Notice of Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation: Lightweight Thermal Paper from the People's Republic of China, 62209-62212 [E7-21616]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 212 / Friday, November 2, 2007 / Notices
and must suspend liquidation of entries
pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision.
The CIT’s decision in this case on July
6, 2007, constitutes a decision of the
court that is not in harmony with the
ITC Final Determination. This notice is
published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken.
Accordingly, the Department will
suspend liquidation of subject
merchandise entered after the effective
date of this notice pending a final and
conclusive court decision.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with section 516A(c)(1) of
the Act.
Dated: October 26, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–21617 Filed 11–1–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–427–820]
Notice of Extension of Time Limit for
Preliminary Results in Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review: Stainless
Steel Bar From France
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 2, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Goldberger at (202) 482–4136,
Import Administration, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 2, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20230.
AGENCY:
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Extension Of Time Limit For
Preliminary Results
15:58 Nov 01, 2007
Jkt 214001
Dated: October 29, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretaryfor Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–21625 Filed 11–1–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
On April 27, 2007, the Department of
Commerce (the Department) published a
notice of initiation of administrative
reviews of antidumping duty orders that
included the antidumping duty order on
stainless steel bar from France, covering
the period March 1, 2006, through
February 28, 2007. See Initiation of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews, 72 FR 20986
(April 27, 2007). Pursuant to section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the Department shall
make a preliminary determination in an
administrative review of an
antidumping duty order within 245
days after the last day of the anniversary
month of the date of publication of the
order. The Act further provides,
however, that the Department may
VerDate Aug<31>2005
extend that 245-day period to up to 365
days if it determines it is not practicable
to complete the review within the
foregoing time period.
The preliminary results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on stainless
steel bar from France are currently
scheduled to be completed on December
1, 2007. However, the Department finds
that it is not practicable to complete the
preliminary results in this
administrative review within this time
limit because additional time is needed
to fully analyze the sales and cost–ofproduction questionnaire responses and
supplemental questionnaire responses
submitted by the respondent, and to
conduct verifications of these responses.
Therefore, in accordance with section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Department
is extending the time limit for
completion of the preliminary results of
this review by 120 days to March 30,
2008. Because March 30, 2008, falls on
a non–business day, the Department
will complete the preliminary results of
this review no later than March 31,
2008, which is the next business day
after the 120-day extension period. The
final results continue to be due 120 days
after the publication of the preliminary
results.
This notice is published pursuant to
sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i)(1) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2).
[C–570–921]
Notice of Initiation of Countervailing
Duty Investigation: Lightweight
Thermal Paper from the People’s
Republic of China
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 2, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Scott Holland or Nancy Decker, AD/
CVD Operations, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–1279 and (202)
482–0196, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
62209
The Petition
On September 19, 2007, the
Department of Commerce (the
‘‘Department’’) received a petition filed
in proper form by Appleton Papers Inc.
(the ‘‘petitioner’’) a domestic producer
of lightweight thermal paper (‘‘LWTP’’).
In response to the Department’s
requests, the petitioner provided timely
information supplementing the petition
on September 28, October 2, and
October 23, 2007.
In accordance with section 702(b)(1)
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(‘‘the Act’’), the petitioner alleges that
manufacturers, producers, or exporters
of LWTP in the People’s Republic of
China ( the ‘‘PRC’’), receive
countervailable subsidies within the
meaning of section 701 of the Act and
that such imports are materially
injuring, or threatening material injury
to, an industry in the United States.
The Department finds that the
petitioner filed the petition on behalf of
the domestic industry because it is an
interested party as defined in section
771(9)(C) of the Act and the petitioner
has demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to the
countervailing duty investigation (see
‘‘Determination of Industry Support for
the Petition’’ section below).
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation is January
1, 2006, through December 31, 2006.
Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by each of
this investigation includes certain
lightweight thermal paper, which is
thermal paper with a basis weight of 70
grams per square meter (‘‘g/m2’’) (with
a tolerance of ± 4.0 g/m2) or less;
irrespective of dimensions;1 with or
without a base coat2 on one or both
sides; with thermal active coating(s)3 on
one or both sides that is a mixture of the
dye and the developer that react and
form an image when heat is applied;
with or without a top coat;4 and without
1 LWTP is typically produced in jumbo rolls that
are slit to the specifications of the converting
equipment and then converted into finished slit
rolls. Both jumbo rolls and converted rolls (as well
as LWTP in any other forms, presentations, or
dimensions) are covered by the scope of these
investigations.
2 A base coat, when applied, is typically made of
clay and/or latex and like materials and is intended
to cover the rough surface of the paper substrate
and to provide insulating value.
3 A thermal active coating is typically made of
sensitizer, dye, and co-reactant.
4 A top coat, when applied, is typically made of
polyvinyl acetone, polyvinyl alcohol, and/or like
materials and is intended to provide environmental
protection, an improved surface for press printing,
and/or wear protection for the thermal print head.
E:\FR\FM\02NON1.SGM
02NON1
62210
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 212 / Friday, November 2, 2007 / Notices
an adhesive backing. Certain lightweight
thermal paper is typically (but not
exclusively) used in point–of-sale
applications such as ATM receipts,
credit card receipts, gas pump receipts,
and retail store receipts. The
merchandise subject to these
investigations may be classified in the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) under
subheadings 4811.90.8040 and
4811.90.9090.5 Although HTSUS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the scope of this
investigation is dispositive.
Comments on Scope of Investigation
During our review of the petition, we
discussed the scope with the petitioner
to ensure that it is an accurate reflection
of the products for which the domestic
industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as
discussed in the preamble to the
regulations (Antidumping Duties;
Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR
27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)), we are
setting aside a period for interested
parties to raise issues regarding product
coverage. The Department encourages
all interested parties to submit such
comments within 20 calendar days of
the publication of this notice.
Comments should be addressed to
Import Administration’s Central
Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’), Room 1870, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street
and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230. The period of
scope consultations is intended to
provide the Department with ample
opportunity to consider all comments
and to consult with parties prior to the
issuance of the preliminary
determinations.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Consultations
Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of
the Act, the Department invited
representatives of the Government of the
PRC for consultations with respect to
the countervailing duty petition. The
Department held these consultations in
Beijing, China, with representatives of
the Government of the PRC on
September 28, 2007. See the
Memorandum to The File, entitled,
5 HTSUS subheading 4811.90.8000 was a
classification used for LWTP until January 1, 2007.
Effective that date, subheading 4811.90.8000 was
replaced with 4811.90.8020 (for gift wrap, a nonsubject product) and 4811.90.8040 (for ‘‘other,’’
including LWTP). HTSUS subheading 4811.90.9000
was a classification for LWTP until July 1, 2005.
Effective that date, subheading 4811.90.9000 was
replaced with 4811.90.9010 (for tissue paper, a nonsubject product) and 4811.90.9090 (for ‘‘other,’’
including LWTP). Petitioner indicated that, from
time to time, LWTP also may have been entered
under HTSUS subheading 3703.90, HTSUS heading
4805, and perhaps other subheadings of the HTSUS.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:58 Nov 01, 2007
Jkt 214001
‘‘Consultations with Officials from the
Government of the People’s Republic of
China’’ (September 28, 2007) on file in
the CRU of the Department of
Commerce, Room B–099.
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions
Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires
that a petition be filed by or on behalf
of the domestic industry. Section
702(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a
petition meets this requirement if the
domestic producers or workers who
support the petition account for: (i) at
least 25 percent of the total production
of the domestic like product; and (ii)
more than 50 percent of the production
of the domestic like product produced
by that portion of the industry
expressing support for, or opposition to,
the petition. Moreover, section
702(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if
the petition does not establish support
of domestic producers or workers
accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like
product, the Department shall: (i) poll
the industry or rely on other
information in order to determine if
there is support for the petition, as
required by subparagraph (A), or (ii)
determine industry support using a
statistically valid sampling method.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines
the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a
whole of a domestic like product. Thus,
to determine whether a petition has the
requisite industry support, the statute
directs the Department to look to
producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The International
Trade Commission (ITC), which is
responsible for determining whether
‘‘the domestic industry’’ has been
injured, must also determine what
constitutes a domestic like product in
order to define the industry. While both
the Department and the ITC must apply
the same statutory definition regarding
the domestic like product (section
771(10) of the Act), they do so for
different purposes and pursuant to a
separate and distinct authority. In
addition, the Department’s
determination is subject to limitations of
time and information. Although this
may result in different definitions of the
like product, such differences do not
render the decision of either agency
contrary to law. See USEC, Inc. v.
United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT
2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd. v.
United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644
(CIT 1988), aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir.
1989), cert. denied 492 U.S. 919 (1989).
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the
domestic like product as ‘‘a product
which is like, or in the absence of like,
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
most similar in characteristics and uses
with, the article subject to an
investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the
reference point from which the
domestic like product analysis begins is
‘‘the article subject to an investigation,’’
(i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to
be investigated, which normally will be
the scope as defined in the petition).
With regard to the domestic like
product, the petitioner does not offer a
definition of domestic like product
distinct from the scope of the
investigation. Based on our analysis of
the information submitted on the
record, we have determined that
lightweight thermal paper, both jumbo
rolls and converted slit rolls, constitute
a single domestic like product, which is
defined further in the ‘‘Scope of the
Investigation’’ section above, and we
have analyzed industry support in terms
of that domestic like product. For a
discussion of the domestic like product
analysis in this case, see the
Countervailing Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Lightweight
Thermal Paper from the People’s
Republic of China (PRC Initiation
Checklist) at Attachment II, on file in
the Central Records Unit, Room B–099
of the main Department of Commerce
building.
On October 9, 2007, the Department
extended the initiation deadline by 20
days to poll the domestic industry in
accordance with section 702(c)(4)D) of
the Act, because it was ‘‘not clear from
the petitions whether the industry
support criteria have been met...’’ See
Notice of Extension of the Deadline for
Determining the Adequacy of the
Antidumping Duty Petitions:
Lightweight Thermal Paper from
Germany, the Republic of Korea, and
the People’s Republic of China; and the
Countervailing Duty Petition:
Lightweight Thermal Paper from the
People’s Republic of China, 72 FR 58639
(October 16, 2007).
On October 12 and 15, 2007, we
issued polling questionnaires to all
known producers of jumbo rolls and
converted slit rolls of lightweight
thermal paper identified in the
petitions, submissions from other
interested parties, and by the ITC. The
questionnaires are on file in the CRU in
room B–099 of the main Department of
Commerce building. We requested that
each company complete the polling
questionnaire, certify its response, and
fax its response to the Department by
the due date. For a detailed discussion
of the responses received see PRC
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
Our analysis of the data indicates that
the domestic producers of lightweight
thermal paper who support the petitions
E:\FR\FM\02NON1.SGM
02NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 212 / Friday, November 2, 2007 / Notices
account for at least 25 percent of the
total production of the domestic like
product and more than 50 percent of the
production (by quantity and U.S. dollar
sales value) of the domestic like product
produced by that portion of the industry
expressing support for, or opposition to,
the petition. See PRC Initiation
Checklist at Attachment II. Accordingly,
the Department determines that the
industry support requirements of
section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act have
been met. Therefore, the Department
determines that the petitioner filed the
petition on behalf of the domestic
industry because it is an interested party
as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the
Act and it has demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the
countervailing duty investigation that it
is requesting the Department initiate.
See PRC Initiation Checklist at
Attachment II.
Injury Test
Because the PRC, is a ‘‘Subsidies
Agreement Country’’ within the
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act,
section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to
this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC
must determine whether imports of the
subject merchandise from the PRC
materially injure, or threaten material
injury to, a U.S. industry.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges that the U.S.
industry producing the domestic like
product is being materially injured, or is
threatened with material injury, by
reason of the individual and cumulated
subsidized imports of the subject
merchandise. The petitioner contends
that the industry’s injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share,
increased inventories, lost sales,
reduced production, reduced capacity
and capacity utilization rate, reduced
shipments, underselling and price
depression or suppression, lost revenue,
and a decline in financial performance.
We have assessed the allegations and
supporting evidence regarding material
injury and causation, and we have
determined that these allegations are
properly supported by adequate
evidence and meet the statutory
requirements for initiation. See PRC
Initiation Checklist at Attachment III
(Injury).
Initiation of Countervailing Duty
Investigation
Section 702(b) of the Act requires the
Department to initiate a countervailing
duty proceeding whenever an interested
party files a petition on behalf of an
industry that; (1) alleges the elements
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:58 Nov 01, 2007
Jkt 214001
necessary for an imposition of a duty
under section 701(a) of the Act; and (2)
is accompanied by information
reasonably available to the petitioner(s)
supporting the allegations. The
Department has examined the
countervailing duty petition on LWTP
from the PRC and finds that it complies
with the requirements of section 702(b)
of the Act. Therefore, in accordance
with section 702(b) of the Act, we are
initiating a countervailing duty
investigation to determine whether
manufacturers, producers, or exporters
of LWTP in the PRC receive
countervailable subsidies. For a
discussion of evidence supporting our
initiation determination, see PRC
Initiation Checklist.
We are including in our investigation
the following programs alleged in the
petition to have provided
countervailable subsidies to producers
and exporters of the subject
merchandise in the PRC:
Preferential Lending
1. Government Policy Lending
Program
2. Loans provided pursuant to the
Northeast Revitalization Program
3. Loan guarantees from government–
owned and controlled banks
Income Tax Programs
4. ‘‘Two Free, Three Half’’ program
5. Income tax exemption program for
export–oriented foreign investment
enterprises (‘‘FIEs’’)
6. Corporate income tax refund
program for reinvestment of FIE
profits in export–oriented
enterprises
7. Local income tax exemption and
reduction program for ‘‘productive’’
FIEs
8. Reduced income tax rates for FIEs
based on location
9. Reduced income tax rate for
knowledge or technology intensive
FIEs
10. Reduced income tax rate for high
or new technology FIEs
11. Preferential tax policies for
research and development at FIEs
12. Income tax credits on purchases of
domestically produced equipment
by domestically–owned companies
Indirect Tax Programs and Import
Tariff Program
13. Export payments characterized as
VAT rebates
14. VAT and tariff exemptions on
imported equipment
Grant Programs
15. State Key Technology Renovation
Program Fund
Provincial Subsidy Programs
16. Funds for ‘‘outward expansion’’ of
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
62211
industries in Guangdong Province
17. Export interest subsidy funds for
enterprises located in Shenzhen
City or Zhejiang Province
18. Loans and interest subsidies
pursuant to the Liaoning Province’s
five-year framework
Currency Programs
19. Currency retention
For further information explaining why
the Department is investigating these
programs, see China Initiation Checklist.
We are not including in our
investigation the following programs
alleged to benefit producers and
exporters of the subject merchandise in
the PRC:
A. Currency manipulation
Petitioner alleges that the PRC
government’s policy of maintaining an
undervalued RMB is an export subsidy
that provides either a direct transfer of
funds or the provision of a good or
service at less than adequate
remuneration. Petitioner has not
sufficiently alleged the elements
necessary for the imposition of a
countervailing duty and did not support
the allegation with reasonably available
information. Therefore, we do not plan
to investigate the currency manipulation
program.
B. Provision Of Goods Or Services For
Less Than Adequate Remuneration
1. Electricity and natural gas
2. Water
3. Papermaking chemicals
4. Land
Respondent Selection
For this investigation, the Department
expects to select respondents based on
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
data for U.S. imports during the POI. We
intend to make our decision regarding
respondent selection within 20 days of
publication of this Federal Register
notice. The Department invites
comments regarding the CBP data and
respondent selection within seven
calendar days of publication of this
Federal Register notice.
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section
702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, a copy of the
public version of the petition has been
provided to the Government of the PRC.
As soon as and to the extent practicable,
we will attempt to provide a copy of the
public version of the petition to each
exporter named in the petition,
consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We have notified the ITC of our
initiation, as required by section 702(d)
of the Act.
E:\FR\FM\02NON1.SGM
02NON1
62212
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 212 / Friday, November 2, 2007 / Notices
Preliminary Determination by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine,
within 25 days after the date on which
it receives notice of the initiation,
whether there is a reasonable indication
that imports of subsidized LWTP from
the PRC are causing material injury, or
threatening to cause material injury, to
a U.S. industry. See section 703(a)(2) of
the Act. A negative ITC determination
will result in the investigation being
terminated; otherwise, the investigation
will proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: October 29, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–21616 Filed 11–1–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Institute of Standards and
Technology
[Docket No.: 070911510–7512–01]
Announcing Request for Candidate
Algorithm Nominations for a New
Cryptographic Hash Algorithm
(SHA–3) Family
National Institute of Standards
and Technology, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice and request for
nominations for candidate hash
algorithms.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice solicits
nominations from any interested party
for candidate algorithms to be
considered for SHA–3, and specifies
how to submit a nomination package. It
presents the nomination requirements
and the minimum acceptability
requirements of a ‘‘complete and
proper’’ candidate algorithm
submission. The evaluation criteria that
will be used to appraise the candidate
algorithms are also described.
DATES: Candidate algorithm nomination
packages must be received by October
31, 2008. Further details are available in
section 2.
ADDRESSES: Candidate algorithm
submission packages should be sent to:
Ms. Shu-jen Chang, Information
Technology Laboratory, Attention: Hash
Algorithm Submissions, 100 Bureau
Drive—Stop 8930, National Institute of
Standards and Technology,
Gaithersburg, MD 20899–8930.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
general information, send e-mail to
hash-function@nist.gov. For questions
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:58 Nov 01, 2007
Jkt 214001
related to a specific submission package,
contact Ms. Shu-jen Chang, National
Institute of Standards and Technology,
100 Bureau Drive—Stop 8930,
Gaithersburg, MD 20899–8930;
telephone: 301–975–2940 or via fax at
301–975–8670, e-mail: shujen.chang@nist.gov.
This
notice contains the following sections:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Background
2. Requirements for Candidate Algorithm
Submission Packages
2.A Cover Sheet
2.B Algorithm Specifications and
Supporting Documentation
2.C Optical Media
2.D Intellectual Property Statements/
Agreements/Disclosures
2.E General Submission Requirements
2.F Technical Contacts and Additional
Information
3. Minimum Acceptability Requirements
4. Evaluation Criteria
4.A Security
4.B Cost
4.C Algorithm and Implementation
Characteristics
5. Initial Planning for the First SHA–3
Candidate Conference
6. Plans for the Candidate Evaluation Process
6.A Overview
6.B Round 1 Technical Evaluation
6.C Round 2 Technical Evaluation
7. Miscellaneous
Authority: This work is being initiated
pursuant to NIST’s responsibilities under the
Federal Information Security Management
Act (FISMA) of 2002, Public Law 107–347.
1. Background
Modern, collision resistant hash
functions were designed to create small,
fixed size message digests so that a
digest could act as a proxy for a possibly
very large variable length message in a
digital signature algorithm, such as RSA
or DSA. These hash functions have
since been widely used for many other
‘‘ancillary’’ applications, including
hash-based message authentication
codes, pseudo random number
generators, and key derivation
functions.
A series of related hash functions
have been developed, such as MD4,
MD5, SHA–0, SHA–1 and the SHA–2
family, (which includes 224, 256, 384
and 512-bit variants); all of these follow
the Merkle-Damgard construct. NIST
began the standardization of the SHA
hash functions in 1993, with a
specification of SHA–0 in the Federal
Information Processing Standards
Publication (FIPS PUBS) 180, the Secure
Hash Standard; subsequent revisions of
the FIPS have replaced SHA–0 with
SHA–1 and added the SHA–2 family in
FIPS 180–1 and FIPS 180–2,
respectively.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Recently, cryptanalysts have found
collisions on the MD4, MD5, and SHA–
0 algorithms; moreover, a method for
finding SHA–1 collisions with less than
the expected amount of work has been
published, although at this time SHA–
1 collisions have not yet been
demonstrated. Although there is no
specific reason to believe that a practical
attack on any of the SHA–2 family of
hash functions is imminent, a successful
collision attack on an algorithm in the
SHA–2 family could have catastrophic
effects for digital signatures.
NIST has decided that it is prudent to
develop a new hash algorithm to
augment and revise FIPS 180–2. The
new hash algorithm will be referred to
as ‘‘SHA–3’’, and will be developed
through a public competition, much like
the development of the Advanced
Encryption Standard (AES). NIST
intends that SHA–3 will specify an
unclassified, publicly disclosed
algorithm(s), which is available
worldwide without royalties or other
intellectual property restrictions, and is
capable of protecting sensitive
information for decades. Following the
close of the submission period, NIST
intends to make all ‘‘complete and
proper’’ (as defined in section 3)
submissions publicly available for
review and comment.
NIST does not currently plan to
withdraw SHA–2 or remove it from the
revised Secure Hash Standard; however,
it is intended that SHA–3 can be
directly substituted for SHA–2 in
current applications, and will
significantly improve the robustness of
NIST’s overall hash algorithm toolkit.
Therefore, the submitted algorithms for
SHA–3 must provide message digests of
224, 256, 384 and 512 bits to allow
substitution for the SHA–2 family. The
160-bit hash value produced by SHA–1
is becoming too small to use for digital
signatures, therefore, a 160-bit
replacement hash algorithm is not
contemplated.
Many cryptographic applications that
are currently specified in FIPS and NIST
Special Publications require the use of
a NIST-approved hash algorithm. These
publications include:
• FIPS 186–2, Digital Signature
Standard;
• FIPS 198, The Keyed-Hash Message
Authentication Code (HMAC);
• SP 800–56A, Recommendation for
Pair-Wise Key Establishment Schemes
Using Discrete Logarithm Cryptography;
and
• SP 800–90, Recommendation for
Random Number Generation Using
Deterministic Random Bit Generators
(DRBGs).
E:\FR\FM\02NON1.SGM
02NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 212 (Friday, November 2, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62209-62212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-21616]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-570-921]
Notice of Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation:
Lightweight Thermal Paper from the People's Republic of China
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 2, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Holland or Nancy Decker, AD/CVD
Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1279 and (202) 482-0196,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On September 19, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the
``Department'') received a petition filed in proper form by Appleton
Papers Inc. (the ``petitioner'') a domestic producer of lightweight
thermal paper (``LWTP''). In response to the Department's requests, the
petitioner provided timely information supplementing the petition on
September 28, October 2, and October 23, 2007.
In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (``the Act''), the petitioner alleges that manufacturers,
producers, or exporters of LWTP in the People's Republic of China ( the
``PRC''), receive countervailable subsidies within the meaning of
section 701 of the Act and that such imports are materially injuring,
or threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States.
The Department finds that the petitioner filed the petition on
behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and the petitioner has
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the
countervailing duty investigation (see ``Determination of Industry
Support for the Petition'' section below).
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation is January 1, 2006, through December
31, 2006.
Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by each of this investigation includes
certain lightweight thermal paper, which is thermal paper with a basis
weight of 70 grams per square meter (``g/m\2\'') (with a tolerance of
4.0 g/m\2\) or less; irrespective of dimensions;\1\ with
or without a base coat\2\ on one or both sides; with thermal active
coating(s)\3\ on one or both sides that is a mixture of the dye and the
developer that react and form an image when heat is applied; with or
without a top coat;\4\ and without
[[Page 62210]]
an adhesive backing. Certain lightweight thermal paper is typically
(but not exclusively) used in point-of-sale applications such as ATM
receipts, credit card receipts, gas pump receipts, and retail store
receipts. The merchandise subject to these investigations may be
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(``HTSUS'') under subheadings 4811.90.8040 and 4811.90.9090.\5\
Although HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is
dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ LWTP is typically produced in jumbo rolls that are slit to
the specifications of the converting equipment and then converted
into finished slit rolls. Both jumbo rolls and converted rolls (as
well as LWTP in any other forms, presentations, or dimensions) are
covered by the scope of these investigations.
\2\ A base coat, when applied, is typically made of clay and/or
latex and like materials and is intended to cover the rough surface
of the paper substrate and to provide insulating value.
\3\ A thermal active coating is typically made of sensitizer,
dye, and co-reactant.
\4\ A top coat, when applied, is typically made of polyvinyl
acetone, polyvinyl alcohol, and/or like materials and is intended to
provide environmental protection, an improved surface for press
printing, and/or wear protection for the thermal print head.
\5\ HTSUS subheading 4811.90.8000 was a classification used for
LWTP until January 1, 2007. Effective that date, subheading
4811.90.8000 was replaced with 4811.90.8020 (for gift wrap, a non-
subject product) and 4811.90.8040 (for ``other,'' including LWTP).
HTSUS subheading 4811.90.9000 was a classification for LWTP until
July 1, 2005. Effective that date, subheading 4811.90.9000 was
replaced with 4811.90.9010 (for tissue paper, a non-subject product)
and 4811.90.9090 (for ``other,'' including LWTP). Petitioner
indicated that, from time to time, LWTP also may have been entered
under HTSUS subheading 3703.90, HTSUS heading 4805, and perhaps
other subheadings of the HTSUS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on Scope of Investigation
During our review of the petition, we discussed the scope with the
petitioner to ensure that it is an accurate reflection of the products
for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as
discussed in the preamble to the regulations (Antidumping Duties;
Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)),
we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues
regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all interested
parties to submit such comments within 20 calendar days of the
publication of this notice. Comments should be addressed to Import
Administration's Central Records Unit (``CRU''), Room 1870, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230. The period of scope consultations is intended to
provide the Department with ample opportunity to consider all comments
and to consult with parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary
determinations.
Consultations
Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, the Department
invited representatives of the Government of the PRC for consultations
with respect to the countervailing duty petition. The Department held
these consultations in Beijing, China, with representatives of the
Government of the PRC on September 28, 2007. See the Memorandum to The
File, entitled, ``Consultations with Officials from the Government of
the People's Republic of China'' (September 28, 2007) on file in the
CRU of the Department of Commerce, Room B-099.
Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions
Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed by
or on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department
shall: (i) poll the industry or rely on other information in order to
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by
subparagraph (A), or (ii) determine industry support using a
statistically valid sampling method.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which
is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has
been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like
product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and
the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic
like product (section 771(10) of the Act), they do so for different
purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In
addition, the Department's determination is subject to limitations of
time and information. Although this may result in different definitions
of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of
either agency contrary to law. See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F.
Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd. v. United
States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir.
1989), cert. denied 492 U.S. 919 (1989).
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an
investigation,'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the
petition).
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not
offer a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of
the investigation. Based on our analysis of the information submitted
on the record, we have determined that lightweight thermal paper, both
jumbo rolls and converted slit rolls, constitute a single domestic like
product, which is defined further in the ``Scope of the Investigation''
section above, and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that
domestic like product. For a discussion of the domestic like product
analysis in this case, see the Countervailing Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Lightweight Thermal Paper from the People's
Republic of China (PRC Initiation Checklist) at Attachment II, on file
in the Central Records Unit, Room B-099 of the main Department of
Commerce building.
On October 9, 2007, the Department extended the initiation deadline
by 20 days to poll the domestic industry in accordance with section
702(c)(4)D) of the Act, because it was ``not clear from the petitions
whether the industry support criteria have been met...'' See Notice of
Extension of the Deadline for Determining the Adequacy of the
Antidumping Duty Petitions: Lightweight Thermal Paper from Germany, the
Republic of Korea, and the People's Republic of China; and the
Countervailing Duty Petition: Lightweight Thermal Paper from the
People's Republic of China, 72 FR 58639 (October 16, 2007).
On October 12 and 15, 2007, we issued polling questionnaires to all
known producers of jumbo rolls and converted slit rolls of lightweight
thermal paper identified in the petitions, submissions from other
interested parties, and by the ITC. The questionnaires are on file in
the CRU in room B-099 of the main Department of Commerce building. We
requested that each company complete the polling questionnaire, certify
its response, and fax its response to the Department by the due date.
For a detailed discussion of the responses received see PRC Initiation
Checklist at Attachment II.
Our analysis of the data indicates that the domestic producers of
lightweight thermal paper who support the petitions
[[Page 62211]]
account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic
like product and more than 50 percent of the production (by quantity
and U.S. dollar sales value) of the domestic like product produced by
that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to,
the petition. See PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
Accordingly, the Department determines that the industry support
requirements of section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act have been met.
Therefore, the Department determines that the petitioner filed the
petition on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested
party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the
countervailing duty investigation that it is requesting the Department
initiate. See PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
Injury Test
Because the PRC, is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act
applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine
whether imports of the subject merchandise from the PRC materially
injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened
with material injury, by reason of the individual and cumulated
subsidized imports of the subject merchandise. The petitioner contends
that the industry's injured condition is illustrated by reduced market
share, increased inventories, lost sales, reduced production, reduced
capacity and capacity utilization rate, reduced shipments, underselling
and price depression or suppression, lost revenue, and a decline in
financial performance. We have assessed the allegations and supporting
evidence regarding material injury and causation, and we have
determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate
evidence and meet the statutory requirements for initiation. See PRC
Initiation Checklist at Attachment III (Injury).
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation
Section 702(b) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a
countervailing duty proceeding whenever an interested party files a
petition on behalf of an industry that; (1) alleges the elements
necessary for an imposition of a duty under section 701(a) of the Act;
and (2) is accompanied by information reasonably available to the
petitioner(s) supporting the allegations. The Department has examined
the countervailing duty petition on LWTP from the PRC and finds that it
complies with the requirements of section 702(b) of the Act. Therefore,
in accordance with section 702(b) of the Act, we are initiating a
countervailing duty investigation to determine whether manufacturers,
producers, or exporters of LWTP in the PRC receive countervailable
subsidies. For a discussion of evidence supporting our initiation
determination, see PRC Initiation Checklist.
We are including in our investigation the following programs
alleged in the petition to have provided countervailable subsidies to
producers and exporters of the subject merchandise in the PRC:
Preferential Lending
1. Government Policy Lending Program
2. Loans provided pursuant to the Northeast Revitalization Program
3. Loan guarantees from government-owned and controlled banks
Income Tax Programs
4. ``Two Free, Three Half'' program
5. Income tax exemption program for export-oriented foreign
investment enterprises (``FIEs'')
6. Corporate income tax refund program for reinvestment of FIE
profits in export-oriented enterprises
7. Local income tax exemption and reduction program for
``productive'' FIEs
8. Reduced income tax rates for FIEs based on location
9. Reduced income tax rate for knowledge or technology intensive
FIEs
10. Reduced income tax rate for high or new technology FIEs
11. Preferential tax policies for research and development at FIEs
12. Income tax credits on purchases of domestically produced
equipment by domestically-owned companies
Indirect Tax Programs and Import Tariff Program
13. Export payments characterized as VAT rebates
14. VAT and tariff exemptions on imported equipment
Grant Programs
15. State Key Technology Renovation Program Fund
Provincial Subsidy Programs
16. Funds for ``outward expansion'' of industries in Guangdong
Province
17. Export interest subsidy funds for enterprises located in
Shenzhen City or Zhejiang Province
18. Loans and interest subsidies pursuant to the Liaoning
Province's five-year framework
Currency Programs
19. Currency retention
For further information explaining why the Department is investigating
these programs, see China Initiation Checklist.
We are not including in our investigation the following programs
alleged to benefit producers and exporters of the subject merchandise
in the PRC:
A. Currency manipulation
Petitioner alleges that the PRC government's policy of maintaining
an undervalued RMB is an export subsidy that provides either a direct
transfer of funds or the provision of a good or service at less than
adequate remuneration. Petitioner has not sufficiently alleged the
elements necessary for the imposition of a countervailing duty and did
not support the allegation with reasonably available information.
Therefore, we do not plan to investigate the currency manipulation
program.
B. Provision Of Goods Or Services For Less Than Adequate
Remuneration
1. Electricity and natural gas
2. Water
3. Papermaking chemicals
4. Land
Respondent Selection
For this investigation, the Department expects to select
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection data for U.S.
imports during the POI. We intend to make our decision regarding
respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this Federal
Register notice. The Department invites comments regarding the CBP data
and respondent selection within seven calendar days of publication of
this Federal Register notice.
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, a copy of
the public version of the petition has been provided to the Government
of the PRC. As soon as and to the extent practicable, we will attempt
to provide a copy of the public version of the petition to each
exporter named in the petition, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
702(d) of the Act.
[[Page 62212]]
Preliminary Determination by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 25 days after the date
on which it receives notice of the initiation, whether there is a
reasonable indication that imports of subsidized LWTP from the PRC are
causing material injury, or threatening to cause material injury, to a
U.S. industry. See section 703(a)(2) of the Act. A negative ITC
determination will result in the investigation being terminated;
otherwise, the investigation will proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of
the Act.
Dated: October 29, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-21616 Filed 11-1-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
