14812 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 61 / Wednesday, April 1, 2009 / Notices 

through court action. Furthermore, 

canceling an existing bond and 

replacing it with another bond with a 

different limit of liability (either lower 

or higher) and with retroactive effect is 

contrary to sound administrative 

practice. There are approximately 

140,000 bonds currently on file with 

CBP. The possibility that each and every 

one of these bonds may be reconsidered 

and liability reassessed anytime after 

execution would cause administrative 

chaos. Finally, to avoid confusion, 

termination will not occur automatically 

and importers must request termination 

pursuant to 19 CFR 113.27(a). 

CBP requires bonds to protect revenue 

and assure compliance with any 

provision of law, regulation, or 

instruction the agency is authorized to 

enforce. See 19 U.S.C. 1623. CBP is also 

required to collect debts aggressively. 

See 31 U.S.C. 3711 and 31 CFR 901.1. 

In order to fulfill its mandate and also 

facilitate trade, CBP does not 

retroactively raise or lower bond 

security amounts that cover past 

customs transactions. When CBP 

determines that an existing bond does 

not provide sufficient security, the 

principal is only required to terminate 

the existing bond and obtain a new 

bond with additional security for future 

importations. The obligation of the 

earlier bond for the earlier time period 

remains in place. See 19 CFR 113.3. 

It is incorrect to state that if the 

United States were to agree to make no 

future claims against the EBR-calculated 

bonds, then the cancellation of the 

bonds would not be retroactive. 

Cancelling the bonds would be 

retroactive because the bonds secure 

customs transactions, which are, in this 

case, entries already made into the 

United States. As discussed in the 

Background section of this notice, even 

though the actual amount of AD/CV 

duties owed may be determined at a 

later date, the obligation is incurred and 

security is posted at the time of entry. 

Finally, the U.S. Court of International 

Trade in National Fisheries did not 

order CBP to cancel the bonds at issue 

in that case, and therefore does not 

support the commenters’ argument that 

CBP should cancel the EBR-calculated 

bonds. National Fisheries at 1335–1336. 

Therefore, on or after the publication 

of this notice, an importer with a 

current bond that was calculated using 

the EBR may request termination 

pursuant to 19 CFR 113.27(a), such that 

no further obligations would be charged 

against that bond. For existing bonds, 

CBP will enforce the bonds up to the 

date of termination, which will be no 

earlier than the effective date of this 

notice. 

Comment: Some commenters 

recommend that even though the 

proposal indicates that it applies to 

shrimp imports from all of the countries 

subject to an AD order, to avoid 

confusion, CBP should specifically state 

this in the final notice and list the 

individual countries. 

Another commenter asserts that the 

proposal should only apply to India and 

Thailand because the WTO dispute was 

initiated by these countries and 

therefore, the recommendation only 

applies to those countries and not 

Brazil, China, and Vietnam. The 

commenter states that continuing to 

apply the EBR to Brazil, China, and 

Vietnam would help to offset any 

revenue loss on those cases. The 

commenter also states that 

discontinuing application to those 

countries would be contrary to CBP’s 

commitment to Congress to address the 

issue of non-collection of AD duties and 

is irrational, unwarranted, and a clear 

perversion of CBP’s mission to collect 

all import duties determined to be due 

to the United States. 

CBP’s Response: Based on a careful 

evaluation of the WTO reports and 

available evidence, CBP has decided to 

end the designation of shrimp subject to 

AD/CV duty orders as a special category 

or covered case subject to the 

requirement of additional bond amounts 

for all countries. For a list of orders 

currently covering shrimp, see footnote 

1 of this document. 

Conclusion 

After analysis of the comments and 

further review of the matter, CBP has 

decided to end the designation of 

shrimp covered by antidumping or 

countervailing duty orders as a special 

category or covered case subject to the 

requirement of additional bond 

amounts. Shrimp importers may request 

termination of existing continuous 

bonds pursuant to 19 CFR 113.27(a) and 

submit a new continuous bond 

application pursuant to 19 CFR 

113.12(b). The requirements for 

submitting a new bond application 

pursuant to 19 CFR 113.12 are available 

on the CBP Web site at http:// 

www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/trade/ 

priority_trade/revenue/bonds/ 

pilot_program/news_develop/ under the 

‘‘Policy and Procedures’’ section. 

Dated: March 27, 2009. 

Jayson P. Ahern, 

Acting Commissioner, Customs and Border 

Protection. 

[FR Doc. E9–7281 Filed 3–31–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R9–IA–2009–N0068; 96300–1671– 

0000–P5] 

Receipt of Applications for Permit 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of receipt of applications 

for permit. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, invite the public to 

comment on the following applications 

to conduct certain activities with 

endangered species. The Endangered 

Species Act requires that we invite 

public comment on these permit 

applications. 

DATES: Written data, comments or 

requests must be received by May 1, 

2009. 

ADDRESSES: Documents and other 

information submitted with these 

applications are available for review, 

subject to the requirements of the 

Privacy Act and Freedom of Information 

Act, by any party who submits a written 

request for a copy of such documents 

within 30 days of the date of publication 

of this notice to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Division of Management 

Authority, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, 

Room 212, Arlington, Virginia 22203; 

fax 703/358–2281. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Division of Management Authority, 

telephone 703/358–2104. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Endangered Species 

The public is invited to comment on 

the following applications for a permit 

to conduct certain activities with 

endangered species. This notice is 

provided pursuant to Section 10(c) of 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). 

Written data, comments, or requests for 

copies of these complete applications 

should be submitted to the Director 

(address above). 

Applicant: Jonathan Davis, Malibu, CA, 

PRT–208563 

The applicant requests a permit to 

import the sport-hunted trophy of one 

male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus 

pygargus) culled from a captive herd 

maintained under the management 

program of the Republic of South Africa, 

for the purpose of enhancement of the 

survival of the species. 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 61 / Wednesday, April 1, 2009 / Notices 14813 

Applicant: Stephen G. Klarr, Bloomfield 

Village, MI, PRT–209140 

The applicant requests a permit to 

import the sport-hunted trophy of one 

male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus 

pygargus) culled from a captive herd 

maintained under the management 

program of the Republic of South Africa, 

for the purpose of enhancement of the 

survival of the species. 

Applicant: Roberto Garza Sada, 

Houston, TX, PRT–209373 

The applicant requests a permit to 

import the sport-hunted trophy of one 

male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus 

pygargus) culled from a captive herd 

maintained under the management 

program of the Republic of South Africa, 

for the purpose of enhancement of the 

survival of the species. 

Applicant: Mark D. Brown, Charleston, 

AR, PRT–209362 

The applicant requests a permit to 

import the sport-hunted trophy of one 

male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus 

pygargus) culled from a captive herd 

maintained under the management 

program of the Republic of South Africa, 

for the purpose of enhancement of the 

survival of the species. 

Applicant: John S. Osborne, Danville, 

CA, PRT–209360 

The applicant requests a permit to 

import the sport-hunted trophy of one 

male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus 

pygargus) culled from a captive herd 

maintained under the management 

program of the Republic of South Africa, 

for the purpose of enhancement of the 

survival of the species. 

Dated: March 20, 2009. 

Lisa J. Lierheimer, 

Senior Permit Biologist, Branch of Permits, 

Division of Management Authority. 

[FR Doc. E9–7265 Filed 3–31–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Alcoholic Beverage Control Ordinance, 

Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian 

Community 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This notice publishes an 

amendment to the Salt River PimaMaricopa Indian Community’s Code of 

Ordinances, Chapter 14, Articles I and 

II. This amended Code of Ordinances 

was last published on May 8, 1998 (63 

FR 25516). Chapter 14 of the Code 

regulates and controls the possession, 

sale and consumption of liquor within 

the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian 

Community’s trust lands specified in 

Attachment A of Article II. The Code 

allows for the possession and sale of 

alcoholic beverages within Salt River 

Pima-Maricopa Indian Community trust 

lands. This Code will increase the 

ability of the tribal government to 

control the distribution and possession 

of liquor within its reservation and at 

the same time will provide an important 

source of revenue and strengthening of 

the tribal government and the delivery 

of tribal services. 

DATES: Effective Date: This Code is 

effective as of May 1, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim 

Steele, Tribal Relations Specialist, 

Western Regional Office, Bureau of 

Indian Affairs, 400 N. 5th Street, Two 

Arizona Center, 12th Floor, Phoenix, 

Arizona 85001; Telephone (602) 379– 

6786; Fax (602) 379–4100; or Elizabeth 

Colliflower, Office of Tribal Services, 

1849 C Street, NW., Mail Stop 4513– 

MIB, Washington, DC 20240; Telephone 

(202) 513–7640; Fax (202) 208–5113. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to the Act of August 15, 1953; Public 

Law 83–277, 67 Stat. 586, 18 U.S.C. 

1161, as interpreted by the Supreme 

Court in Rice v. Rehner, 463 U.S. 713 

(1983), the Secretary of the Interior shall 

certify and publish in the Federal 

Register notice of adopted or amended 

liquor ordinances for the purpose of 

regulating liquor transactions in Indian 

country. The Salt River Pima-Maricopa 

Indian Community’s Community 

Council adopted this amendment to the 

Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian 

Community’s Code of Ordinances, 

Chapter 14, Articles 1 and 2, by 

Ordinance No. SRO–334–08 on June 4, 

2008. 

This notice is published in 

accordance with the authority delegated 

by the Secretary of the Interior to the 

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. I 

certify that the Salt River PimaMaricopa Indian Community Council 

duly adopted this amendment to the 

Alcoholic Beverage Control Ordinance 

on June 4, 2008. 

Dated: March 18, 2009. 

George T. Skibine, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and 

Economic Development. 

The amendment to Salt River PimaMaricopa Indian Community’s Code of 

Ordinances, Chapter 14, Articles 1 and 

2, reads as follows: 

Salt River Pima-Maricopa 

Indian Community 

Ordinance Number: SRO–334–08. 

To repeal Articles I & II Of Chapter 14 

of the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian 

Community Code Of Ordinaces in its 

entirety and adopt revised Articles I & 

Ii, to update and provide necessary 

clarifications to the regulated 

possession, consumption and sales of 

alcoholic beverages within the 

community. 

Be it enacted that: 

Chapter 14, Article I and II of the Salt 

River Pima-Maricopa Indian 

Community Code of Ordinances is 

repealed in its entirety and revised 

Articles I and II, Chapter 14 are hereby 

enacted: 

Article I. In General 

Sec. 14–1. Violation of chapter. 

A person who violates any provision 

of Chapter 14 of the Code shall be 

deemed guilty of an offense, and, upon 

conviction thereof, shall be sentenced to 

imprisonment for a period not to exceed 

six (6) months or to a fine not to exceed 

five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) or both 

such imprisonment and fine, with costs. 

(Ord. No. SRO–31–74, 5–29–74; Code 

1976, § 14–11–14–16.) 

Secs. 14–2–14–09. Reserved. 

Article II. Alcoholic Beverage Control 

Sec. 14–10. Sovereign Immunity. 

Nothing in this Article is intended or 

shall be construed as a waiver of the 

sovereign immunity of the Salt River 

Pima-Maricopa Indian Community. 

Sec. 14–11. Title; authority; purpose; 

etc. 

(a) Title. This article shall be known 

as the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian 

Community Alcoholic Beverage Control 

Ordinance. 

(b) 

Authority. This article is enacted pursuant 

to the Act of August 15, 1953 (Pub. L. 83– 

277, 67 State. 588, 18 U.S.C. 1161) and 

Article VII of the Salt River Pima-Maricopa 

Indian Community Constitution. 

(c) Purpose. The purpose of this 

article is to regulate and control the 

possession, consumption, and sale of 

liquor on the Salt River Pima-Maricopa 

Indian Community. The enactment of an 

ordinance governing liquor possession 

and sale on the reservation will increase 

the ability of the Community 

government to control reservation liquor 

distribution and possession, and at the 

same time will provide an important 

source of revenue for the continued 

operation and strengthening of the