76700 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–583–831] 

Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils 

From Taiwan: Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce 

SUMMARY: On August 13, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published the preliminary 

results of the administrative review of 

the antidumping duty order on stainless 

steel sheet and strip in coils (SSSSC) 

from Taiwan. This review covers twenty 

producers/exporters of the subject 

merchandise to the United States. The 

period of review (POR) is July 1, 2008, 

through June 30, 2009. 

Based on our analysis of the 

comments received, we have made no 

changes in the margin calculations. 

Therefore, the final results do not differ 

from the preliminary results. The final 

weighted-average dumping margin for 

the reviewed firms are listed below in 

the section entitled ‘‘Final Results of 

Review.’’ 

DATES: Effective Date: December 9, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Henry Almond, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 2, Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 

482–0049. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

This review covers twenty producers/ 

exporters. The Department selected Chia 

Far Industrial Factory Co., Ltd. (Chia 

Far) as the only respondent for 

individual examination in this 

administrative review. 

On August 13, 2010, the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

preliminary results of administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on SSSSC from Taiwan. See Stainless 

Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils From 

Taiwan: Preliminary Results and 

Rescission in Part of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 75 FR 49467 

(Aug. 13, 2010) (Preliminary Results). 

We invited parties to comment on our 

preliminary results of review. On 

September 2, 2010, and September 13, 

2010, we received new factual 

information and a case brief, 

respectively, from Yieh United Steel 

Corporation (YUSCO). On September 

23, 2010, we rejected YUSCO’s new 

factual information as being untimely 

filed. On October 4, 2010, YUSCO 

requested that we reconsider our 

decision to reject its September 2, 2010, 

submission. On October 5, 2010, we 

declined to reconsider our decision. No 

other parties commented on our 

Preliminary Results. 

The Department has conducted this 

administrative review in accordance 

with section 751 of Tariff Act of 1930, 

as amended (the Act). 

Scope of the Order 

The products covered by the order are 

certain stainless steel sheet and strip in 

coils. Stainless steel is an alloy steel 

containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or 

less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more 

of chromium, with or without other 

elements. The subject sheet and strip is 

a flat-rolled product in coils that is 

greater than 9.5 mm in width and less 

than 4.75 mm in thickness, and that is 

annealed or otherwise heat treated and 

pickled or otherwise descaled. The 

subject sheet and strip may also be 

further processed (e.g., cold-rolled, 

polished, aluminized, coated, etc.) 

provided that it maintains the specific 

dimensions of sheet and strip following 

such processing. 

The merchandise subject to the order 

is classified in the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 

at subheadings: 7219.13.00.31, 

7219.13.00.51, 7219.13.00.71, 

7219.13.00.81, 7219.14.00.30, 

7219.14.00.65, 7219.14.00.90, 

7219.32.00.05, 7219.32.00.20, 

7219.32.00.25, 7219.32.00.35, 

7219.32.00.36, 7219.32.00.38, 

7219.32.00.42, 7219.32.00.44, 

7219.33.00.05, 7219.33.00.20, 

7219.33.00.25, 7219.33.00.35, 

7219.33.00.36, 7219.33.00.38, 

7219.33.00.42, 7219.33.00.44, 

7219.34.00.05, 7219.34.00.20, 

7219.34.00.25, 7219.34.00.30, 

7219.34.00.35, 7219.35.00.05, 

7219.35.00.15, 7219.35.00.30, 

7219.35.00.35, 7219.90.00.10, 

7219.90.00.20, 7219.90.00.25, 

7219.90.00.60, 7219.90.00.80, 

7220.12.10.00, 7220.12.50.00, 

7220.20.10.10, 7220.20.10.15, 

7220.20.10.60, 7220.20.10.80, 

7220.20.60.05, 7220.20.60.10, 

7220.20.60.15, 7220.20.60.60, 

7220.20.60.80, 7220.20.70.05, 

7220.20.70.10, 7220.20.70.15, 

7220.20.70.60, 7220.20.70.80, 

7220.20.80.00, 7220.20.90.30, 

7220.20.90.60, 7220.90.00.10, 

7220.90.00.15, 7220.90.00.60, and 

7220.90.00.80. Although the HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

Department’s written description of the 

merchandise under the order is 

dispositive. 

Excluded from the scope of the order 

are the following: (1) Sheet and strip 

that is not annealed or otherwise heat 

treated and pickled or otherwise 

descaled, (2) sheet and strip that is cut 

to length, (3) plate (i.e., flat-rolled 

stainless steel products of a thickness of 

4.75 mm or more), (4) flat wire (i.e., 

cold-rolled sections, with a prepared 

edge, rectangular in shape, of a width of 

not more than 9.5 mm), and (5) razor 

blade steel. Razor blade steel is a flatrolled product of stainless steel, not 

further worked than cold-rolled (coldreduced), in coils, of a width of not 

more than 23 mm and a thickness of 

0.266 mm or less, containing, by weight, 

12.5 to 14.5 percent chromium, and 

certified at the time of entry to be used 

in the manufacture of razor blades. See 

Chapter 72 of the HTSUS, ‘‘Additional 

U.S. Note’’ 1(d). 

Also excluded from the scope of the 

order are certain specialty stainless steel 

products described below. Flapper valve 

steel is defined as stainless steel strip in 

coils containing, by weight, between 

0.37 and 0.43 percent carbon, between 

1.15 and 1.35 percent molybdenum, and 

between 0.20 and 0.80 percent 

manganese. This steel also contains, by 

weight, phosphorus of 0.025 percent or 

less, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 

percent, and sulfur of 0.020 percent or 

less. The product is manufactured by 

means of vacuum arc remelting, with 

inclusion controls for sulphide of no 

more than 0.04 percent and for oxide of 

no more than 0.05 percent. Flapper 

valve steel has a tensile strength of 

between 210 and 300 ksi, yield strength 

of between 170 and 270 ksi, plus or 

minus 8 ksi, and a hardness (Hv) of 

between 460 and 590. Flapper valve 

steel is most commonly used to produce 

specialty flapper valves in compressors. 

Also excluded is a product referred to 

as suspension foil, a specialty steel 

product used in the manufacture of 

suspension assemblies for computer 

disk drives. Suspension foil is described 

as 302/304 grade or 202 grade stainless 

steel of a thickness between 14 and 127 

microns, with a thickness tolerance of 

plus-or-minus 2.01 microns, and surface 

glossiness of 200 to 700 percent Gs. 

Suspension foil must be supplied in coil 

widths of not more than 407 mm, and 

with a mass of 225 kg or less. Roll marks 

may only be visible on one side, with 

no scratches of measurable depth. The 

material must exhibit residual stresses 

of 2 mm maximum deflection, and 

flatness of 1.6 mm over 685 mm length. 

Certain stainless steel foil for 

automotive catalytic converters is also 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Notices 76701 

1Arnokrome III is a trademark of the Arnold 

Engineering Company. 

2 Gilphy 36 is a trademark of Imphy, S.A. 

3 Durphynox 17 is a trademark of Imphy, S.A. 

4This list of uses is illustrated and provided for 

descriptive purposes only. 

5 GIN4 Mo, GIN5 and GIN6 are the proprietary 

grades of Hitachi Metals America, Ltd. 

excluded from the scope of the order. 

This stainless steel strip in coils is a 

specialty foil with a thickness of 

between 20 and 110 microns used to 

produce a metallic substrate with a 

honeycomb structure for use in 

automotive catalytic converters. The 

steel contains, by weight, carbon of no 

more than 0.030 percent, silicon of no 

more than 1.0 percent, manganese of no 

more than 1.0 percent, chromium of 

between 19 and 22 percent, aluminum 

of no less than 5.0 percent, phosphorus 

of no more than 0.045 percent, sulfur of 

no more than 0.03 percent, lanthanum 

of less than 0.002 or greater than 0.05 

percent, and total rare earth elements of 

more than 0.06 percent, with the 

balance iron. 

Permanent magnet iron-chromiumcobalt alloy stainless strip is also 

excluded from the scope of the order. 

This ductile stainless steel strip 

contains, by weight, 26 to 30 percent 

chromium, and 7 to 10 percent cobalt, 

with the remainder of iron, in widths 

228.6 mm or less, and a thickness 

between 0.127 and 1.270 mm. It exhibits 

magnetic remanence between 9,000 and 

12,000 gauss, and a coercivity of 

between 50 and 300 oersteds. This 

product is most commonly used in 

electronic sensors and is currently 

available under proprietary trade names 

such as Arnokrome III.1

Certain electrical resistance alloy steel 

is also excluded from the scope of the 

order. This product is defined as a nonmagnetic stainless steel manufactured to 

American Society of Testing and 

Materials specification B344 and 

containing, by weight, 36 percent 

nickel, 18 percent chromium, and 46 

percent iron, and is most notable for its 

resistance to high temperature 

corrosion. It has a melting point of 1,390 

degrees Celsius and displays a creep 

rupture limit of 4 kilograms per square 

millimeter at 1,000 degrees Celsius. This 

steel is most commonly used in the 

production of heating ribbons for circuit 

breakers and industrial furnaces, and in 

rheostats for railway locomotives. The 

product is currently available under 

proprietary trade names such as Gilphy 

36.2

Certain martensitic precipitationhardenable stainless steel is also 

excluded from the scope of the order. 

This high-strength, ductile stainless 

steel product is designated under the 

Unified Numbering System as S45500- 

grade steel, and contains, by weight, 11 

to 13 percent chromium, and 7 to 10 

percent nickel. Carbon, manganese, 

silicon and molybdenum each comprise, 

by weight, 0.05 percent or less, with 

phosphorus and sulfur each comprising, 

by weight, 0.03 percent or less. This 

steel has copper, niobium, and titanium 

added to achieve aging, and will exhibit 

yield strengths as high as 1,700 Mpa and 

ultimate tensile strengths as high as 

1750 Mpa after aging, with elongation 

percentages of 3 percent or less in 50 

mm. It is generally provided in 

thicknesses between 0.635 and 0.787 

mm, and in widths of 25.4 mm. This 

product is most commonly used in the 

manufacture of television tubes and is 

currently available under proprietary 

trade names such as Durphynox 17.3

Finally, three specialty stainless steels 

typically used in certain industrial 

blades and surgical and medical 

instruments are also excluded from the 

scope of the order. These include 

stainless steel strip in coils used in the 

production of textile cutting tools (e.g., 

carpet knives).4 This steel is similar to 

AISI grade 420 but containing, by 

weight, 0.5 to 0.7 percent of 

molybdenum. The steel also contains, 

by weight, carbon of between 1.0 and 

1.1 percent, sulfur of 0.020 percent or 

less, and includes between 0.20 and 

0.30 percent copper and between 0.20 

and 0.50 percent cobalt. This steel is 

sold under proprietary names such as 

GIN4 Mo. The second excluded 

stainless steel strip in coils is similar to 

AISI 420–J2 and contains, by weight, 

carbon of between 0.62 and 0.70 

percent, silicon of between 0.20 and 

0.50 percent, manganese of between 

0.45 and 0.80 percent, phosphorus of no 

more than 0.025 percent and sulfur of 

no more than 0.020 percent. This steel 

has a carbide density on average of 100 

carbide particles per 100 square 

microns. An example of this product is 

GIN5 steel. The third specialty steel has 

a chemical composition similar to AISI 

420 F, with carbon of between 0.37 and 

0.43 percent, molybdenum of between 

1.15 and 1.35 percent, but lower 

manganese of between 0.20 and 0.80 

percent, phosphorus of no more than 

0.025 percent, silicon of between 0.20 

and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of no more 

than 0.020 percent. This product is 

supplied with a hardness of more than 

Hv 500 guaranteed after customer 

processing, and is supplied as, for 

example, GIN6.5

Period of Review 

The POR is July 1, 2008, through June 

30, 2009. 

China Steel Corporation 

As we stated in the Preliminary 

Results, our practice concerning noshipment respondents has been to 

rescind the administrative review if the 

respondent certifies that it had no 

shipments within the applicable 

deadline and we have confirmed 

through our examination of data from 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(CBP) that there were no shipments of 

subject merchandise during the POR. 

See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing 

Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27393 (May 19, 

1997), and Oil Country Tubular Goods 

from Japan: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review and Partial Rescission of 

Review, 70 FR 53161, 53162 (Sept. 7, 

2005), unchanged in Oil Country 

Tubular Goods from Japan: Final 

Results and Partial Rescission of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review, 71 FR 95 (Jan. 3, 2006). As a 

result, in such circumstances, we 

normally instructed CBP to liquidate 

any entries from the no-shipment 

company at the deposit rate in effect on 

the date of entry. 

In our May 6, 2003, ‘‘automatic 

assessment’’ clarification, we explained 

that, where respondents in an 

administrative review demonstrate that 

they had no knowledge of sales through 

resellers to the United States, we would 

instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at 

the all-others rate applicable to the 

proceeding. See Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). 

Based on China Steel Corporation’s 

timely assertion of no shipments and 

confirmation of that claim by 

examination of CBP data as well as 

through a no-shipment inquiry sent to 

CBP, we continue to determine that 

China Steel Corporation had no 

shipments to the United States during 

the POR. See Preliminary Results, 75 FR 

at 49470. 

As we stated in the Preliminary 

Results, because ‘‘as entered’’ liquidation 

instructions do not alleviate the 

concerns which the May 2003 

clarification was intended to address, 

we find it appropriate in this case to 

instruct CBP to liquidate any existing 

entries of merchandise produced by 

China Steel Corporation and exported 

by other parties at the all-others rate. In 

addition, we continue to find that it is 

more consistent with the May 2003 

clarification not to rescind the review in 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
76702 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Notices 

6This rate is based upon the calculated rate from 

the most recently completed segment of this 

proceeding. See Preliminary Results, 75 FR at 

49474. 

part in these circumstances but, rather, 

to complete the review with respect to 

China Steel Corporation and issue 

appropriate instructions to CBP based 

on the final results of the review. See 

the ‘‘Assessment Rates’’ section of this 

notice below. 

Cost of Production 

As discussed in the Preliminary 

Results, we conducted an investigation 

to determine whether Chia Far made 

home market sales of the foreign like 

product during the POR at prices below 

its cost of production (COP) within the 

meaning of section 773(b) of the Act. 

See Preliminary Results, 75 FR at 

49472–73. As detailed in the 

Preliminary Results, we based our 

analysis on Chia Far’s weighted-average 

quarterly COP. Id. For these final 

results, we have continued to apply a 

quarterly cost methodology and have 

made no changes to the cost test 

performed in the Preliminary Results. 

We found that more than 20 percent 

of Chia Far’s sales of a given product 

during the reporting period were at 

prices less than the weighted-average 

COP for this period. Thus, we continue 

to determine that these below-cost sales 

were made in ‘‘substantial quantities’’ 

within an extended period of time and 

at prices which did not permit the 

recovery of all costs within a reasonable 

period of time in the normal course of 

trade. See sections 773(b)(2)(B)–(D) of 

the Act. 

Therefore, for purposes of these final 

results, we continue to find that Chia 

Far made below-cost sales not in the 

ordinary course of trade. Consequently, 

we disregarded the below-cost sales and 

used the remaining sales as the basis for 

determining normal value pursuant to 

section 773(b)(1) of the Act. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

The issue raised by YUSCO in its case 

brief, and to which we have responded, 

is listed in the Appendix to this notice 

and addressed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum (Decision 

Memo), which is adopted by this notice. 

Parties can find a complete discussion 

of the issue raised in this review and the 

corresponding recommendation in this 

public memorandum, which is on file in 

the Central Records Unit, room 7046, of 

the main Department building. 

In addition, a complete version of the 

Decision Memo can be accessed directly 

on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ 

frn/. The paper copy and electronic 

version of the Decision Memo are 

identical in content. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on our analysis of the 

comments received, we have made no 

changes in the margin calculations for 

Chia Far. 

Final Results of Review 

We determine that the following 

weighted-average margin percentages 

exist for the period July 1, 2008, through 

June 30, 2009: 

Manufacturer/exporter Percent 

margin 

Chia Far Industrial Factory Co., Ltd 0.00 

Review-Specific Average Rate Applicable to 

the Following Companies: 6

Chain Chon Industrial Co., Ltd ... 4.30 

Chien Shing Stainless Co ........... 4.30 

China Steel Corporation ............. * 

Dah Shi Metal Industrial Co., Ltd 4.30 

Goang Jau Shing Enterprise Co., 

Ltd ............................................ 4.30 

KNS Enterprise Co., Ltd ............. 4.30 

Lih Chan Steel Co., Ltd .............. 4.30 

Maytun International Corp .......... 4.30 

PFP Taiwan Co., Ltd .................. 4.30 

Shih Yuan Stainless Steel Enterprise Co., Ltd ........................... 4.30 

Ta Chen Stainless Pipe Co., Ltd 4.30 

Tang Eng Iron Works .................. 4.30 

Tibest International Inc ............... 4.30 

Tung Mung Development Co., 

Ltd./Ta Chen Stainless Pipe 

Co., Ltd ** ................................ 4.30 

Waterson Corp ............................ 4.30 

Yieh Loong Enterprise Co., Ltd 

(aka Chung Hung Steel Co., 

Ltd.) ......................................... 4.30 

Yieh Mau Corp ............................ 4.30 

Yieh Trading Corp ....................... 4.30 

Yieh United Steel Corporation .... 4.30 

* No shipments or sales subject to this review. 

** This rate applies to shipments of SSSSC 

produced by Tung Mung Development Co., 

Ltd. in Taiwan and exported from Taiwan to 

the United States by Ta Chen Stainless Pipe 

Co., Ltd. 

Assessment 

The Department shall determine, and 

CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on 

all appropriate entries. The Department 

intends to issue assessment instructions 

to CBP 15 days after the date of 

publication of these final results of 

review. 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we 

calculated importer-specific ad valorem 

duty assessment rates for Chia Far based 

on the ratio of the total amount of 

antidumping duties calculated for the 

examined sales to the total entered 

value of those sales. Pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate without regard to antidumping 

duties any entries for which the 

assessment rate is de minimis (i.e., less 

than 0.50 percent). 

Consistent with the Department’s 

practice, for the companies which were 

not selected for individual review, we 

will use the cash deposit rate as the 

assessment rate for these companies. 

See, e.g., Certain Frozen Warmwater 

Shrimp From India: Final Results and 

Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 74 FR 33409 

(July 13, 2009), and accompanying 

Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 3. 

The Department clarified its 

‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on 

May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This 

clarification will apply to entries of 

subject merchandise during the POR 

produced by Chia Far for which Chia 

Far did not know its merchandise was 

destined for the United States. This 

clarification will also apply to POR 

entries of subject merchandise produced 

by China Steel Corporation for which 

we are making a final determination of 

no shipments, because it certified that it 

made no POR shipments of subject 

merchandise for which it had 

knowledge of U.S. destination. In this 

instance, we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate unreviewed entries at the allothers rate established in the less-thanfair-value (LTFV) investigation if there 

is no rate for the intermediate 

company(ies) involved in the 

transaction. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

Further, the following deposit 

requirements will be effective for all 

shipments of SSSSC from Taiwan 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date of the final results of 

this administrative review, as provided 

for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) 

The cash deposit rate for the reviewed 

companies will be the rates shown 

above; (2) for previously investigated 

companies not listed above, as well as 

for China Steel Corporation, the cash 

deposit rate will continue to be the 

company-specific rate published for the 

most recent period; (3) if the exporter is 

not a firm covered in this review, or the 

LTFV investigation, but the 

manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate 

will be the rate established for the most 

recent period for the manufacturer of 

the merchandise; and (4) the cash 

deposit rate for all other manufacturers 

or exporters will continue to be 12.61 

percent, the ‘‘All Others’’ rate made 

effective by the LTFV investigation. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Notices 76703 

See Notice of Antidumping Duty 

Order; Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in 

Coils From United Kingdom, Taiwan, 

and South Korea, 64 FR 40555, 40557 

(July 27, 1999). These deposit 

requirements, when imposed, shall 

remain in effect until further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice serves as a final reminder 

to importers of their responsibility, 

under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2), to file a 

certificate regarding the reimbursement 

of antidumping duties prior to 

liquidation of the relevant entries 

during this review period. Failure to 

comply with this requirement could 

result in the Secretary’s presumption 

that reimbursement of antidumping 

duties occurred and the subsequent 

assessment of double antidumping 

duties. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice serves as the only 

reminder to parties subject to 

administrative protective order (APO) of 

their responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 

written notification of return/ 

destruction of APO materials or 

conversion to judicial protective order is 

hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and the terms of an 

APO is a sanctionable violation. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

final results of review in accordance 

with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of 

the Act. 

Dated: December 3, 2010. 

Paul Piquado, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix—Issue in the Decision 

Memorandum 

1. Whether the Department Should Rescind 

the Review with Respect to YUSCO. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30986 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XA078 

Marine Mammals; File No. 15750 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; receipt of application. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

ABR, Inc. Environmental Research and 

Services, Fairbanks, AK, has applied in 

due form for a permit to conduct 

research on marine mammals. 

DATES: Written, telefaxed, or e-mail 

comments must be received on or before 

January 10, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: The application and related 

documents are available for review by 

selecting ‘‘Records Open for Public 

Comment’’ from the Features box on the 

Applications and Permits for Protected 

Species (APPS) home page, https:// 

apps.nmfs.noaa.gov, and then selecting 

File No. 15750 from the list of available 

applications. 

These documents are also available 

upon written request or by appointment 

in the following office(s): 

Permits, Conservation and Education 

Division, Office of Protected Resources, 

NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 

13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone 

(301) 713–2289; fax (301) 713–0376; and 

Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. Box 

21668, Juneau, AK 99802–1668; phone 

(907) 586–7221; fax (907) 586–7249. 

Written comments on this application 

should be submitted to the Chief, 

Permits, Conservation and Education 

Division, at the address listed above. 

Comments may also be submitted by 

facsimile to (301) 713–0376, or by email to NMFS.Pr1Comments@noaa.gov. 

Please include the File No. in the 

subject line of the email comment. 

Those individuals requesting a public 

hearing should submit a written request 

to the Chief, Permits, Conservation and 

Education Division at the address listed 

above. The request should set forth the 

specific reasons why a hearing on this 

application would be appropriate. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Tammy Adams or Laura Morse, (301) 

713–2289. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

subject permit is requested under the 

authority of the Marine Mammal 

Protection Act of 1972, as amended 

(MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the 

regulations governing the taking and 

importing of marine mammals (50 CFR 

part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 

et seq.), and the regulations governing 

the taking, importing, and exporting of 

endangered and threatened species (50 

CFR 222–226). 

The applicant requests a five-year 

permit to conduct aerial surveys in 

Iniskin, Illiamna, Chinitna, and 

Kamishak Bays to document seasonal 

distribution and abundance of marine 

mammals in western lower Cook Inlet, 

Alaska. The applicant requests 

permission for level B harassment of the 

following marine mammals annually: 

1,000 Steller sea lions (Eumetopias 

jubatus), 250 beluga whales 

(Delphinapterus leucas), 34,400 harbor 

seals (Phoca vitulina), 600 harbor 

porpoises (Phocoena phocoena), 150 

Dall’s porpoises (Phocoenoides dalli), 

100 minke whales (Balaenoptera 

acutorostrata), 50 gray whales 

(Eschrichtius robustus), 100 killer 

whales (Orcinus orca), 15 northern fur 

seals (Callorhinus ursinus), 30 fin 

whales (B. physalus), and 125 

humpback whales (Megaptera 

novaeangliae). 

In compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial 

determination has been made that the 

activity proposed is categorically 

excluded from the requirement to 

prepare an environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement. 

Concurrent with the publication of 

this notice in the Federal Register, 

NMFS is forwarding copies of the 

application to the Marine Mammal 

Commission and its Committee of 

Scientific Advisors. 

Dated: December 3, 2010. 

Tammy C. Adams, 

Acting Chief, Permits, Conservation and 

Education Division, Office of Protected 

Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30983 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XA080 

New England Fishery Management 

Council; Public Hearings 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Monkfish Fishery Management 

Plan Amendment 6; Scoping Hearings; 

Request for Comments. 

SUMMARY: The New England Fishery 

Management Council (NEFMC) will 

hold public hearings to solicit 

comments on proposals to be included 

in the Draft Amendment 6 to the 

Monkfish Fishery Management Plan 

(FMP). The purpose of Amendment 6 is 

to consider one or more catch share 

management approaches for the 

monkfish fishery, including, but not 

limited to, Individual Fishery Quotas 

(IFQs), sectors and/or community 

quotas. The NEFMC is initiating a 

public process to determine the scope of 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES