Federal Register Vol. 81, No.49,

Under the regulations in “Subpart—Fruits and Vegetables” (7 CFR 319.56-1 through 319.56-74, referred to below as the regulations), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) prohibits or restricts the importation of fruits and vegetables into the United States from certain parts of the world to prevent plant pests from being introduced into or disseminated within the United States.

Section 319.56-4 contains a performance-based process for approving the importation of certain fruits and vegetables that, based on the findings of a pest risk analysis, can be safely imported subject to one or more of the five designated phytosanitary measures listed in paragraph (b) of that section.

APHIS received a request from the national plant protection organization (NPPO) of Peru to allow the importation of fresh pomegranate fruit into the continental United States. As part of our evaluation of Peru's request, we have prepared a pest risk assessment (PRA) to identify pests of quarantine significance that could follow the pathway of importation of pomegranates into the continental United States from Peru. Based on the PRA, a risk management document (RMD) was prepared to identify phytosanitary measures that could be applied to the pomegranates to mitigate the pest risk. We have concluded that fresh pomegranate fruit can be safely imported from Peru into the continental United States using one or more of the five designated phytosanitary measures listed in § 319.56-4(b). These measures are:

• The pomegranates must be imported as commercial consignments only;

• Each consignment of pomegranates must be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate issued by the NPPO of Peru;

• Each consignment of pomegranates must be treated in accordance with 7 CFR part 305; and

• Each consignment of pomegranates is subject to inspection upon arrival at the port of entry to the United States.

Therefore, in accordance with § 319.56-4(c), we are announcing the availability of our PRA and RMD for public review and comment. The documents may be viewed on the Regulations.gov Web site or in our reading room (see ADDRESSES above for a link to Regulations.gov and information on the location and hours of the reading room). You may request paper copies of the PRA and RMD by calling or writing to the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Please refer to the subject of the analysis you wish to review when requesting copies.

After reviewing any comments we receive, we will announce our decision regarding the import status of fresh pomegranate fruit from Peru in a subsequent notice. If the overall conclusions of our analysis and the Administrator's determination of risk remain unchanged following our consideration of the comments, then we will authorize the importation of fresh pomegranate fruit from Peru into the continental United States subject to the requirements specified in the RMD.

Under the regulations in “Subpart—Fruits and Vegetables” (7 CFR 319.56-1 through 319.56-74, referred to below as the regulations), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) prohibits or restricts the importation of fruits and vegetables into the United States from certain parts of the world to prevent plant pests from being introduced into or disseminated within the United States.

Section 319.56-4 contains a performance-based process for approving the importation of certain fruits and vegetables that, based on the findings of a pest risk analysis, can be safely imported subject to one or more of the five designated phytosanitary measures listed in paragraph (b) of that section.

APHIS received a request from the national plant protection organization (NPPO) of Peru to allow the importation of fresh figs (Ficus carica) into the continental United States. As part of our evaluation of Peru's request, we have prepared a pest risk assessment (PRA) to identify pests of quarantine significance that could follow the pathway of importation of figs into the continental United States from Peru. Based on the PRA, a risk management document (RMD) was prepared to identify phytosanitary measures that could be applied to the figs to mitigate the pest risk. We have concluded that figs can be safely imported from Peru to the continental United States using one or more of the five designated phytosanitary measures listed in § 319.56-4(b). These measures are:

• The figs must be imported as commercial consignments only;

• Each consignment of figs must be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate issued by the NPPO of Peru;

• Each consignment of figs must be treated in accordance with 7 CFR part 305; and

• Each consignment of figs is subject to inspection upon arrival at the port of entry to the United States.

Therefore, in accordance with § 319.56-4(c), we are announcing the availability of our PRA and RMD for public review and comment. The documents may be viewed on the Regulations.gov Web site or in our reading room (see ADDRESSES above for a link to Regulations.gov and information on the location and hours of the reading room). You may request paper copies of the PRA and RMD by calling or writing to the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Please refer to the subject of the analysis you wish to review when requesting copies.

After reviewing any comments we receive, we will announce our decision regarding the import status of fresh figs from Peru in a subsequent notice. If the overall conclusions of our analysis and the Administrator's determination of risk remain unchanged following our consideration of the comments, then we will authorize the importation of fresh figs from Peru into the continental United States subject to the requirements specified in the RMD.

RUS issued a PEA for the development of a more efficient and effective environmental review process for its Telecommunications Program on March 1, 2016. The PEA provides a broad environmental analysis of the Agency's preliminary decisions and includes a tiered, site-specific analysis at the project level that would be completed before Agency dispersal of funds and/or applicant construction. Since publication of the Agency's Environmental Policies and Procedures (7 CFR part 1970) on March 2, 2016, RUS has updated the PEA with citations to the Agency's new environmental rule. These changes are administrative and not substantive, therefore supplementation of the PEA is not required.

The RUS Telecommunications Program provides a variety of loans and grants to build and expand broadband networks in rural America. Loans to build broadband networks and deliver service to households and businesses in rural communities provide a necessary source of capital for rural telecommunications companies. Grant funding is awarded based on a number of factors relating to the benefits to be derived from the proposed broadband network project, as specified in applicable program regulations.

Eligible applicants for RUS loans and grants include for-profit and non-profit entities, tribes, municipalities, and cooperatives. The Agency particularly encourages investment in tribal and economically disadvantaged areas. Through low-cost funding for telecommunications infrastructure, rural residents can have access to services that will close the digital divide between rural and urban communities. Once funds are awarded, RUS monitors the projects to make sure they are completed in accordance with program conditions and requirements.

The application process for requesting financial assistance for the various Telecommunications programs varies slightly from a competitive grant program, individual project proposals, or multi-year “loan design” applications. The Agency seeks to synchronize and create environmental review efficiencies for future project-level environmental review compliance for the various programs, commensurate with the potential environmental impacts. The Agency also seeks to establish proper sequencing of certain agency preliminary decisions (i.e., obligation of funds and/or approval of interim financing requests) with subsequent tiered, site-specific project environmental reviews.

The PEA is intended to expedite the funding, deployment, and expansion of broadband infrastructure in rural America. The PEA includes detailed descriptions and analyses of the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts associated with broadband infrastructure technologies and construction methods, such as impacts to water resources, terrestrial resources, historic and cultural resources, air and climate resources, noise, threatened and endangered species, electromagnetic radiation, and Environmental Justice issues. Use of the PEA analyses thereby saves project-level processing time, ensuring consistent and accurate environmental evaluations while avoiding unnecessary duplication and repetition in project-level planning and evaluation. Use of the PEA enables project-level compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and other requirements to focus on the remaining relevant site-specific issues, expediting planning, analysis, compliance, documentation, and ultimately project-level decisions.

The PEA is available for public review at the digital and physical addresses provided in this Notice. Questions and comments should be sent to RUS at the mailing or email addresses provided in this Notice. RUS should receive written comments on the PEA on or before March 31, 2016 to ensure that they are considered in its environmental impact determination.

Any final action by RUS related to the broadband portion of the RUS Telecommunications Program will be subject to, and contingent upon, compliance with all relevant presidential executive orders and federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations in addition to the completion of the environmental review requirements as prescribed in the Agency's Environmental Policies and Procedures.

The Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) regulation (5 CFR part 1320) implementing provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) requires that interested members of the public and affected agencies have an opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). This notice identifies an information collection that RUS is submitting to OMB for extension.

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to: Thomas P. Dickson, Acting Director, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, USDA Rural Utilities Service, STOP 1522, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20250-1522. FAX: (202) 720-8435. Email: [email protected].

Title: 7 CFR 1779, Water and Waste Disposal Programs Guaranteed Loans.

OMB Number: 0572-0122.

Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved information collection.

Abstract: The Rural Utilities Service is authorized by Section 306 of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926) to make loans to public agencies, nonprofit corporations, and Indian tribes for the development of water and waste disposal facilities primarily servicing rural residents. The guaranteed loan program encourages lender participation and provides specific guidance in the processing and servicing of guaranteed loans. The regulations governing the Water and Waste Disposal Guaranteed Loan program are codified at 7 CFR 1779. The required information, in the form of written documentation and Agency approved forms, is collected from applicants/borrowers, their lenders, and consultants. The collected information will be used to determine applicant/borrower eligibility, project feasibility, and to ensure borrowers operate on a sound basis and use loan funds for authorized purposes. Failure to collect proper information could result in improper determinations of eligibility, improper use of funds, and/or unsound loans.

Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 7.8 hours per response.

Respondents: Business or other for profit; Not-for-profit institutions; State, Local or Tribal government.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 15.

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 7.3.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 858 hours.

Copies of this information collection can be obtained from MaryPat Daskal, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, at (202) 720-0992. FAX: (202) 720-8435. Email: [email protected]. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

On October 15, 2015, the Department published in the Federal Register the preliminary determination in the LTFV investigation of PET resin from Canada.1 For a description of the events that have occurred since the Preliminary Determination, see the Issue and Decision Memorandum.2 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 to all parties 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 at http://enforcement.trade.gov. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

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 because of snowstorm “Jonas”. All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended by four business days. The revised deadline for the final determination of this investigation is now March 4, 2016.3

The period of investigation (“POI”) is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014.

The product covered by this investigation is certain PET resin from Canada. For a full description of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix I to this notice.

All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues that parties raised, and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as Appendix II.

The Department determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014:

Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated “all-others” rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero or de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. We based our calculation of the “all-others” rate on the margin calculated for Selenis Canada, the only mandatory respondent in this investigation.

We will disclose to parties in this proceeding the calculations performed for this final determination within five days of the date of public announcement of our final determination, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to continue to suspend liquidation of all entries of certain PET resin from Canada which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after October 15, 2015, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination. We also will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the weighted-average amount by which normal value exceeds U.S. price, as follows: (1) The cash deposit rate for Selenis Canada will be equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margin determined in this final determination; (2) if the exporter is not a firm identified in this investigation but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margin established for the producer of the subject merchandise; and (3) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will be 13.60 percent. The instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice.

In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we will notify the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) of our final determination. As our final determination is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will determine within 45 days whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation of the subject merchandise. If the ITC determines that such injury exists, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation.

This notice will serve as a 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 the 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 this determination and notice in accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

Background

Petitioners in this investigation are DAK Americas, LLC, M&G Chemicals, and Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, America, (collectively, Petitioners). In addition to the Government of the Sultanate of Oman (GSO), the mandatory respondent in this investigation is OCTAL SAOC-FZC and OCTAL Holding SAOC (collectively, OCTAL).

The events that have occurred since the Department published the Preliminary Determination 1 on August 14, 2015 are discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby incorporated in this notice.2 This memorandum also details the changes we made since the Preliminary Determination to the subsidy rates calculated for the mandatory respondent. 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 is available to all parties 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 at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

As explained in the memorandum from the Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 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 determination is now March 4, 2016.3

The merchandise covered by this investigation is PET resin. The merchandise subject to this investigation is properly classified under subheading 3907.60.00.30 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise under investigation is dispositive. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix I.

The subsidy programs under investigation and the issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, dated concurrently with this notice. A list of the issues that parties raised, and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as Appendix II.

We determine the countervailable subsidy rates to be:

Because the total estimated net countervailable subsidy rate for the examined company is de minimis, we determine that countervailable subsidies are not being provided to producers or exporters of PET resin from Oman. We did not calculate an all-others rate pursuant to sections 705(c)(1)(B) and (c)(5) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) because we did not reach an affirmative final determination. Because our final determination is negative, this proceeding is terminated in accordance with section 705(c)(2) of the Act.

In the Preliminary Determination, the total net countervailable subsidy rate for the individually examined respondent was de minimis and, therefore, we did not suspend liquidation of entries of PET resin from Oman. Because the estimated subsidy rates for the examined company is de minimis in this final determination, we are not directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection to suspend liquidation of entries of PET resin from Oman.

In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of our final determination. Because our final determination is negative, this investigation is terminated.

This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to the administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). 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.

This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

On February 12, 2016, the Department of Commerce (Department) received a countervailing duty (CVD) petition concerning imports of stainless steel sheet and strip from the People's Republic of China (PRC), filed in proper form on behalf of AK Steel Corporation, Allegheny Ludlum, LLC d/b/a ATI Flat Rolled Products, North American Stainless, and Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC (collectively, Petitioners).1 The CVD petition was accompanied by an Antidumping Duty (AD) petition for stainless steel sheet and strip from the PRC.2 Petitioners are domestic producers of stainless steel sheet and strip, which represents the domestic industry engaged in the manufacture of stainless steel sheet and strip in the United States.3

On February 17, 2016, the Department requested information and clarification of certain areas of the Petition.4 On February 19, 2016, Petitioners filed responses to these requests 5 and an amendment to the scope section of the petition.6

In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Petitioners allege that the Government of China (GOC) is providing countervailable subsidies (within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act) to imports of stainless steel sheet and strip from the PRC, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States. Also, consistent with section 702(b)(1) of the Act, for those alleged programs in the PRC on which we have initiated a CVD investigation, the Petition is accompanied by information reasonably available to Petitioners supporting their allegation.

The Department finds that Petitioner filed this Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and Petitioner has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD investigation that it is requesting the Department to initiate.7

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2), because the Petition was filed on February 12, 2016, the period of investigation is January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015.

The product covered by this investigation is stainless steel sheet and strip from the PRC. For a full description of the scope of the investigation, see the “Scope of the Investigation” in Appendix I of this notice.

During our review of the Petition, the Department issued questions to, and received responses from, Petitioners pertaining to the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petition would be an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.8

As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations,9 we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (scope). The Department will consider all comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations. If scope comments include factual information (see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), all such factual information should be limited to public information. In order to facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, the Department requests all interested parties submit such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on Tuesday, March 23, 2016, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on Monday, April 4, 2016, because 10 calendar days after the initial comments deadline falls on Saturday, April 2, 2016.10

The Department requests that any factual information the parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigation be submitted during this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may be relevant, the party may contact the Department and request permission to submit the additional information. All such comments must also be filed on the record of each of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations.

All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).11 An electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the applicable deadlines.

Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, the Department notified representatives of the GOC of the receipt of the Petition. Also, in accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, the Department provided representatives of the GOC the opportunity for consultations with respect to the CVD Petition.

Consultations were held with representatives of the PRC on February 25, 2016.12 All invitation letters and memoranda regarding these consultations are on file electronically via ACCESS.

Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, the Department shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling method to poll the “industry.”

Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the “industry” as the producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible for determining whether “the domestic industry” has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,13 they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department's determination is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may result in different definitions of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.14

Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as “a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title.” Thus, the reference point from which the domestic like product analysis begins is “the article subject to an investigation” (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the Petition).

With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioners do not offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigation. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that stainless sheet and strip constitutes a single domestic like product, and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.15

In determining whether Petitioners have standing under section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petition with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the “Scope of the Investigation” in Appendix I of this notice. Petitioners provided their production of the domestic like product in 2015, as well as an estimate of total production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.16 To establish industry support, Petitioners compared their own production to total estimated production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.17 We have relied upon data Petitioners provided for purposes of measuring industry support.18

Our review of the data provided in the Petition, the Second General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to the Department indicates that Petitioners have established industry support.19 First, the Petition established support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product and, as such, the Department is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).20 Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.21 Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petition.22 Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act.

The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and that they have demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD investigation that they are requesting the Department initiate.23

Because the PRC is a “Subsidies Agreement Country” within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from the PRC materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.

Petitioners allege that imports of the subject merchandise are benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are causing, or threatening to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product. In addition, Petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.24

Petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is illustrated by: reduced market share, underselling and price suppression or depression, lost sales and revenues, reductions in U.S. production, shipments, and capacity utilization, decreased employment, and financial deterioration.25 We have assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material injury, and causation, and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.26

Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a CVD investigation whenever an interested party filed a CVD petition on behalf of an industry that: (1) alleges elements necessary for an imposition of a duty under section 701(a) of the Act; and (2) is accompanied by information reasonably available to Petitioners supporting the allegations.

Petitioners allege that producers/exporters of stainless steel sheet and strip from the PRC benefit from countervailable subsidies bestowed by the GOC. The Department examined the Petition and finds that it complies with the requirements of section 702(b)(1) of the Act. Therefore, in accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Act, we are initiating a CVD investigation to determine whether manufacturers, producers, or exporters of stainless steel sheet and strip from the PRC receive countervailable subsidies from the GOC.

Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on all 41 alleged programs in the PRC.27 For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each program, see the PRC CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklists for each investigation is available on ACCESS.

In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determination no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation.

On June 29, 2015, the President of the United States signed into law the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, which made numerous amendments to the AD and CVD law.28 The 2015 law does not specify dates of application for those amendments. On August 6, 2015, the Department published an interpretative rule, in which it announced the applicability dates for each amendment to the Act, except for amendments contained in section 771(7) of the Act, which relate to determinations of material injury by the ITC.29 The amendments to sections 771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of the Act are applicable to all determinations made on or after August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply to this CVD investigation.30

Petitioners named 158 companies as producers/exporters of stainless steel sheet and strip in the PRC.31 Following standard practice in CVD investigations, the Department will, where appropriate, select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) data for U.S. imports of amorphous silica fabric during the period of investigation. For this investigation, the Department will release U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of subject merchandise during the period of investigation under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) numbers listed in the scope. We intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO within five business days of the announcement of this Federal Register notice. Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such applications may be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo/. Interested parties may submit comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection. Comments must be filed in accordance with the filing requirements stated above. If respondent selection is necessary, we intend to base our decision regarding respondent selection upon comments received from interested parties and our analysis of the record information within 20 days of publication of this notice.

In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petition have been provided to the GOC via ACCESS. Because of the particularly large number of producers/exporters identified in the Petition, the Department considers the service of the public version of the Petition to the foreign producers/exporters satisfied by the delivery of the public version to the GOC, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 702(d) of the Act.

The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of stainless steel sheet and strip from the PRC are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.32 A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being terminated; 33 otherwise, these investigation will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.

Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by the Department; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)-(iv). Any party, when submitting factual information, is required to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted 34 and, if the information is being submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information already on the record, to provide an explanation identifying the information already on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct.35 Time limits for the submission of factual information are addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which provides specific time limits based on the type of factual information being submitted. Parties should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information in these investigations.

Parties may request an extension of time limits before the expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time limit established under 19 CFR 351. For submissions that are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, we will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited circumstances, we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. Review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at http://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in these investigations.

Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.36 Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are in effect for company/government officials, as well as their representatives. Investigations initiated on the basis of petitions filed on or after August 16, 2013, and other segments of any AD or CVD proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use the formats for the revised certifications provided at the end of the Final Rule.37 The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the applicable revised certification requirements.

Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, the Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in these investigations should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).

This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and 777(i) of the Act.

The Department published the notice of initiation of this administrative review on August 3, 2015.1 The Department has exercised its discretion to toll all administrative deadlines due to the recent closure of the Federal Government because of Snowstorm “Jonas”. Thus, all of the deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended by four business days. The revised deadline for the preliminary results of review is now March 7, 2016.2 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this administrative review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 3 that is dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice. The Preliminary 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 Preliminary Results Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

The merchandise covered by this review is silicon metal containing at least 96.00 percent, but less than 99.99 percent of silicon by weight. Also covered by this review is silicon metal containing between 89.00 and 96.00 percent silicon by weight but which contains a higher aluminum content than the silicon metal containing at least 96.00 percent but less than 99.99 percent silicon by weight (58 FR 27542, May 10, 1993). Silicon metal is currently provided for under subheadings 2804.69.10 and 2804.69.50 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (“HTS”) as a chemical product, but is commonly referred to as a metal. Semiconductor-grade silicon (silicon metal containing by weight not less than 99.99 percent of silicon and provided for in subheading 2804.61.00 of the HTS) is not subject to this order. Although the HTS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description remains dispositive.

The Department is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

The Department preliminarily determines that Shanghai Jinneng and Shanghai Jinfeng are part of the PRC-wide entity. No review has been requested for the PRC-wide entity. The PRC-wide rate is 139.49 percent.

Interested parties are invited to comment on the preliminary results and may submit case briefs and/or written comments, filed electronically using ACCESS, within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii).4 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, will be due five days after the due date for case briefs, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(d). Parties who submit case or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are requested to submit with each argument a statement of the issue, a summary of the argument not to exceed five pages, and a table of statutes, regulations, and cases cited, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2).

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties, who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, filed electronically using ACCESS. Electronically filed case briefs/written comments and hearing requests must be received successfully in their entirety by the Department's electronic records system, ACCESS, by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.5 Hearing requests should contain: (1) The party's name, address and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those issues raised in the respective case briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, parties will be notified of the time and date of the hearing which will be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington DC 20230. The Department intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of the issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.

Upon issuance of the final results, the Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.6 The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of the final results of this review. The Department intends to instruct CBP to liquidate entries of subject merchandise from Shanghai Jinneng and Shanghai Jinfeng, at 139.49 percent (the PRC-wide rate). For a full discussion of this practice, see Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters which are not under review in this segment of the proceeding but which have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recent period; (2) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, including Shanghai Jinneng and Shanghai Jinfeng, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide entity rate of 139.49 percent; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter(s) that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

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.

On October 15, 2015, the Department published in the Federal Register the preliminary determination in the LTFV investigation of PET resin from India.1 The events occurring since the Preliminary Determination was issued are addressed in detail in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.2 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. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is available to all parties 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 at http://enforcement.trade.gov. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

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 determination of this investigation is now March 4, 2016.3

The period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014.

The product covered by this investigation is certain PET resin from India. For a full description of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix I to this notice.

All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum accompanying this notice, and which is hereby adopted by this notice.4 A list of the issues raised and to which the Department responded is attached to this notice as Appendix II.

Based on our review and analysis of the comments received from parties, and minor corrections presented at verification, we made certain changes to Ester's and Reliance's margin calculations in the Preliminary Determination. For a discussion of these changes, see the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.

In the preliminary determination, we stated that because the mandatory respondents Dhunseri Petrochem, Limited (Dhunseri) and JBF Industries, Limited (JBF) failed to respond to the Department's questionnaire, we preliminarily determined to apply facts otherwise available with an adverse inference to these respondents pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act.5 Pursuant to section 776 of the Act, the Department continues to find it appropriate to base Dhunseri and JBF's rate on AFA. In applying AFA, we are assigning Dhunseri and JBF the highest margin identified in the petition, 19.41 percent. See the Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 14.

The Department determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014:

Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated “all-others” rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero or de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. In this investigation, we calculated weighted-average dumping margins for mandatory respondents Ester and Reliance that are above de minimis and which are not based on section 776 of the Act. However, because there are only two relevant weighted-average dumping margins for this final determination, using a weighted-average of these two rates risks disclosure of business proprietary data. Therefore, the Department assigned a margin to the all-others rate companies based on the simple average of the two mandatory respondents' rates,6 less an adjustment for the export subsidies identified in the companion countervailing duty investigation.7

Background

On October 15, 2015, the Department of Commerce (Department) published in the Federal Register the preliminary determination in the LTFV investigation of PET resin from the PRC.1 For a description of the events that have occurred since the Preliminary Determination, see the Issue and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice.2 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 to all parties 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 at http://enforcement.trade.gov. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

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 because of snowstorm “Jonas.” All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended by four business days. The revised deadline for the final determination of this investigation is now March 4, 2016.

The period of investigation (POI) is July 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014.

The merchandise covered by this investigation is certain PET resin from the PRC. For a full description of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix I to this notice.

All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum accompanying this notice. A list of the issues raised and to which the Department responded is attached to this notice as Appendix II.

Based on the Department's analysis of the comments received and our findings at verification, we made certain changes to our margin calculations. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

In the Initiation Notice, 3 the Department stated that it would calculate combination rates for the respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this investigation. Policy Bulletin 05.1 describes this practice.4

Under section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the rate for all other companies that have not been individually examined is normally an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely on the basis of facts available. In this final determination, the Department has calculated rates for both mandatory respondents that are not zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts available. Therefore, the Department has assigned to the companies that have not been individually examined but have demonstrated their eligibility for a separate rate a margin of 114.47 percent, which is the weighted-average of Xingyu's and FEIS's margins using publicly-ranged quantities for their sales of subject merchandise.5

In our Preliminary Determination, we found that certain PRC exporters and/or producers of the merchandise under consideration during the POI did not respond to the Department's quantity and value questionnaire. As a result, we preliminarily determined to calculate the PRC-wide rate on the basis of adverse facts available (AFA). For the final determination, we have determined to use, as the AFA rate applied to the PRC-wide entity, 126.58 percent, the highest CONNUM-specific dumping margin calculated in this final determination. Consistent with our practice, the Department selected Xingyu's highest CONNUM-specific margin, as AFA, because this rate is higher than the other rates in this investigation and therefore, sufficiently adverse to serve the purposes of facts available.6 Furthermore, there is no need to corroborate the selected margin because it is based on information submitted by Xingyu in the course of this investigation, i.e., it is not secondary information.7

The Department determines that the final weighted-average dumping margins, and cash deposit rates reflecting adjustments to the weighted-average dumping margins to account for export subsidies and estimated domestic subsidy pass-through (see below for additional explanation), are as follows:

We intend to disclose to parties in this proceeding the calculations performed for this final determination within five days of the date of public announcement of our final determination, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all entries of PET resin from the PRC, which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after October 15, 2015, the date of publication in the Federal Register of the affirmative Preliminary Determination. Further, pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act, the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit 10 equal to the weighted-average amount by which the normal value exceeds U.S. price, adjusted where appropriate for export subsidies and estimated domestic subsidy pass-through,11 as follows: (1) For the exporter/producer combination listed in the table above, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the dumping margin which the Department determined in this final determination; (2) for all combinations of PRC exporters/producers of merchandise under consideration which have not received their own separate rate above, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the dumping margin established for the PRC-wide entity; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters of merchandise under consideration which have not received their own separate rate above, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the cash deposit rate applicable to the PRC exporter/producer combination that supplied that non-PRC exporter. The suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

Consistent with the Preliminary Determination and as noted above, where the product under investigation is also subject to a concurrent countervailing duty investigation, we instruct CBP to require a cash deposit less the amount of the countervailing duty determined to constitute any export subsidies or domestic subsidy pass through. Therefore, in the event that countervailing duty order is issued and suspension of liquidation is resumed in the companion countervailing duty investigation on PET resin from the PRC, the Department will instruct CBP to require cash deposits adjusted by the amount of export subsidies and domestic subsidy pass through, as appropriate. These adjustments are reflected in the final column of the rate chart, above.12 Until such suspension of liquidation is resumed in the companion countervailing duty investigation, and so long as suspension of liquidation continues under this antidumping duty investigation, the cash deposit rates for this antidumping duty investigation will be the rates identified in the weighted-average margin column in the rate chart, above.

In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we will notify the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) of our final determination. As our final determination is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will determine within 45 days whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation of the subject merchandise. If the ITC determines that such injury exists, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation.

This notice will serve as a 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 the 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 this determination and notice in accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

The Department published the Preliminary Determination on August 14, 2015,1 and placed the Post-Preliminary Memorandum on the record of this investigation on November 13, 2015.2 A summary of the events that occurred since the post-preliminary determination, as well as a full discussion of the issues raised by parties for this final determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.3 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 is available to all parties 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 at http://trade.gov/enforcement. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

As explained in the memorandum from the Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 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 determination is now March 4, 2016.4

The merchandise covered by this investigation is PET resin. The merchandise subject to this investigation is properly classified under subheading 3907.60.00.30 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise under investigation is dispositive. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix II.

The Department did not receive comments regarding the scope of this investigation.

The Department is conducting this countervailing duty (CVD) investigation in accordance with section 701 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 financial contribution by an “authority” that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is specific.5 For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.6

The subsidy programs under investigation and the issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues that parties raised, and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice at Appendix I.

In making this final determination, the Department relied, in part, on facts available and, because JBF Industries Limited and the Government of India did not act to the best of their ability to respond to the Department's requests for information, we drew an adverse inference where appropriate in selecting from among the facts otherwise available.7 For further information, see the section “Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences” in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Based on our review and analysis of the comments received from parties and minor corrections presented at verification, we made certain changes to the respondents' subsidy rate calculations since the Preliminary Determination and post-preliminary determination. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

On July 16, 2015, Petitioners filed a timely critical circumstances allegation, pursuant to section 773(e)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206(c)(1), alleging that critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of PET resin from India.8 We preliminarily determined that critical circumstances did not exist for Dhunseri Petrochem Ltd., but did exist for JBF Industries Limited and the all-others companies. That determination remains unchanged and a discussion of our final critical circumstances determination can be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum at the section, “Final Determination of Critical Circumstances, In Part.”

In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we calculated a rate for Dhunseri, the only individually investigated exporter/producer of the subject merchandise that participated in this investigation. In accordance with sections 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) and 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, for companies not individually investigated, we apply an “all-others” rate, which is normally calculated by weighting the subsidy rates of the individual companies selected as respondents with those companies' export sales of the subject merchandise to the United States. Under section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, the all-others rate should exclude zero and de minimis rates calculated for the exporters and producers individually investigated, and any rates determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. In this investigation, the only rate that is not zero or de minimis, or based entirely on facts available, is the rate calculated for Dhunseri. Consequently, the rate calculated for Dhunseri is also assigned as the “all-others” rate.

As a result of our Preliminary Determination, and pursuant to section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of entries of merchandise under consideration from India that were entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on or after May 16, 2015 (for those entities for which we found critical circumstances exist) or on or after August 14, 2015, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register (for all entities for which we did not find critical circumstances exist). In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we issued instructions to CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for CVD purposes for subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after December 12, 2015, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of all entries from May 16, 2015, or August 14, 2015, as the case may be, through December 11, 2015.

If the U.S. International Trade Commission (the ITC) issues a final affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order and will reinstate the suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act and will require a cash deposit of estimated CVDs for such entries of subject merchandise in the amounts indicated above. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated and all estimated duties deposited or securities posted as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be refunded or canceled.

In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information relating to this investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or under an administrative protective order, without the written consent of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

In the event the ITC issues a final negative injury determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to an 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 the return or 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 subject to sanction.

This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

Background

On October 15, 2015, the Department published in the Federal Register the preliminary determination in the LTFV investigation of PET resin from Oman.1 For a description of the events that have occurred since the Preliminary Determination, see the Issue and Decision Memorandum.2 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 to all parties 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 at http://enforcement.trade.gov. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

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 because of snowstorm “Jonas”. All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended by four business days. The revised deadline for the final determination of this investigation is now March 4, 2016.3

The period of investigation (“POI”) is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014.

The product covered by this investigation is certain PET resin from Oman. For a full description of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix I to this notice.

All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum accompanying this notice, and which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is appended to the notice.

The Department determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014:

Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated “all-others” rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero or de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. We based our calculation of the “all-others” rate on the margin calculated for OCTAL, the only mandatory respondent in this investigation.

We will disclose to parties in this proceeding the calculations performed for this final determination within five days of the date of public announcement of our final determination, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to continue to suspend liquidation of all entries of certain PET resin from Oman which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after October 15, 2015, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination. We also will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the weighted-average amount by which normal value exceeds U.S. price, as follows: (1) The cash deposit rate for OCTAL will be equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margin determined in this final determination; (2) if the exporter is not a firm identified in this investigation but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margin established for the producer of the subject merchandise; and (3) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will be 7.82 percent. The instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice.

In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we will notify the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) of our final determination. As our final determination is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will determine within 45 days whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation of the subject merchandise. If the ITC determines that such injury exists, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation.

This notice will serve as a 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 the 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 this determination and notice in accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

The Department published the Preliminary Determination on August 14, 2015.1 A summary of the events that occurred since the Department submitted the Preliminary Determination, as well as a full discussion of the issues raised by parties for this final determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.2 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 is available to all parties 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 at http://trade.gov/enforcement. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

As explained in the memorandum from the Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 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 determination is now March 4, 2016.3

The merchandise covered by this investigation is PET resin. The merchandise subject to this investigation is properly classified under subheading 3907.60.00.30 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise under investigation is dispositive. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix II.

The Department did not receive comments regarding the scope of this investigation.

The Department is conducting this countervailing duty (CVD) investigation in accordance with section 701 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 financial contribution by an “authority” that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is specific.4 For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

The subsidy programs under investigation and the issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues that parties raised, and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice at Appendix I.

The Department notes that, in making this final determination, we relied, in part, on facts available and, because two respondents did not act to the best of their ability to respond to the Department's requests for information, we drew an adverse inference where appropriate in selecting from among the facts otherwise available with respect to those respondents.5 For further information, see the section “Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences” in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Based on our review and analysis of the comments received from parties and minor corrections presented at verification, we made certain changes to the respondents' subsidy rate calculations since the Preliminary Determination. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we calculated a rate for Jiangyin Xingyu New Material Co., Ltd. (Xingyu) and Dragon Special Resin (Xiamen) Co., Ltd. (Dragon), the two individually investigated exporters/producers of the subject merchandise that participated in this investigation. In accordance with sections 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) and 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, for companies not individually investigated, we will determine an “all-others” rate equal to the weighted-average countervailable subsidy rates established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis countervailable subsidy rates, and any rates determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. Notwithstanding the language of section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, we have not calculated the “all-others” rate by weight-averaging the rates of the two individually investigated respondents, because doing so risks disclosure of proprietary information. Instead, we have calculated the all-others rate using a simple average of the final rates for the two mandatory company respondents. We intend to disclose to parties the calculations performed in this proceeding within five days of the public announcement of this final determination in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

As a result of our affirmative Preliminary Determination, and pursuant to section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of entries of merchandise under consideration from the PRC that were entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on or after August 14, 2015, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register. In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we issued instructions to CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for CVD purposes for subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after December 12, 2015, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of all entries from August 14, 2015 through December 11, 2015.

If the U.S. International Trade Commission (the ITC) issues a final affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order and will reinstate the suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act and will require a cash deposit of estimated CVDs for such entries of subject merchandise in the amounts indicated above. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated and all estimated duties deposited or securities posted as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be refunded or canceled.

In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information relating to this investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or under an administrative protective order, without the written consent of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to an 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 the return or 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 subject to sanction.

This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

Public comment periods will be provided throughout the agendas. The order in which agenda items are addressed may change. The meetings will run as late as necessary to complete scheduled business.

These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, (808) 522-8220 (voice) or (808) 522-8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

This request is for a revision and extension of a currently approved information collection.

The Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.; MMPA), Fur Seal Act (16 U.S.C. 1151 et seq.; FSA), and Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; ESA) prohibit certain activities affecting marine mammals and endangered and threatened species, with exceptions. Pursuant to section 104 of the MMPA and Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA, special exception permits may be obtained for scientific research and enhancing the survival or recovery of a species or stock of marine mammals or threatened or endangered species. Section 104 of the MMPA also includes permits for commercial and educational photography of marine mammals; import and capture of marine mammals for public display; and, Letters of Confirmation under the General Authorization for scientific research that involves minimal disturbance to marine mammals. The regulations implementing permits and reporting requirements under the MMPA and FSA are at 50 CFR part 216; the regulations for permit requirements under the ESA are at 50 CFR part 222. The required information in this collection is used to make the determinations required by the MMPA, ESA and their implementing regulations prior to issuing a permit; to establish appropriate permit conditions; and to evaluate the impacts of the proposed activity on protected species. Inventory reporting pertaining to marine mammals in public display facilities is required by the MMPA.

This information collection applies to certain protected species for which NMFS is responsible, including cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises), pinnipeds (seals and sea lions), sawfish (largetooth and smalltooth), sea turtles (in water), and sturgeon (Atlantic and shortnose). The information collection may be used for future listed species.

The currently approved application and reporting requirements will be revised to (1) create separate sections for marine mammals versus non-mammal species where doing so will result in less burden to the applicant (e.g., for scientific methods); (2) clarify to applicants why the information is required and what level of detail is needed for our analyses; (3) create `enhanced help' features (e.g., pop-up windows) in the online application system, Authorizations and Permits for Protected Species (APPS; https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov/) to make the instructions more accessible; (4) create a streamlined application and online module in APPS for scientific research permits involving only import, export, or receipt of biological samples (i.e., where no animals in the wild are affected); (5) make photography permit applications accessible via APPS.

Permit applications, permit reports, and inventory reports are available in paper or electronic versions (online or via email). Respondents may submit all applications and forms by email, facsimile, or mail. Respondents may also submit scientific research and enhancement permit applications and Letters of Intent under the General Authorization online via APPS.

OMB Control Number: 0648-0084.

Form Number(s): None.

Type of Review: Regular (revision and extension of a currently approved collection).

Affected Public: Individuals; business or other for-profit organizations; not-for-profit institutions; state, local, or tribal government; Federal government.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 536.

Estimated Time per Response: Scientific research permit applications, 50 hours; public display permit applications, 30 hours; photography permit applications, 10 hours; General Authorization applications, 10 hours; major permit modification requests, 35 hours; minor permit modification requests, 3 hours; scientific research permit reports, 12 hours; public display permit reports, 2 hours; photography permit reports, 2 hours; General Authorization reports, 8 hours; public display inventory reporting, 2 hours; and record keeping, 2 hours per permit or authorization type (including permits for scientific research, public display, photography, General Authorization; and retention or transfer of rehabilitated animals).

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 7,455.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $1,000 in recordkeeping/reporting costs.

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.

The Committee plans to discuss the Atlantic Herring Fishery Management Plan in regards to plans for a public workshop on the Management Strategy Evaluation of Atlantic Herring Acceptable Biological Catch control rules, Plan Development Team (PDT) analyses related to localized depletion in inshore waters and potentially develop a definition of localized depletion, a problem statement and related measures, and/or task PDT with additional analyses. The Committee also plans to discuss Georges Bank haddock catch cap accountability measures (AMs), specifically, plans to potentially develop a framework adjustment in 2016 to consider revising the AMs. Other business will be discussed as necessary.

Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during these meetings. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at (978) 465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

On August 27, 2015, notice was published in the Federal Register (80 FR 52035) that a request for a permit to conduct research on the species identified above had been submitted by the above-named applicant. The requested permit has been issued under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR parts 222-226).

Mr. Kerr has been issued a permit to conduct research on cetaceans in U.S. waters and the high seas of the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian Oceans to determine how environmental toxicants affect cetaceans and vary spatially and temporally across species; and to determine the route of exposure. Authorized research includes vessel surveys targeting live cetaceans; tissue collection of dead, stranded cetaceans; cell line development of tissue samples; and the import/export/receipt of biological samples collected in foreign waters/countries. Research activities on live animals include recordings and observations, biological sampling that includes use of an unmanned aircraft system, tracking, and incidental harassment during vessel surveys. The permit is valid through February 28, 2021.

In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), a final determination has been made that the activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

As required by the ESA, issuance of this permit was based on a finding that such permit: (1) Was applied for in good faith; (2) will not operate to the disadvantage of such endangered species; and (3) is consistent with the purposes and policies set forth in section 2 of the ESA.

The committee meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.150. The USMA BoV provides independent advice and recommendations to the President of the United States on matters related to morale, discipline, curriculum, instruction, physical equipment, fiscal affairs, academic methods, and any other matters relating to the Academy that the Board decides to consider.

Purpose of the Meeting: This is the 2016 Organizational Meeting of the USMA BoV. Members of the Board will be provided updates on Academy issues.

Proposed Agenda: The Board Chair will discuss the following topics: Election of 2016 committee Chair and Vice Chair, set dates for the Summer and Fall Board Meetings, 2015 Annual Report Update, Federal Advisory Committee Act Final Rule, Swearing in of Board Members, Board Charter Renewal, and Review of USMA Board of Visitors Rules. The Superintendent will then give the following updates: Key Past/Upcoming Events Since last Board of Visitors Meeting, First Semester Highlights, Class of 2020 Admissions Update, Military Program Review, Class of 2016 Branching Update, Intellectual Capital for the Army, SHARP (Sexual Harassment and Assault Response and Prevention) Update, Athletic Department Restructure Timeline, Construction Update, Department of Defense Warrior Games, and Upcoming Events.

Public's Accessibility to the Meeting: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165 and subject to the availability of space, this meeting is open to the public. Seating is on a first to arrive basis. Attendees are requested to submit their name, affiliation, and daytime phone number seven business days prior to the meeting to Mrs. Ghostlaw, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the address listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.140d, the committee is not obligated to allow a member of the public to speak or otherwise address the committee during the meeting, and members of the public attending the committee meeting will not be permitted to present questions from the floor or speak to any issue under consideration by the committee. Because the committee meeting will be held in a Federal Government facility on a military post, security screening is required. A government photo ID is required to enter post. Please note that security and gate guards have the right to inspect vehicles and persons seeking to enter and exit the installation. The United States Military Academy, Jefferson Hall, is fully handicap accessible. Wheelchair access is available at the south entrance of the building. For additional information about public access procedures, contact Mrs. Ghostlaw, the committee's Designated Federal Officer, at the email address or telephone number listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Written Comments or Statements: Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140 and section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the public or interested organizations may submit written comments or statements to the committee, in response to the stated agenda of the open meeting or in regard to the committee's mission in general. Written comments or statements should be submitted to Mrs. Ghostlaw, the committee Designated Federal Officer, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the address listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Each page of the comment or statement must include the author's name, title or affiliation, address, and daytime phone number. Written comments or statements should be submitted to Mrs. Ghostlaw, the committee Designated Federal Officer, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the address listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Written comments or statements being submitted in response to the agenda set forth in this notice must be received by the Designated Federal Official at least seven business days prior to the meeting to be considered by the committee. The Designated Federal Official will review all timely submitted written comments or statements with the committee Chairperson and ensure the comments are provided to all members of the committee before the meeting. Written comments or statements received after this date may not be provided to the committee until its next meeting.

Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.140d, the committee is not obligated to allow a member of the public to speak or otherwise address the committee during the meeting. However, the committee Designated Federal Official and Chairperson may choose to invite certain submitters to present their comments verbally during the open portion of this meeting or at a future meeting. The Designated Federal Officer, in consultation with the committee Chairperson, may allot a specific amount of time for submitters to present their comments verbally.

Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities program is to promote academic achievement and to improve results for children with disabilities by providing technical assistance (TA), supporting model demonstration projects, disseminating useful information, and implementing activities that are supported by scientifically based research.

Priority: In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority is from allowable activities specified in the statute (see sections 663 and 681(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)).

Absolute Priority: For FY 2016 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet this priority.

This priority is:

National Center for Students with Disabilities Who Require Intensive Intervention.

Background:

Providing effective evidence-based (as defined in this notice) instruction and intervention for all students, including students with disabilities, is critical for their success in postsecondary settings. Recent data demonstrate that academic and behavioral outcomes for students with disabilities continue to be poor.

In 2015, for example, a large proportion of students with disabilities scored below the basic level 1 on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in both reading (4th grade: 70 percent; 8th grade: 67 percent) and math (4th grade: 49 percent; 8th grade: 72 percent) (U.S. Department of Education, 2015). In the 2011-12 school year, students with disabilities were more than twice as likely to receive an out-of-school suspension as their non-disabled peers, and over half (58 percent) were subjected to seclusion (U.S. Department of Education, 2014). Further, students with emotional disturbance or a specific learning disability were suspended at higher rates than other students with disabilities (Losen, Hodson, Ee, & Martinez, 2014). Nationally, in the 2011-12 school year, it is estimated that nearly 18 million instructional days were lost for all U.S. public school children due to exclusionary discipline (Losen, Hodson, Keith, Morrison, & Belway, 2015).

Significant and persistent academic and behavioral difficulties can limit success in school and postsecondary opportunities. A recent report suggests that the graduation rate for students with disabilities (61.9 percent) is much lower than the graduation rate for all students (81.4 percent) (DePaoli et al., 2015). Students with disabilities are also less likely to have enrolled in postsecondary education, have lower salaries when employed, and have higher involvement with the criminal justice system than their non-disabled peers (Sanford et al., 2011).

For some students, the typical evidence-based instruction and behavioral supports provided in the classroom are not sufficient to address their educational needs or prepare them for postsecondary opportunities. They will need individualized, more intensive intervention composed of practices that are evidence-based.

Interventions can be intensified in multiple ways (e.g., dosage, group size, intervention components, interventionist expertise) (e.g., Barnett, Daly, Jones, & Lentz, 2004; Codding & Lane, 2014; Daly, Martens, Barnett, Witt, & Olson, 2007; Mellard, McKnight, & Jordan, 2010; Warren, Fey, & Yoder, 2007), and for students at risk of, or identified as having, a disability, research has demonstrated the effectiveness of intensive interventions in improving reading outcomes (e.g., Allor, Mathes, Roberts, Cheatham, & Al Otaiba, 2014; Al Otaiba et al., 2014; Denton et al., 2013; Solis, Miciak, Vaughn, & Fletcher, 2014; Wanzek et al., 2013); mathematics outcomes (e.g., Bryant et al., 2014; Dennis, 2015; Fuchs, Fuchs, Powell, Seethaler, Cirino, & Fletcher, 2008; Gersten et al., 2009); and behavioral outcomes (e.g., Gage, Lewis, & Stichter, 2012; Goh & Bambara, 2012).

The co-occurrence of academic and behavioral difficulties has been well documented, yet the exact nature of the relationship is still not well understood (e.g., Algozzine, Wang, & Violette, 2011; Morgan & Sideridis, 2013). However, recent research on integrating academic and behavioral interventions has demonstrated promise for improving student outcomes (e.g., Algozzine et al., 2012; Chaparro, Smolkowski, Baker, Hanson, & Ryan-Jackson, 2012; Stewart, Benner, Martella, Marchand-Martella, 2007). In an analysis of academic, behavioral, and integrated academic and behavioral intervention models, Stewart et al. (2007) found greater gains in reading and behavior for the integrated intervention model than the academic or behavioral intervention models alone.

In short, there are students with disabilities who have persistent learning or behavior difficulties and who need intensive intervention to succeed in school and to be prepared for postsecondary opportunities. However, States, districts, and schools need assistance in developing or refining and coordinating their systems of instruction and intervention to address the needs of these students.

Research has identified numerous components within schools' systems of instruction and intervention that can make an intervention more or less effective and sustainable. For example, the need to improve educators' knowledge and use of evidence-based interventions through teacher preparation (e.g., Ciullo et al., 2015; Gable, Tonelson, Sheth, Wilson, & Park, 2012; Kern, Hilt-Panahon, & Sokol, 2009) and professional development (e.g., Bambara, Goh, Kern, & Caskie, 2012; Ciullo et al., 2015; Debnam, Pas, & Bradshaw, 2012; Kern, Hilt-Panahon, & Sokol, 2009; Regan, Berkeley, Hughes, & Brady, 2015) has been well documented. The need to improve educators' knowledge and use of culturally and linguistically responsive instruction for students with disabilities (e.g., Ford, 2012; Orosco & Klingner, 2010) has also been noted, as 91 percent of 4th and 89 percent of 8th grade students with disabilities who are English Learners (ELs) scored below the basic level in reading on the 2015 NAEP (U.S. Department of Education, 2015).

Another component that can facilitate or impede implementation and sustainability of an intervention is school culture (O'Connor & Freeman, 2012), particularly for students with persistent difficulties (e.g., Bambara et al., 2012). The leadership and organizational supports, such as scheduling, roles of staff, adequate planning time, professional development structure, evaluation, leadership support, policies, and funding (e.g., Bambara et al., 2012; Fixsen, Naoom, Blasé, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005; O'Connor & Freeman, 2012), can also facilitate or impede the effectiveness and sustainability of the system of instruction and intervention. Addressing academic and behavioral difficulties separately, instead of using an integrated approach, may result in inefficiencies in coordinating intervention. By using a more integrated approach, limited resources can be maximized and organizational structures and efficiency can be improved (e.g., Chaparro et al., 2012; Lane, Oakes, & Menzies, 2014; McIntosh, Bohanon, & Goodman, 2010).

As part of the recent emphasis in the Department's accountability efforts on improved results for students with disabilities, the Department required States under Indicator 17 of their IDEA Part B State Performance Plans/Annual Performance Reports (SPPs/APRs) to develop a State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP).2 As part of the SSIP, States must identify the result(s) they intend to achieve through implementing the SSIP (referred to as the State Identified Measureable Result(s) (SIMR)). To date, 42 States are focusing on improving performance in reading, math, or both, and 12 States are focusing on increasing the graduation rate of children and youth with disabilities. States will need TA to support the implementation of their SSIP strategies to improve academic and behavior-related results.

The priority established in this notice will fund a national center that will focus on intensive academic and behavioral interventions for students with disabilities with persistent learning or behavior difficulties, but not students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, as the needs of those students are targeted in other Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) investments.

Priority:

The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to establish and operate a National Center for Students with Disabilities Who Require Intensive Intervention (Center). The Center will assist State educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs) in their efforts to support schools and educators in implementing intensive intervention composed of practices that are evidence-based (“intensive intervention”) for students with disabilities who have persistent learning or behavior difficulties and who need intensive intervention to succeed in school and be prepared for postsecondary opportunities (“students with disabilities who need intensive intervention”). The Center will give priority to those States with SIMRs that focus on academic or behavior-related results. The Center must achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes:

(1) Increased LEA and educators' knowledge and use of intensive intervention in reading, mathematics, and behavior;

(2) Increased LEA and educators' knowledge and use of culturally and linguistically responsive intensive intervention, including intensive intervention for ELs with disabilities;

(3) Increased capacity of LEAs and schools to develop or refine and coordinate their system of instruction and intervention to implement intensive intervention in reading, mathematics, and behavior;

(4) Increased capacity of SEAs, LEAs, and educators to support, implement, and sustain intensive intervention in reading, mathematics, and behavior;

(5) Increased capacity of SEAs to support the efforts of LEAs to use intensive intervention to achieve the academic and behavior-related results identified in a State's SIMR;

(6) Increased knowledge and capacity of SEAs, LEAs, and educators to use and coordinate existing national, regional, State, and local resources (e.g., parent and family organizations, TA providers, mental health agencies and organizations, etc.) to better support, implement, and sustain intensive intervention in reading, mathematics, and behavior;

(7) Increased dissemination of lessons learned from implementing intensive intervention to inform State and local implementation efforts; and

(8) Increased capacity of institutions of higher education (IHEs) to prepare educators to coordinate instruction and intervention and support, implement, and sustain intensive intervention in reading, mathematics, and behavior.

In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the application and administrative requirements in this priority. OSEP encourages innovative approaches to meet these requirements, which are:

(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Significance of the Project,” how the proposed project will—

(1) Address the current training and information needs of LEAs and educators in providing intensive intervention to students with disabilities who need intensive intervention. To meet this requirement the applicant must—

(i) Present information and current data on the current capacity of LEAs and educators to address the needs of students with disabilities who need intensive intervention; and

(ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current educational issues around, and policy initiatives intended to address, the needs of students with disabilities who need intensive intervention; and

(2) Address the current and emerging needs of SEAs and LEAs in developing or refining and coordinating their systems of instruction and intervention for supporting, implementing, and sustaining intensive intervention.

(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Project Services,” how the proposed project will—

(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that have historically been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe how it will—

(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for TA and information; and

(ii) Ensure that services and products meet the needs of the intended recipients (e.g., by creating materials in formats accessible to and in languages understandable to the stakeholders served by the intended recipients);

(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet this requirement, the applicant must provide—

(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and

(ii) The logic model by which the proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes. A logic model communicates how a project will achieve its intended outcomes and provides a framework for both the formative and summative evaluations of the project;

(3) Use a conceptual framework to develop project plans and activities, describing any underlying concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed relationships or linkages among these variables, and any empirical support for this framework;

(4) Be based on current research and make use of evidence-based practices. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) The current research on the effectiveness of intensive intervention for students with disabilities who need intensive intervention;

(ii) The current research about adult learning principles and implementation science that will inform the proposed TA; and

(iii) How the proposed project will incorporate current research and evidence-based practices in the development and delivery of its products and services;

(5) Develop products and provide services that are of high quality and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) How it proposes to identify or develop the knowledge base on coordinating systems of instruction and intervention and supporting, implementing, and sustaining intensive intervention for students with disabilities who need intensive intervention;

(ii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,3 which must identify the intended recipients of the products and services under this approach;

(iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,4 which must identify—

(A) The intended recipients of the products and services under this approach; and

(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of potential TA recipients to work with the project, assessing, at a minimum, their current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build capacity at the local level;

(C) Its proposed approach to working with IHEs to prepare educators to coordinate instruction and intervention and support, implement, and sustain intensive intervention in reading, mathematics, and behavior; and

(iv) Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained TA,5 which must identify—

(A) The intended recipients of the products and services under this approach;

(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of the SEAs, LEAs, and schools to work with the project, including their commitment to the initiative, alignment of the initiative to their needs, current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build capacity at the district level;

(C) Its proposed plan for assisting LEAs to build or enhance training systems that include professional development based on adult learning principles and coaching;

(D) Its proposed plan for working with appropriate levels of the education system (e.g., SEAs, LEAs, schools) to ensure that there is communication between each level and that there are systems in place to support the use of intensive intervention;

(E) Its proposed plan for working with national, State, regional, and local TA providers and agencies (e.g., State TA providers, regional TA providers, Department-funded and other federally funded TA Centers, mental health agencies and organizations) and families to ensure that there is communication between each level and that there are systems in place to support the use of intensive intervention; and

(F) Its proposed plan for collaborating and coordinating with Department-funded TA investments, where appropriate, in order to align complementary work and jointly develop and implement products and services to implement intensive intervention;

(6) Develop products and implement services that maximize efficiency. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) How the proposed project will use technology to achieve the intended project outcomes;

(ii) With whom the proposed project will collaborate and the intended outcomes of this collaboration; and

(iii) How the proposed project will use non-project resources to achieve the intended project outcomes.

(c) In the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Evaluation Plan,” include an evaluation plan for the project as described in the following paragraphs. The evaluation plan must describe: Measures of progress in implementation, including the criteria for determining the extent to which the project's products and services have reached their target population; measures of intended outcomes or results of the project's activities in order to evaluate those activities; and how well the goals or objectives of the proposed project, as described in its logic model, have been met.

The applicant must provide an assurance that, in designing the evaluation plan, it will—

(1) Designate, with the approval of the OSEP project officer, a project liaison staff person with sufficient dedicated time, experience in evaluation, and knowledge of the project to work in collaboration with the Center to Improve Project Performance (CIPP),6 the project director, and the OSEP project officer on the following tasks:

(i) Revise, as needed, the logic model submitted in the grant application to provide for a more comprehensive measurement of implementation and outcomes and to reflect any changes or clarifications to the model discussed at the kick-off meeting;

(ii) Refine the evaluation design and instrumentation proposed in the grant application consistent with the logic model (e.g., prepare evaluation questions about significant program processes and outcomes; develop quantitative or qualitative data collections that permit both the collection of progress data, including fidelity of implementation, as appropriate, and the assessment of project outcomes; select respondent samples if appropriate; design instruments or identifying data sources; and identify analytic strategies); and

(iii) Revise, as needed, the evaluation plan submitted in the grant application such that it clearly—

(A) Specifies the measures and associated instruments or sources for data appropriate to the evaluation questions, suggests analytic strategies for those data, provides a timeline for conducting the evaluation, and includes staff assignments for completing the plan;

(B) Delineates the data expected to be available by the end of the second project year for use during the project's 3+2 review for continued funding described under the heading Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project; and

(C) Can be used to assist the project director and the OSEP project officer, with the assistance of CIPP, as needed, to specify the performance measures to be addressed in the project's Annual Performance Report;

(2) Cooperate with CIPP staff in order to accomplish the tasks described in paragraph (1) of this section; and

(3) Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to cover the costs of carrying out the tasks described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section and implementing the evaluation plan.

(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Adequacy of Project Resources,” how—

(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability, as appropriate;

(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;

(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to carry out the proposed activities; and

(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the anticipated results and benefits.

(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Management Plan,” how—

(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and

(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;

(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors will be allocated to the project and how these allocations are appropriate and adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;

(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and services provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to recipients; and

(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of perspectives, including those of families, educators, TA providers, researchers, and policy makers, among others, in its development and operation.

(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant must—

(1) Include, in Appendix A, a logic model that depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed project.

(2) Include, in Appendix A, a conceptual framework for the project;

(3) Include, in Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines, as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the narrative;

(4) Include, in the budget, attendance at the following:

(i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting in Washington, DC, with the OSEP project officer and other relevant staff during each subsequent year of the project period.

(ii) A two and one-half day project directors' conference in Washington, DC, during each year of the project period;

(iii) Two annual two-day trips to attend Department briefings, Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by OSEP; and

(iv) A one-day intensive 3+2 review meeting in Washington, DC, during the last half of the second year of the project period;

(5) Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual set-aside of five percent of the grant amount to support emerging needs that are consistent with the proposed project's intended outcomes, as those needs are identified in consultation with, and approved by, the OSEP project officer. With approval from the OSEP project officer, the project must reallocate any remaining funds from this annual set-aside no later than the end of the third quarter of each budget period; and

(6) Maintain a Web site that meets government or industry-recognized standards for accessibility.

Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project:

In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fourth and fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), as well as—

(a) The recommendation of a 3+2 review team consisting of experts selected by the Secretary. This review will be conducted during a one-day intensive meeting that will be held during the last half of the second year of the project period;

(b) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the project; and

(c) The quality, relevance, and usefulness of the project's products and services and the extent to which the project's products and services are aligned with the project's objectives and likely to result in the project achieving its intended outcomes.

Definitions:

For the purposes of this priority:

Evidence-based means supported by strong theory.

Strong theory means a rationale for the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice that includes a logic model.

Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities and requirements. Section 681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment requirements of the APA inapplicable to the priority in this notice.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481.

Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3474.

Type of Award: Cooperative agreement.

Estimated Available Funds: $2,100,000.

Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2017 from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

Maximum Award: We will reject any application that proposes a budget exceeding $2,100,000 for a single budget period of 12 months.

Estimated Number of Awards: 1.

Project Period: Up to 36 months with an optional additional 24 months based on performance. Applications must include plans for both the 36-month award and the 24-month extension.

1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs, including public charter schools that operate as LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations; freely associated States and outlying areas; Indian tribes or tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations.

2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost sharing or matching.

3. Eligible Subgrantees: (a) Under 34 CFR 75.708(b) and (c) a grantee may award subgrants—to directly carry out project activities described in its application—to the following types of entities: SEAs; LEAs, including public charter schools that operate as LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations; freely associated States and outlying areas; Indian tribes or tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations suitable to carry out the activities proposed in the application.

(b) The grantee may award subgrants to entities it has identified in an approved application.

4. Other General Requirements:

(a) Recipients of funding under this competition must make positive efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with disabilities (see section 606 of IDEA).

(b) Each applicant for, and recipient of, funding under this program must involve individuals with disabilities, or parents of individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26, in planning, implementing, and evaluating the project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of IDEA).

1. Address to Request Application Package: You can obtain an application package via the Internet or from the Education Publications Center (ED Pubs). To obtain a copy via the Internet, use the following address: www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html. To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write, fax, or call: ED Pubs, U.S. Department of Education, P.O. Box 22207, Alexandria, VA 22304. Telephone, toll free: 1-877-433-7827. FAX: (703) 605-6794. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call, toll free: 1-877-576-7734.

You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: www.EDPubs.gov or at its email address: [email protected].

If you request an application package from ED Pubs, be sure to identify this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.326Q.

Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) by contacting the person or team listed under Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice.

2. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements concerning the content of an application, together with the forms you must submit, are in the application package for this competition.

Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. You must limit Part III to no more than 70 pages, using the following standards:

• A “page” is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.

• Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.

• Use a font that is 12 point or larger.

• Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial. An application submitted in any other font (including Times Roman or Arial Narrow) will not be accepted.

The page limit and double-spacing requirements do not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or the abstract (follow the guidance provided in the application package for completing the abstract), the table of contents, the list of priority requirements, the resumes, the reference list, the letters of support, or the appendices. However, the page limit and double-spacing requirements do apply to all of Part III, the application narrative, including all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.

We will reject your application if you exceed the page limit in the application narrative section or if you apply standards other than those specified in this notice and the application package.

3. Submission Dates and Times:

Applications Available: March 14, 2016.

Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 28, 2016.

Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (Grants.gov). For information (including dates and times) about how to submit your application electronically, or in paper format by mail or hand delivery if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, please refer to Other Submission Requirements in section IV of this notice.

We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements.

Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact the person listed under For Further Information Contact in section VII of this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the application process, the individual's application remains subject to all other requirements and limitations in this notice.

Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 27, 2016.

4. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this competition.

5. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

6. Data Universal Numbering System Number, Taxpayer Identification Number, and System for Award Management: To do business with the Department of Education, you must—

a. Have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and a Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN);

b. Register both your DUNS number and TIN with the System for Award Management (SAM) (formerly the Central Contractor Registry), the Government's primary registrant database;

c. Provide your DUNS number and TIN on your application; and

d. Maintain an active SAM registration with current information while your application is under review by the Department and, if you are awarded a grant, during the project period.

You can obtain a DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet at the following Web site: http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform. A DUNS number can be created within one to two business days.

If you are a corporate entity, agency, institution, or organization, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service. If you are an individual, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service or the Social Security Administration. If you need a new TIN, please allow two to five weeks for your TIN to become active.

The SAM registration process can take approximately seven business days, but may take upwards of several weeks, depending on the completeness and accuracy of the data you enter into the SAM database. Thus, if you think you might want to apply for Federal financial assistance under a program administered by the Department, please allow sufficient time to obtain and register your DUNS number and TIN. We strongly recommend that you register early.

If you are currently registered with SAM, you may not need to make any changes. However, please make certain that the TIN associated with your DUNS number is correct. Also note that you will need to update your registration annually. This may take three or more business days.

Information about SAM is available at www.SAM.gov. To further assist you with obtaining and registering your DUNS number and TIN in SAM or updating your existing SAM account, we have prepared a SAM.gov Tip Sheet, which you can find at: www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/sam-faqs.html.

In addition, if you are submitting your application via Grants.gov, you must (1) be designated by your organization as an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR); and (2) register yourself with Grants.gov as an AOR. Details on these steps are outlined at the following Grants.gov Web page: www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html.

7. Other Submission Requirements: Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted electronically unless you qualify for an exception to this requirement in accordance with the instructions in this section.

a. Electronic Submission of Applications.

Applications for grants under the National Center for Students with Disabilities Who Require Intensive Intervention competition, CFDA number 84.326Q, must be submitted electronically using the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at www.Grants.gov. Through this site, you will be able to download a copy of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and submit your application. You may not email an electronic copy of a grant application to us.

We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format unless, as described elsewhere in this section, you qualify for one of the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement and submit, no later than two weeks before the application deadline date, a written statement to the Department that you qualify for one of these exceptions. Further information regarding calculation of the date that is two weeks before the application deadline date is provided later in this section under Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement.

You may access the electronic grant application for the National Center for Students with Disabilities Who Require Intensive Intervention competition at www.Grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable application package for this competition by the CFDA number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for 84.326, not 84.326Q).

Please note the following:

• When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find information about submitting an application electronically through the site, as well as the hours of operation.

• Applications received by Grants.gov are date and time stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted and must be date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as otherwise noted in this section, we will not accept your application if it is received—that is, date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system—after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements. When we retrieve your application from Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are rejecting your application because it was date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date.

• The amount of time it can take to upload an application will vary depending on a variety of factors, including the size of the application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline date to begin the submission process through Grants.gov.

• You should review and follow the Education Submission Procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov that are included in the application package for this competition to ensure that you submit your application in a timely manner to the Grants.gov system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures pertaining to Grants.gov under News and Events on the Department's G5 system home page at www.G5.gov. In addition, for specific guidance and procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov, please refer to the Grants.gov Web site at: www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html.

• You will not receive additional point value because you submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, as described elsewhere in this section, and submit your application in paper format.

• You must submit all documents electronically, including all information you typically provide on the following forms: the Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and certifications.

• You must upload any narrative sections and all other attachments to your application as files in a read-only, non-modifiable Portable Document Format (PDF). Do not upload an interactive or fillable PDF file. If you upload a file type other than a read-only, non-modifiable PDF (e.g., Word, Excel, WordPerfect, etc.) or submit a password-protected file, we will not review that material. Please note that this could result in your application not being considered for funding because the material in question—for example, the project narrative—is critical to a meaningful review of your proposal. For that reason it is important to allow yourself adequate time to upload all material as PDF files. The Department will not convert material from other formats to PDF. Additional, detailed information on how to attach files is in the application instructions.

• Your electronic application must comply with any page-limit requirements described in this notice.

• After you electronically submit your application, you will receive from Grants.gov an automatic notification of receipt that contains a Grants.gov tracking number. This notification indicates receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by the Department. Grants.gov will also notify you automatically by email if your application met all the Grants.gov validation requirements or if there were any errors (such as submission of your application by someone other than a registered Authorized Organization Representative, or inclusion of an attachment with a file name that contains special characters). You will be given an opportunity to correct any errors and resubmit, but you must still meet the deadline for submission of applications.

Once your application is successfully validated by Grants.gov, the Department will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send you an email with a unique PR/Award number for your application.

These emails do not mean that your application is without any disqualifying errors. While your application may have been successfully validated by Grants.gov, it must also meet the Department's application requirements as specified in this notice and in the application instructions. Disqualifying errors could include, for instance, failure to upload attachments in a read-only, non-modifiable PDF; failure to submit a required part of the application; or failure to meet applicant eligibility requirements. It is your responsibility to ensure that your submitted application has met all of the Department's requirements.

• We may request that you provide us original signatures on forms at a later date.

Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues with the Grants.gov System: If you are experiencing problems submitting your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov Support Desk, toll free, at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it.

If you are prevented from electronically submitting your application on the application deadline date because of technical problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension until 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to enable you to transmit your application electronically or by hand delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing instructions described elsewhere in this notice.

If you submit an application after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date, please contact the person listed under For Further Information Contact in section VII of this notice and provide an explanation of the technical problem you experienced with Grants.gov, along with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number. We will accept your application if we can confirm that a technical problem occurred with the Grants.gov system and that the problem affected your ability to submit your application by 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We will contact you after we determine whether your application will be accepted.

Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement: You qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, and may submit your application in paper format, if you are unable to submit an application through the Grants.gov system because—

• You do not have access to the Internet; or

• You do not have the capacity to upload large documents to the Grants.gov system;

• No later than two weeks before the application deadline date (14 calendar days or, if the fourteenth calendar day before the application deadline date falls on a Federal holiday, the next business day following the Federal holiday), you mail or fax a written statement to the Department, explaining which of the two grounds for an exception prevents you from using the Internet to submit your application.

If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be postmarked no later than two weeks before the application deadline date. If you fax your written statement to the Department, we must receive the faxed statement no later than two weeks before the application deadline date.

Address and mail or fax your statement to: Celia Rosenquist, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5146, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-5076. FAX: (202) 245-7590.

Your paper application must be submitted in accordance with the mail or hand delivery instructions described in this notice.

b. Submission of Paper Applications by Mail.

If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you may mail (through the U.S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier) your application to the Department. You must mail the original and two copies of your application, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.326Q) LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20202-4260.

You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:

(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.

(2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the U.S. Postal Service.

(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier.

(4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education.

If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:

(1) A private metered postmark.

(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.

We will not consider applications postmarked after the application deadline date.

c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.

If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you (or a courier service) may deliver your paper application to the Department by hand. You must deliver the original and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.326Q) 550 12th Street SW., Room 7039, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.

The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays.

1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are listed in the application package.

2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable quality.

In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary requires various assurances including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department of Education (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

3. Additional Review and Selection Process Factors: In the past, the Department has had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain competitions because so many individuals who are eligible to serve as peer reviewers have conflicts of interest. The standing panel requirements under section 682(b) of IDEA also have placed additional constraints on the availability of reviewers. Therefore, the Department has determined that for some discretionary grant competitions, applications may be separated into two or more groups and ranked and selected for funding within specific groups. This procedure will make it easier for the Department to find peer reviewers by ensuring that greater numbers of individuals who are eligible to serve as reviewers for any particular group of applicants will not have conflicts of interest. It also will increase the quality, independence, and fairness of the review process, while permitting panel members to review applications under discretionary grant competitions for which they also have submitted applications. However, if the Department decides to select an equal number of applications in each group for funding, this may result in different cut-off points for fundable applications in each group.

4. Risk Assessment and Special Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 200.205, before awarding grants under this competition the Department conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR 3474.10, the Secretary may impose special conditions and, in appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant if the applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.

1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally, also.

If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, we notify you.

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify administrative and national policy requirements in the application package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also incorporates your approved application as part of your binding commitments under the grant.

3. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition, you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).

(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.

4. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), the Department has established a set of performance measures, including long-term measures, that are designed to yield information on various aspects of the effectiveness and quality of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children With Disabilities program. For purposes of this priority, the Center will use these measures, which focus on the extent to which projects provide high-quality products and services, the relevance of project products and services to educational and early intervention policy and practice, and the use of products and services to improve educational and early intervention policy and practice.

Projects funded under this competition are required to submit data on these measures as directed by OSEP.

Grantees will be required to report information on their project's performance in annual and final performance reports to the Department (34 CFR 75.590).

5. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: Whether a grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, the performance targets in the grantee's approved application.

In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

For Further Information Contact: Celia Rosenquist, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5146, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 245-7373.

If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) by contacting the Grants and Contracts Services Team, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5037, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-2550. Telephone: (202) 245-7363. If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the FRS, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or PDF. To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: Loan Cancellation in the Federal Perkins Loan Program.

OMB Control Number: 1845-0100.

Type of Review: An extension of an existing information collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments; Individuals and Households; Private Sector.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 116,872.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 43,832.

Abstract: This is a request for an extension of the OMB approval for the record-keeping requirements contained in 34 CFR 674.53, 674.56, 674.57, 674.58 and 674.59. The information collections in these regulations are necessary to determine Federal Perkins Loan (Perkins Loan) Program borrower's eligibility to receive program benefits and to prevent fraud and abuse of program funds.

The Commission will submit the reporting and recordkeeping requirements of Reliability Standard MOD-031-2 to OMB for review of a non-material or non-substantive change. Reliability Standard MOD-031-2 replaces or supplements requirements from previous versions of the MOD-031 Reliability Standard, which are approved under FERC-725L (Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System: MOD Reliability Standards).

Type of Request: Approval of a non-material or non-substantive change to the FERC-725L information collection requirements.

Abstract: The Commission requires the information collected by the FERC-725L to implement the statutory provisions of section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA).1 On August 8, 2005, Congress enacted into law the Electricity Modernization Act of 2005, which is Title XII, Subtitle A, of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005).2 EPAct 2005 added a new section 215 to the FPA, which required a Commission-certified Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) to develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, which are subject to Commission review and approval. Once approved, the Reliability Standards may be enforced by the ERO subject to Commission oversight, or the Commission can independently enforce Reliability Standards.3

On February 3, 2006, the Commission issued Order No. 672, implementing section 215 of the FPA.4 Pursuant to Order No. 672, the Commission certified one organization, North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), as the ERO.5 The Reliability Standards developed by the ERO and approved by the Commission apply to users, owners and operators of the Bulk-Power System as set forth in each Reliability Standard.

The Reliability Standard MOD-031-2 achieves the same reliability purpose of the prior version MOD-031-1. This standard provides authority for Bulk-Power System planners and operators to collect demand, energy, and related data to support reliability studies and assessments, and enumerates the responsibilities and obligations of requestors and respondents of that data.

In its November 13, 2015 petition, NERC states that Reliability Standard MOD-031-2 is an improvement to the existing version of the standard because it clarifies the compliance obligations related to (1) providing data to Regional Entities and (2) responding to a request for data subject to confidentiality restrictions. NERC also states that the improvements to the Reliability Standard are consistent with the Commission directives in Order No. 804.6 In Order No. 804, the Commission approved Reliability Standard MOD-031. However, the Commission also directed, pursuant to 215(d)(5) of the FPA, that NERC develop a modification to Reliability Standard MOD-031-1 to clarify that planning coordinators and balancing authorities must provide demand and energy data upon request of a Regional Entity, as necessary to support NERC's development of seasonal and long-term reliability assessments.

In a Delegated Letter Order in Docket No. RD16-1, the Commission approved the proposed Reliability Standard MOD-031-2 on February 18, 2016.7

FERC is not changing the way the FERC-725L collection is being done, and is not modifying the burden, cost, or respondents. The reporting and recordkeeping requirements will be submitted to the OMB as a non-material or non-substantive change to the currently approved FERC-725L collection.

Type of Respondents: Distribution Providers (DP), Load-Serving Entities (LSE), Transmission Planner (TP), and Balancing Authorities (BA).

Estimate of Annual Burden.8 The burden and cost are not expected to change from the figures currently approved by the OMB.9