Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not In Harmony with Final Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value, 327-328 [E6-22559]

Download as PDF mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 2 / Thursday, January 4, 2007 / Notices In 2006, the American Community Survey began publishing up-to-date profiles of American communities every year, providing policymakers, planners, and service providers in the public and private sectors this information every year—not just every ten years. The American Community Survey will provide data at the census tract level by July 2010. These data are needed by federal agencies and others and provides assurance that long-form type data are available after the elimination of the long form from the 2010 Census. The Census Bureau presently plans to resubmit the American Community Survey to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for extended clearance with content changes. The current ACS content has been reviewed by the Census Bureau, in conjunction with Federal agency stakeholders, to determine potential areas for improved item response and/or data quality. In the 2006 ACS Methods Test, the Census Bureau conducted cognitive testing of questions identified by the Census Bureau and federal agency stakeholders for changes to improve data quality and/or item response rates. The question, instruction, and/or response category modifications to some of the 2005 ACS content were field tested. The tested questions included: Year structure built, number of rooms and bedrooms, plumbing and kitchen facilities, telephone availability, vehicles, heating fuel, food stamp benefit, value of this property, mortgage components, place of birth, citizenship, year of arrival in the U.S., school enrollment, educational attainment, residence 1 year ago, disability, military status, period of military service, work last week, temporarily absent from a job, looking for work, weeks worked, industry and occupation. Based on the results of the testing, modifications to some of these questions will be incorporated into the 2008 ACS data collection instruments. In addition to testing modifications to 2005 ACS questions, the 2006 ACS Methods Test also included testing three new topics proposed by Federal agency stakeholders: Health insurance coverage, marital history, and veteran’s service-connected disability. Two final components of the 2006 ACS Methods Test included testing a sequential verses grid design to the ACS questionnaire, and testing the inclusion of a questionnaire instruction booklet in the mailing package. The results of 2006 ACS testing will be incorporated into the survey instruments and formally submitted to OMB for review and approval. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:51 Jan 03, 2007 Jkt 211001 II. Method of Collection The Census Bureau will mail questionnaires to households selected for the American Community Survey. For households that do not return a questionnaire, Census Bureau staff will attempt to conduct interviews via Computer-assisted Telephone Interviews (CATI). We will also conduct Computer-assisted Personal Interviews (CAPI) for a sub sample of nonrespondents. A quality control reinterview will be conducted for a small sample of respondents. For most types of GQs, Census Bureau field representatives (FRs) will conduct personal interviews with respondents to complete questionnaires or, if necessary, leave questionnaires and ask respondents to complete. Information from GQ contacts will be collected via CAPI. A GQ contact reinterview will be conducted from a sample of GQs primarily through CATI. A very small percentage of the GQ reinterviews will be conducted via CAPI. The Census Bureau staff will provide Telephone Questionnaire Assistance (TQA) and if the respondent indicates a desire to complete the survey by telephone, the TQA interviewer conducts the interview. 327 IV. Request for Comments Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collections techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for the OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record. Dated: December 28, 2006. Madeleine Clayton, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E6–22560 Filed 1–3–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–07–P III. Data DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE OMB Number: 0607–0810. Form Number(s): ACS–1, ACS–1(SP), ACS–1(PR), ACS–1(PR)SP, ACS–1(GQ), ACS–1(PR)(GQ), GQFQ, ACS CATI (HU), ACS CAPI (HU), ACS RI (HU), and AGQ RI. Type of Review: Regular. Affected Public: Individuals, households, and businesses. Estimated Number of Respondents: We plan to contact the following number of respondents each year: 3,000,000 households; 200,000 persons in group quarters; 20,000 contacts in group quarters; 27,000 households for reinterview; and 1,500 group quarters contacts for reinterview. Estimated Time Per Response: Estimates are 38 minutes per household, 15 minutes per group quarters contact, 25 minutes per resident in group quarters, and 10 minutes per household or GQ contact in the reinterview samples. Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: The estimate is an annual average of 1,994,500 burden hours. Estimated Total Annual Cost: Except for their time, there is no cost to respondents. Respondent Obligation: Mandatory. Authority: Title 13, United States Code, Section 182. International Trade Administration PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 A–570–892 Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not In Harmony with Final Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On December 8, 2006, the United States Court of International Trade (‘‘CIT’’) sustained the final remand determination made by the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) pursuant to the CIT’s remand of the final determination of the less–than-fair–value investigation of Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 (‘‘CVP 23’’) from the People’s Republic of China. See Goldlink Industries Co., Ltd., Trust Chem Co., Ltd., Tianjin Hanchem International Trading Co., Ltd. V. United States, and Nation Ford Chemical Company and Sun Chemical Corporation, and Clariant Corporation, Consol. Ct. 05–00060, (Ct. Int’l Trade Dec. 8, 2006). This case arises out of the Department’s final determination in the investigation covering the period April 1, 2003, through September 30, 2003. See Notice of Final Determination of AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\04JAN1.SGM 04JAN1 mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES 328 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 2 / Thursday, January 4, 2007 / Notices Sales at Less Than Fair Value for Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from the People’s Republic of China, 69 FR 67304 (November 17, 2004) (‘‘Final Determination’’). The final judgment in this case was not in harmony with the Department’s Final Determination. EFFECTIVE DATE: December 18, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Stolz or Charles Riggle, AD/CVD Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4474 or (202) 482– 0650, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In Goldlink Industries Co., Ltd., Trust Chem Co., Ltd., Tianjin Hanchem International Trading Co., Ltd. v. United States, 431 F. Supp. 2d 1323 (CIT 2006), the CIT remanded the underlying final determination to the Department to (1) re–examine its determination to apply total adverse facts available (‘‘AFA’’) to Tianjin Hanchem International Trading Co., Ltd. (‘‘Hanchem’’); (2) further explain its determination that the subsidies Pidilite Industries, Ltd. (‘‘Pidilite’’), an Indian producer of CVP, received did not distort Pidilite’s financial ratios; (3) re–examine the surrogate values for benzene sulfonyl chloride, calcium chloride and steam; (4) either include terminal charges and brokerage fees in movement costs or precisely and reasonably explain its decision not to include such costs; and (5) re–open the record and allow parties to submit new information as necessary. On September 22, 2006, the Department released the Draft Remand Redetermination to interested parties and requested that they submit comments by September 27, 2006. The petitioners submitted comments on September 27, 2006. Respondents did not submit comments. On October 16, 2006, the Department issued to the CIT its final results of redetermination pursuant to remand. In the remand redetermination the Department (1) applied partial AFA to Hanchem; (2) explained how the subsidies Pidilite received did not distort Pidilite’s financial ratios; (3) re–calculated the surrogate values for benzene sulfonyl chloride, calcium chloride and steam; (4) explained why it is not appropriate to include terminal charges and brokerage fees in movement costs; and (5) re–opened the record and allowed parties to submit new information with respect to the surrogate value of steam. Thus, the Department recalculated the antidumping duty rates applicable to Goldlink Industries Co., Ltd., Trust VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:51 Jan 03, 2007 Jkt 211001 Chem Co., Ltd., Hanchem, Nantong Haidi Chemicals Co., Ltd., and the PRC– wide entity. On December 8, 2006, the CIT sustained the final redetermination made by the Department pursuant to the CIT’s remand of the Final Determination. In its decision in Timken Co., v. United States, 893 F.2d 337, 341 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (‘‘Timken’’), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (‘‘CAFC’’) held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), the Department must publish a notice of a court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’ with a Department determination, and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The CIT’s decision in this case on December 8, 2006, constitutes a final decision of the court that is not in harmony with the Department’s Final Determination. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise pending the expiration of the period of appeal or, if appealed, pending a final and conclusive court decision. In the event the CIT’s ruling is not appealed or, if appealed, upheld by the CAFC, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to revise the cash deposit rates covering the subject merchandise. This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 516A(c)(1) of the Act. Dated: December 27, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6–22559 Filed 1–3–07; 8:45 am] Billing Code: 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–201–802] Gray Portland Cement and Clinker From Mexico: Initiation of an Antidumping Duty ChangedCircumstances Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: In response to a request for a changed-circumstances review from Holcim Apasco, S.A. de C.V. (Apasco) and pursuant to Section II.B.6 of the Agreement between the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the United States Department of Commerce AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 and Secretaria de Economia on Trade in Mexican Cement (the Agreement) dated March 6, 2006, the Department of Commerce is initiating a changedcircumstances review of the antidumping duty order on gray portland cement and clinker from Mexico. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 4, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Callen at (202) 482–0180 or Minoo Hatten at (202) 482–1690, AD/ CVD Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On August 30, 1990, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the antidumping duty order on gray portland cement and clinker from Mexico (Mexican cement). See Antidumping Duty Order: Gray Portland Cement and Clinker From Mexico, 55 FR 35443. According to the Agreement, upon request, the Department ‘‘shall conduct an expedited changedcircumstances review to establish a new estimated duty deposit rate for any Mexican Cement exporter (and its affiliated parties) that’’: (a) Had an estimated duty deposit rate under the Mexican Cement Order; (b) did not receive the new estimated duty deposit rate of three U.S. dollars ($3.00) per metric ton referenced in Section II.A.4.b of this Agreement; and (c) exported Mexican Cement to the United States in the year preceding the Effective Date or exports Mexican Cement to the United States while the Agreement remains in force. On December 14, 2006, pursuant to section II.B.6 of the Agreement, Apasco requested that the Department conduct a changed-circumstances review of certain export sales of the subject merchandise to the United States made by Apasco during the period October through December 2006. Scope of the Order The products subject to this order include gray portland cement and clinker. Gray portland cement is a hydraulic cement and the primary component of concrete. Clinker, an intermediate material product produced when manufacturing cement, has no use other than of being ground into finished cement. Gray portland cement is currently classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item number 2523.29, and cement clinker is currently classifiable E:\FR\FM\04JAN1.SGM 04JAN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 2 (Thursday, January 4, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 327-328]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-22559]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

A-570-892


Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from the People's Republic of China: 
Notice of Court Decision Not In Harmony with Final Determination of 
Sales at Less than Fair Value

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 8, 2006, the United States Court of International 
Trade (``CIT'') sustained the final remand determination made by the 
Department of Commerce (``the Department'') pursuant to the CIT's 
remand of the final determination of the less-than-fair-value 
investigation of Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 (``CVP 23'') from the 
People's Republic of China. See Goldlink Industries Co., Ltd., Trust 
Chem Co., Ltd., Tianjin Hanchem International Trading Co., Ltd. V. 
United States, and Nation Ford Chemical Company and Sun Chemical 
Corporation, and Clariant Corporation, Consol. Ct. 05-00060, (Ct. Int'l 
Trade Dec. 8, 2006). This case arises out of the Department's final 
determination in the investigation covering the period April 1, 2003, 
through September 30, 2003. See Notice of Final Determination of

[[Page 328]]

Sales at Less Than Fair Value for Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from the 
People's Republic of China, 69 FR 67304 (November 17, 2004) (``Final 
Determination''). The final judgment in this case was not in harmony 
with the Department's Final Determination.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 18, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Stolz or Charles Riggle, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4474 
or (202) 482-0650, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In Goldlink Industries Co., Ltd., Trust Chem 
Co., Ltd., Tianjin Hanchem International Trading Co., Ltd. v. United 
States, 431 F. Supp. 2d 1323 (CIT 2006), the CIT remanded the 
underlying final determination to the Department to (1) re-examine its 
determination to apply total adverse facts available (``AFA'') to 
Tianjin Hanchem International Trading Co., Ltd. (``Hanchem''); (2) 
further explain its determination that the subsidies Pidilite 
Industries, Ltd. (``Pidilite''), an Indian producer of CVP, received 
did not distort Pidilite's financial ratios; (3) re-examine the 
surrogate values for benzene sulfonyl chloride, calcium chloride and 
steam; (4) either include terminal charges and brokerage fees in 
movement costs or precisely and reasonably explain its decision not to 
include such costs; and (5) re-open the record and allow parties to 
submit new information as necessary.
    On September 22, 2006, the Department released the Draft Remand 
Redetermination to interested parties and requested that they submit 
comments by September 27, 2006. The petitioners submitted comments on 
September 27, 2006. Respondents did not submit comments. On October 16, 
2006, the Department issued to the CIT its final results of 
redetermination pursuant to remand. In the remand redetermination the 
Department (1) applied partial AFA to Hanchem; (2) explained how the 
subsidies Pidilite received did not distort Pidilite's financial 
ratios; (3) re-calculated the surrogate values for benzene sulfonyl 
chloride, calcium chloride and steam; (4) explained why it is not 
appropriate to include terminal charges and brokerage fees in movement 
costs; and (5) re-opened the record and allowed parties to submit new 
information with respect to the surrogate value of steam. Thus, the 
Department recalculated the antidumping duty rates applicable to 
Goldlink Industries Co., Ltd., Trust Chem Co., Ltd., Hanchem, Nantong 
Haidi Chemicals Co., Ltd., and the PRC-wide entity. On December 8, 
2006, the CIT sustained the final redetermination made by the 
Department pursuant to the CIT's remand of the Final Determination.
    In its decision in Timken Co., v. United States, 893 F.2d 337, 341 
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (``Timken''), the United States Court of Appeals for 
the Federal Circuit (``CAFC'') held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) 
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''), the Department 
must publish a notice of a court decision that is not ``in harmony'' 
with a Department determination, and must suspend liquidation of 
entries pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's decision in 
this case on December 8, 2006, constitutes a final decision of the 
court that is not in harmony with the Department's Final Determination. 
This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements 
of Timken. Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of 
liquidation of the subject merchandise pending the expiration of the 
period of appeal or, if appealed, pending a final and conclusive court 
decision. In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed or, if 
appealed, upheld by the CAFC, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs 
and Border Protection to revise the cash deposit rates covering the 
subject merchandise.
    This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 
516A(c)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: December 27, 2006.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6-22559 Filed 1-3-07; 8:45 am]
Billing Code: 3510-DS-S

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.