81_FR_8953 81 FR 8918 - Certain Pasta From Italy: Final Results, and Rescission, in Part, of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2013

81 FR 8918 - Certain Pasta From Italy: Final Results, and Rescission, in Part, of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2013

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 35 (February 23, 2016)

Page Range8918-8920
FR Document2016-03750

The Department of Commerce (Department) has conducted an administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on certain pasta from Italy. On August 10, 2015, we published the Preliminary Results for this administrative review.\1\ The period of review (POR) is January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013. We find that DeMatteis Agroalimentare S.p.A. (also known as, De Matteis Agroalimentare SpA) (DeMatteis) received countervailable subsidies and La Molisana S.p.A. (La Molisana) received de minimis countervailable subsidies during the POR. These rates are shown below in the final results of review section. As discussed below, we are rescinding the review with respect to La Molisana Industrie Alimentari S.p.A. (LMIA). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 35 (Tuesday, February 23, 2016) 
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8918-8920]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03750]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-475-819]


Certain Pasta From Italy: Final Results, and Rescission, in Part, 
of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2013

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Department) has conducted an 
administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on certain 
pasta from Italy. On August 10, 2015, we published the Preliminary 
Results for this administrative review.\1\ The period of review (POR) 
is January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013. We find that DeMatteis 
Agroalimentare S.p.A. (also known as, De Matteis Agroalimentare SpA) 
(DeMatteis) received countervailable subsidies and La Molisana S.p.A. 
(La Molisana) received de minimis countervailable subsidies during the 
POR. These rates are shown below in the final results of review 
section. As discussed below, we are rescinding the review with respect 
to La Molisana Industrie Alimentari S.p.A. (LMIA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Pasta From Italy: Preliminary Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, Rescission in Part, and 
Preliminary Intent to Rescind in Part; 2013, 80 FR 47900 (August 10, 
2015) (Preliminary Results). See also Memorandum from Jennifer Meek, 
International Trade Analyst, to the File, ``Preliminary Results 
Program Description,'' for details regarding program ``Law 488/92--
Industrial Development Grants,'' August 4, 2015.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: February 23, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Meek or Joseph Shuler, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 
20230; telephone: (202) 482-2778 or (202) 482-1293, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In the Preliminary Results, we indicated that we would seek 
clarification regarding La Molisana's use of Article 14 of Law 46/1982 
and additional historical sales data from La Molisana and its parent 
company. We invited interested parties to file case briefs and rebuttal 
briefs following the release of the Preliminary Results. La Molisana 
filed a case brief. No other parties commented on the Preliminary 
Results. We also invited interested parties to comment on the 
additional information we solicited from La Molisana following the 
Preliminary Results; no additional comments were provided.

Scope of the Order

    The scope of the Order consists of certain pasta from Italy.\2\ The 
merchandise subject to the order is currently classifiable under items 
1901.90.90.95 and 1902.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the 
merchandise is dispositive. A full description of the scope of the 
Order is contained in the ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for Final 
Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain Pasta 
from Italy,'' from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, dated February 12, 
2016

[[Page 8919]]

(Issues and Decision Memorandum), and hereby adopted by this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Notice of Countervailing Duty Order and Amended Final 
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Certain Pasta 
(``Pasta'') From Italy, 61 FR 38544 (July 24, 1996) (Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 
available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the 
main Department building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the internet at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed and electronic 
versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in 
content. A list of topics discussed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum is provided in the Appendix to this notice.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case brief filed by La Molisana in this 
review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is 
incorporated herein by reference. A list of the issues which parties 
raised, and to which we respond in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, 
follows as an appendix to this notice.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on additional information provided by La Molisana after the 
Preliminary Results at the Department's request, the Department 
corrected certain program calculations which affected the 
countervailable subsidy rate to be applied to La Molisana. For a full 
explanation of the changes made, see the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum.

Methodology

    We have 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 determine 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.\3\ In making these findings, we have relied, in part, on an 
adverse inference in selecting from among the facts otherwise available 
because we find that the GOI did not act to the best of its ability to 
respond to our requests for information regarding certain programs.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 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. For a 
full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see 
Issues and Decision Memorandum.
    \4\ See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act. For further 
discussion, see Issues and Decision Memorandum at ``Use of Facts 
Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Partial Rescission

    In the Preliminary Results, we announced our intent to recind the 
administrative review with respect to LMIA. As we stated in the 
Preliminary Results, the record demonstrates that LMIA ceased 
operations prior to the POR. Moreover, La Molisana reported that all 
entries shown in the entry data from Customs and Border Protection 
(CBP) as entries made by LMIA were of subject merchandise produced and 
exported by La Molisana. There is no record evidence that LMIA made 
entries of subject merchandise during the POR. Therefore, we are now 
rescinding the review with respect to LMIA.

Final Results of the Review

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we calculated individual 
subsidy rates for the mandatory respondents, DeMatteis and La Molisana.
    We find the net countervailable subsidy rate for the producers and/
or exporters under review to be as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Net
                      Producer/exporter                         subsidy
                                                                 rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DeMatteis Agroalimentare S.p.A. (also known as De Matteis           2.12
 Agroalimentare SpA)........................................
La Molisana S.p.A...........................................        0.26
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    We intend to disclose the calculations performed to interested 
parties within five days of the publication of these final results in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Assessment Rates

    Consistent with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), we intend to issue assessment 
instructions to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) fifteen 
days after the date of publication of these final results. Because we 
have calculated a de minimis countervailable subsidy rate for La 
Molisana in the final results of this review, in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.212 we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries 
without regard to countervailing duties. For DeMatteis, we will 
instruct CBP to assess countervailing duties on the value of POR 
entries at the rate shown above.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, we intend to 
instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing 
duties in the amounts shown above, for the companies listed above, with 
the exception of La Molisana, 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. Because the 
countervailable subsidy rate for La Molisana is de minimis, the 
Department will instruct CBP to collect cash despoits at a rate of zero 
for La Molisana for all shipments of the subject merchandise that are 
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the 
date of publication of the final results of this administrative review. 
For all non-reviewed companies (except Barilla G. e R. F.lli S.p.A. and 
Gruppo Agricoltura Sana S.r.l., which are excluded from the order,\5\ 
and Pasta Lensi S.r.l., which was revoked from the Order \6\), we will 
instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits at the most recently 
assigned company-specific or all-others rate applicable to the company. 
These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect 
until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Order, 61 FR 38545.
    \6\ See Certain Pasta from Italy: Final Results of the Ninth 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Revocation 
of Order, in Part, 71 FR 36318 (June 26, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice serves as a final reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written 
notification of return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to 
judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with 
the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
    We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213.

    Dated: February 12, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum

1. Summary
2. Background

[[Page 8920]]

3. Changes Since the Preliminary Results
4. Scope of the Order
5. Partial Rescission of the Administrative Review
6. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences
7. Subsidy Valuation Information
8. Loan Benchmarks and Discount Rates
9. Analysis of Programs
10. Analysis of Comments
    Comment 1: Whether to Rescind the Review of LMIA
    Comment 2: Entries Covered in La Molisana's Liquidation 
Instructions
    Comment 3: Application of the Appropriate Sales Denominator
11. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2016-03750 Filed 2-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

8918 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Notices industrial grade amorphous silica fabric, fabric must contain no coatings or treatments; S.p.A. (also known as, De Matteis which contains a minimum of 90 percent and (4) the amorphous silica fabric must be Agroalimentare SpA) (DeMatteis) silica (SiO2) by nominal weight, and a white in color. For purposes of this scope, received countervailable subsidies and nominal width in excess of 8 inches. The ‘‘areal shrinkage’’ refers to the extent to La Molisana S.p.A. (La Molisana) investigation covers industrial grade which a specimen of amorphous silica fabric amorphous silica fabric regardless of other shrinks while subjected to heating at 1800 received de minimis countervailable materials contained in the fabric, regardless degrees F for 30 minutes. subsidies during the POR. These rates of whether in roll form or cut-to-length, Areal shrinkage is expressed as the are shown below in the final results of regardless of weight, width (except as noted following percentage: review section. As discussed below, we above), or length. The investigation covers are rescinding the review with respect industrial grade amorphous silica fabric to La Molisana Industrie Alimentari regardless of whether the product is S.p.A. (LMIA). approved by a standards testing body (such DATES: Effective Date: February 23, as being Factory Mutual (FM) Approved), or regardless of whether it meets any 2016. Also excluded from the scope are governmental specification. amorphous silica fabric rope and tubing (or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Industrial grade amorphous silica fabric sleeving). Amorphous silica fabric rope is a Jennifer Meek or Joseph Shuler, AD/ may be produced in various colors. The knitted or braided product made from CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement investigation covers industrial grade amorphous silica yarns. Silica tubing (or and Compliance, U.S. Department of amorphous silica fabric regardless of whether sleeving) is braided into a hollow sleeve from the fabric is colored. Industrial grade Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution amorphous silica yarns. Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; amorphous silica fabric may be coated or The subject imports are normally classified telephone: (202) 482–2778 or (202) 482– treated with materials that include, but are in subheadings 7019.59.4021, 7019.59.4096, 1293, respectively. not limited to, oils, vermiculite, acrylic latex 7019.59.9021, and 7019.59.9096 of the compound, silicone, aluminized polyester SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United (Mylar®) film, pressure-sensitive adhesive, or States (HTSUS), but may also enter under Background other coatings and treatments. The HTSUS subheadings 7019.40.4030, investigation covers industrial grade In the Preliminary Results, we 7019.40.4060, 7019.40.9030, 7019.40.9060, amorphous silica fabric regardless of whether indicated that we would seek 7019.51.9010, 7019.51.9090, 7019.52.9010, the fabric is coated or treated, and regardless clarification regarding La Molisana’s use 7019.52.9021, 7019.52.9096 and of coating or treatment weight as a percentage 7019.90.1000. HTSUS subheadings are of Article 14 of Law 46/1982 and of total product weight. Industrial grade provided for convenience and customs additional historical sales data from La amorphous silica fabric may be heat-cleaned. purposes only; the written description of the Molisana and its parent company. We The investigation covers industrial grade scope of this investigation is dispositive. invited interested parties to file case amorphous silica fabric regardless of whether [FR Doc. 2016–03756 Filed 2–22–16; 8:45 am] the fabric is heat-cleaned. briefs and rebuttal briefs following the Industrial grade amorphous silica fabric BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P release of the Preliminary Results. La may be imported in rolls or may be cut-to- Molisana filed a case brief. No other length and then further fabricated to make parties commented on the Preliminary welding curtains, welding blankets, welding DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Results. We also invited interested pads, fire blankets, fire pads, or fire screens. parties to comment on the additional Regardless of the name, all industrial grade International Trade Administration information we solicited from La amorphous silica fabric that has been further [C–475–819] cut-to-length or cut-to-width or further Molisana following the Preliminary finished by finishing the edges and/or adding Results; no additional comments were Certain Pasta From Italy: Final Results, provided. grommets, is included within the scope of this investigation. and Rescission, in Part, of Countervailing Duty Administrative Scope of the Order Subject merchandise also includes (1) any industrial grade amorphous silica fabric that Review; 2013 The scope of the Order consists of has been converted into industrial grade AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, certain pasta from Italy.2 The amorphous silica fabric in China from merchandise subject to the order is fiberglass cloth produced in a third country; International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. currently classifiable under items and (2) any industrial grade amorphous silica 1901.90.90.95 and 1902.19.20 of the fabric that has been further processed in a ACTION: Notice. Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the third country prior to export to the United States, including but not limited to treating, SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce United States (HTSUS). Although the coating, slitting, cutting to length, cutting to (Department) has conducted an HTSUS subheadings are provided for width, finishing the edges, adding grommets, administrative review of the convenience and customs purposes, the or any other processing that would not countervailing duty (CVD) order on written description of the merchandise otherwise remove the merchandise from the certain pasta from Italy. On August 10, is dispositive. A full description of the scope of the investigation if performed in the 2015, we published the Preliminary scope of the Order is contained in the country of manufacture of the in-scope ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for Results for this administrative review.1 industrial grade amorphous silica fabric. Final Results of Countervailing Duty Excluded from the scope of the The period of review (POR) is January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013. We Administrative Review: Certain Pasta investigation is amorphous silica fabric that is subjected to controlled shrinkage, which is find that DeMatteis Agroalimentare from Italy,’’ from Christian Marsh, also called ‘‘pre-shrunk’’ or ‘‘aerospace Deputy Assistant Secretary for grade’’ amorphous silica fabric. In order to be 1 See Certain Pasta From Italy: Preliminary Antidumping and Countervailing Duty mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES excluded as a pre-shrunk or aerospace grade Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant amorphous silica fabric, the amorphous silica Review, Rescission in Part, and Preliminary Intent Secretary for Enforcement and fabric must meet the following exclusion to Rescind in Part; 2013, 80 FR 47900 (August 10, 2015) (Preliminary Results). See also Memorandum Compliance, dated February 12, 2016 criteria: (l) The amorphous silica fabric must from Jennifer Meek, International Trade Analyst, to contain a minimum of 98 percent silica the File, ‘‘Preliminary Results Program 2 See Notice of Countervailing Duty Order and (SiO2) by nominal weight; (2) the amorphous Description,’’ for details regarding program ‘‘Law Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty silica fabric must have an areal shrinkage of 488/92—Industrial Development Grants,’’ August 4, Determination: Certain Pasta (‘‘Pasta’’) From Italy, EN23FE16.001</GPH> 4 percent or less; (3) the amorphous silica 2015. 61 FR 38544 (July 24, 1996) (Order). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23FEN1.SGM 23FEN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Notices 8919 (Issues and Decision Memorandum), for information regarding certain Cash Deposit Requirements and hereby adopted by this notice. programs.4 In accordance with section The Issues and Decision Partial Rescission 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, we intend to Memorandum is a public document and instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of is on file electronically via Enforcement In the Preliminary Results, we estimated countervailing duties in the and Compliance’s Antidumping and announced our intent to recind the amounts shown above, for the Countervailing Duty Centralized administrative review with respect to companies listed above, with the Electronic Service System (ACCESS). LMIA. As we stated in the Preliminary exception of La Molisana, on shipments ACCESS is available to registered users Results, the record demonstrates that of subject merchandise entered, or at http://access.trade.gov and available LMIA ceased operations prior to the withdrawn from warehouse, for to all parties in the Central Records POR. Moreover, La Molisana reported consumption on or after the date of Unit, room 7046 of the main Department that all entries shown in the entry data publication of the final results of this building. In addition, a complete from Customs and Border Protection review. Because the countervailable version of the Issues and Decision (CBP) as entries made by LMIA were of subsidy rate for La Molisana is de Memorandum can be accessed directly subject merchandise produced and minimis, the Department will instruct on the internet at http:// exported by La Molisana. There is no CBP to collect cash despoits at a rate of enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. record evidence that LMIA made entries zero for La Molisana for all shipments The signed and electronic versions of of subject merchandise during the POR. of the subject merchandise that are the Issues and Decision Memorandum Therefore, we are now rescinding the entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, are identical in content. A list of topics review with respect to LMIA. for consumption on or after the date of discussed in the Issues and Decision Final Results of the Review publication of the final results of this Memorandum is provided in the administrative review. For all non- Appendix to this notice. In accordance with 19 CFR reviewed companies (except Barilla G. e 351.221(b)(5), we calculated individual R. F.lli S.p.A. and Gruppo Agricoltura Analysis of Comments Received subsidy rates for the mandatory Sana S.r.l., which are excluded from the All issues raised in the case brief filed respondents, DeMatteis and La order,5 and Pasta Lensi S.r.l., which was by La Molisana in this review are Molisana. revoked from the Order 6), we will addressed in the Issues and Decision We find the net countervailable instruct CBP to continue to collect cash Memorandum, which is incorporated subsidy rate for the producers and/or deposits at the most recently assigned herein by reference. A list of the issues exporters under review to be as follows: company-specific or all-others rate which parties raised, and to which we applicable to the company. These cash respond in the Issues and Decision Net deposit requirements, when imposed, Memorandum, follows as an appendix Producer/exporter subsidy shall remain in effect until further rate to this notice. notice. Changes Since the Preliminary Results DeMatteis Agroalimentare S.p.A. Administrative Protective Order (also known as De Matteis Based on additional information Agroalimentare SpA) ............... 2.12 This notice serves as a final reminder provided by La Molisana after the 0.26 to parties subject to administrative La Molisana S.p.A ...................... Preliminary Results at the Department’s protective order (APO) of their request, the Department corrected Disclosure responsibility concerning the certain program calculations which disposition of proprietary information affected the countervailable subsidy rate We intend to disclose the calculations disclosed under APO in accordance to be applied to La Molisana. For a full performed to interested parties within with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely explanation of the changes made, see five days of the publication of these written notification of return or the Issues and Decision Memorandum. final results in accordance with 19 CFR destruction of APO materials or 351.224(b). conversion to judicial protective order is Methodology hereby requested. Failure to comply Assessment Rates We have conducted this review in with the regulations and the terms of an accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of Consistent with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), APO is a sanctionable violation. the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the we intend to issue assessment We are issuing and publishing these Act). For each of the subsidy programs instructions to the U.S. Customs and results in accordance with sections found countervailable, we determine Border Protection (CBP) fifteen days 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 that there is a subsidy, i.e., a after the date of publication of these CFR 351.213. government-provided financial final results. Because we have Dated: February 12, 2016. contribution that gives rise to a benefit calculated a de minimis countervailable Paul Piquado, to the recipient, and that the subsidy is subsidy rate for La Molisana in the final Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and specific.3 In making these findings, we results of this review, in accordance Compliance. have relied, in part, on an adverse with 19 CFR 351.212 we will instruct inference in selecting from among the CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries Appendix facts otherwise available because we without regard to countervailing duties. List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and find that the GOI did not act to the best For DeMatteis, we will instruct CBP to Decision Memorandum mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES of its ability to respond to our requests assess countervailing duties on the 1. Summary value of POR entries at the rate shown 2. Background 3 See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act above. 5 SeeOrder, 61 FR 38545. regarding financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) of the Act regarding benefit; and section 771(5A) of 4 See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act. For 6 SeeCertain Pasta from Italy: Final Results of the the Act regarding specificity. For a full description further discussion, see Issues and Decision Ninth Countervailing Duty Administrative Review of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see Memorandum at ‘‘Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Notice of Revocation of Order, in Part, 71 FR Issues and Decision Memorandum. and Adverse Inferences.’’ 36318 (June 26, 2006). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23FEN1.SGM 23FEN1

8920 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Notices 3. Changes Since the Preliminary Results NMFS and the Regional Fishery NMFS is supportive of these comments 4. Scope of the Order Management Councils (Councils); and will explore ways to improve public 5. Partial Rescission of the Administrative explained timing and procedural access to NEPA documents and Review linkages; provided guidance on information on the status of ongoing 6. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences documentation needs; and provided NEPA analyses. However, NMFS 7. Subsidy Valuation Information guidance for fostering partnerships and believes that, given the limited purpose 8. Loan Benchmarks and Discount Rates cooperation between NMFS and the of the draft NAO supplement—to revise 9. Analysis of Programs Councils on NEPA compliance. and update agency NEPA procedures to 10. Analysis of Comments After consulting with the Councils conform to the timelines for review and Comment 1: Whether to Rescind the and with the Council on Environmental approval of fishery management plans Review of LMIA Quality (CEQ) on proposed revisions to and to integrate applicable Comment 2: Entries Covered in La the 2013 NMFS NEPA policy, NMFS environmental analytical procedures— Molisana’s Liquidation Instructions proposed using this policy as a basis for the NAO supplement is not the Comment 3: Application of the issuing revised and updated NEPA Appropriate Sales Denominator appropriate vehicle for addressing all procedures for MSA actions in the form such issues. As NOAA generally works 11. Recommendation of a line-office supplement to NOAA to revise and update its NEPA [FR Doc. 2016–03750 Filed 2–22–16; 8:45 am] Administrative Order (NAO) 216–6), procedures through the NAO, the BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P which contains NOAA’s policies and agency will continue seeking ways to procedures for complying with the enhance public access, participation NEPA. On June 30, 2014, NMFS and process transparency through all DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE published a notice in the Federal appropriate mechanisms. Register inviting public comments for a Key Issues Raised In Comments: National Oceanic and Atmospheric 90-day period on a proposed NMFS notes that since the initiation of Administration supplement to the NAO (NAO efforts to comply with section 304(i), RIN 0648–XD124 supplement) intended to satisfy fully commenters have expressed widely the requirements of section 304(i) of the divergent opinions on how best to National Environmental Policy Act Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA). Section proceed. When introducing Policy Compliance for Council-Initiated 304(i) requires NMFS, in consultation Directive 30–132, ‘‘National Fishery Management Actions Under with the Councils and Council on Environmental Policy Act Compliance the Magnuson-Stevens Act Environmental Quality (CEQ), to revise for Fishery Management Actions under AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries and update agency NEPA procedures to the Magnuson-Stevens Act (2/19/ Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and conform to the timelines for review and 2013),’’ NMFS provided a background Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), approval of fishery management plans document that summarized NMFS’s Commerce. and to integrate applicable consideration of key issues and environmental analytical procedures. 16 concerns, ‘‘Introduction to NMFS Policy ACTION: Notice of availability. U.S.C. 1854(i). After careful Directive: National Environmental SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is consideration of the public comments Policy Act Compliance for Fishery to notify the public that NOAA/NMFS received in response to the 2014 notice, Management Actions under the has finalized revisions to the NOAA NOAA/NMFS has decided to finalize Magnuson-Stevens Act.’’ Some of the policy and procedures for complying the NAO supplement with editorial, but same issues and concerns were re- with the National Environmental Policy no substantive, changes to the June 30, introduced as comments on the draft Act (NEPA) in the context of Magnuson- 2014 draft. Supplement. For additional context Stevens Act (MSA) fishery management NMFS received comments from 5 regarding NMFS’s treatment of these actions. This notice provides a summary environmental non-governmental concerns, please see the background of the public comments received and organizations and 2 fishery management document, available at: http://www. the agency’s responses. The final councils. The key issues are nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/management/ revised and updated NEPA procedures summarized below along with NMFS’s councils/ccc/2013/2013_md_ for MSA actions are available online at responses. We note that many agenda.htm. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/msa2007/ comments are similar to those raised nepa.htm. previously either as comments on a Comments and Responses proposed rule (73 FR 27998, May14, DATES: The final policy is effective 2008), (which was subsequently Comment 1: Ultimate Responsibility for February 23, 2016. withdrawn (79 FR 40703, Jul. 14, 2014)), NEPA Lies With NMFS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: or as comments on the 2013 NMFS Comment: Commenters expressed Steve Leathery, 301–427–8014. NEPA policy. When NMFS issued the support for the position emphasized in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 2013 NMFS NEPA policy directive, it the NMFS NEPA procedures that NMFS developed a background document that retains ultimate responsibility for NEPA Background addressed many of these comments. A compliance. Some comments requested On February 19, 2013, in compliance copy of the background document for that the procedures be revised to with section 304(i), NMFS issued an 2013 Policy Directive can be viewed and indicate that NMFS must remain internal policy pertaining to complying downloaded at the following site: primary author of the NEPA documents, mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES with NEPA in the context of MSA http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/laws_ that NMFS must oversee the NEPA fishery management actions. This policies/msa/nepa.html. process, and that the Councils should policy, entitled ‘‘Policy Directive 30– In this notice, we will limit our not conduct NEPA scoping during 132: National Environmental Policy Act discussion to those comments that Council meetings. Compliance for Council-Initiated specifically address issues pertaining to Response: The NAO supplement Fishery Management Actions under the the NAO supplement. Many of these clearly states that ‘‘ultimate legal Magnuson-Stevens Act’’ (the policy): comments pertain broadly to responsibility for NEPA lies . . . with Clarified roles and responsibilities of transparency in the NEPA process. NMFS.’’ However, for reasons stated in VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23FEN1.SGM 23FEN1


Document Created: 2018-02-02 14:33:17
Document Modified: 2018-02-02 14:33:17
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionNotices
ActionNotice.
DatesEffective Date: February 23, 2016.
ContactJennifer Meek or Joseph Shuler, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2778 or (202) 482-1293, respectively.
FR Citation81 FR 8918 
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR