Federal Register / Vol. 66, No.

222 / Friday, November 16, 2001 / Notices
7208.10.30.00, 7208.10.60.00, 7208.25.30.00, 7208.25.60.00, 7208.26.00.30, 7208.26.00.60, 7208.27.00.30, 7208.27.00.60, 7208.36.00.30, 7208.36.00.60, 7208.37.00.30, 7208.37.00.60, 7208.38.00.15, 7208.38.00.30, 7208.38.00.90, 7208.39.00.15, 7208.39.00.30, 7208.39.00.90, 7208.40.60.30, 7208.40.60.60, 7208.53.00.00, 7208.54.00.00, 7208.90.00.00, 7211.14.00.90, 7211.19.15.00, 7211.19.20.00, 7211.19.30.00, 7211.19.45.00, 7211.19.60.00, 7211.19.75.30, 7211.19.75.60, and 7211.19.75.90. Certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products covered by this investigation, including vacuum degassed fully stabilized; high strength low alloy; and the substrate for motor lamination steel may also enter under the following tariff numbers: 7225.11.00.00, 7225.19.00.00, 7225.30.30.50, 7225.30.70.00, 7225.40.70.00, 7225.99.00.90, 7226.11.10.00, 7226.11.90.30, 7226.11.90.60, 7226.19.10.00, 7226.19.90.00, 7226.91.50.00, 7226.91.70.00, 7226.91.80.00, and 7226.99.00.00. Subject merchandise may also enter under 7210.70.30.00, 7210.90.90.00, 7211.14.00.30, 7212.40.10.00, 7212.40.50.00, and 7212.50.00.00. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and U.S. Customs purposes, the Department’s written description of the merchandise under investigation is dispositive. Amended Final Determination Saldanha Steel’s first allegation is that we made a ministerial error in our calculation of the benefit from loan guarantees provided by the IDC by calculating the difference between the IDC’s guarantee fee and a commercial guarantee fee, as well as the difference between the actual interest rate and a commercial interest rate for an unguaranteed loan. We disagree. We believe that Saldanha Steel’s allegation constitutes an argument with the Department’s methodology in calculating the benefit from these loan guarantees, rather than a ministerial error. Section 351.224(f) of the Department’s regulations defines a ministerial error as ‘‘an error in addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical error resulting from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any other similar type of unintentional error which the Secretary considers ministerial.’’ 19 CFR 351.224(f). Saldanha Steel’s disagreement with our method for calculating the benefit from the guarantee program does not constitute an allegation of an ‘‘unintentional error.’’ The Department intentionally used the formula described above, as well as an unguaranteed commercial loan benchmark, in calculating the amount of the benefit. See Memorandum from Joseph Spetrini to Faryar Shirzad, Regarding Issues and Decision
Producer/exporter Saldanha Steel/Iscor ....................................................................................................................................................... All Others ........................................................................................................................................................................

57707

Memorandum in the Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from South Africa (September 21, 2001), at 17. Likewise, the Department explicitly and intentionally rejected the use of Saldanha Steel’s actual loans as possible benchmarks. Id., at 8. Saldanha Steel’s second allegation is that we made a ministerial error in our calculation of the benefit from the Findevco Ltd. loan. Saldanha Steel claims that the Department verified that it made actual and scheduled interest payments before 2003 on the loan it received from Findevco Ltd., which loan was determined to be countervailable by the Department, and that such interest payments were omitted from the calculation. We agree that this omission constitutes a ministerial error within the meaning of section 351.224(f) of the Department’s regulations. We have, therefore, corrected our calculation to include these payments. This correction resulted in the total combined countervailable subsidy rate attributable to Saldanha Steel and Iscor decreasing from 6.37 percent ad valorem to 5.76 percent ad valorem. Because the ‘‘all others’’ rate is based on the combined Saldanha Steel and Iscor rate, the correction also results in an identical change in the ‘‘all others’’ rate. Subsidy Rates
Subsidy rate 5.76 % Ad Valorem. 5.76 % Ad Valorem.

This determination is issued and published pursuant to section 351.224(e) of the Department’s regulations.
Dated: November 8, 2001. Faryar Shirzad, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. 01–28756 Filed 11–15–01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION Proposed Collection; Comment Request—Customer Satisfaction Surveys (Fast Track Recall Survey, Ombudsman Survey, State Partner Survey, Hotline Survey, and Clearinghouse Survey)
AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) requests comments on proposed surveys to determine customers’ level of satisfaction with existing services. The Commission will consider all comments received in response to this notice

before requesting approval of this collection of information from the Office of Management and Budget. DATES: Written comments must be received by the Office of the Secretary not later than January 15, 2002. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be captioned ‘‘Customer Satisfaction Surveys’’ and mailed to the Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, DC 20207, or delivered to the attention of that office, room 419, North Tower, 4330 East-West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland, 20814. Written comments may also be sent to the Office of the Secretary by facsimile at (301) 504–0127 or by e-mail at cpscos@cpsc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about the proposed collection of information, or to obtain a copy of the questions to be used for this

VerDate 11<MAY>2000

13:46 Nov 15, 2001

Jkt 197001

PO 00000

Frm 00010

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

E:\FR\FM\16NON1.SGM

pfrm07

PsN: 16NON1

57708

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 222 / Friday, November 16, 2001 / Notices
activities a year would be conducted using this clearance. The Commission staff estimates the number of annual respondents to be about 1,504. Among the anticipated sources and annual respondents are:
ACTION:

collection of information, call or write Linda L. Glatz, management and program analyst, Office of Planning and Evaluation, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, DC 20207; (301) 504–0416, Ext. 2264. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Background This request for clearance of several planned customer satisfaction surveys is in response to the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)related evaluations of service quality and customer satisfaction. ‘‘Customers’’ of CPSC include any individual or entity interested in or affected by agency activities. These would include, but not be limited to, (1) Consumers telephoning the Hotline to report product-related incidents, or to receive information; (2) consumers, industry members, or others contacting the National Injury Information Clearinghouse for information; (3) State representatives who work with CPSC on cooperative programs; (4) firms using CPSC’s Fast-Track Product Recall Program to report and simultaneously propose satisfactory product recall plans; and (5) small businesses that have sought information or assistance from the CPSC’s small business ombudsman. The information will be used by the CPSC Office of Planning and Evaluation to prepare sections of the agency’s annual performance report (required by the GPRA). This information will provide measures of the quality and effectiveness of agency efforts related to three goals in its strategic plan (informing the public, industry services, and customer satisfaction). If this information is not collected, the Commission would not have useful measures of its effectiveness in providing useful services to consumers and others, and information necessary to guide program development would not be available. B. Estimated Burden The surveys will be conducted by inhouse staff through telephone or in writing by (1) Customer service followup queries with samples of telephone Hotline callers, (2) surveying a sample of firms using the Fast-track Product Recall Program to assess their views and suggestions for improvements in the service aspects of the program, and (3) conducting mail surveys of state partners and samples of customers of the National Injury Information Clearinghouse. Fewer than 5 customer surveys or information collection

Correction notice.

SUMMARY: On November 1, 2001, a 60day notice inviting comment from the public was inadvertently published for the ‘‘High School Equivalency Program Hotline ......................................... 1,000 (HEP) and College Assistance Migrant National Injury Information Program (CAMP)’’ in the Federal Clearinghouse ........................... 300 Register (Volume 66, Number 212) Small Businesses ......................... 50 State Partners ............................... 54 dated November 1, 2001. This information collection is being Fast Track Product Recall Program .......................................... 100 submitted under the Streamlined Clearance Process for Discretionary 1,504 Grant Information Collection (1890– 0001). Therefore, this notice amends the The average time needed for each public comment period for this program response is estimated at 3.5 minutes. Thus, the annual time burden would be to 30 days. The Leader, Regulatory Information Management, Office of the about 5,264 (3.5 × 1,504) minutes or 88 Chief Information Officer, hereby issues hours. Using $13.50 an hour (the average hourly wage for all private a correction notice on the submission industry workers, according to the 2000 for OMB review as required by the edition of the Statistical Abstract of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Since U.S.) times 88 hours, the cost would be an incorrect public notice was negligible (a total of about $1,188 per published on November 1, the year). Department of Education is correcting the end date to the 30 days as required C. Requests for Comments for discretionary grants instead of 60 The Commission solicits written days. comments from all interested persons about the proposed surveys. The DATES: Interested persons are invited to Commission specifically seeks submit comments on or before information relevant to the following December 17, 2001. topics: ADDRESSES: Written comments should —Whether the surveys described above be addressed to the Office of are necessary for the proper Information and Regulatory Affairs, performance of the Commission’s Attention: Karen Lee, Desk Officer, functions, including whether the Department of Education, Office of information would have practical Management and Budget, 725 17th utility; Street, N.W., Room 10235, New —Whether the estimated burden of the Executive Office Building, Washington, proposed collections of information DC 20503 or should be electronically are accurate; mailed to the Internet address —Whether the quality, utility, and Karen_F._Lee@OMB.EOP.GOV. Requests clarity of the information to be for copies of the proposed information collected could be enhanced; and collection request may be accessed from —Whether the burden imposed by the http://edicsweb.ed.gov, or should be collection of information could be addressed to Vivian Reese, Department minimized by use of automated, of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, electronic or other technological SW, Room 5624, Regional Office collection techniques, or other forms of information technology. Building 3, Washington, DC 20202–4651 or should be electronically mailed to the Dated: November 9, 2001. Internet address Todd Stevenson, OCIO_IMB_Issues@ed.gov, or should be Acting Secretary, Consumer Product Safety faxed to 202–708–9346. Commission.

[FR Doc. 01–28685 Filed 11–15–01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355–01–P

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathy Axt at (540) 776–7742.
Dated: November 9, 2001. John Tressler, Leader, Regulatory Information Management Group, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. 01–28686 Filed 11–15–01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Notice of Proposed Information Collection Requests
AGENCY:

Department of Education.

VerDate 11<MAY>2000

17:10 Nov 15, 2001

Jkt 197001

PO 00000

Frm 00011

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

E:\FR\FM\16NON1.SGM

pfrm01

PsN: 16NON1