76396 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Notices 

IV. Adjourn Briefing. 

CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION: Lenore Ostrowsky, Acting 

Chief, Public Affairs Unit (202) 376– 

8591. TDD: (202) 376–8116. 

Persons with a disability requiring 

special services, such as an interpreter 

for the hearing impaired, should contact 

Pamela Dunston at least seven days 

prior to the meeting at 202–376–8105. 

TDD: (202) 376–8116. 

Dated: December 3, 2010. 

David Blackwood, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30933 Filed 12–6–10; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 6335–01–P 

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS 

Sunshine Act Notice 

AGENCY: United States Commission on 

Civil Rights. 

ACTION: Notice of meeting. 

DATE AND TIME: Friday, March 11, 2011; 

9:30 a.m. EST. 

PLACE: 624 Ninth Street, NW., Room 

540, Washington, DC 20425. 

Briefing Agenda 

This briefing is open to the public. 

Topic: The Civil Rights Implications 

of Eminent Domain Abuse. 

I. Introductory Remarks by Chairman. 

II. Speakers’ Presentations. 

III. Questions by Commissioners and 

Staff Director. 

IV. Adjourn Briefing. 

CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION: Lenore Ostrowsky, Acting 

Chief, Public Affairs Unit (202) 376– 

8591. TDD: (202) 376–8116. 

Persons with a disability requiring 

special services, such as an interpreter 

for the hearing impaired, should contact 

Pamela Dunston at least seven days 

prior to the meeting at 202–376–8105. 

TDD: (202) 376–8116. 

Dated: December 3, 2010. 

David Blackwood, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30935 Filed 12–6–10; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 6335–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–201–822] 

Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils 

From Mexico: Extension of Time Limit 

for Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: December 8, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patrick Edwards, Brian Davis, or 

Angelica Mendoza, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 7, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–8029, (202) 482– 

7924, or (202) 482–3019, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On August 9, 2010, the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

preliminary results of the administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils 

(S4 in coils) from Mexico for the period 

July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009. See 

Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils 

From Mexico; Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review, 75 FR 47780 (August 9, 2010) 

(Preliminary Results). In the Preliminary 

Results, we invited parties to comment. 

In response to the Department’s 

invitation to comment on the 

preliminary results of this review, 

respondent, ThyssenKrupp Mexinox 

S.A. (Mexinox) submitted (1) a request 

for a public hearing and (2) a case brief 

on September 8, 2010. See Letter from 

Mexinox, titled ‘‘Stainless Steel Sheet 

and Strip in Coils from Mexico—Case 

Brief,’’ dated September 8, 2010 

(Mexinox’s Case Brief). Also on 

September 8, 2010, Allegheny Ludlum 

Corporation, AK Steel Corporation, and 

North American Stainless (collectively, 

petitioners), submitted a case brief. See 

Letter from Petitioners, titled ‘‘Stainless 

Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from 

Mexico—Petitioner’s Case Brief,’’ dated 

September 8, 2010 (Petitioners’ Case 

Brief). 

On September 9, 2010, the 

Department received a request from 

petitioners to extend the deadline to 

submit rebuttal briefs and on September 

13, 2010, the Department granted this 

request. Petitioners timely submitted 

their rebuttal brief on September 15, 

2010. See Letter from Petitioners, titled 

‘‘Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils 

from Mexico—Petitioners’ Rebuttal 

Brief,’’ dated September 15, 2010 

(Petitioners’ Rebuttal Brief). Also on 

September 15, 2010, Mexinox submitted 

its rebuttal brief. See Letter from 

Mexinox, titled ‘‘Stainless Steel Sheet 

and Strip in Coils from Mexico— 

Rebuttal Brief,’’ dated September 15, 

2010 (Mexinox’s Rebuttal Brief). On 

September 17, 2010, Mexinox withdrew 

its request for a hearing. See Letter from 

Mexinox, titled ‘‘Stainless Steel Sheet 

and Strip in Coils from Mexico— 

Withdrawal of Hearing Request,’’ dated 

September 17, 2010. 

On November 17, 2010, we issued a 

letter to petitioners notifying them that 

we were rejecting their Case Brief 

because it contained new information 

regarding the U.S. entities that 

petitioners believe are purchasers of 

certain merchandise. Also on November 

17, 2010, we issued a letter to Mexinox 

stating that we were rejecting its 

Rebuttal Brief because it also contained 

new information regarding the U.S. 

entities that petitioners believe are 

purchasers of certain merchandise. On 

November 22, 2010, Mexinox submitted 

its revised Rebuttal Brief, and on 

November 23, 2010, petitioners 

submitted its revised Case Brief. The 

current deadline for the final results of 

this review is December 7, 2010. 

Extension of Time Limits for Final 

Results 

Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires 

the Department to complete the final 

results of an administrative review 

within 120 days after the date on which 

the preliminary results are published. 

However, if it is not practicable to 

complete the review within the time 

period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act 

allows the Department to extend the 120 

day time period for the final results up 

to 180 days. 

The Department finds that it is not 

practicable to complete this review 

within the original time frame because 

additional analysis must be performed 

with respect to several complex issues 

raised by the parties, such as Mexinox’s 

cost of production, contemporaneous 

matching, etc. Accordingly, the 

Department is extending the time limit 

for completion of the final results of this 

administrative review until no later than 

January 6, 2011, which is 150 days after 

the date on which the preliminary 

results of review were published. 

This extension is issued and 

published in accordance with sections 

751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i) of the Act. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Notices 76397 

1National Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995, Public Law 104–113, 110 Stat. 775— 

784 (1996). 

2OMB Circular A–119 Revised, Federal 

Participation in the Development and Use of 

Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity 

Assessment Activities (rev. Feb. 10, 1998) ¶ 3, 

available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ 

rewrite/circulars/a119/a119.html. 

Dated: December 2, 2010. 

Susan H. Kuhbach, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30859 Filed 12–7–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology 

[Docket No. 0909100442–0563–02] 

Effectiveness of Federal Agency 

Participation in Standardization in 

Select Technology Sectors for National 

Science and Technology Council’s 

Sub-Committee on Standardization 

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards 

and Technology, Department of 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Request for Information. 

SUMMARY: The National Institute of 

Standards and Technology, on behalf of 

the National Science and Technology 

Council’s Sub-Committee on Standards, 

invites interested parties to provide 

their perspectives on the effectiveness of 

Federal agencies’ participation in the 

development and implementation of 

standards and conformity assessment 

activities and programs. This 

information will help the SubCommittee on Standards develop case 

studies that Federal agencies can 

consider in their future engagement in 

standards development and conformity 

assessment, particularly for multidisciplinary technologies, or for 

technologies involving engagement from 

multiple Federal agencies. 

DATES: Comments are due on or before 

11:59 p.m. on February 7, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Comments will be accepted 

by e-mail only. Comments should be 

sent to SOS_RFI@nist.gov with the 

subject line ‘‘Standardization feedback 

for Sub-Committee on Standards.’’ 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ajit 

Jillavenkatesa, 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 

1060, Gaithersburg, MD 20899–1060, 

301–975–8519, ajit.jilla@nist.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 

24, 2010, the U.S. Chief Technology 

Officer and Associate Director for 

Technology in the White House Office 

of Science and Technology Policy, 

Aneesh Chopra, announced the 

establishment of a Sub-Committee on 

Standards under the National Science 

and Technology Council’s Committee of 

Technology. (http:// 

www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/03/24/ 

providing-leadership-standardsaddress-national-challenges). The SubCommittee includes leaders of executive 

branch agencies and commissions that 

have an interest in, or are involved with, 

technical standards. It is co-chaired by 

Patrick Gallagher (Director, National 

Institute of Standards and Technology, 

U.S. Department of Commerce). 

Information about agencies participating 

in this Sub-Committee, and its charter is 

available at: http://www.standards.gov/ 

standards_gov/ 

nstcsubcommitteeonstandards.cfm. By 

examining the various methods that 

Federal agencies use to engage in 

standards-development activities in 

partnership with the private sector, the 

Sub-Committee on Standards intends to 

develop information on how Federal 

agencies may engage more effectively in 

the standardization system in a manner 

that is consistent with the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 1 and the Office of 

Management and Budget Circular A– 

119.2 In support of this objective, the 

Sub-Committee is interested in 

perspectives on (1) the effectiveness of 

the methods Federal agencies have used 

to engage in standards-setting activities 

by identifying which methods have 

enhanced or limited the public-private 

standards-setting processes; (2) the 

effectiveness of Federal agencies 

coordination with the private sector; 

and (3) the adequacy and availability of 

Federal resources; and (4) other issues 

that arise and are considered during the 

standards setting process which impact 

the process, and the timeliness, 

adoption and use of the resulting 

standards. 

Request for Information 

The objective of this request is to 

inform the development of case studies 

that will examine the effectiveness of 

Federal agencies’ participation in 

standards-setting efforts led by the 

private sector. The case studies would 

provide agencies information on lessons 

learned from Federal agency 

engagement in standards development 

for technologies that are complex, multidisciplinary, exhibit system-type 

characteristics, and involve multiple 

government agencies, and addressed 

specific national priorities. Issues 

impacting U.S. competitiveness such as 

the interplay of standards with 

intellectual property, competition, and 

innovation are also significant 

considerations in these technology 

areas. These case studies may inform 

decisions about Federal agencies’ 

engagement in standardization for 

technologies with similar 

characteristics. The questions below are 

intended to help frame the issues and 

should not be construed as a limitation 

on comments that parties may submit. 

Comments containing references, 

studies, research, and other empirical 

data that are not widely published 

should include copies of the referenced 

materials. All comments will be made 

publicly available. 

The Sub-Committee on Standards is 

specifically interested in comments that 

address the questions below as they 

relate to the following technologies: 

1. Smart Grid. 

2. Health Information Technology. 

3. Cyber Security. 

4. Emergency Communications 

Interoperability. 

5. Radioactivity Detectors and 

Radiation Monitors (ANSI N42.3x and 

N42.4x). 

6. Other technologies involving 

significant Federal agency participation 

in standards setting. 

For the purposes of this notice, the 

term ‘‘standards’’ and the phrase 

‘‘standards setting’’ is used in a generic 

manner to cover both standards and 

conformity assessment development. 

State and local governments, standardssetting organizations, industry, 

consumers, manufacturers, solution 

providers, and other stakeholders are 

invited to respond. Responses should 

identify the technologies involved as 

appropriate. 

Standards-Setting Processes, Reasons 

for Participation and the Benefits of 

Standardization 

Emerging technologies offer great 

potential for delivering new and 

improved products and services in the 

global economy. Standards can enable 

further innovation and enhance the 

value of these new technologies. Federal 

law and associated policy guidance has 

expressed a general preference for 

Federal agencies to rely on voluntary 

consensus standards, in lieu of 

government unique standards, through 

the National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 and Office of 

Management and Budget Circular A– 

119, which encourage agency staff to 

participate in standards-development 

activities led by the private sector, as 

appropriate. 

Recognizing that stakeholders 

participate in standards-setting 

activities for varying reasons, and in 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES