Sulfanilic Acid From China and India; Scheduling of Expedited Five-Year Reviews
Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 244 (Tuesday, December 20, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Number 244 (Tuesday, December 20, 2016)
Notices
Pages 92853-92854
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov
FR Doc No: 2016-30534
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
Investigation Nos. 701-TA-318 and 731-TA-538 and 561 (Fourth Review)
Sulfanilic Acid From China and India; Scheduling of Expedited Five-Year Reviews
AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives notice of the scheduling of expedited reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (``the Act'') to determine whether revocation of the countervailing duty order on sulfanilic acid from India and antidumping orders on sulfanilic acid from China and India would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of
Page 92854
material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time.
DATES: Effective Date: December 5, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lawrence Jones (202-205-3358), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (http://www.usitc.gov). The public record for these reviews may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background.-- On December 5, 2016, the Commission determined that the domestic interested party group response to its notice of institution (81 FR 60386, September 1, 2016) of the subject five-year reviews was adequate. The Commission also determined that the respondent interested party group response with respect to the order on sulfanilic acid from China was adequate but that the respondent interested party group response with respect to the orders on sulfanilic acid from India was inadequate. However, on November 18, 2016, the sole participating respondent interested party, in the review on sulfanilic acid from China (Archroma), withdrew its position and statements that advocated for revocation of the order. The Commission therefore determined that it would not be appropriate to conduct a full review of the order concerning China. The Commission did not find any circumstances that warranted conducting full reviews with respect to the orders concerning India.\1\ Accordingly, the Commission determined that it would conduct expedited reviews pursuant to section 751(c)(3) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A record of the Commissioners' votes, the Commission's statement on adequacy, and any individual Commissioner's statements will be available from the Office of the Secretary and at the Commission's Web site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For further information concerning the conduct of these reviews and rules of general application, consult the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part 207).
Staff report.--A staff report containing information concerning the subject matter of the reviews will be placed in the nonpublic record on December 15, 2016, and made available to persons on the Administrative Protective Order service list for these reviews. A public version will be issued thereafter, pursuant to section 207.62(d)(4) of the Commission's rules.
Written submissions.--As provided in section 207.62(d) of the Commission's rules, interested parties that are parties to the reviews and that have provided individually adequate responses to the notice of institution,\2\ and any party other than an interested party to the reviews may file written comments with the Secretary on what determinations the Commission should reach in the reviews. Comments are due on or before December 22, 2016 and may not contain new factual information. Any person that is neither a party to the five-year reviews nor an interested party may submit a brief written statement (which shall not contain any new factual information) pertinent to the reviews by December 22, 2016. However, should the Department of Commerce extend the time limit for its completion of the final results of its reviews, the deadline for comments (which may not contain new factual information) on Commerce's final results is three business days after the issuance of Commerce's results. If comments contain business proprietary information (BPI), they must conform with the requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. The Commission's rules with respect to filing were revised effective July 25, 2014. See 79 FR 35920 (June 25, 2014), and the revised Commission Handbook on E-filing, available from the Commission's Web site at http://edis.usitc.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Commission has found the responses submitted by Nation Ford Chemical Co. and Archroma U.S., Inc. to be individually adequate. Comments from other interested parties will not be accepted (see 19 CFR 207.62(d)(2)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each document filed by a party to the reviews must be served on all other parties to the reviews (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service.
Determinations.--The Commission has determined these reviews are extraordinarily complicated and therefore has determined to exercise its authority to extend the review period by up to 90 days pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(5)(B).
Authority: These reviews are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.62 of the Commission's rules.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: December 14, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
FR Doc. 2016-30534 Filed 12-19-16; 8:45 am
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
