This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains documents other than rules or

proposed rules that are applicable to the

public. Notices of hearings and investigations,

committee meetings, agency decisions and

rulings, delegations of authority, filing of

petitions and applications and agency

statements of organization and functions are

examples of documents appearing in this

section.

Notices Federal Register

33802

Vol. 65, No. 102

Thursday, May 25, 2000

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

[TM–00–06]

Notice of Meeting of the National

Organic Standards Board

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Federal Advisory Committee Act, as

amended, the Agricultural Marketing

Service (AMS) announces a forthcoming

meeting of the National Organic

Standards Board (NOSB).

DATES: June 6, 2000, from 9 a.m. to 5

p.m., and June 7, 2000, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

(Eastern Daylight Time each day).

PLACE: Hilton Crystal City at National

Airport, 2399 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, VA 22202, Telephone: (703)

418–6800.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Keith Jones, Program Manager, National

Organic Program, USDA–AMS–TMP–

NOP, Room 2945–So., Ag Stop 0268,

P.O. Box 96456, Washington, D.C.

20090–6456, Telephone: (202) 720–

3252.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

2119 (7 U.S.C. 6518) of the Organic

Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA),

as amended (7 U.S.C. Section 6501 et

seq.) requires the establishment of the

NOSB. The purpose of the NOSB is to

assist in the development of standards

for substances to be used in organic

production and to advise the Secretary

on any other aspects of the

implementation of OFPA. The NOSB

met for the first time in Washington,

D.C., in March 1992 and currently has

six committees working on various

aspects of the program. The committees

are: Crops Standards; Processing,

Labeling and Packaging Standards;

Livestock Standards; Accreditation;

Materials; and International Issues.

In August of 1994, the NOSB

provided its initial recommendations for

the National Organic Program (NOP) to

the Secretary of Agriculture. Since that

time the NOSB has submitted 30

addenda to its recommendations and

reviewed more than 170 substances for

inclusion on the National List of

Allowed and Prohibited Substances.

The last meeting of the NOSB was held

on March 21–22, 2000, in Buena Park,

California.

The Department of Agriculture

(USDA) published its re-proposed

National Organic Program regulation in

the Federal Register on March 13, 2000

(65 FR 13512). Comments are being

accepted until June 12, 2000. Comments

may be submitted to: Keith Jones,

Program Manager, National Organic

Program, USDA–AMS–TMP–NOP,

Room 2945–So., Ag Stop 0275, PO Box

96456, Washington, DC 20090–6456.

Comments also may be sent by fax to

(703) 365–0760 or filed via the Internet

through the NOP’s homepage at: http:/

/www.ams.usda.gov/nop. Comments

should be identified with docket

number TMD–00–02–PR.

Purpose and Agenda

The principal purposes of this

meeting are to provide an opportunity

for the NOSB to receive committee

reports; approve the NOSB’s comment

to the re-proposed National Organic

Program regulation; vote on whether to

recommend the addition of ethylene gas

and amino acids to the National List;

elect new officers of the NOSB; and

receive an update regarding certification

of aquatic animals from the USDA.

Copies of the NOSB final meeting

agenda can be requested from Mrs. Toni

Strother, USDA–AMS–TMP–NOP,

Room 2510–So., Ag Stop 0268, P.O. Box

96456, Washington, D.C. 20090–6456;

by phone at (202) 720–3252; or by

accessing the NOP website at http://

www.ams.usda.gov/nop after May 23,

2000.

Type of Meeting

This meeting is open to the public.

The NOSB has scheduled time for

public input on Tuesday, June 6, 2000,

from 1:30 p.m. until 4:00 p.m. at the

Hilton Crystal City at National Airport,

2399 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, VA 22202. Telephone: (703)

418–6800. Individuals and

organizations wishing to make an oral

presentation at the meeting should

forward the request to Mrs. Strother at

the above address or by FAX to (202)

205–7808 by close of business June 2,

2000. While persons wishing to make a

presentation may sign up at the door,

advance registration will ensure an

opportunity to speak during the allotted

time period and will help the NOSB to

better manage the meeting and

accomplish its agenda. Individuals or

organizations will be given

approximately 5 minutes to present

their views. All persons making an oral

presentation are requested to provide

their comments in writing, if possible.

Written submissions may supplement

the oral presentation with additional

material. Written comments may be

submitted to the NOSB at the meeting

or to Mrs. Strother after the meeting at

the above address.

Dated: May 23, 2000.

Sharon Bomer Lauritsen

Acting Deputy Administrator, Transportation

and Marketing

[FR Doc. 00–13289 Filed 5–23–00; 1:35 pm]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Docket 2–2000]

Foreign-Trade Zone 193–Pinellas

County, FL; Application for Subzone

Status, Amendment of Application—

RP Scherer Corporation (Gelatin

Capsules)

Notice is hereby given that the

application of the Pinellas County Board

of County Commissioners, grantee of

FTZ 193, requesting authority for

special-purpose subzone status for the

gelatin capsule manufacturing facilities

of RP Scherer Corporation (Scherer)

located in the St. Petersburg/Clearwater

area, Pinellas County, Florida (65 FR

5308, 2/3/00), has been amended to

expand the proposed use of zone

procedures at the Scherer plant to

include the manufacture of a new antiAIDS drug, using foreign and domestic

ingredients. The foreign ingredients

include Lopinavir (HTSUS

2933.59.7000—9.3% duty rate). The

finished product is classified under

HTSUS 3004.70.9010 and is duty free.

Scherer will be finishing and

encapsulating the finished drug under

contract for Abbott Laboratories, Inc.,

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 102 / Thursday, May 25, 2000 / Notices 33803

which has authority from the FTZ Board

to produce the drug under zone

procedures at its Chicago, Illinois, plant.

The application remains otherwise

unchanged.

The comment period is reopened

until June 26, 2000.

Dated: May 17, 2000.

Dennis Puccinelli,

Acting Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–13098 Filed 5–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–851–802]

Preliminary Determination of Critical

Circumstances: Certain Small

Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless

Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe

From the Czech Republic

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 25, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

Brinkmann or Dennis McClure, AD/CVD

Enforcement, Office 6, Group II, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20230;

telephone: (202) 482–4126 or 482–0984,

respectively.

The Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the statute are references to

the provisions effective January 1, 1995,

the effective date of the amendments

made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act)

by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act.

In addition, unless otherwise indicated,

all citations to the Department’s

regulations are references to the

provisions codified at 19 CFR part 351

(April 1999).

Background

On February 4, 2000, the Department

published the preliminary affirmative

determination in the antidumping duty

investigation on certain small diameter

carbon and alloy seamless standard, line

and pressure pipe (seamless pipe) from

the Czech Republic, 65 FR 5599. On

April 18, 2000, the petitioners alleged

that there is a reasonable basis to believe

or suspect that critical circumstances

exist with respect to imports of seamless

pipe from the Czech Republic.

Critical Circumstances

Section 733(e)(1) of the Act provides

that the Department will preliminarily

determine that critical circumstances

exist if there is a reasonable basis to

believe or suspect that: (A)(i) There is a

history of dumping and material injury

by reason of dumped imports in the

United States or elsewhere of the subject

merchandise, or (ii) the person by

whom, or for whose account, the

merchandise was imported knew or

should have known that the exporter

was selling the subject merchandise at

less than its fair value and that there

was likely to be material injury by

reason of such sales, and (B) there have

been massive imports of the subject

merchandise over a relatively short

period. Section 351.206(h)(1) of the

Department’s regulations provides that,

in determining whether imports of the

subject merchandise have been

‘‘massive,’’ the Department normally

will examine: (i) The volume and value

of the imports; (ii) seasonal trends; and

(iii) the share of domestic consumption

accounted for by the imports. In

addition, section 351.206(h)(2) of the

Department’s regulations provides that

an increase in imports of 15 percent

during the ‘‘relatively short period’’ of

time may be considered ‘‘massive.’’

Section 351.206(i) of the Department’s

regulations defines ‘‘relatively short

period’’ as normally being the period

beginning on the date the proceeding

begins (i.e., the date the petition is filed)

and ending at least three months later.

The regulations also provide, however,

that if the Department finds that

importers, or exporters or producers,

had reason to believe, at some time prior

to the beginning of the proceeding, that

a proceeding was likely, the Department

may consider a period of not less than

three months from that earlier time.

History of Dumping and Importer

Knowledge

Because we are aware of the European

Union’s (EU’s) November 17, 1997,

finding that the Czech Republic had

sold similar products (e.g., seamless

pipes, of iron or non-alloy steel) at less

than fair value and had caused injury to

the domestic industry, we find that a

reasonable basis exists to believe or

suspect that there is a history of

dumping and material injury by reason

of dumped imports in the United States

or elsewhere of the subject merchandise,

pursuant to section 733(e)(1)(A)(i) of the

Act. Although the products investigated

by the EU are not all identical to those

covered by the scope of this

investigation, we do not require the

scope of our proceedings to match

exactly the scope of the foreign

proceeding. See Notice of Final

Determination of Sales at Less Than

Fair Value: Disposable Pocket Lighters

From the People’s Republic of China, 60

FR 22359, 22368 (May 5, 1995). In

addition, the Department may look to

the second criterion for determining

importer knowledge of dumping.

In determining whether there is a

reasonable basis to believe or suspect

that an importer knew or should have

known that the exporter was selling the

seamless pipe at less than fair value,

pursuant to section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii) of

the Act, the Department’s normal

practice is to consider margins of 25

percent or more for export price (EP)

sales sufficient to impute knowledge of

dumping. See Certain Cut-to-Length

Carbon Steel Plate From the People’s

Republic of China, 62 FR 31972, 31978

(June 11, 1997). In the instant case, the

respondent, Nova Hut, received a

margin of 32.26 percent in the amended

preliminary determination, 65 FR

12971. Therefore, we have imputed

knowledge of dumping to importers of

subject merchandise from Nova Hut.

In determining whether there is a

reasonable basis to believe or suspect

that an importer knew or should have

known that there was likely to be

material injury by reason of dumped

imports, under section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii) of

the Act, the Department normally will

look to the preliminary injury

determination of the International Trade

Commission (ITC). If the ITC finds a

reasonable indication of present

material injury to the relevant U.S.

industry, the Department will determine

that a reasonable basis exists to impute

importer knowledge that there was

likely to be material injury by reason of

dumped imports. In this case, the ITC

has found that a reasonable indication

of present material injury due to

dumping exists for all imports of

seamless pipe from the Czech Republic.

See Certain Seamless Carbon and Alloy

Steel Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe

from the Czech Republic, Japan, Mexico,

Romania and South Africa, 64 FR 46953

(August 27, 1999). As a result, the

Department has determined that there is

a reasonable basis to believe or suspect

that importers knew or should have

known that there was likely to be

material injury by reason of dumped

imports of subject merchandise from the

Czech Republic.

Massive Imports

In determining whether there are

‘‘massive imports’’ over a ‘‘relatively

short period,’’ pursuant to 733(e)(1)(B)

of the Act, the Department normally

compares the import volume of the

subject merchandise for three months

immediately preceding and following

the filing of the petition. Imports

normally will be considered massive