Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From China, 35568-35569 [2014-14561]

Download as PDF 35568 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 120 / Monday, June 23, 2014 / Notices parties to develop holistic management approaches, monitoring, and research projects that could be conducted to improve the adaptive management decision process, and better vaccines, delivery methods, and diagnostics for reducing the prevalence of brucellosis in bison and elk and transmissions to cattle. The Record of Decision includes a statement of the decision made, synopses of other alternatives considered, the basis for the decision, a description of the environmentally preferable alternative, a finding of no impairment of park resources and values, a list on measures to minimize environmental harm, and an overview of public involvement in the decisionmaking process. Dated: May 19, 2014. Sue E. Masica, Regional Director, Intermountain Region, National Park Service. [FR Doc. 2014–14544 Filed 6–20–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–CB–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 731–TA–1092 (Final)] Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From China United States International Trade Commission. ACTION: Denial of a request to institute a section 751(b) review concerning the Commission’s affirmative determination in investigation No. 731–TA–1092 (Final), Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From China. AGENCY: The Commission hereby gives notice that it has declined to institute an investigation pursuant to section 751(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(b)) (the Act) to review the Commission’s affirmative determination in investigation No. 731–TA–1092 (Final) because it is already conducting a full five-year review of the same order. DATES: Effective Date: June 17, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Corkran (202–205–3057), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearingimpaired 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 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:33 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 232001 accessing its internet server (https:// www.usitc.gov). The public record for this matter may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On May 22, 2006, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) determined that imports of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China and Korea were being sold in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673) (71 FR 29303 and 71 FR 29310, respectively). The Commission initially determined that a U.S. industry was not materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of imports of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China and Korea (71 FR 39128, July 11, 2006). Following an appeal of the negative determinations and on remand from the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), the Commission determined that a U.S. industry was threatened with material injury by reason of subject imports of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China and Korea. On January 13, 2009, the CIT affirmed the Commission’s affirmative determinations on remand. Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, Slip Op. 09–05 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2009). On February 10, 2009, Commerce published notice of the CIT’s decision and suspended liquidation for entries of the subject merchandise after the effective date of the notice until the end of all appellate proceedings (74 FR 6570). On November 4, 2009, Commerce published orders that antidumping duties be imposed on imports of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China and Korea, effective January 23, 2009 (74 FR 57145). Following affirmance of the CIT’s judgment by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and upon conclusion of all appellate proceedings in the action, the Commission published notice of its final determinations in the antidumping investigations of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China and Korea (75 FR 68618, November 8, 2010). Commerce revoked the order on diamonds sawblades from Korea effective as of October 24, 2011 (76 FR 66892, Oct. 28, 2011). On July 11, 2013, the Commission received a request to review its affirmative determination in investigation No. 731–TA–1092 (Final) pursuant to section 751(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(b)). The request, filed by Husqvarna Construction Products North PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 America, Inc. (Husqvarna) of Olathe, Kansas, argued that there were several changes since the issuance of the Commission’s remand determination. Specifically, Husqvarna noted Commerce’s revocation of the antidumping duty order on imports of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from Korea; additional Commerce determinations with respect to Chinese exporter Advanced Technology & Materials Co., Ltd.; the acquisition of certain petitioners by non-U.S. producers of diamond sawblades, as well as changes in those petitioners’ patterns of sourcing diamond sawblades; an alleged reduction in the overlap of competition between subject imports from China and the domestic like product as a result of the preceding changes; and opposition to the continuation of the order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China by a ‘‘significant part of U.S. production.’’ On August 9, 2013, the Commission published a Federal Register notice inviting comments from the public on whether changed circumstances exist sufficient to warrant the institution of changed circumstances reviews (78 FR 48717–48718, Aug. 9, 2013). In response to its Federal Register notice soliciting comments, the Commission received one submission on behalf of the Diamond Sawblades Manufacturing Coalition (DSMC), an ad hoc group of U.S. producers of diamond sawblades and the petitioning coalition in the original antidumping duty investigation, arguing that the Commission should not institute a changed circumstances review investigation. On December 2, 2013, Commerce initiated, and the ITC instituted, fiveyear sunset reviews of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China (78 FR 72061 & 78 FR 72216, Dec. 2, 2013). On May 20, 2014, the Commission determined to conduct a full five-year sunset review of the order. On April 23, 2014, the Commission determined not to conduct a changed circumstances review investigation of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China.1 Given the fact that the Commission was concurrently conducting a five-year review of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China, and was aware of the arguments that supported conducting a full review of the order, the Commission determined 1 Commissioner Aranoff, whose tenure at the Commission ended on April 4, 2014, did not participate in this matter. E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM 23JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 120 / Monday, June 23, 2014 / Notices that conducting a changed circumstances review was unwarranted because it would be duplicative of a full five-year review. See Eveready Battery Co., Inc. v. United States, 77 F. Supp. 2d 1327 (CIT 1999) (finding that a request for a changed circumstances review was rendered moot by the Commission’s institution of a full fiveyear sunset review). Authority: This notice is published pursuant to section 207.45 of the Commission’s rules. By order of the Commission. Issued: June 17, 2014. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2014–14561 Filed 6–20–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION the scheduling of the final phase of the Commission’s investigations 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 January 15, 2014 (79 FR 2693). The hearing was held in Washington, DC, on May 6, 2014, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission completed and filed its determinations in these investigations on June 12, 2014. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 4473 (June 2014), entitled Prestressed Concrete Steel Rail Tie Wire from China and Mexico: Investigation Nos. 731–TA–1207–1208 (Final). [Investigation Nos. 731–TA–1207–1208 (Final)] Prestressed Concrete Steel Rail Tie Wire From China and Mexico By order of the Commission. Issued: June 17, 2014. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2014–14510 Filed 6–20–14; 8:45 am] emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES Determination On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigations, 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 materially injured by reason of imports from China and Mexico of prestressed concrete steel rail tie wire, provided for in subheading 7217.10.80 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 these investigations effective April 23, 2013, following receipt of petitions filed with the Commission and Commerce by Davis Wire Corp., Kent, Washington and Insteel Wire Products Co., Mount Airy, North Carolina. The final phase of the investigations were scheduled by the Commission following notification of a preliminary determination by Commerce that imports of prestressed concrete steel rail tie wire from China and Mexico were being sold at LTFV within the meaning of section 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(b)).2 Notice of 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR § 207.2(f)). 2 Commerce made a preliminary determination of sales at not less than fair value with respect to VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:33 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 232001 BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140–0100] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Certain Rifles Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice. ACTION: 30-day notice. AGENCY: The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register Volume 79, Number 72, page 21284 on April 15, 2014, allowing for a 60 day comment period. SUMMARY: imports from Thailand, 78 FR 75547, December 12, 2013. Subsequently, Commerce made a final determination of sales at not less than fair value with respect to imports from Thailand, 79 FR 25574, May 5, 2014. Effective May 5, 2014 the Commission terminated its investigation with respect to imports from Thailand, 79 FR 26775, May 9, 2014. PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 35569 The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days for public comment until July 23, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have comments, especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Natisha Taylor, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Firearms Industry Programs Branch, 99 New York Avenue NE., Washington, DC 20226. Written comments and/or suggestions can also be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503 or send email to OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points: • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of this Information Collection 1140–0100: (1) Type of Information Collection: Extension without change of an existing collection. (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Certain Rifles. (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Form number: ATF Form 3310.12. Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice DATES: E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM 23JNN1

Agencies

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 120 (Monday, June 23, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35568-35569]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14561]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 731-TA-1092 (Final)]


Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From China

AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Denial of a request to institute a section 751(b) review 
concerning the Commission's affirmative determination in investigation 
No. 731-TA-1092 (Final), Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From 
China.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY:  The Commission hereby gives notice that it has declined to 
institute an investigation pursuant to section 751(b) of the Tariff Act 
of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(b)) (the Act) to review the Commission's 
affirmative determination in investigation No. 731-TA-1092 (Final) 
because it is already conducting a full five-year review of the same 
order.

DATES:  Effective Date: June 17, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Douglas Corkran (202-205-3057), 
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 (https://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this 
matter may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at 
https://edis.usitc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On May 22, 2006, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) determined 
that imports of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China and 
Korea were being sold in the United States at less than fair value 
within the meaning of section 731 of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673) (71 FR 
29303 and 71 FR 29310, respectively). The Commission initially 
determined that a U.S. industry was not materially injured or 
threatened with material injury by reason of imports of diamond 
sawblades and parts thereof from China and Korea (71 FR 39128, July 11, 
2006).
    Following an appeal of the negative determinations and on remand 
from the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), the Commission 
determined that a U.S. industry was threatened with material injury by 
reason of subject imports of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from 
China and Korea. On January 13, 2009, the CIT affirmed the Commission's 
affirmative determinations on remand. Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition 
v. United States, Slip Op. 09-05 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2009).
    On February 10, 2009, Commerce published notice of the CIT's 
decision and suspended liquidation for entries of the subject 
merchandise after the effective date of the notice until the end of all 
appellate proceedings (74 FR 6570). On November 4, 2009, Commerce 
published orders that antidumping duties be imposed on imports of 
diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China and Korea, effective 
January 23, 2009 (74 FR 57145).
    Following affirmance of the CIT's judgment by the U.S. Court of 
Appeals for the Federal Circuit and upon conclusion of all appellate 
proceedings in the action, the Commission published notice of its final 
determinations in the antidumping investigations of diamond sawblades 
and parts thereof from China and Korea (75 FR 68618, November 8, 2010). 
Commerce revoked the order on diamonds sawblades from Korea effective 
as of October 24, 2011 (76 FR 66892, Oct. 28, 2011).
    On July 11, 2013, the Commission received a request to review its 
affirmative determination in investigation No. 731-TA-1092 (Final) 
pursuant to section 751(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(b)). The request, 
filed by Husqvarna Construction Products North America, Inc. 
(Husqvarna) of Olathe, Kansas, argued that there were several changes 
since the issuance of the Commission's remand determination. 
Specifically, Husqvarna noted Commerce's revocation of the antidumping 
duty order on imports of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from 
Korea; additional Commerce determinations with respect to Chinese 
exporter Advanced Technology & Materials Co., Ltd.; the acquisition of 
certain petitioners by non-U.S. producers of diamond sawblades, as well 
as changes in those petitioners' patterns of sourcing diamond 
sawblades; an alleged reduction in the overlap of competition between 
subject imports from China and the domestic like product as a result of 
the preceding changes; and opposition to the continuation of the order 
on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China by a ``significant 
part of U.S. production.''
    On August 9, 2013, the Commission published a Federal Register 
notice inviting comments from the public on whether changed 
circumstances exist sufficient to warrant the institution of changed 
circumstances reviews (78 FR 48717-48718, Aug. 9, 2013). In response to 
its Federal Register notice soliciting comments, the Commission 
received one submission on behalf of the Diamond Sawblades 
Manufacturing Coalition (DSMC), an ad hoc group of U.S. producers of 
diamond sawblades and the petitioning coalition in the original 
antidumping duty investigation, arguing that the Commission should not 
institute a changed circumstances review investigation.
    On December 2, 2013, Commerce initiated, and the ITC instituted, 
five-year sunset reviews of the antidumping duty order on diamond 
sawblades and parts thereof from China (78 FR 72061 & 78 FR 72216, Dec. 
2, 2013). On May 20, 2014, the Commission determined to conduct a full 
five-year sunset review of the order.
    On April 23, 2014, the Commission determined not to conduct a 
changed circumstances review investigation of the antidumping duty 
order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China.\1\ Given the 
fact that the Commission was concurrently conducting a five-year review 
of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof 
from China, and was aware of the arguments that supported conducting a 
full review of the order, the Commission determined

[[Page 35569]]

that conducting a changed circumstances review was unwarranted because 
it would be duplicative of a full five-year review. See Eveready 
Battery Co., Inc. v. United States, 77 F. Supp. 2d 1327 (CIT 1999) 
(finding that a request for a changed circumstances review was rendered 
moot by the Commission's institution of a full five-year sunset 
review).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Commissioner Aranoff, whose tenure at the Commission ended 
on April 4, 2014, did not participate in this matter.

    Authority: This notice is published pursuant to section 207.45 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
of the Commission's rules.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: June 17, 2014.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014-14561 Filed 6-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.