Stainless Steel Bar From Brazil: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 5817-5818 [E9-2184]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 20 / Monday, February 2, 2009 / Notices analytical issues relevant to the Department’s conduct of Sunset Reviews is set forth in the Department’s Policy Bulletin 98.3, ‘‘Policies Regarding the Conduct of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders;’’ Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 1998) (‘‘Sunset Policy Bulletin’’). The Notice of Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews provides further information regarding what is required of all parties to participate in Sunset Reviews. Statutory Time Limits Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), requires the Department to issue the final results of a review within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary results are published. However, if it is not practicable to complete the review within that time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the time limit for the final results to a maximum of 180 days. See also 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2). Dated: January 27, 2009. John M. Andersen, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. [FR Doc. E9–2197 Filed 1–30–09; 8:45 am] Extension of Time Limit of Final Results We determine that it is not practicable to complete the final results of this review within the original time limit. Interested parties have raised complex accounting issues in their case and rebuttal briefs that require the Department to further analyze its positions with respect to these issues. Thus, additional time is necessary to complete the final results. Therefore, the Department is fully extending the final results by 60 days. The final results are now due no later than April 5, 2009. As this date falls on a Sunday, the final results are due April 6, 2009. See Notice of Clarification: Application of ‘‘Next Business Day’’ Rule for Administrative Determination Deadlines Pursuant of the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005). This extension is in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2). BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A–533–843 Certain Lined Paper Products from India: Extension of Time Limits for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: February 2, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Moore, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482–3692. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dated: January 23, 2009. John M. Andersen, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. [FR Doc. E9–2183 Filed 1–30–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES Background On October 31, 2007, the U.S. Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) published a notice of initiation of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain lined paper products from India, covering the period April 17, 2006 to August 31, 2007. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 72 FR 61621 (October 31, 2007). On October 7, 2008, the Department published the preliminary results of this review. See Certain Lined Paper Products from India: Notice of Preliminary Results of the First Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR 58548 (October 7, 2008). The final results of this review are currently due no later than February 4, 2009. VerDate Nov<24>2008 15:03 Jan 30, 2009 Jkt 217001 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–351–825] Stainless Steel Bar From Brazil: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective Date: February 2, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine Cartsos or Minoo Hatten, AD/ CVD Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 5817 Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1757 or (202) 482– 1690, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background At the request of interested parties, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain stainless steel bar from Brazil for the period February 1, 2007, through January 31, 2008. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, Request for Revocation in Part, and Deferral of Administrative Review, 73 FR 16837 (March 31, 2008). On October 27, 2008, we extended the time period for issuing the preliminary results of the review by 90 days until January 29, 2009. See Stainless Steel Bar From Brazil: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR 63695 (October 27, 2008). Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires the Department to make a preliminary determination within 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of an order for which a review is requested and a final determination within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary determination is published. If it is not practicable to complete the review within these time periods, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the time limit for the preliminary determination to a maximum of 365 days after the last day of the anniversary month. See also 19 CFR 351.213(h). We determine that it is not practicable to complete the preliminary results of this review by the current deadline of January 29, 2009, for several reasons. Specifically, the Department has granted the respondent, Villares Metals S.A. (Villares), several extensions to respond to the original and supplemental questionnaires.1 Thus, the Department needs additional time to review and analyze the responses submitted by Villares. Further, the Department requires additional time to review issues such as corporate affiliations and steel grades of products reported by Villares, as it will affect the Department’s matching methodology in this case. Finally, in response to the petitioners’ cost allegation submitted on November 1 See, e.g., letters to Villares from Laurie Parkhill, dated April 18, 2008, May 22, 2008, July 11, 2008, July 30, 2008, and December 19, 2008. E:\FR\FM\02FEN1.SGM 02FEN1 5818 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 20 / Monday, February 2, 2009 / Notices 4, 2008, we initiated a cost investigation on December 2, 2008, and received Villares’s cost information on January 9, 2009. The Department requires additional time to review and analyze Villares’s cost information. Therefore, we are extending the time period for issuing the preliminary results of this review by 30 days until February 28, 2009. This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2). Dated: January 26, 2009. John M. Andersen, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. [FR Doc. E9–2184 Filed 1–30–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–890] dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective Date: February 2, 2009. SUMMARY: On January 7, 2009, the United States Court of International Trade (‘‘CIT’’ or the ‘‘Court’’) sustained the final remand determination made by the Department of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) pursuant to the Court’s remands of the amended final determination of the less than fair value investigation of wooden bedroom furniture (‘‘WBF’’) from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, July 15, 2008 (‘‘Remand III’’); Dorbest Limited, et al. v. United States, Slip Op. 09–02 (CIT January 7, 2009) (‘‘Dorbest III’’). This case arises out of the Department’s final determination of sales at less than fair value: Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the PRC, 69 FR 67313 (November 17, 2004), as amended, 70 FR 329 (January 5, 2005) (‘‘Final Determination’’). The final judgment in this case was not in harmony with the Department’s Final Determination. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Bolling, AD/CVD Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., VerDate Nov<24>2008 15:03 Jan 30, 2009 Jkt 217001 Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3434. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 5, 2005, the Department published its amended final determination and antidumping duty order. See Final Determination. On August 1, 2005, the Department issued its voluntary remand redetermination wherein it modified the value of labor. See Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the PRC: Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to the Court Remand Orders, (August 1, 2005) (‘‘Remand I’’). On October 31, 2006, the court remanded the Department’s Final Determination for further administrative proceedings. See Dorbest Limited, et al. v. United States, 462 F.Supp. 2d 1262 (CIT 2006) (‘‘Dorbest I’’). The Department also requested and the Court granted voluntary remands concerning the following aspects of the margin calculation for Rui Feng Woodwork Co., Ltd., Rui Feng Lumber Development Co., Ltd. and Dorbest Limited (collectively, ‘‘Dorbest’’): The treatment of spare parts; the elimination of metal parts and canopies from Dorbest’s calculation; and the valuation of raw material expenses. On May 25, 2007, the Department issued its final results of redetermination. Id.; see also 462 F.Supp 2d 1262 (CIT 2006) Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, Court No. 05–00003, May 25, 2007 (‘‘Remand II’’). In Remand II, the Department, pursuant to the Court’s opinion and order, modified certain aspects of the Final Determination as follows: (1) Revised the labor rate for Dorbest; (2) recalculated Dorbest’s resin value; (3) recalculated the mirror value; (4) revised the selection of surrogate companies, by excluding Evergreen International Ltd. (‘‘Evergreen’’) and Jayaraja Furniture (‘‘Jayayraja’’) from the surrogate financial ratio calculations; (5) eliminated the spare parts discount adjustment to Dorbest’s U.S. price; (6) removed non-scope metal parts from Dorbest’s normal value calculation; (7) treated certain of Dorbest’s incoming raw materials as direct material costs rather than as a deduction from U.S. prices; and (8) recalculated the separate rate, based on the remanded components of the margin calculation challenged by the litigants. On February 27, 2008, the Court remanded the Department’s Final Determination for further administrative proceedings. See Dorbest Limited, et al. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 05– cv–00003, Slip Op. 08–24 (February 27, 2008) (‘‘Dorbest et al. v. United States’’) (‘‘Dorbest II’’). The Department PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 requested, and the Court granted, a voluntary remand on the valuation of Dorbest’s cardboard. Id. On July 15, 2008, the Department issued its final results of redetermination pursuant to Dorbest II. See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, July 15, 2008 (‘‘Remand III’’). In Remand III, the Department made the following modifications to its Final Determination: (1) Recalculated Dorbest’s cardboard value; (2) revised the selection of surrogate companies by excluding Fusion Design Private Ltd. (‘‘Fusion Design’’), DnD’s Fine Furniture Pvt., Ltd. (‘‘DnD’’), Nizamuddin Furniture Private Ltd. (‘‘Nizamuddin’’), and Swaran Furniture Ltd. (‘‘Swaran’’) from the surrogate ratio calculations; and (3) recalculated the separate rate pursuant to the Court’s instructions. On January 7, 2009, the Court sustained Remand III. The revised antidumping duty margins are as follows: For Dorbest is 2.92 percent; Lung Dong Furniture Co., Ltd. and Dongguan Dong He Furniture Co., Ltd. is 2.71 percent; Shing Mark Enterprise Co., Ltd., is 5.20 percent; Starcorp, is 17.50 percent; and the revised margin for the parties that received separate rates is 6.78 percent. Timken Notice In its decision in Timken, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (‘‘CAFC’’) held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), the Department must publish a notice of a court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’ with a Department determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (‘‘Timken’’). The CIT’s decision in Dorbest III on January 7, 2009, constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with the Department’s final determination of sales at less than fair value. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of liquidation of enjoined entries pending the exhaustion of all appellate rights. In the event the CIT’s ruling is not appealed, or if appealed, upheld by the CAFC, the Department will publish an amended final determination. This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 516A(c)(1) of the Act. E:\FR\FM\02FEN1.SGM 02FEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 20 (Monday, February 2, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5817-5818]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-2184]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-351-825]


Stainless Steel Bar From Brazil: Extension of Time Limit for 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

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

DATES: Effective Date: February 2, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine Cartsos or Minoo Hatten, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
1757 or (202) 482-1690, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    At the request of interested parties, the Department of Commerce 
(the Department) initiated an administrative review of the antidumping 
duty order on certain stainless steel bar from Brazil for the period 
February 1, 2007, through January 31, 2008. See Initiation of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, Request for 
Revocation in Part, and Deferral of Administrative Review, 73 FR 16837 
(March 31, 2008). On October 27, 2008, we extended the time period for 
issuing the preliminary results of the review by 90 days until January 
29, 2009. See Stainless Steel Bar From Brazil: Extension of Time Limit 
for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 73 
FR 63695 (October 27, 2008).

Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results

    Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 
Act), requires the Department to make a preliminary determination 
within 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of an order 
for which a review is requested and a final determination within 120 
days after the date on which the preliminary determination is 
published. If it is not practicable to complete the review within these 
time periods, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to 
extend the time limit for the preliminary determination to a maximum of 
365 days after the last day of the anniversary month. See also 19 CFR 
351.213(h).
    We determine that it is not practicable to complete the preliminary 
results of this review by the current deadline of January 29, 2009, for 
several reasons. Specifically, the Department has granted the 
respondent, Villares Metals S.A. (Villares), several extensions to 
respond to the original and supplemental questionnaires.\1\ Thus, the 
Department needs additional time to review and analyze the responses 
submitted by Villares. Further, the Department requires additional time 
to review issues such as corporate affiliations and steel grades of 
products reported by Villares, as it will affect the Department's 
matching methodology in this case. Finally, in response to the 
petitioners' cost allegation submitted on November

[[Page 5818]]

4, 2008, we initiated a cost investigation on December 2, 2008, and 
received Villares's cost information on January 9, 2009. The Department 
requires additional time to review and analyze Villares's cost 
information. Therefore, we are extending the time period for issuing 
the preliminary results of this review by 30 days until February 28, 
2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See, e.g., letters to Villares from Laurie Parkhill, dated 
April 18, 2008, May 22, 2008, July 11, 2008, July 30, 2008, and 
December 19, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) 
and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2).

    Dated: January 26, 2009.
John M. Andersen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. E9-2184 Filed 1-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

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