2018 End-to-End Census Test-Address Canvassing Operation, 37424-37425 [2017-16875]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
37424
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 153 / Thursday, August 10, 2017 / Notices
Dated: August 4, 2017.
David Mussatt,
Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
[FR Doc. 2017–16837 Filed 8–9–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Census Bureau
2018 End-to-End Census Test—
Address Canvassing Operation
Census Bureau, Commerce.
Notice, comment request.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Census Bureau publishes
this notice to announce a change in the
expected burden for the 2018 End-toEnd Census Test—Address Canvassing
Operation. The Census Bureau invites
public comment on the increase in
burden, as described below.
Agency: U.S. Census Bureau.
Title: 2018 End-to-End Census Test—
Address Canvassing Operation.
OMB Control Number: 0607–0997.
Type of Request: New Collection.
Number of Respondents: 85,093.
Average Hours per Response: 5
minutes.
Burden Hours: 7,091.
Needs and Uses: The Address
Canvassing operation is the first
operation in the 2018 End-to-End
Census Test, with field activity
beginning in the summer of 2017. The
purpose of the Address Canvassing
operation is (1) to deliver a complete
and accurate address list and spatial
database for enumeration and
SUMMARY:
tabulation, and (2) to determine the type
and address characteristics for each
living quarter. The Address Canvassing
operation consists of two major
components: In-Office Address
Canvassing and In-Field Address
Canvassing. Only the latter component
involves collection of information from
residents at their living quarters.
The following objectives are crucial to
a successful Address Canvassing
operation:
• Test the listing and mapping
capabilities required by In-Field
Address Canvassing.
• Validate the creation of In-Field
Address Canvassing workload by InOffice Address Canvassing.
• Conduct a listing quality control
operation during In-Field Address
Canvassing.
The results of this test will inform the
Census Bureau’s final preparations for
the Address Canvassing Operation in
advance of the 2020 Census.
The number of housing units with
respondent burden in the original OMB
package was calculated based on the
national estimate of 25 percent of
addresses in the Self-Response areas
needing In-Field Address Canvassing.
This estimate was based on our original
approach to In-Office Address
Canvassing Operation, which included
two phases: Interactive Review and
Active Block Resolution. In the
Interactive Review phase staff make an
initial assessment of the stability of the
blocks under review, determining
whether a block is ‘‘stable,’’ or
undergoing minor changes or no
changes at all, or ‘‘unstable,’’ which
indicates that there are significant
changes within the block. In the Active
Block Resolution phase, which we are
no longer pursuing for the 2020 Census,
staff would have done a second, ‘‘deep
dive’’ into the ‘‘unstable’’ blocks to
attempt to resolve them by accurately
identifying the changes taking place.
The Census Bureau discontinued this
second phase because we were
experiencing significant issues with
productivity and quality control in the
Active Block Resolution phase. The
result of this decision is that our
estimated national workload for In-Field
Address Canvassing has increased from
25 percent to 30 percent. Prior to the
suspension of Active Block Resolution,
some of the blocks in the three test sites
were removed from In-Field Address
Canvassing workload as result of this
phase of the In-Office Address
Canvassing operation. Therefore, in
order to ensure that the operations
implemented in the 2018 End-to-End
Census Test are consistent with the
operations we plan to execute in the
2020 Census, the Census Bureau
determined it was appropriate to add
the blocks originally resolved during
Active Block Resolution back into the
in-field workload for this test.
The original estimate of burden was
calculated to be:
Estimated Number of Respondents:
43,965 households.
Estimated Time per Response: 5
minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 3,664 hours.
Estimated
number of
respondents
Test site
Estimated
time per
response
(minutes)
Total
burden hours
Pierce County, Washington .........................................................................................................
Providence County, Rhode Island ...............................................................................................
Bluefield-Beckley-Oak Hill, West Virginia Area ...........................................................................
20,818
17,526
5,621
5
5
5
1,735
1,461
468
Totals ....................................................................................................................................
43,965
........................
3,664
The new burden estimate is
calculated to be:
Estimated Number of Respondents:
85,093 households.
Estimated Time per Response: 5
minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 7,091 hours.
Estimated
number of
respondents
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Test site
Estimated
time per
response
(minutes)
Total
burden hours
Pierce County, Washington .........................................................................................................
Providence County, Rhode Island ...............................................................................................
Bluefield-Beckley-Oak Hill, West Virginia Area ...........................................................................
43,806
25,409
15,878
5
5
5
3,651
2,117
1,323
Totals ....................................................................................................................................
85,093
........................
7,091
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:03 Aug 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\10AUN1.SGM
10AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 153 / Thursday, August 10, 2017 / Notices
Written comments and
recommendations on this change in
burden should be sent within 30 days of
publication of this notice to OIRA_
Submission@omb.eop.gov or fax to (202)
395–5806.
Sheleen Dumas,
Departmental PRA Lead, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017–16875 Filed 8–9–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–07–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–909]
Certain Steel Nails From the People’s
Republic of China: Notice of Court
Decision Not in Harmony With Final
Results of Administrative Review and
Notice of Amended Final Results
Pursuant to Court Decision
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On July 3, 2017, the Court of
International Trade (CIT or Court)
sustained the Department of
Commerce’s (the Department) final
remand results pertaining to the sixth
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain steel
nails from the People’s Republic of
China (PRC) covering the period of
August 1, 2013, through July 31, 2014.
The Department is notifying the public
that the final judgment in this case is
not in harmony with the final results of
the administrative review. Therefore,
the Department is amending the final
results with respect to the dumping
margin assigned to SDC International
Aust. PTY. Ltd. (SDC).
DATES: Applicable July 13, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Annathea Cook, AD/CVD Operations
Office V, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0250.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Background
As part of the sixth administrative
review of certain steel nails from the
PRC, on August 29, 2014, MidContinent Nail Corporation (Mid
Continent), the petitioner, requested a
review of ‘‘SDC INTERNATIONAL
AUSTRALIA (PTY) LTD.’’ 1 On
1 See Mid Continent’s ‘‘Request for Sixth
Administrative Review,’’ August 29, 2014, at
Attachment 1.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:03 Aug 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
September 2, 2014, Progressive Steel
and Wire (Progressive Wire), a domestic
interested party, requested a review of
‘‘SDC International Aust. Pty., Ltd.’’ and
‘‘SDC International Australia Pty.,
Ltd.’’ 2 On September 30, 2014, the
Department initiated a review of, among
other companies: ‘‘SDC International
Aust. Pty., Ltd.,’’ ‘‘SDC International
Australia Pty., Ltd.,’’ and ‘‘SDC
International Australia (Pty) Ltd.’’
On March 8, 2016, the Department
issued the 6th AR Final Results,3 where
the Department continued to grant a
separate rate only to ‘‘SDC International
Aust. PTY. LTD.’’—the full business
name requested by SDC in its separate
rate certification and supported by the
company’s business license.4 SDC
challenged the 6th AR Final Results
before the CIT.5
The Department requested a voluntary
remand to address whether the
Department improperly included
permutations of SDC’s company name
as part of the PRC-wide entity,
subjecting these name permutations to
the PRC-wide entity rate. On January 20,
2017, the Court granted the
Department’s request for a voluntary
remand to reevaluate its determination
regarding permutations of SDC’s name.
On July 3, 2017, the CIT sustained the
Department’s final remand
determination, affirming the
Department’s determination to continue
to grant a separate rate to the name SDC
provided on its business license—‘‘SDC
International Aust. PTY. LTD.’’—and no
other names.6 The CIT further affirmed
the Department’s determination to
amend its 6th AR Final Results, issue
accompanying liquidation instructions
indicating that any entries under ‘‘SDC
International Australia Pty., Ltd.’’ and
‘‘SDC International Australia (Pty) Ltd.’’
for this review period may be assessed
at the separate rate for ‘‘SDC
International Aust. PTY. LTD.,’’ and to
no longer list these name permutations
in the PRC-wide entity.
2 See Progressive Steel & Wire LLC’s ‘‘Request for
Administrative Review,’’ September 2, 2014, at
Attachment 1.
3 See Certain Steel Nails from the People’s
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review; 2013–2014, 81 FR
14092 (March 16, 2016) (6th AR Final Results) and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.
4 See 6th AR Final Results.
5 CIT Court No. 16–00062.
6 See SDC International Aust. PTY. LTD. v.
United States, CIT Slip Op. 17–78, Ct. No. 16–00062
(July 3, 2017).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37425
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,7 as clarified
by Diamond Sawblades,8 the Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit held
that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
the Department must publish a notice of
a court decision that is not ‘‘in
harmony’’ with a Department
determination and must suspend
liquidation of entries pending a
‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The
Court’s July 3, 2017, judgment in SDC
International Aust. PTY. Ltd. v. United
States constitutes a final decision of the
Court that is not in harmony with the
Department’s AR6 Final Results. This
notice is published in fulfillment of the
publication requirement of Timken.
Accordingly, the Department will
continue the suspension of liquidation
of the subject merchandise at issue
pending expiration of the period to
appeal or, if appealed, a final and
conclusive court decision.
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court
decision, the Department hereby
amends the AR6 Final Results with
respect to the companies identified
below. Based on the Remand Results, as
affirmed by the Court in SDC
International Aust. PTY. Ltd. v. United
States, the revised combination-rate
weighted average-dumping margin for
the companies listed below during the
period August 1, 2013, through July 31,
2014 is as follows:
Exporter
SDC International Aust. PTY.
Ltd. (SDC) 9 .......................
Weightedaverage
margin
(percent)
11.95
In the event that the CIT’s ruling is
not appealed or, if appealed, is upheld
by a final and conclusive court decision,
the Department will instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
assess antidumping duties on
7 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337,
341 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).
8 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v.
United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010)
(Diamond Sawblades).
9 The Department determines that any entries
under ‘‘SDC International Australia Pty., Ltd.’’ and
‘‘SDC International Australia (Pty) Ltd.’’ for this
review period may be assessed at the separate rate
for ‘‘SDC International Aust. PTY. LTD.’’ The
Department will issue accompanying liquidation
instructions indicating that these permutations are
assessed at the separate rate, i.e. 11.95%, and will
no longer identify these name permutations as part
of the PRC-wide entity for this review period. These
changes to the 6th AR Final Results are specific to,
and a result of, the above-referenced remand
redetermination.
E:\FR\FM\10AUN1.SGM
10AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 153 (Thursday, August 10, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37424-37425]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-16875]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Census Bureau
2018 End-to-End Census Test--Address Canvassing Operation
AGENCY: Census Bureau, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice, comment request.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Census Bureau publishes this notice to announce a change
in the expected burden for the 2018 End-to-End Census Test--Address
Canvassing Operation. The Census Bureau invites public comment on the
increase in burden, as described below.
Agency: U.S. Census Bureau.
Title: 2018 End-to-End Census Test--Address Canvassing Operation.
OMB Control Number: 0607-0997.
Type of Request: New Collection.
Number of Respondents: 85,093.
Average Hours per Response: 5 minutes.
Burden Hours: 7,091.
Needs and Uses: The Address Canvassing operation is the first
operation in the 2018 End-to-End Census Test, with field activity
beginning in the summer of 2017. The purpose of the Address Canvassing
operation is (1) to deliver a complete and accurate address list and
spatial database for enumeration and tabulation, and (2) to determine
the type and address characteristics for each living quarter. The
Address Canvassing operation consists of two major components: In-
Office Address Canvassing and In-Field Address Canvassing. Only the
latter component involves collection of information from residents at
their living quarters.
The following objectives are crucial to a successful Address
Canvassing operation:
Test the listing and mapping capabilities required by In-
Field Address Canvassing.
Validate the creation of In-Field Address Canvassing
workload by In-Office Address Canvassing.
Conduct a listing quality control operation during In-
Field Address Canvassing.
The results of this test will inform the Census Bureau's final
preparations for the Address Canvassing Operation in advance of the
2020 Census.
The number of housing units with respondent burden in the original
OMB package was calculated based on the national estimate of 25 percent
of addresses in the Self-Response areas needing In-Field Address
Canvassing. This estimate was based on our original approach to In-
Office Address Canvassing Operation, which included two phases:
Interactive Review and Active Block Resolution. In the Interactive
Review phase staff make an initial assessment of the stability of the
blocks under review, determining whether a block is ``stable,'' or
undergoing minor changes or no changes at all, or ``unstable,'' which
indicates that there are significant changes within the block. In the
Active Block Resolution phase, which we are no longer pursuing for the
2020 Census, staff would have done a second, ``deep dive'' into the
``unstable'' blocks to attempt to resolve them by accurately
identifying the changes taking place. The Census Bureau discontinued
this second phase because we were experiencing significant issues with
productivity and quality control in the Active Block Resolution phase.
The result of this decision is that our estimated national workload for
In-Field Address Canvassing has increased from 25 percent to 30
percent. Prior to the suspension of Active Block Resolution, some of
the blocks in the three test sites were removed from In-Field Address
Canvassing workload as result of this phase of the In-Office Address
Canvassing operation. Therefore, in order to ensure that the operations
implemented in the 2018 End-to-End Census Test are consistent with the
operations we plan to execute in the 2020 Census, the Census Bureau
determined it was appropriate to add the blocks originally resolved
during Active Block Resolution back into the in-field workload for this
test.
The original estimate of burden was calculated to be:
Estimated Number of Respondents: 43,965 households.
Estimated Time per Response: 5 minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 3,664 hours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Estimated time
Test site number of per response Total burden
respondents (minutes) hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pierce County, Washington....................................... 20,818 5 1,735
Providence County, Rhode Island................................. 17,526 5 1,461
Bluefield-Beckley-Oak Hill, West Virginia Area.................. 5,621 5 468
-----------------------------------------------
Totals...................................................... 43,965 .............. 3,664
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The new burden estimate is calculated to be:
Estimated Number of Respondents: 85,093 households.
Estimated Time per Response: 5 minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 7,091 hours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Estimated time
Test site number of per response Total burden
respondents (minutes) hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pierce County, Washington....................................... 43,806 5 3,651
Providence County, Rhode Island................................. 25,409 5 2,117
Bluefield-Beckley-Oak Hill, West Virginia Area.................. 15,878 5 1,323
-----------------------------------------------
Totals...................................................... 85,093 .............. 7,091
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 37425]]
Written comments and recommendations on this change in burden
should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395-5806.
Sheleen Dumas,
Departmental PRA Lead, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017-16875 Filed 8-9-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
