Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand; Corrected Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 44017-44018 [E6-12536]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
hsrobinson on PROD1PC69 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 149 / Thursday, August 3, 2006 / Notices
Background
On December 14, 1999, the
Department published a notice of final
results of the antidumping duty
administrative review of DRAMs from
Korea covering the period May 1, 1997
through April 30, 1998. See Dynamic
Random Access Memory
Semiconductors of One Megabit or
Above From the Republic of Korea, 64
FR 69694 (Dec. 14, 1999) (Final Results).
Subsequently, Hyundai Electronics
Industries Co., Ltd. (Hyundai) 1 filed
suit at the CIT contesting the Final
Results.
In the Final Results, the Department
determined that: (1) The use of total
adverse facts available (AFA) was
warranted for LG Semicon (LG) (see
Final Results at 64 FR 69695); (2)
Hyundai and LG’s reported research and
development (R&D) expenses did not
reflect the appropriate R&D cost of the
subject merchandise (see Final Results
at 64 FR 69702); and (3) the reduced
R&D costs recognized by Hyundai and
LG, through the amortization and
deferral of their R&D expenses, did not
reasonably reflect the R&D cost of the
subject merchandise (see Final Results
at 64 FR 69700).
On April 16, 2004, the Court
remanded the Department’s Final
Results, in Hyundai Electronics
Industries, Co., Ltd., and Hyundai
Electronics America Inc. v. United
States and Micron Technology, Inc., 342
F. Supp. 2d 1141 (CIT 2004) (Hyundai
I). In its remand, the Court ordered the
Department to: (1) Recalculate LG’s
dumping margin by application of AFA
to only a portion of its U.S. sales; (2)
provide additional information
regarding the effect of non-subject
merchandise R&D on R&D for subject
merchandise, or recalculate R&D costs
on the most product-specific basis
possible; (3) provide specific evidence
showing how Hyundai and LG’s actual
R&D expenses for the period of review
are not reasonably accounted for in their
amortized R&D costs, or accept their
amortization of R&D expenses, and (4)
provide additional information showing
how R&D expenses that are currently
deferred by Hyundai and LG affect
production or revenue for the instant
review period, or accept their deferral
methodology.
In its first redetermination on remand,
the Department: (1) Recalculated LG’s
dumping margin using 89.10 percent as
partial AFA; (2) provided information to
1 After the 1997–1998 administrative review was
completed, respondent Hyundai acquired LG
Semicon. Subsequent to the acquisition the name of
the combined company was changed to Hynix
Semiconductor, Inc.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:20 Aug 02, 2006
Jkt 208001
demonstrate that Hyundai and LG’s
production of subject merchandise has
benefitted from cross-fertilization; (3)
recalculated LG and Hyundai’s R&D
costs to allow for amortization, and (4)
expensed Hyundai and LG’s deferred
R&D costs in the period incurred and
explained why deferral of certain R&D
expenses does not reasonably reflect the
R&D expenses related to the subject
merchandise.
In Hyundai Electronics Industries,
Co., Ltd., and Hyundai Electronics
America Inc. v. United States and
Micron Technology, Inc., 395 F. Supp
2d 1231 (CIT 2005) (Hyundai II), the
Court sustained the Department’s
application of 89.10 percent as partial
AFA, and its use of amortized R&D
expenses for calculating Hyundai and
LG’s respective costs of production. The
Court remanded the Department’s crossfertilization determination with
instructions to recalculate Hyundai and
LG’s R&D expenses without application
of the cross-fertilization theory, and also
remanded the Department’s recognition
of all of Hyundai and LG’s 1997 R&D
expenses for antidumping duty
purposes with instructions to accept
Hyundai’s and LG’s deferral
methodology in calculating R&D
expenses for their respective costs of
production.
In Hyundai Electronics Industries,
Co., Ltd., and Hyundai Electronics
America Inc. v. United States and
Micron Technology, Inc., 414 F. Supp.
2d 1289 (CIT 2006) (Hyundai III), the
Court ordered that the Department’s
original findings rejecting LG and
Hyundai’s cost amortization
methodology, as stated in the Final
Results, shall be reinstated in
accordance with Hynix Semiconductor
Inc. v. United States, 424 F.3d 1363
(Fed. Cir. 2005) (Hynix IV). However,
the Court denied the Department’s
motion that its original findings
rejecting LG and Hyundai’s R&D
deferral methodology, as stated in the
Final Results, be reinstated in
accordance with Hynix IV.
On April 5, 2006, the CIT found that
the Department complied with the CIT’s
remand order in Hyundai III and
sustained the Department’s remand
redetermination. See Hyundai IV, 425 F.
Supp.2d at 1321. On June 5, 2006,
consistent with the decision of the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit,
in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.
2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990), the Department
notified the public that the CIT’s
decision was ‘‘not in harmony’’ with the
Department’s Final Results. See
Dynamic Random Access Memory
Semiconductors of One Megabit or
Above From the Republic of Korea;
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
44017
Notice of Court Decision Not in
Harmony with Final Results of
Administrative Review, 71 FR 32305
(June 5, 2006). We are issuing amended
final results to reflect the results of the
remand determinations because no
party has further appealed and there is
now a final and conclusive decision in
the court proceeding.
Amended Final Results of Review
We are amending the final results of
the 1997–1998 administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on DRAMs
from the Republic of Korea for LG and
Hyundai. The revised weighted-average
dumping margin for LG is 15.87 percent
and the revised weighted-average
dumping margin for Hyundai is 3.76
percent.
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and
the U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties
on all appropriate entries. In accordance
with section 351.212(b)(1) of the
Department’s regulations, we have
calculated importer-specific assessment
rates by dividing the dumping margins
found on the subject merchandise
examined by the estimated entered
value of such merchandise. Where the
importer-specific assess rates are above
de minimis, we will instruct CBP to
assess antidumping duties on that
importer’s entries of subject
merchandise. The Department will issue
appropriate assessment instructions
directly to CBP within 15 days of
publication of these amended final
results of review.
These amended final results of
administrative review are issued and
published in accordance with section
516A(c)(1) of the Act.
Dated: July 26, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–12554 Filed 8–2–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–549–822]
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp
from Thailand; Corrected Partial
Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 3, 2006.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\03AUN1.SGM
03AUN1
44018
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 149 / Thursday, August 3, 2006 / Notices
Irina
Itkin or Alice Gibbons, 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)
482–0498, respectively.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
On July 20, 2006, the Department of
Commerce (the Department) published
in the Federal Register its notice of
partial rescission of the antidumping
duty administrative review of certain
frozen warmwater shrimp from
Thailand for the period August 4, 2004,
through January 31, 2006. See Certain
Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from
Thailand; Partial Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 71 FR 41200 (July 20, 2006)
(Partial Rescission). In the Partial
Rescission, the Department noted that it
was rescinding the administrative
review with respect to Kiang Huat Sea
Hull Trading Frozen Food Public Co.,
Ltd., based on a timely request for
withdrawal. See Partial Rescission, 71
FR at 41201. However, the Department
incorrectly spelled this company’s
name. Specifically, the correct name for
this company is Kiang Huat Sea Gull
Trading Frozen Food Public Co., Ltd.
We now correct the partial rescission
of the 2004–2006 antidumping duty
administrative review of certain frozen
warmwater shrimp from Thailand as
noted above. As a result of this
correction, we are rescinding the 2004–
2006 administrative review for Kiang
Huat Sea Gull Trading Frozen Food
Public Co., Ltd.
This corrected partial rescission is
issued and published in accordance
section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).
Dated: July 26, 2006.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretaryfor Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–12536 Filed 8–2–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
hsrobinson on PROD1PC69 with NOTICES
International Trade Administration
(A–475–703)
Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin
From Italy: Second Extension of the
Time Limit for the Preliminary Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 3, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Saliha Loucif or Salim Bhabhrawala, at
(202) 482–1779 or (202) 482–1784,
respectively; AD/CVD Operations,
Office 1, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street & Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
VerDate Aug<31>2005
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
17:24 Aug 02, 2006
Jkt 208001
Background
On September 28, 2005, the
Department of Commerce (Department)
published a notice of initiation of
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on Granular
Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin (PTFE)
From Italy, covering the period August
1, 2004, through July 31, 2005. See
Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews and Request for Revocation in
Part, 70 FR 56631 (September 28, 2006).
On April 14, 2006, the Department
extended the preliminary results from
May 3, 2006 to August 1, 2006. See
Extension of the Time Limit for the
Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR
19481 (April 14, 2006).
Second Extension of Time Limit for
Preliminary Results of Review
Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires
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.
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 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.
We determine that it is not practicable
to complete the preliminary results of
this review within the originally
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
extended time limit due to a number of
complicated issues (e.g., further–
manufacturing of wet raw polymer into
granular PTFE resin, U.S. warehousing),
which must be addressed prior to the
issuance of those results. The
Department requires additional time to
analyze the respondent’s questionnaire
response and issue any necessary
supplemental questionnaires.
Accordingly, the Department is
extending, by 30 days, the time limit for
completion of the preliminary results of
this administrative review until no later
than August 31, 2006. We intend to
issue the final results no later than 120
days after publication of the preliminary
results notice.
This notice of extension of the time
limit is published in accordance with
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.
Dated: July 26, 2006.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretaryfor Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–12566 Filed 8–2–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–891]
Hand Trucks and Certain Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China;
Notice of Extension of Time Limits for
Preliminary Results in Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review and New
Shipper Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
Effective Date: August 3, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Elizabeth Eastwood or Nichole Zink,
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) 482–3874 and (202)
482–0049, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On February 1 and February 3, 2006,
respectively, the Department of
Commerce (the Department) published
notices of initiation of administrative
and new shipper reviews of the
antidumping duty order on hand trucks
and certain parts thereof (hand trucks)
from the People’s Republic of China
(PRC). See Initiation of Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Administrative
E:\FR\FM\03AUN1.SGM
03AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 149 (Thursday, August 3, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44017-44018]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-12536]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-549-822]
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand; Corrected Partial
Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 3, 2006.
[[Page 44018]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irina Itkin or Alice Gibbons, 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) 482-0498, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 20, 2006, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
published in the Federal Register its notice of partial rescission of
the antidumping duty administrative review of certain frozen warmwater
shrimp from Thailand for the period August 4, 2004, through January 31,
2006. See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand; Partial
Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 41200 (July
20, 2006) (Partial Rescission). In the Partial Rescission, the
Department noted that it was rescinding the administrative review with
respect to Kiang Huat Sea Hull Trading Frozen Food Public Co., Ltd.,
based on a timely request for withdrawal. See Partial Rescission, 71 FR
at 41201. However, the Department incorrectly spelled this company's
name. Specifically, the correct name for this company is Kiang Huat Sea
Gull Trading Frozen Food Public Co., Ltd.
We now correct the partial rescission of the 2004-2006 antidumping
duty administrative review of certain frozen warmwater shrimp from
Thailand as noted above. As a result of this correction, we are
rescinding the 2004-2006 administrative review for Kiang Huat Sea Gull
Trading Frozen Food Public Co., Ltd.
This corrected partial rescission is issued and published in
accordance section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19
CFR 351.213(d)(4).
Dated: July 26, 2006.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6-12536 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
