Stainless Steel Wire Rods From India: Notice of Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 40696-40697 [06-6300]

Download as PDF 40696 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 18, 2006 / Notices that reimbursement of the antidumping duties occurred and the concomitant assessment of double antidumping duties. This notice is also the only reminder to parties subject to the administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR § 351.305. 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 the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. The Department is publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: July 11, 2006. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix List of Issues Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum Comment 1: Determining the Market Price of Electricity in Applying the Major Input Rule Comment 2: Whether to Adjust U.S. Prices for Duties Imposed to Offset Export Subsidies Comment 3: Whether to Recalculate Interest and General and Administrative Expenses After Applying the Major Input Rule Comment 4: Adding Import Duties to Reported Costs [FR Doc. E6–11292 Filed 7–17–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–580–834] Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea; Notice of Extension of Time Limits for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: July 18, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irina Itkin or Brianne Riker, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–0656 and (202) 482–0629, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES AGENCY: VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:27 Jul 17, 2006 Jkt 208001 Background The Department of Commerce (the Department) published an antidumping duty order on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils (SSSSC) from the Republic of Korea on July 27, 1999. See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order; Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils From United Kingdom, Taiwan and South Korea, 64 FR 40555 (July 27, 1999). On August 29, 2005, the Department published a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the order on SSSSC from Korea for the period July 1, 2004, through June 30, 2005. See 70 FR 51009. The respondents in this administrative review are: Boorim Corporation, Dae Kyung Corporation, DaiYang Metal Co., Ltd., Dine Trading Co., Ltd., and Dosko Co., Ltd. On April 10, 2005, the Department published in the Federal Register its preliminary results. See Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea; Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 18074 (Apr. 10, 2006). The final results are currently due no later than August 8, 2006. Extension of the Time Limit for Final Results of Administrative Review Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) requires the Department to make a final determination in an administrative review within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary determination is published. However, if it is not practicable to complete the review within this time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the time limit for 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. In accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2), the Department finds that it is not practicable to complete the review within the original time frame because analysis of the issues presented in the case briefs, including the issue related to the U.S. price adjustment for countervailing duties imposed to offset export subsidies, requires additional time. Because it is not practicable to complete this administrative review within the time limit mandated by section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2), the Department is fully extending the time limit for completion of the final results to 300 days. Therefore, the final results are due no later than February 5, 2007, the next PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 business day after 300 days from publication of the preliminary results. This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. Dated: July 11, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6–11370 Filed 7–17–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–533–808] Stainless Steel Wire Rods From India: Notice of Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On May 19, 2006, the Department of Commerce (The Department) published a notice of its intent to rescind the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel wire rods from India for Viraj Alloys, Ltd., Viraj Forgings, Ltd., Viraj Impoexpo, Ltd., Viraj Smelting, Viraj Profiles, and VSL Wires, Ltd. (collective, the Viraj entities), and Mukand Limited (Mukand) due to the lack of suspended entries of merchandise subject to the order during the period December 1, 2004, through November 30, 2005. See Stainless Steel Wire Rods from India: Notice of Intent of Rescind Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 29124 (May 19, 2006). The Department received comments from Mukand and rebuttal comments from the petitioner, Carpenter Technology Corporation, regarding Mukand but did not receive any comments from any parties regarding the Viraj entities. We are now rescinding the administrative review with respect to the Viraj entities and Mukand. DATES: Effective Date: July 18, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristin Case or John Holman, 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) 482–3174 or (202) 482– 3683, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background After initiating an administrative review of the Viraj entities and Mukand E:\FR\FM\18JYN1.SGM 18JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 18, 2006 / Notices (see Notice of Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 71 FR 5241 (February 1, 2006)), the Department determined that there were no suspended entries of merchandise subject to the order involving any of the Viraj entities or Mukand for the period of review (POR). Therefore, it published a notice of intent to rescind the administrative review and requested comments with respect to its intent to rescind the administrative review of wire rods from India. See Stainless Steel Wire Rods from India: Notice of Intent to Rescind Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 29124 (May 19, 2006) (Intent to Rescind). On May 18, 2006, Mukand submitted a letter claiming that it had an entry of subject merchandise during the POR. The letter included a copy of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) form 7501 which indicated a November 2005 entry date. On June 5, 2006, Mukand submitted a case brief and documentation to support its claim that it had an entry during the POR. On June 16, 2006, the petitioner submitted comments rebutting Mukand’s arguments. At the request of Mukand, on June 21, 2006, we held a hearing on our intent to rescind the administrative review with respect to Mukand. The Department did not receive comments concerning its intent to rescind the administrative review of the Viraj entities. wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES Scope of the Order The products covered by this order are certain stainless steel wire rods, which are hot-rolled or hot-rolled annealed and/or pickled rounds, squares, octagons, hexagons or other shapes, in coils. Wire rods are made of alloy steels containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 10.5 percent or ore of chromium, with or without other elements. These products are only manufactured by hot-rolling, are normally sold in coiled form, and are of solid cross section. The majority of wire rods sold in the United States are round in cross-section shape, annealed, and pickled. The most common size is 5.5 millimeters in diameter. The products are currently classifiable under subheadings 7221.00.0005, 7221.00.0015, 7221.00.0030, 7221.00.0045, and 7221.00.0075 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of this proceeding remains dispositive. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:25 Jul 17, 2006 Jkt 208001 40697 Analysis of Comments Received Viraj Entities All issues concerning the Intent to Rescind raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to the administrative review of the order on stainless steel wire rods from India are addressed in the ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’ (Decision Memo) from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary, dated July 12, 2006, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The Decision Memo, which is a public document, is on file in the Central Records Unit, main Commerce building, Room B–099, and is accessible on the Web at http:// ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/index.html. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Previously we determined that ‘‘there are no suspended entries of merchandise subject to the order involving any of the Viraj entities for the POR.’’ See Intent to Rescind. Further, we received no comments with respect to this determination. Therefore, we are rescinding the review with respect to the Viraj Entities. Rescission of Administrative Review Section 751(a) of the Act provides that, when conducting administrative reviews, the Department shall determine the dumping margin for entries during the POR. Further, according to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), the Department may rescind an administrative review in whole or only with respect to a particular exporter or producer if it concludes that, during the POR, there were no entries, exports, or sales of the subject merchandise, as the case may be. The Department has consistently interpreted the statutory and regulatory language as requiring ‘‘that there be entries during the period of review upon which to assess antidumping duties.’’ See Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Japan: Notice of Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 70 FR 44088, 44088 (August 1, 2005), and Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from Taiwan: Final Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 66 FR 18610 (April 10, 2001). In Allegheny Ludlum Corp. v. United States, 346 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2003), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the Department’s practice of rescinding annual reviews when there are no entries of subject merchandise during the POR. See also Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from Taiwan: Final Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 68 FR 63067, 63068 (November 7, 2003) (stating that ‘‘the Department’s interpretation of its statute and regulations, as affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, supports not conducting an administrative review when the evidence on the record indicates that respondents had no entries of subject merchandise during the POR’’). PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Mukand Previously we determined that ‘‘there were no entries of merchandise subject to the order from Mukand during the POR.’’ See Intent to Rescind. After a review of all of the facts on the record, we have determined that Mukand’s entry in question entered after the POR. We found that the entry documentation submitted by Mukand was actually pre-filed and indicated the broker’s elected date of entry and not the actual date of entry. Morever, Mukand confirmed this fact when it stated in its case brief that ‘‘wire rod then moved in bond from Los Angeles to Chicago. When it arrived in Chicago Customs, Customs indicated a December 5, 2006, release date as the arrival date in the Port of Chicago.’’ See Mukand’s Letter to the Secretary, dated June 5, 2006. Thus, we are rescinding the review with respect to Mukand. For a detailed discussion of this issue, see the Decision Memo and also the ‘‘Memorandum to the File’’ from the analyst through Minoo Hatten, Program Manager, ‘‘2004–2005 Entry of Stainless Steel Wire Rods from India by Mukand Limited,’’ dated July 12, 2006. Thus, the regulations, previous administrative decisions, and case law all support rescission of the administrative review in this case. Therefore, the Department rescinds the administrative review with respect to the Viraj entities and Mukand. This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(l) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d). Dated: July 12, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. 06–6300 Filed 7–7–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–M E:\FR\FM\18JYN1.SGM 18JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 137 (Tuesday, July 18, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40696-40697]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-6300]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-533-808]


Stainless Steel Wire Rods From India: Notice of Rescission of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On May 19, 2006, the Department of Commerce (The Department) 
published a notice of its intent to rescind the administrative review 
of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel wire rods from India 
for Viraj Alloys, Ltd., Viraj Forgings, Ltd., Viraj Impoexpo, Ltd., 
Viraj Smelting, Viraj Profiles, and VSL Wires, Ltd. (collective, the 
Viraj entities), and Mukand Limited (Mukand) due to the lack of 
suspended entries of merchandise subject to the order during the period 
December 1, 2004, through November 30, 2005. See Stainless Steel Wire 
Rods from India: Notice of Intent of Rescind Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 71 FR 29124 (May 19, 2006). The Department 
received comments from Mukand and rebuttal comments from the 
petitioner, Carpenter Technology Corporation, regarding Mukand but did 
not receive any comments from any parties regarding the Viraj entities. 
We are now rescinding the administrative review with respect to the 
Viraj entities and Mukand.

DATES: Effective Date: July 18, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristin Case or John Holman, 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-
3174 or (202) 482-3683, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    After initiating an administrative review of the Viraj entities and 
Mukand

[[Page 40697]]

(see Notice of Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 71 FR 5241 
(February 1, 2006)), the Department determined that there were no 
suspended entries of merchandise subject to the order involving any of 
the Viraj entities or Mukand for the period of review (POR). Therefore, 
it published a notice of intent to rescind the administrative review 
and requested comments with respect to its intent to rescind the 
administrative review of wire rods from India. See Stainless Steel Wire 
Rods from India: Notice of Intent to Rescind Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 71 FR 29124 (May 19, 2006) (Intent to Rescind).
    On May 18, 2006, Mukand submitted a letter claiming that it had an 
entry of subject merchandise during the POR. The letter included a copy 
of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) form 7501 which indicated a 
November 2005 entry date. On June 5, 2006, Mukand submitted a case 
brief and documentation to support its claim that it had an entry 
during the POR. On June 16, 2006, the petitioner submitted comments 
rebutting Mukand's arguments. At the request of Mukand, on June 21, 
2006, we held a hearing on our intent to rescind the administrative 
review with respect to Mukand. The Department did not receive comments 
concerning its intent to rescind the administrative review of the Viraj 
entities.

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this order are certain stainless steel wire 
rods, which are hot-rolled or hot-rolled annealed and/or pickled 
rounds, squares, octagons, hexagons or other shapes, in coils. Wire 
rods are made of alloy steels containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or 
less of carbon and 10.5 percent or ore of chromium, with or without 
other elements. These products are only manufactured by hot-rolling, 
are normally sold in coiled form, and are of solid cross section. The 
majority of wire rods sold in the United States are round in cross-
section shape, annealed, and pickled. The most common size is 5.5 
millimeters in diameter.
    The products are currently classifiable under subheadings 
7221.00.0005, 7221.00.0015, 7221.00.0030, 7221.00.0045, and 
7221.00.0075 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience 
and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of this 
proceeding remains dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues concerning the Intent to Rescind raised in the case and 
rebuttal briefs by parties to the administrative review of the order on 
stainless steel wire rods from India are addressed in the ``Issues and 
Decision Memorandum'' (Decision Memo) from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary, dated 
July 12, 2006, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The Decision 
Memo, which is a public document, is on file in the Central Records 
Unit, main Commerce building, Room B-099, and is accessible on the Web 
at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/index.html. The paper copy and electronic 
version of the Decision Memo are identical in content.

Rescission of Administrative Review

    Section 751(a) of the Act provides that, when conducting 
administrative reviews, the Department shall determine the dumping 
margin for entries during the POR. Further, according to 19 CFR 
351.213(d)(3), the Department may rescind an administrative review in 
whole or only with respect to a particular exporter or producer if it 
concludes that, during the POR, there were no entries, exports, or 
sales of the subject merchandise, as the case may be. The Department 
has consistently interpreted the statutory and regulatory language as 
requiring ``that there be entries during the period of review upon 
which to assess antidumping duties.'' See Granular 
Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Japan: Notice of Rescission of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 70 FR 44088, 44088 (August 1, 
2005), and Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from Taiwan: Final Rescission 
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 66 FR 18610 (April 10, 
2001). In Allegheny Ludlum Corp. v. United States, 346 F.3d 1368 (Fed. 
Cir. 2003), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the 
Department's practice of rescinding annual reviews when there are no 
entries of subject merchandise during the POR. See also Stainless Steel 
Plate in Coils from Taiwan: Final Rescission of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 68 FR 63067, 63068 (November 7, 2003) (stating 
that ``the Department's interpretation of its statute and regulations, 
as affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, supports 
not conducting an administrative review when the evidence on the record 
indicates that respondents had no entries of subject merchandise during 
the POR'').

Viraj Entities

    Previously we determined that ``there are no suspended entries of 
merchandise subject to the order involving any of the Viraj entities 
for the POR.'' See Intent to Rescind. Further, we received no comments 
with respect to this determination. Therefore, we are rescinding the 
review with respect to the Viraj Entities.

Mukand

    Previously we determined that ``there were no entries of 
merchandise subject to the order from Mukand during the POR.'' See 
Intent to Rescind.
    After a review of all of the facts on the record, we have 
determined that Mukand's entry in question entered after the POR. We 
found that the entry documentation submitted by Mukand was actually 
pre-filed and indicated the broker's elected date of entry and not the 
actual date of entry. Morever, Mukand confirmed this fact when it 
stated in its case brief that ``wire rod then moved in bond from Los 
Angeles to Chicago. When it arrived in Chicago Customs, Customs 
indicated a December 5, 2006, release date as the arrival date in the 
Port of Chicago.'' See Mukand's Letter to the Secretary, dated June 5, 
2006.
    Thus, we are rescinding the review with respect to Mukand. For a 
detailed discussion of this issue, see the Decision Memo and also the 
``Memorandum to the File'' from the analyst through Minoo Hatten, 
Program Manager, ``2004-2005 Entry of Stainless Steel Wire Rods from 
India by Mukand Limited,'' dated July 12, 2006.
    Thus, the regulations, previous administrative decisions, and case 
law all support rescission of the administrative review in this case. 
Therefore, the Department rescinds the administrative review with 
respect to the Viraj entities and Mukand.
    This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 
777(i)(l) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d).

    Dated: July 12, 2006.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 06-6300 Filed 7-7-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M