Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 10, 1997 / Notices 47625

addresses; the unmatched cases will be

sent to the field for reconciliation

during the Housing Unit Follow-up

operation. The resultant address listing

will be used in the ICM Person

Interview phase. The materials for the

independent listing have been

submitted to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) and the Bureau of

the Census has received approval for the

materials. The materials for the Housing

Unit Follow-up operation will be

submitted shortly to the OMB.

During the second phase of the ICM,

the ICM Person Interview, the Bureau of

the Census will target ICM sample cases

for telephone interviews; these cases

will consist of households in ICM areas

that returned their census

questionnaires and provided their

telephone numbers. After the

conclusion of the Nonresponse Followup operation for a cluster, all remaining

ICM sample cases will be interviewed

using a person-to-person approach.

Telephone interviews may also be used

later in the process for hard to

enumerate areas or situations.

Intensive probing techniques will be

used to reconstruct a roster of the

residents of the housing unit. The

interviewing instrument will examine

all the people mentioned during the

interview and determine if they should

be enumerated at the housing unit in

question according to census residency

rules. The interviewer will ask probing

questions to determine the status of the

units and their occupants on census

day, April 4, 1998. For households

where the census day residents have

moved out, we will attempt to obtain an

ICM proxy interview from the current

residents or another reliable proxy. We

will use the proxy information in the

estimates. When combined with our

efforts to match responses to the results

of the initial count, the interview data

will identify persons missed or

incorrectly included in the census as

well as persons correctly enumerated.

An Outmover Tracing Evaluation will

be conducted during the time when the

ICM Person Interviews are being

completed. For census day residents

that have moved (outmovers), we will

attempt to obtain their current address

and/or telephone number. We will

interview the ‘‘outmovers’’ at their new

address by telephone or in person. For

the telephone interviews, we will use a

computer assisted telephone

interviewing (CATI) instrument and for

the personal visit interviews, a paper

questionnaire, Form DT–1340.

For outmover households where we

successfully trace and interview a

member of the Census day household,

the information obtained in this

interview will be used in the evaluation.

For households where we are unable to

locate the Census day residents or

obtain an interview from them, we will

use the information from the proxy

interview in the evaluation.

For quality assurance, at maximum, a

20 percent random sample of

respondents in the ICM sample will be

reinterviewed using the CAPI

instrument.

After the person interview, person

matching for Dual System Estimation

(DSE) will be conducted. Unresolved

cases will be reconciled in the field

during the ICM Person Follow-up

interview. The materials to be used in

the Person Follow-up interview will be

submitted later this year.

II. Method of Collection

Telephone and person-to-person

interviews.

III. Data

OMB Number: Not available.

Form Number: CAPI Person Interview

(no form number), CAPI Person Quality

Assurance Interview (no form number),

CATI Outmover Tracing Interview (no

form number), and Form DT–1340, ICM

Outmover Tracing Questionnaire.

Type of Review: Regular.

Affected Public: Individuals or

households.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

31,000 housing units.

Estimated Time Per Response: 20

minutes (CAPI Person Interview and

CATI/Paper Outmover Tracing

Interview) and 10 minutes (CAPI Person

QA Interview).

Estimated Total Annual Burden

Hours: Total = 12,199 Hours.

Person Interview = 10,333 Hours

(31,000×20 minutes).

Person QA Interview = 1,033 Hours

(6,200×10 minutes).

Outmover Tracing Evaluation = 833

Hours (2,500×20 minutes).

Estimated Total Annual Cost: There is

no cost to respondents except for their

time to respond.

Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory.

Legal Authority: Title 13, U.S. Code,

Sections 141, 193, and 221.

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: September 4, 1997.

Linda Engelmeier,

Departmental Forms Clearance Officer, Office

of Management and Organization.

[FR Doc. 97–23981 Filed 9–9–97; 8:45 a.m.]

BILLING CODE 3510–07–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Docket 70–97]

Foreign-Trade Zone 27—Boston, MA;

Application for Subzone Status;

Massachusetts Heavy Industries, Inc.

(Shipbuilding)

An application has been submitted to

the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the

Board) by the Massachusetts Port

Authority, grantee of FTZ 27, requesting

special-purpose subzone status for the

shipbuilding facility of Massachusetts

Heavy Industries, Inc. (MHI), in Quincy,

Massachusetts (formerly, General

Dynamics-Quincy shipyard, the site of

former FTZ Subzone 27B). The

application was submitted pursuant to

the provisions of the Foreign-Trade

Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–

81u), and the regulations of the Board

(15 CFR part 400). It was formally filed

on September 4, 1997.

The MHI shipyard (104 acres, up to

1,000 employees) is located at 115 East

Howard Street in the City of Quincy, on

the Weymouth Fore River. Currently

undergoing extensive renovation, the

facility will be used for the

construction, repair, and conversion of

commercial vessels for domestic and

international customers. Foreign

components expected to be used at the

MHI shipyard (up to 30% of total)

include propulsion units, main engines

and control systems, profile steel,

casting plates, bow thrusters, pumps,

tank level and alarm systems, diesel

generators, navigation equipment, radio

communications, deck machinery,

rudder systems, heating/ventilation

systems, valves, gauges, boilers, pumps,

condensers, propellers and shafts,

anchor systems, incinerators, inert gas

plants, lifeboats/davits, hydraulic power
47626 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 10, 1997 / Notices

racks, emergency generators, panels and

consoles (1997 duty rate range: free—

5.2%, ad valorem).

FTZ procedures would exempt MHI

from Customs duty payments on the

foreign components (except steel mill

products) used in export activity (up to

100% of total production). On its

domestic sales, the company would be

able to choose the duty rate that applies

to finished oceangoing vessels (duty

free) for the foreign-origin components

noted above. The manufacturing activity

conducted under FTZ procedures would

be subject to the ‘‘standard shipyard

restriction’’ applicable to foreign-origin

steel mill products (e.g., pipe, plate),

which requires that Customs duties be

paid on such items. The application

indicates that the savings from FTZ

procedures would help improve the

facility’s international competitiveness.

In accordance with the Board’s

regulations, a member of the FTZ Staff

has been designated examiner to

investigate the application and report to

the Board.

Public comment on the application is

invited from interested parties.

Submissions (original and three copies)

shall be addressed to the Board’s

Executive Secretary at the address

below. The closing period for their

receipt is November 10, 1997. Rebuttal

comments in response to material

submitted during the foregoing period

may be submitted during the subsequent

15-day period (to November 24, 1997).

A copy of the application will be

available for public inspection at the

following locations:

U.S. Department of Commerce, Export

Assistance Center, World Trade

Center, Suite 307, 164 Northern

Avenue, Boston, MA 02210

Office of the Executive Secretary,

Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room

3716, U.S. Department of Commerce,

14th Street & Pennsylvania Avenue,

NW, Washington, DC 20230

Dated: September 4, 1997.

John J. Da Ponte, Jr.,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–23997 Filed 9–9–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–25–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–201–802]

Preliminary Results of Antidumping

Duty Administrative Review Gray

Portland Cement and Clinker From

Mexico

AGENCY: International Trade

Administration/Import Administration/

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of

antidumping duty administrative

review.

SUMMARY: In response to requests from

interested parties, the Department of

Commerce is conducting an

administrative review of the

antidumping duty order on gray

portland cement and clinker from

Mexico. The review covers exports of

subject merchandise to the United

States during the period August 1, 1995,

through July 31, 1996, and one firm,

CEMEX, S.A., and its affiliated party

Cementos de Chihuahua, S.A. de C.V.

The results of this review indicate the

existence of dumping margins for the

period.

We invite interested parties to

comment on these preliminary results.

Parties who submit arguments in this

proceeding are requested to submit with

the argument (1) a statement of the

issue, and (2) a brief summary of the

argument.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 10, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steven Presing, Kristen Smith or Kristen

Stevens, Office VII, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20230;

telephone (202) 482–3793.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

(URAA). In addition, unless otherwise

indicated, all citations to the

Department’s regulations are to the

regulations at 19 CFR part 353 (April

1997).

Background

On August 12, 1996, the Department

of Commerce (the Department)

published in the Federal Register a

Notice of Opportunity to Request

Administrative Review of the

antidumping duty order on gray

portland cement and clinker from

Mexico for the above-referenced period

(61 FR 156, August 12, 1996). In

accordance with 19 CFR 353.22,

CEMEX, S.A. (CEMEX) and the

Petitioner, the Southern Tier Cement

Committee, requested a review of

CEMEX. On October 17, 1996, the

Department published a Notice of

Initiation of Antidumping Review (61

FR 181, September 17, 1996). The

Department is now conducting a review

of this Respondent pursuant to section

751 of the Act.

Scope of Review

The products covered by this review

include gray portland cement and

clinker. Gray portland cement is a

hydraulic cement and the primary

component of concrete. Clinker, an

intermediate material product produced

when manufacturing cement, has no use

other than of being ground into finished

cement. Gray portland cement is

currently classifiable under the

Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) item

number 2523.29 and cement clinker is

currently classifiable under number

2523.10. Gray portland cement has also

been entered under number 2523.90 as

‘‘other hydraulic cements.’’ The HTS

subheadings are provided for

convenience and U.S. Customs Service

(the Customs Service) purposes only.

The Department’s written description

remains dispositive as to the scope of

the product coverage.

Verification

As provided in section 782(i) of the

Act, we verified information provided

by the Respondent using standard

verification procedures, including onsite inspection of the manufacturer’s

facilities and the examination of

relevant sales and financial records. Our

verification results are outlined in

verification reports in the official file for

this case (public versions of these

reports are on file in room B–099 of the

Department’s main building).

Collapsing

On May 19, 1997, the Department

published new regulations (62 FR

27296, May 19, 1997). Although this

proceeding is not governed by those

regulations, they are instructive where

they describe current Department

practice and policy. Section 351.401(f)

of the new regulations, 62 FR at 27410,

describes the Department’s current

policy regarding when it will treat two

or more producers as a single entity (i.e.,

‘‘collapse’’ the firms) for purposes of

calculating a dumping margin. See also