Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Latvia; Preliminary Results of the Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order, 68544-68546 [E6-20012]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
68544
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 227 / Monday, November 27, 2006 / Notices
parties have provided an adequate
response to a notice of initiation where
the Department receives complete
substantive responses from respondent
interested parties accounting, on
average, for more than 50 percent, by
volume, or value, if appropriate, of the
total exports of the subject merchandise
to the United States over the five
calendar years preceding the year of
publication of the notice of initiation.
On September 20, 2006, the Department
found that Mittal Steel accounted for
more than 50 percent of exports by
volume of the subject merchandise from
Ukraine to the United States, dependent
upon it demonstrating that it exported
to the United States during the period.
See Memorandum to Susan H. Kuhbach,
Director, from Damian Felton entitled,
‘‘Adequacy Determination in
Antidumping Duty Sunset Review of
Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from
Ukraine,’’ (September 20, 2006).
In its substantive response, Mittal
Steel also notified the Department of a
name change that occurred in November
2005. Prior to this date, the company
was named ‘‘Krivorozhstal’’ Steel
Works. In November 2005, with Mittal
Steel’s purchase of the company, the
name became Mittal Steel Kryviy Rih.
On September 28, 2006, the
Department sent a letter to Mittal Steel
requesting proof of order date, invoice
date, quantity, value, shipment date,
and payment date for its reported
shipments. The Department also
requested that Mittal Steel confirm that
the merchandise was included in the
scope of the order. On October 20, 2006,
Mittal Steel submitted the requested
documentation.
Because the Department has no
evidence contradicting Mittal Steel’s
claim that it is the successor to
‘‘Krivorozhstal’’ Steel Works, which
made the 2001 shipments, we are
equating Mittal and ‘‘Krivorozhstal’’
Steel Works solely for the purpose of
determining whether the respondent
interested party submitted an adequate
response to our notice of initiation.
Based on its response to our request for
supporting documentation, the
Department determines that Mittal Steel
has demonstrated that it represents
more than 50 percent of the total exports
of subject merchandise from Ukraine to
the United States during this five-year
sunset review period (2001–2005).
Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.218(e)(2)(i), the Department is
conducting a full sunset review of this
antidumping duty order.
The final results in the full sunset
review of this antidumping duty order
are due on or before March 29, 2007.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:58 Nov 24, 2006
Jkt 211001
Scope of the Order
The product covered by this order is
all steel concrete reinforcing bars sold in
straight lengths, currently classifiable in
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) under item
numbers 7214.20.00, 7228.30.8050,
7222.11.0050, 7222.30.0000,
7228.60.6000, 7228.20.1000, or any
other tariff item number. Specifically
excluded are plain rounds (i.e., nondeformed or smooth bars) and rebar that
has been further processed through
bending or coating. HTSUS subheadings
are provided for convenience and
customs purposes. The written
description of the scope of the order is
dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in this sunset review
are addressed in the ‘‘Issues and
Decision Memorandum for the Sunset
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order
on Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from
Ukraine; Preliminary Results,’’ from
Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, to
David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary
for Import Administration (November
20, 2006) (‘‘Decision Memo’’), which is
hereby adopted by this notice. The
issues discussed in the Decision Memo
include the likelihood of continuation
or recurrence of dumping and the
magnitude of the margin likely to
prevail if the antidumping duty order
were revoked. Parties can find a
complete discussion of all issues raised
in this sunset review and the
corresponding recommendations in this
public memo, which is on file in room
B–099 of the main Department building.
In addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memo can be accessed directly
on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn.
The paper copy and electronic version
of the Decision Memo are identical in
content.
Preliminary Results of Review
The Department preliminarily
determines that revocation of the
antidumping duty order on steel
concrete reinforcing bars from Ukraine
is likely to lead to continuation or
recurrence of dumping at the following
weighted-average margin:
PO 00000
Manufacturers/producers/exporters
Weighted-average margin
(percent)
All Others Rate, including
Mittal Steel Kryviy Rih and
‘‘Krivorozhstal’’ Steel
Works 2 ..............................
41.69
2 As
of February 1, 2006, Ukraine graduated
to market economy status. See Final Results
of Inquiry Into Ukraine’s Status as a Non-Market Economy Country, 71 FR 9520 (February
24, 2006). As a result, the Ukraine wide rate is
now the All Others rate. Mittal Steel is considered part of the all others rate because a successor-in-interest determination has not been
made. See, e.g., Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel
Plate from Belgium, Brazil, Finland, Germany,
Mexico, Poland, Romania, Spain, Sweden,
and the United Kingdom and Carbon Steel
Plate from Taiwan; Second Five-Year (Sunset)
Reviews of Antidumping Duty Orders and Antidumping Finding; Final Results, 71 FR 11577,
11579 (March 8, 2006) (explaining that
Duferco is subject to the all others rate because the Department had not yet conducted
a changed circumstances review to determine
the successor-in-interest to Forges de
Clabecq, S.A.).
Any interested party may request a
hearing within 30 days of publication of
this notice in accordance with 19 CFR
351.310(c). Interested parties may
submit case briefs no later than 50 days
after the date of publication of this
notice, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.309(c)(1)(i). Rebuttal briefs, which
must be limited to issues raised in the
case briefs, may be filed no later than 5
days after the case briefs, in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.309(d)(1). Any hearing,
if requested, will be held two days after
rebuttal briefs are due, in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.310(d)(1). The
Department will issue a notice of final
results of this sunset review, which will
include the results of its analysis of
issues raised in any such briefs, no later
than March 29, 2007.
This five-year (‘‘sunset’’) review and
notice are in accordance with sections
751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Date: November 20, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration
[FR Doc. E6–20011 Filed 11–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–449–804]
Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From
Latvia; Preliminary Results of the
Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty
Order
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
AGENCY:
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\27NON1.SGM
27NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 227 / Monday, November 27, 2006 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
SUMMARY: On August 1, 2006, the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) initiated a sunset review
of the antidumping duty order on steel
concrete reinforcing bars from Latvia.
On the basis of the notice of intent to
participate by a domestic interested
party and adequate responses filed on
behalf of the domestic and respondent
interested parties, the Department is
conducting a full sunset review of the
antidumping duty order pursuant to
section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (‘‘the Act’’) and 19 CFR
351.218(e)(2)(i). As a result of this
sunset review, the Department
preliminarily finds that revocation of
the antidumping duty order would be
likely to lead to continuation or
recurrence of dumping at the levels
listed below in the section entitled
‘‘Preliminary Results of Review.’’
Effective Date: November 27, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Audrey R. Twyman, Damian Felton, or
Brandon Farlander, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 1, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20230;
telephone: 202–482–3534, 202–482–
0133, and 202–482–0182, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 1, 2006, the Department
published its notice of initiation of the
sunset review of the antidumping duty
order on steel concrete reinforcing bars
from Latvia, in accordance with section
751(c) of the Act. See Initiation of FiveYear (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews, 71 FR 43443
(August 1, 2006) (‘‘Notice of Initiation’’).
The Department received a notice of
intent to participate from the following
domestic parties: the Rebar Trade
Action Coalition and its individual
producer members, Nucor Corporation,
CMC Steel Group, and Gerdau
Ameristeel, as well as domestic
producers TAMCO Steel and Schnitzer
Steel Industries, Inc. (‘‘Schnitzer’’)
(collectively ‘‘domestic interested
parties’’), within the deadline specified
in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). The
companies claimed interested party
status under section 771(9)(C) of the
Act, as manufacturers of a domestic-like
product in the United States.
The Department received a complete
substantive response to the notice of
initiation from the domestic interested
parties within the 30-day deadline
specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). In
this response, Cascade Steel Rolling
Mills, Inc. (‘‘Cascade’’) was substituted
for Schnitzer as a domestic interested
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:58 Nov 24, 2006
Jkt 211001
party. Cascade is a wholly owned
subsidiary of Schnitzer. Also, Steel
Dynamics, Inc. (‘‘SDI’’) was added as a
domestic producer. Because SDI did not
file a notice of intent to participate in
this review, it is not eligible to file a
substantive response. See 19 CFR
351.218(d)(iii)(A). Therefore, the
domestic interested parties are now the
Rebar Trade Action Coalition and its
individual producer members Nucor
Corporation, CMC Steel Group, and
Gerdau Ameristeel, as well as TAMCO
Steel, and Cascade.
The Department received a complete
substantive response from respondent
interested party, Joint Stock Company
Liepajas Metalurgs (‘‘LM’’ or the
‘‘respondent interested party’’), within
the 30-day deadline specified in 19 CFR
351.218(d)(3)(i). On September 5, 2006,
the Department received a rebuttal to
Liepajas Metalurgs’ substantive
response from the domestic interested
parties.
19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(A) provides
that the Secretary normally will
conclude that respondent interested
parties have provided adequate
response to a notice of initiation where
the Department receives complete
substantive responses from respondent
interested parties accounting on average
for more than 50 percent, by volume, or
value, if appropriate, of the total exports
of the subject merchandise to the United
States over the five calendar years
preceding the year of publication of the
notice of initiation. On September 20,
2006, the Department found that LM
accounted for more than 50 percent of
exports by volume of the subject
merchandise from Latvia to the United
States. See Memorandum to Susan H.
Kuhbach, Director, from Damian Felton
entitled, ‘‘Adequacy Determination in
Antidumping Duty Sunset Review of
Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from
Latvia,’’ (September 20, 2006). In
accordance with 19 CFR
351.218(e)(2)(i), the Department
determined to conduct a full sunset
review of this antidumping duty order.
The final results in the full sunset
review of this antidumping duty order
are due on or before March 29, 2007.
Scope of the Order
The product covered by this order is
all steel concrete reinforcing bars sold in
straight lengths, currently classifiable in
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) under item
numbers 7214.20.00, 7228.30.8050,
7222.11.0050, 7222.30.0000,
7228.60.6000, 7228.20.1000, or any
other tariff item number. Specifically
excluded are plain rounds (i.e., nondeformed or smooth bars) and rebar that
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
68545
has been further processed through
bending or coating. HTSUS subheadings
are provided for convenience and
customs purposes. The written
description of the scope of the order is
dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in this sunset review
are addressed in the ‘‘Issues and
Decision Memorandum for the Sunset
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order
on Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from
Latvia; Preliminary Results,’’ from
Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, to
David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary
for Import Administration, dated
November 20, 2006 (‘‘Decision Memo’’),
which is hereby adopted by this notice.
The issues discussed in the Decision
Memo include the likelihood of
continuation or recurrence of dumping
and the magnitude of the margin likely
to prevail if the antidumping duty order
were revoked. Parties can find a
complete discussion of all issues raised
in this sunset review and the
corresponding recommendations in this
public memo, which is on file in room
B–099 of the main Department building.
In addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memo can be accessed directly
on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn.
The paper copy and electronic version
of the Decision Memo are identical in
content.
Preliminary Results of Review
The Department preliminarily
determines that revocation of the
antidumping duty order on steel
concrete reinforcing bars from Latvia is
likely to lead to continuation or
recurrence of dumping at the following
weighted-average margins:
Manufacturers/Producers/Exporters
Joint Stock Company
Liepajas Metalurgs ............
All Others ..............................
Weighted-average margin
(percent)
17.21
17.21
Any interested party may request a
hearing within 30 days of publication of
this notice in accordance with 19 CFR
351.310(c). Interested parties may
submit case briefs no later than 50 days
after the date of publication of this
notice, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.309(c)(1)(i). Rebuttal briefs, which
must be limited to issues raised in the
case briefs, may be filed no later than 5
days after the case briefs, in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.309(d)(1). Any hearing,
if requested, will be held two days after
rebuttal briefs are due, in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.310(d)(1). The
E:\FR\FM\27NON1.SGM
27NON1
68546
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 227 / Monday, November 27, 2006 / Notices
Department will issue a notice of final
results of this sunset review, which will
include the results of its analysis of
issues raised in any such briefs, no later
than March 29, 2007.
This five-year (‘‘sunset’’) review and
notice are in accordance with sections
751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: November 20, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–20012 Filed 11–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–570–907, C–560–821, C–580–857]
Notice of Initiation of Countervailing
Duty Investigations: Coated Free Sheet
Paper From the People’s Republic of
China, Indonesia, and the Republic of
Korea
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce
DATES: Effective Date: November 27,
2006.
AGENCY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Layton or David Neubacher (the
PRC), Dana Mermelstein or Sean Carey
(Indonesia), and Eric Greynolds or Darla
Brown (Korea), AD/CVD Operations,
Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0371
and (202) 482–5823, (202) 482–1391 and
(202) 482–3964, and (202) 482–6071 and
(202) 482–2849, respectively.
Initiation of Investigations:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
The Petitions
On October 31, 2006, the Department
of Commerce (the Department) received
petitions filed in proper form by
NewPage Corporation (petitioner). The
Department received from petitioner
information supplementing the petitions
throughout the 20-day initiation period.
In accordance with section 702(b)(1)
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(‘‘the Act’’), petitioner alleges that
manufacturers, producers, or exporters
of coated free sheet paper (CFS) in the
People’s Republic of China ( the PRC),
Indonesia, and the Republic of Korea
(Korea) received countervailable
subsidies within the meaning of section
701 of the Act and that such imports are
materially injuring, or threatening
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:58 Nov 24, 2006
Jkt 211001
material injury to, an industry in the
United States.
The Department finds that petitioner
filed these petitions on behalf of the
domestic industry because it is an
interested party as defined in sections
771(9)(C) of the Act and petitioner has
demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to each of the
countervailing duty investigations that
it is requesting the Department to
initiate (see ‘‘Determination of Industry
Support for the Petitions’’ section
below).
Scope of Investigations
The merchandise covered by each of
these investigations includes coated free
sheet paper and paperboard of a kind
used for writing, printing or other
graphic purposes. Coated free sheet
paper is produced from not-more-than
10 percent by weight mechanical or
combined chemical/mechanical fibers.
Coated free sheet paper is coated with
kaolin (China clay) or other inorganic
substances, with or without a binder,
and with no other coating. Coated free
sheet paper may be surface-colored,
surface-decorated, printed (except as
described below), embossed, or
perforated. The subject merchandise
includes single- and double-side-coated
free sheet paper; coated free sheet paper
in both sheet or roll form; and is
inclusive of all weights, brightness
levels, and finishes. The terms ‘‘wood
free’’ or ‘‘art’’ paper may also be used to
describe the imported product.
Excluded from the scope are: (1)
Coated free sheet paper that is imported
printed with final content printed text
or graphics; (2) base paper to be
sensitized for use in photography; and
(3) paper containing by weight 25
percent or more cotton fiber.
Coated free sheet paper is classifiable
under subheadings 4810.13.1900,
4810.13.2010, 4810.13.2090,
4810.13.5000, 4810.13.7040,
4810.14.1900, 4810.14.2010,
4810.14.2090, 4810.14.5000,
4810.14.7040, 4810.19.1900,
4810.19.2010, and 4810.19.2090 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS). While HTSUS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, our
written description of the scope of these
investigations is dispositive.
Comments on Scope of Investigations
During our review of the petitions, we
discussed the scope with petitioner to
ensure that it is an accurate reflection of
the products for which the domestic
industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as
discussed in the preamble to the
regulations (Antidumping Duties;
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR
27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)), we are
setting aside a period for interested
parties to raise issues regarding product
coverage. The Department encourages
all interested parties to submit such
comments within 20 calendar days of
the publication of this notice.
Comments should be addressed to
Import Administration’s Central
Records Unit (CRU), Room 1870, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street
and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230. The period of
scope consultations is intended to
provide the Department with ample
opportunity to consider all comments
and to consult with parties prior to the
issuance of the preliminary
determinations.
Consultations
Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of
the Act, the Department invited
representatives of the relevant foreign
governments for consultations with
respect to the countervailing duty
petitions. The Department held
consultations with representatives of the
government of the PRC on November 9
and November 20, 2006. See the
November 9 and November 20, 2006,
memoranda to the file regarding the
consultations with officials from the
PRC (public documents on file in the
CRU of the Department of Commerce,
Room B–099). The Department held
consultations with representatives of the
governments of Indonesia and Korea on
November 16, 2006. See the November
16, 2006, memoranda to the file
regarding the consultations with
officials from Indonesia and Korea
(public documents on file in the CRU).
On November 20, 2006, the Government
of Indonesia (GOI) filed a letter
reiterating their concerns regarding one
of the issues the GOI raised at
consultations.
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions
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 (1) At least 25
percent of the total production of the
domestic like product and (2) 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
E:\FR\FM\27NON1.SGM
27NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 227 (Monday, November 27, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68544-68546]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-20012]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-449-804]
Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Latvia; Preliminary Results
of the Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
[[Page 68545]]
SUMMARY: On August 1, 2006, the Department of Commerce (``the
Department'') initiated a sunset review of the antidumping duty order
on steel concrete reinforcing bars from Latvia. On the basis of the
notice of intent to participate by a domestic interested party and
adequate responses filed on behalf of the domestic and respondent
interested parties, the Department is conducting a full sunset review
of the antidumping duty order pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act'') and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(2)(i). As a
result of this sunset review, the Department preliminarily finds that
revocation of the antidumping duty order would be likely to lead to
continuation or recurrence of dumping at the levels listed below in the
section entitled ``Preliminary Results of Review.''
Effective Date:
November 27, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Audrey R. Twyman, Damian Felton, or
Brandon Farlander, AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street & Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20230; telephone:
202-482-3534, 202-482-0133, and 202-482-0182, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 1, 2006, the Department published its notice of
initiation of the sunset review of the antidumping duty order on steel
concrete reinforcing bars from Latvia, in accordance with section
751(c) of the Act. See Initiation of Five-Year (``Sunset'') Reviews, 71
FR 43443 (August 1, 2006) (``Notice of Initiation'').
The Department received a notice of intent to participate from the
following domestic parties: the Rebar Trade Action Coalition and its
individual producer members, Nucor Corporation, CMC Steel Group, and
Gerdau Ameristeel, as well as domestic producers TAMCO Steel and
Schnitzer Steel Industries, Inc. (``Schnitzer'') (collectively
``domestic interested parties''), within the deadline specified in 19
CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). The companies claimed interested party status
under section 771(9)(C) of the Act, as manufacturers of a domestic-like
product in the United States.
The Department received a complete substantive response to the
notice of initiation from the domestic interested parties within the
30-day deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). In this response,
Cascade Steel Rolling Mills, Inc. (``Cascade'') was substituted for
Schnitzer as a domestic interested party. Cascade is a wholly owned
subsidiary of Schnitzer. Also, Steel Dynamics, Inc. (``SDI'') was added
as a domestic producer. Because SDI did not file a notice of intent to
participate in this review, it is not eligible to file a substantive
response. See 19 CFR 351.218(d)(iii)(A). Therefore, the domestic
interested parties are now the Rebar Trade Action Coalition and its
individual producer members Nucor Corporation, CMC Steel Group, and
Gerdau Ameristeel, as well as TAMCO Steel, and Cascade.
The Department received a complete substantive response from
respondent interested party, Joint Stock Company Liepajas Metalurgs
(``LM'' or the ``respondent interested party''), within the 30-day
deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). On September 5, 2006,
the Department received a rebuttal to Liepajas Metalurgs' substantive
response from the domestic interested parties.
19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(A) provides that the Secretary normally
will conclude that respondent interested parties have provided adequate
response to a notice of initiation where the Department receives
complete substantive responses from respondent interested parties
accounting on average for more than 50 percent, by volume, or value, if
appropriate, of the total exports of the subject merchandise to the
United States over the five calendar years preceding the year of
publication of the notice of initiation. On September 20, 2006, the
Department found that LM accounted for more than 50 percent of exports
by volume of the subject merchandise from Latvia to the United States.
See Memorandum to Susan H. Kuhbach, Director, from Damian Felton
entitled, ``Adequacy Determination in Antidumping Duty Sunset Review of
Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Latvia,'' (September 20, 2006). In
accordance with 19 CFR 351.218(e)(2)(i), the Department determined to
conduct a full sunset review of this antidumping duty order.
The final results in the full sunset review of this antidumping
duty order are due on or before March 29, 2007.
Scope of the Order
The product covered by this order is all steel concrete reinforcing
bars sold in straight lengths, currently classifiable in the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') under item numbers
7214.20.00, 7228.30.8050, 7222.11.0050, 7222.30.0000, 7228.60.6000,
7228.20.1000, or any other tariff item number. Specifically excluded
are plain rounds (i.e., non-deformed or smooth bars) and rebar that has
been further processed through bending or coating. HTSUS subheadings
are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written
description of the scope of the order is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in this sunset review are addressed in the
``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Sunset Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Latvia;
Preliminary Results,'' from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, to David M. Spooner, Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, dated November 20, 2006
(``Decision Memo''), which is hereby adopted by this notice. The issues
discussed in the Decision Memo include the likelihood of continuation
or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margin likely to
prevail if the antidumping duty order were revoked. Parties can find a
complete discussion of all issues raised in this sunset review and the
corresponding recommendations in this public memo, which is on file in
room B-099 of the main Department building. In addition, a complete
version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at
https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the
Decision Memo are identical in content.
Preliminary Results of Review
The Department preliminarily determines that revocation of the
antidumping duty order on steel concrete reinforcing bars from Latvia
is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the
following weighted-average margins:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
Manufacturers/Producers/Exporters average margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joint Stock Company Liepajas Metalurgs.................. 17.21
All Others.............................................. 17.21
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of
publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.310(c).
Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 50 days after
the date of publication of this notice, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.309(c)(1)(i). Rebuttal briefs, which must be limited to issues
raised in the case briefs, may be filed no later than 5 days after the
case briefs, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(d)(1). Any hearing, if
requested, will be held two days after rebuttal briefs are due, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.310(d)(1). The
[[Page 68546]]
Department will issue a notice of final results of this sunset review,
which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised in any
such briefs, no later than March 29, 2007.
This five-year (``sunset'') review and notice are in accordance
with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: November 20, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6-20012 Filed 11-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
