Foreign-Trade Zone 84-Houston, Texas; Authorization of Production Activity; Toshiba International Corporation; (Hybrid Electric Vehicle Motors and Generators Production); Houston, Texas, 36523-36524 [2013-14539]

Download as PDF mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 117 / Tuesday, June 18, 2013 / Notices of prepayment for the tenant’s unit if the tenant chooses to stay in-place. Also, in no event may the Rural Development Voucher payment exceed the actual tenant lease rent. The amount of the voucher does not change either over time or if the tenant chooses to move to a more expensive location. 1. f. Mobility and Portability of Rural Development Vouchers. An eligible family that is issued a Rural Development Voucher may elect to use the assistance in the same project or may choose to move to another location. The Rural Development Voucher may be used at the prepaid property or any other rental unit in the United States and its territories that passes Rural Development physical inspection standards, and where the owner will accept a Rural Development Voucher and execute a Form HUD 52641. Tenants and landlords must inform Rural Development if the tenant plans to move during the HAP agreement term, even to a new unit in the same complex. All moves (within a complex or to another complex) require a new obligation, a new inspection and a new HAP agreement. In addition, HUD Section 8 and federally assisted public housing is excluded from the Rural Development Voucher Program because these units are already federally subsidized. Tenants with a Rural Development Voucher would have to give up the Rural Development Voucher to accept the assistance at those properties. The Rural Development Voucher may be used in other properties financed by Rural Development, but it cannot be used in combination with the Rural Development Rental Assistance program. Tenants with a Rural Development Voucher that apply for housing in a Rural Developmentfinanced property must choose between using the voucher or Rental Assistance. If the tenant relinquishes the Rural Development Voucher in favor of Rental Assistance, the tenant is not eligible to receive another Rural Development Voucher. g. Term of Funding and Conditions for Renewal for Rural Development Vouchers. The Rural Development Voucher Program provides voucher assistance for 12 monthly payments. The voucher is issued to the household in the name of the primary tenant, as the voucher holder. The voucher is not transferable from the voucher holder to any other household member except in the case of the voucher holder’s death or involuntary household separation such as the incarceration of the voucher holder or transfer of the voucher holder to an assisted living or nursing home VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:52 Jun 17, 2013 Jkt 229001 facility. Upon receiving documentation of such cases, the voucher may be transferred at the Agency’s discretion to another tenant on the voucher holder’s lease. The voucher is renewable subject to the availability of appropriations to the USDA. In order to renew a voucher, a tenant must return a signed Voucher Obligation Form which will be sent to the tenant within 60–90 days before the current voucher expires. If the voucher holder fails to return the renewal Voucher Obligation Form before the current voucher funding expires, the voucher will be terminated. In order to ensure continued eligibility to use the Rural Development Voucher, at the time they apply for renewal of the voucher, tenants must certify that the current family income does not exceed 80 percent of family median income. Rural Development will advise the tenant of the maximum income level when the renewal Voucher Obligation Form is sent. Renewal requests will have no preference and will be processed as a new application as described in this Notice. III. Non-Discrimination Statement The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, employees, and applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability, sex, gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicable, political beliefs, marital status, familial or parental status, sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program, or protected genetic information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited bases will apply to all programs and/or employment activities.) If you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form (PDF), found online at http:// www.ascr.usda.gov/ complaint_filing_cust.html, or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632–9992 to request the form. You may also write a letter containing all of the information requested in the form. Send your completed complaint form or letter to us by mail at U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250– 9410, by fax (202) 690–7442 or email at program.intake@usda.gov. Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing or have speech disabilities and PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 36523 you wish to file either an EEO or program complaint please contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877–8339 or (800) 845– 6136 (in Spanish). Persons with disabilities, who wish to file a program complaint, please see information above on how to contact us by mail directly or by email. If you require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) please contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD). IV. Paperwork Reduction Act The information collection requirements contained in this document are those of the Housing Choice Voucher Program, which have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520) and assigned OMB control number 2577–0169. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection displays a currently valid OMB control number. Dated: June 11, 2013. ˜ Tammye Trevino, Administrator, Rural Housing Service. [FR Doc. 2013–14397 Filed 6–17–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–XV–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B–17–2013] Foreign-Trade Zone 84—Houston, Texas; Authorization of Production Activity; Toshiba International Corporation; (Hybrid Electric Vehicle Motors and Generators Production); Houston, Texas On February 11, 2013, the Port of Houston Authority, grantee of FTZ 84, submitted a notification of proposed production activity on behalf of Toshiba International Corporation, located in Houston, Texas. The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400) including notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment (78 FR 13857, 03–01– 2013). The FTZ Board has determined that no further review of the activity is warranted at this time. The production activity described in the notification is authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations, including Section 400.14. E:\FR\FM\18JNN1.SGM 18JNN1 36524 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 117 / Tuesday, June 18, 2013 / Notices Dated: June 11, 2013. Elizabeth Whiteman, Acting Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2013–14539 Filed 6–17–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–580–855] Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 2010–2011 Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On December 10, 2012, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof (diamond sawblades) from the Republic of Korea (Korea). The period of review (POR) is November 1, 2010, through October 23, 2011. For the final results, we continue to find that certain companies covered by this review made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value. DATES: As of June 18, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sergio Balbontin or Yasmin Nair, AD/ CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–6478 and (202) 482–3813, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Background On December 10, 2012, the Department published the Preliminary Results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades from Korea.1 On January 16, 2013, we received case briefs with respect to the Preliminary Results from the Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition (Petitioner), Ehwa Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd. (Ehwa), and Shinhan Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd. and SH Trading, Inc. (collectively, Shinhan). On January 23, 2013, we received rebuttal briefs from these same parties. On April 5, 2012, the Petitioner alleged that Hyosung Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd., Western Diamond 1 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2010– 2011, 77 FR 73420 (December 10, 2012) (Preliminary Results). VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:52 Jun 17, 2013 Jkt 229001 Tools Inc., and Hyosung D&P Co., Ltd. (collectively, Hyosung); Ehwa and Shinhan, and their respective Chinese subsidiaries, Weihai Xiangguang Mechanical Industrial Co., Ltd. and Qingdao Shinhan Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd., sold diamond sawblades into the United States bearing false country of origin designations. On March 19, 2013, we issued a postpreliminary memorandum finding that the information submitted by Ehwa and Shinhan is reliable for the final results of the review.2 We allowed parties the opportunity to comment but did not receive comments. We extended the due date for the final results of review to April 30, 2013,3 and then to June 10, 2013.4 We have conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). versions of the Final Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Fraud Allegations Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of the comments received, we changed our calculation methodology for Ehwa’s and Shinhan’s dumping margins. We modified the model-match methodology to ensure only products with the same physical form matched. For Ehwa, we corrected currency conversions for expenses reported by Ehwa, adjusted certain programming language related to Ehwa’s level of trade (LOT), and recalculated Ehwa’s variable cost of manufacturing and production interest expense.6 We continue to find the information Ehwa and Shinhan submitted in this review to be reliable for the final results of review.5 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). Access to IA ACCESS is available to registered users at http:// iaaccess.trade.gov and is available to all parties 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 2 See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, entitled ‘‘Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Orders on Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the Republic of Korea for the 2010–2011 Period: Post-Preliminary Analysis’’ dated March 19, 2013 (Post-Preliminary Analysis Memorandum). 3 See Department Memorandum, ‘‘Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the Republic of Korea and the People’s Republic of China: Extension of Time Limits for the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews’’ dated March 22, 2013. 4 See Department Memorandum, ‘‘Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the Republic of Korea and the People’s Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews’’ dated April 29, 2013. 5 See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, entitled ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results in the Second Antidumping Duty Order Administrative Review of Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the Republic of Korea’’ dated concurrently with this notice (Final Decision Memorandum) at Comment 2. PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Scope of the Order The merchandise subject to the order is diamond sawblades. The diamond sawblades subject to the order are currently classifiable under subheadings 8202 to 8206 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), and may also enter under 6804.21.00. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. A full description of the scope of the order is contained in the Final Decision Memorandum. The written description is dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs are addressed in the Final Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised is attached to this notice as Appendix I. Use of Adverse Facts Available Consistent with the Preliminary Results, we determine that the failure of Hyosung to provide requested information necessary to calculate accurate dumping margins warrants the use of facts otherwise available with an adverse inference. Consequent to the changes from the Preliminary Results identified above, the final margin for Hyosung is 120.90 percent.7 Cost of Production As discussed in the Preliminary Results, we conducted an investigation to determine whether Ehwa and 6 See Final Decision Memorandum, and Department Memoranda, ‘‘Final Results Calculation for Ehwa Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd. in the Second Review of Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the Republic of Korea,’’ and ‘‘Final Results Calculation for Shinhan Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd. in the Second Review of Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the Republic of Korea’’ dated concurrently with this notice for a complete explanation of the changes to the dumping margin calculations. 7 For further discussion, see Department Memorandum, ‘‘Final Adverse Facts Available Rate for Hyosung’’ dated concurrently with this notice. E:\FR\FM\18JNN1.SGM 18JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 117 (Tuesday, June 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36523-36524]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14539]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[B-17-2013]


Foreign-Trade Zone 84--Houston, Texas; Authorization of 
Production Activity; Toshiba International Corporation; (Hybrid 
Electric Vehicle Motors and Generators Production); Houston, Texas

    On February 11, 2013, the Port of Houston Authority, grantee of FTZ 
84, submitted a notification of proposed production activity on behalf 
of Toshiba International Corporation, located in Houston, Texas.
    The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations 
of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400) including notice in the Federal 
Register inviting public comment (78 FR 13857, 03-01-2013). The FTZ 
Board has determined that no further review of the activity is 
warranted at this time. The production activity described in the 
notification is authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's 
regulations, including Section 400.14.


[[Page 36524]]


    Dated: June 11, 2013.
Elizabeth Whiteman,
Acting Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-14539 Filed 6-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P