North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Article 1904 Binational Panel Review: Notice of NAFTA Panel Decision, 26914 [2017-12039]

Download as PDF 26914 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 111 / Monday, June 12, 2017 / Notices b. Differential Pricing c. Value-Added Tax d. Surrogate Values VII. Recommendation [FR Doc. 2017–12106 Filed 6–9–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Article 1904 Binational Panel Review: Notice of NAFTA Panel Decision United States Section, NAFTA Secretariat, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of NAFTA Panel Decision in the matter of Supercalendered Paper from Canada: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination (Secretariat File Number: USA–CDA–2015–1904–01). AGENCY: On April 13, 2017, the Binational Panel issued its Memorandum Opinion and Order in the matter of Supercalendered Paper from Canada: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination (Final Determination). The Binational Panel affirmed in part and remanded in part the Final Determination by the United States Department of Commerce (Commerce) and copies of the NAFTA Panel Decision are available from the United States Section of the NAFTA Secretariat. SUMMARY: Paul E. Morris, United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Room 2061, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482–5438. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter 19 of Article 1904 of NAFTA provides a dispute settlement mechanism involving trade remedy determinations issued by the Government of the United States, the Government of Canada, and the Government of Mexico. Following a Request for Panel Review, a Binational Panel is composed to review the trade remedy determination being challenged and issue a binding Panel Decision. There are established NAFTA Rules of Procedure for Article 1904 Binational Panel Reviews (Rules) and the NAFTA Panel Decision has been notified in accordance with Rule 70. For the complete Rules, please see https:// www.nafta-sec-alena.org/Home/Textsof-the-Agreement/Rules-of-Procedure/ Article-1904. Panel Decision: On April 13, 2017, the Binational Panel issued its asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:28 Jun 09, 2017 Jkt 241001 Memorandum Opinion and Order which affirmed in part and remanded in part the Final Determination by Commerce. The Binational Panel concluded and ordered that Commerce’s Final Determination is remanded for further consideration consistent with the Panel’s decision with respect to (1) the use of Commerce’s ‘‘concurrent subsidies’’ methodology to analyze the provision of ‘‘hot idle’’ funding to Port Hawkesbury Paper LLP (PHP) in a transaction between private parties; (2) Commerce’s conclusion that the Government of Nova Scotia entrusted and directed Nova Scotia Power, Inc. to make a financial contribution by providing electricity; (3) Commerce’s conclusion that Nova Scotia Power, Inc. provided electricity for less than adequate remuneration, addressing both its conclusion that a Tier 1 benchmark was not available and its calculation of a Tier 3 benchmark; (4) the use of Commerce’s ‘‘concurrent subsidies methodology’’ with respect to granting of Forestry Infrastructure monies to New Page Port Hawkesbury (NPPH) prior to its acquisition by Pacific West Commercial Corporation (PWCC); (5) Commerce’s statement that the administrative record contains no evidence of a hostile takeover of Fibrek by Resolute; (6) Commerce’s failure to examine whether the grants to Resolute under the Northern Industrial Electricity Rate and Forestry Sector Prosperity Funds programs were tied to the production of a particular product or to the production of an input product; and (7) Commerce’s use of the same nonrecurring grant as the source for Adverse Facts Available for both recurring and non-recurring grants. The Binational Panel ordered that to the extent not rendered moot by Commerce’s explanation on remand as to why a Tier 1 benchmark for measuring the adequacy of remuneration of Port Hawkesbury’s electricity was not available, Commerce’s October 21, 2016 motion for a voluntary remand to consider whether Commerce should include a separate component for return on equity in its Tier 3 benchmark for measuring the adequacy of remuneration of Port Hawkesbury’s electricity is granted, and the calculation of the benchmark for such purchases is hereby remanded. The Binational Panel further ordered that the Final Determination in all other respects is sustained and directed Commerce to submit its redetermination on remand within 75 days of the date of issue of the NAFTA Panel Decision. For the full Memorandum Opinion and Order, please see https://www.nafta-sec- PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 alena.org/Home/Dispute-Settlement/ Decisions-and-Reports. Dated: June 6, 2017. Paul E. Morris, U.S. Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat. [FR Doc. 2017–12039 Filed 6–9–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–GT–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–201–845] Antidumping Suspension Agreement on Sugar From Mexico: Rescission of 2014–2015 and 2015–2016 Administrative Reviews Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On May 1, 2017, the Department notified the producers/ exporters that were signatories to the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Duty Investigation on sugar from Mexico (the AD Agreement) of its intent to terminate the AD Agreement unless a new agreement was reached on or before June 5, 2017. The Department subsequently modified its notice of intent to terminate the AD Agreement, stating its continued intent to terminate the AD Agreement unless an amended agreement was reached on or before June 6, 2017. Because the Department intends to terminate the AD Agreement, or, in the alternative, amend the AD Agreement prior to the expiration of the termination period, the two ongoing administrative reviews of the original AD Agreement are now moot, and the Department is rescinding both administrative reviews. DATES: Effective June 5, 2017. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sally C. Gannon or David Cordell, Enforcement & Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482–0162 or (202) 482–0408. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background Investigation and Issuance of the AD Agreement On April 17, 2014, the Department initiated an antidumping duty investigation under section 732 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), to determine whether imports of sugar from Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM 12JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 111 (Monday, June 12, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 26914]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12039]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Article 1904 
Binational Panel Review: Notice of NAFTA Panel Decision

AGENCY: United States Section, NAFTA Secretariat, International Trade 
Administration, Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of NAFTA Panel Decision in the matter of Supercalendered 
Paper from Canada: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination 
(Secretariat File Number: USA-CDA-2015-1904-01).

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

SUMMARY: On April 13, 2017, the Binational Panel issued its Memorandum 
Opinion and Order in the matter of Supercalendered Paper from Canada: 
Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination (Final 
Determination). The Binational Panel affirmed in part and remanded in 
part the Final Determination by the United States Department of 
Commerce (Commerce) and copies of the NAFTA Panel Decision are 
available from the United States Section of the NAFTA Secretariat.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul E. Morris, United States 
Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Room 2061, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482-5438.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter 19 of Article 1904 of NAFTA provides 
a dispute settlement mechanism involving trade remedy determinations 
issued by the Government of the United States, the Government of 
Canada, and the Government of Mexico. Following a Request for Panel 
Review, a Binational Panel is composed to review the trade remedy 
determination being challenged and issue a binding Panel Decision. 
There are established NAFTA Rules of Procedure for Article 1904 
Binational Panel Reviews (Rules) and the NAFTA Panel Decision has been 
notified in accordance with Rule 70. For the complete Rules, please see 
https://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/Home/Texts-of-the-Agreement/Rules-of-Procedure/Article-1904.
    Panel Decision: On April 13, 2017, the Binational Panel issued its 
Memorandum Opinion and Order which affirmed in part and remanded in 
part the Final Determination by Commerce. The Binational Panel 
concluded and ordered that Commerce's Final Determination is remanded 
for further consideration consistent with the Panel's decision with 
respect to (1) the use of Commerce's ``concurrent subsidies'' 
methodology to analyze the provision of ``hot idle'' funding to Port 
Hawkesbury Paper LLP (PHP) in a transaction between private parties; 
(2) Commerce's conclusion that the Government of Nova Scotia entrusted 
and directed Nova Scotia Power, Inc. to make a financial contribution 
by providing electricity; (3) Commerce's conclusion that Nova Scotia 
Power, Inc. provided electricity for less than adequate remuneration, 
addressing both its conclusion that a Tier 1 benchmark was not 
available and its calculation of a Tier 3 benchmark; (4) the use of 
Commerce's ``concurrent subsidies methodology'' with respect to 
granting of Forestry Infrastructure monies to New Page Port Hawkesbury 
(NPPH) prior to its acquisition by Pacific West Commercial Corporation 
(PWCC); (5) Commerce's statement that the administrative record 
contains no evidence of a hostile takeover of Fibrek by Resolute; (6) 
Commerce's failure to examine whether the grants to Resolute under the 
Northern Industrial Electricity Rate and Forestry Sector Prosperity 
Funds programs were tied to the production of a particular product or 
to the production of an input product; and (7) Commerce's use of the 
same non-recurring grant as the source for Adverse Facts Available for 
both recurring and non-recurring grants.
    The Binational Panel ordered that to the extent not rendered moot 
by Commerce's explanation on remand as to why a Tier 1 benchmark for 
measuring the adequacy of remuneration of Port Hawkesbury's electricity 
was not available, Commerce's October 21, 2016 motion for a voluntary 
remand to consider whether Commerce should include a separate component 
for return on equity in its Tier 3 benchmark for measuring the adequacy 
of remuneration of Port Hawkesbury's electricity is granted, and the 
calculation of the benchmark for such purchases is hereby remanded. The 
Binational Panel further ordered that the Final Determination in all 
other respects is sustained and directed Commerce to submit its 
redetermination on remand within 75 days of the date of issue of the 
NAFTA Panel Decision. For the full Memorandum Opinion and Order, please 
see https://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/Home/Dispute-Settlement/Decisions-and-Reports.

     Dated: June 6, 2017.
Paul E. Morris,
U.S. Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat.
[FR Doc. 2017-12039 Filed 6-9-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-GT-P