[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 207 (Tuesday, October 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65700-65703]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27376]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-533-868]
Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe From India: Initiation of
Countervailing Duty Investigation
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce
DATES: Effective date: October 20, 2015
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laurel LaCivita at (202) 482-4243, or
Mandy Mallott at (202) 482-6430, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On September 30, 2015, the Department of Commerce (``Department'')
received a countervailing duty (``CVD'') petition concerning imports of
welded stainless pressure pipe (``welded stainless pipe'') from India,
filed in proper form on behalf of Bristol Metals, LLC, Felker Brothers
Corp, Outokumpu Stainless Pipe, Inc., and Marcegaglia USA
(collectively, ``Petitioners''). The CVD petition was accompanied by an
antidumping duty (``AD'') petition concerning imports of welded
stainless pipe from India.\1\ Petitioners are domestic producers of
welded stainless pipe.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duties: Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India,''
dated September 30, 2015 (``Petition'').
\2\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 2, 2015, the Department requested information and
clarification for certain areas of the Petition.\3\ Petitioners filed
responses to these requests on October 6, 2015.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See letter from the Department, ``Petitions for the
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of
Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India: Supplemental Questions,''
dated October 2, 2015 (``General Issues Questionnaire''); letter
from the Department, ``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing
Duties on Imports of Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India:
Supplemental Questions,'' October 2, 2015 (``CVD Deficiency
Questionnaire'').
\4\ See letter from Petitioners, ``Welded Stainless Pressure
Pipe from India: Response to Supplemental Questions,'' dated October
6, 2015, covering volume I (``General Issues Supplement'') and III
(``CVD Supplement'') of the Petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (``the Act''), Petitioners allege that the Government of India
(``GOI'') is providing countervailable subsidies (within the meaning of
sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act) to imports of welded stainless pipe
from India, 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 India on which we have initiated a CVD investigation, the
Petition is accompanied by information reasonably available to
Petitioners supporting their allegations.
The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition on behalf
of the domestic industry because Petitioners are interested parties as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also finds that
Petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to
the initiation of the CVD investigation that Petitioners are
requesting.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the
Petition'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation is January 1, 2014, through December
31, 2014.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this investigation is welded stainless pipe
from India. For a full description of the scope of this investigation,
see the ``Scope of the Investigation'' in Appendix I of this notice.
Comments on Scope of the Investigation
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.\7\ As discussed in the preamble to the Department's
regulations,\8\ we are setting aside a period for interested parties to
raise issues regarding product coverage (i.e., scope). The Department
will consider all comments received from interested parties and, if
necessary, will consult with the interested parties prior to the
issuance of the preliminary determination. 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 questionnaire, the
[[Page 65701]]
Department requests all interested parties to submit such comments by
5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (``ET'') on Tuesday, November 10, 2015, which is
the first business day after 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 Friday, November 20,
2015, which is 10 calendar days after the initial comments deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See General Issues Questionnaire and General Issues
Supplement. See also Petitioners' submission, ``Welded Stainless
Pressure Pipe from India: Revised Scope Definition,'' dated October
15, 2015.
\8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule,
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
investigation may be relevant, the party may contact the Department and
request permission to submit the additional information. All such
comments must be filed on the record of the concurrent AD
investigation.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (``ACCESS'').\9\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements);
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing
Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263
(July 6, 2011), for details of the Department's electronic filing
requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. Information
on help using ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook% 20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consultations
Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, the Department
notified representatives of the GOI 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 GOI the opportunity for
consultations with respect to the CVD petition. As the GOI did not
request consultations prior to the initiation of this investigation,
the Department and the GOI did not hold consultations.
Determination of Industry Support for the Petition
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,\10\ 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.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\11\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F.
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 welded stainless pipe
constitutes a single domestic like product and we have analyzed
industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in
this case, see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India (``India CVD
Initiation Checklist''), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry
Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India (``Attachment
II''). This checklist is dated concurrently with this notice and on
file electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS
is also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the
main Department of Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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. To establish industry support, Petitioners provided their
shipments of the domestic like product in 2014, and compared their
shipments to the estimated total shipments of the domestic like product
for the entire domestic industry.\13\ Because total industry production
data for the domestic like product for 2014 are not reasonably
available to Petitioners, and Petitioners have established that
shipments are a reasonable proxy for production data,\14\ we have
relied upon the shipment data provided by Petitioners for purposes of
measuring industry support.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 2-3 and Exhibits I-1 and
I-2; see also General Issues Supplement, at 3-8 and Exhibits I-9 and
I-10.
\14\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 3 and Exhibit I-1; see
also General Issues Supplement, at 3-6 and Exhibits I-8 and I-9.
\15\ For further discussion, see India CVD Initiation Checklist,
at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our review of the data provided in the Petition, General Issues
Supplement, and other information readily available to the Department
indicates that Petitioners have established industry support.\16\
First, the Petition established support from domestic producers (or
workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total shipments
\17\ of the
[[Page 65702]]
domestic like product and, as such, the Department is not required to
take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g.,
polling).\18\ 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 shipments of the
domestic like product.\19\ 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
shipments of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the
industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petition.\20\
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\17\ As mentioned above, Petitioners have established that
shipments are a reasonable proxy for production data. Section
351.203(e)(1) of the Department's regulations states ``production
levels may be established by reference to alternative data that the
Secretary determines to be indicative of production levels.''
\18\ See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also India CVD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\19\ See India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 they have demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the CVD investigation that they are
requesting the Department initiate.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Injury Test
Because India 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 India materially
injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
Petitioners allege that imports of the subject merchandise are
benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are
causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry
producing the domestic like product. In CVD petitions, section
771(24)(A)-(B) of the Act provides that imports of subject merchandise
from developing and least developed countries must exceed the
negligibility threshold of four percent. Petitioners demonstrate that
subject imports from India, which has been designated as a least
developed country,\22\ exceed the negligibility threshold provided for
under section 771(24)(B) of the Act.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See section 771(36)(B) of the Act.
\23\ See General Issues Supplement, at 9 and Exhibit I-11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share; decline in shipments, production,
and capacity utilization; underselling and price suppression or
depression; inventory overhang; decreased employment, hours worked, and
wages; lost sales and revenues; and negative impact on
profitability.\24\ 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.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 10-25 and Exhibits I-1,
I-5, and I-7; see also General Issues Supplement, at 9 and Exhibit
I-11.
\25\ See India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III,
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation
Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a
CVD investigation whenever an interested party files a CVD petition on
behalf of an industry that: (1) Alleges the 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 welded stainless
pipe in India benefit from countervailable subsidies bestowed by the
GOI. 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 welded stainless pipe from India receive countervailable
subsidies from the GOI.
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.\26\ 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.\27\ The amendments to
sections 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.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Pub. L. 114-
27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
\27\ See Dates of Application of Amendments to the Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Laws Made by the Trade Preferences Extension
Act of 2015, 80 FR 46793 (August 6, 2015) (Applicability Notice).
The 2015 amendments may be found at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
\28\ Id. at 46794-95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 25 of the 50
alleged programs in India. For a full discussion of the basis for our
decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the India CVD
Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for
this 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.
Respondent Selection
Petitioners named thirteen companies as producers/exporters of
welded stainless pipe in India.\29\ 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 welded stainless pipe during the period of
investigation. We intend to release CBP data under Administrative
Protective Order (``APO'') to all parties with access to information
protected by APO within five business days of publication of this
Federal Register notice. The Department invites comments regarding
respondent selection within seven business days of publication of this
Federal Register notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Volume I of the Petition, at Exhibit I-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An
electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its
entirety by ACCESS, by 5 p.m. ET by the date noted above. We intend to
make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of
publication of this notice. Interested parties must submit
[[Page 65703]]
applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR
351.305(b). Instructions for filing such applications may be found on
the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petition has been
provided to the GOI via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will
attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petition to each
known exporter (as named in the Petition), consistent with 19 CFR
351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
702(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determinations by the ITC
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 welded stainless pipe from India are
materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S.
industry.\30\ A negative ITC determination will result in the
investigation being terminated; \31\ otherwise, this investigation will
proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
\31\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submission of Factual Information
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). The regulation requires any
party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which
subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted
and, if the information is 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. 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 this investigation.
Extension of Time Limits Regulation
Parties may request an extension of time limits before the
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, 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 351.301 expires. 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. 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.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual
information in this investigation.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\32\
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.\33\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with the applicable revised
certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\33\ See Certification of Factual Information To Import
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (``Final Rule''); see also
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at
http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
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 this investigation 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.
Dated: October 20, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by this investigation is circular welded
austenitic stainless pressure pipe not greater than 14 inches in
outside diameter. References to size are in nominal inches and
include all products within tolerances allowed by pipe
specifications. This merchandise includes, but is not limited to,
the American Society for Testing and Materials (``ASTM'') A-312 or
ASTM A-778 specifications, or comparable domestic or foreign
specifications. ASTM A-358 products are only included when they are
produced to meet ASTM A-312 or ASTM A-778 specifications, or
comparable domestic or foreign specifications.
Excluded from the scope of the investigation are: (1) Welded
stainless mechanical tubing, meeting ASTM A-554 or comparable
domestic or foreign specifications; (2) boiler, heat exchanger,
superheater, refining furnace, feedwater heater, and condenser
tubing, meeting ASTM A-249, ASTM A-688 or comparable domestic or
foreign specifications; and (3) specialized tubing, meeting ASTM A-
269, ASTM A-270 or comparable domestic or foreign specifications.
The subject imports are normally classified in subheadings
7306.40.5005, 7306.40.5040, 7306.40.5062, 7306.40.5064, and
7306.40.5085 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(``HTSUS''). They may also enter under HTSUS subheadings
7306.40.1010, 7306.40.1015, 7306.40.5042, 7306.40.5044,
7306.40.5080, and 7306.40.5090. The HTSUS subheadings are provided
for convenience and customs purposes only; the written description
of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2015-27376 Filed 10-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P