Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India: Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 2344-2346 [2011-619]

Download as PDF 2344 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Notices occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. We are issuing and publishing the preliminary results determination in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: January 7, 2011. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. 2011–627 Filed 1–12–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–533–820] Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India: Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: In response to requests from petitioners,1 the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India (‘‘Indian Hot-Rolled’’) manufactured by Essar Steel Limited (‘‘Essar’’), Ispat Industries Limited (‘‘Ispat’’), JSW Steel Limited (‘‘JSW’’), and Tata Steel Limited (‘‘Tata’’). The period of review (‘‘POR’’) covers December 1, 2008, through November 30, 2009. We preliminarily determine that Essar, Ispat, JSW, and Tata had no reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results. We intend to issue the final results no later than 120 days from the date of publication of this notice, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). DATES: Effective Date: January 13, 2011. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Hargett or James Terpstra, AD/CVD Operations Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4161 and (202) 482–3965, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: 1 The petitioners are the United States Steel Corporation, Nucor Corporation, and ArcelorMittal USA Inc. (collectively ‘‘petitioners’’). VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:15 Jan 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 Background On December 3, 2001, the Department published in the Federal Register the antidumping duty order on Indian HotRolled. See Notice of Amended Final Antidumping Duty Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain HotRolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India, 66 FR 60194 (December 3, 2001) (‘‘Amended Final Determination’’). On December 1, 2009, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice titled ‘‘Opportunity to Request Administrative Review’’ of the antidumping duty order on Indian HotRolled. See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 74 FR 62743 (December 1, 2009). On December 31, 2009, petitioners requested an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on Indian Hot-Rolled, for subject merchandise produced or exported by Ispat, JSW, Tata, and Essar. On January 29, 2010, the Department published a notice of initiation of antidumping duty administrative review of Indian HotRolled for the period December 1, 2008, through November 30, 2009. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, Request for Revocation in Part, and Deferral of Initiation of Administrative Review, 75 FR 4770 (January 29, 2010) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’). On February 2, 2010, Ispat and Essar, and on February 17, 2010, JSW, each informed the Department that they did not have shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. In February 2010, the Department exercised its discretion to toll deadlines for the duration of the closure of the Federal Government from February 5, through February 12, 2010. Thus all deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended for seven days. See Memorandum to the Record from Ronald Lorentzen, DAS for Import Administration, regarding ‘‘Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the Government Closure During the Recent Snowstorm,’’ dated February 12, 2010. On February 16, 2010, the Department issued its antidumping questionnaire to Tata. On February 18, 2010, Tata informed the Department that it had one shipment of subject merchandise that was entered into the United States during the POR, but that shipment was not of normal commercial quantities and was a one-off transaction for testing purposes only. Tata informed the PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Department that it would, therefore, not respond to the antidumping questionnaire. On August 23, 2010, the Department placed on the record and invited interested parties to comment on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) data obtained to corroborate the claims of the respondents. See Memorandum to the File from Christopher Hargett, International Trade Compliance Analyst, through James Terpstra, Program Manager, and Melissa Skinner, Office Director, concerning ‘‘Customs and Border Protection (‘CBP’) Data for Corroboration of Claims of No Shipments,’’ dated August 23, 2010 (‘‘August 23 Comment Memorandum’’); clarified by Memorandum to the File from Christopher Hargett, International Trade Compliance Analyst, through James Terpstra, Program Manager, and Melissa Skinner, Office Director, concerning ‘‘Clarification of Customs and Border Protection (‘CBP’) Data for Corroboration of Claims of No Shipments,’’ dated August 25, 2010 (‘‘August 25 Clarification Memorandum’’). On August 31, 2010, we received timely comments from Nucor Corporation. On September 14, 2010, the Department extended the deadline for the preliminary results to January 7, 2011. See Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from India: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 55742 (September 14, 2010). On November 23, 2010, we requested CBP to provide documents associated with certain entries. See Memorandum to Michael Walsh, Director, AD/CVD/ Revenue Policy and Programs, Office of International Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, from Melissa Skinner, Office Director, entitled ‘‘Request for U.S. Entry Documents— Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from India (A–533–820),’’ dated November 23, 2010 (‘‘November 23 CBP Request Memorandum’’). We received such documents on December 23, 2010. See Memorandum from Christopher Hargett, International Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 3, through Melissa Skinner, Office Director, Office 3, AD/ CVD Operations, to the File, entitled ‘‘Entry Documentation for Corroboration of Claims of No Shipments,’’ dated January 7, 2011 (‘‘January 7 Entry Documentation Memorandum’’). Period of Review The POR covered by this review is December 1, 2008, through November 30, 2009. E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM 13JAN1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Notices srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES Scope of the Order The merchandise subject to this order is certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products of a rectangular shape, of a width of 0.5 inch or greater, neither clad, plated, nor coated with metal and whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other nonmetallic substances, in coils (whether or not in successively superimposed layers), regardless of thickness, and in straight lengths, of a thickness of less than 4.75 mm and of a width measuring at least 10 times the thickness. Universal mill plate (i.e., flat-rolled products rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 mm, but not exceeding 1250 mm, and of a thickness of not less than 4 mm, not in coils and without patterns in relief) of a thickness not less than 4.0 mm is not included within the scope of this order. Specifically included in the scope of this order are vacuum-degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to as interstitial-free (‘‘IF’’)) steels, highstrength low-alloy (‘‘HSLA’’) steels, and the substrate for motor lamination steels. IF steels are recognized as lowcarbon steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as titanium or niobium (also commonly referred to as columbium), or both, added to stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper, niobium, vanadium, and molybdenum. The substrate for motor lamination steels contains micro-alloying levels of elements such as silicon and aluminum. Steel products included in the scope of this order, regardless of definitions in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’), are products in which: (i) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; (ii) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by weight; and (iii) none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated: 1.80 percent of manganese, or 2.25 percent of silicon, or 1.00 percent of copper, or 0.50 percent of aluminum, or 1.25 percent of chromium, or 0.30 percent of cobalt, or 0.40 percent of lead, or 1.25 percent of nickel, or 0.30 percent of tungsten, or 0.10 percent of molybdenum, or 0.10 percent of niobium, or 0.15 percent of vanadium, or 0.15 percent of zirconium. All products that meet the physical and chemical description provided VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:15 Jan 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 above are within the scope of this order unless otherwise excluded. The following products, by way of example, are outside or specifically excluded from the scope of this order: • Alloy hot-rolled carbon steel products in which at least one of the chemical elements exceeds those listed above (including, e.g., American Society for Testing and Materials (‘‘ASTM’’) specifications A543, A387, A514, A517, A506). • Society of Automotive Engineers (‘‘SAE’’)/American Iron & Steel Institute (‘‘AISI’’) grades of series 2300 and higher. • Ball bearings steels, as defined in the HTSUS. • Tool steels, as defined in the HTSUS. • Silico-manganese (as defined in the HTSUS) or silicon electrical steel with a silicon level exceeding 2.25 percent. • ASTM specifications A710 and A736. • United States Steel (‘‘USS’’) Abrasion-resistant steels (USS AR 400, USS AR 500). • All products (proprietary or otherwise) based on an alloy ASTM specification (sample specifications: ASTM A506, A507). • Non-rectangular shapes, not in coils, which are the result of having been processed by cutting or stamping and which have assumed the character of articles or products classified outside chapter 72 of the HTSUS. The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable in the HTSUS at subheadings: 7208.10.15.00, 7208.10.30.00, 7208.10.60.00, 7208.25.30.00, 7208.25.60.00, 7208.26.00.30, 7208.26.00.60, 7208.27.00.30, 7208.27.00.60, 7208.36.00.30, 7208.36.00.60, 7208.37.00.30, 7208.37.00.60, 7208.38.00.15, 7208.38.00.30, 7208.38.00.90, 7208.39.00.15, 7208.39.00.30, 7208.39.00.90, 7208.40.60.30, 7208.40.60.60, 7208.53.00.00, 7208.54.00.00, 7208.90.00.00, 7211.14.00.90, 7211.19.15.00, 7211.19.20.00, 7211.19.30.00, 7211.19.45.00, 7211.19.60.00, 7211.19.75.30, 7211.19.75.60, and 7211.19.75.90. Certain hot-rolled carbon steel covered by this order, including: vacuumdegassed fully stabilized; high-strength low-alloy; and the substrate for motor lamination steel may also enter under the following tariff numbers: 7225.11.00.00, 7225.19.00.00, 7225.30.30.50, 7225.30.70.00, 7225.40.70.00, 7225.99.00.90, 7226.11.10.00, 7226.11.90.30, 7226.11.90.60, 7226.19.10.00, 7226.19.90.00, 7226.91.50.00, PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 2345 7226.91.70.00, 7226.91.80.00, and 7226.99.00.00. Subject merchandise may also enter under 7210.70.30.00, 7210.90.90.00, 7211.14.00.30, 7212.40.10.00, 7212.40.50.00, and 7212.50.00.00. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the Department’s written description of the merchandise subject to this order is dispositive. Preliminary Results of Review As noted in the ‘‘Background’’ section above, Essar, Ispat and JSW have each submitted timely-filed certifications indicating that they had no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. In addition, Tata informed the Department that it had made one small shipment of subject merchandise that entered the United States during the POR. However, Tata claimed that the shipment was not of normal commercial quantities in the ordinary course of trade. Further, Tata claimed that the shipment to the United States was a one-off transaction for testing purposes only. In August, 2010, the Department released to interested parties under Administrative Protective Order (‘‘APO’’) information it intended to use for corroboration of the respondents’ claims. See August 23 Comment Memorandum; clarified by August 25 Clarification Memorandum. In comments submitted on August 31, 2010, Nucor asserted that the data presented failed to confirm the absence of sales, entries, or shipments; alleging instead that the data raise additional questions that the Department should address. On November 23, 2010, the Department requested from CBP the entry documents associated with certain entries which Nucor alleged raised questions with respect to the assertions of respondent(s). See November 23 CBP Request Memorandum. On December 23, 2010, the Department received the entry documents from CBP. These documents and our analysis are proprietary. See January 7 Entry Document Memorandum. Based on the claims of the parties and our analysis of CBP data, we preliminarily determine that the evidence on the record indicates that Essar, Ispat, and JSW did not export subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. Further, the Department preliminary determines that record evidence indicates that Tata had no reviewable transactions of subject merchandise during the POR. However, based on our review of the recently obtained entry documentation, we E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM 13JAN1 2346 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Notices intend to seek clarifying information from Tata after our preliminary results with respect to its exports. Disclosure The Department will disclose these preliminary results to the parties within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES Comments Interested parties are invited to comment on the preliminary results and may submit case briefs and/or written comments within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii). Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, will be due five days later, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(d). Parties who submit case or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are requested to submit with each argument (1) a statement of the issue, and (2) a brief summary of the argument. Parties are requested to provide a summary of the arguments not to exceed five pages and a table of statutes, regulations, and cases cited. See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2). Additionally, parties are requested to provide their case brief and rebuttal briefs in electronic format (e.g., Microsoft Word, pdf, etc.). Interested parties, who wish to request a hearing or to participate if one is requested, must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) The party’s name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in case and rebuttal briefs. The Department will issue the final results of this review, including the results of its analysis of issues raised in any such written briefs or at the hearing, if held, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice. Assessment Rate The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after the publication of the final results of this review. Since the implementation of the 1997 regulations, our practice concerning noshipment respondents has been to rescind the administrative review if the respondent certifies that it had no shipments and we have confirmed through our examination of CBP data that there were no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:15 Jan 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27393 (May 19, 1997). As a result, in such circumstances, we normally instruct CBP to liquidate any entries from the no-shipment company at the deposit rate in effect on the date of entry. In our May 6, 2003, ‘‘automatic assessment’’ clarification, we explained that, where respondents in an administrative review demonstrate that they had no knowledge of sales through resellers to the United States, we would instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the all-others rate applicable to the proceeding. See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment Policy Notice). Because ‘‘as entered’’ liquidation instructions do not alleviate the concerns which the May 2003 clarification was intended to address, we find it appropriate in this case to instruct CBP to liquidate any existing entries of merchandise produced by Essar, Ispat, JSW, or Tata and exported by other parties at the all-others rate, should we continue to find that Essar, Ispat, and JSW had no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States, and Tata had no reviewable transactions, during the POR, in our final results. See, e.g., Magnesium Metal From the Russian Federation: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 56989 (September 17, 2010). In addition, the Department finds that it is more consistent with the May 2003 clarification not to rescind the review in part in these circumstances but, rather, to complete the review with respect to Essar, Ispat, JSW, and Tata and issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results of the review. Cash Deposit Requirements The following deposit rates will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For Essar, Ispat, JSW, and Tata, and for previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent final results in which that manufacturer or exporter participated; (2) if the exporter is not a firm covered in these reviews, a prior review, or the original less-than-fairvalue (‘‘LTFV’’) investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 recent final results for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (3) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or any previous review or the LTFV conducted by the Department, the cash deposit rate will be 23.87 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV. See Amended Final Determination. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Notification to Importers This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and countervailing 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 and countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping and countervailing duties. These preliminary results of review are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4). Dated: January 7, 2011. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. 2011–619 Filed 1–12–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Quarterly Update to Annual Listing of Foreign Government Subsidies on Articles of Cheese Subject to an InQuota Rate of Duty Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective Date: January 13, 2011. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gayle Longest, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482–3338. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 702 of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (as amended) (‘‘the Act’’) requires the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) to determine, in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, whether any foreign government is providing a subsidy with AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM 13JAN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 9 (Thursday, January 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2344-2346]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-619]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-533-820]


Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India: Notice 
of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: In response to requests from petitioners,\1\ the Department of 
Commerce (``the Department'') is conducting an administrative review of 
the antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat 
products from India (``Indian Hot-Rolled'') manufactured by Essar Steel 
Limited (``Essar''), Ispat Industries Limited (``Ispat''), JSW Steel 
Limited (``JSW''), and Tata Steel Limited (``Tata''). The period of 
review (``POR'') covers December 1, 2008, through November 30, 2009. We 
preliminarily determine that Essar, Ispat, JSW, and Tata had no 
reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The petitioners are the United States Steel Corporation, 
Nucor Corporation, and ArcelorMittal USA Inc. (collectively 
``petitioners'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary 
results. We intend to issue the final results no later than 120 days 
from the date of publication of this notice, pursuant to section 
751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act'').

DATES: Effective Date: January 13, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Hargett or James Terpstra, 
AD/CVD Operations Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
4161 and (202) 482-3965, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On December 3, 2001, the Department published in the Federal 
Register the antidumping duty order on Indian Hot-Rolled. See Notice of 
Amended Final Antidumping Duty Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 
Products From India, 66 FR 60194 (December 3, 2001) (``Amended Final 
Determination''). On December 1, 2009, the Department published in the 
Federal Register a notice titled ``Opportunity to Request 
Administrative Review'' of the antidumping duty order on Indian Hot-
Rolled. See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or 
Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 
74 FR 62743 (December 1, 2009). On December 31, 2009, petitioners 
requested an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on 
Indian Hot-Rolled, for subject merchandise produced or exported by 
Ispat, JSW, Tata, and Essar. On January 29, 2010, the Department 
published a notice of initiation of antidumping duty administrative 
review of Indian Hot-Rolled for the period December 1, 2008, through 
November 30, 2009. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Administrative Reviews, Request for Revocation in Part, and 
Deferral of Initiation of Administrative Review, 75 FR 4770 (January 
29, 2010) (``Initiation Notice''). On February 2, 2010, Ispat and 
Essar, and on February 17, 2010, JSW, each informed the Department that 
they did not have shipments of subject merchandise to the United States 
during the POR.
    In February 2010, the Department exercised its discretion to toll 
deadlines for the duration of the closure of the Federal Government 
from February 5, through February 12, 2010. Thus all deadlines in this 
segment of the proceeding have been extended for seven days. See 
Memorandum to the Record from Ronald Lorentzen, DAS for Import 
Administration, regarding ``Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As a 
Result of the Government Closure During the Recent Snowstorm,'' dated 
February 12, 2010.
    On February 16, 2010, the Department issued its antidumping 
questionnaire to Tata. On February 18, 2010, Tata informed the 
Department that it had one shipment of subject merchandise that was 
entered into the United States during the POR, but that shipment was 
not of normal commercial quantities and was a one-off transaction for 
testing purposes only. Tata informed the Department that it would, 
therefore, not respond to the antidumping questionnaire.
    On August 23, 2010, the Department placed on the record and invited 
interested parties to comment on U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
(``CBP'') data obtained to corroborate the claims of the respondents. 
See Memorandum to the File from Christopher Hargett, International 
Trade Compliance Analyst, through James Terpstra, Program Manager, and 
Melissa Skinner, Office Director, concerning ``Customs and Border 
Protection (`CBP') Data for Corroboration of Claims of No Shipments,'' 
dated August 23, 2010 (``August 23 Comment Memorandum''); clarified by 
Memorandum to the File from Christopher Hargett, International Trade 
Compliance Analyst, through James Terpstra, Program Manager, and 
Melissa Skinner, Office Director, concerning ``Clarification of Customs 
and Border Protection (`CBP') Data for Corroboration of Claims of No 
Shipments,'' dated August 25, 2010 (``August 25 Clarification 
Memorandum''). On August 31, 2010, we received timely comments from 
Nucor Corporation.
    On September 14, 2010, the Department extended the deadline for the 
preliminary results to January 7, 2011. See Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon 
Steel Flat Products from India: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary 
Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 55742 
(September 14, 2010).
    On November 23, 2010, we requested CBP to provide documents 
associated with certain entries. See Memorandum to Michael Walsh, 
Director, AD/CVD/Revenue Policy and Programs, Office of International 
Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, from Melissa Skinner, Office 
Director, entitled ``Request for U.S. Entry Documents--Certain Hot-
Rolled Steel Flat Products from India (A-533-820),'' dated November 23, 
2010 (``November 23 CBP Request Memorandum''). We received such 
documents on December 23, 2010. See Memorandum from Christopher 
Hargett, International Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 3, through 
Melissa Skinner, Office Director, Office 3, AD/CVD Operations, to the 
File, entitled ``Entry Documentation for Corroboration of Claims of No 
Shipments,'' dated January 7, 2011 (``January 7 Entry Documentation 
Memorandum'').

Period of Review

    The POR covered by this review is December 1, 2008, through 
November 30, 2009.

[[Page 2345]]

Scope of the Order

    The merchandise subject to this order is certain hot-rolled carbon 
steel flat products of a rectangular shape, of a width of 0.5 inch or 
greater, neither clad, plated, nor coated with metal and whether or not 
painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic 
substances, in coils (whether or not in successively superimposed 
layers), regardless of thickness, and in straight lengths, of a 
thickness of less than 4.75 mm and of a width measuring at least 10 
times the thickness. Universal mill plate (i.e., flat-rolled products 
rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 
mm, but not exceeding 1250 mm, and of a thickness of not less than 4 
mm, not in coils and without patterns in relief) of a thickness not 
less than 4.0 mm is not included within the scope of this order.
    Specifically included in the scope of this order are vacuum-
degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to as interstitial-free 
(``IF'')) steels, high-strength low-alloy (``HSLA'') steels, and the 
substrate for motor lamination steels. IF steels are recognized as low-
carbon steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as titanium 
or niobium (also commonly referred to as columbium), or both, added to 
stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized as 
steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper, 
niobium, vanadium, and molybdenum. The substrate for motor lamination 
steels contains micro-alloying levels of elements such as silicon and 
aluminum.
    Steel products included in the scope of this order, regardless of 
definitions in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(``HTSUS''), are products in which: (i) Iron predominates, by weight, 
over each of the other contained elements; (ii) the carbon content is 2 
percent or less, by weight; and (iii) none of the elements listed below 
exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:

1.80 percent of manganese, or
2.25 percent of silicon, or
1.00 percent of copper, or
0.50 percent of aluminum, or
1.25 percent of chromium, or
0.30 percent of cobalt, or
0.40 percent of lead, or
1.25 percent of nickel, or
0.30 percent of tungsten, or
0.10 percent of molybdenum, or
0.10 percent of niobium, or
0.15 percent of vanadium, or
0.15 percent of zirconium.

    All products that meet the physical and chemical description 
provided above are within the scope of this order unless otherwise 
excluded. The following products, by way of example, are outside or 
specifically excluded from the scope of this order:
     Alloy hot-rolled carbon steel products in which at least 
one of the chemical elements exceeds those listed above (including, 
e.g., American Society for Testing and Materials (``ASTM'') 
specifications A543, A387, A514, A517, A506).
     Society of Automotive Engineers (``SAE'')/American Iron & 
Steel Institute (``AISI'') grades of series 2300 and higher.
     Ball bearings steels, as defined in the HTSUS.
     Tool steels, as defined in the HTSUS.
     Silico-manganese (as defined in the HTSUS) or silicon 
electrical steel with a silicon level exceeding 2.25 percent.
     ASTM specifications A710 and A736.
     United States Steel (``USS'') Abrasion-resistant steels 
(USS AR 400, USS AR 500).
     All products (proprietary or otherwise) based on an alloy 
ASTM specification (sample specifications: ASTM A506, A507).
     Non-rectangular shapes, not in coils, which are the result 
of having been processed by cutting or stamping and which have assumed 
the character of articles or products classified outside chapter 72 of 
the HTSUS.
    The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable in 
the HTSUS at subheadings: 7208.10.15.00, 7208.10.30.00, 7208.10.60.00, 
7208.25.30.00, 7208.25.60.00, 7208.26.00.30, 7208.26.00.60, 
7208.27.00.30, 7208.27.00.60, 7208.36.00.30, 7208.36.00.60, 
7208.37.00.30, 7208.37.00.60, 7208.38.00.15, 7208.38.00.30, 
7208.38.00.90, 7208.39.00.15, 7208.39.00.30, 7208.39.00.90, 
7208.40.60.30, 7208.40.60.60, 7208.53.00.00, 7208.54.00.00, 
7208.90.00.00, 7211.14.00.90, 7211.19.15.00, 7211.19.20.00, 
7211.19.30.00, 7211.19.45.00, 7211.19.60.00, 7211.19.75.30, 
7211.19.75.60, and 7211.19.75.90. Certain hot-rolled carbon steel 
covered by this order, including: vacuum-degassed fully stabilized; 
high-strength low-alloy; and the substrate for motor lamination steel 
may also enter under the following tariff numbers: 7225.11.00.00, 
7225.19.00.00, 7225.30.30.50, 7225.30.70.00, 7225.40.70.00, 
7225.99.00.90, 7226.11.10.00, 7226.11.90.30, 7226.11.90.60, 
7226.19.10.00, 7226.19.90.00, 7226.91.50.00, 7226.91.70.00, 
7226.91.80.00, and 7226.99.00.00. Subject merchandise may also enter 
under 7210.70.30.00, 7210.90.90.00, 7211.14.00.30, 7212.40.10.00, 
7212.40.50.00, and 7212.50.00.00. Although the HTSUS subheadings are 
provided for convenience and customs purposes, the Department's written 
description of the merchandise subject to this order is dispositive.

Preliminary Results of Review

    As noted in the ``Background'' section above, Essar, Ispat and JSW 
have each submitted timely-filed certifications indicating that they 
had no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the 
POR. In addition, Tata informed the Department that it had made one 
small shipment of subject merchandise that entered the United States 
during the POR. However, Tata claimed that the shipment was not of 
normal commercial quantities in the ordinary course of trade. Further, 
Tata claimed that the shipment to the United States was a one-off 
transaction for testing purposes only.
    In August, 2010, the Department released to interested parties 
under Administrative Protective Order (``APO'') information it intended 
to use for corroboration of the respondents' claims. See August 23 
Comment Memorandum; clarified by August 25 Clarification Memorandum. In 
comments submitted on August 31, 2010, Nucor asserted that the data 
presented failed to confirm the absence of sales, entries, or 
shipments; alleging instead that the data raise additional questions 
that the Department should address.
    On November 23, 2010, the Department requested from CBP the entry 
documents associated with certain entries which Nucor alleged raised 
questions with respect to the assertions of respondent(s). See November 
23 CBP Request Memorandum.
    On December 23, 2010, the Department received the entry documents 
from CBP. These documents and our analysis are proprietary. See January 
7 Entry Document Memorandum. Based on the claims of the parties and our 
analysis of CBP data, we preliminarily determine that the evidence on 
the record indicates that Essar, Ispat, and JSW did not export subject 
merchandise to the United States during the POR. Further, the 
Department preliminary determines that record evidence indicates that 
Tata had no reviewable transactions of subject merchandise during the 
POR. However, based on our review of the recently obtained entry 
documentation, we

[[Page 2346]]

intend to seek clarifying information from Tata after our preliminary 
results with respect to its exports.

Disclosure

    The Department will disclose these preliminary results to the 
parties within five days of the date of publication of this notice in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Comments

    Interested parties are invited to comment on the preliminary 
results and may submit case briefs and/or written comments within 30 
days of the date of publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 
351.309(c)(1)(ii). Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the 
case briefs, will be due five days later, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.309(d). Parties who submit case or rebuttal briefs in this 
proceeding are requested to submit with each argument (1) a statement 
of the issue, and (2) a brief summary of the argument. Parties are 
requested to provide a summary of the arguments not to exceed five 
pages and a table of statutes, regulations, and cases cited. See 19 CFR 
351.309(c)(2). Additionally, parties are requested to provide their 
case brief and rebuttal briefs in electronic format (e.g., Microsoft 
Word, pdf, etc.). Interested parties, who wish to request a hearing or 
to participate if one is requested, must submit a written request to 
the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration within 30 days of the 
date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) The 
party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of 
participants; and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. See 19 CFR 
351.310(c). Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those 
raised in case and rebuttal briefs. The Department will issue the final 
results of this review, including the results of its analysis of issues 
raised in any such written briefs or at the hearing, if held, not later 
than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice.

Assessment Rate

    The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions 
directly to CBP 15 days after the publication of the final results of 
this review.
    Since the implementation of the 1997 regulations, our practice 
concerning no-shipment respondents has been to rescind the 
administrative review if the respondent certifies that it had no 
shipments and we have confirmed through our examination of CBP data 
that there were no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. See 
Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27393 (May 19, 
1997). As a result, in such circumstances, we normally instruct CBP to 
liquidate any entries from the no-shipment company at the deposit rate 
in effect on the date of entry.
    In our May 6, 2003, ``automatic assessment'' clarification, we 
explained that, where respondents in an administrative review 
demonstrate that they had no knowledge of sales through resellers to 
the United States, we would instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at 
the all-others rate applicable to the proceeding. See Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment Policy Notice).
    Because ``as entered'' liquidation instructions do not alleviate 
the concerns which the May 2003 clarification was intended to address, 
we find it appropriate in this case to instruct CBP to liquidate any 
existing entries of merchandise produced by Essar, Ispat, JSW, or Tata 
and exported by other parties at the all-others rate, should we 
continue to find that Essar, Ispat, and JSW had no shipments of subject 
merchandise to the United States, and Tata had no reviewable 
transactions, during the POR, in our final results. See, e.g., 
Magnesium Metal From the Russian Federation: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 56989 (September 17, 
2010). In addition, the Department finds that it is more consistent 
with the May 2003 clarification not to rescind the review in part in 
these circumstances but, rather, to complete the review with respect to 
Essar, Ispat, JSW, and Tata and issue appropriate instructions to CBP 
based on the final results of the review.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit rates will be effective upon publication of 
the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of 
hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as 
provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For Essar, Ispat, JSW, 
and Tata, and for previously reviewed or investigated companies not 
listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-
specific rate published for the most recent final results in which that 
manufacturer or exporter participated; (2) if the exporter is not a 
firm covered in these reviews, a prior review, or the original less-
than-fair-value (``LTFV'') investigation, but the manufacturer is, the 
cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent 
final results for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (3) if 
neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or 
any previous review or the LTFV conducted by the Department, the cash 
deposit rate will be 23.87 percent, the all-others rate established in 
the LTFV. See Amended Final Determination. These cash deposit 
requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further 
notice.

Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and countervailing 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 and countervailing duties 
occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping and 
countervailing duties.
    These preliminary results of review are issued and published in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.221(b)(4).

     Dated: January 7, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011-619 Filed 1-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P