in response to a worker 

petition filed by a company official on 

behalf of workers at Boston Scientific, 

Murrieta, California. 

The petitioner has requested that the 

petition be withdrawn. Consequently, 

the investigation has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC this 22nd day of 

October, 2004. 

Linda G. Poole, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E4–3028 Filed 11–4–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–30–P

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–55,792] 

Burner Systems International, Inc., 

Mansfield, OH; Notice of Termination 

of Investigation 

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade 

Act of 1974, an investigation was 

initiated on October 14, 2004 in 

response to petition filed by a company 

official on behalf of workers at Burner 

Systems International, Inc., Mansfield, 

Ohio. 

The petitioner has requested that the 

petition be withdrawn. Consequently, 

further investigation in this case would 

serve no purpose, and the investigation 

has been terminated.

Signed in Washington, DC, this 21st day of 

October, 2004. 

Richard Church, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E4–3029 Filed 11–4–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–30–P

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W 55,678] 

C&D Technologies, LLC, Formerly 

CelesticaMilwaukie, OR; Notice of 

Termination of Investigation 

Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade 

Act of 1974, as amended, an 

investigation was initiated on 

September 24, 2004 in response to a 

petition filed by a company official on 

behalf of workers at C&D Technologies, 

LLC, formerly Celestica, Milwaukie, 

Oregon. 

The petitioner has requested that the 

petition be withdrawn. Consequently, 

the investigation has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC this 22nd day of 

October 2004. 

Richard Church, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E4–3023 Filed 11–4–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–30–P

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment And Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–55,763] 

Contractor’s Engineer, LLCNeodesha, 

KS; Notice of Termination of 

Investigation 

Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade 

Act of 1974, an investigation was 

initiated on October 8, 2004 in response 

to a petition filed by a company official 

on behalf of workers at Contractor’s 

Engineer, LLC, Neodesha, Kansas (TA–

W–55,763). 

The petitioner has requested that the 

petition be withdrawn. Consequently, 

further investigation in this case would 

serve no purpose, and the investigation 

has been terminated.