Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Trinidad and Tobago: Amended Final Results Pursuant to a Court Decision, 10238-10239 [E9-5114]

Download as PDF 10238 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 10, 2009 / Notices Signed at Washington, DC, this 26th day of February 2009. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign–Trade Zones Board. Attest: Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E9–5120 Filed 3–9–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–274–804] Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Trinidad and Tobago: Amended Final Results Pursuant to a Court Decision AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On December 3, 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (‘‘CAFC’’) affirmed the Department of Commerce’s (‘‘Department’’) final results of redetermination pursuant to the Department’s voluntary remand, wherein the Department calculated credit expenses from the date of invoice, rather than the date of shipment for Mittal Steel Point Lisas Ltd. (‘‘Mittal’’).1 The Court also affirmed the Department’s classification of Mittal’s composite wire rod as non–prime merchandise. The period of review (‘‘POR’’) is October 1, 2003, through September 30, 2004. The Department is amending the final results of the second administrative review of carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod (‘‘wire rod’’) from Trinidad and Tobago to reflect the U.S. Court of International Trade’s (‘‘CIT’’) decision. EFFECTIVE DATE: March 10, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis McClure, 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) 482–5973. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 16, 2005, the Department published its final results in the second administrative review of the antidumping duty order on wire rod from Trinidad and Tobago covering the POR.2 On December 16, 2005, and January 17, 2006, respectively, Mittal filed a summons and complaint with the U.S. Court of International Trade (‘‘CIT’’) challenging the Department’s credit expense calculation and treatment of non–prime merchandise. On March 7, 2007, the Department requested a voluntary remand so that we could reevaluate the calculation of credit expenses and inventory carrying costs used to calculate constructed export price. On April 24, 2007, the CIT granted the Department’s voluntary remand motion to reevaluate its calculation of credit expenses and inventory carrying costs and affirmed the Department’s treatment of non– prime merchandise. On June 21, 2007, the Department filed with the CIT its final results of redetermination, calculating credit expenses from the invoice date, rather Manufacturer/exporter than the shipment date. The Department also changed the inventory carrying costs used in its constructed export price calculation to reflect the date of invoice as the date of sale. On August 8, 2007, the CIT sustained the final results of redetermination on remand. On September 7, 2007, the Department notified the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Final Results. On October 5, 2007, and October 9, 2007, respectfully, both Mittal and Gerdau Ameristeel Corp. and Keystone Consolidated Industries, Inc., the petitioners, appealed the CIT’s decision. On December 3, 2008, the CAFC affirmed the CIT’s decision on both issues. The deadline to appeal the redetermination pursuant to remand is March 3, 2009, 90 days after the date the CAFC affirmed the CIT’s decision (i.e., December 3, 2008). However, on January 12, 2009, Mittal filed a motion to lift the injunction on liquidating entries related to this case, in which it informed the CIT that neither it nor petitioners intended to petition the U.S. Supreme Court for certiorari. The CIT granted Mittal’s motion on January 13, 2009. Therefore, the Department is amending the Final Results with respect to Mittal. Amended Final Results of Review The remand redetermination explained that the Department determined to calculate credit expense from the date of invoice. Based on this reconsideration, we are amending the final results for Mittal. Accordingly, we are applying to Mittal the following dumping margin. Period of review Weighted–average margin (%) Original: Mittal Steel Point Lisas Ltd. (formerly Caribbean Ispat Limited) ................................... Assessment Notification to Interested Parties The Department has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by these amended final results. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of these amended final results This notice serves as a final 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. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.402(f)(3), failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary’s presumption 1 See Mittal Steel Point Lisas Ltd. v. United States, Unites States Court of Appeals 2008-1040, -1054 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (‘‘Mittal v. United States’’). 2 See Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and Tobago, 70 FR 69512 (November 16, 2005) (‘‘Final Results’’). 3 See Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad & Tobago: Amended Notice of Court Decision Not In Harmony with Final Results of VerDate Nov<24>2008 15:20 Mar 09, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 10/1/2003–9/30/2004 4.13 Revised: 4.08 that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. This notice also serves as a reminder to parties 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 and as explained Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR 51408 (September 7, 2007). E:\FR\FM\10MRN1.SGM 10MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 10, 2009 / Notices in the APO itself. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: March 4, 2009. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E9–5114 Filed 3–9–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–881] Malleable Cast Iron Pipe Fittings from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order. AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce EFFECTIVE DATE: March 10, 2009 SUMMARY: On November 3, 2008, the Department of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) initiated a sunset review of the antidumping duty order on malleable cast iron pipe fittings from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). On the basis of a notice of intent to participate, and an adequate substantive response from 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. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ´ Sergio Balbontın, 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) 482–6478. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On November 3, 2008, the Department published the notice of initiation of the sunset review of the antidumping duty order on malleable cast iron pipe fittings (‘‘MCP’’) from the PRC pursuant to VerDate Nov<24>2008 15:20 Mar 09, 2009 Jkt 217001 section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). See Initiation of Five-year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 73 FR 65292 (November 3, 2008). On November 11, 2008, the Department received a notice of intent to participate from domestic interested parties, Anvil International, Inc. and Ward Manufacturing, Inc. (collectively ‘‘domestic interested parties’’), within the deadline specified in section 351.218(d)(1)(i) of the Department’s regulations. The domestic interested parties claimed interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act as domestic producers of MCP in the United States. On December 2, 2008, the Department received a substantive response from the domestic interested parties within the deadline specified in section 351.218(d)(3)(i) of the Department’s regulations. The Department did not receive a response 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. See Memorandum to the File titled, ‘‘Adequacy Determination: Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Malleable Cast Iron Pipe Fittings from the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated January 13, 2009. Scope of the Order The products covered by the antidumping duty order are certain malleable iron pipe fittings, cast, other than grooved fittings, from the PRC. The merchandise is classified under item numbers 7307.19.90.30, 7307.19.90.60 and 7307.19.90.80 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTSUS). Excluded from the scope of the order are metal compression couplings, which are imported under HTSUS number 7307.19.90.80. A metal compression coupling consists of a coupling body, two gaskets, and two compression nuts. These products range in diameter from 1/2 inch to 2 inches and are carried only in galvanized finish. Although HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the Department’s written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in this review are addressed in the ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’ (‘‘Decision Memorandum’’) from John M. Andersen, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 10239 Secretary for Import Administration, dated concurrently with this notice, and 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 http:// 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) of the Act, we determine that revocation of the antidumping duty order on MCP from the PRC would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the following weighted–average percentage margins: Exporter/Manufacturer Beijing Sai Lin Ke Hardware Co. Ltd. (‘‘SLK’’) Langfang Pannext Pipe Fitting Co., Ltd. ......... Chengde Malleable Iron General Factory (‘‘Chengde’’) .............. SCE Co., Ltd. (‘‘SCE’’) Jinan Meide Casting Co., Ltd. .................... PRC–Wide .................... Margin(percent) 15.92 7.35 11.18 11.18 11.31 111.36 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: March 3, 2009. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E9–5086 Filed 3–9–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S E:\FR\FM\10MRN1.SGM 10MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 10, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10238-10239]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-5114]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-274-804]


Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Trinidad and Tobago: 
Amended Final Results Pursuant to a Court Decision

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 3, 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for 
the Federal Circuit (``CAFC'') affirmed the Department of Commerce's 
(``Department'') final results of redetermination pursuant to the 
Department's voluntary remand, wherein the Department calculated credit 
expenses from the date of invoice, rather than the date of shipment for 
Mittal Steel Point Lisas Ltd. (``Mittal'').\1\ The Court also affirmed 
the Department's classification of Mittal's composite wire rod as non-
prime merchandise. The period of review (``POR'') is October 1, 2003, 
through September 30, 2004. The Department is amending the final 
results of the second administrative review of carbon and certain alloy 
steel wire rod (``wire rod'') from Trinidad and Tobago to reflect the 
U.S. Court of International Trade's (``CIT'') decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Mittal Steel Point Lisas Ltd. v. United States, Unites 
States Court of Appeals 2008-1040, -1054 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (``Mittal 
v. United States'').

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 10, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis McClure, 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) 482-5973.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 16, 2005, the Department 
published its final results in the second administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on wire rod from Trinidad and Tobago covering 
the POR.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from 
Trinidad and Tobago, 70 FR 69512 (November 16, 2005) (``Final 
Results'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 16, 2005, and January 17, 2006, respectively, Mittal 
filed a summons and complaint with the U.S. Court of International 
Trade (``CIT'') challenging the Department's credit expense calculation 
and treatment of non-prime merchandise. On March 7, 2007, the 
Department requested a voluntary remand so that we could reevaluate the 
calculation of credit expenses and inventory carrying costs used to 
calculate constructed export price. On April 24, 2007, the CIT granted 
the Department's voluntary remand motion to reevaluate its calculation 
of credit expenses and inventory carrying costs and affirmed the 
Department's treatment of non-prime merchandise.
    On June 21, 2007, the Department filed with the CIT its final 
results of redetermination, calculating credit expenses from the 
invoice date, rather than the shipment date. The Department also 
changed the inventory carrying costs used in its constructed export 
price calculation to reflect the date of invoice as the date of sale. 
On August 8, 2007, the CIT sustained the final results of 
redetermination on remand. On September 7, 2007, the Department 
notified the public that the final judgment in this case is not in 
harmony with the Final Results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad & 
Tobago: Amended Notice of Court Decision Not In Harmony with Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR 51408 
(September 7, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 5, 2007, and October 9, 2007, respectfully, both Mittal 
and Gerdau Ameristeel Corp. and Keystone Consolidated Industries, Inc., 
the petitioners, appealed the CIT's decision. On December 3, 2008, the 
CAFC affirmed the CIT's decision on both issues. The deadline to appeal 
the redetermination pursuant to remand is March 3, 2009, 90 days after 
the date the CAFC affirmed the CIT's decision (i.e., December 3, 2008). 
However, on January 12, 2009, Mittal filed a motion to lift the 
injunction on liquidating entries related to this case, in which it 
informed the CIT that neither it nor petitioners intended to petition 
the U.S. Supreme Court for certiorari. The CIT granted Mittal's motion 
on January 13, 2009. Therefore, the Department is amending the Final 
Results with respect to Mittal.

Amended Final Results of Review

    The remand redetermination explained that the Department determined 
to calculate credit expense from the date of invoice. Based on this 
reconsideration, we are amending the final results for Mittal. 
Accordingly, we are applying to Mittal the following dumping margin.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            Weighted-average
                                                                                               margin (%)
                   Manufacturer/exporter                          Period of review       ----------------------
                                                                                          Original:   Revised:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mittal Steel Point Lisas Ltd. (formerly Caribbean Ispat              10/1/2003-9/30/2004       4.13       4.08
 Limited).................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment

    The Department has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (``CBP'') shall assess, antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries covered by these amended final results. The 
Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days 
after the publication date of these amended final results

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice serves as a final 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. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.402(f)(3), failure to 
comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's 
presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the 
subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties 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 and as explained

[[Page 10239]]

in the APO itself. Timely written notification of the return/
destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order 
is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the 
terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 
751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: March 4, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-5114 Filed 3-9-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S