Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 242 / Friday, December 17, 2010 / Notices 78967 

1See Changzhou Wujin Fine Chemical Factory 

Co., Ltd. v. United States, No. 09–00216, Slip Op. 

10–85 (Ct. Int’l Trade Aug. 5, 2010); Changzhou 

Wujin Fine Chemical Factory Co., Ltd. v. United 

States, No. 09–00216, Slip Op. 10–103 (Ct. Int’l 

Trade Sept. 13, 2010). 

2See 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic 

Acid from the People’s Republic of China: Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 74 

FR 10545 (March 11, 2009) (‘‘Final Determination’’). 

3 Id. at 10545. 

4See Changzhou Wujin Fine Chemical Factory 

Co., Ltd. v. United States, No. 09–00216 (Ct. Int’l 

Trade Feb. 8, 2010). 

5See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant 

to Court Order: Changzhou Wujin Fine Chemical 

Factory Co., Ltd. v. United States (May 3, 2010) at 

1–9. 

allow us to estimate a firm’s stock of 

management and organizational assets, 

specifically the use of decentralized 

decision rights and greater investments 

in human capital. The results will 

provide information on investments in 

organizational practices thus allowing 

us to gain a better understanding of the 

benefits from these investments when 

measured in terms of firm productivity 

or firm market value. A manufacturing 

sector establishment based survey on 

management and organizational 

practices would provide information on 

the dimensions of organizational capital 

for this sector that is not currently 

available. 

Understanding the determinants of 

productivity growth is essential to 

understanding the dynamics of the U.S. 

economy. The Management and 

Organizational Practices Survey (MOPS) 

will provide information on whether the 

large and persistent differences in 

productivity across establishments 

(even within the same industry) are 

partly driven by differences in 

management and organizational 

practices. In addition to increasing our 

understanding of the dynamics of the 

economy, the MOPS will provide policy 

makers with some guidance in attempts 

to raise aggregate productivity levels. 

Policymakers, such as the Federal 

Reserve Board, can use the MOPS to 

understand the current state and 

evolution of management and 

organizational practices which can in 

turn aid the policymakers in forecasting 

future productivity growth. 

Management data will also be 

particularly important for 

understanding what policymakers can 

do to assist U.S. manufacturing 

companies hit particularly hard by the 

recent recession. There has been 

renewed policy interest in approaches 

to support the manufacturing industry. 

For example, some policymakers have 

suggested extending programs like the 

Manufacturing Extension Program 

(MEP). The MEP is a nationwide system 

of resources, transforming manufactures 

to compete globally by making use of 

modern manufacturing equipment, 

innovative methodologies, and 

management practices to improve/ 

increase the productivity in the 

manufacturing sector. The MOPS would 

provide information on differences in 

manufacturing management and 

organizational practices by region, 

industry and firm size which would 

directly aid policy discussions about the 

potential impact of programs like the 

MEP. Researchers for this proposed 

survey have discussed with members of 

the Council of Economic Advisors the 

potential impact of management 

practices on manufacturing performance 

and the evaluation of the MEP. In a 

similar vein, researchers on this 

proposal have had discussions with 

members of the current administration 

about measuring and evaluating 

differences in healthcare management 

and its links to patient outcomes. The 

MOPS could also provide information 

in this area. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit. 

Frequency: Annually. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory. 

Legal Authority: Title 13 U.S.C., 

Sections 131, 182, 193, and 224. 

OMB Desk Officer: Brian HarrisKojetin, (202) 395–7314. 

Copies of the above information 

collection proposal can be obtained by 

calling or writing Diana Hynek, 

Departmental Paperwork Clearance 

Officer, (202) 482–0266, Department of 

Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20230 (or via the Internet at 

dhynek@doc.gov). 

Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to Brian Harris-Kojetin, OMB 

Desk Officer either by fax (202–395– 

7245) or e-mail (bharrisk@omb.eop.gov). 

Dated: December 13, 2010. 

Glenna Mickelson, 

Management Analyst, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31679 Filed 12–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–07–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–934] 

1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1- 

Diphosphonic Acid From the People’s 

Republic of China: Notice of Decision 

of the Court of International Trade Not 

in Harmony 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On September 13, 2010, the 

United States Court of International 

Trade (‘‘CIT’’) sustained the remand 

determination made by the Department 

of Commerce (the ‘‘Department’’) 

pursuant to the CIT’s remand of the 

final determination in the antidumping 

duty investigation on 1- 

hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-diphosphonic 

acid (‘‘HEDP’’) from the People’s 

Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) and ordered 

the case dismissed.1 This case arises out 

of the Department’s final determination 

in the antidumping investigation on 

HEDP from the PRC.2 The final 

judgment in this case was not in 

harmony with the Department’s Final 

Determination. 

DATES: Effective Date: September 23, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shawn Higgins, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 4, Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–0679. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 

11, 2009, the Department published its 

Final Determination in which it 

determined that HEDP from the PRC is 

being, or is likely to be, sold in the 

United States at less than fair value as 

provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (the ‘‘Act’’).3

Separate rate respondent companies 

Changzhou Wujin Fine Chemical 

Factory Co., Ltd. (‘‘Wujin Fine’’) and 

Jiangsu Jianghai Chemical Group Co., 

Ltd. (‘‘Jiangsu Jianghai’’) timely 

challenged certain aspects of the Final 

Determination to the CIT. Among the 

issues raised before the CIT was 

whether the Department properly 

corroborated the adverse facts available 

(‘‘AFA’’) rate upon which it relied in 

calculating the separate rate. 

On February 8, 2010, the CIT granted 

the United States’ motion for a 

voluntary remand to reconsider the 

separate rate assigned to Wujin Fine and 

Jiangsu Jianghai after examining 

whether the Department corroborated 

the AFA rate upon which it relied in 

calculating the separate rate.4 In a 

remand determination filed on May 3, 

2010, the Department determined that 

the AFA rate upon which the 

Department relied in calculating the 

separate rate was not corroborated in the 

Final Determination.5 Consequently, the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
78968 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 242 / Friday, December 17, 2010 / Notices 

6See Changzhou Wujin Fine Chemical Factory 

Co., Ltd. v. United States, No. 09–00216, Slip Op. 

10–103 (Ct. Int’l Trade Sept. 13, 2010). 

Department calculated a revised 

separate rate of 15.47 percent for Wujin 

Fine and Jiangsu Jianghai relying on a 

second AFA rate that did not require 

corroboration. The CIT sustained the 

Department’s remand redetermination 

on August 5, 2010, and subsequently 

dismissed the case.6

On November 12, 2010, Wujin Fine 

and Jiangsu Jianghai filed an appeal 

with the United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit (‘‘CAFC’’) of the 

CIT’s decision. 

Timken Notice 

In its decision in Timken Co. v. 

United States, 893 F.2d 337, 341 (Fed. 

Cir. 1990) (‘‘Timken’’), the CAFC held 

that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the 

Act, the Department must publish a 

notice of a court decision that is not ‘‘in 

harmony’’ with a Department 

determination and must suspend 

liquidation of entries pending a 

‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The CIT’s 

decision of September 13, 2010, 

constitutes a final decision of that court 

that is not in harmony with the 

Department’s Final Determination. This 

notice is published in fulfillment of the 

publication requirements of Timken. In 

the event the CIT’s decision is affirmed 

on appeal, the Department will publish 

an amended final determination 

revising the separate rate assigned to 

Wujin Fine and Jiangsu Jianghai and 

issue revised cash deposit instructions 

to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 

This notice is issued and published in 

accordance with section 516A(c)(1) of 

the Act. 

Dated: December 10, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31756 Filed 12–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–821–819] 

Magnesium Metal From the Russian 

Federation: Extension of Time Limit for 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: December 17, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Hermes Pinilla, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 5, Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street, and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–3477. 

Background 

On May 28, 2010, the Department of 

Commerce (the Department) published a 

notice of initiation of an administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on magnesium metal from the Russian 

Federation for the period April 1, 2009, 

through March 31, 2010. See Initiation 

of Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duty Administrative Reviews, 75 FR 

29976 (May 28, 2010). The preliminary 

results of this administrative review are 

currently due no later than December 

31, 2010. 

Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary 

Results 

Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires 

the Department to make a preliminary 

determination within 245 days after the 

last day of the anniversary month of an 

order for which a review is requested 

and a final determination within 120 

days after the date on which the 

preliminary determination is published 

in the Federal Register. If it is not 

practicable to complete the review 

within these time periods, section 

751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the 

Department to extend the time limit for 

the preliminary determination to a 

maximum of 365 days after the last day 

of the anniversary month. 

We determine that it is not practicable 

to complete the preliminary results of 

this review by the current deadline of 

December 31, 2010, because we require 

additional time to analyze a number of 

complex corporate-affiliation issues 

relating to this administrative review. 

Therefore, in accordance with section 

751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.213(h)(2), we are extending the time 

period for issuing the preliminary 

results of this review by 75 days to 

March 16, 2011. 

This notice is published in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) 

and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: December 13, 2010. 

Christian Marsh, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31753 Filed 12–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–520–803] 

Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, 

Sheet, and Strip From the United Arab 

Emirates: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) is conducting an 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on 

polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, 

and strip (PET Film) from the United 

Arab Emirates (UAE). This review 

covers respondents, JBF RAK LLC (JBF), 

and FLEX Middle East FZE (FLEX), 

producers and exporters of PET Film 

from the UAE. The Department 

preliminarily determines that sales of 

PET Film from the UAE have been made 

below normal value (NV) during the 

November 6, 2008, through October 31, 

2009 period of review. The preliminary 

results are listed below in the section 

titled ‘‘Preliminary Results of Review.’’ 

Interested parties are invited to 

comment on these preliminary results. 

DATES: Effective Date: December 17, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Andrew Huston, or Jun Jack Zhao, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 6, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–4261 or (202) 482– 

1396, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On November 10, 2008, the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register the antidumping duty order on 

PET Film from the UAE. See 

Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, 

and Strip From Brazil, the People’s 

Republic of China and the United Arab 

Emirates: Antidumping Duty Orders and 

Amended Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value for the United 

Arab Emirates, 73 FR 66595 (November 

10, 2008) (Order). On November 2, 2009, 

the Department published a notice of 

opportunity to request an administrative 

review of this order. See Antidumping 

or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, 

or Suspended Investigation: 

Opportunity to Request Administrative 

Review, 74 FR 56573 (November 2, 

2009). In response, on November 24, 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES