Certain Tissue Paper Products From the People's Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of 2007-2008 Administrative Review, 70323-70324 [E8-27623]

Download as PDF rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Notices control objectives as set forth in the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended, (EAA) while limiting U.S. jurisdiction over non-U.S. products containing a de minimis percentage, by value, of U.S. content. To prevent the diversion of controlled U.S. items and foreign-made items incorporating a significant amount of U.S. content, a foreign-made item that contains more than the de minimis amount of controlled U.S.-origin content by value is subject to the EAR, i.e., a license may be required from BIS for the export abroad to another foreign country or incountry transfer of the foreign-made item. Prior to March 1987, the EAR set no de minimis levels for U.S. content in foreign-made items; foreign-made items were subject to the EAR if they contained any amount of U.S.-origin content, no matter how small. A rule published March 23, 1987 (52 FR 9147) revised what were then called the ‘‘parts and components’’ provisions to establish thresholds at which the amount of U.S.-origin commodities in foreign-made items would warrant exercise of U.S. jurisdiction over the foreign-made item when located outside the United States. The rule was established to alleviate a major trade dispute with allies who strenuously objected to U.S. assertion of jurisdiction over all reexports of non-U.S. items that contained even small amounts of U.S. content. A major revision of the EAR in 1996 (61 FR 12714) introduced the term ‘‘de minimis’’ and established de minimis thresholds for software and technology. The most recent revisions to the de minimis rules occurred on October 1, 2008, when BIS published a rule to change the de minimis calculation for foreign produced hardware bundled with U.S.-origin software, clarify the definition of ‘incorporate’ as it is applied to the de minimis rules, and to make certain other changes. Commodities controlled by Category 7—Product Group A in the Commerce Control List are certain equipment and components related to navigation and avionics. Reviewing agencies have raised concerns that such commodities, when controlled for MT reasons, have the potential to provide a foreign product with unique military capabilities, even if the value of the commodity is below normal de minimis levels. Airline and national aviation safety controls help to minimize the risk of diversion for Category 7—Product Group A commodities installed in civilian aircraft. It is expected the commodities will remain in the aircraft and free from tampering with such VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 19, 2008 Jkt 217001 safety controls. However, when the commodities are exported in less costly end items with no national aviation safety authority controls, there may be a higher risk of diversion. Requests for Comments BIS is seeking public comments on the expected impact on U.S. manufacturers of commodities controlled by Category 7—Product Group A, as well as the expected impact on foreign manufacturers that incorporate U.S.-origin 7A commodities into their foreign-made products, if BIS were to remove from de minimis eligibility commodities controlled for MT reasons under Category 7—Product Group A, except when the commodities are incorporated as standard equipment in FAA (or national equivalent) certified civilian transport aircraft. Specific estimates related to number of exports, revenue, jobs, etc. that would be affected would be very useful. Also, the impact such a change would have on decisions to incorporate U.S.-origin items in future foreign products would also be useful. Examples of commercial foreign products that incorporate commodities controlled by Category 7— Product Group A would be helpful as well. Comments that include rational argument in support of the position taken in the comment are likely to be more useful than comments that merely assert a position without such support. Finally, BIS is interested in concrete information (URL addresses, technical specifications, etc.) about the availability of equivalent commodities from foreign sources. Dated: November 14, 2008. Matthew S. Borman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export Administration. [FR Doc. E8–27588 Filed 11–19–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–33–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–894] Certain Tissue Paper Products From the People’s Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of 2007–2008 Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: November 20, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Smith or Gemal Brangman, AD/ CVD Operations, Office 2, Import AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 70323 Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–1766 or (202) 482– 3773, respectively. Background On April 25, 2008, the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain tissue products from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’), covering the period March 1, 2007, through February 29, 2008. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 73 FR 22337 (April 25, 2008). The preliminary results for this administrative review are currently due no later than December 1, 2008. 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 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 an order for which a review is requested. If it is not practicable to complete the review within this time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend this deadline to a maximum of 365 days. In this review, the respondents, Max Fortune Industrial Limited and Max Fortune (FETDE) Paper Products Co., Ltd. (collectively referred to as ‘‘Max Fortune’’), requested that the Department revoke the antidumping duty order on certain tissue paper products from the PRC with respect to them pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b). The Department requires additional time to review and analyze the revocation request and the factors of production information submitted by Max Fortune in this administrative review and, if necessary, issue an additional supplemental questionnaire. The Department also requires additional time to conduct verification of Max Fortune’s questionnaire responses. Thus, it is not practicable to complete this review within the original time limit. Therefore, the Department is fully extending the time limit for completion of the preliminary results by 120 days to 365 days, in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. The preliminary results are now due no later than March 31, 2009. The final results continue to E:\FR\FM\20NON1.SGM 20NON1 70324 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Notices be due 120 days after publication of the preliminary results. We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2). Dated: November 14, 2008. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8–27623 Filed 11–19–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–122–853] Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Canada: Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Commerce (the Department) preliminarily determines that citric acid and certain citrate salts (citric acid) from Canada are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The estimated margins of sales at LTFV are listed in the ‘‘Suspension of Liquidation’’ section of this notice. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination. Pursuant to a request from the respondent, we are postponing for 60 days the final determination and extending provisional measures from a four–month period to not more than six months. Accordingly, we will make our final determination not later than 135 days after publication of the preliminary determination. EFFECTIVE DATE: November 20, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terre Keaton Stefanova or Rebecca Trainor, 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) 482–1280 and (202) 482–4007, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES AGENCY: Background On May 5, 2008, the Department initiated the antidumping duty investigation of citric acid from Canada. See Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Canada and the People’s Republic VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 19, 2008 Jkt 217001 of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 73 FR 27492 (May 13, 2008) (Initiation Notice). The petitioners in this investigation are Archer Daniels Midland Company, Cargill, Incorporated, and Tate & Lyle Americas, Inc. The Department set aside a period of time for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage and encouraged all parties to submit comments within 20 calendar days of publication of the Initiation Notice. See Initiation Notice, 73 FR at 27493. See also Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). For further details, see the ‘‘Scope Comments’’ section of this notice, below. The Department also set aside a time for parties to comment on product characteristics for use in the antidumping duty questionnaire. On May 27, 2008, we received product characteristic comments from the petitioners. In June 2008, we received comments from Shandong TTCA Co., Ltd (TTCA), and Jungbunzlauer Technology GMBH & Co KG, (JBLT) regarding the petitioners’ product characteristic comments. Also in June 2008, the petitioners filed comments in response to TTCA’s submission. For an explanation of the product–comparison criteria used in this investigation, see the ‘‘Product Comparisons’’ section of this notice, below. On June 11, 2008, the International Trade Commission (ITC) published its affirmative preliminary determination that there is a reasonable indication that imports of citric acid and certain citrate salts from Canada are materially injuring the U.S. industry, and the ITC notified the Department of its finding. See Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Canada and China; Determinations, Investigation Nos. 701– TA–456 and 731–TA–1151–1152, 73 FR 33115 (June 11, 2008). On June 17, 2008, we selected JBLT as the sole mandatory respondent in this investigation. See Memorandum from James Maeder, Office Director, to Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary, entitled: ‘‘Antidumping Duty Investigation of Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Canada - Selection of Respondents for Individual Review,’’ dated June 17, 2008. We subsequently issued the antidumping questionnaire to JBLT on June 26, 2008. On August 19, 2008, the petitioners made a timely request pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(e) for a 50–day postponement of the preliminary determination. On August 29, 2008, pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act, the Department postponed the preliminary PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 determination of this investigation until November 12, 2008. See Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Canada and the People’s Republic of China: Postponement of Preliminary Determinations of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 73 FR 50941 (August 29, 2008). In August and September 2008, we received JBLT’s questionnaire responses. In September and October 2008, we issued supplemental questionnaires, and we received JBLT’s responses to these questionnaires in October and November 2008. We note that JBLT’s questionnaire response that was due on November 7, 2008, was not received in time for consideration in the preliminary determination, but will be considered in the final determination. On October 22, 2008, JBLT requested that in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination in this investigation, the Department: 1) postpone its final determination by 60 days in accordance with 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii); and 2) extend the application of the provisional measures prescribed under 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2) from a four–month period to a six–month period. On October 24, 2008, the petitioner requested that in the event of a negative preliminary determination in this investigation, the Department postpone the final determination by 60 days. For further discussion, see the ‘‘Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures’’ section of this notice, below. On October 28, 2008, the petitioners submitted comments for consideration in the preliminary determination. Period of Investigation The period of investigation (POI) is April 1, 2007, to March 31, 2008. This period corresponds to the four most recent fiscal quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition. See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1). Scope of Investigation The scope of this investigation includes all grades and granulation sizes of citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium citrate in their unblended forms, whether dry or in solution, and regardless of packaging type. The scope also includes blends of citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium citrate; as well as blends with other ingredients, such as sugar, where the unblended form(s) of citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium citrate constitute 40 percent or more, by weight, of the blend. The scope of this investigation also includes all forms of crude calcium citrate, including dicalcium citrate E:\FR\FM\20NON1.SGM 20NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 225 (Thursday, November 20, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70323-70324]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-27623]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-894]


Certain Tissue Paper Products From the People's Republic of 
China: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of 2007-2008 
Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 20, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Smith or Gemal Brangman, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14\th\ Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-1766 
or (202) 482-3773, respectively.

Background

    On April 25, 2008, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') 
published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain tissue 
products from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''), covering the 
period March 1, 2007, through February 29, 2008. See Initiation of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request 
for Revocation in Part, 73 FR 22337 (April 25, 2008). The preliminary 
results for this administrative review are currently due no later than 
December 1, 2008.

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 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 an order for which a 
review is requested. If it is not practicable to complete the review 
within this time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the 
Department to extend this deadline to a maximum of 365 days.
    In this review, the respondents, Max Fortune Industrial Limited and 
Max Fortune (FETDE) Paper Products Co., Ltd. (collectively referred to 
as ``Max Fortune''), requested that the Department revoke the 
antidumping duty order on certain tissue paper products from the PRC 
with respect to them pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b). The Department 
requires additional time to review and analyze the revocation request 
and the factors of production information submitted by Max Fortune in 
this administrative review and, if necessary, issue an additional 
supplemental questionnaire. The Department also requires additional 
time to conduct verification of Max Fortune's questionnaire responses. 
Thus, it is not practicable to complete this review within the original 
time limit. Therefore, the Department is fully extending the time limit 
for completion of the preliminary results by 120 days to 365 days, in 
accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. The preliminary 
results are now due no later than March 31, 2009. The final results 
continue to

[[Page 70324]]

be due 120 days after publication of the preliminary results.
    We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with 
section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2).

    Dated: November 14, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-27623 Filed 11-19-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S

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