5468 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 2, 2005 / Notices 

agency that has control of the Native 

American human remains. The National 

Park Service is not responsible for the 

determinations in this notice.

An assessment of the human remains, 

and catalog records and associated 

documents relevant to the human 

remains, was made by Phoebe A. Hearst 

Museum of Anthropology professional 

staff in consultation with 

representatives of the Pala Band of 

Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pala 

Reservation, California.

In 1907, human remains representing 

at least two individuals were removed 

from an unknown location in northeast 

San Diego County, CA, by T.T. 

Waterman and donated to the Phoebe A. 

Hearst Museum of Anthropology the 

same year. The site was located on 

‘‘Warner’s Ranch,’’ approximately 5 

miles north of the Warner house, and 4 

miles northwest of Warner Springs (also 

known at the time as Warner Hot 

Springs and as Aqua [sic] Caliente). No 

known individuals were identified. No 

associated funerary objects are present.

The village site at Warner’s Ranch 

belonged to the Cupeno Tribe. After 

eviction by a later owner, the Cupeno, 

in 1903, were moved to the Pala 

Reservation where their descendents 

still live. The Pala Reservation is now 

known as the Pala Band of Luiseno 

Mission Indians. The historic era burial 

practice, the existence of historic 

textiles, which are integral with the 

human remains, and the general 

location indicate that the human 

remains were Cupeno.

Officials of the Phoebe A. Hearst 

Museum of Anthropology have 

determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 

3001 (9–10), the human remains 

described above represent the physical 

remains of at least two individuals of 

Native American ancestry. Officials of 

the Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of 

Anthropology also have determined 

that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), 

there is a relationship of shared group 

identity that can be reasonably traced 

between the Native American human 

remains and the Pala Band of Luiseno 

Mission Indians of the Pala Reservation, 

California.

Representatives of any other Indian 

tribe that believes itself to be culturally 

affiliated with the human remains 

should contact C. Richard Hitchcock, 

NAGPRA Coordinator, Phoebe A. Hearst 

Museum of Anthropology, University of 

California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 

94720, telephone (510) 642–6096, before 

March 4, 2005. Repatriation of the 

human remains to the Pala Band of 

Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pala 

Reservation, California may proceed 

after that date if no additional claimants 

come forward.

The Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of 

Anthropology is responsible for 

notifying the Pala Band of Luiseno 

Mission Indians of the Pala Reservation, 

California that this notice has been 

published.

Dated: December 20, 2004

Sherry Hutt,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.

[FR Doc. 05–1955 Filed 2–1–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–50–S

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed collection; 

comment request. 

SUMMARY: The proposed information 

collection is a 3-year extension, 

pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (Pub.L. 104–13), of the 

current ‘‘generic clearance’’ (approved 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget under control No. 3117–0016) 

under which the Commission can issue 

information collections (specifically, 

producer, importer, purchaser, and 

foreign producer questionnaires and 

certain institution notices) for a series of 

import injury investigations that are 

required by the Tariff Act of 1930 and 

the Trade Act of 1974, normally in 

response to petitions from domestic 

firms. Comments concerning the 

proposed information collections are 

requested in accordance with 5 CFR 

1320.8(d); such comments are described 

in greater detail in the section of this 

notice entitled supplementary 

information.

DATES: To be assured of consideration, 

written comments must be received not 

later than April 1, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Signed comments should be 

submitted to Marilyn Abbott, Secretary, 

U.S. International Trade Commission, 

500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 

20436.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Copies of the proposed information 

collections and draft Paperwork 

Reduction Act Submission and 

Supporting Statement to be submitted to 

the Office of Management and Budget 

may be obtained from: Debra Baker, 

Office of Investigations, U.S. 

International Trade Commission 

(telephone no. (202) 205–3180; e-mail 

address-Debra.Baker@usitc.gov). 

Hearing-impaired persons can obtain 

information on this matter by contacting 

the Commission’s TDD terminal on 

(202) 205–1810. Persons with mobility 

impairments who will need special 

assistance in gaining access to the 

Commission should contact the Office 

of the Secretary at (202) 205–2000. 

General information concerning the 

Commission may also be obtained by 

accessing its Internet server (http://

www.usitc.gov). The draft Supporting 

Statement is also on the Commission’s 

Web site (at http://info.usitc.gov/OINV/

INVEST/OINVINVEST.NSF).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Comments 

Comments are solicited as to (1) 

Whether the proposed information 

collection is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 

of the burden of the proposed 

information collection, including the 

validity of the methodology and 

assumptions used; (3) the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and (4) minimization of the 

burden of the proposed information 

collection on those who are to respond 

(including through the use of 

appropriate automated, electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 

forms of information technology, e.g., 

permitting electronic submission of 

responses). 

Summary of the Proposed Information 

Collections 

(1) Need for the Proposed Information 

Collections 

The information requested in the 

questionnaires and five-year sunset 

review institution notices is for use by 

the Commission in connection with the 

following statutory investigations: 

antidumping duty, countervailing duty, 

escape clause, North American Free 

Trade Agreement (NAFTA) safeguard, 

market disruption, and interferencewith-programs of the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture (USDA). The Commission’s 

generic clearance to issue 

questionnaires will not apply to 

repetitive questionnaires such as those 

issued on a quarterly or annual basis or 

to other investigations and research 

studies conducted under section 332 of 

the Trade Act of 1974. 

Data received in response to the 

questionnaires issued under the terms of 

the proposed generic clearance are 

consolidated in the form of a staff 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 2, 2005 / Notices 5469

report. In addition, in the majority of its 

investigations, the Commission releases 

completed questionnaires returned by 

industry participants to representatives 

of parties to its investigations under the 

terms of an administrative protective 

order, the terms of which safeguard the 

confidentiality of any business 

proprietary or business confidential 

information. Representatives of 

interested parties also receive a 

confidential version of the staff report 

under the administrative protective 

order. Subsequent party submissions to 

the Commission for specific proceedings 

are based, in large part, upon their 

review of the information collected by 

the Commission. The information 

provided by firms in response to the 

questionnaires constitutes a major 

portion of the statistical base for the 

Commission’s determinations. 

Publicly-available data are utilized 

where possible by the Commission. 

However, the use of questionnaires is 

generally the most expedient and valid 

method of obtaining record data due to 

the requirement for comparability in 

measurement for production (both 

domestic and foreign), import, and 

purchase data as well as for timeliness 

and due to the frequent need to evaluate 

the individual operations of firms 

within an industry. Included in the 

proposed generic clearance are the 

institution notices for the five-year 

reviews of antidumping and 

countervailing duty orders and 

suspended investigations. Responses to 

the institution notices will be evaluated 

by the Commission and form much of 

the record for its determination to 

conduct either an expedited or full 

review. 

(2) Information Collection Plan 

Questionnaires for specific 

investigations are sent to all identified 

domestic producers manufacturing the 

product(s) in question. Importer and 

purchaser questionnaires are also sent to 

all significant importers/purchasers of 

the product(s). Finally, all foreign 

manufacturers of the product(s) in 

question that are represented by counsel 

are sent questionnaires, and, in 

addition, the Commission attempts to 

contact any other foreign manufacturers, 

especially if they export the product(s) 

in question to the United States. Firms 

receiving questionnaires include 

businesses, farms, and/or other forprofit institutions; responses are 

mandatory.

The institution notices for the fiveyear reviews are published in the 

Federal Register and solicit comment 

from interested parties (i.e., U.S. 

producers within the industry in 

question as well as labor unions or 

representative groups of workers, U.S. 

importers and foreign exporters, and 

involved foreign country governments). 

(3) Description of the Information To Be 

Collected 

Although the content of each 

questionnaire will differ based on the 

needs of a particular investigation, 

questionnaires are based on longestablished, generic formats. Producer 

questionnaires generally consist of the 

following four parts: (part I) general 

questions relating to the organization 

and activities of the firm; (part II) data 

on capacity, production, inventories, 

employment, and the quantity and value 

of the firm’s shipments and purchases 

from various sources; (part III) financial 

data, including income-and-loss data on 

the product in question, data on asset 

valuation, research and development 

expenses, and capital expenditures; and 

(part IV) pricing and market factors. 

(Questionnaires may, on occasion, also 

contain part V, an abbreviated version of 

the above-listed parts, used for gathering 

data on additional product categories.) 

Importer questionnaires generally 

consist of three parts: (part I) general 

questions relating to the organization 

and activities of the firm; (part II) data 

on the firm’s imports and the shipment 

and inventories of its imports; and (part 

III) pricing and market factors similar to 

that requested in the producer 

questionnaire. 

Purchaser questionnaires generally 

consist of five parts: (Part I) general 

questions relating to the organization 

and activities of the firm; (part II) data 

concerning the purchases of the product 

by the firm; (part III) market 

characteristics and purchasing practices; 

(part IV) comparisons between imported 

and U.S.-produced product; and (part V) 

actual purchase prices for specific types 

of domestic and subject imported 

products and the names of the firm’s 

vendors. 

Foreign producer questionnaires 

generally consist of (part I) general 

questions relating to the organization 

and activities of the firm; (part II) data 

concerning the firm’s manufacturing 

operations; and may include (part III) 

market factors. 

The notices of institution for the fiveyear reviews include 11 specific 

requests for information that firms are to 

provide if their response is to be 

considered by the Commission. 

The Commission solicits input from 

petitioners and other potential 

recipients when preparing 

questionnaires for individual 

investigations to ensure that the 

questions are succinct and relevant to 

the investigation and that the scope of 

the information request is streamlined 

to the extent feasible. Further, the 

Commission has formalized the process 

where interested parties comment on 

data collection and draft questionnaires 

in final phase countervailing duty and 

antidumping investigations (and 5-year 

full reviews). Interested parties are 

provided approximately 2 weeks to 

provide comments to the Commission 

on the draft questionnaires. 

(4) Estimated Burden of the Proposed 

Information Collection 

The Commission estimates that 

information collections issued under the 

requested generic clearance will impose 

an average annual burden of 173,000 

burden hours on 4,300 respondents (i.e., 

recipients that provide a response to the 

Commission’s questionnaires or the 

notices of institution of five-year 

reviews). Table 1 lists the projected 

annual burden for each type of 

information collection for the period 

July 2005–June 2008:

TABLE 1.—PROJECTED ANNUAL BURDEN DATA, BY TYPE OF INFORMATION COLLECTION, JULY 2005–JUNE 2008 

Item Producer

questionnaires 1

Importer

questionnaires 2

Purchaser

questionnaires 3

Foreign producer

questionnaires 4

Institution notices 

for 5-year reviews 5

Total 

Estimated burden hours imposed annually for July 2005–June 2008 

Number of respondents ......... 952 1,370 1,070 814 61 4,267 

Frequency of response .............. 1 1 1 1 1 1 

Total annual responses ............ 952 1,370 1,070 814 61 4,267 

5470 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 2, 2005 / Notices 

TABLE 1.—PROJECTED ANNUAL BURDEN DATA, BY TYPE OF INFORMATION COLLECTION, JULY 2005–JUNE 2008—

Continued

Item Producer

questionnaires 1

Importer

questionnaires 2

Purchaser

questionnaires 3

Foreign producer

questionnaires 4

Institution notices 

for 5-year reviews 5Total 

Hours per response .............. 52.7 38.5 26.3 50.6 14.8 40.6 

Total hours .... 50,170 52,745 28,141 41,188 904 173,148 

1Producer questionnaires.—Estimates based upon the following variables: number of respondents (anticipated caseload (×) number of producer respondents per case) and hours per response (responding firm burden (+) outside review burden (+) third-party disclosure burden). See 

definitions below. Responding firm burden accounts for 91 percent of the total producer questionnaire burden (48.0 hours per response), outside 

review burden accounts for 6 percent of the total burden, and third-party disclosure burden accounts for the remaining 3 percent. (The averages 

per questionnaire of the outside review and third-party disclosure burdens are not listed here since they are incurred only for the questionnaires 

of parties; such averages for all questionnaires are not meaningful.) 2 Importer questionnaires.—Estimates based upon the following variables: number of respondents (anticipated caseload (×) number of importer 

respondents per case) and hours per response (responding firm burden (+) outside review burden (+) third-party disclosure burden). See definitions below. Responding firm burden accounts for 98 percent of the total importer questionnaire burden (37.7 hours per response), outside review burden and third-party disclosure burden each account for about 1 percent of the total burden. (The averages per questionnaire of the outside review and third-party disclosure burdens are not listed here since they are incurred only for the questionnaires of parties; such averages for 

all questionnaires are not meaningful.) 3Purchaser questionnaires.—Estimates based upon the following variables: number of respondents (anticipated caseload (×) number of purchaser respondents per case) and hours per response (responding firm burden). See definitions below. Purchasers are not interested parties to 

investigations by statute and typically do not engage outside counsel. Therefore, there is minimal outside review burden nor third-party disclosure 

burden for purchasers. 4Foreign producer questionnaires.—Estimates based upon the following variables: number of respondents (anticipated caseload (×) number of 

foreign producer respondents per case) and hours per response (responding firm burden (+) outside review burden (+) third-party disclosure burden). See definitions below. Responding firm burden accounts for 62 percent of the total foreign producer questionnaire burden (31.4 hours per 

response), outside review burden accounts for another 20 percent, and third-party disclosure burden accounts for 18 percent of the total burden. 5 Institution notices for 5-year reviews.—Estimates based upon the following variables: anticipated five-year review caseload, number of respondents to each notice, and responding firm burden. 

Note.—Above estimates include questionnaires for specific investigations where the mailing list consists of fewer than 10 firms. In such instances the majority or all firms within the industry under investigation may be said to receive questionnaires. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, sbull I11‘‘(a)ny collection of information addressed to all or a substantial majority of an industry is presumed to involved ten 

or more persons.’’

DEFINITIONS

Anticipated caseload.—Derived from current Commission budget estimates. 

Number of respondents per case.—Defined as the number of firms which return completed (see note 3 to table 3) questionnaires to the Commission. Current estimates of ‘‘number of respondents per case’’ for the questionnaires were derived, in part, from the number of respondents to 

Commission questionnaires that were issued under the current generic clearance. 

Responding firm burden.—Defined as the time required by the firm which received the questionnaire to review instructions, search data 

sources, and complete and review its response. Commission questionnaires do not impose the burden of developing, acquiring, installing and utilizing technology and systems, nor require adjusting existing methodology or training personnel. Current estimates of ‘‘responding firm burden’’

for the questionnaires were derived, in part, from the actual burden reported by firms that responded to Commission questionnaires issued under 

the current generic clearance. 

Outside review burden.—Time devoted by outside legal and financial advisors to reviewing questionnaires completed by the responding firms 

who are their clients prior to submitting them to the Commission. 

Third-party disclosure burden.—Time required for outside legal advisors to serve their clients’ questionnaires on other parties to the investigation or review under an administrative protective order. 

The Commission further estimates 

that it costs responding firms $72.27 per 

burden hour to complete a specific 

questionnaire issued under the generic 

clearance. (This estimate is based upon 

actual costs reported by respondents to 

questionnaires issued under the current 

generic clearance.) More complete 

information concerning costs to 

respondents, including costs incurred 

for the purchase of services, and 

estimates of the annualized cost to the 

Commission are presented in the draft 

Supporting Statement available from the 

Commission. There is no known capital 

and start-up cost component imposed 

by the proposed information collections. 

(5) Minimization of Burden 

The Commission strives to minimize 

the burden on all questionnaire 

respondents and takes into account the 

needs of smaller firms. It periodically 

reviews its investigative processes, 

including data collection, to reduce the 

information burden. In recognition of 

the limitations of administrative 

resources or automated record systems, 

questionnaires clearly state that 

estimates are acceptable for certain 

items. They are designed in part with 

check-in type formats to simplify the 

response. The reporting burden for 

smaller firms is reduced in that the 

sections of the questionnaire that are 

applicable to their operations are 

typically more limited. For example, 

questionnaires are constructed so that 

meaningful data can be obtained from 

larger firms with complex business 

operations; thus, many sections of the 

questionnaires may not apply to 

respondents with comparatively simple 

operations. Requests by parties to 

expand the data collection or add items 

to the questionnaire may not be 

accepted if the Commission believes 

such requests will increase the response 

burden while not substantially adding 

to the investigative record. 

The Commission’s collection of data 

through its questionnaires does not 

currently involve the interactive use of 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. Completed questionnaires 

are almost always returned to the 

Commission in paper form (including 

by fax and e-mail). While the 

Commission has explored the use of 

alternative methods of submission, it 

has proved most expedient to use paper 

copies for a number of reasons. (The 

draft Supporting Statement available 

from the Commission addresses this 

issue in greater detail.) Likewise, it is 

the Commission’s experience that it is 

most expedient that the information 

provided in response to its notices of 

institution for the five-year reviews be 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 2, 2005 / Notices 5471

1No response to this request for information is 

required if a currently valid Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) number is not displayed; the 

OMB number is 3117–0016/USITC No. 05–5–109, 

expiration date June 30, 2005. Public reporting 

burden for the request is estimated to average 7 

hours per response. Please send comments 

regarding the accuracy of this burden estimate to 

the Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20436.

submitted in document form directly to 

its Office of the Secretary.

By order of the Commission.

Issued: January 27, 2005. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission.

[FR Doc. 05–1952 Filed 2–1–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigations Nos. 701–TA–302 and 731–

TA–454 (Second Review)] 

Fresh and Chilled Atlantic Salmon 

From Norway

AGENCY: United States International 

Trade Commission.

ACTION: Institution of five-year reviews 

concerning the countervailing duty and 

antidumping duty orders on fresh and 

chilled Atlantic salmon from Norway. 

SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives 

notice that it has instituted reviews 

pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff 

Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)) (the Act) 

to determine whether revocation of the 

countervailing duty and antidumping 

duty orders on fresh and chilled 

Atlantic salmon from Norway would be 

likely to lead to continuation or 

recurrence of material injury. Pursuant 

to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, interested 

parties are requested to respond to this 

notice by submitting the information 

specified below to the Commission; 1 to 

be assured of consideration, the 

deadline for responses is March 23, 

2005. Comments on the adequacy of 

responses may be filed with the 

Commission by April 18, 2005. For 

further information concerning the 

conduct of these reviews and rules of 

general application, consult the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, part 201, subparts A through 

E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, 

subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part 

207).

EFFECTIVE DATES: February 2, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Messer (202–205–3193), Office of 

Investigations, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20436. Hearingimpaired persons can obtain 

information on this matter by contacting 

the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202–

205–1810. Persons with mobility 

impairments who will need special 

assistance in gaining access to the 

Commission should contact the Office 

of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. 

General information concerning the 

Commission may also be obtained by 

accessing its Internet server (http://

www.usitc.gov). The public record for 

these reviews may be viewed on the 

Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) 

at http://edis.usitc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background.—On April 12, 1991, the 

Department of Commerce issued 

countervailing duty and antidumping 

duty orders on imports of fresh and 

chilled Atlantic salmon from Norway 

(56 FR 14920, 14921). Following fiveyear reviews by Commerce and the 

Commission, effective March 13, 2000, 

Commerce issued a continuation of the 

countervailing duty and antidumping 

duty orders on imports of fresh and 

chilled Atlantic salmon from Norway 

(65 FR 13358). The Commission is now 

conducting second reviews to determine 

whether revocation of the orders would 

be likely to lead to continuation or 

recurrence of material injury to the 

domestic industry within a reasonably 

foreseeable time. It will assess the 

adequacy of interested party responses 

to this notice of institution to determine 

whether to conduct full reviews or 

expedited reviews. The Commission’s 

determinations in any expedited 

reviews will be based on the facts 

available, which may include 

information provided in response to this 

notice. 

Definitions.—The following 

definitions apply to these reviews: 

(1) Subject Merchandise is the class or 

kind of merchandise that is within the 

scope of the five-year reviews, as 

defined by the Department of 

Commerce. 

(2) The Subject Country in these 

reviews is Norway. 

(3) The Domestic Like Product is the 

domestically produced product or 

products which are like, or in the 

absence of like, most similar in 

characteristics and uses with, the 

Subject Merchandise. In its original 

determinations and expedited five-year 

review determinations, the Commission 

defined the Domestic Like Product as 

fresh and chilled Atlantic salmon, 

including salmon smolts. 

(4) The Domestic Industry is the U.S. 

producers as a whole of the Domestic 

Like Product, or those producers whose 

collective output of the Domestic Like 

Product constitutes a major proportion 

of the total domestic production of the 

product. In its original determinations 

and its expedited five-year review 

determinations, the Commission 

defined the Domestic Industry as all 

domestic producers of fresh and chilled 

Atlantic salmon, including salmon 

smolts. 

(5) An Importer is any person or firm 

engaged, either directly or through a 

parent company or subsidiary, in 

importing the Subject Merchandise into 

the United States from a foreign 

manufacturer or through its selling 

agent. 

Participation in the reviews and 

public service list.—Persons, including 

industrial users of the Subject 

Merchandise and, if the merchandise is 

sold at the retail level, representative 

consumer organizations, wishing to 

participate in the reviews as parties 

must file an entry of appearance with 

the Secretary to the Commission, as 

provided in section 201.11(b)(4) of the 

Commission’s rules, no later than 21 

days after publication of this notice in 

the Federal Register. The Secretary will 

maintain a public service list containing 

the names and addresses of all persons, 

or their representatives, who are parties 

to the reviews. 

Former Commission employees who 

are seeking to appear in Commission 

five-year reviews are reminded that they 

are required, pursuant to 19 CFR 201.15, 

to seek Commission approval if the 

matter in which they are seeking to 

appear was pending in any manner or 

form during their Commission 

employment. The Commission is 

seeking guidance as to whether a second 

transition five-year review is the ‘‘same 

particular matter’’ as the underlying 

original investigation for purposes of 19 

CFR 201.15 and 18 U.S.C. 207, the post 

employment statute for Federal 

employees. Former employees may seek 

informal advice from Commission ethics 

officials with respect to this and the 

related issue of whether the employee’s 

participation was ‘‘personal and 

substantial.’’ However, any informal 

consultation will not relieve former 

employees of the obligation to seek 

approval to appear from the 

Commission under its rule 201.15. For 

ethics advice, contact Carol McCue 

Verratti, Deputy Agency Ethics Official, 

at 202–205–3088.

Limited disclosure of business 

proprietary information (BPI) under an 

administrative protective order (APO) 

and APO service list.—Pursuant to 

section 207.7(a) of the Commission’s 

rules, the Secretary will make BPI 

submitted in these reviews available to 

authorized applicants under the APO