Foreign-Trade Zone 82; Application for Subzone Authority; ThyssenKrupp Steel and Stainless USA, LLC; Invitation for Public Comment on Preliminary Recommendation, 17692-17693 [2010-7883]

Download as PDF 17692 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 7, 2010 / Notices ‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the Board’s website, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz. For further information, contact Maureen Hinman at maureen.hinman@trade.gov or (202) 482–0627. Dated: March 30, 2010. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2010–7885 Filed 4–6–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [Docket 24–2010] WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES Foreign–Trade Zone 75 -- Phoenix, Arizona, Application for Reorganization under Alternative Site Framework An application has been submitted to the Foreign–Trade Zones (FTZ) Board (the Board) by the City of the Phoenix, grantee of FTZ 75, requesting authority to reorganize the zone under the alternative site framework (ASF) adopted by the Board (74 FR 1170, 1/12/ 09; correction 74 FR 3987, 1/22/09). The ASF is an option for grantees for the establishment or reorganization of general–purpose zones and can permit significantly greater flexibility in the designation of new ‘‘usage–driven’’ FTZ sites for operators/users located within a grantee’s ‘‘service area’’ in the context of the Board’s standard 2,000–acre activation limit for a general–purpose zone project. The application was submitted pursuant to 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 March 31, 2010. FTZ 75 was approved by the Board on March 25, 1982 (Board Order 185, 47 FR 14931, 04/07/82), and was expanded on July 2, 1993 (Board Order 647, 58 FR 37907, 07/14/93), on February 27, 2008 (Board Order 1545, 73 FR 13531, 03/13/ 08), and on March 23, 2010 (Board Order 1672). The current zone project includes the following sites: Site 1 (338 acres) within the 550–acre Phoenix Sky Harbor Center and adjacent air cargo terminal at the Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, Phoenix; Site 2 (18 acres) CC&F South Valley Industrial Center, 7th Street and Victory Street, Phoenix; Site 3 (74 acres) - Riverside Industrial Center, 4747 West Buckeye Road, Phoenix; Site 4 (18 acres) - Santa Fe Business Park, 47th Avenue and Campbell Avenue, Phoenix; and, Site 5 (32.5 acres) - the jet fuel storage and VerDate Nov<24>2008 15:18 Apr 06, 2010 Jkt 220001 distribution system at and adjacent to the Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, Phoenix. The grantee’s proposed service area under the ASF would be Maricopa County and portions of Pinal and Yavapai Counties, Arizona, as described in the application. If approved, the grantee would be able to serve sites throughout the service area based on companies’ needs for FTZ designation. The proposed service area is within and adjacent to the Phoenix Customs and Border Protection port of entry. The applicant is requesting authority to reorganize its existing zone project to include all of the existing sites as ‘‘magnet’’ sites. The ASF allows for the possible exemption of one magnet site from the ‘‘sunset’’ time limits that generally apply to sites under the ASF, and the applicant proposes that Site 1 be so exempted. No usage–driven sites are being requested at this time. Because the ASF only pertains to establishing or reorganizing a general–purpose zone, the application would have no impact on FTZ 75’s authorized subzones. In accordance with the Board’s regulations, Christopher Kemp of the FTZ Staff is designated examiner to evaluate and analyze the facts and information presented in the application and case 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 June 7, 2010. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period to June 21, 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 website, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz. For further information, contact Christopher Kemp at Christopher.Kemp@trade.gov or (202) 482–0862. Dated: March 31, 2010. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2010–7884 Filed 4–6–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [Docket 51–2008] Foreign-Trade Zone 82; Application for Subzone Authority; ThyssenKrupp Steel and Stainless USA, LLC; Invitation for Public Comment on Preliminary Recommendation The FTZ Board is inviting public comment on its staff’s preliminary recommendation pertaining to the application by the City of Mobile, grantee of FTZ 82, to establish a subzone at the ThyssenKrupp Steel and Stainless USA, LLC (ThyssenKrupp) facility in Calvert, Alabama. The staff’s preliminary recommendation is for approval of the application with a restriction limiting the FTZ benefits to ThyssenKrupp’s production for export. The bases for this finding are as follows: Analysis of the application record indicates that full approval of the ThyssenKrupp application could have a negative impact on domestic raw material suppliers as well as other domestic steel producers. Regarding raw material suppliers, while there may not be sufficient quantities available from domestic sources for all raw materials proposed in the application, significant U.S. production remains of several key materials. Unrestricted use of FTZ procedures in the steel industry could harm certain domestic raw material producers if cost savings are provided for imported materials used in ThyssenKrupp’s production for the U.S. market. As to impact on other domestic steel producers, while ordinarily all companies in an industry would have an equal opportunity to use FTZ procedures for their operations, the structure of many existing U.S. steel plants could make those companies’ use of FTZ procedures overly complicated and costly. Unlike the ThyssenKrupp plant, many existing facilities are ‘‘minimills’’ and have less integration at a single site. Product may move between several facilities during the manufacturing process. This structure would require FTZ applications, CBP activations, and bonds to be done separately for each facility, whereas ThyssenKrupp will only face those burdens (and costs) once due to the nature of its Alabama facility. In addition, ThyssenKrupp will be sourcing the ‘‘slab’’ for its carbon steel operations from Brazil, and will be shipping some stainless steel production to Mexico for certain coldrolling operations. Other domestic producers conduct such operations in E:\FR\FM\07APN1.SGM 07APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 7, 2010 / Notices the United States, creating higher levels of U.S. activity and employment. As a result, in combination with the other factors cited above, unrestricted FTZ authority for ThyssenKrupp could provide cost savings that would not be equally available to other domestic producers that have higher overall U.S. value added. At the same time, the ThyssenKrupp facility in Alabama will be competing with other ThyssenKrupp plants abroad for production destined for markets elsewhere in North and South America and beyond. FTZ savings for the Alabama facility’s export production could enhance its competitiveness in the world market. Public comment on the preliminary recommendation and the bases for the finding is invited through May 14, 2010. Rebuttal comments may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period, until June 1, 2010. Submissions (original and one electronic copy) shall be addressed to the Board’s Executive Secretary at: Foreign-Trade Zones Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 2111, 1401 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230. For further information, contact Elizabeth Whiteman at Elizabeth.Whiteman@trade.gov or (202) 482–0473. Dated: March 30, 2010. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2010–7883 Filed 4–6–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–351–838, A–533–840, A–549–822] Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Brazil, India, and Thailand: Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Department) received timely requests to conduct administrative reviews of the antidumping duty orders on certain frozen warmwater shrimp (shrimp) from Brazil, India and Thailand. The anniversary month of these orders is February. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221, we are initiating these administrative reviews. DATES: Effective Date: April 7, 2010. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Trainor at (202) 482–4007 (Brazil), Elizabeth Eastwood at (202) 482–3874 (India), and Kate Johnson at (202) 482–4929 (Thailand), AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. Background The Department received timely requests from the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee (hereinafter, Domestic Producers), the American Shrimp Processors Association (ASPA), and the Louisiana Shrimp Association (LSA), and certain individual companies, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), during the anniversary month of February 2010, for administrative reviews of the antidumping duty orders on shrimp from Brazil, India, and Thailand. The Department is now initiating administrative reviews of these orders covering multiple companies for Brazil, India, and Thailand, as noted in the ‘‘Initiation of Reviews’’ section of this notice. In accordance with the Department’s statement in its notice of opportunity to request administrative reviews, we have not initiated administrative reviews with respect to those companies which the Department was unable to locate in prior segments and for which no new information as to the party’s location was provided by the requestor (see Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 75 FR 5037 (February 1, 2010)). We have also not initiated administrative reviews with respect to those companies we previously determined to be duplicates or no longer exist. Finally, we have not initiated an administrative review with respect to the following companies requested by the Domestic Producers, the ASPA, and the LSA, because these companies were revoked from the antidumping duty order on certain frozen warmwater shrimp from Thailand as a result of the partial revocation of the order, effective January 16, 2009: Andaman Seafood Co., Ltd., Wales & Co. Universe Limited, Chanthaburi Frozen Food Co., Ltd., Chanthaburi Seafoods Co., Ltd., Intersia Foods Co., Ltd. (formerly Y2K Frozen Foods Co., Ltd.), Phatthana Seafood Co., Ltd., Phatthana Frozen Food Co., Ltd., Thailand Fishery Cold Storage Public Co., Ltd., Thai International Seafood Co., Ltd., S.C.C. Frozen Seafood Co., Ltd., and Sea Wealth Frozen Food Co., Ltd. (collectively, the Rubicon Group); and, Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. See Implementation of the Findings of the WTO Panel in United States— Antidumping Measure on Shrimp from Thailand: Notice of Determination Under Section 129 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act and Partial Revocation of the Antidumping Duty Order on Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand, 74 FR 5638, 5639 (January 30, 2009); and, Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review and Notice of Revocation in Part, 74 FR 52452 (October 13, 2009). Initiation of Reviews In accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), we are initiating administrative reviews of the antidumping duty orders on shrimp from Brazil, India and Thailand. We intend to issue the final results of these reviews by February 28, 2011. Period to be reviewed WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES Antidumping duty proceeding BRAZIL Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp, A–351–838 ............................................................................................................ Amazonas Industria Alimenticias SA. Natal Pesca Ltda.. Railson Pesca e Exportacao Ltd.. Tenda Atacada Ltda.. INDIA Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp, A–533–840 ............................................................................................................... Abad Fisheries. Accelerated Freeze-Drying Co.. Adani Exports Ltd. Adilakshmi Enterprises. Allana Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd.. Allansons Ltd.. VerDate Nov<24>2008 15:18 Apr 06, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 17693 E:\FR\FM\07APN1.SGM 07APN1 2/1/09–1/31/10 2/1/09–1/31/10

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 66 (Wednesday, April 7, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17692-17693]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-7883]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Docket 51-2008]


Foreign-Trade Zone 82; Application for Subzone Authority; 
ThyssenKrupp Steel and Stainless USA, LLC; Invitation for Public 
Comment on Preliminary Recommendation

    The FTZ Board is inviting public comment on its staff's preliminary 
recommendation pertaining to the application by the City of Mobile, 
grantee of FTZ 82, to establish a subzone at the ThyssenKrupp Steel and 
Stainless USA, LLC (ThyssenKrupp) facility in Calvert, Alabama. The 
staff's preliminary recommendation is for approval of the application 
with a restriction limiting the FTZ benefits to ThyssenKrupp's 
production for export. The bases for this finding are as follows:
    Analysis of the application record indicates that full approval of 
the ThyssenKrupp application could have a negative impact on domestic 
raw material suppliers as well as other domestic steel producers. 
Regarding raw material suppliers, while there may not be sufficient 
quantities available from domestic sources for all raw materials 
proposed in the application, significant U.S. production remains of 
several key materials. Unrestricted use of FTZ procedures in the steel 
industry could harm certain domestic raw material producers if cost 
savings are provided for imported materials used in ThyssenKrupp's 
production for the U.S. market.
    As to impact on other domestic steel producers, while ordinarily 
all companies in an industry would have an equal opportunity to use FTZ 
procedures for their operations, the structure of many existing U.S. 
steel plants could make those companies' use of FTZ procedures overly 
complicated and costly. Unlike the ThyssenKrupp plant, many existing 
facilities are ``mini-mills'' and have less integration at a single 
site. Product may move between several facilities during the 
manufacturing process. This structure would require FTZ applications, 
CBP activations, and bonds to be done separately for each facility, 
whereas ThyssenKrupp will only face those burdens (and costs) once due 
to the nature of its Alabama facility.
    In addition, ThyssenKrupp will be sourcing the ``slab'' for its 
carbon steel operations from Brazil, and will be shipping some 
stainless steel production to Mexico for certain cold-rolling 
operations. Other domestic producers conduct such operations in

[[Page 17693]]

the United States, creating higher levels of U.S. activity and 
employment. As a result, in combination with the other factors cited 
above, unrestricted FTZ authority for ThyssenKrupp could provide cost 
savings that would not be equally available to other domestic producers 
that have higher overall U.S. value added.
    At the same time, the ThyssenKrupp facility in Alabama will be 
competing with other ThyssenKrupp plants abroad for production destined 
for markets elsewhere in North and South America and beyond. FTZ 
savings for the Alabama facility's export production could enhance its 
competitiveness in the world market.
    Public comment on the preliminary recommendation and the bases for 
the finding is invited through May 14, 2010. Rebuttal comments may be 
submitted during the subsequent 15-day period, until June 1, 2010. 
Submissions (original and one electronic copy) shall be addressed to 
the Board's Executive Secretary at: Foreign-Trade Zones Board, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, Room 2111, 1401 Constitution Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC 20230.
    For further information, contact Elizabeth Whiteman at 
Elizabeth.Whiteman@trade.gov or (202) 482-0473.

    Dated: March 30, 2010.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-7883 Filed 4-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P