Brake Rotors from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Amended Final Results of Administrative ReviewSales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order Pursuant to Court Decision, 11081-11082 [E9-5665]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 49 / Monday, March 16, 2009 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A–570–846
Brake Rotors from the People’s
Republic of China: Notice of Amended
Final Results of Administrative
ReviewSales at Less Than Fair Value
and Antidumping Duty Order Pursuant
to Court Decision
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 16, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Walker, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9,
Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: 202- 482–0413.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This matter arose from a challenge to
the Final Results issued by the
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) for the period of review
(‘‘POR’’) April 1, 2004,4 through Marchy
31, 20055.1 See Brake Rotors from the
People’s Republic of China: Final
Results and Partial Rescission of the
2004/2005 Administrative Review and
Notice of Rescission of 2004/2005 New
Shipper Review, 71 FR 66304
(November 14, 2006) (‘‘Final Results’’).
Following publication of the Final
Results, the Respondents2 filed a
lawsuit with the Court of International
Trade (‘‘CIT’’) challenging the
Department’s Final Results. The
Respondents contested several aspects
of the Final Results, including the
Department’s surrogate valuation for
steel scrap.
On June 26, 2008, the CIT directed the
Department to: 1) explain whether the
rejected rotors, casting strands/handles,
etc., reintroduced into the production
process should be properly accounted
for in the factor of production
‘‘STLSCRAP’’; 2) address the issue of
the composition of the predominant
scrap used in the production process; 3)
1 We note that the Court of International Trade
cited an incorrect period of review (‘‘POR’’) of April
1, 2005, through May 31, 2006 in its decision. See
Laizhou Auto Brake Equipment Company, et. al. v.
United States, Court No. 06-00430, Slip Op. 08-120
(CIT November 5, 2008) (‘‘Laizhou II’’). The CIT
corrected this error on February 20, 2009. See
Laizhou II Errata, dated February 20, 2009.
2 The Respondents referenced here are Longkou
Haimeng Machinery Co., Ltd., Hongfa Machinery
(Dalian) Co., Ltd., Laizhou Auto Brake Equipment
Co., Ltd., Laizhou City Luqi Machinery Co., Ltd.,
Laizhou Hongda Auto Replacement Parts Co., Ltd.,
and Qingdao Gren (Group) Co.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:38 Mar 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
address respondents’ argument that the
Department should be solely focusing
on the type of scrap the Respondents
reported in the factor field
‘‘STLSCRAP’’; and 4) explain whether
the Department has in fact reassessed its
position in subsequent reviews as to the
proper harmonized tariff schedule
(‘‘HTS’’) classification of the
Respondents’ scrap. See Laizhou Auto
Brake Equipment Company, et. al. v.
United States, Court No. 06–00430, Slip
Op. 08–71 (CIT June 26, 2008)
(‘‘Laizhou I’’), at 17–18. Pursuant to the
CIT’s remand instructions, we
reexamined the record and determined
that the best available information on
the record with which to value steel
scrap is HTS 7204.49.00 (other ferrous
waste and scrap (‘‘ferrous scrap’’)),
rather than HTS 7204.10.00 (waste and
scrap of cast iron (‘‘cast iron scrap’’))
which was used in the Final Results.
The Department released the Draft
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to
Court Remand to interested parties on
September 8, 2008. No party submitted
comments. On September 24, 2008, the
Department filed its final results of
redetermination pursuant to Laizhou I
with the CIT. See Final Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand, Court No. 06–00430
(September 24, 2008) (‘‘Final
Redetermination’’). In responding to the
CIT’s questions and reassessing the
record evidence, we have determined it
appropriate to value steel scrap using
HTS 7204.49.00 (ferrous scrap), instead
of the previously selected value, HTS
7204.10.00 (cast iron scrap). We note
that respondents reported purchasing
steel scrap that is captured under HTS
7204.49.00, and there is no record
evidence which contradicts this
assertion. The Department valued HTS
7204.49.00 using publicly available
Indian import statistics for the POR
from the World Trade Atlas (‘‘WTA’’).3
Thus, the Department revised, as
appropriate, the remanded steel scrap
surrogate value selection components of
the margin calculations of Longkou
Haimeng Machinery Co., Ltd. and
Hongfa Machinery (Dalian) Co., Ltd. The
Department also revised the ‘‘sample
rate’’ applicable to the non–mandatory
respondents separate from the PRC–
wide entity who are parties to this
litigation: Laizhou Auto Brake
Equipment Co., Ltd.; Laizhou City Luqi
Machinery Co., Ltd.; Laizhou Hongda
Auto Replacement Parts Co., Ltd.; and
3 WTA is published by Global Trade Information
Services, Inc., which is a secondary electronic
source based upon the publication, Monthly
Statistics of the Foreign Trade of India, Volume II:
Imports. See https://www.gtis.com/wta.htm.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11081
Qingdao Gren (Group) Co.4 On
November 5, 2008, the CIT sustained all
aspects of the remand redetermination
made by the Department pursuant to the
CIT’s remand of the Final Results. See
Laizhou II.
On November 21, 2008, consistent
with the decision in Timken Co. v.
United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990), the Department notified the
public that the Court’s decision was not
in harmony with the Department’s final
results. See Brake Rotors Timken
Notice. See Brake Rotors from the
People’s Republic of China: Notice of
Court Decision Not In Harmony With
Final Results of Administrative Review,
73 FR 70618 (November 21, 2008) Brake
Rotors from the People’s Republic of
China: Notice of Court Decision Not In
Harmony With Final Results of
Administrative Review, 73 FR 70618
(November 21, 2008). No party appealed
the CIT’s decision. As there is now a
final and conclusive court decision in
this case, we are amending our Final
Results.
Amended Final Results
As the litigation in this case has
concluded, the Department is amending
the Final Results to reflect the results of
our remand determination. The revised
dumping margins for the order on brake
rotors in the amended final results areis
as follows:
Exporter
Hongfa Machinery
(Dalian) Co. ...............
Laizhou Auto Brake
Equipment Company
Laizhou Luqi Machinery
Co., Ltd. ....................
Laizhou Hongda Auto
Replacement Parts
Co., Ltd. ....................
Longkou Haimeng Machinery Co., Ltd. ........
Qingdao Gren (Group)
Co. .............................
Margin
0.01% (de minimis)
6.20%
6.20%
6.20%
0.01% (de minimis)
6.20%
The Department intends to issue
instructions to U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (‘‘CBP’’) fifteen days after
publication of this notice, to revise the
cash deposit rates for the companiesy
listed above, effective as of the
publication date of this notice. In
addition, we will also instruct CBP to
4 For the sample rate calculation which includes
other mandatory respondents, please see Memo to
the File, through Scot T. Fullerton, Program
Manager, Office 9, from Toni Dach, International
Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 9, Regarding
‘‘Calculation of the ‘Sample Rate’ for the Draft
Redetermination of the 2004/2005 Administrative
Review of Brake Rotors from the People’s Republic
of China,’’ dated September 8, 2008.
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
11082
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 49 / Monday, March 16, 2009 / Notices
liquidate all entries at the appropriate
rates.
This notice is published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended.
Dated: March 4, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–5665 Filed 3–13–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A–580–816)
Certain Corrosion–Resistant Carbon
Steel Flat Products from the Republic
of Korea: Notice of Final Results of the
Fourteenth Administrative Review and
Partial Rescission
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 9, 2008, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of the antidumping duty
administrative review for certain
corrosion–resistant carbon steel flat
products (CORE) from the Republic of
Korea (Korea). See Certain Corrosion–
Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products
From the Republic of Korea: Notice of
Preliminary Results of the Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR
52267 (September 9, 2008) (Preliminary
Results). This review covers seven
manufacturers and exporters
(collectively, the respondents) of the
subject merchandise: LG Chem., Ltd.
(LG), Haewon MSC Co. Ltd. (Haewon),
Dongkuk Industries Co., Ltd. (Dongkuk),
Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd., (Dongbu),
Hyundai HYSCO (HYSCO), Pohang Iron
& Steel Co., Ltd. (POSCO) and Pohang
Coated Steel Co., Ltd. (POCOS)
(collectively, the POSCO Group), and
Union Steel Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
(Union) (collectively, respondents).1
The period of review (POR) is August 1,
2006, through July 31, 2007.
As a result of our analysis of the
comments received, these final results
1 As
noted in the Preliminary Results, on
December 6, 2007, the Department selected Dongbu,
HYSCO, the POSCO Group and Union as
mandatory respondents in this review. See
Memorandum from Christopher Hargett,
International Trade Compliance Analyst, through
James Terpstra, Program Manager, to Melissa
Skinner, Director, Office 3, entitled ‘‘2006-2007
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of
Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from
the Republic of Korea: Selection of Respondents for
Individual Review,’’ dated December 6, 2007.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:38 Mar 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
differ from the Preliminary Results. For
our final results, we find that Dongbu,
HYSCO, the POSCO Group, and Union,
made sales of subject merchandise at
less than normal value (NV). In
addition, based on the final results for
the respondents selected for individual
review, we have determined a
weighted–average margin for those
companies that were not selected for
individual review. Further, we find that
the single sale made by Haewon during
the POR was covered by the new
shipper review published in the Federal
Register on June 23, 2008,2 and thus,
Haewon should be rescinded from the
instant review.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 16, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jolanta Lawska (Union), Cindy Robinson
(Dongbu), Christopher Hargett (HYSCO)
and Victoria Cho (the POSCO Group,
and non–selected companies), 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) 482–8362, (202) 482–
3797, (202) 482–4161, and (202) 482–
5075, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On September 9, 2008, the
Department published the Preliminary
Results. In the Preliminary Results, the
Department determined that during the
POR, Dongbu, HYSCO, the POSCO
Group, and Union, made sales of subject
merchandise at less than normal value
(NV). In addition, based on the
preliminary results for the respondents
selected for individual review, the
Department calculated a weighted–
average margin for those companies that
were not selected for individual review.
On November 12, 2008, the Department
extended the time limits for the final
results of this review until no later than
March 9, 2009. See Corrosion–Resistant
Carbon Steel Flat Products from the
Republic of Korea: Extension of Time
Limits for the Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 73 FR 66841 (November 12,
2008).
Comments from Interested Parties
We invited parties to comment on our
Preliminary Results. On October 9,
2008, ArcelorMittal Steel Inc. (Mittal),
United States Steel Corporation (US
Steel), and Nucor Corporation (Nucor)
2 See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel
Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Notice of
Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper
Review, 73 FR 35366 (June 23, 2008).
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
filed case briefs concerning all four
mandatory respondents. On the same
day, the four mandatory respondents
and Haewon filed case briefs. On
October 17, 2008, Mittal, US Steel, and
Nucor filed rebuttal briefs concerning
all of the mandatory respondents. The
four mandatory respondents filed
rebuttal briefs on the same day.
Scope of the Order
This order covers cold–rolled (cold–
reduced) carbon steel flat–rolled carbon
steel products, of rectangular shape,
either clad, plated, or coated with
corrosion–resistant metals such as zinc,
aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickelor iron–based alloys, whether or not
corrugated or painted, varnished or
coated with plastics or other
nonmetallic substances in addition to
the metallic coating, in coils (whether or
not in successively superimposed
layers) and of a width of 0.5 inch or
greater, or in straight lengths which, if
of a thickness less than 4.75 millimeters,
are of a width of 0.5 inch or greater and
which measures at least 10 times the
thickness or if of a thickness of 4.75
millimeters or more are of a width
which exceeds 150 millimeters and
measures at least twice the thickness, as
currently classifiable in the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) under item numbers
7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060,
7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030,
7210.49.0090, 7210.61.0000,
7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030,
7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090,
7210.90.1000, 7210.90.6000,
7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000,
7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090,
7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000,
7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000,
7212.50.0000, 7212.60.0000,
7215.90.1000, 7215.90.3000,
7215.90.5000, 7217.20.1500,
7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560,
7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030,
7217.90.5060, 7217.90.5090. Included in
this order are corrosion–resistant flat–
rolled products of non–rectangular
cross–section where such cross–section
is achieved subsequent to the rolling
process (i.e., products which have been
‘‘worked after rolling’’) – for example,
products which have been beveled or
rounded at the edges. Excluded from
this order are flat–rolled steel products
either plated or coated with tin, lead,
chromium, chromium oxides, both tin
and lead (terne plate), or both chromium
and chromium oxides (tin–free steel),
whether or not painted, varnished or
coated with plastics or other
nonmetallic substances in addition to
the metallic coating. Also excluded from
this order are clad products in straight
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 49 (Monday, March 16, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11081-11082]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-5665]
[[Page 11081]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A-570-846
Brake Rotors from the People's Republic of China: Notice of
Amended Final Results of Administrative ReviewSales at Less Than Fair
Value and Antidumping Duty Order Pursuant to Court Decision
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 16, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Walker, AD/CVD Operations, Office
9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202- 482-0413.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This matter arose from a challenge to the Final Results issued by
the Department of Commerce (``Department'') for the period of review
(``POR'') April 1, 2004,4 through Marchy 31, 20055.\1\ See Brake Rotors
from the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Partial
Rescission of the 2004/2005 Administrative Review and Notice of
Rescission of 2004/2005 New Shipper Review, 71 FR 66304 (November 14,
2006) (``Final Results''). Following publication of the Final Results,
the Respondents\2\ filed a lawsuit with the Court of International
Trade (``CIT'') challenging the Department's Final Results. The
Respondents contested several aspects of the Final Results, including
the Department's surrogate valuation for steel scrap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We note that the Court of International Trade cited an
incorrect period of review (``POR'') of April 1, 2005, through May
31, 2006 in its decision. See Laizhou Auto Brake Equipment Company,
et. al. v. United States, Court No. 06-00430, Slip Op. 08-120 (CIT
November 5, 2008) (``Laizhou II''). The CIT corrected this error on
February 20, 2009. See Laizhou II Errata, dated February 20, 2009.
\2\ The Respondents referenced here are Longkou Haimeng
Machinery Co., Ltd., Hongfa Machinery (Dalian) Co., Ltd., Laizhou
Auto Brake Equipment Co., Ltd., Laizhou City Luqi Machinery Co.,
Ltd., Laizhou Hongda Auto Replacement Parts Co., Ltd., and Qingdao
Gren (Group) Co.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 26, 2008, the CIT directed the Department to: 1) explain
whether the rejected rotors, casting strands/handles, etc.,
reintroduced into the production process should be properly accounted
for in the factor of production ``STLSCRAP''; 2) address the issue of
the composition of the predominant scrap used in the production
process; 3) address respondents' argument that the Department should be
solely focusing on the type of scrap the Respondents reported in the
factor field ``STLSCRAP''; and 4) explain whether the Department has in
fact reassessed its position in subsequent reviews as to the proper
harmonized tariff schedule (``HTS'') classification of the Respondents'
scrap. See Laizhou Auto Brake Equipment Company, et. al. v. United
States, Court No. 06-00430, Slip Op. 08-71 (CIT June 26, 2008)
(``Laizhou I''), at 17-18. Pursuant to the CIT's remand instructions,
we reexamined the record and determined that the best available
information on the record with which to value steel scrap is HTS
7204.49.00 (other ferrous waste and scrap (``ferrous scrap'')), rather
than HTS 7204.10.00 (waste and scrap of cast iron (``cast iron
scrap'')) which was used in the Final Results.
The Department released the Draft Results of Redetermination
Pursuant to Court Remand to interested parties on September 8, 2008. No
party submitted comments. On September 24, 2008, the Department filed
its final results of redetermination pursuant to Laizhou I with the
CIT. See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand,
Court No. 06-00430 (September 24, 2008) (``Final Redetermination''). In
responding to the CIT's questions and reassessing the record evidence,
we have determined it appropriate to value steel scrap using HTS
7204.49.00 (ferrous scrap), instead of the previously selected value,
HTS 7204.10.00 (cast iron scrap). We note that respondents reported
purchasing steel scrap that is captured under HTS 7204.49.00, and there
is no record evidence which contradicts this assertion. The Department
valued HTS 7204.49.00 using publicly available Indian import statistics
for the POR from the World Trade Atlas (``WTA'').\3\ Thus, the
Department revised, as appropriate, the remanded steel scrap surrogate
value selection components of the margin calculations of Longkou
Haimeng Machinery Co., Ltd. and Hongfa Machinery (Dalian) Co., Ltd. The
Department also revised the ``sample rate'' applicable to the non-
mandatory respondents separate from the PRC-wide entity who are parties
to this litigation: Laizhou Auto Brake Equipment Co., Ltd.; Laizhou
City Luqi Machinery Co., Ltd.; Laizhou Hongda Auto Replacement Parts
Co., Ltd.; and Qingdao Gren (Group) Co.\4\ On November 5, 2008, the CIT
sustained all aspects of the remand redetermination made by the
Department pursuant to the CIT's remand of the Final Results. See
Laizhou II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ WTA is published by Global Trade Information Services, Inc.,
which is a secondary electronic source based upon the publication,
Monthly Statistics of the Foreign Trade of India, Volume II:
Imports. See https://www.gtis.com/wta.htm.
\4\ For the sample rate calculation which includes other
mandatory respondents, please see Memo to the File, through Scot T.
Fullerton, Program Manager, Office 9, from Toni Dach, International
Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 9, Regarding ``Calculation of the
`Sample Rate' for the Draft Redetermination of the 2004/2005
Administrative Review of Brake Rotors from the People's Republic of
China,'' dated September 8, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 21, 2008, consistent with the decision in Timken Co. v.
United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990), the Department notified
the public that the Court's decision was not in harmony with the
Department's final results. See Brake Rotors Timken Notice. See Brake
Rotors from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision
Not In Harmony With Final Results of Administrative Review, 73 FR 70618
(November 21, 2008) Brake Rotors from the People's Republic of China:
Notice of Court Decision Not In Harmony With Final Results of
Administrative Review, 73 FR 70618 (November 21, 2008). No party
appealed the CIT's decision. As there is now a final and conclusive
court decision in this case, we are amending our Final Results.
Amended Final Results
As the litigation in this case has concluded, the Department is
amending the Final Results to reflect the results of our remand
determination. The revised dumping margins for the order on brake
rotors in the amended final results areis as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exporter Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hongfa Machinery (Dalian) Co........................ 0.01% (de minimis)
Laizhou Auto Brake Equipment Company................ 6.20%
Laizhou Luqi Machinery Co., Ltd..................... 6.20%
Laizhou Hongda Auto Replacement Parts Co., Ltd...... 6.20%
Longkou Haimeng Machinery Co., Ltd.................. 0.01% (de minimis)
Qingdao Gren (Group) Co............................. 6.20%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department intends to issue instructions to U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (``CBP'') fifteen days after publication of this
notice, to revise the cash deposit rates for the companiesy listed
above, effective as of the publication date of this notice. In
addition, we will also instruct CBP to
[[Page 11082]]
liquidate all entries at the appropriate rates.
This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.
Dated: March 4, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-5665 Filed 3-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
