University of Notre Dame, et al., 56795-56796 [E9-26429]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 3, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
various features, including iron rests,
linen racks, and others. The subject
ironing tables may be sold with or
without a pad and/or cover. All types
and configurations of floor–standing,
metal–top ironing tables are covered by
this order.
Furthermore, the order specifically
covers imports of ironing tables,
assembled or unassembled, complete or
incomplete, and certain parts thereof.
For purposes of this order, the term
‘‘unassembled’’ ironing table means a
product requiring the attachment of the
leg assembly to the top or the
attachment of an included feature such
as an iron rest or linen rack. The term
‘‘complete’’’ ironing table means a
product sold as a ready–to-use ensemble
consisting of the metal–top table and a
pad and cover, with or without
additional features, e.g., iron rest or
linen rack. The term ‘‘incomplete’’
ironing table means product shipped or
sold as a ‘‘bare board’’ i.e., a metal–top
table only, without the pad and cover,
with or without additional features, e.g.
iron rest or linen rack. The major parts
or components of ironing tables that are
intended to be covered by the order
under the term ‘‘certain parts thereof≥’
consist of the metal top component
(with or without assembled supports
and slides) and/or the leg components,
whether or not attached together as a leg
assembly. This order covers separately
shipped metal top components and leg
components, without regard to whether
the respective quantities would yield an
exact quantity of assembled ironing
tables.
Ironing tables without legs (such as
models that mount on walls or over
doors) are not floor–standing and are
specifically excluded. Additionally,
tabletop or countertop models with
short legs that do not exceed 12 inches
in length (and which may or may not
collapse or retract) are specifically
excluded.
The subject ironing tables are
currently classifiable under HTSUS
subheading 9403.20.0011. The subject
metal top and leg components are
classified under HTSUS subheading
9403.90.8040. Although the HTS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and Customs purposes, the
written description of the scope remains
dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in this case are
addressed in the ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum’’ from Richard Weible,
Director Office 7 to John M. Andersen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
AD/CVD Operations, Import
Administration, dated October 27, 2009
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:15 Nov 02, 2009
Jkt 220001
(Decision Memorandum), which 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 margin likely
to prevail if the order was revoked.
Parties can find a complete discussion
of all issues raised in this sunset review
and the corresponding
recommendations in this public
memorandum, which is on file in room
1117 of the main Commerce building. In
addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the Internet at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The paper copy and
electronic version of the Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Final Results of Sunset Reviews
We determine that revocation of the
antidumping duty order on ironing
tables from the PRC would likely lead
to continuation or recurrence of
dumping at the following percentage
weighted–average margins:
Manufacturers/Exporters/Producers
Since Hardware ............
Shunde Yongjian ..........
Forever Holdings ..........
Gaoming .......................
Harvest .........................
Foshan Shunde ............
PRC–Wide Rate ...........
Weighted–Average
Margin (Percent)
9.47
157.68
72.29
72.29
72.29
157.68
157.68
percent
percent
percent
percent
percent
percent
percent
This notice 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 19 CFR 351.305.
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 these
results and this notice in accordance
with sections 751(c), 752(c), and
777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: October 27, 2009.
John M. Andersen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations.
[FR Doc. E9–26426 Filed 11–2–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56795
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
University of Notre Dame, et al.
Notice of Consolidated Decision on
Applications for Duty–Free Entry of
Electron Microscopes
This is a decision consolidated
pursuant to Section 6(c) of the
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub.
L. 89–651, as amended by Pub. L. 106–
36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301).
Related records can be viewed between
8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. in Room 3705,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and
Constitution Avenue., NW, Washington,
D.C.
Docket Number: 09–051. Applicant:
University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame,
IN 46556. Instrument: Electron
Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI
Company, Czech Republic. Intended
Use: See notice at 74 FR 49363,
September 28, 2009.
Docket Number: 09–052. Applicant:
Youngstown State University,
Youngstown, OH 44555. Instrument:
Electron Microscope. Manufacturer:
JEOL, Ltd., Japan. Intended Use: See
notice at 74 FR 49363, September 28,
2009.
Docket Number: 09–053. Applicant:
University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame,
IN 46556. Instrument: Electron
Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI
Company, the Netherlands. Intended
Use: See notice at 74 FR 49363,
September 28, 2009.
Docket Number: 09–054. Applicant:
University of Nebraska Medical Center
986395, Nebraska Medical Center,
Omaha, NE 68198. Instrument: Electron
Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI
Company, Czech Republic. Intended
Use: See notice at 74 FR 49363,
September 28, 2009.
Comments: None received. Decision:
Approved. No instrument of equivalent
scientific value to the foreign
instrument, for such purposes as these
instruments are intended to be used,
was being manufactured in the United
States at the time the instruments were
ordered. Reasons: Each foreign
instrument is an electron microscope
and is intended for research or scientific
educational uses requiring an electron
microscope. We know of no electron
microscope, or any other instrument
suited to these purposes, which was
being manufactured in the United States
at the time of order of each instrument.
E:\FR\FM\03NON1.SGM
03NON1
56796
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 3, 2009 / Notices
Dated: October 28, 2009.
Christopher Cassel,
Director.
Subsidies Enforcement Office Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–26429 Filed 11–2–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–570–948]
Certain Steel Grating from the People’s
Republic of China: Preliminary
Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination and Alignment of Final
Countervailing Duty Determination
with Final Antidumping Duty
Determination
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) preliminarily
determines that countervailable
subsidies are being provided to
producers and exporters of certain steel
grating (CSG) from the People’s
Republic of China (PRC). For
information on the estimated subsidy
rates, see the ‘‘Suspension of
Liquidation’’ section of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 3, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sean Carey or Justin Neuman, 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) 482–3964 and (202)
482–0486, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Case History
The following events have occurred
since the publication of the
Department’s notice of initiation in the
Federal Register. See Certain Steel
Grating From the People’s Republic of
China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty
Investigation, 74 FR 30278 (June 25,
2009) (Initiation Notice).
On July 17, 2009, due to the large
number of producers and exporters of
certain steel grating in the PRC, we
determined that it would not be possible
to investigate individually each known
exporter or producer. Therefore, based
on data from U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CPB), and in accordance
with section 777A(e)(2)(A)(ii) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
the Department selected as mandatory
respondents the two largest Chinese
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:15 Nov 02, 2009
Jkt 220001
producers/exporters of steel grating that
could reasonably be examined, Ningbo
Jiulong Machinery Manufacturing Co.,
Ltd. (Ningbo Jiulong) and United Steel
Structures Ltd. (USSL). See
Memorandum to John M. Andersen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, ‘‘Countervailing Duty
Investigation: Certain Steel Grating
(CSG) from the People’s Republic of
China (PRC)’’ (July 17, 2009)
(Respondent Selection Memorandum).
A public version of this memorandum is
on file in the Department’s Central
Records Unit (CRU) in Room 1117 of the
main Department building. On July 20,
2009, we issued CVD questionnaires to
the Government of the People’s
Republic of China (GOC), to Ningbo
Jiulong, and to USSL.
At the request of Alabama Metal
Industries Corp. and Fisher and Ludlow
(collectively, Petitioners), on August 10,
2009, the Department postponed the
preliminary determination of this
investigation until October 26, 2009. See
Certain Steel Grating from the People’s
Republic of China: Postponement of
Preliminary Determination in the
Countervailing Duty Investigation, 74 FR
39921 (August 10, 2009). We received
responses from the GOC and both
mandatory respondent companies on
September 9, 2009. We issued a
supplemental questionnaire to the GOC
on September 30, 2009, and to Ningbo
Jiulong on October 1, 2009. After
providing extensions of the due date for
these questionnaire responses to the
GOC and Ningbo, timely responses were
submitted by the GOC on October 15,
2009, and by Ningbo Jiulong on October
13 and 15, 2009.
On July 13, 2009, Petitioners
submitted new subsidy allegations
regarding six programs. On July 20,
2009, the GOC submitted comments on
these allegations. On September 21,
2009, the Department determined to
investigate four of these newly alleged
subsidy programs pursuant to section
775 of the Act. See Memorandum to
Barbara E. Tillman, Director AD/CVD
Operations, Office 6, ‘‘Countervailing
Duty Investigation of Certain Steel
Grating from the People’s Republic of
China (PRC): Initiation Analysis of New
Subsidy Allegations’’ (September 21,
2009) (New Subsidy Initiation
Memorandum). Questionnaires
regarding these newly alleged subsidies
were sent to the GOC and the mandatory
respondent companies on September 21,
2009. The GOC, Ningbo Jiulong, and
USSL submitted responses to the new
subsidy allegations questionnaires on
October 15, 2009. On October 20, 2009,
Petitioners provided pre-preliminary
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
comments. On October 21, 2009, the
GOC submitted additional supplemental
information. On October 22, 2009,
Petitioners provided comments prior to
the preliminary determination. On
October 23, 2009, the GOC provided
additional comments.
In its questionnaire response, USSL
reported that it does not produce CSG.
USSL does produce and sell large steel
structures, for projects such as power
plants, smelters, petrochemical plants
and high-rise buildings, of which CSG is
a minor component. The CSG
incorporated into the steel structures
that USSL produces and sells is
purchased from an unaffiliated supplier.
Based on this information, it appears
that USSL is not one of the two largest
producers or exporters of CSG from the
PRC, and that USSL does not produce
CSG. Subsequently, on October 16,
2009, USSL submitted a letter stating
that it should not be considered to be an
exporter of CSG for purposes of this
investigation. Also on October 16, 2009,
Petitioners filed a letter stating that they
do not object to the deselection of USSL
as a mandatory respondent.
Given this unique combination of
circumstances, we have reconsidered
the selection of USSL as a respondent in
this investigation. Based on the
information provided in USSL’s
questionnaire response, the letters from
USSL and Petitioners, and the
discretion provided to the Department
under section 351.204(c)(1) of the
regulations, we have decided to
discontinue the individual examination
of USSL in this investigation. For a
detailed discussion of the bases for this
decision, see Memorandum for Ronald
K. Lorentzen from John M. Andersen,
‘‘Countervailing Duty Investigation of
Certain Steel Grating from the People’s
Republic of China: Whether USSL
Should be Maintained as a Mandatory
Respondent,’’ dated October 23, 2009.
Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty
Determination With Final Antidumping
Duty Determination
On the same day the Department
initiated this countervailing duty
investigation, see Initiation Notice, the
Department also initiated an
antidumping duty investigation of
certain steel gratings from the PRC. See
Certain Steel Grating from the People’s
Republic of China: Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Investigation, 74 FR
30273 (June 25, 2009). The
countervailing duty investigation and
the antidumping duty investigation
have the same scope with regard to the
merchandise covered.
On October 23, 2009, in accordance
with section 705(a)(1) of the Act,
E:\FR\FM\03NON1.SGM
03NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 211 (Tuesday, November 3, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56795-56796]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-26429]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
University of Notre Dame, et al.
Notice of Consolidated Decision on Applications for Duty-Free Entry
of Electron Microscopes
This is a decision consolidated pursuant to Section 6(c) of the
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966
(Pub. L. 89-651, as amended by Pub. L. 106-36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR
part 301). Related records can be viewed between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00
p.m. in Room 3705, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution
Avenue., NW, Washington, D.C.
Docket Number: 09-051. Applicant: University of Notre Dame, Notre
Dame, IN 46556. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI
Company, Czech Republic. Intended Use: See notice at 74 FR 49363,
September 28, 2009.
Docket Number: 09-052. Applicant: Youngstown State University,
Youngstown, OH 44555. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer:
JEOL, Ltd., Japan. Intended Use: See notice at 74 FR 49363, September
28, 2009.
Docket Number: 09-053. Applicant: University of Notre Dame, Notre
Dame, IN 46556. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI
Company, the Netherlands. Intended Use: See notice at 74 FR 49363,
September 28, 2009.
Docket Number: 09-054. Applicant: University of Nebraska Medical
Center 986395, Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198. Instrument:
Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Company, Czech Republic.
Intended Use: See notice at 74 FR 49363, September 28, 2009.
Comments: None received. Decision: Approved. No instrument of
equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument, for such
purposes as these instruments are intended to be used, was being
manufactured in the United States at the time the instruments were
ordered. Reasons: Each foreign instrument is an electron microscope and
is intended for research or scientific educational uses requiring an
electron microscope. We know of no electron microscope, or any other
instrument suited to these purposes, which was being manufactured in
the United States at the time of order of each instrument.
[[Page 56796]]
Dated: October 28, 2009.
Christopher Cassel,
Director.
Subsidies Enforcement Office Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-26429 Filed 11-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S