Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final Results of New Shipper Review, 62628-62630 [E7-21805]

Download as PDF 62628 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 6, 2007 / Notices screws, rivets, welds or any other type of fastener.6 On May 1, 2006, the Department issued a scope ruling determining that the ‘‘moon chair’’ was outside the scope of the antidumping duty order because it collapses rather than folds as a chair subject to the order would fold, and it does not have a back pad or seat pad commonly found in folding chairs. Moon chairs are described as containing circular, fabric-padded, concave cushions that envelope the user at approximately a 105-degree reclining angle. The fabric cushion is ringed and supported by two curved 16-mm steel tubes. The cushion is attached to this ring by nylon fabric. The cushion is supported by a 16-mm steel tube foursided rectangular cross-brace mechanism that constitutes the moon chair’s legs. This mechanism supports and attaches to the encircling tubing and enables the moon chair to be folded. To fold the chair, the user pulls on a fabric handle in the center of the seat cushion of the chair.7 Continuation of Order mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES As a result of the determinations by the Department and the ITC that revocation of the AD order on folding metal tables and chairs from the PRC would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act, the Department hereby orders the continuation of the AD order on folding metal tables and chairs from the PRC. U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue to collect antidumping duty cash deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise. This review covers imports from all manufacturers and exporters of folding metal tables and chairs from the PRC. The effective date of continuation of this AD order will be the date of publication in the Federal Register of this Continuation Notice. Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, the Department intends to initiate the next five-year review of this order not later than September 2012. This five-year or ‘‘sunset’’ review and notice are in accordance with section 6 See ‘‘Final Scope Ruling of the Antidumping Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People’s Republic of China (A–570–868); Spencer Gifts, LLC’’ (July 13, 2005). 7 See ‘‘Final Scope Ruling of the Antidumping Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People’s Republic of China (A–570–868); Mac Industries (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., Jiaxing Yinmao International Trading Company, Ltd and Fujian Zenithen Consumer Products Company Ltd.’’ (May 1, 2005). VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:55 Nov 05, 2007 Jkt 214001 751(c) of the Act and published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: October 31, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7–21798 Filed 11–5–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–868] Folding Metal Tables and Chairs From the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Extension of Time Limit for the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review October 29, 2007. Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective Dates: November 6, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laurel LaCivita or Matthew Quigley, 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) 482–4243 or (202) 482– 4551, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background On July 27, 2006, the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) published the initiation of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on folding metal tables and chairs from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 71 FR 42626 (July 27, 2006). On July 11, 2007, the Department published the preliminary results. See Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR 37703 (July 11, 2007). This review covers the period June 1, 2005, through May 31, 2006. The final results are currently due by November 8, 2007. Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Review Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), the Department shall make a final determination in an administrative review of an antidumping duty order PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary results are published. The Act further provides, however, that the Department may extend that 120day period to 180 days after the preliminary results if it determines it is not practicable to complete the review within the foregoing time period. The Department finds that it is not practicable to complete the final results of the administrative review of folding metal tables and chairs from the PRC within the 120-day period due to complex issues the parties have raised regarding surrogate financial statements. In accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Department is extending the time period for completion of the final results of this review by 30 days to 150 days after the date on which the preliminary results were published. Therefore, the final results are now due no later than December 7, 2007. This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: October 29, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7–21809 Filed 11–5–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–489–807] Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final Results of New Shipper Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On September 10, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on certain steel concrete reinforcing bars (rebar) from Turkey. This review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise to the United States, Ege Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S./Ege Dis Ticaret A.S. (Ege Celik). The period of review (POR) is April 1, 2006, through September 30, 2006. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made no changes to the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results do not differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted–average dumping margin for Ege Celik is listed below in the section entitled ‘‘Final Results of Review.’’ EFFECTIVE DATE: November 6, 2007. AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\06NON1.SGM 06NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 6, 2007 / Notices Irina Itkin, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230; telephone (202) 482–0656. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey,’’ dated September 4, 2007, for further discussion of our price and quantity analysis. For the final results, the Department continues to find that Ege Celik’s sole U.S. sale during the POR was a bona fide commercial transaction. Background This new shipper review covers one producer/exporter, Ege Celik. On September 10, 2007, the Department published in the Federal Register the preliminary results of the new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on rebar from Turkey. See Notice of Preliminary Results of New Shipper Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey, 72 FR 51598 (Sep. 10, 2007) (Preliminary Results). We invited parties to comment on our preliminary results of this review. In October 2007, we received a case brief with respect to the preliminary results from the domestic industry (i.e., Gerdau AmeriSteel Corporation, Commercial Metals Company (SMI Steel Group), and Nucor Corporation), and we received a rebuttal brief with respect to the preliminary results from Ege Celik. Turkish Government Competition Board’s Report In this review, the domestic interested parties submitted a report by the Turkish Government Competition Board (the Competition Board) regarding the Turkish steel industry. The domestic interested parties argued that this report demonstrates that Ege Celik, as well as the vast majority of the Turkish rebar industry, engaged in anti–competitive behavior prior to and during the POR by colluding with other producers to manipulate home market and export prices and to suppress costs. As noted in our preliminary findings with respect to the Competition Board’s report, we did not rely on the evidence or conclusions in the Competition Board’s report as the basis for any findings in this review. Rather, we investigated whether the facts during the POR would cause us to dismiss reported home market prices or costs within the confines of U.S. antidumping duty law and regulations. See the August 31, 2007, Memorandum from Shawn Thompson, Irina Itkin, and Brianne Riker to David M. Spooner, entitled ‘‘Preliminary Finding on Issues Related to the Turkish Government Competition Board’s Reports in Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey.’’ For purposes of the final results, the domestic industry neither provided any new arguments with respect to the information on the record pertaining to the Competition Board’s report or the respondents’ reported costs, prices, and affiliations that were not already addressed in our preliminary findings, nor commented on specific sections of our preliminary findings with which it disagreed. Rather, the domestic industry merely stated its opposition to our preliminary findings and reiterated its previous arguments. Therefore, we continue to find that: 1) there is no basis to find that Ege Celik is affiliated with any other Turkish rebar producers; 2) there is no basis to conclude that the sales and cost data in this review are distorted by non– market considerations and, thus, it is appropriate to rely on this data for purposes of the final results; and 3) Ege Celik is entitled to a new shipper review because it has met the requirements set forth under 19 CFR 351.214(b). For further discussion, see the Issues and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scope of the Order The product covered by this order is all stock deformed steel concrete reinforcing bars sold in straight lengths and coils. This includes all hot–rolled deformed rebar rolled from billet steel, rail steel, axle steel, or low–alloy steel. It excludes (i) plain round rebar, (ii) rebar that a processor has further worked or fabricated, and (iii) all coated rebar. Deformed rebar is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers 7213.10.000 and 7214.20.000. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive. mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Period of Review The POR is April 1, 2006, through September 30, 2006. Bona Fide Sale Analysis In the preliminary results, we found that Ege Celik’s reported U.S. sale during the POR was a bona fide sale, as required by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv)(c), based on the totality of the facts on the record. See the Memorandum to James Maeder from Irina Itkin entitled, ‘‘Analysis of Ege Celik Endustrisi Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S./Ege Dis Ticaret A.S.’s Bona Fides As A New Shipper in the New Shipper Review of Certain Steel VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:55 Nov 05, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 62629 Decision Memorandum (Decision Memo) at Comment 1. Cost of Production As discussed in the Preliminary Results, we conducted an investigation to determine whether Ege Celik made home market sales of the foreign like product during the POR at prices below its cost of production (COP) within the meaning of section 773(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). We performed the cost test for these final results following the same methodology as in the Preliminary Results. We found 20 percent or more of Ege Celik’s sales of a given product during the reporting period were at prices less than the weighted–average COP for this period. Thus, we determined that these below–cost sales were made in ‘‘substantial quantities’’ within an extended period of time and at prices which did not permit the recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time in the normal course of trade. See sections 773(b)(2)(B) - (D) of the Act. Therefore, for purposes of these final results, we found that Ege Celik made below–cost sales not in the ordinary course of trade. Consequently, we disregarded these sales and used the remaining sales as the basis for determining normal value pursuant to section 773(b)(1) of the Act. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case briefs by parties to these reviews, and to which we have responded, are listed in the Appendix to this notice and addressed in the Decision Memo, which is adopted by this notice. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in these reviews and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit, 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 http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ frn/. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of comments received, we have made no changes to the margin calculations. Because the margin calculations for Ege Celik have not changed from the preliminary results, the preliminary calculations placed on the record of this review are adopted as the final margin calculations. E:\FR\FM\06NON1.SGM 06NON1 62630 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 6, 2007 / Notices cash deposit rate for merchandise produced by Ege Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S. and exported by Ege Dis Ticaret A.S. will be the rate shown above, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent, de minimis within the meaning Margin of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), the cash Manufacturer/Producer/Exporter Percentdeposit will be zero; 2) for previously age investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be Ege Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S./Ege Dis Ticaret A.S. ....... 0.00 the company–specific rate published for the most recent period; 3) if the exporter Assessment is not a firm covered in this review, or the less–than-fair–value (LTFV) The Department shall determine, and investigation, but the manufacturer is, U.S. Customs and Border Protection the cash deposit rate will be the rate (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries, in accordance established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the with 19 CFR 351.212. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), because we have the merchandise; and 4) the cash deposit reported entered value of Ege Celik’s rate for all other manufacturers or U.S. sale, we have calculated an exporters will continue to be 16.06 importer–specific assessment rate based percent, the All Others rate established on the ratio of the total amount of in the LTFV investigation. These antidumping duties calculated for the deposit requirements, when imposed, examined sale to the total entered value shall remain in effect until further of that sale. We will instruct CBP to notice. assess antidumping duties on all Notification to Importers appropriate entries covered by this review if the importer–specific This notice serves as a preliminary assessment rate calculated in the final reminder to importers of their results of this review is above de responsibility, under 19 CFR minimis (i.e., at or above 0.50 percent). 351.402(f)(2), to file a certificate Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we regarding the reimbursement of will instruct CBP to liquidate without antidumping duties prior to liquidation regard to antidumping duties any entries for which the assessment rate is of the relevant entries during this de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent). review period. Failure to comply with See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1). The this requirement could result in the Department intends to issue assessment Secretary’s presumption that instructions to CBP 15 days after the reimbursement of antidumping duties date of publication of these final results occurred and the subsequent assessment of review. of double antidumping duties. The Department clarified its This new shipper review is issued ‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on and published in accordance with May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and sections 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) and 777(i)(1) of Countervailing Duty Proceedings: the Act, as well as 19 CFR 351.214(i). Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This Dated: October 31, 2007. clarification will apply to entries of Stephen J. Claeys, subject merchandise during the POR Acting Assistant Secretary for Import produced by Ege Celik for which it did Administration. not know its merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, Appendix – Issues in Decision we will instruct CBP to liquidate Memorandum unreviewed entries at the All–Others General Issues rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in Issues Related to the Turkish the transaction. Government Competition Board’s mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Final Results of Review We determine that the following weighted–average margin percentage exists for the period April 1, 2006, through September 30, 2006: Cash Deposit Requirements Further, the following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of rebar from Turkey entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: 1) the VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:55 Nov 05, 2007 Jkt 214001 Report [FR Doc. E7–21805 Filed 11–5–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A–489–807 Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Review and Determination To Revoke in Part Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On May 4, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative review and new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on certain steel concrete reinforcing bars (rebar) from Turkey. These reviews cover six producers/ exporters of the subject merchandise to the United States. The period of review (POR) is April 1, 2005, through March 31, 2006. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made certain changes in the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted–average dumping margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled ‘‘Final Results of Review.’’ Finally, we have determined to revoke the antidumping duty order with respect to Turkish rebar produced and exported by Colakoglu Metalurji A.S. and Colakoglu Dis Ticaret A.S. (collectively ‘‘Colakoglu’’) and Diler Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S., Yazici Demir Celik Sanayi ve Turizm Ticaret A.S., and Diler Dis Ticaret A.S. (collectively ‘‘Diler’’). EFFECTIVE DATE: November 6, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irina Itkin, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230; telephone (202) 482–0656. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background The administrative review covers the following five producers/exporters: Colakoglu; Diler; Ekinciler Demir ve Celik Sanayi A.S. and Ekinciler Dis Ticaret A.S. (collectively ‘‘Ekinciler’’); Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi A.S. (Habas); and Kaptan Metal Dis Ticaret ve Nakliyat A.S. and Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S. (collectively ‘‘Kaptan’’). The new shipper review covers one producer/exporter, Kroman Celik E:\FR\FM\06NON1.SGM 06NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 214 (Tuesday, November 6, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62628-62630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-21805]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-489-807]


Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final 
Results of New Shipper Review

AGENCY:  Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 10, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published the preliminary results of the new shipper review 
of the antidumping duty order on certain steel concrete reinforcing 
bars (rebar) from Turkey. This review covers one producer/exporter of 
the subject merchandise to the United States, Ege Celik Endustrisi ve 
Ticaret A.S./Ege Dis Ticaret A.S. (Ege Celik). The period of review 
(POR) is April 1, 2006, through September 30, 2006.
    Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made no 
changes to the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results do not 
differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping 
margin for Ege Celik is listed below in the section entitled ``Final 
Results of Review.''

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 6, 2007.

[[Page 62629]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irina Itkin, AD/CVD Operations, Office 
2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, 
Washington, DC, 20230; telephone (202) 482-0656.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    This new shipper review covers one producer/exporter, Ege Celik. On 
September 10, 2007, the Department published in the Federal Register 
the preliminary results of the new shipper review of the antidumping 
duty order on rebar from Turkey. See Notice of Preliminary Results of 
New Shipper Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Steel 
Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey, 72 FR 51598 (Sep. 10, 2007) 
(Preliminary Results).
    We invited parties to comment on our preliminary results of this 
review. In October 2007, we received a case brief with respect to the 
preliminary results from the domestic industry (i.e., Gerdau AmeriSteel 
Corporation, Commercial Metals Company (SMI Steel Group), and Nucor 
Corporation), and we received a rebuttal brief with respect to the 
preliminary results from Ege Celik.

Scope of the Order

    The product covered by this order is all stock deformed steel 
concrete reinforcing bars sold in straight lengths and coils. This 
includes all hot-rolled deformed rebar rolled from billet steel, rail 
steel, axle steel, or low-alloy steel. It excludes (i) plain round 
rebar, (ii) rebar that a processor has further worked or fabricated, 
and (iii) all coated rebar. Deformed rebar is currently classifiable in 
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item 
numbers 7213.10.000 and 7214.20.000. The HTSUS subheadings are provided 
for convenience and customs purposes. The written description of the 
scope of this proceeding is dispositive.

Period of Review

    The POR is April 1, 2006, through September 30, 2006.

Bona Fide Sale Analysis

    In the preliminary results, we found that Ege Celik's reported U.S. 
sale during the POR was a bona fide sale, as required by 19 CFR 
351.214(b)(2)(iv)(c), based on the totality of the facts on the record. 
See the Memorandum to James Maeder from Irina Itkin entitled, 
``Analysis of Ege Celik Endustrisi Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S./Ege Dis 
Ticaret A.S.'s Bona Fides As A New Shipper in the New Shipper Review of 
Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey,'' dated September 
4, 2007, for further discussion of our price and quantity analysis.
    For the final results, the Department continues to find that Ege 
Celik's sole U.S. sale during the POR was a bona fide commercial 
transaction.

Turkish Government Competition Board's Report

    In this review, the domestic interested parties submitted a report 
by the Turkish Government Competition Board (the Competition Board) 
regarding the Turkish steel industry. The domestic interested parties 
argued that this report demonstrates that Ege Celik, as well as the 
vast majority of the Turkish rebar industry, engaged in anti-
competitive behavior prior to and during the POR by colluding with 
other producers to manipulate home market and export prices and to 
suppress costs. As noted in our preliminary findings with respect to 
the Competition Board's report, we did not rely on the evidence or 
conclusions in the Competition Board's report as the basis for any 
findings in this review. Rather, we investigated whether the facts 
during the POR would cause us to dismiss reported home market prices or 
costs within the confines of U.S. antidumping duty law and regulations. 
See the August 31, 2007, Memorandum from Shawn Thompson, Irina Itkin, 
and Brianne Riker to David M. Spooner, entitled ``Preliminary Finding 
on Issues Related to the Turkish Government Competition Board's Reports 
in Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey.'' For purposes 
of the final results, the domestic industry neither provided any new 
arguments with respect to the information on the record pertaining to 
the Competition Board's report or the respondents' reported costs, 
prices, and affiliations that were not already addressed in our 
preliminary findings, nor commented on specific sections of our 
preliminary findings with which it disagreed. Rather, the domestic 
industry merely stated its opposition to our preliminary findings and 
reiterated its previous arguments. Therefore, we continue to find that: 
1) there is no basis to find that Ege Celik is affiliated with any 
other Turkish rebar producers; 2) there is no basis to conclude that 
the sales and cost data in this review are distorted by non-market 
considerations and, thus, it is appropriate to rely on this data for 
purposes of the final results; and 3) Ege Celik is entitled to a new 
shipper review because it has met the requirements set forth under 19 
CFR 351.214(b). For further discussion, see the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum (Decision Memo) at Comment 1.

Cost of Production

    As discussed in the Preliminary Results, we conducted an 
investigation to determine whether Ege Celik made home market sales of 
the foreign like product during the POR at prices below its cost of 
production (COP) within the meaning of section 773(b)(1) of the Tariff 
Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). We performed the cost test for these 
final results following the same methodology as in the Preliminary 
Results.
    We found 20 percent or more of Ege Celik's sales of a given product 
during the reporting period were at prices less than the weighted-
average COP for this period. Thus, we determined that these below-cost 
sales were made in ``substantial quantities'' within an extended period 
of time and at prices which did not permit the recovery of all costs 
within a reasonable period of time in the normal course of trade. See 
sections 773(b)(2)(B) - (D) of the Act.
    Therefore, for purposes of these final results, we found that Ege 
Celik made below-cost sales not in the ordinary course of trade. 
Consequently, we disregarded these sales and used the remaining sales 
as the basis for determining normal value pursuant to section 773(b)(1) 
of the Act.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case briefs by parties to these reviews, 
and to which we have responded, are listed in the Appendix to this 
notice and addressed in the Decision Memo, which is adopted by this 
notice. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in 
these reviews and the corresponding recommendations in this public 
memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit, 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 http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ frn/. The paper 
copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in 
content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of comments received, we have made no changes 
to the margin calculations. Because the margin calculations for Ege 
Celik have not changed from the preliminary results, the preliminary 
calculations placed on the record of this review are adopted as the 
final margin calculations.

[[Page 62630]]

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following weighted-average margin percentage 
exists for the period April 1, 2006, through September 30, 2006:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
               Manufacturer/Producer/Exporter                 Percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ege Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S./Ege Dis Ticaret A.S....        0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment

    The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212. Pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.212(b)(1), because we have the reported entered value of Ege 
Celik's U.S. sale, we have calculated an importer-specific assessment 
rate based on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties 
calculated for the examined sale to the total entered value of that 
sale. We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries covered by this review if the importer-specific 
assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above 
de minimis (i.e., at or above 0.50 percent). Pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to 
antidumping duties any entries for which the assessment rate is de 
minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent). See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1). The 
Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days 
after the date of publication of these final results of review.
    The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on 
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This 
clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the 
POR produced by Ege Celik for which it did not know its merchandise was 
destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP 
to liquidate unreviewed entries at the All-Others rate if there is no 
rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    Further, the following deposit requirements will be effective for 
all shipments of rebar from Turkey entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the 
final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section 
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: 1) the cash deposit rate for merchandise 
produced by Ege Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S. and exported by Ege 
Dis Ticaret A.S. will be the rate shown above, except if the rate is 
less than 0.50 percent, de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 
351.106(c)(1), the cash deposit will be zero; 2) for previously 
investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will 
continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent 
period; 3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, or the 
less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the manufacturer is, the 
cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent 
period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and 4) the cash deposit 
rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 16.06 
percent, the All Others rate established in the LTFV investigation. 
These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until 
further notice.

Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their 
responsibility, under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2), to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation 
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply 
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.
    This new shipper review is issued and published in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, as well as 19 CFR 
351.214(i).

    Dated: October 31, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix - Issues in Decision Memorandum

General Issues

Issues Related to the Turkish Government Competition Board's Report
[FR Doc. E7-21805 Filed 11-5-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S