Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not In Harmony With Final Results of Administrative Review, 7763-7764 [E7-2836]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
7763
Notices
Federal Register
Vol. 72, No. 33
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains documents other than rules or
proposed rules that are applicable to the
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,
committee meetings, agency decisions and
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of
petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are
examples of documents appearing in this
section.
AMERICAN BATTLE MONUMENTS
COMMISSION
SES Performance Review Board
American Battle Monuments
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the
appointment of members of the ABMC
Performance Review Board.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Theodore Gloukhoff, Director of
Personnel and Administration,
American Battle Monuments
Commission, Courthouse Plaza II, Suite
500, 2300 Clarendon Boulevard,
Arlington, Virginia, 22201–3367,
Telephone Number: (703) 696–6908.
American Battle Monuments
Commission SES Performance Review
Board
Dr. Susan L. Duncan, Director, Human
Resources, US Army Corps of
Engineers;
Mr. Joseph Tyler, Chief, Program
Management Division, US Army
Corps of Engineers;
Mr. Wesley C. Miller, Director, Resource
Management, US Army Corps of
Engineers.
Theodore Gloukhoff,
Director, Personnel and Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–2853 Filed 2–16–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6120–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
(A–570–803)
Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the
People’s Republic of China: Notice of
Court Decision Not In Harmony With
Final Results of Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:14 Feb 16, 2007
Jkt 211001
SUMMARY: On January 9, 2007, the
United States Court of International
Trade (‘‘CIT’’) sustained the final
remand redetermination made by the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) pursuant to the CIT’s
remand of the final results of the
eleventh administrative review of the
antidumping duty orders on heavy
forged hand tools from the People’s
Republic of China. See Shandong
Huarong Machinery Co. v. United States
and Ames True Temper, Slip Op. 2007–
3 (CIT, 2007) (‘‘Shandong Huarong II’’).
This case arises out of the Department’s
final results in the administrative
review covering the period February 1,
2001, through January 31, 2002. See
Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or
Unfinished, With or Without Handles,
From the People’s Republic of China:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review of the Order on
Bars and Wedges, 68 FR 53347
(September 10, 2003) (‘‘Final Results’’).
Consistent with the decision of the
United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit (‘‘Federal Circuit’’) in
Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d
337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (‘‘Timken’’), the
Department is notifying the public that
Shandong Huarong II is not in harmony
with the Department’s Final Results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 20, 2007
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Martin or Mark Manning; AD/
CVD Operations, Office 4, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–3936 or (202) 482–
5253, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
Shandong Huarong Machinery Co. v.
United States, No. 03–00676 (CIT, 2005)
(‘‘Shandong Huarong I’’), the CIT
remanded the underlying final results to
the Department to: (1) reopen the record
in order to afford Shandong Huarong
Machinery Co. (‘‘Huarong’’) a second
opportunity to provide a scrap offset in
which its scrap sales are allocated to the
production of bars/wedges; (2) explain
why its methodology of including
distances greater than the distance from
the nearest port to the factory, when
calculating the weighted–average freight
distance for multiple suppliers of one
particular factor of production (‘‘FOP’’),
satisfies the reasoning in Sigma Corp. v.
United States, 117 F.3d 1401 (Fed. Cir.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1997) (‘‘Sigma’’) and Lasko Metal
Products Inc. v. United States, 43 F.3d
1442, 1446 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (‘‘Lasko’’), or
adjust its methodology; (3) explain its
decision to disregard the effect of
subsidies from the United States and
other countries, in light of Fuyao Glass
Indus. Group Co. v. United States, Slip
Op. 2003–169 (CIT, 2003) (‘‘Fuyao I’’)
and Fuyao Glass Indus. Group Co. v.
United States, Slip Op. 2005–06 (CIT,
2005) (‘‘Fuyao II’’); (4) supply a more
complete explanation to support its
determination that labor costs and other
factor inputs for making steel pallets are
included in the cost of brokerage and
handling; and (5) provide a more
complete explanation to support its
decision that the cost of movement from
the truck to the container yard,
demurrage and storage charges, and
other port charges are included in the
brokerage and handling cost.
The Department released the Draft
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to
Court Remand (‘‘Draft
Redetermination’’) to Huarong and
Ames True Temper 1 (‘‘Ames’’) for
comment on October 7, 2005. The
Department received timely filed
comments from both Huarong and Ames
on October 14, 2005, and rebuttal
comments from Huarong on October 19,
2005. On October 16, 2006, the
Department issued to the CIT its final
results of redetermination pursuant to
remand on November 30, 2005. In the
remand redetermination the Department
did the following: (1) reopened the
record, and applied a steel scrap offset
in its calculation of normal value to
adjust for sales of steel scrap that was
generated from the production of the
subject bars and wedges; (2) applied the
Sigma cap in its analysis and capped the
distance for each supplier before
calculating the weighted–average inland
freight distance; (3) explained its
decision in the Final Results to not
exclude U.S. export data from the
Indian import statistics used as the
surrogate value because it would have
resulted in an insignificant adjustment
to normal value; (4) revised its FOP
methodology to include labor costs and
other factor inputs for making steel
pallets in normal value; and (5)
explained its reasoning for finding that
movement expenses incurred at the port
1 Ames True Temper is a domestic interested
party to the proceeding, and was the petitioner in
the underlying review.
E:\FR\FM\20FEN1.SGM
20FEN1
7764
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 33 / Tuesday, February 20, 2007 / Notices
of export were included in the
calculation of brokerage and handing
expenses. The Department recalculated
the antidumping duty rate applicable to
Huarong, and included the changes
noted above. On January 9, 2007, the
CIT sustained all aspects of the remand
redetermination made by the
Department pursuant to the CIT’s
remand of the Final Results.
In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at
341, the Federal Circuit 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
January 9, 2007, constitutes a final
decision of the court that is not in
harmony with the Department’s Final
Results. 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 Federal Circuit, 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: February 13, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–2836 Filed 2–19–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A–201–822)
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils
from Mexico; Extension of Time Limit
for Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 20, 2007
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Maryanne Burke, Deborah Scott or
Robert James, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 7, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:14 Feb 16, 2007
Jkt 211001
Street and Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–5604, (202) 482–2657 or (202) 482–
0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 3, 2006, the Department of
Commerce (the Department) published a
notice of opportunity to request
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on, inter alia,
stainless steel sheet and strip in coils
from Mexico. See Antidumping or
Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or
Suspended Investigation; Opportunity
to Request Administrative Review, 71
FR 37890 (July 3, 2006). On July 31,
2006, the Department received a timely
request from Allegheny Ludlum
Corporation, United Auto Workers Local
3303, Zanesville Armco Independent
Organization, Inc. and the United
Steelworkers (collectively, petitioners)
to conduct an administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on stainless
steel sheet and strip in coils from
Mexico. Also on July 31, 2006, the
Department received a timely request
from the respondent in this review,
ThyssenKrupp Mexinox S.A. de C.V.
(Mexinox S.A.) and Mexinox USA, Inc.
(Mexinox USA) (collectively, Mexinox)
for revocation of the antidumping order
on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils
from Mexico. On August 30, 2006, the
Department published a notice of
initiation of this administrative review,
covering the period July 1, 2005, to June
30, 2006. See Initiation of Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews and Requests for Revocation in
Part, 71 FR 51573 (August 30, 2006).
The preliminary results are currently
due no later than April 2, 2007.
Extension of Time Limits for
Preliminary Results
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 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 and 19 CFR
351.213(h)(2) allow 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 for which a review is
requested.
The Department has determined it is
not practicable to complete this review
within the statutory time limit because
further analysis is needed with respect
to Mexinox’s affiliated party
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
transactions and its cost of production
data used in the margin calculation
programs. We require additional
information from Mexinox in order to
complete our analysis and will not have
time to analyze this information prior to
the current deadline for the preliminary
results. Accordingly, the Department is
extending the time limit for completion
of the preliminary results of this
administrative review until no later than
July 31, 2007, which is 365 days from
the last day of the anniversary month.
We intend to issue the final results no
later than 120 days after publication of
the preliminary results notice.
This extension is issued and
published in accordance with sections
751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: February 13, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–2835 Filed 2–19–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[Docket No. 070207025–7025–01; I.D.
051906D]
RIN 0648–ZB55
FY 2007 Broad Agency Announcement
Request for Extramural Research,
Innovative Projects, and Sponsorships
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of the availability of
Federal assistance.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NOAA announces the
availability of Federal assistance under
the Broad Agency Announcement
(BAA) for fiscal year 2007. The purpose
of this notice is to request proposals for
special projects and programs associated
with the Agency’s strategic plan and
mission goals, as described in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section,
and to provide the general public with
information and guidelines on how
NOAA will select proposals and
administer discretionary Federal
assistance under this BAA. NOAA
issued approximately $1 billion in
Federal assistance funds in fiscal year
2006. Approximately 81 percent was for
discretionary funding and 19 percent
non-discretionary. This BAA is a
mechanism to encourage research,
technical projects, or sponsorships (e.g.,
conferences, newsletters, etc.) that are
E:\FR\FM\20FEN1.SGM
20FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 33 (Tuesday, February 20, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7763-7764]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-2836]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A-570-803)
Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the People's Republic of China:
Notice of Court Decision Not In Harmony With Final Results of
Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On January 9, 2007, the United States Court of International
Trade (``CIT'') sustained the final remand redetermination made by the
Department of Commerce (``the Department'') pursuant to the CIT's
remand of the final results of the eleventh administrative review of
the antidumping duty orders on heavy forged hand tools from the
People's Republic of China. See Shandong Huarong Machinery Co. v.
United States and Ames True Temper, Slip Op. 2007-3 (CIT, 2007)
(``Shandong Huarong II''). This case arises out of the Department's
final results in the administrative review covering the period February
1, 2001, through January 31, 2002. See Heavy Forged Hand Tools,
Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, From the People's
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review of the Order on Bars and Wedges, 68 FR 53347 (September 10,
2003) (``Final Results''). Consistent with the decision of the United
States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (``Federal Circuit'')
in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990)
(``Timken''), the Department is notifying the public that Shandong
Huarong II is not in harmony with the Department's Final Results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 20, 2007
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Martin or Mark Manning; AD/CVD
Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
3936 or (202) 482-5253, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In Shandong Huarong Machinery Co. v. United
States, No. 03-00676 (CIT, 2005) (``Shandong Huarong I''), the CIT
remanded the underlying final results to the Department to: (1) reopen
the record in order to afford Shandong Huarong Machinery Co.
(``Huarong'') a second opportunity to provide a scrap offset in which
its scrap sales are allocated to the production of bars/wedges; (2)
explain why its methodology of including distances greater than the
distance from the nearest port to the factory, when calculating the
weighted-average freight distance for multiple suppliers of one
particular factor of production (``FOP''), satisfies the reasoning in
Sigma Corp. v. United States, 117 F.3d 1401 (Fed. Cir. 1997)
(``Sigma'') and Lasko Metal Products Inc. v. United States, 43 F.3d
1442, 1446 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (``Lasko''), or adjust its methodology; (3)
explain its decision to disregard the effect of subsidies from the
United States and other countries, in light of Fuyao Glass Indus. Group
Co. v. United States, Slip Op. 2003-169 (CIT, 2003) (``Fuyao I'') and
Fuyao Glass Indus. Group Co. v. United States, Slip Op. 2005-06 (CIT,
2005) (``Fuyao II''); (4) supply a more complete explanation to support
its determination that labor costs and other factor inputs for making
steel pallets are included in the cost of brokerage and handling; and
(5) provide a more complete explanation to support its decision that
the cost of movement from the truck to the container yard, demurrage
and storage charges, and other port charges are included in the
brokerage and handling cost.
The Department released the Draft Results of Redetermination
Pursuant to Court Remand (``Draft Redetermination'') to Huarong and
Ames True Temper \1\ (``Ames'') for comment on October 7, 2005. The
Department received timely filed comments from both Huarong and Ames on
October 14, 2005, and rebuttal comments from Huarong on October 19,
2005. On October 16, 2006, the Department issued to the CIT its final
results of redetermination pursuant to remand on November 30, 2005. In
the remand redetermination the Department did the following: (1)
reopened the record, and applied a steel scrap offset in its
calculation of normal value to adjust for sales of steel scrap that was
generated from the production of the subject bars and wedges; (2)
applied the Sigma cap in its analysis and capped the distance for each
supplier before calculating the weighted-average inland freight
distance; (3) explained its decision in the Final Results to not
exclude U.S. export data from the Indian import statistics used as the
surrogate value because it would have resulted in an insignificant
adjustment to normal value; (4) revised its FOP methodology to include
labor costs and other factor inputs for making steel pallets in normal
value; and (5) explained its reasoning for finding that movement
expenses incurred at the port
[[Page 7764]]
of export were included in the calculation of brokerage and handing
expenses. The Department recalculated the antidumping duty rate
applicable to Huarong, and included the changes noted above. On January
9, 2007, the CIT sustained all aspects of the remand redetermination
made by the Department pursuant to the CIT's remand of the Final
Results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Ames True Temper is a domestic interested party to the
proceeding, and was the petitioner in the underlying review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, the Federal Circuit
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 January 9, 2007,
constitutes a final decision of the court that is not in harmony with
the Department's Final Results. 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 Federal Circuit, 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: February 13, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-2836 Filed 2-19-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
