30278 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 121 / Thursday, June 25, 2009 / Notices 

1 If you believe that another date besides the 

invoice date would provide a more accurate 

representation of your company’s sales during the designated period, please provide a full 

explanation. 

imports of CSG from the PRC are 

materially injuring, or threaten material 

injury to, a U.S. industry. A negative 

ITC determination will result in the 

investigation being terminated; 

otherwise, this investigation will 

proceed according to statutory and 

regulatory time limits. 

This notice is issued and published 

pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act. 

Dated: June 18, 2009. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I 

Scope of the Investigation 

The products covered by this 

investigation are certain steel grating, 

consisting of two or more pieces of steel, 

including load–bearing pieces and cross 

pieces, joined by any assembly process, 

regardless of: (1) size or shape; (2) 

method of manufacture; (3) metallurgy 

(carbon, alloy, or stainless); (4) the 

profile of the bars; and (5) whether or 

not they are galvanized, painted, coated, 

clad or plated. Steel grating is also 

commonly referred to as ‘‘bar grating,’’ 

although the components may consist of 

steel other than bars, such as hot–rolled 

sheet, plate, or wire rod. 

The scope of this investigation 

excludes expanded metal grating, which 

is comprised of a single piece or coil of 

sheet or thin plate steel that has been 

slit and expanded, and does not involve 

welding or joining of multiple pieces of 

steel. The scope of this investigation 

also excludes plank type safety grating 

which is comprised of a single piece or 

coil of sheet or thin plate steel, typically 

in thickness of 10 to 18 gauge, that has 

been pierced and cold formed, and does 

not involve welding or joining of 

multiple pieces of steel. 

Certain steel grating that is the subject 

of this investigation is currently 

classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States 

(‘‘HTSUS’’) under subheading 

7308.90.7000. While the HTSUS 

subheading is provided for convenience 

and customs purposes, the written 

description of the scope of this 

investigation is dispositive. 

Appendix II 

Format for Reporting Quantity and 

Value of Sales 

In providing the information in the 

chart below, please provide the total 

quantity in both pieces and kilograms 

(kg) (net weight) and total value (in U.S. 

dollars) of all your sales to the United 

States during the period October 1, 

2008, through March 31, 2009, covered 

by the scope of this investigation (see 

Appendix I), produced in the PRC, i.e. 

CSG. 

Please provide the conversion factor 

used to convert pieces to kg (net 

weight). 

Please use the invoice date when 

determining which sales to include 

within the period noted above.1

Additionally, if you believe that you 

should be treated as a single entity along 

with other named exporters, please 

complete the chart, below, both in the 

aggregate for all named parties in your 

group and, in separate charts, 

individually for each named entity. 

Please label each chart accordingly. 

Please state whether you exported CSG 

to the United States during the POI. 

If you did export CSG to the United 

States during the POI, please state 

whether you produced 100 percent of 

the CSG that you exported to the United 

States during the POI. 

If you did produce 100 percent of the 

CSG that you exported to the United 

States during the POI, please provide 

the following: 

Market: United States Total Quantity (kg) (Net 

Weight) 

Total 

QuantityPieces Terms of Sale2 Total Value3($U.S.) 

1. Export Price4.

2. Constructed Export Price5.

3. Further Manufactured6.

Total.

2To the extent possible, sales values should be reported based on the same terms (e.g., FOB). 3Values should be expressed in U.S. dollars. Indicate any exchange rates used and their respective dates and sources. 

4Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as an EP sale when the first sale to an unaffiliated person occurs before the goods are imported into the 

United States. 5Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as a constructed export price sale when the first sale to an unaffiliated person occurs after importation. 

However, if the first sale to the unaffiliated person is made by a person in the United States affiliated with the foreign exporter, constructed export price applies even if the sale occurs prior to importation. Do not report the sale to the affiliated party in the United States, rather report the 

sale made by the affiliated party to the unaffiliated customer in the United States. 6 ‘‘Further manufactured’’ refers to merchandise that undergoes further manufacture or assembly in the United States before sale to the first 

unaffiliated customer. 

[FR Doc. E9–15018 Filed 6–24–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–570–948] 

Certain Steel Grating From the 

People’s Republic of China: Initiation 

of Countervailing Duty Investigation 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: June 25, 2009 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sean Carey or Justin Neuman, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 6, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–3964 and (202) 

482–0486, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions 

On May 29, 2009, the Department of 

Commerce (the Department) received 

countervailing duty (CVD) and 

antidumping (AD) petitions concerning 

imports of certain steel grating (CSG) 

from the People’s Republic of China 

(PRC) filed in proper form by Alabama 

Metal Industries Corp. (AMICO) and 

Fisher and Ludlow (collectively, the 

petitioners), domestic producers of CSG. 

See ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of 

Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duties: Certain Steel Grating from the 

People’s Republic of China’’ (the 

petitions). On June 4, 2009, the 

Department issued requests for 

additional information and clarification 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 121 / Thursday, June 25, 2009 / Notices 30279 

of certain areas of the CVD petition 

involving countervailable subsidy 

allegations and further information and 

clarification concerning general issues 

common to the petitions. See Letter 

from Dana Mermelstein, Program 

Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, 

to the petitioners, ‘‘Petition for the 

Imposition of Countervailing Duties on 

Steel Gratings Imported from the 

People’s Republic of China: 

Supplemental Questions, June 4, 2009.’’ 

See also Letter from Robert Bolling, 

Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 4, to the petitioners, ‘‘Petitions 

for the Imposition of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duties: Certain Steel 

Grating from the People’s Republic of 

China: Supplemental Questions, June 4, 

2009.’’ Based on the Department’s 

requests, the petitioners timely filed 

additional information on June 9, 2009. 

A second request seeking additional 

information and clarification concerning 

general issues common to the petitions 

was sent to the petitioners on June 11, 

2009. See Letter from Robert Bolling, 

Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 4, to the petitioners, ‘‘Petitions 

for the Imposition of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duties: Certain Steel 

Grating from the People’s Republic of 

China: Supplemental Questions, June 

11, 2009.’’ Based on the Department’s 

request, the petitioners timely filed 

additional information pertaining to the 

petitions on June 15, 2009. Finally, the 

petitioners clarified the ‘‘Scope of 

Investigation’’ on June 16, 2009. 

In accordance with section 702(b)(1) 

of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 

(the Act), the petitioners allege that 

producers/exporters of CSG in the PRC 

received countervailable subsidies 

within the meaning of section 701 and 

771(5) of the Act, and that imports 

materially injure, or threaten material 

injury to, an industry in the United 

States. 

The Department finds that the 

petitioners filed this CVD petition on 

behalf of the domestic industry because 

they are interested parties as defined in 

section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and the 

petitioners have demonstrated sufficient 

industry support with respect to the 

countervailing duty investigation that 

they are requesting the Department to 

initiate (see ‘‘Determination of Industry 

Support for the CVD Petition’’ below). 

Period of Investigation 

The anticipated period of 

investigation (POI) is calendar year 

2008. See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2). 

Scope of Investigation 

The products covered by this 

investigation are certain steel grating 

from the PRC. For a full description of 

the scope of the investigation, please see 

the ‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ in 

Appendix I to this notice. 

Comments on Scope of Investigation 

During our review of the CVD 

petition, we discussed the scope with 

petitioners to ensure that it is an 

accurate reflection of the products for 

which the domestic industry is seeking 

relief. Moreover, as discussed in the 

preamble to the regulations (See 

Antidumping Duties; Countervailing 

Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 

(May 19, 1997)), we are setting aside a 

period for interested parties to raise 

issues regarding product coverage. The 

Department encourages all interested 

parties to submit such comments within 

twenty calendar days of the date of 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register. Comments should be 

addressed to the Import 

Administration’s Central Records Unit 

(CRU), Room 1117, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. 

The period of scope consultations is 

intended to provide the Department 

with ample opportunity to consider all 

comments and to consult with parties 

prior to the issuance of the preliminary 

determinations. 

Consultations 

Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of 

the Act, the Department held 

consultations with the government of 

the PRC (hereinafter, the GOC) with 

respect to the CVD petition on June 1, 

2009. See Memorandum to the File, 

Countervailing Duty Petitions on PreStressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand and 

Certain Steel Grating from the People’s 

Republic of China: Consultations with 

the Government of the People’s Republic 

of China, on file in the CRU, Room 1117 

of the main Department of Commerce 

building. 

Determination of Industry Support for 

the CVD Petition 

Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires 

that a petition be filed on behalf of the 

domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) 

of the Act provides that a petition meets 

this requirement if the domestic 

producers or workers who support the 

petition account for: (i) At least 25 

percent of the total production of the 

domestic like product; and (ii) more 

than 50 percent of the production of the 

domestic like product produced by that 

portion of the industry expressing 

support for, or opposition to, the 

petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) 

of the Act provides that, if the petition 

does not establish support of domestic 

producers or workers accounting for 

more than 50 percent of the total 

production of the domestic like product, 

the Department shall: (i) Poll the 

industry or rely on other information in 

order to determine if there is support for 

the petition, as required by 

subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine 

industry support using a statistically 

valid sampling method. 

Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines 

the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a 

whole of a domestic like product. Thus, 

to determine whether a petition has the 

requisite industry support, the statute 

directs the Department to look to 

producers and workers who produce the 

domestic like product. The U.S. 

International Trade Commission (ITC), 

which is responsible for determining 

whether ‘‘the domestic industry’’ has 

been injured, must also determine what 

constitutes a domestic like product in 

order to define the industry. While both 

the Department and the ITC must apply 

the same statutory definition regarding 

the domestic like product (section 

771(10) of the Act), they do so for 

different purposes and pursuant to a 

separate and distinct authority. In 

addition, the Department’s 

determination is subject to limitations of 

time and information. Although this 

may result in different definitions of the 

like product, such differences do not 

render the decision of either agency 

contrary to law. See USEC, Inc. v. 

United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 

2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd. v. 

United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 

(CIT 1988), aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 

1989), cert. denied 492 U.S. 919 (1989). 

Section 771(10) of the Act defines the 

domestic like product as ‘‘a product 

which is like, or in the absence of like, 

most similar in characteristics and uses 

with, the article subject to an 

investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the 

reference point from which the 

domestic like product analysis begins is 

‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’ 

(i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to 

be investigated, which normally will be 

the scope as defined in the petition). 

With regard to the domestic like 

product, petitioners do not offer a 

definition of domestic like product 

distinct from the scope of the 

investigation. Based on our analysis of 

the information submitted on the 

record, we have determined that CSG 

constitutes a single domestic like 

product and we have analyzed industry 

support in terms of that domestic like 

product. For a discussion of the 

domestic like product analysis in this 

case, see Countervailing Duty 

Investigation Initiation Checklist: CSG 

from the PRC (CVD Initiation Checklist) 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
30280 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 121 / Thursday, June 25, 2009 / Notices 

at Attachment II (Industry Support), 

dated concurrently with this notice and 

on file in the CRU, Room 1117 of the 

main Department of Commerce 

building. 

With regard to section 702(c)(4)(A), in 

determining whether petitioners have 

standing (i.e., those domestic workers 

and producers supporting the CVD 

petition account for: (1) At least 25 

percent of the total production of the 

domestic like product; and (2) more 

than 50 percent of the production of the 

domestic like product produced by that 

portion of the industry expressing 

support for, or opposition to, the CVD 

petition), we considered the industry 

support data contained in the CVD 

petition with reference to the domestic 

like product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of 

Investigation’’ in Appendix I. To 

establish industry support, petitioners 

provided their production of the 

domestic like product for the year 2008, 

and compared this to total production of 

the domestic like product for the entire 

domestic industry. See Volume I of the 

AD/CVD petitions at 3–6, and Exhibit I– 

3, and Supplement to the AD/CVD 

petitions filed June 9, 2009, at 8–10, and 

Exhibits 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. To estimate 

2008 production of the domestic like 

product, the petitioners used their own 

data as well their own industry specific 

knowledge. Petitioners calculated total 

domestic production based on 

information provided by companies that 

are supporters of the CVD petition and 

that produce the domestic like product 

in the United States, as well as estimates 

of production of non-petitioning 

producers of the domestic like product. 

See Volume I of the AD/CVD petitions 

at 3–6, and Exhibit I–3, and Supplement 

to the AD/CVD petitions filed June 9, 

2009, at 8–10, and Exhibits 3, 4, 5, 6, 

and 7. See also CVD Initiation Checklist 

at Attachment II, Industry Support. 

Our review of the data provided in the 

CVD petition, supplemental 

submissions, and other information 

readily available to the Department 

indicates that petitioners have 

established industry support. First, the 

CVD petition established support from 

domestic producers (or workers) 

accounting for more than 50 percent of 

the total production of the domestic like 

product and, as such, the Department is 

not required to take further action in 

order to evaluate industry support (e.g., 

polling). See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the 

Act and CVD Initiation Checklist at 

Attachment II. Second, the domestic 

producers (or workers) have met the 

statutory criteria for industry support 

under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act 

because the domestic producers (or 

workers) who support the CVD petition 

account for at least 25 percent of the 

total production of the domestic like 

product. See CVD Initiation Checklist at 

Attachment II. Finally, the domestic 

producers (or workers) have met the 

statutory criteria for industry support 

under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act 

because the domestic producers (or 

workers) who support the CVD petition 

account for more than 50 percent of the 

production of the domestic like product 

produced by that portion of the industry 

expressing support for, or opposition to, 

the CVD petition. Accordingly, the 

Department determines that the CVD 

petition was filed on behalf of the 

domestic industry within the meaning 

of section 702(b)(1) of the Act. See CVD 

Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. 

The Department finds that petitioners 

filed the CVD petition on behalf of the 

domestic industry because they are 

interested parties as defined in section 

771(9)(C) of the Act and they have 

demonstrated sufficient industry 

support with respect to the 

countervailing investigation that they 

are requesting the Department initiate. 

See CVD Initiation Checklist at 

Attachment II. 

Injury Test 

Because the PRC is a ‘‘Subsidies 

Agreement Country’’ within the 

meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, 

section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to 

this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC 

must determine whether imports of the 

subject merchandise from the PRC 

materially injure, or threaten material 

injury to, a U.S. industry. 

Allegations and Evidence of Material 

Injury and Causation 

Petitioners allege that imports of CSG 

from the PRC are benefitting from 

countervailable subsidies and that such 

imports are causing, or threaten to 

cause, material injury to the domestic 

industry producing CSG. In addition, 

petitioners allege that subsidized 

imports exceed the negligibility 

threshold provided for under section 

771(24)(A) of the Act. 

Petitioners contend that the industry’s 

injured condition is illustrated by 

reduced market share, increased import 

penetration, underselling and price 

depressing and suppressing effects, lost 

sales and revenue, reduced production 

and capacity utilization, reduced 

employment, and an overall decline in 

financial performance. We have 

assessed the allegations and supporting 

evidence regarding material injury, 

threat of material injury, and causation, 

and we have determined that these 

allegations are properly supported by 

adequate evidence and meet the 

statutory requirements for initiation. See 

CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment 

III (Analysis of Allegations and 

Evidence of Material Injury and 

Causation for the Petition). 

Initiation of Countervailing Duty 

Investigation 

Section 702(b) of the Act requires the 

Department to initiate a CVD proceeding 

whenever an interested party files a 

CVD petition on behalf of an industry 

that: (1) Alleges the elements necessary 

for an imposition of a duty under 

section 701(a) of the Act; and (2) is 

accompanied by information reasonably 

available to the petitioners supporting 

the allegations. 

The Department has examined the 

CVD petition on CSG from the PRC and 

finds that it complies with the 

requirements of section 702(b) of the 

Act. Therefore, in accordance with 

section 702(b) of the Act, we are 

initiating a CVD investigation to 

determine whether producers/exporters 

of CSG in the PRC receive 

countervailable subsidies. For a 

discussion of evidence supporting our 

initiation determination, see CVD 

Initiation Checklist. 

We are including in our investigation 

the following programs alleged in the 

CVD petition to provide countervailable 

subsidies to producers/exporters of the 

subject merchandise: 

A. GOC Provision of Inputs for Less 

Than Adequate Remuneration 

1. Provision of Hot-Rolled Steel for Less 

than Adequate Remuneration 

2. Provision of Steel Bar for Less than 

Adequate Remuneration 

3. Provision of Steel Plate for Less than 

Adequate Remuneration 

4. Provision of Wire Rod for Less than 

Adequate Remuneration 

B. GOC Provision of Land-Use Rights to 

State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) for Less 

Than Adequate Remuneration 

C. GOC Income Tax Programs 

1. ‘‘Two Free, Three Half’’ Program 

2. Reduced Income Tax Rates for 

Export-Oriented Foreign-Invested 

Enterprises (FIEs) 

3. Preferential Income Tax Policy for 

Enterprises in the Northeast Region 

4. Forgiveness of Tax Arrears for 

Enterprises in the Old Industrial 

Bases of Northeast China 

5. Tax Subsidies for FIEs in Specially 

Designated Geographic Areas 

6. Local Income Tax Exemption and 

Reduction Programs for 

‘‘Productive’’ FIEs 

7. Income Tax Credits for Domestically 

Owned Companies Purchasing 

Domestically Produced Equipment 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 121 / Thursday, June 25, 2009 / Notices 30281 

8. Income Tax Credits for FIEs 

Purchasing Domestically Produced 

Equipment 

9. Preferential Tax Programs for FIEs 

Recognized as High or New 

Technology Enterprises 

D. GOC VAT Programs 

1. Import Tariff and Value Added Tax 

(VAT) Exemptions for Encouraged 

Industries Importing Equipment for 

Domestic Operations 

2. VAT and Tariff Exemptions for 

Purchases of Fixed Assets Under 

the Foreign Trade Development 

Fund 

E. Other GOC Programs 

1. Loans and Interest Subsidies 

Provided Pursuant to the Northeast 

Revitalization Program 

2. Grants to ‘‘Third Line’’ Military 

Enterprises 

F. Provincial/Municipal Programs 

1. Liaoning Province ‘‘Five Points, One 

Line’’ Program 

2. Guangzhou City Famous Export 

Brands 

3. Grants to Companies for ‘‘Outward 

Expansion’’ in Guangdong Province 

4. Guangdong and Zhejiang Provinces 

Programs to Rebate Antidumping 

Fees 

For further information explaining 

why the Department is investigating 

these programs, see CVD Initiation 

Checklist. 

We are not including in our 

investigation the following programs 

alleged to benefit producers/exporters of 

the subject merchandise in the PRC: 

A. GOC Policy Lending and Directed 

Credit to Steel Producers 

B. Discounted Loans and Interest Rate 

Subsidies under the Liaoning 

Province Framework 

C. Grants to Steel Producers for 

Environmental Purposes. 

For further information explaining 

why the Department is not initiating an 

investigation of these programs, see 

CVD Initiation Checklist. 

Respondent Selection 

For this investigation, the Department 

intends to select respondents based on 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(CBP) data for U.S. imports during the 

POI (i.e., calendar year 2008). We intend 

to release the CBP data under 

Administrative Protective Order (APO) 

to all parties with access to information 

protected by APO within five days of 

the announcement of the initiation of 

this investigation. Interested parties may 

submit comments regarding the CBP 

data and respondent selection within 

seven calendar days of publication of 

this notice. We intend to make our 

decision regarding respondent selection 

within 20 days of publication of this 

notice. Interested parties must submit 

applications for disclosure under APO 

in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 

Instructions for filing such applications 

may be found on the Department’s 

website at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/apo. 

Distribution of Copies of the CVD 

Petition 

In accordance with section 

702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.202(f), a copy of the public version 

of the petition has been provided to the 

representatives of the GOC. Because of 

the particularly large number of 

producers/exporters identified in the 

petition, the Department considers the 

service of the public version of the 

petition to the foreign producers/ 

exporters satisfied by the delivery of the 

public version to the GOC, consistent 

with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). 

ITC Notification 

We have notified the ITC of our 

initiation, as required by section 702(d) 

of the Act. 

Preliminary Determination by the ITC 

The ITC will preliminarily determine, 

within 25 days after the date on which 

it receives notice of the initiation, 

whether there is a reasonable indication 

that imports of subsidized CSG from the 

PRC materially injure, or threaten 

material injury to, a U.S. industry. See 

section 703(a)(2) of the Act. A negative 

ITC determination will result in the 

investigation being terminated; see 

section 703(a)(1) of the Act. Otherwise, 

the investigation will proceed according 

to statutory and regulatory time limits. 

This notice is issued and published 

pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act. 

Dated: June 18, 2009. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I—Scope of the Investigation 

The products covered by this 

investigation are certain steel grating, 

consisting of two or more pieces of steel, 

including load-bearing pieces and cross 

pieces, joined by any assembly process, 

regardless of: (1) Size or shape; (2) 

method of manufacture; (3) metallurgy 

(carbon, alloy, or stainless); (4) the 

profile of the bars; and (5) whether or 

not they are galvanized, painted, coated, 

clad or plated. Steel grating is also 

commonly referred to as ‘‘bar grating,’’ 

although the components may consist of 

steel other than bars, such as hot-rolled 

sheet, plate, or wire rod. 

The scope of this investigation 

excludes expanded metal grating, which 

is comprised of a single piece or coil of 

sheet or thin plate steel that has been 

slit and expanded, and does not involve 

welding or joining of multiple pieces of 

steel. The scope of this investigation 

also excludes plank type safety grating 

which is comprised of a single piece or 

coil of sheet or thin plate steel, typically 

in thickness of 10 to 18 gauge, that has 

been pierced and cold formed, and does 

not involve welding or joining of 

multiple pieces of steel. 

Certain steel grating that is the subject 

of this investigation is currently 

classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States 

(‘‘HTSUS’’) under subheading 

7308.90.7000. While the HTSUS 

subheading is provided for convenience 

and customs purposes, the written 

description of the scope of this 

investigation is dispositive. 

[FR Doc. E9–15017 Filed 6–24–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request—Requirements for 

Baby-Bouncers, Walker-Jumpers, and 

Baby-Walkers 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In the Federal Register of 

April 16, 2009 (74 FR 17638), the 

Consumer Product Safety Commission 

(CPSC or Commission) published a 

notice in accordance with provisions of 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) to announce the 

CPSC’s intention to seek extension of 

approval of the collection of information 

in the requirements for baby-bouncers, 

walker-jumpers, and baby-walkers in 

regulations codified at 16 CFR 

1500.18(a)(6) and 1500.86(a)(4). 

No comments were received in 

response to that notice. Therefore, by 

publication of this notice, the 

Commission announces that it has 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) a request for 

extension of approval of that collection 

of information without change. 

One CPSC regulation bans any 

product known as a baby-bouncer, 

walker-jumper, baby-walker or similar 

article if it is designed in such a way 

that exposed parts present hazards of 

amputations, crushing, lacerations, 

fractures, hematomas, bruises or other 

injuries to children’s fingers, toes, or 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES