Persulfates From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Final Results of Expedited Second Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order, 11868-11869 [E8-4243]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
11868
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 5, 2008 / Notices
the POR. See Truper Verification
Report. Therefore, because there is no
information on the record that indicates
Truper made sales to the United States
of HFHTs from the PRC during the POR,
and because Truper is the only company
subject to these administrative reviews,
we are preliminarily rescinding these
reviews for the period of February 1,
2006, to January 31, 2007, in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) and
consistent with our practice. Interested
parties may submit case briefs and/or
written comments no later than 30 days
after the date of publication of this
notice. See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii).
Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals to written
comments, limited to issues raised in
such briefs or comments, may be filed
no later than 5 days after the deadline
for submitting the case briefs. See 19
CFR 351.309(d). The Department
requests that interested parties provide
an executive summary of each argument
contained within the case briefs and
rebuttal briefs.
Any interested party may request a
hearing within 30 days of publication of
this notice. See 19 CFR 351.310(c).
Requests should contain the following
information: (1) The party’s name,
address, and telephone number; (2) the
number of participants; and (3) a list of
the issues to be discussed. Oral
presentations will be limited to issues
raised in the briefs. If we receive a
request for a hearing, we plan to hold
the hearing seven days after the
deadline for submission of the rebuttal
briefs at the U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.
The Department will issue the final
results of this administrative review,
which will include the results of its
analysis of issues raised in any such
comments, within 120 days of
publication of this preliminary
rescission, and will publish these
results in the Federal Register.
This notice is in accordance with
section 751 and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR
351.213(d)(4).
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Dated: February 28, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–4248 Filed 3–4–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:03 Mar 04, 2008
Jkt 214001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–847]
Persulfates From the People’s
Republic of China: Notice of Final
Results of Expedited Second Sunset
Review of Antidumping Duty Order
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 5, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lilit
Astvatsatrian, 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)
482–6412.
SUMMARY: On November 1, 2007, the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) initiated a sunset review
of the antidumping duty order on
persulfates from the People’s Republic
of China (‘‘PRC’’). On the basis of a
notice of intent to participate, and an
adequate substantive response filed on
behalf of domestic interested parties, as
well as a lack of response from
respondent interested parties, the
Department conducted an expedited
(120-day) sunset review. As a result of
the sunset review, the Department finds
that revocation of the antidumping duty
order would be likely to lead to
continuation or recurrence of dumping.
The dumping margins are identified in
the Final Results of Review section of
this notice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On November 1, 2007, the Department
published the notice of initiation of the
sunset review of the antidumping duty
order on persulfates from the PRC
pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’).
See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’)
Reviews, 72 FR 61861 (November 1,
2007) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’). On
November 16, 2007, the Department
received a notice of intent to participate
from a domestic interested party, FMC
Corporation (‘‘FMC’’), within the
deadline specified in section
315.218(d)(1)(i) of the Department’s
regulations. FMC claimed interested
party status under section 771(9)(C) of
the Act as a domestic producer of
persulfates in the United States and a
petitioner in the original investigation.
On December 3, 2007, the Department
received a substantive response from
FMC within the deadline specified in
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
section 351.218(d)(3)(i) of the
Department’s regulations. We did not
receive responses from any respondent
interested parties to this proceeding. As
a result, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B)
of the Act and section
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2) of the
Department’s regulations, the
Department determined to conduct an
expedited review of the order.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by this order
are persulfates, including ammonium,
potassium, and sodium persulfates. The
chemical formula for these persulfates
are, respectively, (NH4)2S2O8, K2S2O8,
and Na2S2O8. Potassium persulfates are
currently classifiable under subheading
2833.40.10 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’). Sodium persulfates are
classifiable under HTSUS subheading
2833.40.20. Ammonium and other
persulfates are classifiable under
HTSUS subheadings 2833.40.50 and
2833.40.60. Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the scope of this
order is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in this review are
addressed in the ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum’’ (‘‘Decision
Memorandum’’) from Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, to David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, dated February 29,
2008, which is hereby adopted by this
notice. The issues discussed in the
Decision Memorandum include the
likelihood of continuation or recurrence
of dumping and the magnitude of the
margins likely to prevail if the order
were revoked. Parties can find a
complete discussion of all issues raised
in this review and the corresponding
recommendations in this public
memorandum, which is on file in the
Central Records Unit in room 1117 of
the main Commerce building.
In addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the Web at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and
electronic version of the Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Final Results of Review
Pursuant to section 752(c)(3) of the
Act, we determine that revocation of the
antidumping duty order on persulfates
from the PRC would be likely to lead to
continuation or recurrence of dumping
at the following weighted-average
percentage margins:
E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM
05MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 5, 2008 / Notices
January 24, 2008, the CIT entered final
judgment and ordered the Department
to annul all duty absorption findings
with respect to Agro Dutch Industries,
Ltd. (Agro Dutch). As there is now a
Sinochem Jiangsu Wuxi Import
& Export Corporation (Wuxi)
32.22 final and conclusive court decision in
this case, the Department is amending
Shanghai Ai Jian Import & Exthe final results of the 2002–2003
port Corporation (Shanghai
AJ) .........................................
34.41 administrative review of certain
Guangdong Petroleum Chempreserved mushrooms from India.
ical Import and Export Trade
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 5, 2008.
(Guangdong Petroleum) .......
34.97
PRC-wide ..................................
119.02 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Goldberger or Katherine Johnson,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import
This notice also serves as the only
Administration, International Trade
reminder to parties subject to
Administration, U.S. Department of
administrative protective orders
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
(‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230;
concerning the return or destruction of
proprietary information disclosed under telephone (202) 482–4136 or (202) 482–
APO in accordance with section 351.305 4929, respectively.
of the Department’s regulations. Timely SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
notification of the return or destruction
Background
of APO materials or conversion to
On August 20, 2004, the Department
judicial protective order is hereby
published its final results of
requested. Failure to comply with the
administrative review, covering the
regulations and terms of an APO is a
period of review from February 1, 2002,
violation which is subject to sanction.
through January 31, 2003. See Certain
We are issuing and publishing the
Preserved Mushrooms From India: Final
results and notice in accordance with
Results of Antidumping Duty
sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of
Administrative Review, 69 FR 51630,
the Act.
51631 (August 20, 2004) (Final Results),
Dated: February 28, 2008.
and accompanying Issues and Decision
Stephen J. Claeys,
Memorandum at Comment 5. In the
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Final Results, the Department
Administration.
determined that antidumping duties had
[FR Doc. E8–4243 Filed 3–4–08; 8:45 am]
been absorbed by the respondents in the
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
review, including Agro Dutch, on those
sales for which the respondent was the
importer of record, in accordance with
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
section 751(a)(4) of the Act. In October
2004, Agro Dutch contested the
International Trade Administration
Department=s duty absorption finding,
[A–533–813]
along with several other findings made
in the Final Results, before the CIT. The
Certain Preserved Mushrooms from
CIT issued its decision, affirming the
India: Notice of Amended Final Results
Department’s finding of duty
Pursuant to Final Court Decision
absorption, in March 2006. See Agro
AGENCY: Import Administration,
Dutch Industries., Ltd. v. United States,
International Trade Administration,
Slip Op. 2006–40 (CIT March 28, 2006).
Agro Dutch appealed that decision to
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On November 20, 2007, the
the CAFC. On November 20, 2007, the
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit CAFC reversed the CIT’s decision on the
(CAFC) reversed the decision of the
duty absorption issue. The CAFC held
Court of International Trade (CIT) which that the Department was not empowered
upheld the Department of Commerce’s
to conduct a duty absorption inquiry
(the Department) determination in the
under section 751(a)(4) of the Act with
2002–2003 administrative review of
respect to the sales made by Agro Dutch
certain preserved mushrooms from
on which it acted as the importer of
India to conduct a duty absorption
record because such sales were not
inquiry under section 751(a)(4) of the
made by Agro Dutch through an
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), importer with whom it is affiliated. The
when the producer/exporter acts as its
CAFC held that because the term
own importer of record. See Agro Dutch ‘‘affiliated’’ is defined in the statute, the
Industries Ltd. v. United States, Slip Op. reference in section 751(a)(4) of the Act
2007–1011 (Fed. Cir. November 20,
that subject merchandise be sold
2007) (CAFC Decision). Pursuant to the
‘‘through an importer who is affiliated’’
CAFC’s decision and mandate, on
with the producer/exporter is
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Manufacturers/exporters/producers
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:03 Mar 04, 2008
Weightedaverage
margin
(percent)
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11869
unambiguous -- i.e., the statutory
definition of ‘‘affiliated persons’’
requires the presence of two or more
entities and, therefore, Agro Dutch
cannot be ‘‘affiliated’’ with itself.
Pursuant to the CAFC’s decision and
mandate, on January 24, 2008, the CIT
entered final judgment and ordered the
Department to annul all duty absorption
findings and conclusions with respect to
Agro Dutch in the Final Results.
Because there is now a final and
conclusive court decision in this case,
the Department is amending the final
results of the 2002–2003 administrative
review.
Amended Final Results of Review
We are amending the final results of
the 2002–2003 administrative review on
the antidumping duty order on certain
preserved mushrooms from India to
annul our duty absorption finding and
conclusion with respect to Agro Dutch.
Specifically, we annul our finding that
Agro Dutch absorbed antidumping
duties during the period of review on
those sales for which it was the importer
of record. This amendment does not
affect the weighted–average margin
calculated for Agro Dutch for the period
of review.
Assessment
The Department will instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
assess antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries for this review. We
intend to issue the assessment
instructions to CBP 15 days after the
date of publication of these amended
final results of review.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: February 28, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–4239 Filed 3–4–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–449–804]
Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from
Latvia: Rescission of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 5, 2008
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Layton at (202) 482–0371; AD/
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM
05MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 44 (Wednesday, March 5, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11868-11869]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-4243]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-847]
Persulfates From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Final
Results of Expedited Second Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 5, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lilit Astvatsatrian, 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-
6412.
SUMMARY: On November 1, 2007, the Department of Commerce (``the
Department'') initiated a sunset review of the antidumping duty order
on persulfates from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''). On the
basis of a notice of intent to participate, and an adequate substantive
response filed on behalf of domestic interested parties, as well as a
lack of response from respondent interested parties, the Department
conducted an expedited (120-day) sunset review. As a result of the
sunset review, the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping
duty order would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of
dumping. The dumping margins are identified in the Final Results of
Review section of this notice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On November 1, 2007, the Department published the notice of
initiation of the sunset review of the antidumping duty order on
persulfates from the PRC pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). See Initiation of Five-Year
(``Sunset'') Reviews, 72 FR 61861 (November 1, 2007) (``Initiation
Notice''). On November 16, 2007, the Department received a notice of
intent to participate from a domestic interested party, FMC Corporation
(``FMC''), within the deadline specified in section 315.218(d)(1)(i) of
the Department's regulations. FMC claimed interested party status under
section 771(9)(C) of the Act as a domestic producer of persulfates in
the United States and a petitioner in the original investigation. On
December 3, 2007, the Department received a substantive response from
FMC within the deadline specified in section 351.218(d)(3)(i) of the
Department's regulations. We did not receive responses from any
respondent interested parties to this proceeding. As a result, pursuant
to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and section 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2)
of the Department's regulations, the Department determined to conduct
an expedited review of the order.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by this order are persulfates, including
ammonium, potassium, and sodium persulfates. The chemical formula for
these persulfates are, respectively, (NH4)2S2O8, K2S2O8, and Na2S2O8.
Potassium persulfates are currently classifiable under subheading
2833.40.10 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(``HTSUS''). Sodium persulfates are classifiable under HTSUS subheading
2833.40.20. Ammonium and other persulfates are classifiable under HTSUS
subheadings 2833.40.50 and 2833.40.60. Although the HTSUS subheadings
are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written
description of the scope of this order is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in this review are addressed in the ``Issues and
Decision Memorandum'' (``Decision Memorandum'') from Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to David M.
Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated February
29, 2008, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The issues discussed
in the Decision Memorandum include the likelihood of continuation or
recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margins likely to
prevail if the order were revoked. Parties can find a complete
discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding
recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the
Central Records Unit in room 1117 of the main Commerce building.
In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be
accessed directly on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper
copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
Final Results of Review
Pursuant to section 752(c)(3) of the Act, we determine that
revocation of the antidumping duty order on persulfates from the PRC
would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the
following weighted-average percentage margins:
[[Page 11869]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Manufacturers/exporters/producers margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sinochem Jiangsu Wuxi Import & Export Corporation (Wuxi)... 32.22
Shanghai Ai Jian Import & Export Corporation (Shanghai AJ). 34.41
Guangdong Petroleum Chemical Import and Export Trade 34.97
(Guangdong Petroleum).....................................
PRC-wide................................................... 119.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with section 351.305 of the
Department's regulations. Timely notification of the return or
destruction of APO materials 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 sanction.
We are issuing and publishing the results and notice in accordance
with sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: February 28, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-4243 Filed 3-4-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
