33298 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 23, 2000 / Notices

International Trade Administration,

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,

Washington DC 20230; telephone (202)

482–3434 and (202) 482–0159,

respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On July 31, 1991, the Department

issued an antidumping duty order on

silicon metal from Brazil. See

Antidumping Duty Order: Silicon Metal

from Brazil, 56 FR 36135 (July 31, 1991)

(Antidumping Duty Order). On

September 5, 1996, the Department

published its final results of the second

administrative review of silicon metal

for four Brazilian exporters, Companhia

Brasilerira Carbureto de Calcio

(‘‘CBCC’’), Companhia Ferroligas Minas

Gerais-Minasligas (‘‘Minasligas’’),

Eletrosilex Belo Horizonte

(‘‘Eletrosilex’’), Rima Eletrometalurgia

S.A. (‘‘Rima’’). See Silicon Metal from

Brazil; Final Results of Antidumping

Administrative Review, 61 FR 46763

(September 5, 1996) (Final Results). On

September 9, 1997, the Department

published amended final results to

correct ministerial errors raised by the

parties after requesting and receiving

from the CIT authority to do so. See

Silicon Metal from Brazil: Amended

Final Results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review 62 FR 47441

(September 9, 1997) (Amended Final

Results).

On July 30, 1998, the CIT issued an

order, American Silicon Technologies v.

United States, 19 F. Supp. 2d 1121 (CIT

1998), remanding to the Department the

Amended Final Results. In its July 30,

1998 order, the CIT instructed the

Department to ensure that any reduction

of reported interest expenses for CBCC

and Eletrosilex is based upon income

specifically derived from short-term

investments. Id., at 1123.

On December 16, 1998, the

Department filed its final results

pursuant to remand. See Final Results of

Redetermination Pursuant to Court

Remand, American Silicon

Technologies, Elkem Metals Company,

Globe Metallurgical, Inc. and SKW

Metals & Alloys, Inc. v. United States

(December 16, 1998). On February 17,

1999, the CIT upheld the Department’s

redetermination on remand. See

American Silicon Technologies, Elkem

Metals Company, Globe Metallurgical,

Inc. and SKW Metals & Alloys, Inc. v.

United States, lCITl, Slip Op. 99–17,

(February 17, 1999). Neither party

appealed the CIT’s decision.

Because neither party appealed, there

is now a final and conclusive court

decision in this action. We are therefore

amending our final results of review for

the period July 1, 1992 through June 30,

1993. We recalculated margins for CBCC

and Eletrosilex. The revised weighted

average margins are as follows:

Manufacturer/Exporter Margin

(percent)

CBCC ........................ 35.43

Eletrosilex .................. 51.84

Accordingly, the Department will

determine, and the Customs Service will

assess, antidumping duties on all entries

of subject merchandise from CBCC and

Eletrosilex in accordance with these

amended final results. For assessment

purposes, we have calculated importerspecific duty assessment rates for each

class or kind of merchandise based on

the ratio of the total amount of

antidumping duties calculated for the

examined sales to the total quantity of

sales examined. The Department will

issue appraisement instructions directly

to Customs. The above rate will not

affect CBCC or Eletrosilex’s cash deposit

rates currently in effect, which continue

to be based on the margins found to

exist in the most recently completed

review.

This notice is published in

accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the

Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19

CFR 351.221.

Dated: May 15, 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–12980 Filed 5–22–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee;

Notice of Decision on Application for

Duty-Free Entry of Scientific

Instrument

This decision is made pursuant to

section 6(c) of the Educational,

Scientific, and Cultural Materials

Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89–

651, 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301).

Related records can be viewed between

8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. in Room 4211,

Department of Commerce, 14th and

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,

DC.

Docket Number: 00–007.

Applicant: University of WisconsinMilwaukee, Milwaukee, WI 53211.

Instrument: Scanning Tunneling

Microscope, Model STM 25DH.

Manufacturer: Omicron

Vakuumphysik GmbH, Germany.

Intended Use: See notice at 65 FR

21397.

Comments: None received.

Decision: Approved. No instrument of

equivalent scientific value to the foreign

instrument, for such purposes as it is

intended to be used, is being

manufactured in the United States.

Reasons: The foreign instrument

provides:

(1) Capability to operate at

temperatures to 1500° K, (2) a

vibrationally isolated vacuum chamber

capable to 10 ¥11 mbar and (3) vertical

imaging of film surfaces with accuracy

to 0.001 nm. The National Institute of

Standards and Technology and a

university research center for advanced

microstructure devices advise that (1)

these capabilities are pertinent to the

applicant’s intended purpose and (2)

they know of no domestic instrument or

apparatus of equivalent scientific value

to the foreign instrument for the

applicant’s intended use (comparable

case).

We know of no other instrument or

apparatus of equivalent scientific value

to the foreign instrument which is being

manufactured in the United States.

Dated: May 16, 2000.

Frank W. Creel,

Director, Statutory Import Programs Staff.

[FR Doc. 00–12979 Filed 5–22–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

[I.D. 051800B]

At-sea Scale Certification Program

AGENCY: National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration.

ACTION: Proposed collection; comment

request.

SUMMARY: The Department of

Commerce, as part of its continuing

effort to reduce paperwork and

respondent burden, invites the general

public and other Federal agencies to

take this opportunity to comment on

proposed and/or continuing information

collections, as required by the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C.

3506(c)(2)(A)).

DATES: Written comments must be

submitted on or before July 24, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments

to Linda Engelmeier, Departmental

Forms Clearance Officer, Department of

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 23, 2000 / Notices 33299

Commerce, Room 6066, 14th and

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington

DC 20230 (or via Internet at

lengelme@doc.gov).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Requests for additional information or

copies of the information collection

instrument(s) and instructions should

be directed to Alan Kinsolving, NOAA/

NMFS, F/AKR2, PO BOX 21668, Juneau,

AK 99802–1668; phone 907–586–7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Abstract

The National Marine Fisheries Service

(NMFS) manages the commercial

groundfish harvest off Alaska based on

an annual total allowable catch for each

species. This is based on ‘‘round’’

weight, or the weight of the fish prior to

processing. However, much of the fish

harvested off Alaska is harvested by

vessels that process the catch at-sea and

do not land whole fish. One way that

NMFS uses to estimate the total weight

of fish harvested by processing vessels

is by requiring the vessel to weigh all or

part of their catch on a motioncompensated scale. At this time, two

groups of vessels are required to weigh

all catch at-sea: catcher processors and

motherships that are listed under the

American Fisheries act as eligible to

harvest pollock; and trawl catcher

processors and motherships that are

harvesting fish under the Community

Development Quota Program (CDQ

quota). Non-trawl catcher/processors

that harvest CDQ quota are not required

to weigh all catch, but they are required

to weigh samples of catch. All of these

vessels must also provide an observer

sampling station where NMFS-certified

observers can work. The station must be

inspected and approved annually by

NMFS.

II. Method of Collection

Scale manufacturers must submit

documentation if they wish to have a

scale approved by NMFS. Vessel owners

required to weigh catch must used

NMFS-inspected scales and sampling

stations. To schedule an inspection,

they must submit a request form.

Vessels required to weigh all catch must

test their scales daily and maintain

documentation verifying that the testing

took place. These vessels must also

maintain a printed record of the weight

of each haul that was required to be

weighed. Finally, inspectors employed

by other Federal, state, or local weights

and measures agencies may request

authority to inspect scales on behalf of

NMFS.

III. Data

OMB Number: 0648–0330.

Form Number: None.

Type of Review: Regular submission.

Affected public: Business and other

for-profit institutions.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

49.

Estimated Time Per Response: 176

hours for the scale type evaluation, 45

minutes for conducting and maintaining

a record of the daily scale test, 6

minutes to retain a daily printed scale

output, 6 minutes for the request for

scale inspection, 6 minutes for

maintenance of a scale approval sticker,

6 minutes for an application to inspect

scales on behalf of NMFS, and 2 hours

to make a request for observer sampling

station inspection and maintaining the

results.

Estimated Total Annual Burden

Hours: 3,508.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to

Public: $8,184.

IV. Request for Comments

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether

the proposed collection of information

is necessary for the proper performance

of the functions of the agency, including

whether the information shall have

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden

(including hours and cost) of the

proposed collection of information; (c)

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the

burden of the collection of information

on respondents, including through the

use of automated collection techniques

or other forms of information

technology.

Comments submitted in response to

this notice will be summarized and /or

included in the request for OMB

approval of this information collection;

they also will become a matter of public

record.

Dated: May 17, 2000.

Gwellnar Banks,

Management Analyst, Office of the Chief

Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 00–12969 Filed 5–22–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

[I.D. 051200C]

Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management

Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY: The Gulf of Mexico Fishery

Management Council will convene a

public meeting of the Stone Crab

Advisory Panel (AP).

DATES: The AP meeting is scheduled to

begin at 8:00 a.m. on June 8, 2000 and

will conclude by 12:00 noon.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at

the Banana Bay Resort & Marina, 4590

Overseas Highway, Marathon, FL 33050;

telephone: 305–743–3500.

Council address: Gulf of Mexico

Fishery Management Council, 3018 U.S.

Highway 301 North, Suite 1000, Tampa,

FL 33619.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Wayne Swingle, Executive Director,

Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management

Council, 3018 U.S. Highway 301 North,

Suite 1000, Tampa, FL 33619;

telephone: 813–228–2815.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Stone

Crab Advisory Panel (AP) will convene

to review an amendment to the Stone

Crab Fishery Management Plan (FMP).

The amendment proposes to extend

the trap certificate program for the

commercial stone crab fishery adopted

by the state of Florida into the Federal

waters off west Florida. The Florida

Fish & Wildlife Conservation

Commission (FFWCC), after working

with the stone crab industry and

Council over the past 4 years, has

adopted by rule a trap certificate

program that will gradually reduce the

number of traps over a 30-year period.

The Florida legislature has approved the

portion of this program pertaining to

licenses and fees. Based on this review,

the AP may make recommendations to

the Council for consideration at their

meeting in Key Largo, July 10–14, 2000.

Although other non-emergency issues

not on the agendas may come before the

AP for discussion, in accordance with

the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act,

those issues may not be the subject of

formal action during these meetings.

Actions of the AP will be restricted to

those issues specifically identified in

the agendas and any issues arising after

publication of this notice that require

emergency action under Section 305(c)

of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided

the public has been notified of the

Council’s intent to take action to

address the emergency. Copies of the

agenda can be obtained by calling 813–

228–2815.