Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India and Taiwan; Inv. Nos. 701-TA-415 and 731-TA-933-934 (Second Review)

=== Continuation - AD/CVD - India - Taiwan === 45762 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 151 / Wednesday, August 6, 2014 / Notices 1 See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 79 FR 18279 (April 1, 2014). Background On April 1, 2014, the Department initiated a sunset review of the CVD order on citric acid from the PRC pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’).1 The Department received a notice of intent to participate in the review on behalf of Archer Daniels Midland Company, Cargill, Incorporated, and Tate & Lyle Ingredients Americas LLC, (collectively, ‘‘the domestic industry’’) within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). Each of these companies claimed interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act, as a domestic producer of the domestic like product. The Department received adequate substantive responses collectively from the domestic industry within the 30-day deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). The Department did not receive a substantive response from any government or respondent interested party to the proceeding. Because the Department received no response from the respondent interested parties, the Department conducted an expedited review of this CVD order, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). Scope of the Order The merchandise subject to the order is citric acid and certain citrate salts. The product is currently classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) item numbers 2918.14.0000, 2918.15.1000, 2918.15.5000, 3824.90.9290, and 3824.90.9290. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written product description remains dispositive. For a full description of the scope, see ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review of the Countervailing Duty Order on Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from the People’s Republic of China’’ from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, dated concurrently with this final notice, and hereby adopted by this notice (‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’). Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. The issues discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum include the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of a countervailable subsidy and the net countervailable subsidy likely to prevail if the order were revoked. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this expedited sunset review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which is on file electronically via the Enforcement and Compliance Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is available to registered users at http://iaaccess.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit, Room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http:// enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Final Results of Review We determine that revocation of the CVD order on citric acid from the PRC would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of a countervailable subsidy at the rates listed below: Exporter/manufacturer Net subsidy rate TTCA Co., Ltd. (a.k.a. Shandong TTCA Biochemistry Co., Ltd.) 44.31 percent ad valorem. Yixing Union Biochemical Co., Ltd.; and Yixing Union Cogeneration Co., Ltd ................................................. 36.46 percent ad valorem. Anhui BBCA Biochemical Co., Ltd ..................................................................................................................... 150.58 percent ad valorem. All Others ........................................................................................................................................................... 39.77 percent ad valorem. Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of return/ 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 the results and notice in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(b), and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: July 30, 2014. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary, for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2014–18594 Filed 8–5–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–533–824, A–583–837, C–533–825] Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India and Taiwan: Continuation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders AGENCY : Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES : Effective Date: August 6, 2014. SUMMARY : As a result of the determinations by the Department of Commerce (the Department) and the International Trade Commission (ITC) that revocation of the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip (PET Film) from India and the antidumping duty order on PET Film from Taiwan, would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, the Department is publishing a notice of continuation for these antidumping and countervailing duty orders. Contact Information: Jacqueline Arrowsmith, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–5255. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:14 Aug 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM 06AUN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 45763Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 151 / Wednesday, August 6, 2014 / Notices 1 See Initiation of Five Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 78 FR 19647 (April 2, 2013). 2 See Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film, Sheet and Strip From India: Final Results of the Expedited Second Sunset Review of the Countervailing Duty Order, 78 FR 47276 (August 5, 2013). 3 See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India and Taiwan: Final Results of the Second Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Orders and Correction to the Preliminary Results, 79 FR 12153 (March 4, 2014). 4 See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India and Taiwan, 79 FR 42534 (July 22, 2014). 5 See Notice of Scope Rulings, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005). 1 See Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Canada and the People’s Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Orders, 74 FR 25703 (May 29, 2009). 2 See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 79 FR18279 (April 1, 2014). Background The Department initiated and the ITC instituted sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on PET Film from India and Taiwan and the countervailing duty order on PET Film from India, pursuant to section 751(c) and 752 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 1 As a result of its review, the Department found that revocation of the countervailing duty order would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of net countervailable subsidies, and therefore, notified the ITC of the subsidy rate were the order to be revoked. 2 As a result of its review, the Department found that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on PET Film from India and Taiwan would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and, therefore, notified the ITC of the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail were the orders to be revoked.3 On July 22, 2014, the ITC published its determination pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752 of the Act, that revocation of the antidumping duty order on PET Film from India and Taiwan would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and the countervailing duty order on PET Film from India would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of net countervailable subsidies. 4 Scope of the Orders The products covered by the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders are all gauges of raw, pretreated, or primed PET Film, whether extruded or coextruded. Excluded are metallized films and other finished films that have had at least one of their surfaces modified by the application of a performance-enhancing resinous or inorganic layer of more than 0.00001 inches thick. Imports of PET Film are currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item number 3920.62.00.90. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written description of the scope of the antidumping duty order is dispositive. Scope Determinations Since these orders were published, there was one scope determination for PET film from India, dated August 25, 2003. In this determination, requested by International Packaging Films Inc., the Department determined that tracing and drafting film is outside of the scope of the order on PET Film from India.5 Continuation of the Orders As a result of the determinations by the Department and the ITC that revocation of the antidumping duty orders and the countervailing duty order would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and net countervailable subsidies and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to sections 751(c) and 751(d)(2) of the Act, the Department hereby orders the continuation of these antidumping duty orders on PET film from India and Taiwan and the countervailing duty order on PET Film from India. U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue to collect antidumping duty and countervailing duty cash deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise. The effective date of the continuation of this order will be the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of continuation. Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, the Department intends to initiate the next five-year review of this order not later than 30 days prior to the fifth anniversary of the effective date of continuation. This five-year (sunset) review and this notice are in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4). Dated: July 29, 2014. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2014–18599 Filed 8–5–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–122–853; A–570–937] Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From Canada and the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited First Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders AGENCY : Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY : As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department of Commerce (the Department) finds that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on citric acid and certain citrate salts (citric acid) from Canada and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping. The magnitude of the dumping margins likely to prevail is indicated in the ‘‘Final Results of Sunset Reviews’’ section of this notice. DATES : Effective Date: August 6, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terre Keaton Stefanova or Katherine Johnson, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1280 or (202) 482–4929, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : Background On May 29, 2009, the Department published in the Federal Register the antidumping duty orders on citric acid from Canada and the PRC. 1 On April 1, 2014, the Department published the notice of initiation of the first sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on citric acid from Canada and the PRC pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’).2 On April 14, 2014, the Department received Notices of Intent to Participate in these reviews from the following domestic producers of citric acid: Archer Daniels Midland Company, Cargill, Incorporated, and Tate & Lyle Ingredients Americas LLC. (collectively, ‘‘the petitioners’’), within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). The petitioners claimed interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act, as manufacturers of a domestic like VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:14 Aug 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM 06AUN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── === USITC Institution === 19524 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 62 / Monday, April 1, 2013 / Notices 1 No 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. 13–5–284, expiration date June 30, 2014. Public reporting burden for the request is estimated to average 15 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. hand-deliver comments to 419 E. Broadway, Fritch, TX 79036. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Dated: January 15, 2013. John Wessels, Regional Director, Intermountain Region, National Park Service. [FR Doc. 2013–07487 Filed 3–29–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–CB–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–415 and 731– TA–933–934 (Second Review)] Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India and Taiwan; Institution of Five-Year Reviews AGENCY : United States International Trade Commission. ACTION : Notice. 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 order on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip (‘‘PET film’’) from India and the antidumping duty orders on PET film from India and Taiwan 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 May 1, 2013. Comments on the adequacy of responses may be filed with the Commission by June 14, 2013. 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), as most recently amended at 74 FR 2847 (January 16, 2009). DATES : Effective Date: April 1, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : Mary Messer (202–205–3193), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. 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 public record for these reviews may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : Background.—On July 1, 2002, the Department of Commerce issued a countervailing duty order on imports of PET film from India (67 FR 44179) and antidumping duty orders on imports of PET film from India (67 FR 44175) and Taiwan (67 FR 44174). Following five- year reviews by Commerce and the Commission, effective May 8, 2008, Commerce issued a continuation of the countervailing duty order on imports of PET film from India (73 FR 26080) and the antidumping duty orders on imports of PET film from India and Taiwan (73 FR 26079). The Commission is now conducting second five-year 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 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 Countries in these reviews are India and Taiwan. (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 its full first five-year reviews, the Commission defined the Domestic Like Product as all PET film corresponding to Commerce’s scope, which does not include equivalent PET film. (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 first full five-year reviews, the Commission defined the Domestic Industry to include all domestic producers of PET film. (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 advised that they may appear in a review even if they participated personally and substantially in the corresponding underlying original investigation. The Commission’s designated agency ethics official has advised that a five-year review is not considered the ‘‘same particular matter’’ as the corresponding underlying original investigation for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 207, the post employment statute for Federal employees, and Commission rule 201.15(b) (19 CFR 201.15(b)), 73 FR 24609 (May 5, 2008). This advice was developed in consultation with the Office of Government Ethics. Consequently, former employees are not required to seek Commission approval to appear in a review under Commission VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:34 Mar 29, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01APN1.SGM 01APN1 pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 19525Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 62 / Monday, April 1, 2013 / Notices rule 19 CFR § 201.15, even if the corresponding underlying original investigation was pending when they were Commission employees. For further ethics advice on this matter, 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 issued in the reviews, provided that the application is made no later than 21 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Authorized applicants must represent interested parties, as defined in 19 U.S.C. § 1677(9), who are parties to the reviews. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO. Certification.—Pursuant to section 207.3 of the Commission’s rules, any person submitting information to the Commission in connection with these reviews must certify that the information is accurate and complete to the best of the submitter’s knowledge. In making the certification, the submitter will be deemed to consent, unless otherwise specified, for the Commission, its employees, and contract personnel to use the information provided in any other reviews or investigations of the same or comparable products which the Commission conducts under Title VII of the Act, or in internal audits and investigations relating to the programs and operations of the Commission pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3. Written submissions.—Pursuant to section 207.61 of the Commission’s rules, each interested party response to this notice must provide the information specified below. The deadline for filing such responses is May 1, 2013. Pursuant to section 207.62(b) of the Commission’s rules, eligible parties (as specified in Commission rule 207.62(b)(1)) may also file comments concerning the adequacy of responses to the notice of institution and whether the Commission should conduct expedited or full reviews. The deadline for filing such comments is June 14, 2013. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of sections 201.8 and 207.3 of the Commission’s rules and any submissions that contain BPI must also conform with the requirements of sections 201.6 and 207.7 of the Commission’s rules. Please be aware that the Commission’s rules with respect to electronic filing have been amended. The amendments took effect on November 7, 2011. See 76 FR 61937 (Oct. 6, 2011) and the newly revised Commission’s Handbook on E-Filing, available on the Commission’s Web site at http://edis.usitc.gov. Also, in accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission’s rules, each document filed by a party to the reviews must be served on all other parties to the reviews (as identified by either the public or APO service list as appropriate), and a certificate of service must accompany the document (if you are not a party to the reviews you do not need to serve your response). Inability to provide requested information.—Pursuant to section 207.61(c) of the Commission’s rules, any interested party that cannot furnish the information requested by this notice in the requested form and manner shall notify the Commission at the earliest possible time, provide a full explanation of why it cannot provide the requested information, and indicate alternative forms in which it can provide equivalent information. If an interested party does not provide this notification (or the Commission finds the explanation provided in the notification inadequate) and fails to provide a complete response to this notice, the Commission may take an adverse inference against the party pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act in making its determinations in the reviews. Information To Be Provided in Response to This Notice of Institution: If you are a domestic producer, union/ worker group, or trade/business association; import/export Subject Merchandise from more than one Subject Country; or produce Subject Merchandise in more than one Subject Country, you may file a single response. If you do so, please ensure that your response to each question includes the information requested for each pertinent Subject Country. As used below, the term ‘‘firm’’ includes any related firms. (1) The name and address of your firm or entity (including World Wide Web address) and name, telephone number, fax number, and Email address of the certifying official. (2) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is a U.S. producer of the Domestic Like Product, a U.S. union or worker group, a U.S. importer of the Subject Merchandise, a foreign producer or exporter of the Subject Merchandise, a U.S. or foreign trade or business association, or another interested party (including an explanation). If you are a union/worker group or trade/business association, identify the firms in which your workers are employed or which are members of your association. (3) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is willing to participate in these reviews by providing information requested by the Commission. (4) A statement of the likely effects of the revocation of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on the Domestic Industry in general and/or your firm/entity specifically. In your response, please discuss the various factors specified in section 752(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 1675a(a)) including the likely volume of subject imports, likely price effects of subject imports, and likely impact of imports of Subject Merchandise on the Domestic Industry. (5) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. producers of the Domestic Like Product. Identify any known related parties and the nature of the relationship as defined in section 771(4)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1677(4)(B)). (6) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. importers of the Subject Merchandise and producers of the Subject Merchandise in each Subject Country that currently export or have exported Subject Merchandise to the United States or other countries after 2006. (7) A list of 3–5 leading purchasers in the U.S. market for the Domestic Like Product and the Subject Merchandise (including street address, World Wide Web address, and the name, telephone number, fax number, and Email address of a responsible official at each firm). (8) A list of known sources of information on national or regional prices for the Domestic Like Product or the Subject Merchandise in the U.S. or other markets. (9) If you are a U.S. producer of the Domestic Like Product, provide the following information on your firm’s operations on that product during calendar year 2012, except as noted (report quantity data in pounds and value data in U.S. dollars, f.o.b. plant). If you are a union/worker group or trade/business association, provide the information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms in which your workers are employed/which are members of your association. (a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. production of the Domestic Like Product accounted for by your firm’s(s’) production; (b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to produce the Domestic Like Product (i.e., the level of production that your establishment(s) could reasonably have expected to attain during the year, VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:34 Mar 29, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01APN1.SGM 01APN1 pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 19526 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 62 / Monday, April 1, 2013 / Notices 1 No 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. 13–5–283, expiration date June 30, 2014. Public reporting burden for the request is estimated to average 15 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. assuming normal operating conditions (using equipment and machinery in place and ready to operate), normal operating levels (hours per week/weeks per year), time for downtime, maintenance, repair, and cleanup, and a typical or representative product mix); (c) the quantity and value of U.S. commercial shipments of the Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s); (d) the quantity and value of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of the Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s); and (e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost of goods sold (COGS), (iii) gross profit, (iv) selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses, and (v) operating income of the Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s) (include both U.S. and export commercial sales, internal consumption, and company transfers) for your most recently completed fiscal year (identify the date on which your fiscal year ends). (10) If you are a U.S. importer or a trade/business association of U.S. importers of the Subject Merchandise from the Subject Country(ies), provide the following information on your firm’s(s’) operations on that product during calendar year 2012 (report quantity data in pounds and value data in U.S. dollars). If you are a trade/ business association, provide the information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms which are members of your association. (a) The quantity and value (landed, duty-paid but not including antidumping or countervailing duties) of U.S. imports and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. imports of Subject Merchandise from each Subject Country accounted for by your firm’s(s’) imports; (b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping and/or countervailing duties) of U.S. commercial shipments of Subject Merchandise imported from each Subject Country; and (c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping and/or countervailing duties) of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of Subject Merchandise imported from each Subject Country. (11) If you are a producer, an exporter, or a trade/business association of producers or exporters of the Subject Merchandise in the Subject Country(ies), provide the following information on your firm’s(s’) operations on that product during calendar year 2012 (report quantity data in pounds and value data in U.S. dollars, landed and duty-paid at the U.S. port but not including antidumping or countervailing duties). If you are a trade/business association, provide the information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms which are members of your association. (a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total production of Subject Merchandise in each Subject Country accounted for by your firm’s(s’) production; (b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s) to produce the Subject Merchandise in each Subject Country (i.e., the level of production that your establishment(s) could reasonably have expected to attain during the year, assuming normal operating conditions (using equipment and machinery in place and ready to operate), normal operating levels (hours per week/weeks per year), time for downtime, maintenance, repair, and cleanup, and a typical or representative product mix); and (c) the quantity and value of your firm’s(s’) exports to the United States of Subject Merchandise and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total exports to the United States of Subject Merchandise from each Subject Country accounted for by your firm’s(s’) exports. (12) Identify significant changes, if any, in the supply and demand conditions or business cycle for the Domestic Like Product that have occurred in the United States or in the market for the Subject Merchandise in each Subject Country after 2006, and significant changes, if any, that are likely to occur within a reasonably foreseeable time. Supply conditions to consider include technology; production methods; development efforts; ability to increase production (including the shift of production facilities used for other products and the use, cost, or availability of major inputs into production); and factors related to the ability to shift supply among different national markets (including barriers to importation in foreign markets or changes in market demand abroad). Demand conditions to consider include end uses and applications; the existence and availability of substitute products; and the level of competition among the Domestic Like Product produced in the United States, Subject Merchandise produced in each Subject Country, and such merchandise from other countries. (13) (OPTIONAL) A statement of whether you agree with the above definitions of the Domestic Like Product and Domestic Industry; if you disagree with either or both of these definitions, please explain why and provide alternative definitions. Authority: These reviews are being conducted under authority of Title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.61 of the Commission’s rules. Issued: March 26, 2013. By order of the Commission. Lisa R. Barton, Acting Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2013–07328 Filed 3–29–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–449 and 731– TA–1118–1121 (Review)] Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube From China, Korea, Mexico, and Turkey; Institution of Five-Year Reviews AGENCY : United States International Trade Commission. ACTION : Notice. 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 order on light- walled rectangular pipe and tube from China and revocation of the antidumping duty orders on light- walled rectangular pipe and tube from China, Korea, Mexico, and Turkey 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 May 1, 2013. Comments on the adequacy of responses may be filed with the Commission by June 14, 2013. 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), as most recently amended at 74 FR 2847 (January 16, 2009). DATES : Effective Date: April 1, 2013. VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:34 Mar 29, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01APN1.SGM 01APN1 pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── === Initiation – AD/CVD === 19647Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 63 / Tuesday, April 2, 2013 / Notices The Department will publish in the Federal Register a notice of ‘‘Initiation of Administrative Review of Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation’’ for requests received by the last day of April 2013. If the Department does not receive, by the last day of April 2013, a request for review of entries covered by an order, finding, or suspended investigation listed in this notice and for the period identified above, the Department will instruct CBP to assess antidumping or countervailing duties on those entries at a rate equal to the cash deposit of (or bond for) estimated antidumping or countervailing duties required on those entries at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption and to continue to collect the cash deposit previously ordered. For the first administrative review of any order, there will be no assessment of antidumping or countervailing duties on entries of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the relevant provisional-measures ‘‘gap’’ period, of the order, if such a gap period is applicable to the period of review. This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community. Dated: March 22, 2013. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations . [FR Doc. 2013–07547 Filed 4–1–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review AGENCY : Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY : In accordance with section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) is automatically initiating five-year reviews (‘‘Sunset Reviews’’) of the antidumping duty orders listed below. The International Trade Commission (‘‘the Commission’’) is publishing concurrently with this notice its notice of Institution of Five-Year Review which covers the same orders. DATES : Effective Date: April 1, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Department official identified in the Initiation of Review section below at AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. For information from the Commission contact Mary Messer, Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission at (202) 205–3193. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : Background The Department’s procedures for the conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth in its Procedures for Conducting Five- Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 63 FR 13516 (March 20, 1998) and 70 FR 62061 (October 28, 2005). Guidance on methodological or analytical issues relevant to the Department’s conduct of Sunset Reviews is set forth in the Department’s Policy Bulletin 98.3—Policies Regarding the Conduct of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders: Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 1998), and in Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012). Initiation of Review In accordance with 19 CFR 351.218(c), we are initiating Sunset Reviews of the following antidumping duty orders: DOC Case No. ITC Case No. Country Product Department contact A–570–914 ............... 731–TA–1118 ......... China ...................... Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube (1st Review). Jennifer Moats (202) 482–5047. C–570–915 ............... 701–TA–449 ........... China ...................... Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube (1st Review). David Goldberger (202) 482– 4136. A–580–859 ............... 731–TA–1119 ......... Korea ...................... Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube (1st Review). Dana Mermelstein (202) 482– 1391. A–201–836 ............... 731–TA–1120 ......... Mexico .................... Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube (1st Review). Dana Mermelstein (202) 482– 1391. A–489–815 ............... 731–TA–1121 ......... Turkey .................... Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube (1st Review). Dana Mermelstein (202) 482– 1391. A–533–824 ............... 731–TA–933 ........... India ........................ Polyethylene Terephthalate (Pet) Film (2nd Review). Dana Mermelstein (202) 482– 1391. C–533–825 ............... 701–TA–415 ........... India ........................ Polyethylene Terephthalate (Pet) Film (2nd Review). Dana Mermelstein (202) 482– 1391. A–583–837 ............... 731–TA–934 ........... Taiwan .................... Polyethylene Terephthalate (Pet) Film (2nd Review). Dana Mermelstein (202) 482– 1391. With respect to the orders on Light- Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube, we have advanced the initiation date of certain Sunset Reviews upon determining that initiation of the Sunset Reviews for all of the Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube orders on the same date would promote administrative efficiency. Filing Information As a courtesy, we are making information related to Sunset proceedings, including copies of the pertinent statute and Department’s regulations, the Department’s schedule for Sunset Reviews, a listing of past revocations and continuations, and current service lists, available to the public on the Department’s Internet Web site at the following address: ‘‘http://ia.ita.doc.gov/sunset/.’’ All submissions in these Sunset Reviews must be filed in accordance with the Department’s regulations regarding format, translation, and service of documents. These rules, including electronic filing requirements via Import Administration’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (‘‘IA ACCESS’’), can be found at 19 CFR VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:35 Apr 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM 02APN1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 19648 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 63 / Tuesday, April 2, 2013 / Notices 1 In comments made on the interim final sunset regulations, a number of parties stated that the proposed five-day period for rebuttals to substantive responses to a notice of initiation was insufficient. This requirement was retained in the final sunset regulations at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(4). As provided in 19 CFR 351.302(b), however, the Department will consider individual requests to extend that five-day deadline based upon a showing of good cause. 351.303. See also Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011). This notice serves as a reminder that any party submitting factual information in an AD/CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information. See section 782(b) of the Act. Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are in effect for company/government officials as well as their representatives in all AD/CVD investigations or proceedings initiated on or after March 14, 2011. See Certification of Factual Information to Import Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Interim Final Rule, 76 FR 7491 (February 10, 2011) (‘‘Interim Final Rule’’) amending 19 CFR 351.303(g)(1) and (2) and supplemented by Certification of Factual Information To Import Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Supplemental Interim Final Rule, 76 FR 54697 (September 2, 2011). The formats for the revised certifications are provided at the end of the Interim Final Rule. The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the revised certification requirements. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(d), the Department will maintain and make available a service list for these proceedings. To facilitate the timely preparation of the service list(s), it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding contact the Department in writing within 10 days of the publication of the Notice of Initiation. Because deadlines in Sunset Reviews can be very short, we urge interested parties to apply for access to proprietary information under administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’) immediately following publication in the Federal Register of this notice of initiation by filing a notice of intent to participate. The Department’s regulations on submission of proprietary information and eligibility to receive access to business proprietary information under APO can be found at 19 CFR 351.304– 306. Information Required From Interested Parties Domestic interested parties defined in section 771(9)(C), (D), (E), (F), and (G) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.102(b) wishing to participate in a Sunset Review must respond not later than 15 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of initiation by filing a notice of intent to participate. The required contents of the notice of intent to participate are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(ii). In accordance with the Department’s regulations, if we do not receive a notice of intent to participate from at least one domestic interested party by the 15-day deadline, the Department will automatically revoke the order without further review. See 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(iii). If we receive an order-specific notice of intent to participate from a domestic interested party, the Department’s regulations provide that all parties wishing to participate in a Sunset Review must file complete substantive responses not later than 30 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of initiation. The required contents of a substantive response, on an order-specific basis, are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3). Note that certain information requirements differ for respondent and domestic parties. Also, note that the Department’s information requirements are distinct from the Commission’s information requirements. Please consult the Department’s regulations for information regarding the Department’s conduct of Sunset Reviews.1 Please consult the Department’s regulations at 19 CFR Part 351 for definitions of terms and for other general information concerning antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings at the Department. This notice of initiation is being published in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218 (c). Dated: March 25, 2013. Edward C. Yang, Senior Director, China/Non-Market Economy Unit. [FR Doc. 2013–07550 Filed 4–1–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Northeast Region Dealer Purchase Reports AGENCY : National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION : Notice. SUMMARY : The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES : Written comments must be submitted on or before June 3, 2013. ADDRESSES : Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at JJessup@doc.gov). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to David Ulmer, (757) 723– 0303 or David.Ulmer@noaa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : I. Abstract This request is for extension of a current information collection. Federally permitted dealers, and any individual acting in the capacity of a dealer, must submit to NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Regional Administrator or to the official designee a detailed report of all fish purchased or received for a commercial purpose, other than solely for transport on land by one of the available electronic reporting mechanisms approved by NMFS. The information obtained is used by economists, biologists, and managers in the management of the fisheries. The data collection parameters are consistent with the current requirements for Federal dealers under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. II. Method of Collection Dealers submit purchase information through an electronic process by either the Web-based system as administered by the Atlantic Coast Cooperative Statistics Program, the computer-based VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:35 Apr 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM 02APN1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── === USITC Full Review === 42105Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Notices If you wish to You must contact the Council Coordinator (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) no later than Submit written information or questions before the teleconference for the council to consider during the teleconference. Monday, July 22, 2013. Give an oral presentation during the teleconference ............................... Monday, July 22, 2013. Submitting Written Information or Questions Interested members of the public may submit relevant information or questions for the Council to consider during the teleconference. Written statements must be received by the date listed in ‘‘Public Input’’ under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, so that the information may be made available to the Council for their consideration prior to this teleconference. Written statements must be supplied to the Council Coordinator in one of the following formats: One hard copy with original signature, and one electronic copy via email (acceptable file formats are Adobe Acrobat PDF, MS Word, MS PowerPoint, or rich text file). Giving an Oral Presentation Individuals or groups requesting to make an oral presentation during the teleconference will be limited to 3 minutes per speaker, with no more than a total of 30 minutes for all speakers. Interested parties should contact the Council Coordinator, in writing (preferably via email; see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), to be placed on the public speaker list for this teleconference. To ensure an opportunity to speak during the public comment period of the teleconference, members of the public must register with the Council Coordinator. Registered speakers who wish to expand upon their oral statements, or those who had wished to speak but could not be accommodated on the agenda, may submit written statements to the Council Coordinator up to 30 days subsequent to the teleconference. Meeting Minutes Summary minutes of the teleconference will be maintained by the Council Coordinator (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) and will be available for public inspection within 90 days of the meeting and will be posted on the Council’s Web site at http://www.fws.gov/whhcc. Rowan W. Gould, Acting Deputy Director. [FR Doc. 2013–16881 Filed 7–12–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [124A2100RM.AADD003200.A087C222. 999900.AR.DED.97C22214.001] Advisory Board for Exceptional Children AGENCY : Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. ACTION : Notice of Meeting. SUMMARY : The Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) is announcing that the Advisory Board for Exceptional Children (Advisory Board) will hold its next meeting in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The purpose of the meeting is to meet the mandates of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004 (IDEA) for Indian children with disabilities. DATES : The Advisory Board will meet on Thursday, July 18, 2013, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and Friday, July 19, 2013 from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Mountain Time. Orientation for new members will be held Wednesday, July 17, 2013, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Mountain Time. ADDRESSES : The meeting will be held at the Manuel Lujan, Jr. Building, 1011 Indian School Road NW., Room 231– 232, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87104. Telephone 505–563–5383. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sue Bement, Designated Federal Officer, Bureau of Indian Education, Division of Performance and Accountability (DPA), 1011 Indian School Road NW., Suite 332, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87104; telephone number (505) 563–5274 or email sue.bement@bie.edu. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the BIE is announcing that the Advisory Board will hold its next meeting in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The Advisory Board was established under the Individuals with Disabilities Act of 2004 (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.) to advise the Secretary of the Interior, through the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, on the needs of Indian children with disabilities. The meetings are open to the public. The following items will be on the agenda: • Remarks from Acting BIE Director; • Report from Acting Associate Deputy Director, DPA/BIE; • Report from, Supervisory Education Specialist, Special Education, DPA/BIE; • BIE Data Summit Review; • Discussion and selection of Advisory Board Priorities; • Public Comment (via conference call, July 19, 2013, meeting only*); and • BIE Advisory Board-Advice and Recommendations. *During the July 19, 2013 meeting, time has been set aside for public comment via conference call from 1:00– 1:30 p.m. Mountain Time. The call-in information is: Conference Number 1– 888–417–0376, Passcode 1509140. Dated: July 10, 2013. Kevin K. Washburn, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. [FR Doc. 2013–16886 Filed 7–12–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–6W–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–415 and 731– TA–933–934 (Second Review)] Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India and Taiwan; Notice of Commission Determinations To Conduct Full Five- Year Reviews AGENCY : United States International Trade Commission. ACTION : Notice. SUMMARY : The Commission hereby gives notice that it will proceed with full reviews pursuant to section 751(c)(5) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(5)) to determine whether revocation of the countervailing duty order on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip (‘‘PET’’ film) from India and the antidumping duty orders on PET film from India and Taiwan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. A schedule for the review will be established and announced at a later date. 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). VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:53 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15JYN1.SGM 15JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 42106 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Notices DATES : Effective Date: July 5, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Szustakowski (202–205–3169), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. 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 public record for these reviews may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : On July 5, 2013, the Commission determined that it should proceed to full reviews in the subject five-year reviews pursuant to section 751(c)(5) of the Act. The Commission found the domestic interested party group response to its notice of institution (78 F.R. 19524, April 2, 2013) to be adequate and that the respondent interested party group response with respect to Taiwan was adequate and decided to conduct a full review with respect to the antidumping duty order concerning PET film from Taiwan. The Commission found that the respondent interested party group response with respect to the reviews on the orders on PET film from India was inadequate. However, the Commission determined to conduct full reviews concerning the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on PET film from India to promote administrative efficiency in light of its decision to conduct a full review with respect to the order on PET film from Taiwan. A record of the Commissioners’ votes, the Commission’s statement on adequacy, and any individual Commissioner’s statements will be available from the Office of the Secretary and at the Commission’s Web site. Authority: These reviews are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.62 of the Commission’s rules. By order of the Commission. Issued: July 10, 2013. Lisa R. Barton, Acting Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2013–16869 Filed 7–12–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–886] Certain TV Programs, Literary Works for TV Production and Episode Guides Pertaining to Same; Institution of Investigation Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337 AGENCY : U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION : Notice. SUMMARY : Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on June 7, 2013, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of E.T. Radcliffe, LLC of Dallas, Texas and Emir Tiar of Coto De Caza, California. Supplements to the Complaint were filed June 25, 2013 and June 27, 2013. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain TV programs, literary works for TV production and episode guides pertaining to same by reason of infringement of U.S. Copyright PAU003415849 (‘‘the ’849 copyright’’); U.S. Copyright TXU001832727 (‘‘the ’727 copyright’’); and U.S. Copyright PAU003639268 (‘‘the ’268 copyright’’), and that an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The complaint further alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain TV programs, literary works for TV production and episode guides pertaining to same, by reason of unfair methods of competition and unfair acts, the threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry in the United States. The complainants request that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders. ADDRESSES : The complaint, except for any confidential information contained therein, is available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Room 112, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205–2000. Hearing impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained 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 at http:// www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone (202) 205–2560. Authority: The authority for institution of this investigation is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and in section 210.10 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2013). Scope of Investigation: Having considered the complaint, the U.S. International Trade Commission, on July 9, 2013, ordered that— (1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine: (a) Whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain TV programs, literary works for TV production and episode guides pertaining to same by reason of infringement of the ’849 copyright; the ’727 copyright; and the ’268 copyright, and whether an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337; (b) whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(A) of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain TV programs, literary works for TV production and episode guides pertaining to same, by reason of unfair methods of competition and unfair acts, the threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry in the United States; (2) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of investigation shall be served: (a) The complainants are: E.T. Radcliffe, LLC, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 2700, Dallas, TX 75202. Emir Tiar, 31785 Via Coyote, Coto De Caza, CA 92679. (b) The respondents are the following entities alleged to be in violation of section 337, and are the parties upon which the complaint is to be served: VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:53 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15JYN1.SGM 15JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── === USITC Scheduling === 2883Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 11 / Thursday, January 16, 2014 / Notices 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). objects excavated from the Rudder site have always been in the physical custody of the AMNH at the University of Alabama. The 205 unassociated funerary objects are comprised of 1 ceramic bowl, 2 ceramic water bottles, 199 pottery sherds, 2 pieces of graphite, and 1 sandstone pallet. These unassociated funerary objects were recovered from six burial features. The human remains from these burial features were either not collected during excavation or have been misplaced in the last 74 years. These burial features, however, were derived from Henry Island phase strata in the mounds at this site. These unassociated funerary objects are, therefore, from Mississippian culture burials. Although there is no scientific certainty that Native Americans of the Henry Island phase are directly related to modern Federally recognized tribes, Spanish and French explorers of the 16th and 17th centuries do indicate the presence chiefdom level tribal entities in the southeastern United States. The Coosa paramount chiefdom noted in historical chronicles is the most likely entity related to Henry Island phase sites in this part of the Guntersville Reservoir. Tribal groups or towns now part of The Muscogee (Creek) Nation claim descent from the Coosa chiefdom. The preponderance of the evidence indicates that in this part of the Guntersville Reservoir area, Henry Island phase sites are most likely culturally associated with groups now part of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation. Determinations Made by the Tennessee Valley Authority Officials of TVA have determined that: • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(B), the 205 cultural items described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony and are believed, by a preponderance of the evidence, to have been removed from the specific burial sites of a Native American individuals. • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the unassociated funerary objects and The Muscogee (Creek) Nation. Additional Requestors and Disposition Lineal descendants or representatives of any Federally recognized Indian tribe not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Dr. Thomas O. Maher, TVA, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, WT11D, Knoxville, TN 37902–1401, telephone (865) 632– 7458, email tomaher@tva.gov, by February 18, 2014. After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the unassociated funerary objects to The Muscogee (Creek) Nation may proceed. TVA is responsible for notifying the University of Alabama and the Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma; Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas (previously listed as the Alabama- Coushatta Tribes of Texas); Alabama- Quassarte Tribal Town; Cherokee Nation; Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians; Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma; Kialegee Tribal Town; Poarch Band of Creeks (previously listed as the Poarch Band of Creek Indians of Alabama); Seminole Tribe of Florida (previously listed as the Seminole Tribe of Florida (Dania, Big Cypress, Brighton, Hollywood & Tampa Reservations)); Shawnee Tribe; The Chickasaw Nation; The Muscogee (Creek) Nation; The Seminole Nation of Oklahoma; Thlopthlocco Tribal Town; and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma, that this notice has been published. Dated: December 2, 2013. Melanie O’Brien, Acting Manager, National NAGPRA Program. [FR Doc. 2014–00805 Filed 1–15–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–50–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 731–TA–1205 (Final)] Silica Bricks and Shapes From China Determination On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigation, the United States International Trade Commission (Commission) determines, pursuant to section 735(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)) (the Act), that an industry in the United States is not materially injured or threatened with material injury, and the establishment of an industry in the United States is not materially retarded, by reason of imports from China of silica bricks and shapes, provided for in subheadings 6902.20.10 (statistical reporting number 6902.20.1020), 6902.20.50 (statistical reporting number 6902.20.5020), and 6909.19.50 (statistical reporting number 6909.19.5095) of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that have been found by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). Background The Commission instituted this investigation effective November 15, 2012, following receipt of a petition filed with the Commission and Commerce by Utah Refractories Corp., Lehi, UT. The final phase of the investigation was scheduled by the Commission following notification of a preliminary determination by Commerce that imports of silica bricks and shapes from China were being sold at LTFV within the meaning of section 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(b)). Notice of the scheduling of the final phase of the Commission’s investigation and of a public hearing to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register of July 30, 2013 (78 FR 45968). The hearing was held in Washington, DC, on November 21, 2013, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission transmitted its determination in this investigation to the Secretary of Commerce on January 9, 2014. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 4443 (January 2014), entitled Silica Bricks and Shapes from China: Investigation No. 731–TA–1205 (Final). Issued: January 10, 2014. By order of the Commission. Lisa R. Barton, Acting Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2014–00702 Filed 1–15–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–415 and 731– TA–933 and 934 (Second Review)] Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India and Taiwan; Scheduling of Full Five-Year Reviews Concerning the Countervailing Duty Order on Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip (‘‘PET Film’’) From India and the Antidumping Duty Orders on PET Film From India and Taiwan AGENCY : United States International Trade Commission. ACTION : Notice. VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:55 Jan 15, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\16JAN1.SGM 16JAN1 ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 2884 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 11 / Thursday, January 16, 2014 / Notices SUMMARY : The Commission hereby gives notice of the scheduling of full reviews pursuant to section 751(c)(5) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(5)) (the Act) to determine whether revocation of the countervailing duty order on PET film from India and/or revocation of the antidumping duty orders on PET film from India and Taiwan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. The Commission has determined to exercise its authority to extend the review period by up to 90 days pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(5)(B). For further information concerning the conduct of this review 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). DATES : Effective Date: January 6, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia Trainor (202–205–3354), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. 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 public record for this review may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : Background. On July 5, 2013, the Commission determined that responses to its notice of institution of the subject five-year reviews were such that full reviews pursuant to section 751(c)(5) of the Act should proceed (78 FR 42105, July 15, 2013). A record of the Commissioners’ votes, the Commission’s statement on adequacy, and any individual Commissioner’s statements are available from the Office of the Secretary and at the Commission’s Web site. Participation in the review 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 these reviews as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in section 201.11 of the Commission’s rules, by 45 days after publication of this notice. A party that filed a notice of appearance following publication of the Commission’s notice of institution of the reviews need not file an additional notice of appearance. 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. Limited disclosure of business proprietary information (BPI) under an administrative protective order (APO) and BPI service list. Pursuant to section 207.7(a) of the Commission’s rules, the Secretary will make BPI gathered in these reviews available to authorized applicants under the APO issued in the reviews, provided that the application is made by 45 days after publication of this notice. Authorized applicants must represent interested parties, as defined by 19 U.S.C. 1677(9), who are parties to the reviews. A party granted access to BPI following publication of the Commission’s notice of institution of the review need not reapply for such access. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO. Staff report. The prehearing staff report in the reviews will be placed in the nonpublic record on May 2, 2014, and a public version will be issued thereafter, pursuant to section 207.64 of the Commission’s rules. Hearing. The Commission will hold a hearing in connection with the reviews beginning at 9:30 a.m. on May 20, 2014, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building. Requests to appear at the hearing should be filed in writing with the Secretary to the Commission on or before May 12, 2014. A nonparty who has testimony that may aid the Commission’s deliberations may request permission to present a short statement at the hearing. All parties and nonparties desiring to appear at the hearing and make oral presentations should attend a prehearing conference to be held at 9:30 a.m. on May 14, 2014, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building. Oral testimony and written materials to be submitted at the public hearing are governed by sections 201.6(b)(2), 201.13(f), 207.24, and 207.66 of the Commission’s rules. Parties must submit any request to present a portion of their hearing testimony in camera no later than 7 business days prior to the date of the hearing. Written submissions. Each party to the reviews may submit a prehearing brief to the Commission. Prehearing briefs must conform with the provisions of section 207.65 of the Commission’s rules; the deadline for filing is May 12, 2014. Parties may also file written testimony in connection with their presentation at the hearing, as provided in section 207.24 of the Commission’s rules, and posthearing briefs, which must conform with the provisions of section 207.67 of the Commission’s rules. The deadline for filing posthearing briefs is May 29, 2014. In addition, any person who has not entered an appearance as a party to the reviews may submit a written statement of information pertinent to the subject of the reviews on or before May 29, 2014. On June 18, 2014, the Commission will make available to parties all information on which they have not had an opportunity to comment. Parties may submit final comments on this information on or before June 20, 2014, but such final comments must not contain new factual information and must otherwise comply with section 207.68 of the Commission’s rules. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission’s rules; any submissions that contain BPI must also conform with the requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission’s rules. The Commission’s Handbook on E-Filing, available on the Commission’s Web site at http://edis.usitc.gov, elaborates upon the Commission’s rules with respect to electronic filing. Additional written submissions to the Commission, including requests pursuant to section 201.12 of the Commission’s rules, shall not be accepted unless good cause is shown for accepting such submissions, or unless the submission is pursuant to a specific request by a Commissioner or Commission staff. In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission’s rules, each document filed by a party to the reviews must be served on all other parties to the reviews (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service. Authority: These reviews are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.62 of the Commission’s rules. Dated: Issued: January 13, 2014. By order of the Commission. Lisa R. Barton, Acting Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2014–00728 Filed 1–15–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:55 Jan 15, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\16JAN1.SGM 16JAN1 ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── === USITC Determination === 42534 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 140 / Tuesday, July 22, 2014 / Notices 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on (202) 205–1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 provides that if the Commission finds a violation it shall exclude the articles concerned from the United States: unless, after considering the effect of such exclusion upon the public health and welfare, competition conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States consumers, it finds that such articles should not be excluded from entry. 19 U.S.C. § 1337(d)(1). The Commission is interested in further development of the record on the public interest in its investigations. Accordingly, members of the public are invited to file submissions of no more than five (5) pages, inclusive of attachments, concerning the public interest in light of the administrative law judge’s Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bonding issued in this investigation on July 16, 2014. Comments should address whether issuance of an exclusion order in this investigation could affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers. In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that: (i) explain how the articles potentially subject to the order are used in the United States; (ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the potential order; (iii) indicate the extent to which like or directly competitive articles are produced in the United States or are otherwise available in the United States, with respect to the articles potentially subject to the order; (iv) indicate whether Complainant, Complainant’s licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to an exclusion order within a commercially reasonable time; and (v) explain how the exclusion order would impact consumers in the United States. Written submissions must be filed no later than by close of business on August 14, 2014. Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above and submit 8 true paper copies to the Office of the Secretary by noon the next day pursuant to Commission rule 210.4(f), 19 C.F.R. § 210.4(f). Submissions should refer to the investigation number (‘‘Inv. No. 337–TA–882’’) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, http://www.usitc.gov/ secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/ handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf). Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary (202–205– 2000). Any person desiring to submit a document (or portion thereof) to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment unless the information has already been granted such treatment during the proceedings. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary of the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See section 201.6 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 C.F.R. § 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is sought will be treated accordingly. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary. This action is taken under authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 1337, and Part 210 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 C.F.R. Part 210). By order of the Commission. Issued: July 17, 2014. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2014–17203 Filed 7–21–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–415 and 731– TA–933 and 934 (Second Review)] Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India and Taiwan Determinations On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject five-year review, the United States International Trade Commission (Commission) determines, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)), that revocation of the countervailing duty order on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip (‘‘PET film’’) from India and the antidumping duty orders on PET film from India and Taiwan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. Background The Commission instituted these reviews on April 1, 2013 (78 FR 19524) and determined on July 5, 2013 that it would conduct full reviews (78 FR 42105, July 15, 2013). Notice of the scheduling of the Commission’s reviews and of a public hearing to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register on January 16, 2014 (79 FR 2883). The hearing was cancelled on May 14, 2014 (79 FR 28949, May 20, 2014). The Commission completed and filed its determinations in these reviews on June 27, 2014. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 4479 (July 2014), entitled Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India and Taiwan: Investigation Nos. 701–TA–415 and 731–TA–933 and 934 (Second Review). By order of the Commission. Issued: July 16, 2014. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2014–17158 Filed 7–21–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Clean Air Act On July 16, 2014, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed consent decree with the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota in the lawsuit entitled United States and State of Minnesota by its Minnesota Pollution Control Agency v. Allete, Inc. d/b/a Minnesota Power, Civil Action No. 0:14–cv–2911–ADM–LIB. The United States and the State of Minnesota by its Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, filed this lawsuit under the Clean Air Act. The United States’ and the State’s complaint seeks injunctive relief and civil penalties for violations of the New Source Review (NSR) and Title V provisions of the Clean Air Act, at the defendant’s Boswell and Laskin coal-fired power VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:09 Jul 21, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22JYN1.SGM 22JYN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── === Final Results - AD - India - Taiwan === 67113Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2013 / Notices 6 See, e.g., Glycine from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Rescission, in Part, 72 FR 58809 (October 17, 2007), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2. 7 See 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3). 8 See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). The Department will issue the final results of this NSR, which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised in any such comments, within 90 days of publication of these preliminary results, pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act. Deadline for Submission of Publicly Available Surrogate Value Information In accordance with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(ii), the deadline for submission of publicly available information to value factors of production under 19 CFR 351.408(c) is 20 days after the date of publication of the preliminary results. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(4), if an interested party submits factual information less than ten days before, on, or after (if the Department has extended the deadline), the applicable deadline for submission of such factual information, an interested party may submit factual information to rebut, clarify, or correct the factual information no later than ten days after such factual information is served on the interested party. However, the Department generally will not accept in the rebuttal submission additional or alternative surrogate value information not previously on the record, if the deadline for submission of surrogate value information has passed. 6 Furthermore, the Department generally will not accept business proprietary information in either the surrogate value submissions or the rebuttals thereto, as the regulation regarding the submission of surrogate values allows only for the submission of publicly available information.7 Assessment Rates Upon issuing the final results of this NSR, the Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. 8 The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of this NSR. In this review, we calculated a per- unit rate for each importer by dividing the total dumping margins for reviewed sales to that party by the total sales quantity associated with those transactions. For duty-assessment rates calculated on this basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting per-unit rate against the entered quantity of the subject merchandise. If the respondent’s weighted-average dumping margin is above de minimis, we will calculate importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rate based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer’s examined sales to the total entered value of those same sales in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Then, we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this NSR. Where either the respondent’s weighted- average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. The final results of this NSR shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this administrative review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable. Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this NSR for shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For merchandise produced by Jinxiang Zhongtian Business Co., Ltd. and exported by Goodman, the cash deposit rate will be that established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis, then zero cash deposit will be required); (2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non- PRC exporters not listed above that received a separate rate in a prior segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the existing producer/exporter-specific combination rate; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be that for the PRC-wide entity; and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC producer/exporter combination that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Notification to Importers This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) 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 double antidumping duties. We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214, and 351.221(b)(4). Dated: November 4, 2013. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 1. Summary 2. Background 3. Scope of the Order 4. Bona Fide Sale Analysis 5. Non-Market Economy Country Status 6. Separate Rates 7. Surrogate Country 8. Economic Comparability 9. Significant Producer of Comparable Merchandise 10. Data Availability 11. Date of Sale 12. Fair Value Comparisons 13. Differential Pricing Analysis 14. U.S. Price 15. Normal Value 16. Factor Valuations 17. Currency Conversion [FR Doc. 2013–26861 Filed 11–7–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–533–824, A–583–837] Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India and Taiwan: Preliminary Results of the Second Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Orders AGENCY : Enforcement and Compliance, formerly Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES : Effective Date: November 8, 2013. SUMMARY : On April 2, 2013, the Department of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) initiated the second sunset review of the antidumping duty orders on Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip (‘‘PET Film’’) from India and Taiwan. The Department determined that it was appropriate to conduct full reviews. The Department VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Nov 07, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1 TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 67114 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2013 / Notices 1 See Notice of Amended Final Antidumping Duty Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India, 67 FR 44175 (July 1, 2002); see also Notice of Amended Final Antidumping Duty Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip (PET Film) from Taiwan, 67 FR 44174 (July 1, 2002). 2 See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 78 FR 19647 (April 2, 2013). 3 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, from Mark Hoadley, Acting Director, Office 6, on ‘‘Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders on Polyethylene Terephthalate Film from India and Taiwan: Adequacy Redetermination, ’’ dated July 22, 2013. 4 See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film from India and Taiwan: Extension of Time Limits for Preliminary and Final Results of the Second Antidumping Duty Sunset Reviews 78 FR 45512 (July 29, 2013) (‘‘PET Film Extension Notice’’). 5 See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty Proceedings; Final Modification for Reviews, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012) (‘‘Final Modification for Reviews’’). 6 See ‘‘Memorandum for The Record from Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary of Enforcement and Compliance,’’ dated October 18, 2013 (‘‘Tolling Memorandum’’) 7 See Notice of Scope Rulings, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005). preliminarily finds that revocation of these antidumping duty orders would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the rates identified in the ‘‘Preliminary Results of Review’’ section of this notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacqueline Arrowsmith or Myrna Lobo, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–5255 or (202) 482–2371, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : Background The antidumping duty orders on PET Film from India and Taiwan were published on July 1, 2002. 1 On April 2, 2013, the Department initiated the second sunset review of these orders pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’).2 The Department received a notice of intent to participate from DuPont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc., and SKC, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘the domestic interested parties’’), within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). DuPont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc., and SKC, Inc. are manufacturers of a domestic like product in the United States and, accordingly, are domestic interested parties pursuant to section 771(9)(C) of the Act. On May 2, 2013, the Department received an adequate substantive response to the notice of initiation from the domestic interested parties within the 30-day deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). The Department received no response from the respondent interested parties, i.e., PET Film producers and exporters from India and/or Taiwan. On the basis of the notice of intent to participate and adequate substantive response filed by the domestic interested parties and the inadequate response from any respondent interested party, the Department decided to conduct expedited sunset reviews of these orders pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C). However, on July 22, 2013, the Department revised its original adequacy determination and determined to conduct full sunset reviews of these orders.3 The Department also extended the deadline for issuing the preliminary results of these full sunset reviews by 90 days, to October 18, 2013. 4 The reviews were converted to full sunset reviews to provide interested parties with an opportunity to comment concerning the implementation of the Final Modification for Reviews, and the deadline was extended for the preliminary results of these reviews because these reviews are extraordinarily complicated.5 On October 18, 2013, the Department issued a tolling memorandum extending all deadlines by 16 days for the duration of the government shutdown. 6 The deadline for these reviews is now November 4, 2013. Scope of the Orders The products covered by these orders are all gauges of raw, pretreated or primed PET film, whether extruded or coextruded. Excluded are metallized films and other finished films that have had at least one of their surfaces modified by the application of a performance-enhancing resinous or inorganic layer of more than 0.00001 inches thick. Imports of PET film were classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) under item number 3920.62.00. Effective July 1, 2003, the HTSUS subheading 3920.62.00.00 was divided into 3920.62.00.10 (metallized PET film) and 3920.62.00.90 (non- metallized PET film). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for the convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of these orders is dispositive. Since these orders were published, there was one scope determination for PET film from India, dated August 25, 2003. In this determination, requested by International Packaging Films Inc., the Department determined that tracing and drafting film is outside of the scope of the order on PET film from India.7 Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised for the preliminary results of these reviews are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum (‘‘Decision Memorandum’’) from Edward Yang, Director, Office VII, Office of AD/CVD Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, dated concurrently with this notice. The issues discussed in the Decision Memorandum are the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping, and the magnitude of the margins of dumping likely to prevail if these orders were revoked. The analysis addresses the impact of the Final Modification for Reviews on these reviews. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which is on file electronically via Import Administration’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is available to registered users at http://iaaccess.trade.gov and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit in room 7046 of the main Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://trade.gov/ enforcement/. The signed Decision Memorandum and electronic versions of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Preliminary Results of Review Pursuant to sections 752(c)(1) and (3) of the Act, we preliminarily determine that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on PET Film from India and Taiwan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping. Further, we determine that the magnitude of the margins of dumping likely to prevail are as follows: Exporter or producer Margin (percent) Ester Industries Limited, Inc. .... 24.10 Polyplex Corporation Limited ... 3.02 All Others .................................. 16.96 VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Nov 07, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1 TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 67115Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2013 / Notices 8 See PET Film Extension Notice; see also Tolling Memorandum. 1 See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 78 FR 25420, 25424 (May 1, 2013). 2 See Letter from Crowell & Moring on behalf of Electrolux regarding ‘‘Request for Administrative Review’’ (May 31, 2013). This public document and all other public documents and public versions of business proprietary documents for this administrative review are on file electronically via IA ACCESS. 3 See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 78 FR 38924 (June 28, 2013) (Initiation Notice). 4 See Letter from Hong Kong Gree regarding ‘‘No Shipment Certification’’ (August 27, 2013). 5 See Department Memorandum regarding ‘‘Analysis of CBP Data and Identification of Companies to Receive Q&V Questionnaires’’ (August 2, 2013). 6 See Message number 3263301available at http:// addcvd.cbp.gov and also IA ACCESS. 7 See, e.g., Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India: Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 77 FR 19634 (April 2, 2012); see also Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and Tube From Turkey: Notice of Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, In Part, 74 FR 47921 (September 18, 2009). 8 The Department received several submissions for the withdrawal of administrative review requests and will publish separately a ‘‘Notice of Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review’’ with respect to those companies for which review requests have been withdrawn. 9 See 19 CFR 351.303(f). 10 See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Exporter or producer Margin (percent) Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, Ltd. ........................................ 8.99 Shinkong Synthetic Fibers Cor- poration/Shinkong Materials Technology Co., Ltd. ............. 0.75 All Others .................................. 4.37 Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 50 days after the date of publication of the preliminary results of these full sunset reviews, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(i). Rebuttal briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than five days after the time limit for filing case briefs in accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(d). Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.310(c). A hearing, if requested, will be held two days after the date the rebuttal briefs are due. The Department will issue a notice of final results of these full sunset reviews, which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised in any such comments, no later than March 13, 2014. 8 The Department is issuing and publishing these preliminary results and notice in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: November 4, 2013. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2013–26851 Filed 11–7–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–570–968] Aluminum Extrusions From the People’s Republic of China: Intent To Rescind 2012 Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, in Part AGENCY : Enforcement and Compliance, formerly Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES : Effective Date: November 8, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristen Johnson or Brooke Kennedy, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4793 or (202) 482–3818, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : Background On May 1, 2013, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on aluminum extrusions from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) for the period January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2012. 1 On May 31, 2013, we received from Electrolux North America, Inc., Electrolux Home Products, Inc., and Electrolux Major Appliances (collectively, Electrolux), a domestic interested party, a request that the Department conduct an administrative review of Hong Kong Gree Electric Appliances Sales Limited (Hong Kong Gree). 2 On June 28, 2013, the Department published a notice of initiation of administrative review with respect to 153 companies. 3 On August 27, 2013, Hong Kong Gree notified the Department that it had no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the period of review (POR). 4 Intent To Rescind the 2012 Administrative Review, in Part Hong Kong Gree submitted a letter to the Department certifying that it had no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. Electrolux did not comment on Hong Kong Gree’s claim of no shipments. Previously, on August 2, 2013, we released the results of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data query, which showed that Hong Kong Gree had no suspended entries of subject merchandise during the POR. 5 After receipt of Hong Kong Gree’s no shipment certification, we sent a ‘‘no shipments inquiry’’ message to CBP, which posted the message on September 20, 2013.6 CPB did not respond to the Department within the customary ten days regarding the inquiry into whether there were any suspended entries from Hong Kong Gree during the POR. Based on our analysis of all the information on the record, we preliminarily determine that Hong Kong Gree had no shipments or entries of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), and consistent with our practice,7 we preliminarily determine to rescind the review for Hong Kong Gree. We will continue this administrative review with respect to those companies for which a review was requested and not subsequently withdrawn.8 Public Comment The Department is setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding the Department’s intent to rescind the administrative review for Hong Kong Gree. Interested parties should submit such comments within 20 calendar days of the publication of this notice. All comments are to be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS) available to registered users at http:// iaaccess.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit, Room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building, and must also be served on interested parties.9 An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by IA ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on the day it is due. 10 The period for public comment is intended to provide the Department with ample opportunity to consider all issues prior to the issuance any the notice of rescission of the VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Nov 07, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1 TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── === Final Results - CVD - India === 47276 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2013 / Notices 3 See id. 4 See CVD Order, 76 FR at 11759. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case briefs are addressed in the Final Decision Memorandum. 3 A list of the issues raised is attached to this notice as an Appendix. The Final Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Import Administration’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is available to registered users at http://iaaccess.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Final Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the internet at http://www.trade.gov/ ia/. The signed Final Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Final Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Final Results of Review In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we calculated a subsidy rate for the mandatory respondent, Yida Group. Producer/exporter Net subsidy rate (percent) Shanxi Yida Special Steel Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. and its cross-owned affiliates Shanxi Yida Special Steel Group Co., Ltd. and Shanxi Yida Petroleum Equipment Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (collectively, Yida Group) .... 5.07 Assessment Rates The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 15 days after the date of publication of these final results, to liquidate shipments of subject merchandise by Yida Group entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after March 3, 2011, through December 31, 2011. Cash Deposit Instructions The Department also intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated CVDs in the amount shown above on shipments of subject merchandise by Yida Group entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this review. For all non-reviewed companies, we will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits at the most recent company-specific or country-wide rate applicable to the company. Accordingly, the cash deposit rates that will be applied to companies covered by this order, but not examined in this review, are those established in the most recently completed segment of the proceeding for each company.4 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Administrative Protective Order This notice 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 written notification of 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)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended. Dated: July 29, 2013. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary+ for Import Administration. Appendix—Issues in Decision Memorandum Comment 1: Double Counting Comment 2: Policy Lending to Drill Pipe Producers Comment 3: Calculation of Benefit under Policy Lending to Drill Pipe Producers Comment 4: Electricity Benchmark Rates Comment 5: Calculation of Benefit under Provision of Electricity for Less Than Adequate Remuneration Comment 6: Sales Denominator for Shanxi Yida Special Steel Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. [FR Doc. 2013–18856 Filed 8–2–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–533–825] Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film, Sheet, and Strip From India: Final Results of the Expedited Second Sunset Review of the Countervailing Duty Order AGENCY : Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES : Effective Date: August 5, 2013. SUMMARY : On April 2, 2013, the Department of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) initiated the second sunset review of the countervailing duty order on polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film, sheet, and strip (‘‘PET film’’) from India. The Department finds that revocation of this countervailing duty order (CVD’’) would be likely to lead to the continuation or recurrence of net countervailable subsidies at the rates in the ‘‘Final Results of Review’’ section of this notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Carey or Dana Mermelstein, 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 or 482–1391, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : Background The CVD order on PET film from India was published on July 1, 2002. See Notice of Countervailing Duty Order: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India, 67 FR 44179 (July 1, 2002). On April 2, 2012, the Department initiated the second sunset review of the order, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews, 78 FR 19647 (April 2, 2013). The Department received notices of intent to participate from DuPont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc., and SKC, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘domestic interested parties’’) within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). The Department received an adequate substantive response to the notice of initiation from the domestic interested parties within the 30-day deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). The Department received no substantive responses from the Government of India (‘‘GOI’’) and respondent interested parties. The regulations provide, at 19 CFR 351.218 (e)(1)(ii)(A), that the Department will normally conclude that respondent interested parties have provided adequate response to a notice of initiation where it receives complete substantive responses from respondent interested parties accounting on average for more than 50 percent, on a volume basis (or a value basis, if appropriate), of the total exports of the subject merchandise to the United States over the five calendar years preceding the year of publication of the notice of initiation. Moreover, in a sunset review of a CVD order, the Department will VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:07 Aug 02, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM 05AUN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 47277Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2013 / Notices normally conduct a full review only if it receives adequate responses from domestic and respondent interested parties and a complete substantive response from the foreign government. See 19 CFR 351.218(e)(2) and 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(B) and (C). Because the Department received no responses from the GOI and respondent interested parties, the Department is conducting an expedited (120-day) sunset review of the CVD order on PET film from India pursuant to 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). Scope of the Order The products covered by the order are all gauges of raw, pretreated, or primed PET film, whether extruded or coextruded. Excluded are metalized films and other finished films that have had at least one of their surfaces modified by the application of a performance-enhancing resinous or inorganic layer of more than 0.00001 inches thick. Imports of PET film are classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) under item number 3920.62.00.90. Effective July 1, 2003, the HTSUS subheading 3920.62.00.00 was divided into 3920.62.00.10 (metallized PET film) and 3920.62.00.90 (non- metallized PET film). Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written product description remains dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum (‘‘Decision Memorandum’’) from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated concurrently with this notice, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The issues discussed in the Decision Memorandum include the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of a countervailable subsidy and the net countervailable subsidy likely to prevail if the order was revoked. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file electronically via Import Administration’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (‘‘IA ACCESS’’). IA ACCESS is available to registered users at http:// iaaccess.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit in room 7046 of the main Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ ia/. The signed Decision Memorandum and electronic versions of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Final Results of Review Pursuant to sections 752(b)(1) and (3) of the Act, the Department determines that revocation of the CVD order on PET film from India would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of countervailable subsidies at the following net countervailable subsidy rates: Manufacturers/exporters/producers Net countervailable subsidy (percent) Ester Industries Ltd .................................................................................. 27.37% ad valorem Garware Polyester Ltd .............................................................................. 33.42% ad valorem Polyplex Corporation Ltd .......................................................................... 22.69% ad valorem All others ................................................................................................... 29.34% ad valorem This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective orders is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction. The Department is issuing and publishing these final results and this notice in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(b), and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: July 30, 2013. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. 2013–18834 Filed 8–2–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [Docket No. 121025586–3654–01] RIN 0648–XC326 Listing Endangered or Threatened Species: 12-Month Finding on a Petition To Delist the Southern Resident Killer Whale AGENCY : National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION : Notice of 12-month petition finding. SUMMARY : We, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), are issuing a 12-month finding on a petition to delist the Southern Resident killer whale (Orcinus orca) Distinct Population Segment (DPS) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). We listed the Southern Resident killer whale DPS as endangered under the ESA in 2005. We accepted the petition to delist the Southern Resident killer whale DPS on November 27, 2012, initiating a public comment period and a status review. Based on our review of the petition, public comments, and the best available scientific information, we find that delisting the Southern Resident killer whale DPS is not warranted. DATES : The finding announced in this document was made on August 5, 2013. ADDRESSES : This finding and supporting information are available on our Web page at: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/ protected_species/marine_mammals/ killer_whale/delist_petition.html. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynne Barre, NMFS Northwest Region, (206) 526–4745; Marta Nammack, NMFS Office of Protected Resources, (301) 427–8469. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : ESA Statutory Provisions and Policy Considerations On August 2, 2012, we received a petition submitted by the Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of the Center for Environmental Science Accuracy and Reliability, Empresas Del Bosque, and Coburn Ranch to delist the endangered Southern Resident killer whale DPS under the ESA. Copies of the petition VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:07 Aug 02, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM 05AUN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES