Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony with Final Results of Administrative Review, 65515-65516 [E9-29468]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 236 / Thursday, December 10, 2009 / Notices
• Update on Status of Title IX Project.
[Discussion of this agenda item was
held in closed session.]
• Update on Status of 2010
Enforcement Report. [Discussion of
this agenda item was held in closed
session.]
• National Conference Update.
• Approval of Concept Papers for FY
2010 Briefing Topics.
• Amendments to Title IX Briefing
Report.
• Approval of MEPA Briefing Report.
III. State Advisory Committee Issues.
• Iowa SAC.
• Massachusetts SAC.
IV. Management & Operations.
• Motion To Permit Commissioners’
Special Assistants To Join
Commissioners’ Line for
Telephonic Meetings.
V. Approval of September 24, October 8,
October 15 and October 30 Meeting
Minutes.
VI. Staff Director’s Report.
VII. Adjourn.
CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION: Lenore Ostrowsky,
Acting
Chief, Public Affairs Unit (202) 376–
8591. TDD: (202) 376–8116.
Persons with a disability requiring
special services, such as an interpreter
for the hearing impaired, should contact
Pamela Dunston at least seven days
prior to the meeting at 202–376–8105.
TDD: (202) 376–8116.
Dated: December 8, 2009.
David Blackwood,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E9–29577 Filed 12–8–09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6335–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Foreign-Trade Zones Board
[Docket 55–2009]
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Foreign-Trade Zone 74—Baltimore,
MD: Application for Subzone Michelin
North America, Inc. (Tire Distribution
and Wheel Assembly); Elkton, MD
An application has been submitted to
the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the
Board) by the City of Baltimore, grantee
of FTZ 74, requesting special-purpose
subzone status for the distribution
facility of Michelin North America, Inc.
(MNA), located in Elkton, Maryland.
The application was submitted pursuant
to the provisions of the Foreign-Trade
Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–
81u), and the regulations of the Board
(15 CFR part 400). It was formally filed
on December 3, 2009.
MNA’s facility (130 employees,
approximately 71 acres/756,600
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Dec 09, 2009
Jkt 220001
enclosed square feet) is located at 515
Fletchwood Road, Elkton, Maryland.
The facility is primarily used for the
storage and distribution of tires and tire
accessories (duty rates range from dutyfree to 4.0%); however, the applicant is
also requesting manufacturing authority
to perform wheel assembly at the
proposed subzone.
On its distribution activity, FTZ
procedures could exempt MNA from
customs duty payments on the foreign
products that are exported (3 to 7% of
shipments). On its domestic sales, the
company would be able to defer duty
payments until merchandise is shipped
from the facility and entered for
consumption. Certain tires from China
are temporarily subject to additional
duties imposed in a Section 421
safeguard case; such tires will be
admitted to the proposed subzone under
privileged foreign status (19 CFR
146.41) or domestic (duty paid) status
(19 CFR 146.43).
As noted above, the applicant is also
requesting to perform wheel assembly
(up to 100,000 units annually) using
domestic and foreign components on
behalf of auto manufacturer clients.
Foreign-sourced components include
tires (HTSUS 4011.10, 4011.20, 4011.61,
4011.62, 4011.63, 4011.92, 4011.93,
4011.94, 4011.99, duty-free to 4.0%),
wheel rims (HTSUS 8708.70, duty-free
to 2.5%), flaps (HTSUS 4012.90, dutyfree to 4.2%), valves (HTSUS 8481.80,
2% to 5.6%), tubes (HTSUS 4013.10,
3.7%), gaskets (HTSUS 4016.93, 2.5%),
sensors (HTSUS 8525.10, duty-free), and
nuts (HTSUS 7318.16, duty-free).
FTZ procedures could exempt MNA
from customs duty payments on the
foreign components used in production
for export to non-NAFTA countries. On
shipments for U.S. consumption and to
NAFTA markets, MNA could elect the
wheel assembly duty rate (generally
dutiable as an auto part—2.5%) for the
foreign components (mostly tires,
dutiable at 4%) listed above. The auto
part duty rate (2.5%) would apply if the
wheel assemblies are shipped via zoneto-zone transfer to U.S. motor vehicle
assembly plants with subzone status.
FTZ designation would further allow
Michelin to realize logistical benefits
through the use of certain customs
procedures and duty savings on scrap
and waste. The request indicates that
the savings from FTZ procedures would
help improve the facility’s international
competitiveness.
In accordance with the Board’s
regulations, Diane Finver of the FTZ
Staff is designated examiner to evaluate
and analyze the facts and information
presented in the application and case
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65515
record and to report findings and
recommendations to the Board.
Public comment is invited from
interested parties. Submissions (original
and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the
Board’s Executive Secretary at the
address below. The closing period for
their receipt is February 8, 2010.
Rebuttal comments in response to
material submitted during the foregoing
period may be submitted during the
subsequent 15-day period to
February 23, 2010.
A copy of the application will be
available for public inspection at the
Office of the Executive Secretary,
Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 2111,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20230–0002, and in the ‘‘Reading
Room’’ section of the Board’s Web site,
which is accessible via https://
www.trade.gov/ftz.
For further information, contact Diane
Finver at Diane.Finver@trade.gov or
(202) 482–1367.
Dated: December 3, 2009.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–29472 Filed 12–9–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–489–807]
Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing
Bars from Turkey: Notice of Court
Decision Not in Harmony with Final
Results of Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On June 15, 2009, and
November 23, 2009, the United States
Court of International Trade (CIT)
sustained the Department of
Commerce’s (the Department’s) results
of redetermination pursuant to the CIT’s
remand orders in Habas Sinai ve Tibbi
Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi A.S. v. United
States, Court No. 05–00613, Slip Op.
09–55 (June 15, 2009) and Habas Sinai
ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi A.S.
v. United States, Court No. 05–00613,
Slip Op. 09–133 (Nov. 23, 2009). See
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to
Remand, dated March 3, 2008, and
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to
Remand, dated September 8, 2009
(found at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/remands).
Consistent with the decision of the
United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Timken Co. v.
United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
E:\FR\FM\10DEN1.SGM
10DEN1
65516
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 236 / Thursday, December 10, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
1990) (Timken), the Department is
notifying the public that the final
judgment in this case is not in harmony
with the Department’s final results of
the administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain steel
concrete reinforcing bars (rebar) from
Turkey covering the period of review
(POR) of April 1, 2003, through March
31, 2004. See Certain Steel Concrete
Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final
Results, Rescission of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review in Part, and
Determination To Revoke in Part, 70 FR
67665 (Nov. 8, 2005) (Final Results).
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 10, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Elizabeth Eastwood, 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) 482–3874.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
quarterly or POR-average costs for Habas
in this case.
On September 8, 2009, the
Department issued its final results of
redetermination pursuant to the CIT’s
June 15, 2009, ruling. The remand
redetermination explained that, in
accordance with the CIT’s instructions,
the Department reconsidered its use of
POR cost data and as a result it
recalculated the margin for Habas using
quarterly costs. Further, the Department
adopted an alternative methodology for
the recovery-of-cost test and eliminated
the 90/60 day window period for priceto-price comparisons to prevent
distortions as a result of the use of
quarterly costs.
The Department’s redeterminations
resulted in changes to the Final Results
weighted-average margin for Habas from
26.07 percent to 5.58 percent.
Background
On November 8, 2005, the Department
published its final results in the
antidumping duty administrative review
of rebar from Turkey covering the POR
of April 1, 2003, through March 31,
2004. See Final Results. In the Final
Results, the Department followed its
normal practice of using POR weightedaverage costs in its margin calculations
for all companies, instead of quarterlyaverage costs as requested by one
respondent, Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar
Istihsal Endustrisi A.S. (Habas). In
addition, in the Final Results, the
Department based the U.S. date of sale
for each respondent on the earlier of
shipment date or invoice date, contrary
to Habas’ request to use contract date as
its U.S. date of sale.
On November 15, 2007, the CIT
remanded two issues to the Department
for reconsideration related to the Final
Results for Habas:1) using POR
weighted-average costs versus quarterlyaverage costs in its margin calculations;
and 2) basing the U.S. date of sale on
invoice date versus contract date. On
March 3, 2008, the Department issued
its final results of redetermination
pursuant to the CIT’s November 15,
2007, ruling.
On June 15, 2009, the CIT affirmed
the Department’s determination to use
contract date as the date of sale for
Habas’ U.S. sales. However, the CIT also
determined that the Department’s Final
Results were not supported by
substantial evidence on the record with
respect to the agency’s cost test. Thus,
it remanded to the Department once
again whether it is appropriate to use
In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at
341, the CAFC 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 CIT’s decision on November 23,
2009, constitutes a final decision of that
court that is not in harmony with the
Department’s 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 CIT’s ruling is not appealed or, if
appealed, upheld by the CAFC, the
Department will instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection to assess
antidumping duties on entries of the
subject merchandise during the POR
from Habas based on the revised
assessment rates calculated by the
Department.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with section 516A(c)(1) of
the Act.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Dec 09, 2009
Jkt 220001
Timken Notice
Dated: December 4, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–29468 Filed 12–9–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XR39
Endangered and Threatened Species;
Recovery Plans; Correction
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Extension of public comment
period; correction.
SUMMARY: On November 24, 2009, we,
NMFS, announced an extension of the
public comment period for the Draft
Central Valley Salmon and Steelhead
Recovery Plan (Draft Plan). The Draft
Plan addresses the Sacramento River
winter-run Chinook salmon
(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)
Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU),
the Central Valley spring-run Chinook
salmon (O. tshawytscha) ESU, and the
Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of
Central Valley Steelhead (Oncorhynchus
mykiss). In response to requests for an
extension of the public comment period,
we extended the comment period for the
proposed action an additional 60 days,
but the new comment due date and zip
code for written comments were
incorrect. The correct end date for
submission of comments is February 3,
2010, and correct zip code for written
comments is 95814.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Howard Brown, NMFS Sacramento
River Basin Branch Chief at (916) 930–
3608 or Brian Ellrott at (916) 930–3612.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On November 24, 2009, we, NMFS,
announced an extension of the public
comment period for the Draft Central
Valley Salmon and Steelhead Recovery
Plan (Draft Plan) (74 FR 61329). NMFS
inadvertently published February 3,
2009 for the comment period end date,
and the correct end date should read, in
all instances, February 3, 2010. NMFS
also inadvertently published an
incorrect mailing address zip code, and
the correct zip code is 95814. The Draft
Plan addresses the Sacramento River
winter-run Chinook salmon
(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)
Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU),
the Central Valley spring-run Chinook
salmon (O. tshawytscha) ESU, and the
Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of
Central Valley Steelhead (Oncorhynchus
mykiss). In response to requests for an
extension of the public comment period,
we extended the comment period for the
E:\FR\FM\10DEN1.SGM
10DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 236 (Thursday, December 10, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65515-65516]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-29468]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-489-807]
Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey: Notice of
Court Decision Not in Harmony with Final Results of Administrative
Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On June 15, 2009, and November 23, 2009, the United States
Court of International Trade (CIT) sustained the Department of
Commerce's (the Department's) results of redetermination pursuant to
the CIT's remand orders in Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal
Endustrisi A.S. v. United States, Court No. 05-00613, Slip Op. 09-55
(June 15, 2009) and Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi
A.S. v. United States, Court No. 05-00613, Slip Op. 09-133 (Nov. 23,
2009). See Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Remand, dated March
3, 2008, and Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Remand, dated
September 8, 2009 (found at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/remands). Consistent
with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit (CAFC) in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
[[Page 65516]]
1990) (Timken), the Department is notifying the public that the final
judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department's final
results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on
certain steel concrete reinforcing bars (rebar) from Turkey covering
the period of review (POR) of April 1, 2003, through March 31, 2004.
See Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final Results,
Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part, and
Determination To Revoke in Part, 70 FR 67665 (Nov. 8, 2005) (Final
Results).
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 10, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Eastwood, 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) 482-3874.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On November 8, 2005, the Department published its final results in
the antidumping duty administrative review of rebar from Turkey
covering the POR of April 1, 2003, through March 31, 2004. See Final
Results. In the Final Results, the Department followed its normal
practice of using POR weighted-average costs in its margin calculations
for all companies, instead of quarterly-average costs as requested by
one respondent, Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi A.S.
(Habas). In addition, in the Final Results, the Department based the
U.S. date of sale for each respondent on the earlier of shipment date
or invoice date, contrary to Habas' request to use contract date as its
U.S. date of sale.
On November 15, 2007, the CIT remanded two issues to the Department
for reconsideration related to the Final Results for Habas:1) using POR
weighted-average costs versus quarterly-average costs in its margin
calculations; and 2) basing the U.S. date of sale on invoice date
versus contract date. On March 3, 2008, the Department issued its final
results of redetermination pursuant to the CIT's November 15, 2007,
ruling.
On June 15, 2009, the CIT affirmed the Department's determination
to use contract date as the date of sale for Habas' U.S. sales.
However, the CIT also determined that the Department's Final Results
were not supported by substantial evidence on the record with respect
to the agency's cost test. Thus, it remanded to the Department once
again whether it is appropriate to use quarterly or POR-average costs
for Habas in this case.
On September 8, 2009, the Department issued its final results of
redetermination pursuant to the CIT's June 15, 2009, ruling. The remand
redetermination explained that, in accordance with the CIT's
instructions, the Department reconsidered its use of POR cost data and
as a result it recalculated the margin for Habas using quarterly costs.
Further, the Department adopted an alternative methodology for the
recovery-of-cost test and eliminated the 90/60 day window period for
price-to-price comparisons to prevent distortions as a result of the
use of quarterly costs.
The Department's redeterminations resulted in changes to the Final
Results weighted-average margin for Habas from 26.07 percent to 5.58
percent.
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, the CAFC 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
CIT's decision on November 23, 2009, constitutes a final decision of
that court that is not in harmony with the Department's 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 CIT's ruling is not appealed or, if
appealed, upheld by the CAFC, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection to assess antidumping duties on entries of the
subject merchandise during the POR from Habas based on the revised
assessment rates calculated by the Department.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with section
516A(c)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 4, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-29468 Filed 12-9-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S