81 FR 7753 - Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2013
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 30 (February 16, 2016)
International Trade Administration
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 30 (February 16, 2016)
| Page Range | 7753-7755 | |
| FR Document | 2016-03082 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 16, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 7753-7755] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-03082] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-533-825] Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2013 AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 6, 2015, the Department published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip (PET film) from India.\1\ The period of review (POR) is January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013.\2\ Based on an analysis of the comments received, the Department has made changes to the subsidy rate determined for Jindal Poly Films Limited (Jindal). The final subsidy rates are listed in the ``Final Results of Administrative Review'' section below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India: Preliminary Results And Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2013, 80 FR 46956 (August 6, 2015) (Preliminary Results 2013). \2\ As explained in the memorandum from the Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement & Compliance, the Department has exercised its discretion to toll all administrative deadlines due to the recent closure of the Federal Government. All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended by four business days. The revised deadline for the final results of this review is now February 8, 2016. See Memorandum to the Record from Ron Lorentzen, Acting A/S for Enforcement & Compliance, regarding ``Tolling of Adminstrative Deadlines as a Result of the Government Closure During Snowstorm Jonas,'' dated January 27, 2016. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATES: Effective date: February 16, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elfi Blum, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0197. Scope of the Order For the purposes of the order, the products covered are all gauges of raw, pretreated, or primed polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet and strip, whether extruded or coextruded. Excluded are metallized films and other finished films that have had at least one of their surfaces modified by the application of a performance-enhancing resinous or inorganic layer of more than 0.00001 inches thick. Imports of PET film are classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item number 3920.62.00.90. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written description of the scope of the order is dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received The issues raised by Petitioners \3\ and Jindal in their case briefs, and Petitioners' rebuttal brief, are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\4\ The issues are [[Page 7754]] identified in the Appendix to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://trade.gov/enforcement/frn/index.html. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ DuPont Teijin Films, Inc., Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc. and SKC, Inc. (collectively, ``Petitioners''). \4\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India; 2013,'' dated concurrently with this notice and herein incorporated by reference (Issues and Decision Memorandum). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on the comments received from Petitioners and Jindal, we adjusted the numerators used in Jindal's subsidy rate calculations for the Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS) and the Duty Drawback (DDB) programs. For a discussion of these issues, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum and Memorandum to the File from Elfi Page, International Trade Compliance Analyst, titled ``Final Results of 2013 Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India-Jindal Polyfilms Limited,'' each dated concurrently with these final results. Methodology The Department conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we find that there is a subsidy, i.e., a government-provided financial contribution that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is specific.\5\ For a description of the methodology underlying all of the Department's conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act regarding financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) of the Act regarding benefit; and, section 771(5A) of the Act regarding specificity. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Companies Not Selected for Individual Review For the companies not selected for individual review (Ester, Garware, Polyplex, Vacmet, and Vacmet India Limited), because the rates calculated for Jindal and SRF were above de minimis and not based entirely on facts available, we applied a subsidy rate based on a weighted average of the subsidy rates calculated for Jindal and SRF using publicly ranged sales data submitted by respondents.\6\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ The statute and the Department's regulations do not directly address the establishment of rates to be applied to companies not selected for individual examination where the Department limited its examination in an administrative review pursuant to section 777A(e)(2) of the Act. However, the Department normally determines the rates for non-selected companies in reviews in a manner that is consistent with section 705(c)(5) of the Act, which provides instructions for calculating the all others rate in an investigation. Section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act instructs the Department to calculate an all others rate using the weighted average of the subsidy rates established for the producers/exporters individually examined, excluding any zero, de minimis, or facts available rates. In this review, calculating the non-selected rate by weight averaging Jindal's and SRF's rates risks disclosure of proprietary information. Therefore, we calculated the rate for the non-selected companies by weight averaging the rates of Jindal and SRF using publicly-ranged sales data. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Final Results of Administrative Review In accordance with section 777A(e)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we determine the total estimated net countervailable subsidy rates for the period January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013 to be: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subsidy rate Manufacturer/exporter (percent ad valorem) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jindal Poly Films of India Limited...................... 8.90 SRF Limited............................................. 2.11 Ester Industries Limited................................ 6.09 Garware Polyester Ltd................................... 6.09 Polyplex Corporation Ltd................................ 6.09 Vacmet.................................................. 6.09 Vacmet India Limited.................................... 6.09 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Assessment and Cash Deposit Requirements In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), the Department intends to issue appropriate instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 15 days after publication of the final results of this review. The Department will instruct CBP to liquidate shipments of subject merchandise produced and/or exported by the companies listed above, entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption from January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013, at the percent rates, as listed above for each of the respective companies, of the entered value. The Department intends also to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties, in the amounts shown above for each of the respective companies shown above, on shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this review. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits at the most-recent company-specific or all-others rate applicable to the company, as appropriate. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Administrative Protective Order This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to an administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction. These final results are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: February 8, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I--Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background Scope of the Order III. Subsidies Valuation Information A. Allocation Period B. Benchmarks Interest Rates C. Denominator IV. Analysis of Programs A. Programs Determined To Be Countervailable B. Programs Determined To Be Not Used or To Provide No Benefit During the POR V. Analysis of Comments Comment 1: Whether the Department Wrongly Countervailed Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS) Benefits That Apply to Non- Subject Merchandise. Comment 2: Whether the Department Used the Wrong Numerator To Calculate the POR Benefit For the Status Holder Incentive Scheme (SHIS). Comment 3: Whether the Value Added Tax (VAT) and Central Sales Tax (CST) Refunds Under the Industrial Promotion Subsidy (IPS) of the State Government of Maharashtra's (SGOM) Package Scheme of Incentives (PSI) Is Countervailable. Comment 4: Whether the Department Double Counted One of the EPCGS Licences Reported by Jindal and Failed To Include the Benefit of Another License in Its Rate Calculations for Jindal [[Page 7755]] Comment 5: Whether the Department Used the Wrong Figure To Calculate the Duty Drawback Subsidy for Jindal [FR Doc. 2016-03082 Filed 2-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 16, 2016 / Notices 7753
shall assess, antidumping duties on all Notification to Importers period of review (POR) is January 1,
appropriate entries covered by this This notice also serves as a 2013, through December 31, 2013.2
review.10 The Department intends to preliminary reminder to importers of Based on an analysis of the comments
issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 their responsibility under 19 CFR received, the Department has made
days after the publication date of the 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate changes to the subsidy rate determined
final results of this review. regarding the reimbursement of for Jindal Poly Films Limited (Jindal).
For any individually examined antidumping duties prior to liquidation The final subsidy rates are listed in the
respondent whose weighted average of the relevant entries during the POR. ‘‘Final Results of Administrative
dumping margin is above de minimis Failure to comply with this requirement Review’’ section below.
(i.e., 0.50 percent) in the final results of could result in the Department’s DATES: Effective date: February 16, 2016.
this review, the Department will presumption that reimbursement of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elfi
calculate importer-specific assessment antidumping duties occurred and the Blum, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII,
rates on the basis of the ratio of the total subsequent assessment of double Enforcement and Compliance, U.S.
amount of dumping calculated for the antidumping duties. Department of Commerce, 14th Street
importer’s examined sales to the total These preliminary results are issued and Constitution Avenue NW.,
entered value of sales, in accordance and published in accordance with Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Where an sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the 482–0197.
importer- (or customer-) specific ad Act. Scope of the Order
valorem rate is greater than de minimis, Dated: February 8, 2016.
the Department will instruct CBP to For the purposes of the order, the
Paul Piquado, products covered are all gauges of raw,
collect the appropriate duties at the time
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and pretreated, or primed polyethylene
of liquidation.11 Where either a Compliance.
respondent’s weighted average dumping terephthalate film, sheet and strip,
margin is zero or de minimis, or an Appendix whether extruded or coextruded.
importer- (or customer-) specific ad Excluded are metallized films and other
List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary finished films that have had at least one
valorem is zero or de minimis, the Decision Memorandum
Department will instruct CBP to of their surfaces modified by the
1. Summary application of a performance-enhancing
liquidate appropriate entries without 2. Case History
regard to antidumping duties.12 resinous or inorganic layer of more than
3. Scope of the Order
4. Discussion of the Methodology
0.00001 inches thick. Imports of PET
Cash Deposit Requirements a. Non-Market Economy Country Status film are classifiable in the Harmonized
b. Separate Rates Tariff Schedule of the United States
The following cash deposit
c. Surrogate Country (HTSUS) under item number
requirements will be effective upon
d. PRC-Wide Entity 3920.62.00.90. HTSUS subheadings are
publication of the final results of this e. Determination of Comparison Method provided for convenience and customs
review for shipments of the subject f. Results of Differential Pricing Analysis purposes. The written description of the
merchandise from the PRC entered, or g. Comparisons to Normal Value scope of the order is dispositive.
withdrawn from warehouse, for h. Date of Sale
consumption on or after the publication i. Export Price Analysis of Comments Received
date, as provided by sections j. Value Added Tax
k. Normal Value
The issues raised by Petitioners 3 and
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the Jindal in their case briefs, and
companies listed above that have a l. Factor Valuations
m. Currency Conversion Petitioners’ rebuttal brief, are addressed
separate rate, the cash deposit rate will 5. Recommendation in the Issues and Decision
be that established in the final results of Memorandum.4 The issues are
[FR Doc. 2016–03073 Filed 2–12–16; 8:45 am]
this review (except, if the rate is zero or
de minimis, then zero cash deposit will BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative
be required); (2) for previously Review; 2013, 80 FR 46956 (August 6, 2015)
investigated or reviewed PRC and non- (Preliminary Results 2013).
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 2 As explained in the memorandum from the
PRC exporters not listed above that
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement &
received a separate rate in a prior International Trade Administration Compliance, the Department has exercised its
segment of this proceeding, the cash discretion to toll all administrative deadlines due
deposit rate will continue to be the [C–533–825] to the recent closure of the Federal Government. All
existing exporter-specific rate; (3) for all deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have
PRC exporters of subject merchandise Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, been extended by four business days. The revised
Sheet, and Strip From India: Final deadline for the final results of this review is now
that have not been found to be entitled February 8, 2016. See Memorandum to the Record
to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate Results of Countervailing Duty from Ron Lorentzen, Acting A/S for Enforcement &
will be that for the PRC-wide entity; and Administrative Review; 2013 Compliance, regarding ‘‘Tolling of Adminstrative
Deadlines as a Result of the Government Closure
(4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, During Snowstorm Jonas,’’ dated January 27, 2016.
merchandise which have not received International Trade Administration, 3 DuPont Teijin Films, Inc., Mitsubishi Polyester
their own rate, the cash deposit rate will Department of Commerce. Film, Inc. and SKC, Inc. (collectively,
be the rate applicable to the PRC ‘‘Petitioners’’).
SUMMARY: On August 6, 2015, the 4 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
exporter that supplied that non-PRC Department published the preliminary Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
exporter. These deposit requirements, results of the administrative review of Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado,
when imposed, shall remain in effect the countervailing duty order on Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
until further notice. polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, Compliance, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for
the Final Results of Countervailing Duty
and strip (PET film) from India.1 The Administrative Review: Polyethylene Terephthalate
10 See 19 CFR 351.212(b). Film, Sheet, and Strip from India; 2013,’’ dated
11 See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). 1 See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and concurrently with this notice and herein
12 See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). Strip From India: Preliminary Results And Partial Continued
VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:15 Feb 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\16FEN1.SGM 16FEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_7783/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 16, 2016 / Notices 7755
Comment 5: Whether the Department Used Department requested additional Scope of the Investigation
the Wrong Figure To Calculate the Duty information and clarification on the
Drawback Subsidy for Jindal The products covered by this
calculation of AD margins,6 and investigation are geogrids from the PRC.
[FR Doc. 2016–03082 Filed 2–12–16; 8:45 am] Petitioner timely filed a response to this For a full description of the scope of this
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P request on January 28, 2016.7 On investigation, see the ‘‘Scope of the
January 27, 2016, the Department Investigation,’’ in Appendix I of this
determined to toll all deadlines four notice.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE business days as a result of the Federal
Government closure during snowstorm Comments on Scope of the Investigation
International Trade Administration Jonas, which is applicable to this During our review of the AD and CVD
[A–570–036] initiation. Petitions, the Department issued
As explained in the memorandum questions to, and received responses
Certain Biaxial Integral Geogrid from the Acting Assistant Secretary for from, Petitioner pertaining to the
Products From the People’s Republic Enforcement and Compliance, the proposed scope to ensure that the scope
of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair- Department has exercised its discretion language in the Petition would be an
Value Investigation to toll all administrative deadlines due accurate reflection of the products for
to the recent closure of the Federal which the domestic industry is seeking
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, Government. All deadlines in this
International Trade Administration, relief.10
segment of the proceeding have been As discussed in the preamble to the
Department of Commerce. extended by four business days. The Department’s regulations,11 we are
DATES: Effective date: February 16, 2016. revised deadline for the initiation of this setting aside a period for interested
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julia investigation is now February 8, 2016.8 parties to raise issues regarding product
Hancock at (202) 482–1394 and Susan In accordance with section 732(b) of coverage (i.e., the scope). The
Pulongbarit (202) 482–4031, AD/CVD the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Department will consider all comments
Operations, Enforcement and ‘‘Act’’), Petitioner alleges that imports of received from parties and, if necessary,
Compliance, U.S. Department of geogrids from the PRC are being, or are will consult with parties prior to the
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution likely to be, sold in the United States at issuance of the preliminary
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. less-than-fair value within the meaning determination. If scope comments
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: of section 731 of the Act, and that such include factual information (see 19 CFR
imports are materially injuring, or 351.102(b)(21)), all such factual
The Petition threatening material injury to, an information should be limited to public
On January 13, 2016, the Department industry in the United States. Also, information. In order to facilitate
of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the preparation of its questionnaires, the
received an antidumping duty (‘‘AD’’) Act, the Petition is accompanied by Department requests all interested
petition concerning imports of certain information reasonably available to parties to submit such comments by
biaxial integral geogrid products Petitioner supporting its allegations. 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (‘‘ET’’) on
(‘‘geogrids’’) from the People’s Republic The Department finds that Petitioner February 29, 2016, which is 20 calendar
of China (‘‘PRC’’), filed in proper form filed these Petitions on behalf of the days from the signature date of this
on behalf of Tensar Corporation domestic industry because Petitioner is notice. Any rebuttal comments, which
(‘‘Petitioner’’).1 The AD petition was an interested party as defined in section may include factual information, must
accompanied by a countervailing duty 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 10,
(‘‘CVD’’) petition for the PRC.2 also finds that Petitioner demonstrated 2016, which is 10 calendar days after
Petitioner is a domestic producer of sufficient industry support with respect the initial comments deadline.
geogrids.3 to the initiation of the AD investigation The Department requests that any
On January 15, 2016, the Department that Petitioner is requesting.9 factual information the parties consider
requested additional information and Period of Investigation relevant to the scope of the
clarification of certain areas of the investigations be submitted during this
Petition,4 and Petitioner timely filed Because the AD Petition was filed on
time period. However, if a party
January 13, 2015, the period of
responses to these requests on January subsequently finds that additional
investigation (‘‘POI’’) is, pursuant to 19
20, 2016.5 On January 26, 2016, the factual information pertaining to the
CFR 351.204(b)(1), July 1, 2015, through
scope of the investigations may be
1 See the Petitions for the Imposition of December 31, 2015.
relevant, the party may contact the
Antidumping Duties and Countervailing Duties:
Certain Biaxial Integral Geogrid Products from the Response to the General Issues Supplemental
Department and request permission to
People’s Republic of China, dated January 13, 2016 Questionnaire, dated January 20, 2016 (‘‘General submit the additional information. All
(‘‘the Petition’’). Issues Supplement’’). such comments must be filed on the
2 Id. 6 See Letter from the Department to Petitioner
records of each of the concurrent AD
3 See Volume I of the Petition at 2. entitled ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of and CVD investigations.
4 See Letters from the Department to Petitioner Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Biaxial
entitled ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Integral Geogrid Products from the People’s Filing Requirements
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports Republic of China: Supplemental Questions,’’
of Certain Biaxial Integral Geogrid Products from January 26, 2016 (‘‘Second AD Supplemental All submissions to the Department
the People’s Republic of China: Supplemental Questionnaire’’). must be filed electronically using
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
7 See Petitioner’s January 28, 2016 submission
Questions,’’ January 15, 2016 (‘‘General Issues Enforcement and Compliance’s
Supplemental Questionnaire’’); and ‘‘Petition for (‘‘Second AD Petition Supplement’’).
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Certain 8 See Memorandum to the Record from Ron
Biaxial Integral Geogrid Products from the People’s Lorentzen, Acting A/S for Enforcement & Centralized Electronic Service System
Republic of China,’’ dated January 15, 2016 (‘‘AD Compliance, regarding ‘‘Tolling of Administrative
Supplemental Questionnaire’’). Deadlines As a Result of the Government Closure 10 See General Issues Supplemental
5 See Petitioner’s Response to the AD During Snowstorm Jonas,’’’ dated January 27, 2016. Questionnaire and General Issues Supplement.
Supplemental Questionnaire, dated January 20, 9 See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for 11 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing
2016 (‘‘AD Petition Supplement’’) and Petitioner’s the Petition’’ section below. Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:15 Feb 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\16FEN1.SGM 16FEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_7783/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2016-02-13 03:13:38
Document Modified: 2016-02-13 03:13:38
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Contact | Elfi Blum, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0197. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 7753 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR