Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Latvia: Extension of the Time Limit for the Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 26335-26336 [E6-6761]
Download as PDF
26335
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Notices
771(9)(C) of the Act as a U.S. producer
of the domestic like product. We
received a submission from the
domestic interested party within the 30day deadline specified in section
351.218(d)(3)(i) of the Department’s
regulations. However, we did not
receive submissions from any
respondent interested parties. As a
result, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B)
of the Act and section
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2) of the
Department’s regulations, the
Department conducted expedited sunset
reviews of these orders.
Scope of the Orders
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
PRC
The merchandise covered by this
order is silicon metal containing at least
96.00 percent but less than 99.99
percent silicon by weight. Also covered
by this antidumping order is silicon
metal containing between 89.00 and
96.00 percent silicon by weight but
which contains more aluminum than
the silicon metal containing at least
96.00 percent but less than 99.99
percent silicon by weight. Silicon metal
is currently provided for under
subheadings 2804.69.10 and 2804.69.50
of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States (HTSUS) 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
silicon and provided for in subheading
2804.61.00 of the HTSUS) is not subject
to the order. Although the HTSUS item
numbers are provided for convenience
and for customs purposes, the written
description remains dispositive.
Brazil
The merchandise covered by this
order is silicon metal containing at least
96.00 percent but less than 99.99
percent silicon by weight. Also covered
by this antidumping order is silicon
metal containing between 89.00 and
96.00 percent silicon by weight but
which contains more aluminum than
the silicon metal containing at least
96.00 percent but less than 99.99
percent silicon by weight. Silicon metal
is currently provided for under
subheadings 2804.69.10 and 2804.69.50
of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States (HTSUS) 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
silicon and provided for in subheading
2804.61.00 of the HTSUS) is not subject
to the order. Although the HTSUS item
numbers are provided for convenience
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:45 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
and for customs purposes, the written
description remains dispositive.
Scope Clarifications
PRC
There has been one scope clarification
in this proceeding. See Scope Rulings,
58 FR 27542 (May 10, 1993). In a
response to a request by domestic
interested parties for clarification of the
scope of the antidumping duty order,
the Department determined that silicon
metal containing between 89.00 percent
and 99.00 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, is the same class or kind of
merchandise as the silicon metal
described in the original order.
Therefore, such material is within the
scope of the order on silicon metal from
the PRC.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in these cases are
addressed in the ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum’’ from Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, to David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, dated April 27, 2006
(‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’),
which is hereby adopted by this notice.
The issues discussed in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum include the
likelihood of continuation or recurrence
of dumping and the magnitude of the
margin likely to prevail if the orders
were revoked. Parties can find a
complete discussion of all issues raised
in these sunset reviews and the
corresponding recommendations in this
public memorandum, which is on file in
room B–099 of the main Department
building.
In addition, a complete version of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum can
be accessed directly on our Web site at
https://ia.ita.doc.gov. The paper copy
and electronic version of the Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Manufacturers/Exporters/Producers
Weighted–Average
Margin (Percent)
Camargo Correa
Metais, S.A. (‘‘CCM’’)
Companhia Brasileira
Carbureto de Calcio
(‘‘CBCC’’) ..................
RIMA Eletrometalurgica
S.A. (‘‘RIMA’’) ............
All Others ......................
93.20
Revoked
Revoked
91.06
1We will notify the ITC that Companhia
Brasileira Carbureto de Calcio (‘‘CBCC’’) and
RIMA Eletrometalurgica S.A. (‘‘RIMA’’) are no
longer subject to the order. See Policies Regarding the Conduct of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’)
Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Orders; Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871
(April 16, 1998); see also Silicon Metal From
Brazil: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Revocation of Order
in Part, 68 FR 57670 (October 6, 2003) (order
revoked as to CBCC) and Silicon Metal from
Brazil; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Revocation of Order
in Part, 67 FR 77225 (December 17, 2002)
(order revoked as to RIMA).
This notice also serves as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders
(‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of
proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR
351.305. Timely 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 which is subject
to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing these
results and notice in accordance with
sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the
Act.
Dated: April 27, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–6760 Filed 5–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–449–804]
Final Results of Reviews
We determine that revocation of the
antidumping duty orders on Silicon
Metal from the PRC and Brazil would
likely lead to continuation or recurrence
of dumping at the following percentage
weighted–average margins:
Manufacturers/Exporters/Producers
PRC.
PRC–wide Rate ............
Brazil1.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from
Latvia: Extension of the Time Limit for
the Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Weighted–Average Department of Commerce.
Margin (Percent)
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 4, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
139.49 Shane Subler at (202) 482–0189, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 1, Import
Sfmt 4703
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
26336
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Notices
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On September 27, 2005, Joint Stock
Company Liepajas Metalurgs, a Latvian
producer of subject merchandise,
requested an administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on Steel
Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Latvia.
On September 30, 2005, the petitioners
in the proceeding, the Rebar Trade
Action Coalition1 and its individual
members, also requested an
administrative review of the
antidumping order. On October 25,
2005, the Department published a notice
of initiation of the administrative
review, covering the period September
1, 2004, through August 31, 2005 (70 FR
61601). The preliminary results are
currently due no later than June 2, 2006.
Statutory Time Limits
Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires
the Department of Commerce (the
Department) to complete the
preliminary results of an administrative
review within 245 days after the last day
of the anniversary month of an order/
finding for which a review is requested,
and the final results within 120 days
after the date on which the preliminary
results are published. However, 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
(1) the preliminary results to a
maximum of 365 days after the last day
of the anniversary month of an order/
finding for which a review is requested,
and (2) the final results to 180 days (or
300 days if the Department does not
extend the time limit for the preliminary
results) from the date of publication of
the preliminary results.
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary
Results of Review
We determine that it is not practicable
to complete the preliminary results of
this review within the original time
limits. Several complex issues related to
merchandise classification, date of sale,
and cost of production have been raised
during the course of this administrative
review. The Department needs more
time to address these items and evaluate
the issues more thoroughly.
1 The Rebar Trade Action Coalition comprises
Gerdau AmeriSteel, CMC Steel Group, Nucor
Corporation, and TAMCO.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:45 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
For the reasons noted above, we are
extending the time limit for completion
of the preliminary results until no later
than August 1, 2006. We intend to issue
the final results no later than 120 days
after publication of the preliminary
results.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of
the Act.
Dated: April 28, 2006.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–6761 Filed 5–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[I.D. 041306A]
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental
to Specified Activities; On-ice Seismic
Operations in the Beaufort Sea
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of issuance of an
incidental harassment authorization.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In accordance with provisions
of the Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA) as amended, notification is
hereby given that an Incidental
Harassment Authorization (IHA) to take
small numbers of marine mammals, by
harassment, incidental to conducting
on-ice vibroseis seismic operations in
the Harrison Bay portion of the western
U.S. Beaufort Sea has been issued to
Kuukpik Veritas DGC (Kuukpik) for a
period of 1 year.
DATES: Effective from April 30, 2006
through April 29, 2007.
ADDRESSES: The authorization and
application containing a list of the
references used in this document may
be obtained by writing to this address or
by telephoning the contact listed here.
The application is also available at:
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shane Guan, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 713–2289, ext
137 or Brad Smith, Alaska Region,
NMFS, (907) 271–5006.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
the Secretary of Commerce to allow,
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
upon request, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking of marine mammals
by U.S. citizens who engage in a
specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings
are made and either regulations are
issued or, if the taking is limited to
harassment, a notice of a proposed
authorization is provided to the public
for review.
Permission may be granted if NMFS
finds that the taking will have a
negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable
adverse impact on the availability of the
species or stock(s) for subsistence uses,
and that the permissible methods of
taking and requirements pertaining to
the mitigation, monitoring and reporting
of such takings are set forth. NMFS has
defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR
216.103 as ’’...an impact resulting from
the specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
established an expedited process by
which citizens of the United States can
apply for an authorization to
incidentally take small numbers of
marine mammals by harassment. Except
for certain categories of activities not
pertinent here, the MMPA defines
‘‘harassment’’ as:
any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance
which (i) has the potential to injure a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
[Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential
to disturb a marine mammal or marine
mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of behavioral patterns, including,
but not limited to, migration, breathing,
nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering
[Level B harassment].
Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45–
day time limit for NMFS review of an
application followed by a 30–day public
notice and comment period on any
proposed authorizations for the
incidental harassment of marine
mammals. Within 45 days of the close
of the comment period, NMFS must
either issue or deny issuance of the
authorization.
Summary of Request
On October 24, 2005, NMFS received
an application from ASRC Energy
Services, Lynx Enterprises, Inc. (AES
Lynx) on behalf of Kuukpik for the
taking, by harassment, of two species of
marine mammals incidental to
conducting an on-ice seismic survey
program. The seismic operations will be
conducted in the Harrison Bay portion
of the western U.S. Beaufort Sea. The
proposed survey would be conducted
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26335-26336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-6761]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-449-804]
Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Latvia: Extension of the
Time Limit for the Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 4, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Subler at (202) 482-0189, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 1, Import
[[Page 26336]]
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On September 27, 2005, Joint Stock Company Liepajas Metalurgs, a
Latvian producer of subject merchandise, requested an administrative
review of the antidumping duty order on Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars
from Latvia. On September 30, 2005, the petitioners in the proceeding,
the Rebar Trade Action Coalition\1\ and its individual members, also
requested an administrative review of the antidumping order. On October
25, 2005, the Department published a notice of initiation of the
administrative review, covering the period September 1, 2004, through
August 31, 2005 (70 FR 61601). The preliminary results are currently
due no later than June 2, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Rebar Trade Action Coalition comprises Gerdau
AmeriSteel, CMC Steel Group, Nucor Corporation, and TAMCO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Statutory Time Limits
Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), requires the Department of Commerce (the Department) to complete
the preliminary results of an administrative review within 245 days
after the last day of the anniversary month of an order/finding for
which a review is requested, and the final results within 120 days
after the date on which the preliminary results are published. However,
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 (1) the preliminary results to a maximum of
365 days after the last day of the anniversary month of an order/
finding for which a review is requested, and (2) the final results to
180 days (or 300 days if the Department does not extend the time limit
for the preliminary results) from the date of publication of the
preliminary results.
Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Review
We determine that it is not practicable to complete the preliminary
results of this review within the original time limits. Several complex
issues related to merchandise classification, date of sale, and cost of
production have been raised during the course of this administrative
review. The Department needs more time to address these items and
evaluate the issues more thoroughly.
For the reasons noted above, we are extending the time limit for
completion of the preliminary results until no later than August 1,
2006. We intend to issue the final results no later than 120 days after
publication of the preliminary results.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.
Dated: April 28, 2006.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6-6761 Filed 5-3-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S