Certain Forged Stainless Steel Flanges from India: Notice of Partial Rescission of New Shipper Review, 15104-15105 [E7-5934]
Download as PDF
15104
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 61 / Friday, March 30, 2007 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–533–809]
Certain Forged Stainless Steel Flanges
from India: Notice of Partial Rescission
of New Shipper Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) is rescinding the new
shipper review of Pradeep Metals
Limited. We initiated this review on
October 6, 2006. See Stainless Steel
Flanges from India: Notice of Initiation
of Antidumping Duty New Shipper
Reviews, 71 FR 59081 (October 6, 2006).
Our basis for rescinding this new
shipper review is described below.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 30, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael J. Heaney or Robert James, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 7, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482 4475 or (202) 482–
0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Background
On August 31, 2006, we received
requests from Micro Forge (India) Ltd.
(Micro) and Pradeep Metals Limited
(Pradeep), two Indian manufacturers of
forged stainless steel flanges, for new
shipper reviews. On October 6, 2006,
based on the certifications and
documentation these companies
submitted, we initiated a new shipper
review for both Micro and Pradeep. See
Stainless Steel Flanges from India:
Notice of Initiation of Antidumping
Duty New Shipper Reviews, 71 FR 59081
(October 6, 2006). The period of review
for the new shipper review is February
1, 2006, through July 31, 2006.
We issued our antidumping
questionnaire for the new shipper
review to Pradeep on October 13, 2006.
We received a section A response from
Pradeep on October 30, 2006. We
received Pradeep’s response to sections
B, C and D of our questionnaire on
November 14, 2006.
In its August 31, 2006 request for a
new shipper review, Pradeep indicated
that its first and only entry of flanges
into the United States occurred on
March 21, 2006. Subsequent to initiating
the new shipper reviews the Department
conducted a data query of entry
information from Customs and Border
Protection (CBP). The data obtained
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:49 Mar 29, 2007
Jkt 211001
from CBP were placed on the record of
this proceeding. See November 14, 2006
Memorandum from Fred Baker to the
file: ‘‘U.S. entry Documents–Stainless
Steel Flanges from India’’ (Pradeep
Entry Memorandum). We determined,
based on our review of the data obtained
from CBP, that Pradeep had exported
flanges to the United States three to five
years prior to the period covered by the
new shipper review, and therefore
pursuant to 19 CFR
351.214(b)(2)(iv)(A),(B) and (C) did not
qualify for a new shipper review for the
period February 1, 2006, through July
31, 2006. See November 20, 2006
Memorandum from Fred Baker to the
File: Intent to Rescind New Shipper
Review of Pradeep Metals, Ltd
(Department’s Rescission
Memorandum). The Department’s
Rescission Memorandum also stated our
intent to rescind the new shipper review
with respect to Pradeep based on
Pradeep having exported subject
merchandise to the United States prior
to the period covered by the new
shipper review. See ibid.
We invited parties to submit
comments on our intent to rescind. On
December 5, 2006 we received
comments from Pradeep. In its
December 5, 2006, letter, Pradeep
maintains that in some instances
unaffiliated companies supplied raw
materials to Pradeep which were used to
make flanges. However, Pradeep asserts
that these unaffiliated companies
continued to maintain title to the
merchandise. Pradeep further maintains
that while its name appears on Customs
entry documentation, the CBP
documentation fails to establish that
Pradeep ‘‘sold the subject flanges to the
United States as a producer or
exporter.’’ See December 5, 2006 letter
from Pradeep to the U.S. Department of
Commerce.
Partial Rescission of New Shipper
Review
We have determined that Pradeep
fails to qualify for a new shipper review.
As explained in the Department’s
Rescission Memorandum, the
Department’s regulations require that
the requester of a new shipper review
report the date of its first shipment to
the United States. Pradeep has indicated
in its August 31, 2006, request for a new
shipper review that its first shipment of
flanges entered the United States on
March 21, 2006. However, information
obtained from CBP, including Pradeep’s
own commercial invoices and shipping
documents, indicate Pradeep was the
exporter on a number of transactions
that entered the United States three to
five years before 2006. (The CBP
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
information is not susceptible to public
summary. However, the documents
obtained from CBP are included in their
entirety in the appendices to the
Department’s November 14, 2006,
Pradeep Entry Memorandum.)
In its December 5, 2006, submission,
Pradeep suggests it has ‘‘already
reported or stated in its submissions to
the Department all the cases where
Pradeep Metals was the producer and
exporter to the United States. Under
those stated facts Pradeep Metals
qualifies for a new shipper review.’’
Pradeep’s December 5, 2006 letter
(emphasis added). While the record
indicates the March 21, 2006, entry was
the first U.S. entry in which Pradeep
was both the producer and the exporter,
it is plainly evident from the entry
documents in our Pradeep Entry
Memorandum that on numerous
occasions prior to that shipment
Pradeep acted as the exporter (i.e., the
shipper) of subject stainless steel
flanges. The evidence indicates these
flanges were in some cases produced by
other Indian manufacturers, but were
clearly shipped and exported to the
United States by Pradeep, as evidenced
by the commercial invoices and
shipping documents issued by Pradeep
itself. See, e.g., the sales documentation
included at Appendices I, II, IV, V, VII
and VIII of the Pradeep Entry
Memorandum. In addition to the
commercial invoices and packing lists,
several of these entry packages include
a CBP ‘‘Notice of Action’’ which
identifies Pradeep as the shipper.
Pradeep continues in its comments by
suggesting ‘‘another unaffiliated Indian
flange company’’ may have contracted
with Pradeep to provide tolling
operations in producing flanges which
‘‘were then owned by that other
unaffiliated Indian producer, and
returned to that other Indian company
for its own disposition.’’ But the
documentation found in the Pradeep
Entry Memorandum contradicts
Pradeep’s suggestion that someone else
may have been shipping flanges that
Pradeep manufactured in a tolling
operation. The hypothetical scenario
posited by Pradeep’s December 5, 2006,
letter is not consistent with the facts
already on the record, which indicate
Pradeep was the shipper and exporter of
subject flanges (whether or not
produced by Pradeep) prior to the
instant period of new shipper review.
While Pradeep may not have
previously acted as both manufacturer
and exporter of any given prior
shipment, the evidence clearly
establishes that on numerous occasions
prior to this new shipper review,
Pradeep shipped subject stainless steel
E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM
30MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 61 / Friday, March 30, 2007 / Notices
flanges to the United States. Therefore,
we find that Pradeep is not a new
shipper pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)
of the Act, and that Pradeep’s request
for new shipper review does not meet
the requirements of 19 CFR
351.214(b)(2)(iv)(A),(B) and (C).
Accordingly, we are rescinding the new
shipper review of Pradeep.
Assessment
The Department will instruct CBP to
assess antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries. For Pradeep,
antidumping duties shall be assessed at
rates equal to the cash deposit of
estimated antidumping duties required
at the time of entry, or withdrawal from
warehouse, for consumption, in
accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(c)(1)(I). The Department will
issue liquidation instructions to CBP 15
days after the publication of this notice.
Notification to Importers
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
This notice serves as a final reminder
to importers of their responsibility
under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a
certificate regarding the reimbursement
of antidumping duties prior to
liquidation of the relevant entries
during the review period. Failure to
comply with this requirement could
result in the Secretary’s presumption
that reimbursement of antidumping
duties occurred and subsequent
assessment of double antidumping
duties.
This notice also serves as the only
reminder to any parties that are subject
to administrative protective order (APO)
of their responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the return/
destruction of APO material or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a violation which is subject to
sanctions.
This notice is published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(f)(3).
Dated: March 23, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–5934 Filed 3–29–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:22 Mar 29, 2007
Jkt 211001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–831]
Fresh Garlic from the People’s
Republic of China: Extension of Time
Limits for the Final Results of the 11th
Administrative Review and New
Shipper Reviews
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 30, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Walker, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9,
Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0413.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On December 11, 2006, the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) published the preliminary
results of the administrative review and
new shipper review of fresh garlic from
the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’),
covering the period November 1, 2004,
through October 31, 2005. See Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Partial Rescission and
Preliminary Results of the Eleventh
Administrative Review and New
Shipper Reviews, 71 FR 71510
(December 11, 2006).
Extension of Time Limit of Final
Results
Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), and section 351.213(h)(1) of the
Department’s regulations, the
Department shall issue the preliminary
results of an administrative review
within 245 days after the last day of the
anniversary month of the date of
publication of the antidumping duty
order. The Act further provides that the
Department shall issue the final results
of a review within 120 days after the
date on which the notice of the
preliminary results was published in the
Federal Register. However, if the
Department determines that it is not
practicable to complete the review
within this time period, section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and section
351.213(h)(2) of the Department’s
regulations allow the Department to
extend the 245-day period to 365 days
and the 120-day period to 180 days.
Section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act also
provides that we may extend the
deadlines in a new shipper review if we
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15105
determine that the case is
extraordinarily complicated.
The Department determines that it
would not be practicable to complete
the final results of the aligned
administrative review and new shipper
reviews within the statutory time
period. The Department requires
additional time to analyze voluminous
comments regarding the nine companies
involved in the instant reviews. This
includes several issues the Department
considers to be extraordinarily
complicated, including, but not limited
to, the intermediate valuation of the
garlic bulb. Therefore, in accordance
with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the
Department is extending the time period
for issuing the final results of this
review by 60 days until June 9, 2007.
However, since June 9th falls on a
Saturday, the actual due date is June 11,
2007.
This notice is published pursuant to
sections 751(c)(3)(A) and
751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act, and section
351.214(h)(i)(1) of the Department’s
Regulations.
Dated: March 19, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–5861 Filed 3–29–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–421–807]
Certain Hot–Rolled Carbon Steel Flat
Products from the Netherlands: Notice
of Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: In response to requests from
Nucor Corporation (Nucor), Mittal Steel
USA Inc. (Mittal) and United States
Steel Corporation (USSC) (collectively,
petitioners), the U.S. Department of
Commerce (the Department) initiated an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain hot–
rolled carbon steel flat products from
the Netherlands for Corus Staal BV
(Corus) for the period November 1,
2005, through October 31, 2006. No
other interested party requested a
review of Corus for this period of
review. For the reasons discussed
below, the Department is rescinding this
administrative review.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 30, 2007.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM
30MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 61 (Friday, March 30, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15104-15105]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5934]
[[Page 15104]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-533-809]
Certain Forged Stainless Steel Flanges from India: Notice of
Partial Rescission of New Shipper Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is rescinding the
new shipper review of Pradeep Metals Limited. We initiated this review
on October 6, 2006. See Stainless Steel Flanges from India: Notice of
Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews, 71 FR 59081
(October 6, 2006). Our basis for rescinding this new shipper review is
described below.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 30, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael J. Heaney or Robert James, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14\th\ Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482
4475 or (202) 482-0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 31, 2006, we received requests from Micro Forge (India)
Ltd. (Micro) and Pradeep Metals Limited (Pradeep), two Indian
manufacturers of forged stainless steel flanges, for new shipper
reviews. On October 6, 2006, based on the certifications and
documentation these companies submitted, we initiated a new shipper
review for both Micro and Pradeep. See Stainless Steel Flanges from
India: Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews, 71
FR 59081 (October 6, 2006). The period of review for the new shipper
review is February 1, 2006, through July 31, 2006.
We issued our antidumping questionnaire for the new shipper review
to Pradeep on October 13, 2006. We received a section A response from
Pradeep on October 30, 2006. We received Pradeep's response to sections
B, C and D of our questionnaire on November 14, 2006.
In its August 31, 2006 request for a new shipper review, Pradeep
indicated that its first and only entry of flanges into the United
States occurred on March 21, 2006. Subsequent to initiating the new
shipper reviews the Department conducted a data query of entry
information from Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The data obtained
from CBP were placed on the record of this proceeding. See November 14,
2006 Memorandum from Fred Baker to the file: ``U.S. entry Documents-
Stainless Steel Flanges from India'' (Pradeep Entry Memorandum). We
determined, based on our review of the data obtained from CBP, that
Pradeep had exported flanges to the United States three to five years
prior to the period covered by the new shipper review, and therefore
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv)(A),(B) and (C) did not qualify for
a new shipper review for the period February 1, 2006, through July 31,
2006. See November 20, 2006 Memorandum from Fred Baker to the File:
Intent to Rescind New Shipper Review of Pradeep Metals, Ltd
(Department's Rescission Memorandum). The Department's Rescission
Memorandum also stated our intent to rescind the new shipper review
with respect to Pradeep based on Pradeep having exported subject
merchandise to the United States prior to the period covered by the new
shipper review. See ibid.
We invited parties to submit comments on our intent to rescind. On
December 5, 2006 we received comments from Pradeep. In its December 5,
2006, letter, Pradeep maintains that in some instances unaffiliated
companies supplied raw materials to Pradeep which were used to make
flanges. However, Pradeep asserts that these unaffiliated companies
continued to maintain title to the merchandise. Pradeep further
maintains that while its name appears on Customs entry documentation,
the CBP documentation fails to establish that Pradeep ``sold the
subject flanges to the United States as a producer or exporter.'' See
December 5, 2006 letter from Pradeep to the U.S. Department of
Commerce.
Partial Rescission of New Shipper Review
We have determined that Pradeep fails to qualify for a new shipper
review. As explained in the Department's Rescission Memorandum, the
Department's regulations require that the requester of a new shipper
review report the date of its first shipment to the United States.
Pradeep has indicated in its August 31, 2006, request for a new shipper
review that its first shipment of flanges entered the United States on
March 21, 2006. However, information obtained from CBP, including
Pradeep's own commercial invoices and shipping documents, indicate
Pradeep was the exporter on a number of transactions that entered the
United States three to five years before 2006. (The CBP information is
not susceptible to public summary. However, the documents obtained from
CBP are included in their entirety in the appendices to the
Department's November 14, 2006, Pradeep Entry Memorandum.)
In its December 5, 2006, submission, Pradeep suggests it has
``already reported or stated in its submissions to the Department all
the cases where Pradeep Metals was the producer and exporter to the
United States. Under those stated facts Pradeep Metals qualifies for a
new shipper review.'' Pradeep's December 5, 2006 letter (emphasis
added). While the record indicates the March 21, 2006, entry was the
first U.S. entry in which Pradeep was both the producer and the
exporter, it is plainly evident from the entry documents in our Pradeep
Entry Memorandum that on numerous occasions prior to that shipment
Pradeep acted as the exporter (i.e., the shipper) of subject stainless
steel flanges. The evidence indicates these flanges were in some cases
produced by other Indian manufacturers, but were clearly shipped and
exported to the United States by Pradeep, as evidenced by the
commercial invoices and shipping documents issued by Pradeep itself.
See, e.g., the sales documentation included at Appendices I, II, IV, V,
VII and VIII of the Pradeep Entry Memorandum. In addition to the
commercial invoices and packing lists, several of these entry packages
include a CBP ``Notice of Action'' which identifies Pradeep as the
shipper.
Pradeep continues in its comments by suggesting ``another
unaffiliated Indian flange company'' may have contracted with Pradeep
to provide tolling operations in producing flanges which ``were then
owned by that other unaffiliated Indian producer, and returned to that
other Indian company for its own disposition.'' But the documentation
found in the Pradeep Entry Memorandum contradicts Pradeep's suggestion
that someone else may have been shipping flanges that Pradeep
manufactured in a tolling operation. The hypothetical scenario posited
by Pradeep's December 5, 2006, letter is not consistent with the facts
already on the record, which indicate Pradeep was the shipper and
exporter of subject flanges (whether or not produced by Pradeep) prior
to the instant period of new shipper review.
While Pradeep may not have previously acted as both manufacturer
and exporter of any given prior shipment, the evidence clearly
establishes that on numerous occasions prior to this new shipper
review, Pradeep shipped subject stainless steel
[[Page 15105]]
flanges to the United States. Therefore, we find that Pradeep is not a
new shipper pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act, and that
Pradeep's request for new shipper review does not meet the requirements
of 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv)(A),(B) and (C). Accordingly, we are
rescinding the new shipper review of Pradeep.
Assessment
The Department will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on
all appropriate entries. For Pradeep, antidumping duties shall be
assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping
duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for
consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(I). The Department
will issue liquidation instructions to CBP 15 days after the
publication of this notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding
the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during the review period. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and subsequent assessment
of double antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as the only reminder to any parties that
are subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the return/destruction of APO material or
conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to
comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is
subject to sanctions.
This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(f)(3).
Dated: March 23, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-5934 Filed 3-29-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S