Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of the 2007 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 26371-26373 [E9-12827]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 2, 2009 / Notices
determination, a request for such
postponement is made by exporters,
who account for a significant proportion
of exports of the subject merchandise, or
in the event of a negative preliminary
determination, a request for such
postponement is made by the petitioner.
The Department’s regulations, at 19 CFR
351.210(e)(2), require that requests by
respondents for postponement of a final
determination be accompanied by a
request for extension of provisional
measures from a four-month period to
not more than six months.
On May 26, 2009, Triveni requested
that in the event of an affirmative
preliminary determination in this
investigation, the Department postpone
its final determination by 60 days. At
the same time, Triveni requested that
the Department extend the application
of the provisional measures prescribed
under section 733(d) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.210(e)(2), from a four-month
period to a six-month period. In
accordance with section 735(a)(2) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2), because
(1) our preliminary determination is
affirmative, (2) the requesting exporter
accounts for a significant proportion of
exports of the subject merchandise, and
(3) no compelling reasons for denial
exist, we are granting this request and
are postponing the final determination
until no later than 135 days after the
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register. Suspension of liquidation will
be extended accordingly.
This determination is issued and
published pursuant to sections 733(f)
and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: May 27, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–12826 Filed 6–1–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–846]
Brake Rotors From the People’s
Republic of China: Final Results and
Partial Rescission of the 2007
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On March 20, 2009, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results and partial rescission of the 2007
administrative review of the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:43 Jun 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
antidumping duty order on brake rotors
from the People’s Republic of China
covering the period April 1, 2007,
through August 13, 2007. No interested
party commented on the preliminary
results or the partial rescission. We have
made no changes to the margin
calculations. Therefore, the final results
do not differ from the preliminary
results. The final weighted-average
dumping margins for the reviewed firms
are listed below in the section entitled
‘‘Final Results of Review.’’
DATES: Effective Date: June 2, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Smith or Terre Keaton Stefanova,
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) 482–1766 or (202) 482–
1280, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on brake rotors
from the People’s Republic of China
(PRC) covers one mandatory respondent
(Yantai Winhere Auto-Part
Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Winhere)) and
the following 11 respondents not
selected for individual review: Laizhou
Auto Brake Equipment Co., Ltd.
(LABEC); Laizhou Hongda Auto
Replacement Parts Co., Ltd. (Laizhou
Hongda); Longkou Jinzheng Machinery
Co., Ltd. (Jinzheng); Longkou TLC
Machinery Co., Ltd. (Longkou TLC);
Qingdao Gren (Group) Co. (Gren);
Qingdao Meita Automotive Industry
Co., Ltd. (Meita); Xianghe Zichen
Casting Company, Ltd. (Xianghe
Zichen); Zibo Botai Manufacturing Co.,
Ltd. (Zibo Botai); Laizhou Luda Sedan
Fittings Company, Ltd. (Luda); Laizhou
Sanli (Sanli); and Zibo Golden Harvest
Machinery Limited Company (ZGOLD).
We are rescinding this review with
respect to China National Automotive
Industry Import & Export Corporation or
National Automotive Industry Import &
Export Corporation (CAIEC) and
Shandong Laizhou CAPCO Industry
(Laizhou CAPCO). See ‘‘Final Partial
Rescission of 2007 Administrative
Review’’ section below.
On March 20, 2009, the Department
published the preliminary results and
partial rescission of this administrative
review. See Brake Rotors From the
People’s Republic of China: Preliminary
Results of the 2007 Administrative
Review and Partial Rescission, 74 FR
11911 (Preliminary Results). We invited
interested parties to comment on the
Preliminary Results. Comments were
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26371
due April 20, 2009, however, no
interested party submitted comments.
We have conducted this administrative
review in accordance with sections 751
and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the Act) and sections 19
CFR 351.213 and 19 CFR 351.221 of the
Department’s regulations.
Period of Review
The period of review (POR) is April
1, 2007, through August 13, 2007.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by this order
are brake rotors made of gray cast iron,
whether finished, semifinished, or
unfinished, ranging in diameter from 8
to 16 inches (20.32 to 40.64 centimeters)
and in weight from 8 to 45 pounds (3.63
to 20.41 kilograms). The size parameters
(weight and dimension) of the brake
rotors limit their use to the following
types of motor vehicles: Automobiles,
all-terrain vehicles, vans and
recreational vehicles under ‘‘one ton
and a half,’’ and light trucks designated
as ‘‘one ton and a half.’’
Finished brake rotors are those that
are ready for sale and installation
without any further operations. Semifinished rotors are those on which the
surface is not entirely smooth, and have
undergone some drilling. Unfinished
rotors are those which have undergone
some grinding or turning.
These brake rotors are for motor
vehicles, and do not contain in the
casting a logo of an original equipment
manufacturer (OEM) which produces
vehicles sold in the United States, (e.g.,
General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Honda,
Toyota, Volvo). Brake rotors covered in
this order are not certified by OEM
producers of vehicles sold in the United
States. The scope also includes
composite brake rotors that are made of
gray cast iron, which contain a steel
plate, but otherwise meet the above
criteria. Excluded from the scope of this
order are brake rotors made of gray cast
iron, whether finished, semifinished, or
unfinished, with a diameter less than 8
inches or greater than 16 inches (less
than 20.32 centimeters or greater than
40.64 centimeters) and a weight less
than 8 pounds or greater than 45 pounds
(less than 3.63 kilograms or greater than
20.41 kilograms).
Brake rotors are currently classifiable
under subheading 8708.39.5010 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS).1 Although the
1 As of January 1, 2005, the HTSUS classification
for brake rotors (discs) changed from 8708.39.5010
to 8708.39.5030. As of January 1, 2007, the HTSUS
classification for brake rotors (discs) changed from
8708.39.5030 to 8708.30.5030. See Harmonized
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
Continued
02JNN1
26372
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 2, 2009 / Notices
HTSUS subheading is provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the scope of this
order is dispositive.
because the Department concluded that
these companies did not export subject
merchandise to the United States during
the POR. See Preliminary Results at 74
FR 11914. No interested parties filed
comments objecting to our preliminary
rescission. Therefore, in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we are
Final Partial Rescission of 2007
Administrative Review
We preliminarily rescinded the
review for CAIEC and Laizhou CAPCO
rescinding this administrative review
with respect to these companies.
Final Results of Review
We determine that the following
antidumping duty margins exist in these
final results:
BRAKE ROTORS FROM THE PRC
Weighted-average percent margin
(percent)
Individually reviewed exporter 2007 administrative review
Yantai Winhere Auto-Part Manufacturing Co., Ltd ............................................................................................
Separate-rate applicant exporters 2007 administrative review
0.04 (de minimis)
Weighted-average percent margin
(percent)
Laizhou Auto Brake Equipment Co., Ltd ...........................................................................................................
Laizhou Hongda Auto Replacement Parts Co., Ltd ..........................................................................................
Longkou Jinzheng Machinery Co., Ltd ..............................................................................................................
Longkou TLC Machinery Co., Ltd ......................................................................................................................
Qingdao Gren (Group) Co. ................................................................................................................................
Qingdao Meita Automotive Industry Co., Ltd .....................................................................................................
Xianghe Zichen Casting Company, Ltd .............................................................................................................
Zibo Botai Manufacturing Co., Ltd .....................................................................................................................
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
(de
(de
(de
(de
(de
(de
(de
(de
PRC–wide rate
Margin (percent)
PRC-Wide Rate (including Laizhou Luda Sedan Fittings Company, Ltd., Laizhou Sanli and Zibo Golden
Harvest Machinery Limited Company).
Assessment
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the
Department will determine, and CBP
shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries. The Department
intends to issue assessment instructions
to CBP 15 days after the date of
publication of these final results of
review. In accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1), for Winhere, we
calculated importer (or customer)specific assessment rates for the
merchandise subject to this review.
Because we do not have entered values
on the record for Winhere’s sales, we
calculated a per-unit assessment rate by
aggregating the antidumping duties due
for all U.S. sales to each importer (or
customer) and dividing this amount by
the total quantity sold to that importer
(or customer). See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
To determine whether the duty
assessment rates are de minimis, in
accordance with the requirement set
forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), we
calculated importer (or customer)specific ad valorem ratios based on the
estimated entered value. Where an
importer (or customer)-specific ad
valorem rate is zero or de minimis, we
will instruct CBP to liquidate
appropriate entries without regard to
antidumping duties. See 19 CFR
351.106(c)(2).
As stated in the Preliminary Results,
for the companies receiving a separate
rate that were not selected for
individual review (i.e., Gren, Jinzheng,
LABEC, Laizhou Hongda, Longkou TLC,
Meita, Xianghe Zichen, and Zibo Botai),
we calculated an assessment rate based
on the weighted-average margin
calculated for Winhere, the only
mandatory respondent in this review.
As Winhere’s margin is de minimis, we
will instruct CBP to liquidate
appropriate entries without regard to
antidumping duties with respect to
these companies. See 19 CFR
351.106(c)(2).
With respect to the PRC-wide entity
which includes Luda, Sanli and ZGOLD
(i.e., the respondents that did not
demonstrate their eligibility for
separate-rate status), we will instruct
CBP to liquidate appropriate entries at
the PRC-wide rate of 43.32 percent.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The antidumping duty order on brake
rotors from the PRC was revoked
effective August 14, 2007. See Brake
Rotors From the People’s Republic of
China: Revocation of Antidumping Duty
Order Pursuant to Second Five-Year
43.32
(Sunset) Review, 73 FR 36039 (June 25,
2008). As a result, we instructed CBP to
terminate the suspension of liquidation
of entries of the subject merchandise.
Therefore, the collection of cash
deposits of antidumping duties on
entries of the subject merchandise is no
longer required.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as the final
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)
to file a certificate regarding the
reimbursement of antidumping duties
prior to liquidation of the relevant
entries during this review period.
Failure to comply with this requirement
could result in the Secretary’s
presumption that reimbursement of
antidumping duties occurred and in the
subsequent assessment of double
antidumping duties. This notice also
serves as the only reminder to parties
subject to administrative protective
order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction or
conversion to judicial protective order
of proprietary information disclosed
under APO in accordance with 19 CFR
351.305(a)(3). Timely written
notification of the return or destruction
of APO materials or conversion to
Tariff Schedule of the United States (2007) (Rev. 2),
available at www.usitc.gov.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:43 Jun 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
minimis)
minimis)
minimis)
minimis)
minimis)
minimis)
minimis)
minimis)
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 2, 2009 / Notices
judicial protective order is hereby
requested. Failure to comply with the
regulations and the terms of an APO is
a sanctionable violation. This
administrative review and this notice
are published in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the
Act.
Dated: May 27, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–12827 Filed 6–1–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–489–805]
Certain Pasta from Turkey: Notice of
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Changed Circumstances Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On January 7, 2009, the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) published a notice of
initiation of a changed circumstances
review of the antidumping duty order of
certain pasta from Turkey as requested
by Marsan Gida Sanayi ve Ticret A.S.
(‘‘Marsan’’). On April 8, 2009, the
Department preliminary found that
Marsan is the successor–in-interest to
Gidasa Sabanci Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret
A.S. (‘‘Gidasa’’), and should be accorded
the same antidumping duty treatment
accorded Gidasa with respect to the
antidumping duty order on certain pasta
from Turkey.1 The Department gave
interested parties an opportunity to
comment on the preliminary results, but
received no comments. Therefore, the
final results do not differ from the
preliminary results of review.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 2, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher Hargett, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 3, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–4161.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 24, 1996, the Department
published in the Federal Register an
antidumping duty order on certain pasta
1 See Certain Pasta from Turkey: Notice of
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 74 FR 17153 (April 14,
2009) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:43 Jun 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
from Turkey.2 On December 3, 2008,
Marsan requested that the Department
initiate and conduct an expedited
changed circumstances review to
determine that, for purposes of the
antidumping law, Marsan is the
successor–in-interest to Gidasa. See
December 3, 2008, letter from Marsan to
the Secretary of Commerce. On January
7, 2009, the Department published a
notice of initiation of a changed
circumstances review of the
antidumping order.3 On February 23,
2009, the Department requested
additional information from Marsan
regarding its operations in Turkey. See
February 23, 2009, changed
circumstances review questionnaire
from the Department to Marsan. On
March 16, 2009, Marsan replied to the
Department’s questionnaire. See March
16, 2009, letter from Marsan to the
Secretary of Commerce. On April 14,
2009, the Department published the
preliminary results of review and
invited interested parties to comment.
See Preliminary Results. We received no
comments.
Scope of Review
Imports covered by this review are
shipments of certain non–egg dry pasta
in packages of five pounds (2.27
kilograms) or less, whether or not
enriched or fortified or containing milk
or other optional ingredients such as
chopped vegetables, vegetable purees,
milk, gluten, diastases, vitamins,
coloring and flavorings, and up to two
percent egg white. The pasta covered by
this scope is typically sold in the retail
market, in fiberboard or cardboard
cartons, or polyethylene or
polypropylene bags of varying
dimensions.
Excluded from the scope of this
review are refrigerated, frozen, or
canned pastas, as well as all forms of
egg pasta, with the exception of non–egg
dry pasta containing up to two percent
egg white.
The merchandise subject to review is
currently classifiable under item
1902.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the HTSUS
subheading is provided for convenience
and customs purposes, the written
description of the merchandise subject
to the order is dispositive.
2 See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order and
Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Certain Pasta from Turkey, 61 FR
68545 (July 24, 1996).
3 See Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Duty
Changed Circumstances Review: Certain Pasta from
Turkey, 74 FR 681 (January 7, 2009).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26373
Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Review
Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), and 19 CFR 351.216, the
Department will conduct a changed
circumstances review upon receipt of
information concerning, or a request
from an interested party for review of,
an antidumping duty order which
shows changed circumstances sufficient
to warrant a review of the order. In this
case, the Department found that the
information submitted by the
respondent provided sufficient evidence
of changed circumstances to warrant a
review to determine whether Marsan is
the successor–in-interest to Gidasa.
Thus, in accordance with section 751(b)
of the Act, the Department initiated a
changed circumstances review to
determine whether Marsan is the
successor–in-interest to Gidasa for
purposes of determining antidumping
duty liability with respect to imports of
certain pasta from Turkey.
In making a successor–in-interest
determination, the Department
examines several factors including, but
not limited to, changes in: (1)
management; (2) production facilities;
(3) supplier relationships; and (4)
customer base. See, e.g., Notice of Final
Results of Changed Circumstances
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Polychloroprene Rubber From
Japan, 67 FR 58 (January 2, 2002); Brass
Sheet and Strip from Canada: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 57 FR 20460
(May 13, 1992). While no single factor
or combination of factors will
necessarily provide a dispositive
indication of a successor–in-interest
relationship, the Department will
generally consider the new company to
be the successor to the previous
company if the new company’s resulting
operation is not materially dissimilar to
that of its predecessor. See, e.g., Fresh
and Chilled Atlantic Salmon from
Norway; Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 64 FR 9979
(March 1, 1999); Industrial Phosphoric
Acid from Israel; Final Results of
Changed Circumstances Review, 59 FR
6944 (February 14, 1994). Thus, if the
evidence demonstrates that, with
respect to the production and sale of the
subject merchandise, the new company
operates as the same business entity as
the former company, the Department
will accord the new company the same
antidumping treatment as its
predecessor.
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.221(c)(3)(i), we determine that
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 104 (Tuesday, June 2, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26371-26373]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-12827]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-846]
Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Final Results
and Partial Rescission of the 2007 Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On March 20, 2009, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
published the preliminary results and partial rescission of the 2007
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on brake rotors
from the People's Republic of China covering the period April 1, 2007,
through August 13, 2007. No interested party commented on the
preliminary results or the partial rescission. We have made no changes
to the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results do not differ
from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping
margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled
``Final Results of Review.''
DATES: Effective Date: June 2, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Smith or Terre Keaton Stefanova,
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-
1766 or (202) 482-1280, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This administrative review of the antidumping duty order on brake
rotors from the People's Republic of China (PRC) covers one mandatory
respondent (Yantai Winhere Auto-Part Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Winhere))
and the following 11 respondents not selected for individual review:
Laizhou Auto Brake Equipment Co., Ltd. (LABEC); Laizhou Hongda Auto
Replacement Parts Co., Ltd. (Laizhou Hongda); Longkou Jinzheng
Machinery Co., Ltd. (Jinzheng); Longkou TLC Machinery Co., Ltd.
(Longkou TLC); Qingdao Gren (Group) Co. (Gren); Qingdao Meita
Automotive Industry Co., Ltd. (Meita); Xianghe Zichen Casting Company,
Ltd. (Xianghe Zichen); Zibo Botai Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Zibo Botai);
Laizhou Luda Sedan Fittings Company, Ltd. (Luda); Laizhou Sanli
(Sanli); and Zibo Golden Harvest Machinery Limited Company (ZGOLD). We
are rescinding this review with respect to China National Automotive
Industry Import & Export Corporation or National Automotive Industry
Import & Export Corporation (CAIEC) and Shandong Laizhou CAPCO Industry
(Laizhou CAPCO). See ``Final Partial Rescission of 2007 Administrative
Review'' section below.
On March 20, 2009, the Department published the preliminary results
and partial rescission of this administrative review. See Brake Rotors
From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the 2007
Administrative Review and Partial Rescission, 74 FR 11911 (Preliminary
Results). We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary
Results. Comments were due April 20, 2009, however, no interested party
submitted comments. We have conducted this administrative review in
accordance with sections 751 and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the Act) and sections 19 CFR 351.213 and 19 CFR 351.221 of
the Department's regulations.
Period of Review
The period of review (POR) is April 1, 2007, through August 13,
2007.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by this order are brake rotors made of gray
cast iron, whether finished, semifinished, or unfinished, ranging in
diameter from 8 to 16 inches (20.32 to 40.64 centimeters) and in weight
from 8 to 45 pounds (3.63 to 20.41 kilograms). The size parameters
(weight and dimension) of the brake rotors limit their use to the
following types of motor vehicles: Automobiles, all-terrain vehicles,
vans and recreational vehicles under ``one ton and a half,'' and light
trucks designated as ``one ton and a half.''
Finished brake rotors are those that are ready for sale and
installation without any further operations. Semi-finished rotors are
those on which the surface is not entirely smooth, and have undergone
some drilling. Unfinished rotors are those which have undergone some
grinding or turning.
These brake rotors are for motor vehicles, and do not contain in
the casting a logo of an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) which
produces vehicles sold in the United States, (e.g., General Motors,
Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, Volvo). Brake rotors covered in this
order are not certified by OEM producers of vehicles sold in the United
States. The scope also includes composite brake rotors that are made of
gray cast iron, which contain a steel plate, but otherwise meet the
above criteria. Excluded from the scope of this order are brake rotors
made of gray cast iron, whether finished, semifinished, or unfinished,
with a diameter less than 8 inches or greater than 16 inches (less than
20.32 centimeters or greater than 40.64 centimeters) and a weight less
than 8 pounds or greater than 45 pounds (less than 3.63 kilograms or
greater than 20.41 kilograms).
Brake rotors are currently classifiable under subheading
8708.39.5010 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS).\1\ Although the
[[Page 26372]]
HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the scope of this order is dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As of January 1, 2005, the HTSUS classification for brake
rotors (discs) changed from 8708.39.5010 to 8708.39.5030. As of
January 1, 2007, the HTSUS classification for brake rotors (discs)
changed from 8708.39.5030 to 8708.30.5030. See Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (2007) (Rev. 2), available at
www.usitc.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Partial Rescission of 2007 Administrative Review
We preliminarily rescinded the review for CAIEC and Laizhou CAPCO
because the Department concluded that these companies did not export
subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. See
Preliminary Results at 74 FR 11914. No interested parties filed
comments objecting to our preliminary rescission. Therefore, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we are rescinding this
administrative review with respect to these companies.
Final Results of Review
We determine that the following antidumping duty margins exist in
these final results:
Brake Rotors From the PRC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Individually reviewed exporter 2007 Weighted-average percent
administrative review margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yantai Winhere Auto-Part Manufacturing Co., 0.04 (de minimis)
Ltd.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate-rate applicant exporters 2007 Weighted-average percent
administrative review margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Laizhou Auto Brake Equipment Co., Ltd...... 0.04 (de minimis)
Laizhou Hongda Auto Replacement Parts Co., 0.04 (de minimis)
Ltd.
Longkou Jinzheng Machinery Co., Ltd........ 0.04 (de minimis)
Longkou TLC Machinery Co., Ltd............. 0.04 (de minimis)
Qingdao Gren (Group) Co.................... 0.04 (de minimis)
Qingdao Meita Automotive Industry Co., Ltd. 0.04 (de minimis)
Xianghe Zichen Casting Company, Ltd........ 0.04 (de minimis)
Zibo Botai Manufacturing Co., Ltd.......... 0.04 (de minimis)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-wide rate Margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-Wide Rate (including Laizhou Luda Sedan 43.32
Fittings Company, Ltd., Laizhou Sanli and
Zibo Golden Harvest Machinery Limited
Company).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b),
the Department will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties
on all appropriate entries. The Department intends to issue assessment
instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these
final results of review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), for
Winhere, we calculated importer (or customer)-specific assessment rates
for the merchandise subject to this review. Because we do not have
entered values on the record for Winhere's sales, we calculated a per-
unit assessment rate by aggregating the antidumping duties due for all
U.S. sales to each importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by
the total quantity sold to that importer (or customer). See 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1). To determine whether the duty assessment rates are de
minimis, in accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR
351.106(c)(1), we calculated importer (or customer)-specific ad valorem
ratios based on the estimated entered value. Where an importer (or
customer)-specific ad valorem rate is zero or de minimis, we will
instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to
antidumping duties. See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
As stated in the Preliminary Results, for the companies receiving a
separate rate that were not selected for individual review (i.e., Gren,
Jinzheng, LABEC, Laizhou Hongda, Longkou TLC, Meita, Xianghe Zichen,
and Zibo Botai), we calculated an assessment rate based on the
weighted-average margin calculated for Winhere, the only mandatory
respondent in this review. As Winhere's margin is de minimis, we will
instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to
antidumping duties with respect to these companies. See 19 CFR
351.106(c)(2).
With respect to the PRC-wide entity which includes Luda, Sanli and
ZGOLD (i.e., the respondents that did not demonstrate their eligibility
for separate-rate status), we will instruct CBP to liquidate
appropriate entries at the PRC-wide rate of 43.32 percent.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The antidumping duty order on brake rotors from the PRC was revoked
effective August 14, 2007. See Brake Rotors From the People's Republic
of China: Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order Pursuant to Second Five-
Year (Sunset) Review, 73 FR 36039 (June 25, 2008). As a result, we
instructed CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation of entries of
the subject merchandise. Therefore, the collection of cash deposits of
antidumping duties on entries of the subject merchandise is no longer
required.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as the final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding
the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and in the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties. This notice also serves as the
only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order
(APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction or
conversion to judicial protective order of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or
conversion to
[[Page 26373]]
judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with
the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
This administrative review and this notice are published in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: May 27, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-12827 Filed 6-1-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P