Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From the Netherlands: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of Administrative Review, 14960-14961 [E9-7445]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
14960
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices
not practicable to complete the review
within the time period, section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the
Department to extend these deadlines to
a maximum of 365 days and 180 days,
respectively.
The Department needs additional
time due to conduct the constructed
export price verification and to analyze
cost of production issues. Therefore, the
Department finds that it is not
practicable to complete the final results
of the review within the original time
limit and is extending the deadline for
the completion of the final results for
the antidumping duty order on welded
ASTM A–312 stainless steel pipe from
South Korea from 120 to 180 days from
the date of publication of the
preliminary results. Accordingly, the
final results will now be due no later
than June 22, 2009.
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to sections 751(a)(3)(A) and
777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: March 27, 2009.
John M. Andersen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations.
[FR Doc. E9–7446 Filed 4–1–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–533–825]
Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film,
Sheet, and Strip From India: Extension
of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
Effective Date: April 2, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elfi
Blum or Sean Carey, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 6, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–0197 and (202)
482–3964, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
film, sheet, and strip from India. See
Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews, 73 FR 50308 (August 26, 2008).
This administrative review covers the
period January 1, 2007, through
December 31, 2007. The preliminary
results of this administrative review are
currently due no later than April 2,
2009.
Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary
Results
Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1), the
Department shall issue preliminary
results in an administrative review of a
countervailing duty order within 245
days after the last day of the anniversary
month of the order for which the
administrative review was requested.
However, if the Department determines
that it is not practicable to complete the
review within the aforementioned
specified time limits, section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.213(h)(2) allow the Department to
extend the 245-day period to 365 days.
Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2), we
determine that it is not practicable to
complete the results of this review
within the original time limit. The
Department needs additional time to
analyze the supplemental questionnaire
responses, which were recently
submitted, and to determine whether
any additional information is required.
In accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A)
of the Act, the Department has decided
to extend the time limit for the
preliminary results from 245 days to 365
days; the preliminary results will now
be due no later than July 31, 2009.
Unless extended, the final results
continue to be due 120 days after the
publication of the preliminary results,
pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1) of the
Department’s regulations.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A)
and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Background
On August 26, 2008, in response to a
timely request from Jindal Poly Films,
Limited of India (Jindal), the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) initiated an administrative
review of the countervailing duty order
on polyethylene terephthalate (PET)
Dated: March 27, 2009.
John M. Andersen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations.
[FR Doc. E9–7438 Filed 4–1–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:43 Apr 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–421–807]
Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat
Products From the Netherlands: Notice
of Court Decision Not in Harmony With
Final Results of Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: April 2, 2009
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Cordell or Robert James, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 7, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–0408 or (202) 482–
0649, respectively.
SUMMARY: On March 24, 2009, the
United States Court of International
Trade (the Court) sustained the remand
redetermination issued by the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) pursuant to the Court’s
remand order in the final results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain hotrolled carbon steel flat products from
the Netherlands. See Corus Staal v. US,
Court No. 07–221, Slip Op 09–21 CIT
(March 24, 2009) (Corus Staal
Judgment).
This case arises out of the
Department’s Final Results and
Amended Final Results for the period of
review (POR) period November 1, 2004,
through October 31, 2005. See Certain
Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products
from the Netherlands; Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 72 FR 28676 (May 22, 2007),
and Accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 6 (Final
Results); see also Certain Hot-Rolled
Carbon Steel Flat Products from the
Netherlands; Amended Final Results of
the Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 72 FR 34441 (June 22, 2007)
(Amended Results). Consistent with the
decision of the United States Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal
Circuit) in Timken Co. v. United States,
893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken),
the Department is notifying the public
that Corus Staal Judgment is not in
harmony with the Department’s Final
Results and the Amended Final Results.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to the remand order of the Court in
Corus Staal BV v. United States, Slip
Op. 08–144 (CIT, December 29, 2008)
(Corus Staal), the Department released
the Draft Results of Redetermination
E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM
02APN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices
Pursuant to Court Remand to interested
parties on January 16, 2009. Corus and
ArcelorMittal USA. Inc. (ArcelorMittal),
domestic interested party, submitted
comments on January 23, 2009. Corus
and domestic producer U.S. Steel
Corporation (U.S. Steel) submitted
rebuttal comments on January 28, 2009.
On February 20, 2009, the Department
filed its final results of redetermination
pursuant to Corus Staal with the CIT.
See Final Results of Redetermination
Pursuant to Court Remand, Corus Staal
BV v. United States Court No. 07–00221,
Slip Op. 08–144 (CIT December 29,
2008) (Final Redetermination). In the
Final Redetermination, the Department
amended the final results of the 2004–
2005 administrative review to rescind
our duty absorption finding with respect
to Corus Staal BV (Corus), ‘‘consistent
with the Federal Circuit’s interpretation
of 19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(4) in Agro Dutch
Indus. Ltd. v. United States, 508 F.3d
1024, 1028 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (Agro
Dutch).’’ See Corus Staal at 26.
Specifically, we no longer found that
Corus absorbed antidumping duties
during the period of review since Corus
was, itself, the importer of record. This
redetermination did not affect either the
weighted-average margin or assessment
rate calculated for Corus for the relevant
period of review.
On March 24, 2009, the Court
sustained all aspects of the remand
redetermination. The Court reaffirmed
the Department’s calculation of Corus
Staal’s dumping margin during the
administrative review and affirmed the
Department’s reversal of its duty
absorption finding. Further, the Court
also affirmed the Department’s authority
to issue instructions to U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP) to levy
antidumping duties on entries.
In Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, the
Federal Circuit 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.
The Court’s decision in Corus Staal
Judgment on March 24, 2009,
constitutes a final decision of the court
that is not in harmony with the
Department’s Final Results and
Amended Final Results. This notice is
published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken.
Accordingly, the Department will
continue the suspension of liquidation
of the subject merchandise pending the
expiration of the period of appeal or, if
appealed, pending a final and
conclusive court decision. In the event
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:43 Apr 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
the Court’s ruling is not appealed or, if
appealed, upheld by the Federal Circuit
the Department will instruct CBP to
assess antidumping duties on entries of
the subject merchandise during the POR
based on the Amended Final Results.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with section 516A(c)(1) of
the Act.
Dated: March 27, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–7445 Filed 4–1–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Proposed Information Collection;
Comment Request; Limits on
Applications of Take Prohibitions
AGENCY: National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The Department of
Commerce, as part of its continuing
effort to reduce paperwork and
respondent burden, invites the general
public and other Federal agencies to
take this opportunity to comment on
proposed and/or continuing information
collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted on or before June 1, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments
to Diana Hynek, Departmental
Paperwork Clearance Officer,
Department of Commerce, Room 7845,
14th and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230 (or via the
Internet at dHynek@doc.gov).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection
instrument and instructions should be
directed to Steve Stone at (503) 231–
2317, or steve.stone@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Abstract
Section 4(d) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) requires the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to
adopt such regulations as it ‘‘deems
necessary and advisable to provide for
the conservation of’’ threatened species.
Those regulations may include any or
all of the prohibitions provided in
section 9(a)(1) of the ESA, which
specifically prohibits ‘‘take’’ of any
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14961
endangered species (‘‘take’’ includes
actions that harass, harm, pursue, kill,
or capture). The first salmonid species
listed by NMFS as threatened were
protected by virtually blanket
application of the section 9 take
prohibitions. There are now 22 separate
Distinct Population Segments (DPS) of
west coast salmonids listed as
threatened, covering a large percentage
of the land base in California, Oregon,
Washington and Idaho. NMFS is
obligated to enact necessary and
advisable protective regulations. NMFS
makes section 9 prohibitions generally
applicable to many of those threatened
DPS, but also seeks to respond to
requests from States and others to both
provide more guidance on how to
protect threatened salmonids and avoid
take, and to limit the application of take
prohibitions wherever warranted (See
70 FR 37160, June 28, 2005; 71 FR 834,
January 5, 2006; and 73 FR 55451,
September 25, 2008). The regulations
describe programs or circumstances that
contribute to the conservation of, or are
being conducted in a way that limits
impacts on, listed salmonids. Because
we have determined that such
programs/circumstances adequately
protect listed salmonids, the regulations
do not apply the ‘‘take’’ prohibitions to
them. Some of these limits on the take
prohibitions entail voluntary
submission of a plan to NMFS and/or
annual or occasional reports by entities
wishing to take advantage of these
limits, or continue within them.
II. Method of Collection
Submissions may be in paper or
electronic format.
III. Data
OMB Control Number: 0648–0399.
Form Number: None.
Type of Review: Regular submission.
Affected Public: State, local, or tribal
government; business or other for-profit
organizations.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
301.
Estimated Time per Response: 20
hours for a road maintenance
agreement; 5 hours for a diversion
screening limit project; 30 hours for an
urban development package; 10 hours
for an urban development report; 20
hours for a tribal plan; and 5 hours for
a report of aided, salvaged, or disposed
of salmonids.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 1,705.
Estimated Total Annual Cost to
Public: $1,000.
E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM
02APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 62 (Thursday, April 2, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14960-14961]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-7445]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-421-807]
Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From the
Netherlands: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results
of Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: April 2, 2009
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Cordell or Robert James, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
0408 or (202) 482-0649, respectively.
SUMMARY: On March 24, 2009, the United States Court of International
Trade (the Court) sustained the remand redetermination issued by the
Department of Commerce (the Department) pursuant to the Court's remand
order in the final results of the administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products
from the Netherlands. See Corus Staal v. US, Court No. 07-221, Slip Op
09-21 CIT (March 24, 2009) (Corus Staal Judgment).
This case arises out of the Department's Final Results and Amended
Final Results for the period of review (POR) period November 1, 2004,
through October 31, 2005. See Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat
Products from the Netherlands; Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 72 FR 28676 (May 22, 2007), and Accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 6 (Final Results); see also
Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Netherlands;
Amended Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 72
FR 34441 (June 22, 2007) (Amended Results). Consistent with the
decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
(Federal Circuit) in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed.
Cir. 1990) (Timken), the Department is notifying the public that Corus
Staal Judgment is not in harmony with the Department's Final Results
and the Amended Final Results.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the remand order of the Court
in Corus Staal BV v. United States, Slip Op. 08-144 (CIT, December 29,
2008) (Corus Staal), the Department released the Draft Results of
Redetermination
[[Page 14961]]
Pursuant to Court Remand to interested parties on January 16, 2009.
Corus and ArcelorMittal USA. Inc. (ArcelorMittal), domestic interested
party, submitted comments on January 23, 2009. Corus and domestic
producer U.S. Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel) submitted rebuttal
comments on January 28, 2009.
On February 20, 2009, the Department filed its final results of
redetermination pursuant to Corus Staal with the CIT. See Final Results
of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, Corus Staal BV v. United
States Court No. 07-00221, Slip Op. 08-144 (CIT December 29, 2008)
(Final Redetermination). In the Final Redetermination, the Department
amended the final results of the 2004-2005 administrative review to
rescind our duty absorption finding with respect to Corus Staal BV
(Corus), ``consistent with the Federal Circuit's interpretation of 19
U.S.C. 1675(a)(4) in Agro Dutch Indus. Ltd. v. United States, 508 F.3d
1024, 1028 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (Agro Dutch).'' See Corus Staal at 26.
Specifically, we no longer found that Corus absorbed antidumping duties
during the period of review since Corus was, itself, the importer of
record. This redetermination did not affect either the weighted-average
margin or assessment rate calculated for Corus for the relevant period
of review.
On March 24, 2009, the Court sustained all aspects of the remand
redetermination. The Court reaffirmed the Department's calculation of
Corus Staal's dumping margin during the administrative review and
affirmed the Department's reversal of its duty absorption finding.
Further, the Court also affirmed the Department's authority to issue
instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to levy
antidumping duties on entries.
In Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, the Federal Circuit 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. The Court's
decision in Corus Staal Judgment on March 24, 2009, constitutes a final
decision of the court that is not in harmony with the Department's
Final Results and Amended Final Results. This notice is published in
fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the
Department will continue the suspension of liquidation of the subject
merchandise pending the expiration of the period of appeal or, if
appealed, pending a final and conclusive court decision. In the event
the Court's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed, upheld by the
Federal Circuit the Department will instruct CBP to assess antidumping
duties on entries of the subject merchandise during the POR based on
the Amended Final Results.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with section
516A(c)(1) of the Act.
Dated: March 27, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-7445 Filed 4-1-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
