Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 177 / Thursday, September 11, 2008 / Notices 52823 

1 50 U.S.C. app. 2401–2420 (2000). Since August 

21, 2001, the Act has been in lapse and the 

President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 

17, 2001 (3 CFR, 2001 Comp. 783 (2002)), which 

has been extended by successive Presidential 

Notices, the most recent being that of July 23, 2008 

(73 FR 43603 (July 25, 2008)), has continued the 

Regulations in effect under the International 

Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 

1701–1706 (2000)) (‘‘IEEPA’’). 

2The Regulations are currently codified in the 

Code of Federal Regulations at 15 CFR parts 

730–774 (2008). The current version of the 

Regulations govern the procedural aspects of this 

case. The charged violations occurred in 1997. The 

Regulations governing the charged violations are 

found in the 1997 version of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (15 CFR parts 730–774 (1997)). 

agreement between the Bureau of 

Industry and Security, United States 

Department of Commerce (‘‘BIS’’), and 

Respondent Ralph Michel (‘‘Michel’’), 

then-Assistant Secretary for Export 

Enforcement Julie L. Myers issued an 

Order (68 FR 65032, Nov. 18, 2003) 

resolving an administrative proceeding 

against Michel pursuant to Section 13(c) 

of the Export Administration Act of 

1979, as amended (‘‘Act’’),1 and the 

Export Administration Regulations 

(‘‘Regulations’’),2 based on allegations in 

a proposed charging letter that Michel 

had committed six violations of the 

Regulations. 

Among other things, the November 

12, 2003 Order provided a non-standard 

denial of export privileges that 

prohibited Michel, for a period of five 

years from the date of that Order, from 

participating in any way in any 

transaction involving the export from 

the United States to Pakistan of any item 

subject to the Regulations or in any 

other activity subject to the Regulations 

that involves Pakistan. 

Whereas, the November 12, 2003 

Order lists Michel as ‘‘Ralph Michel, 

Vice President, Omega Engineering, 

Inc., One Omega Drive, Stamford, 

Connecticut 06907’’; 

Whereas, the Office of Export 

Enforcement, Bureau of Industry and 

Security, U.S. Department of Commerce 

(‘‘OEE’’), has confirmed that this 

address is no longer correct, and that 

Michel’s current address is ‘‘41 

Rosewood Dr., Easton, CT 06612’’; and 

Whereas, as a result of the 

information OEE obtained regarding 

Michel’s current address, OEE has 

requested that an order be issued 

amending the November 12, 2003 Order 

to reflect that new address for Michel; 

Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that 

the November 12, 2003 Order denying 

Michel for five years from participating 

in any way in any transaction involving 

the export from the United States to 

Pakistan of any item subject to the 

Regulations or in any other activity 

subject to the Regulations that involves 

Pakistan is amended by deleting the 

address ‘‘Vice President, Omega 

Engineering, Inc., One Omega Drive, 

Stamford, Connecticut 06907’’, and by 

adding the address ‘‘41 Rosewood Dr., 

Easton, CT 06612’’. In all other aspects, 

the November 12, 2003 Order remains 

in full force and effect. 

This Order shall be effective 

immediately upon publication in the 

Federal Register. 

Entered this 4th day of September 2008. 

Darryl W. Jackson, 

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export 

Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. E8–21229 Filed 9–10–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DT–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–427–801, A–428–801, A–475–801, A–588–

804, A–412–801] 

Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From 

France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the 

United Kingdom: Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Reviews and Rescission of Reviews in 

Part 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On May 7, 2008, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published the preliminary 

results of the administrative reviews of 

the antidumping duty orders on ball 

bearings and parts thereof from France, 

Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United 

Kingdom. The reviews cover 27 

manufacturers/exporters. The period of 

review is May 1, 2006, through April 30, 

2007. 

Based on our analysis of the 

comments received, we have made 

changes, including corrections of certain 

programming and other ministerial 

errors, in the margin calculations. 

Therefore, the final results differ from 

the preliminary results. The final 

weighted-average dumping margins for 

the reviewed firms are listed below in 

the section entitled ‘‘Final Results of the 

Reviews.’’

DATES: Effective Date: September 11, 

2008. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Catherine 

Cartsos or Richard Rimlinger, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 5, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–1757 or (202) 482–

4477, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On May 7, 2008, the Department of 

Commerce published the preliminary 

results of the administrative reviews of 

the antidumping duty orders on ball 

bearings and parts thereof from France, 

Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United 

Kingdom. See Ball Bearings and Parts 

Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, 

Japan, and the United Kingdom: 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Reviews and Intent 

to Rescind Reviews in Part, 73 FR 25654 

(May 7, 2008) (Preliminary Results). For 

these administrative reviews, the period 

of review covered is May 1, 2006, 

through April 30, 2007. 

We invited interested parties to 

comment on the preliminary results. At 

the request of certain parties, we held a 

hearing for Japan-specific issues on July 

1, 2008, a hearing for Germany-specific 

issues on July 10, 2008, a hearing for 

France-specific issues on July 11, 2008, 

and a hearing for general issues on July 

15, 2008. The Department has 

conducted these administrative reviews 

in accordance with section 751 of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 

Scope of Orders 

The products covered by the orders 

are ball bearings (other than tapered 

roller bearings) and parts thereof. These 

products include all antifriction 

bearings that employ balls as the rolling 

element. Imports of these products are 

classified under the following 

categories: antifriction balls, ball 

bearings with integral shafts, ball 

bearings (including radial ball bearings) 

and parts thereof, and housed or 

mounted ball bearing units and parts 

thereof. 

Imports of these products are 

classified under the following 

Harmonized Tariff Schedules (HTS) 

subheadings: 3926.90.45, 4016.93.10, 

4016.93.50, 6909.19.5010, 8431.20.00, 

8431.39.0010, 8482.10.10, 8482.10.50, 

8482.80.00, 8482.91.00, 8482.99.05, 

8482.99.35, 8482.99.2580, 8482.99.6595, 

8483.20.40, 8483.20.80, 8483.30.40, 

8483.30.80, 8483.50.90, 8483.90.20, 

8483.90.30, 8483.90.70, 8708.50.50, 

8708.60.50, 8708.60.80, 8708.93.30, 

8708.93.6000, 8708.99.06, 8708.99.3100, 

8708.99.4000, 8708.99.4960, 8708.99.58, 

8708.99.8015, 8708.99.8080, 8803.10.00, 

8803.20.00, 8803.30.00, 8803.90.30, and 

8803.90.90. 

As a result of changes to the HTS, 

effective February 2, 2007, the subject 

merchandise is also classifiable under 

the following additional HTS item 

numbers: 8708.30.50.90, 8708.40.75.00, 

8708.50.79.00, 8708.50.8900, 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with NOTICES
52824 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 177 / Thursday, September 11, 2008 / Notices 

8708.50.91.50, 8708.50.99.00, 

8708.70.6060, 8708.80.65.90, 

8708.93.75.00, 8708.94.75, 

8708.95.20.00, 8708.99.55.00, 

8708.99.68, 8708.99.81.80. 

Although the HTS item numbers 

above are provided for convenience and 

customs purposes, the written 

descriptions of the scope of these orders 

remain dispositive. 

The size or precision grade of a 

bearing does not influence whether the 

bearing is covered by one of the orders. 

These orders cover all the subject 

bearings and parts thereof (inner race, 

outer race, cage, rollers, balls, seals, 

shields, etc.) outlined above with 

certain limitations. With regard to 

finished parts, all such parts are 

included in the scope of these orders. 

For unfinished parts, such parts are 

included if they have been heat-treated 

or if heat treatment is not required to be 

performed on the part. Thus, the only 

unfinished parts that are not covered by 

these orders are those that will be 

subject to heat treatment after 

importation. The ultimate application of 

a bearing also does not influence 

whether the bearing is covered by the 

orders. Bearings designed for highly 

specialized applications are not 

excluded. Any of the subject bearings, 

regardless of whether they may 

ultimately be utilized in aircraft, 

automobiles, or other equipment, are 

within the scope of these orders. 

For a list of scope determinations 

which pertain to the orders, see the 

‘‘Memorandum to Laurie Parkhill’’

regarding scope determinations, dated 

April 30, 2008, which is on file in the 

Central Records Unit (CRU) of the main 

Department of Commerce building, 

room 1117, in the General Issues record 

(A–100–001) for the 2006–2007 reviews. 

Rescission of Reviews in Part 

In the Preliminary Results, we 

preliminarily found that Essex Nexans 

Europe SAS, Essex Nexans SAS, Essex 

Nexans L&K GmbH, Essex International 

Ltd., IKN GmbH, and WWC ServiceCenter GmbH had no shipments of 

subject merchandise during the period 

of review and we stated our intent to 

rescind the administrative reviews with 

respect to these companies. We have 

received no comments concerning our 

intent to rescind these administrative 

reviews. We continue to find that Essex 

Nexans Europe SAS, Essex Nexans SAS, 

Essex Nexans L&K GmbH, Essex 

International Ltd., IKN GmbH, and 

WWC Service-Center GmbH had no 

shipments of ball bearings from France, 

Germany, Italy, or the United Kingdom 

for the final results of these reviews. In 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) 

we are rescinding our reviews for Essex 

Nexans Europe SAS, Essex Nexans SAS, 

Essex Nexans L&K GmbH, Essex 

International Ltd., IKN GmbH, and 

WWC Service-Center GmbH. 

Analysis of the Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties to the 

concurrent administrative reviews of the 

orders on ball bearings and parts thereof 

are addressed in the ‘‘Issues and 

Decision Memorandum’’ (Decision 

Memo) from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy 

Assistant Secretary, to David M. 

Spooner, Assistant Secretary, dated 

September 4, 2008, which is hereby 

adopted by this notice. A list of the 

issues which parties have raised and to 

which we have responded is in the 

Decision Memo and attached to this 

notice as an Appendix. The Decision 

Memo, which is a public document, is 

on file in the CRU, main Department of 

Commerce building, Room 1117, and is 

accessible on the Web at http:// 

ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/index.html. The paper 

copy and electronic version of the 

Decision Memo are identical in content. 

Selection of Respondents 

Due to the large number of companies 

in the reviews and the resulting 

administrative burden to review each 

company for which a request had been 

made and not withdrawn, the 

Department exercised its authority to 

limit the number of respondents 

selected for the reviews. Based on our 

analysis of the responses and our 

available resources, we chose to 

examine the sales of the following 

companies: 

France: 

* SKF France S.A. and SFK Aerospace 

France S.A.S. (SKF France) 

Germany: 

* Gebru ̈der Reinfurt GmbH & Co., KG 

(GRW) 

* SKF GmbH (SKF Germany) 

Italy: 

* SKF RIV–SKF Officine di Villas 

Perosa S.p.A.; SKF Industrie S.p.A.; 

RFT S.p.A.; OMVP S.p.A. 

(collectively SKF Italy) 

Japan: 

* JTEKT Corporation (formerly known 

as Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd.) (JTEKT) 

* NTN Corporation (NTN) 

United Kingdom: 

* The Barden Corporation (UK) 

Limited; Schaeffler (UK) Ltd. 

(formerly known as the Barden 

Corporation (UK) Ltd. or FAG (UK) 

Ltd.) (collectively Barden/Schaeffler 

UK) 

For a detailed discussion on the 

selection of respondents for individual 

examination, see Preliminary Results, 73 

FR at 25655. 

For the responding companies which 

remain under review and which we did 

not select for individual examination, 

we have either calculated a simple 

average of the weighted-average margins 

of the two selected respondents in a 

review (Japan—10.00 percent) or 

assigned the weighted-average margin 

from the previous administrative review 

(United Kingdom—0.72 percent). For a 

discussion of the rate for the nonselected respondent in the U.K. review, 

see Comment 16 of the Decision Memo. 

Adverse Facts Available 

Christian Feddersen GmbH & Co. KG, 

Lentz & Schmahl GmbH, and Societe 

Nexans did not respond to our request 

concerning their sales or exports of ball 

bearings from France, Italy, Germany 

and the United Kingdom. These 

companies had the ability to provide 

data concerning the quantity and value 

of subject merchandise to the United 

States during the POR but did not do so, 

failing to cooperate by not acting to the 

best of their ability. We could neither 

consider them in our selection of 

respondents for individual examination 

nor complete any administrative 

reviews of the companies. See 

Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 25655. We 

received no comments on our 

preliminary determination to apply 

adverse facts available to these 

companies. For our final results, we 

have based their margins on facts 

available with an adverse inference in 

accordance with section 776 of the Act. 

As facts available with an adverse 

inference for these non-responsive 

companies, we have selected the rates of 

66.42 percent for France, 70.41 percent 

for Germany, 69.99 percent for Italy, and 

60.15 percent for the United Kingdom. 

We corroborated these rates in 

accordance with section 776(c) of the 

Act. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 

25657. 

In addition, in our preliminary results 

we used facts otherwise available with 

an adverse inference for certain U.S. 

sales made by SKF Germany for which 

SKF Germany was not the producer and 

for which the producer failed to provide 

cost-of-production information by the 

deadline for submission of the 

information. We continue to find that it 

is appropriate to use facts otherwise 

available with an adverse inference for 

certain U.S. sales made by SKF 

Germany. For a detailed discussion see 

Comment 15 in the Decision Memo. 

Sales Below Cost in the Home Market 

The Department disregarded homemarket sales that failed the cost-ofVerDate Aug<31>2005 14:21 Sep 10, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11SEN1.SGM 11SEN1

rmajette on PRODPC74 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 177 / Thursday, September 11, 2008 / Notices 52825 

production test for the following firms 

for these final results of reviews: 

Country Company 

France ..................... SKF France 

Germany ................. GRW 

SKF Germany 

Italy ......................... SKF Italy 

Japan ...................... JTEKT 

NTN 

United Kingdom ...... Barden/Schaeffler UK 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on our analysis of comments 

received and based on our own analysis 

of the preliminary results, we have 

made revisions that have changed the 

results for certain firms. We have 

corrected programming and ministerial 

errors in the preliminary results, where 

applicable. A detailed discussion of 

each correction we made is in the 

analysis memoranda which are on file 

in the CRU, main Department of 

Commerce building, Room 1117. 

Final Results of the Reviews 

We determine that the following 

percentage weighted-average dumping 

margins on ball bearings and parts 

thereof exist for the period May 1, 2006, 

through April 30, 2007: 

Company Margin 

(percent) 

FRANCE 

Christian Feddersen GmbH & 

Co. KG .................................... 66.42 

Lentz & Schmahl GmbH ............. 66.42 

SKF France ................................ 11.09 

Societe Nexans .......................... 66.42 

GERMANY 

Christian Feddersen GmbH & 

Co. KG .................................... 70.41 

GRW ........................................... 0.12 

Lentz & Schmahl GmbH ............. 70.41 

SKF Germany ............................. 4.15 

Societe Nexans .......................... 70.41 

ITALY 

Christian Feddersen GmbH & 

Co. KG .................................... 69.99 

Lentz & Schmahl GmbH ............. 69.99 

SKF Italy (and Somecat) ............ 7.06 

Societe Nexans .......................... 69.99 

JAPAN 

Aisin Seiki Company, Ltd. .......... 10.00 

Canon, Inc. ................................. 10.00 

JTEKT ......................................... 8.03 

Nachi-Fujikoshi Corp. ................. 10.00 

Nippon Pillow Block Company 

Ltd. .......................................... 10.00 

NTN ............................................ 11.96 

Sapporo Precision, Inc ............... 10.00 

Toyota Motor Corp./Toyota Industries Corp. .......................... 10.00 

Company Margin 

(percent) 

Yamazaki Mazak Trading Company ........................................ 10.00 

UNITED KINGDOM 

Barden/Schaeffler UK ................. 0.28 

Christian Feddersen GmbH & 

Co. KG .................................... 58.20 

Lentz & Schmahl GmbH ............. 58.20 

Rolls Royce PLC ........................ 0.72 

Societe Nexans .......................... 58.20 

Assessment Rates 

The Department will determine and 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(CBP) shall assess antidumping duties 

on all appropriate entries. We intend to 

issue appropriate assessment 

instructions directly to CBP 15 days 

after publication of these final results of 

reviews. In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.212(b)(1), we have calculated, 

whenever possible, an importer/ 

customer-specific assessment rate or 

value for subject merchandise. 

The Department clarified its 

‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on 

May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment of 

Antidumping Duties). This clarification 

will apply to entries of subject 

merchandise during the period of 

review produced by companies 

included in these final results of 

reviews for which the reviewed 

companies did not know their 

merchandise was destined for the 

United States. In such instances, we will 

instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed 

entries at the all-others rate if there is no 

rate for the intermediate company(ies) 

involved in the transaction. For a full 

discussion of this clarification, see 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties. 

For the responsive companies which 

were not selected for individual review, 

we will instruct CBP to apply the rates 

listed above to all entries of subject 

merchandise from such firms. 

For companies for which we are 

relying on total adverse facts available 

to establish a dumping margin, we will 

instruct CBP to apply the assigned 

dumping margins to all entries of 

subject merchandise during the POR 

that were produced and/or exported by 

the companies. 

Export Price 

With respect to export-price (EP) 

sales, we divided the total dumping 

margins (calculated as the difference 

between normal value and the EP) for 

each exporter’s importer or customer by 

the total number of units the exporter 

sold to that importer or customer. We 

will direct CBP to assess the resulting 

per-unit dollar amount against each unit 

of merchandise on each of that 

importer’s or customer’s entries under 

the relevant order during the review 

period. 

Constructed Export Price 

For constructed export-price (CEP) 

sales, we divided the total dumping 

margins for the reviewed sales by the 

total entered value of those reviewed 

sales for each importer. We will direct 

CBP to assess the resulting percentage 

margin against the entered customs 

values for the subject merchandise on 

each of that importer’s entries under the 

relevant order during the review period. 

See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). 

Cash-Deposit Requirements 

To calculate the cash-deposit rate for 

each respondent (i.e., each exporter 

and/or manufacturer included in these 

reviews), we divided the total dumping 

margins for each company by the total 

net value of that company’s sales of 

merchandise during the review period 

subject to each order. 

To derive a single deposit rate for 

each respondent, we weight-averaged 

the EP and CEP deposit rates (using the 

EP and CEP, respectively, as the 

weighting factors). To accomplish this 

when we sampled CEP sales (see 

Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 25662), we 

first calculated the total dumping 

margins for all CEP sales during the 

review period by multiplying the 

sample CEP margins by the ratio of total 

days in the review period to days in the 

sample weeks. We then calculated a 

total net value for all CEP sales during 

the review period by multiplying the 

sample CEP total net value by the same 

ratio. Finally, we divided the combined 

total dumping margins for both EP and 

CEP sales by the combined total value 

for both EP and CEP sales to obtain the 

deposit rate. 

We will direct CBP to collect the 

resulting percentage deposit rate against 

the entered customs value of each of the 

exporter’s entries of subject 

merchandise entered, or withdrawn 

from warehouse, for consumption on or 

after the date of publication of this 

notice. Entries of parts incorporated into 

finished bearings before sales to an 

unaffiliated customer in the United 

States will receive the respondent’s 

deposit rate applicable to the order. 

Furthermore, the following deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

publication of this notice of final results 

of administrative reviews for all 

shipments of the subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with NOTICES
52826 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 177 / Thursday, September 11, 2008 / Notices 

for consumption on or after the date of 

publication, consistent with section 

751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cashdeposit rates for the reviewed 

companies will be the rates shown 

above except that, for firms whose 

weighted-average margins are less than 

0.5 percent and therefore de minimis, 

the Department shall not require a 

deposit of estimated antidumping 

duties; (2) for previously reviewed or 

investigated companies not listed above, 

the cash-deposit rate will continue to be 

the company-specific rate published for 

the most recent period; (3) if the 

exporter is not a firm covered in this 

review, a prior review, or the original 

less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation 

but the manufacturer is, the cashdeposit rate will be the rate established 

for the most recent period for the 

manufacturer of the merchandise; (4) 

the cash-deposit rate for all other 

manufacturers or exporters will 

continue to be the all-others rate for the 

relevant order made effective by the 

final results of review published on July 

26, 1993. See Antifriction Bearings 

(Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) 

and Parts Thereof From France, et al. 

Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Reviews and Revocation 

in Part of an Antidumping Duty Order, 

58 FR 39729 (July 26, 1993). For ball 

bearings from Italy, see Antifriction 

Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller 

Bearings) and Parts Thereof From 

France, et al. Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Reviews and Partial Termination of 

Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 66471, 

66521 (December 17, 1996). These rates 

are the all-others rates from the relevant 

LTFV investigation. 

These deposit requirements shall 

remain in effect until further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice serves as a final reminder 

to importers of their responsibility 

under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a 

certificate regarding the reimbursement 

of antidumping duties prior to 

liquidation of the relevant entries 

during this review period. Failure to 

comply with this requirement could 

result in the Department’s presumption 

that reimbursement of antidumping 

duties occurred and the subsequent 

assessment of doubled antidumping 

duties. 

Notification Regarding APOs 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 

notification of the return or destruction 

of APO materials or conversion to 

judicial protective order is hereby 

requested. Failure to comply with the 

regulations and the terms of an APO is 

a sanctionable violation. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

results in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. 

Dated: September 4, 2008. 

David M. Spooner 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix 

1. Zeroing of Negative Margins 

2. Model-Matching Methodology 

3. Collapsing and Successor in Interest 

4. Inventory Carrying Costs 

5. Calculation of Cost of Production/ 

Constructed Value and Use of AFA 

6. Rate for Respondent Not Selected 

7. Miscellaneous Issues 

A. 15–Day Issuance of Liquidation 

Instructions 

B. CEP Profit 

C. Decision Not to Verify JTEKT’s and 

NTN’s Cost Data 

D. BPI Treatment for Dumping Duties and 

Net Value of Sales 

8. Clerical Errors 

[FR Doc. E8–21137 Filed 9–10–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

The Manufacturing Council: Meeting 

AGENCY: International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of a meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Manufacturing Council 

will hold a meeting to deliberate for 

approval a draft letter of 

recommendation on Sustainable 

Manufacturing metrics. 

DATES: September 23, 2008. 

Location: Rochester, NY. 

Additional Information: A 

supplemental notice will be issued in 

the near future with the exact address 

and time of the meeting. The date and 

address will also be posted on the 

Council’s Web site at http:// 

www.manufacturing.gov/council as 

soon as they are available. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

Manufacturing Council Executive 

Secretariat, Room 4043, Washington, DC 

20230 (Phone: 202–482–1369), or visit 

the Council’s Web site at http:// 

www.manufacturing.gov/council. 

Dated: September 5, 2008. 

Kate Sigler, 

Executive Secretary, The Manufacturing 

Council. 

[FR Doc. E8–21073 Filed 9–10–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology 

Notice of Inventions Available for 

Licensing 

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards 

and Technology, Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of Inventions Available 

for Licensing. 

SUMMARY: The inventions listed below 

are owned in whole or part by the U.S. 

Government, as represented by the 

Secretary of Commerce. The U.S. 

Government’s interest in these 

inventions is available for licensing in 

accordance with 35 U.S.C. 207 and 37 

CFR Part 404 to achieve expeditious 

commercialization of results of federally 

funded research and development. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Technical and licensing information on 

these inventions may be obtained by 

writing to: National Institute of 

Standards and Technology, Office of 

Technology Partnerships, Attn: Mary 

Clague, Building 222, Room A240, 

Gaithersburg, MD 20899. Information is 

also available via telephone: 301–975–

4188, fax 301–975–3482, or e-mail: 

mary.clague@nist.gov. Any request for 

information should include the NIST 

Docket number and title for the 

invention as indicated below. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NIST may 

enter into a Cooperative Research and 

Development Agreement (‘‘CRADA’’) 

with the licensee to perform further 

research on the inventions for purposes 

of commercialization. The inventions 

available for licensing are: 

[NIST Docket Number: 00–013US] 

Title: Mode-Locked Pulsed Laser 

System and Method. 

Abstract: The invention is a system 

and method for stabilizing the carrierenvelope phase of the pulses emitted by 

a femtosecond mode-locked laser by 

using the powerful tools of frequencydomain laser stabilization. Control of 

the pulse-to-pulse carrier-envelope 

phases was confirmed using temporal 

cross correlation. This phase 

stabilization locks the absolute 

frequencies emitted by the laser, which 

is used to perform absolute optical 

frequency measurements that were 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with NOTICES