Sugar From Mexico, 70833 [2015-28856]

Download as PDF tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 220 / Monday, November 16, 2015 / Notices use, experience, and enjoyment of the corridor. The draft plan: (1) Identifies management strategies to address natural and cultural resource protection; (2) proposes management strategies to address visitor safety concerns and conflicts with wildlife; (3) addresses vehicle/bicycle management related to road use, trailhead parking areas and pullouts; (4) identifies management strategies related to the operation of facilities within the corridor; (5) considers if a multi-use pathway should be provided along Moose-Wilson Road; and (6) examines specific road realignment and paving options for the Moose-Wilson and Death Canyon Roads. Four management alternatives, Alternatives A through D, are analyzed in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Alternative A, the no-action alternative, would continue current management practices related to resources, visitor use, park operations, and maintenance of facilities within the Moose-Wilson corridor. Alternative B emphasizes managing the corridor as a visitor destination. Reduced crowding on Moose-Wilson Road and at destinations within the corridor would provide visitors an opportunity for selfdiscovery. Existing developed areas and facilities would be maintained where appropriate and removed or relocated in some areas to protect natural and cultural resources. Alternative C, the NPS preferred alternative, emphasizes the conservation legacy stories within the corridor. The intensity and timing of visitor use would be managed to effectively provide high quality visitor opportunities by reducing high traffic volumes and congestion. Development within the corridor would generally be maintained within the existing development footprint. Alternative D would enhance recreational opportunities with additional amenities. This alternative would integrate the Moose-Wilson corridor with the region’s larger recreational network, and would enhance the recreational scenic driving experience by reducing high traffic volumes and congestion. You are encouraged to comment on the draft plan via the Internet at https://parkplanning.nps.gov/ MooseWilson. You may also mail comments to the Superintendent’s Office, Attention: Moose-Wilson EIS, P.O. Drawer 170, Moose, Wyoming 83012–0170. You may also hand-deliver comments to the Grand Teton National Park Headquarters at Moose, Wyoming. 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:47 Nov 13, 2015 Jkt 238001 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: October 22, 2015. Sue E. Masica, Regional Director, Intermountain Region, National Park Service. [FR Doc. 2015–28016 Filed 11–13–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–CB–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–513 and 731– TA–1249 (Final)] Sugar From Mexico Determinations On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigations, the United States International Trade Commission (‘‘Commission’’) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the Act’’), that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of sugar from Mexico, provided for in statistical subheadings 1701.12.1000, 1701.12.5000, 1701.13.1000, 1701.13.5000, 1701.14.1000, 1701.14.5000, 1701.91.1000, 1701.91.3000, 1701.99.1010, 1701.99.1025, 1701.99.1050, 1701.99.5010, 1701.99.5025, 1701.99.5050, 1702.90.4000 and 1703.10.3000 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’’), and to be subsidized by the government of Mexico.2 Background The Commission, pursuant to sections 705(b) and 735(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b) and 19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)), instituted these investigations effective March 28, 2014, following receipt of a petition filed with the Commission and Commerce by the American Sugar Coalition and its members: American Sugar Cane League, Thibodaux, LA; American Sugarbeet Growers Association, Washington, DC; American Sugar Refining, Inc., West Palm Beach, FL; Florida Sugar Cane League, Washington, DC; Hawaiian Commercial and Sugar Company, Puunene, HI; Rio Grande Valley Sugar Growers, Inc., Santa Rosa, TX; Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida, Belle Glade, FL; and United States Beet Sugar Association, Washington, DC. The final phase of the investigations was scheduled by the Commission following notification of preliminary determinations by Commerce that imports of sugar from Mexico were subsidized within the meaning of section 703(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671b(b)) and dumped within the meaning of 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(b)). Notice of 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 on December 18, 2014 (79 FR 75591). On December 19, 2014, the Department of Commerce suspended the antidumping and countervailing duty investigations on sugar from Mexico (79 FR 78039, 78044, December 29, 2014). Subsequently, Commerce received timely requests to continue the antidumping and countervailing duty investigations on sugar from Mexico and resumed its investigations on May 4, 2015 (80 FR 25278). The Commission, therefore, revised its schedule to conform with Commerce’s new schedule (80 FR 28009, May 15, 2015). The hearing was held in Washington, DC, on September 16, 2015, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission made these determinations pursuant to sections 705(b) and 735(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b) and 19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)). It completed and filed its determinations in these investigations on November 6, 2015. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 4577 (November 2015), entitled Sugar from Mexico: Investigation Nos. 701–TA–513 and 731–TA–1249 (Final). By order of the Commission. Issued: November 9, 2015. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2015–28856 Filed 11–13–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 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 All six Commissioners voted in the affirmative. PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 70833 E:\FR\FM\16NON1.SGM 16NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 220 (Monday, November 16, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 70833]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28856]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation Nos. 701-TA-513 and 731-TA-1249 (Final)]


Sugar From Mexico

Determinations

    On the basis of the record \1\ developed in the subject 
investigations, the United States International Trade Commission 
(``Commission'') determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (``the 
Act''), that an industry in the United States is materially injured by 
reason of imports of sugar from Mexico, provided for in statistical 
subheadings 1701.12.1000, 1701.12.5000, 1701.13.1000, 1701.13.5000, 
1701.14.1000, 1701.14.5000, 1701.91.1000, 1701.91.3000, 1701.99.1010, 
1701.99.1025, 1701.99.1050, 1701.99.5010, 1701.99.5025, 1701.99.5050, 
1702.90.4000 and 1703.10.3000 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''), and to be subsidized by the government of Mexico.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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\ All six Commissioners voted in the affirmative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    The Commission, pursuant to sections 705(b) and 735(b) of the Act 
(19 U.S.C. 1671d(b) and 19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)), instituted these 
investigations effective March 28, 2014, following receipt of a 
petition filed with the Commission and Commerce by the American Sugar 
Coalition and its members: American Sugar Cane League, Thibodaux, LA; 
American Sugarbeet Growers Association, Washington, DC; American Sugar 
Refining, Inc., West Palm Beach, FL; Florida Sugar Cane League, 
Washington, DC; Hawaiian Commercial and Sugar Company, Puunene, HI; Rio 
Grande Valley Sugar Growers, Inc., Santa Rosa, TX; Sugar Cane Growers 
Cooperative of Florida, Belle Glade, FL; and United States Beet Sugar 
Association, Washington, DC. The final phase of the investigations was 
scheduled by the Commission following notification of preliminary 
determinations by Commerce that imports of sugar from Mexico were 
subsidized within the meaning of section 703(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 
1671b(b)) and dumped within the meaning of 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 
1673b(b)). Notice of 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 on 
December 18, 2014 (79 FR 75591). On December 19, 2014, the Department 
of Commerce suspended the antidumping and countervailing duty 
investigations on sugar from Mexico (79 FR 78039, 78044, December 29, 
2014). Subsequently, Commerce received timely requests to continue the 
antidumping and countervailing duty investigations on sugar from Mexico 
and resumed its investigations on May 4, 2015 (80 FR 25278). The 
Commission, therefore, revised its schedule to conform with Commerce's 
new schedule (80 FR 28009, May 15, 2015). The hearing was held in 
Washington, DC, on September 16, 2015, and all persons who requested 
the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel.
    The Commission made these determinations pursuant to sections 
705(b) and 735(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b) and 19 
U.S.C. 1673d(b)). It completed and filed its determinations in these 
investigations on November 6, 2015. The views of the Commission are 
contained in USITC Publication 4577 (November 2015), entitled Sugar 
from Mexico: Investigation Nos. 701-TA-513 and 731-TA-1249 (Final).

    By order of the Commission.
    Issued: November 9, 2015.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2015-28856 Filed 11-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.