Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Amended Antidumping Duty Order in Accordance With Final Court Decision, 49459-49460 [2010-20078]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 156 / Friday, August 13, 2010 / Notices
telephone (202) 482–6412 or (202) 482–
0650, respectively.
International Trade Administration
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In July
2008, the Department published in the
A–570–912
Federal Register the Final
Determination in the antidumping duty
Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road
investigation on OTR tires from the PRC
Tires from the People’s Republic of
in which it calculated a zero dumping
China: Notice of Amended Final
rate for respondent Xugong Tyres Co.,
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Ltd. (‘‘Xugong’’). See Final
Fair Value and Amended Antidumping
Determination, 73 FR at 40489; OTR
Duty Order in Accordance With Final
Tires Order, 73 FR at 51625–26.
Court Decision
In August 2008, Bridgestone
AGENCY: Import Administration,
Americas, Inc. and Bridgestone
International Trade Administration,
Americas Tire Operations, LLC
Department of Commerce.
(collectively, ‘‘Bridgestone’’) and Titan
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 13, 2010.
Tire Corporation (‘‘Titan’’), respectively,
SUMMARY: On May 14, 2010, the United
domestic producers of the like product,
States Court of International Trade
initiated actions at the CIT challenging
(‘‘CIT’’) sustained the final remand
the final determination with respect to
redetermination made by the
Xugong’s zero dumping margin. Among
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
their claims, Bridgestone and Titan
Department’’) pursuant to the CIT’s
alleged that the Department erred in its
remand of the final determination in the final determination by treating as
antidumping investigation on certain
indirect materials certain inputs used by
new pneumatic off–the-road tires (‘‘OTR Xugong in the production of subject
tires’’) from the People’s Republic of
merchandise.
China (‘‘PRC’’). See Bridgestone
In April 2009, the Department
Americas Inc. v. United States, Consol.
requested a voluntary remand to further
Ct. No. 08–00256, Slip Op. 10–55 (Ct.
explain its determination regarding the
Int’l Trade May 14, 2010)
classification of the fifteen raw materials
(‘‘Bridgestone’’). This case arose out of
reported by Xugong as indirect
the Department’s final determination in materials. On August 4, 2009, the CIT
the antidumping duty investigation on
remanded this matter to the Department
OTR tires from the PRC. See Certain
to reconsider whether each of the fifteen
New Pneumatic Off–The-Road–Tires
inputs was a direct or indirect material,
from the People’s Republic of China:
to reopen the record as appropriate, and
Final Affirmative Determination of Sales to recalculate the margin accordingly.
at Less Than Fair Value and Partial
See Bridgestone Americas Inc. v. United
Affirmative Determination of Critical
States, Consol. Ct. No. 08–00256, Slip
Circumstances, 73 FR 40485 (July 15,
Op. 09–79 (Ct. Int’l Trade Aug. 4, 2009).
2008) (‘‘Final Determination’’); Certain
After receiving comments on the draft
New Pneumatic Off–the-Road Tires from remand results, the Department on
the People’s Republic of China: Notice
January 7, 2010, issued its final remand
of Amended Final Affirmative
redetermination in which it treated
Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Xugong’s fifteen raw material inputs as
Value and Antidumping Duty Order, 73 direct materials and, thus, recalculated
FR 51624 (September 4, 2008) (‘‘OTR
Xugong’s margin by adding Xugong’s
Tires Order’’). As there is now a final
fifteen raw materials as direct material
and conclusive court decision in this
inputs in the calculation of the normal
action, we are amending our final
value. As a result of this recalculation,
determination and our antidumping
Xugong’s dumping rate changed from
duty order.
0.00 percent to 10.01 percent. See Final
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lilit Determination Pursuant to Court
Astvatsatrian or Charles Riggle, AD/CVD Remand, Bridgestone Americas Inc. v.
Operations, Office 8, Import
United States, Consol. Ct. No. 08–00256,
Administration, International Trade
dated January 8, 2010.
On May 14, 2010, the CIT sustained
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution the final redetermination made by the
Department pursuant to the CIT’s
Avenue, NW, Washington DC 20230;
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
49459
remand of the final determination in the
antidumping investigation of the OTR
tires from the PRC. See Bridgestone, Slip
Op. 10–55 at 14. Consistent with the
decision of U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit in Timken Co. v. United
States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990), the
Department published in the Federal
Register a notice of a court decision that
is not ‘‘in harmony’’ with the
Department’s final determination. See
Certain New Pneumatic Off–the-Road
Tires from the People’s Republic of
China: Notice of Decision of the Court
of International Trade Not in Harmony,
75 FR 31422 (June 3, 2010) (‘‘Timken
Notice ’’). Pursuant to section 516A(e) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), and consistent with the Timken
Notice, the Department instructed U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’)
to begin suspension of liquidation,
effective May 24, 2010, with respect to
subject merchandise produced and
exported by Xugong, pending a final
and conclusive court decision in this
action. While merchandise produced
and exported by Xugong was originally
excluded from the antidumping order,
the Department’s remand determination
found that merchandise exported and
produced by Xugong was, in fact, sold
at less than fair value. As the period to
appeal the CIT decision in Bridgestone
has expired, and a final and conclusive
court decision with respect to this
proceeding is in place, we are amending
our amended final determination and
antidumping duty order, accordingly.
Inclusion in the Application of the
Antidumping Duty Order
As discussed above and pursuant to
the affirmed remand determination,
Xugong is no longer excluded from the
antidumping duty order issued in this
case. Therefore, as noted above, subject
merchandise exported and produced by
Xugong is subject to the antidumping
duty order on OTR tires from the PRC.
Amendment to Final Determination and
Antidumping Order
Because there is now a final and
conclusive court decision with respect
to this proceeding, the revised dumping
margin in the amended final
determination is as follows:
OTR TIRES FROM THE PRC
Original Final Margin
(Percent)
Exporter
Producer
Xuzhou Xugong Tyres Co., Ltd. ...................
Xuzhou Xugong Tyres Co., Ltd. ...................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:55 Aug 12, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\13AUN1.SGM
0.00
13AUN1
Amended Final Margin
(Percent)
10.01
49460
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 156 / Friday, August 13, 2010 / Notices
Also, as noted above, Xugong is no
longer excluded from the antidumping
duty order issued in this case.
Therefore, the Department will instruct
the CBP to collect a cash deposit of
10.01 percent for entries of subject
merchandise produced and exported by
Xugong, effective May 24, 2010, in
accordance with the Timken Notice.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 735(d), 736(a),
and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: August 6, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010–20078 Filed 8–12–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–893]
Administrative Review of Certain
Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the
People’s Republic of China: Final
Results and Partial Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On March 12, 2010, the
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) published in the Federal
Register the Preliminary Results of the
fourth administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain
frozen warmwater shrimp from the
People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’).1 We
gave interested parties an opportunity to
comment on the Preliminary Results.
Based upon our analysis of the
comments and information received, we
made changes to the margin calculations
for the final results. We find that certain
exporters have not sold subject
merchandise at less than normal value
(‘‘NV’’) during the period of review
(‘‘POR’’), February 1, 2008, through
January 31, 2009.
DATES: Effective Date: August 13, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob
Palmer and Irene Gorelik, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 9, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
1 See Fourth Administrative Review of Certain
Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People’s
Republic of China: Preliminary Results, Preliminary
Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Intent Not to Revoke, In
Part, 75 FR 11855 (March 12, 2010) (‘‘Preliminary
Results’’).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:35 Aug 12, 2010
Jkt 220001
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–9068 and (202)
482–6905, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 26, 2009, the Department
initiated an administrative review of
477 producers/exporters of subject
merchandise from the PRC.2 In the
Preliminary Results, the Department
preliminarily rescinded the review with
respect to several companies which
submitted no shipment certifications
and for which we have not found any
information to contradict these claims.
These companies are Yangjiang City
Yelin Hoitat Quick Frozen Seafood Co.,
Ltd., Fuqing Yihua Aquatic Food Co.,
Ltd., Fuqing Minhua Trade Co., Ltd., the
Allied Pacific Group (comprised of
Allied Pacific Food (Dalian) Co., Ltd.;
Allied Pacific Aquatic Products
(Zhanjiang) Co., Ltd.; Zhanjiang Allied
Pacific Aquaculture Co., Ltd.; Allied
Pacific (H.K.) Co., Ltd.; and King Royal
Investments Ltd.); Gallant Ocean
(Lianjiang), Ltd.; Gallant Ocean
(Nanhai), Ltd.; Shantou Yelin Frozen
Seafood Co., Ltd. (doing business as
Shantou Yelin Quick-Freeze Marine
Products Co., Ltd.).
As noted above, on March 12, 2010,
the Department published the
Preliminary Results of this
administrative review.3 On April 1,
2010, the Petitioner,4 Domestic
Processors,5 Zhanjiang Regal Integrated
Marine Resources Co., Ltd. (‘‘Regal’’),
and Hilltop International (‘‘Hilltop’’)
submitted additional surrogate value
information. On April 6, 2010,
Petitioner, Domestic Processors, and
Hilltop submitted rebuttal surrogate
value information.
On March 30, 2010, we extended the
deadline for parties to submit the case
briefs and rebuttal briefs to April 12,
2010 and April 17, 2010, respectively.6
On April 12, 2010, the Petitioner,
Domestic Processors, Hilltop, and Regal
filed case briefs. On April 19, 2010, the
Petitioner, Domestic Processors, and
Hilltop filed rebuttal briefs. On May 20,
2010, the Department extended the
2 See Notice of Initiation of Administrative
Reviews and Requests for Revocation in Part of the
Antidumping Duty Orders on Frozen Warmwater
Shrimp from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam and
the People’s Republic of China, 74 FR 13178 (March
26, 2009) for a listing of these companies.
3 See Preliminary Results.
4 Petitioner is the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action
Committee (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘Petitioner’’).
5 These domestic parties are the American
Shrimp Processors Association and Louisiana
Shrimp Association (hereinafter referred to as
‘‘Domestic Processors’’).
6 See Letter from the Department to Interested
Parties, dated March 30, 2010.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
deadline for the completion of the final
results of this review until August 9,
2010.7 On June 15, June 23, and July 14,
2010, the Department placed wage rate
data on the record for comment
following the recent decision in Dorbest
Limited et. al. v. United States, 2009–
1257, –1266, issued by the United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
(‘‘CAFC’’) on May 14, 2010, regarding
the Department’s wage rate
methodology.8 Interested parties
submitted comments regarding the new
wage rate data on June 22, and July 21,
2010. See ‘‘Wage Rate Methodology’’
section below for a detailed explanation
of the Department’s revised wage rate
for these final results.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties to this review
are addressed in the ‘‘Fourth
Administrative Review of Frozen
Warmwater Shrimp from the People’s
Republic of China: Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final Results,’’
which is dated concurrently with this
notice (‘‘I&D Memo’’). A list of the issues
which parties raised and to which we
respond in the I&D Memo is attached to
this notice as an Appendix. The I&D
Memo is a public document and is on
file in the Central Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’),
Main Commerce Building, Room 1117,
and is accessible on the Department’s
Web site at https://www.trade.gov/ia. The
paper copy and electronic version of the
memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on a review of the record as
well as comments received from parties
regarding our Preliminary Results, we
have made revisions to Hilltop and
Regal’s margin calculations for the final
results. First, we have revised
classifications for certain expenses in
the surrogate financial ratios used in the
Preliminary Results. The Department’s
practice is to exclude certain expenses
in the surrogate financial ratio
calculations for constructed export price
(‘‘CEP’’) sales where those expenses have
been accounted for elsewhere in the
margin program.9 Hilltop reported only
CEP sales, so the Department will
7 See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the
People’s Republic of China: Extension of Final
Results of Antidumping Administrative Review, 75
FR 28235 (May 20, 2010).
8 See Memoranda to the File re; Wage Rate Data,
dated June 15, June 23, and July 14, 2010.
9 See Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires
from the People’s Republic of China: Final
Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of
Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 40485 (July 15, 2008)
and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 18C.
E:\FR\FM\13AUN1.SGM
13AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 156 (Friday, August 13, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49459-49460]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-20078]
[[Page 49459]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A-570-912
Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires from the People's
Republic of China: Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value and Amended Antidumping Duty Order in Accordance
With Final Court Decision
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 13, 2010.
SUMMARY: On May 14, 2010, the United States Court of International
Trade (``CIT'') sustained the final remand redetermination made by the
Department of Commerce (``the Department'') pursuant to the CIT's
remand of the final determination in the antidumping investigation on
certain new pneumatic off-the-road tires (``OTR tires'') from the
People's Republic of China (``PRC''). See Bridgestone Americas Inc. v.
United States, Consol. Ct. No. 08-00256, Slip Op. 10-55 (Ct. Int'l
Trade May 14, 2010) (``Bridgestone''). This case arose out of the
Department's final determination in the antidumping duty investigation
on OTR tires from the PRC. See Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road-Tires
from the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of
Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 40485 (July 15, 2008) (``Final
Determination''); Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the
People's Republic of China: Notice of Amended Final Affirmative
Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty
Order, 73 FR 51624 (September 4, 2008) (``OTR Tires Order''). As there
is now a final and conclusive court decision in this action, we are
amending our final determination and our antidumping duty order.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lilit Astvatsatrian or Charles Riggle,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-6412
or (202) 482-0650, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In July 2008, the Department published in
the Federal Register the Final Determination in the antidumping duty
investigation on OTR tires from the PRC in which it calculated a zero
dumping rate for respondent Xugong Tyres Co., Ltd. (``Xugong''). See
Final Determination, 73 FR at 40489; OTR Tires Order, 73 FR at 51625-
26.
In August 2008, Bridgestone Americas, Inc. and Bridgestone Americas
Tire Operations, LLC (collectively, ``Bridgestone'') and Titan Tire
Corporation (``Titan''), respectively, domestic producers of the like
product, initiated actions at the CIT challenging the final
determination with respect to Xugong's zero dumping margin. Among their
claims, Bridgestone and Titan alleged that the Department erred in its
final determination by treating as indirect materials certain inputs
used by Xugong in the production of subject merchandise.
In April 2009, the Department requested a voluntary remand to
further explain its determination regarding the classification of the
fifteen raw materials reported by Xugong as indirect materials. On
August 4, 2009, the CIT remanded this matter to the Department to
reconsider whether each of the fifteen inputs was a direct or indirect
material, to reopen the record as appropriate, and to recalculate the
margin accordingly. See Bridgestone Americas Inc. v. United States,
Consol. Ct. No. 08-00256, Slip Op. 09-79 (Ct. Int'l Trade Aug. 4,
2009).
After receiving comments on the draft remand results, the
Department on January 7, 2010, issued its final remand redetermination
in which it treated Xugong's fifteen raw material inputs as direct
materials and, thus, recalculated Xugong's margin by adding Xugong's
fifteen raw materials as direct material inputs in the calculation of
the normal value. As a result of this recalculation, Xugong's dumping
rate changed from 0.00 percent to 10.01 percent. See Final
Determination Pursuant to Court Remand, Bridgestone Americas Inc. v.
United States, Consol. Ct. No. 08-00256, dated January 8, 2010.
On May 14, 2010, the CIT sustained the final redetermination made
by the Department pursuant to the CIT's remand of the final
determination in the antidumping investigation of the OTR tires from
the PRC. See Bridgestone, Slip Op. 10-55 at 14. Consistent with the
decision of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Timken Co.
v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990), the Department
published in the Federal Register a notice of a court decision that is
not ``in harmony'' with the Department's final determination. See
Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the People's Republic of
China: Notice of Decision of the Court of International Trade Not in
Harmony, 75 FR 31422 (June 3, 2010) (``Timken Notice ''). Pursuant to
section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''),
and consistent with the Timken Notice, the Department instructed U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to begin suspension of
liquidation, effective May 24, 2010, with respect to subject
merchandise produced and exported by Xugong, pending a final and
conclusive court decision in this action. While merchandise produced
and exported by Xugong was originally excluded from the antidumping
order, the Department's remand determination found that merchandise
exported and produced by Xugong was, in fact, sold at less than fair
value. As the period to appeal the CIT decision in Bridgestone has
expired, and a final and conclusive court decision with respect to this
proceeding is in place, we are amending our amended final determination
and antidumping duty order, accordingly.
Inclusion in the Application of the Antidumping Duty Order
As discussed above and pursuant to the affirmed remand
determination, Xugong is no longer excluded from the antidumping duty
order issued in this case. Therefore, as noted above, subject
merchandise exported and produced by Xugong is subject to the
antidumping duty order on OTR tires from the PRC.
Amendment to Final Determination and Antidumping Order
Because there is now a final and conclusive court decision with
respect to this proceeding, the revised dumping margin in the amended
final determination is as follows:
OTR Tires from the PRC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Final Margin Amended Final Margin
Exporter Producer (Percent) (Percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xuzhou Xugong Tyres Co., Ltd......... Xuzhou Xugong Tyres 0.00 10.01
Co., Ltd..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 49460]]
Also, as noted above, Xugong is no longer excluded from the
antidumping duty order issued in this case. Therefore, the Department
will instruct the CBP to collect a cash deposit of 10.01 percent for
entries of subject merchandise produced and exported by Xugong,
effective May 24, 2010, in accordance with the Timken Notice.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
735(d), 736(a), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: August 6, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010-20078 Filed 8-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S