43812 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 2, 2006 / Notices 

viewed on the World Wide Web at 

http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/open.html. 

Kurt N. Lindland, 

Assistant United States Attorney. 

[FR Doc. 06–6647 Filed 8–1–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–15–M 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms 

and Explosives 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comments Requested 

ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information 

Collection Under Review: Employee 

Possessor Questionnaire [OMB Number 

1140–0072] 

The Department of Justice (DOJ), 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms 

and Explosives (ATF) has submitted the 

following information collection request 

to the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for review and approval in 

accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed 

information collection is published to 

obtain comments from the public and 

affected agencies. This proposed 

information collection was previously 

published in the Federal Register 

Volume 71, Number 104, pages 30959–

30960 on May 31, 2006, allowing for a 

60 day comment period. 

The purpose of this notice is to allow 

for an additional 30 days for public 

comment until September 1, 2006. This 

process is conducted in accordance with 

5 CFR 1320.10. 

Written comments and/or suggestions 

regarding the items contained in this 

notice, especially the estimated public 

burden and associated response time, 

should be directed to The Office of 

Management and Budget, Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Attention Department of Justice Desk 

Officer, Washington, DC 20503. 

Additionally, comments may be 

submitted to OMB via facsimile to (202) 

395–5806. 

Written comments and suggestions 

from the public and affected agencies 

concerning the proposed collection of 

information are encouraged. Your 

comments should address one or more 

of the following four points: 

—Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

—Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies 

estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

—Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

—Minimize the burden of the collection 

of information on those who are to 

respond, including through the use of 

appropriate automated, electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 

collection techniques or other forms 

of information technology, e.g., 

permitting electronic submission of 

responses. 

Overview of This Information 

Collection 

(1) Type of Information Collection: 

Extension of a currently approved 

collection. 

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: 

Employee Possessor Questionnaire. 

(3) Agency form number, if any, and 

the applicable component of the 

Department of Justice sponsoring the 

collection: Form Number: ATF F 

5400.28. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, 

Firearms and Explosives. 

(4) Affected public who will be asked 

or required to respond, as well as a brief 

abstract: Primary: Individuals or 

households. Other: Business or other 

for-profit. Abstract: Each employee 

possessor in the explosive business or 

operations required to ship, transport, 

receive, or possess (actual or 

constructive), explosive materials must 

submit this form. The form will be 

submitted to ATF to determine whether 

the person who provided the 

information is qualified to be an 

employee possessor in an explosive 

business. 

(5) An estimate of the total number of 

respondents and the amount of time 

estimated for an average respondent to 

respond: There will be an estimated 

10,000 respondents, who will complete 

the form within approximately 20 

minutes. 

(6) An estimate of the total burden (in 

hours) associated with the collection: 

There are an estimated 3,334 total 

burden hours associated with this 

collection. 

If additional information is required 

contact: Lynn Bryant, Department 

Clearance Officer, United States 

Department of Justice, Policy and 

Planning Staff, Justice Management 

Division, Suite 1600, Patrick Henry 

Building, 601 D Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20530. 

Dated: July 28, 2006. 

Lynn Bryant, 

Department Clearance Officer, United States 

Department of Justice. 

[FR Doc. E6–12450 Filed 8–1–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–FY–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Antitrust Division 

Proposed Termination of Judgments 

Notice is hereby given that Defendant 

American Watch Association, Inc. 

(‘‘AWA’’) and Defendant Foote, Cone & 

Belding, Inc. (‘‘Foote’’) have filed a joint 

motion to terminate both the Final 

Judgment entered against the AWA 

(‘‘the AWA Final Judgment’’) and the 

Final Judgment entered against Foote 

(‘‘the Foote Final Judgment’’) on March 

9, 1960 in United States v. The 

Watchmakers of Switzerland 

Information Center, Inc., Trade Reg. 

Rep. (CCH) ¶69,655 (S.D.N.Y. Mar 9, 

1960) (collectively ‘‘the AWA and Foote 

Final Judgments’’) and that the 

Department of Justice (‘‘the 

Department’’), Antitrust Division, in a 

stipulation also filed with the Court, has 

tentatively consented to termination of 

the AWA and Foote Final Judgments, 

but has reserved the right to withdraw 

its consent pending receipt of public 

comments. 

The AWA and Foote Final Judgments, 

similar to the Final Judgment entered in 

United States v. The Watchmakers of 

Switzerland Information Center, Inc., 

Trade Reg. Rep. (CCH) ¶69,655 

(S.D.N.Y. Mar. 9, 1960) (‘‘the 

Watchmakers Final Judgment’’), arose 

out of a 1950s investigation of the 

anticompetitive practices of the Swiss 

watch industry, including Swiss watch 

manufacturers, Swiss trade associations, 

and their United States importers. The 

United States filed a complaint against 

more than 20 watch companies and 

associations in 1954, including the 

AWA and Foote. United States v. The 

Watchmakers of Switzerland 

Information Center, Inc., Civil Action 

No. 96–170 (S.D.N.Y. Complaint filed 

Oct. 19, 1954). The AWA is an 

association that promotes the growth 

and health of the U.S. watch industry 

and lobbies to influence regulatory 

policy. Its members include U.S. watch 

companies as well as U.S. subsidiaries 

of foreign watch manufacturers. Foote is 

an advertising agency that allegedly 

acted as an agent for some of the 

defendants. 

The United States made serveral 

allegations in its complaint. It charged 

that certain Swiss and U.S. 


wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 2, 2006 / Notices 43813 

manufacturers and sellers of Swiss 

watches and watch parts engaged in a 

conspiracy ‘‘to restrict, eliminate and 

discourage the manufacture of watches 

and watch parts in the United States, 

and to restrain United States imports 

and exports of watches and watch parts 

for manufacturing and repair purposes.’’

Id. The United States also charged that 

these companies agreed to fix minimum 

prices for watches and maximum prices 

for repair parts, regulate the use and 

distribution of watches and repair parts, 

boycott those who violated these 

restrictions. Id. The conspiracy came 

about through the adoption and 

enforcement of an agreement known as 

the Collective Convention of the Swiss 

Watch Industry. ‘‘The purpose of the 

Collective Convention was to protect, 

develop and stablize the Swiss watch 

industry and to impede the growth and 

competitive watch industries outside of 

Switzerland.’’ United States v. The 

Watchmakers of Switzerland 

Information Center, Inc., 1963–1 Trade 

Cas. (CCH) ¶70,600, at 77,426 (S.D.N.Y. 

Dec. 20, 1962). 

The AWA was named as a defendant 

because, as a trade association whose 

members included most of the 

defendant manufacturers and importers, 

there was concern that the AWA could 

aid the alleged conspiracy by policing 

members’ conduct and influencing 

members to participate in the cartel. 

Foote was named as a defendant in 

the Complaint, becuase as an 

advertising agency and an agent for 

some of the defendants, there was 

concern that Foote, similar to the AWA, 

was policing the alleged conspiracy and 

thus aiding the defendants in the 

enforcement of the cartel. 

On March 9, 1960, prior to trial, the 

United States and the defendant 

importers (not the AWA since it is a 

trade association, nor Foote since it is 

an advertising agency) named in the 

complaint agreed to enter into the 

Watchmakers Final Judgment in lieu of 

going to trial. United States v. The 

Watchmakers of Switzerland 

Information Center, Inc., Trade Reg. 

Rep. (CCH) ¶69,655 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 9, 

1960). Also on March 9, 1960, the 

United States and Defendants AWA and 

Foote agreed to enter into the AWA 

Final Judgment and the Foote Final 

Judgment, respectively, in lieu of going 

to trial. Id. Most of the restrictions in the 

AWA and Foote Final Judgments 

prohibit conduct that each company, 

respectively, could have taken to 

facilitate the conspiracy. 

The Department has filed with the 

Court a memorandum setting forth the 

reasons why the United States believes 

that termination of the AWA and Foote 

Final Judgments would serve the public 

interest. Copies of the AWA’s and 

Foote’s joint motion to terminate, the 

stipulation containing the United States’

tentative consent, the United States’

memorandum, and all further papers 

filed with the Court in connection with 

the AWA’s and Foote’s joint motion will 

be available for inspection at the 

Antitrust Documents Group, Antitrust 

Division, Room 215, 325 7th Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20004, and at the 

Office of the Clerk of the United States 

District Court for the Southern District 

of New York. Copies of these materials 

may be obtained from the Antitrust 

Division upon request and payment of 

the copying fee set by Department 

regulations. 

Interested persons may submit 

comments regarding the proposed 

termination of the AWA and Foote Final 

Judgments to the United States. Such 

comments must be received by the 

Antitrust Division within sixty (60) days 

and will be filed with the Court by the 

United States. Comments should be 

addressed to John R. Read, Chief, 

Litigation III Section, Antitrust Division, 

U.S. Department of Justice, 325 7th 

Street, NW., Suite 300, Washington, DC 

20530. 

Dorothy B. Fountain, 

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust 

Division. 

[FR Doc. 06–6625 Filed 8–1–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–11–M 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

Manufacturer of Controlled 

Substances; Notice of Registration 

By Notice dated March 20, 2006 and 

published in the Federal Register on 

March 24, 2006, (71 FR 14948), 

Cerilliant API Services LLC, 811 Paloma 

Drive, Suite A, Round Rock, Texas 

78664, made application to the Drug 

Enforcement Administration (DEA) to 

be registered as a bulk manufacturer of 

the basic classes of controlled 

substances listed in Schedule I and II; 

and by letter to modify its name to 

Austin Pharma LLC. Subsequent to the 

publication of the Notice of Application, 

by letter, the company has also 

requested to withdraw thirty-five drug 

codes from their initial application 

request. 

Drug Schedule 

Marihuana (7360) ......................... I 

Tetrahydrocannabinols (7370) ..... I 

Alphamethadol (9605) .................. I 

Drug Schedule 

Methadone (9250) ........................ II 

Methadone intermediate (9254) ... II 

Levo-alphacetylmethadol (9648) .. II 

Alfentanil (9737) ........................... II 

Remifentanil (9739) ...................... II 

Sufentanil (9740) .......................... II 

Fentanyl (9801) ............................ II 

The company plans to manufacture 

the listed controlled substances in bulk 

for distribution to its customers. 

In reference to drug code 7360 

(Marihuana), the company plans to bulk 

manufacture cannabidiol as a synthetic 

intermediate. This controlled substance 

will be further synthesized to bulk 

manufacture a synthetic THC (7370). No 

other activity for this drug code is 

authorized for this registration. 

No comments or objections have been 

received. DEA has considered the 

factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and 

determined that the registration of 

Cerilliant API Services LLC to 

manufacture the listed basic classes of 

controlled substances is consistent with 

the public interest at this time. DEA has 

investigated Cerilliant API Services LLC 

to ensure that the company’s 

registration is consistent with the public 

interest. The investigation has included 

inspection and testing of the company’s 

physical security systems, verification 

of the company’s compliance with state 

and local laws, and a review of the 

company’s background and history. 

Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823, 

and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, 

the above named company is granted 

registration as a bulk manufacturer of 

the basic classes of controlled 

substances listed. 

Dated: July 26, 2006. 

Joseph T. Rannazzisi, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of 

Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E6–12478 Filed 8–1–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

Manufacturer of Controlled 

Substances; Notice of Application 

Pursuant to Section 1301.33(a) of Title 

21 of the Code of Federal Regulations 

(CFR), this is notice that on June 22, 

2006, Clariant LSM (Missouri) Inc., 2460 

W. Bennett Street, or (P.O. Box 1246, zip 

65801), Springfield, Missouri 65807–

1229, made application by renewal to 

the Drug Enforcement Administration 

(DEA) to be registered as a bulk 

manufacturer of the basic classes of 


wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES