Solid Urea From the Russian Federation: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 35405-35408 [2011-15123]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 117 / Friday, June 17, 2011 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
Civil Nuclear Trade Advisory
Committee Public Meeting
International Trade
Administration, DOC.
ACTION: Notice of Federal Advisory
Committee Meeting.
AGENCY:
This notice sets forth the
schedule and proposed agenda of a
meeting of the Civil Nuclear Trade
Advisory Committee (CINTAC).
DATES: The meeting is scheduled for
Thursday, July 14, 2011, at 10 a.m.
Eastern Daylight Time (EDT).
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in
Room 4830, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Herbert Clark Hoover
Building, 1401 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
David Kincaid, Office of Energy &
Environmental Industries, International
Trade Administration, Room 4053, 1401
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20230. (Phone: 202–482–1706; Fax:
202–482–5665; e-mail:
David.Kincaid@trade.gov).
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background: The CINTAC was
established under the discretionary
authority of the Secretary of Commerce
and in accordance with the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C.
App.), in response to an identified need
for consensus advice from U.S. industry
to the U.S. Government regarding the
development and administration of
programs to expand United States
exports of civil nuclear goods and
services in accordance with applicable
United States regulations, including
advice on how U.S. civil nuclear goods
and services export policies, programs,
and activities will affect the U.S. civil
nuclear industry’s competitiveness and
ability to participate in the international
market.
Topics to be considered: The agenda
for the July 14, 2011 CINTAC meeting
is as follows:
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Public Session
1. Opening remarks.
2. Trade Promotion Activities Update,
including U.S. industry program at the
International Atomic Energy Agency.
3. Public comment period.
Closed Session
1. Discussion of matters determined to
be exempt from the provisions relating
to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C.
App. (10)(a)1 and 10(a)(3).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:39 Jun 16, 2011
Jkt 223001
The open session will be disabledaccessible. Public seating is limited and
available on a first-come, first-served
basis. Members of the public wishing to
attend the meeting must notify Mr.
David Kincaid at the contact
information below by 5 p.m. EDT on
Friday, July 8, 2011 in order to preregister for clearance into the building.
Please specify any requests for
reasonable accommodation at least five
business days in advance of the
meeting. Last minute requests will be
accepted, but may be impossible to fill.
A limited amount of time will be
available for pertinent brief oral
comments from members of the public
attending the meeting. To accommodate
as many speakers as possible, the time
for public comments will be limited to
two (2) minutes per person, with a total
public comment period of 30 minutes.
Individuals wishing to reserve speaking
time during the meeting must contact
Mr. Kincaid and submit a brief
statement of the general nature of the
comments and the name and address of
the proposed participant by 5 p.m. EDT
on Friday, July 8, 2011. If the number
of registrants requesting to make
statements is greater than can be
reasonably accommodated during the
meeting, the International Trade
Administration (ITA) may conduct a
lottery to determine the speakers.
Speakers are requested to bring at least
20 copies of their oral comments for
distribution to the participants and
public at the meeting.
Any member of the public may
submit pertinent written comments
concerning the CINTAC’s affairs at any
time before and after the meeting.
Comments may be submitted to the
Civil Nuclear Trade Advisory
Committee, Office of Energy &
Environmental Industries, Room 4053,
1401 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20230. For
consideration during the meeting, and
to ensure transmission to the Committee
prior to the meeting, comments must be
received no later than 5 p.m. EDT on
Friday, July 8, 2011. Comments received
after that date will be distributed to the
members but may not be considered at
the meeting.
The Assistant Secretary for
Administration, with the concurrence of
the delegate of the General Counsel,
formally determined on April 20, 2011,
pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5
U.S.C. App. (10)(d)), that the portion of
the meeting dealing with matters the
disclosure of which would be likely to
frustrate significantly implementation of
an agency action as described in 5
U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B) shall be exempt
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35405
from the provisions relating to public
meetings found in 5 U.S.C. App.
(10)(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). The portion of
the meeting dealing with matters
requiring disclosure of trade secrets and
commercial or financial information as
described in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4) shall be
exempt from the provisions relating to
public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. App.
(10)(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). The remaining
portions of the meeting will be open to
the public.
Copies of CINTAC meeting minutes
will be available within 90 days of the
meeting.
Edward A. O’Malley,
Director, Office of Energy and Environmental
Industries.
[FR Doc. 2011–15022 Filed 6–16–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–821–801]
Solid Urea From the Russian
Federation: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on solid urea
from the Russian Federation (Russia).
The review covers one producer/
exporter of the subject merchandise,
MCC EuroChem (EuroChem). The
period of review (POR) is July 1, 2009,
through June 30, 2010. We preliminarily
determine that EuroChem sold the
subject merchandise at less than normal
value during the POR.
We invite interested parties to
comment on these preliminary results.
Parties who submit argument in this
proceeding are requested to submit with
the argument (1) a statement of the issue
and (2) a brief summary of the
argument.
AGENCY:
DATES:
Effective Date: June 17, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dustin Ross or Minoo Hatten, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 5, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–0747 or (202) 482–
1690, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\17JNN1.SGM
17JNN1
35406
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 117 / Friday, June 17, 2011 / Notices
Background
Fair-Value Comparisons
On July 14, 1987, the Department
published the antidumping duty order
on solid urea from the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics (Soviet Union). See
Antidumping Duty Order; Urea From
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,
52 FR 26367 (July 14, 1987). Following
the break-up of the Soviet Union, the
antidumping duty order on solid urea
from the Soviet Union was transferred
to the individual members of the
Commonwealth of Independent States.
See Solid Urea From the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics; Transfer of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Solid Urea
From the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics to the Commonwealth of
Independent States and the Baltic States
and Opportunity to Comment, 57 FR
28828 (June 29, 1992).
Pursuant to section 751(a)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
and 19 CFR 351.213(b), the Ad Hoc
Committee of Domestic Nitrogen
Producers and its individual ureaproducing members, CF Industries, Inc.,
and PCS Nitrogen (collectively, the
petitioner), requested an administrative
review of the antidumping duty order
on solid urea from Russia with respect
to EuroChem on July 28, 2010. On
August 31, 2010, in accordance with 19
CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we published a
notice of initiation of administrative
review of the order. See Initiation of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews and Deferral of
Initiation of Administrative Review, 75
FR 53274 (August 31, 2010). On March
23, 2011, we extended the deadline for
the preliminary results by 75 days to
June 16, 2011. See Solid Urea From the
Russian Federation: Extension of Time
Limit for Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 76 FR 17380 (March 29, 2011).
We are conducting the administrative
review of the order in accordance with
section 751(a) of the Act.
To determine whether EuroChem’s
sales of solid urea from Russia were
made in the United States at less than
normal value, we compared the
constructed export price (CEP) to the
normal value as described in the
‘‘Constructed Export Price’’ and
‘‘Normal Value’’ sections of this notice.
When making this comparison in
accordance with section 771(16) of the
Act, we considered all products sold in
the home market as described in the
‘‘Scope of the Order’’ section of this
notice, above, that were in the ordinary
course of trade for purposes of
determining an appropriate product
comparison to the U.S. sale. If an
identical home-market model with
identical physical characteristics as
described below was reported, we made
comparisons to weighted-average homemarket prices that were based on all
sales of the identical product during a
contemporaneous month. If there were
no contemporaneous sales of an
identical model, we identified sales of
the most similar merchandise that were
most contemporaneous with the U.S.
sale in accordance with 19 CFR
351.414(e).
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the order
is solid urea, a high-nitrogen content
fertilizer which is produced by reacting
ammonia with carbon dioxide. The
product is currently classified under the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) item number
3102.10.00.00. Such merchandise was
classified previously under item number
480.3000 of the Tariff Schedules of the
United States. Although the HTSUS
subheading is provided for convenience
and customs purposes, the written
description of the merchandise subject
to the order is dispositive.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:39 Jun 16, 2011
Jkt 223001
Product Comparisons
In accordance with section 771(16) of
the Act, we compared products
produced by EuroChem and sold in the
U.S. and home markets on the basis of
the comparison product which was
closest in terms of the physical
characteristics to the product sold in the
United States. In the order of
importance, these characteristics are
form, grade, nitrogen content, size, ureaformaldehyde content, other additive/
conditioning agent, coating agent, and
biuret content.
Date of Sale
Section 351.401(i) of the Department’s
regulations states that, normally, the
Department will use the date of invoice,
as recorded in the producer’s or
exporter’s records kept in the ordinary
course of business, as the date of sale.
The regulation provides further that the
Department may use a date other than
the date of the invoice if the Secretary
is satisfied that a different date better
reflects the date on which the material
terms of sale are established. The
Department has a long-standing practice
of finding that, where shipment date
precedes invoice date, shipment date
better reflects the date on which the
material terms of sale are established.
See Notice of Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Negative Final Determination of Critical
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Circumstances: Certain Frozen and
Canned Warmwater Shrimp From
Thailand, 69 FR 76918 (December 23,
2004), and accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum at Comment 10;
see also Notice of Final Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Structural Steel Beams From Germany,
67 FR 35497 (May 20, 2002), and
accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 2.
For all U.S. sales, EuroChem reported
contract date as the date of sale.
EuroChem defines contract date as the
date on which the material terms of sale
are established and no longer subject to
change. In those cases where a price
addendum to the contract was issued,
EuroChem considers the addendum date
to be the final contract date where all
the material terms of sale are established
and no longer subject to change. Based
on record evidence, all material terms of
sale are established on the date of
contract or the date of the price
addendum to the contract. Therefore,
we have used contract date as reported
by EuroChem as the date of sale for all
U.S. sales.
With respect to EuroChem’s homemarket sales, price and quantity are
subject to change until invoicing.
Because the material terms of sale are
not established until invoicing, we have
used invoice date as the date of sale in
the home market except, in cases where
shipment date precedes invoice date, we
have used the shipment date as the date
of sale in the home market.
Constructed Export Price
In accordance with section 772(b) of
the Act, we used CEP for EuroChem
because the subject merchandise was
sold in the United States by a U.S. seller
affiliated with the producer and export
price was not otherwise indicated.
We calculated CEP based on the freeon-board or delivered price to
unaffiliated purchasers in, or for
exportation to, the United States. We
also made deductions for any movement
expenses in accordance with section
772(c)(2)(A) of the Act. In accordance
with section 772(d)(1) of the Act, we
calculated the CEP by deducting selling
expenses associated with economic
activities occurring in the United States,
which includes direct selling expenses
and indirect selling expenses. Finally,
we made an adjustment for profit
allocated to these expenses in
accordance with section 772(d)(3) of the
Act.
Normal Value
In order to determine whether there is
a sufficient volume of sales in the home
market to serve as a viable basis for
E:\FR\FM\17JNN1.SGM
17JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 117 / Friday, June 17, 2011 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
calculating normal value (i.e., the
aggregate volume of home-market sales
of the foreign like product is five
percent or more of the aggregate volume
of U.S. sales), we compared the volume
of EuroChem’s home-market sales of the
foreign like product to the volume of its
U.S. sales of subject merchandise in
accordance with section 773(a)(1)(C) of
the Act. Based on this comparison, we
determined that EuroChem had a viable
home market during the POR.
Consequently, we based normal value
on home-market sales to unaffiliated
purchasers made in the usual quantities
in the ordinary course of trade and sales
made to affiliated purchasers where we
find prices were made at arm’s length,
described in detail below.
We based normal value on the starting
prices to home-market customers.
Pursuant to section 773(a)(6)(B)(ii) of
the Act, we deducted movement
expenses EuroChem incurred on its
home-market sales. Pursuant to section
773(a)(6)(B)(i) of the Act, we deducted
home-market packing costs. We made
deductions for direct selling expenses,
as appropriate.
Affiliation
The Department may calculate normal
value based on a sale to an affiliated
party only if it is satisfied that the price
to the affiliated party is comparable to
the price at which sales are made to
parties not affiliated with the exporter
or producer, i.e., sales were made at
arm’s-length prices. See 19 CFR
351.403(c). We exclude from our
analysis transactions to affiliated
customers for consumption in the home
market that we determine were not sold
at arm’s-length prices.
To test whether EuroChem’s sales to
affiliated parties were made at arm’slength prices, we compared the prices of
sales of comparable merchandise to
affiliated and unaffiliated customers, net
of all rebates, movement charges, direct
selling expenses, and packing. Pursuant
to 19 CFR 351.403(c) and in accordance
with our practice, when the prices
charged to an affiliated party were, on
average, between 98 and 102 percent of
the prices charged to unaffiliated parties
for merchandise comparable to that sold
to the affiliated party, we determined
that the sales to the affiliated party were
at arm’s-length prices. See Antidumping
Proceedings: Affiliated Party Sales in
the Ordinary Course of Trade, 67 FR
69186 (November 15, 2002). We
included in our calculation of normal
value those sales to affiliated parties
that were made at arm’s-length prices.
Where we excluded sales because they
were not at arm’s-length prices, we
used, based on the information we
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:39 Jun 16, 2011
Jkt 223001
requested and EuroChem provided, data
related to sales of the foreign like
product made by the affiliated parties’
home-market customers.
The petitioner alleges in this review
that, through the provisions of its
concession agreement with its homemarket franchisees, EuroChem is in a
position, potentially, to exhibit control
over the franchisees. Therefore, they
assert, the Department should treat
EuroChem’s franchisees as affiliates
and, for sales to those franchisees that
do not pass the arm’s-length test,
request the data for downstream sales.
Based on information on the record,
the Department preliminarily does not
find that affiliation exists between
EuroChem and its franchisees. For a
detailed discussion of this issue, see
Memorandum to Laurie Parkhill dated
concurrently with this notice entitled
‘‘Solid Urea from the Russian
Federation—Affiliation Analysis.’’
Level of Trade
To the extent practicable, we
determined normal value for sales at the
same level of trade as the U.S. sales.
When there were no sales at the same
level of trade, we compared U.S. sales
to home-market sales at a different level
of trade. The normal-value level of trade
is that of the starting-price sales in the
home market. To determine whether
home-market sales are at a different
level of trade than U.S. sales, we
examined stages in the marketing
process and selling functions along the
chain of distribution between the
producer and the unaffiliated customer.
In the home market, EuroChem
reported a single channel of
distribution. Within this single channel
of distribution, EuroChem reported a
single level of trade for all three
customer types (i.e., distributors,
traders, and end-users). After analyzing
the data on the record with respect to
the selling functions performed for each
customer type, we find that EuroChem
made all home-market sales at a single
marketing stage (i.e., one level of trade)
in the home market.
In the U.S. market, EuroChem had
only CEP sales through its affiliated
reseller to unaffiliated customers
through a single channel of distribution
and, thus, a single level of trade. See
section 772(b) of the Act. We found that
there were significant differences
between the selling activities associated
with the CEP level of trade and those
associated with the home-market level
of trade. For example, the CEP level of
trade involved little or no sales-strategic
and economic planning, personnel
training, advertising, distributor/dealer
training, procurement/sourcing service,
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35407
packing, and sales/marketing support.
Therefore, we considered the CEP level
of trade to be different from the homemarket level of trade and at a less
advanced stage of distribution than the
home-market level of trade.
Consequently, we could not match U.S.
sales to sales at the same level of trade
in the home market nor could we
determine a level-of-trade adjustment
based on EuroChem’s home-market
sales of the foreign like product.
Because the data available do not
provide an appropriate basis to
determine a level-of-trade adjustment
and the home-market level of trade is at
a more advanced stage of distribution
than the CEP, we have made a CEPoffset adjustment to normal value in
accordance with section 773(a)(7)(B) of
the Act. The CEP offset is the sum of
indirect selling expenses incurred on
the home-market sales up to the amount
of indirect selling expenses incurred on
the U.S. sales.
Preliminary Results of the Review
As a result of this review, we
preliminarily determine that a dumping
margin of 1.17 percent exists for
EuroChem for the period July 1, 2009,
through June 30, 2010.
Disclosure and Comment
We will disclose the calculations used
in our analysis to parties to this review
within five days of the date of
publication of this notice. See 19 CFR
351.224(b). Any interested party may
request a hearing within 30 days of the
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). If a
hearing is requested, the Department
will notify interested parties of the
hearing schedule.
Interested parties are invited to
comment on the preliminary results of
this review. Interested parties may
submit case briefs within 30 days of the
date of publication of this notice. See 19
CFR 351.309(c). Rebuttal briefs, which
must be limited to issues raised in the
case briefs, may be filed not later than
35 days after the date of publication of
this notice. See 19 CFR 351.309(d).
Parties who submit case briefs or
rebuttal briefs in this review are
requested to submit with each argument
(1) a statement of the issue and (2) a
brief summary of the argument with an
electronic version included.
We intend to issue the final results of
this administrative review, including
the results of our analysis of issues
raised in the case briefs, within 120
days after the date on which the
preliminary results are published. See
19 CFR 351.213(h)(1).
E:\FR\FM\17JNN1.SGM
17JNN1
35408
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 117 / Friday, June 17, 2011 / Notices
Assessment Rates
The Department shall determine, and
the U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties
on all appropriate entries. In accordance
with 19 CFR 351.212, we have
calculated for EuroChem an importer/
customer-specific assessment rate for
these preliminary results of review. We
will instruct CBP to assess the importer/
customer-specific rate on applicable
entries of subject merchandise made by
the importer during the POR.
The Department clarified its
‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on
May 6, 2003. This clarification applies
to entries of subject merchandise during
the POR produced by EuroChem where
EuroChem did not know that its
merchandise was destined for the
United States. In such instances, we will
instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed
entries at the all-others rate if there is no
rate for the intermediate company(ies)
involved in the transaction. For a full
discussion of this clarification, see
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings: Assessment of
Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May
6, 2003).
The Department intends to issue
assessment instructions to CBP 15 days
after the date of publication of the final
results of this administrative review.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements
will be effective upon publication of the
notice of final results of administrative
review for all shipments of subject
merchandise entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or
after the date of publication, as provided
by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The
cash deposit rate for EuroChem will be
the rate established in the final results
of this review; (2) 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 period; (3)
if the exporter is not a firm covered in
this review or the less-than-fair-value
investigation but the manufacturer is,
the cash deposit rate will be the rate
established for the most recent period
for the manufacturer of the
merchandise; (4) the cash deposit rate
for all other manufacturers or exporters
will continue to be 64.93 percent, the
all-others rate established in Urea From
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics;
Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value, 52 FR 19557 (May 26,
1987). These cash deposit requirements,
when imposed, shall remain in effect
until further notice.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:39 Jun 16, 2011
Jkt 223001
Notification to Importers
This notice also 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 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 duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of double antidumping duties.
We are issuing and publishing this
notice in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: June 10, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011–15123 Filed 6–16–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XR75
Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)
Components of Fishery Management
Plans (Northeast Multispecies, Atlantic
Sea Scallop, Monkfish, Atlantic
Herring, Skates, Atlantic Salmon, and
Atlantic Deep-Sea Red Crab) 5-Year
Review
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of intent
(NOI) to prepare a programmatic
environmental impact statement (EIS).
AGENCY:
The New England Fishery
Management Council (Council) is in the
process of preparing a programmatic EIS
for an Omnibus EFH Amendment to the
fishery management plans (FMPs) for
Northeast (NE) multispecies, Atlantic
sea scallop, monkfish, Atlantic herring,
NE skate complex, Atlantic salmon, and
Atlantic deep-sea red crab. The Council
will expand the scope of this action to
include review of, and possible changes
to, the NE multispecies closed areas.
During this comment period, the
Council is seeking comments on the
possible revision of these management
areas.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before 5 p.m. e.s.t., July
18, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• E-mail: HabitatNOI@noaa.gov.
• Mail: Paul J. Howard, Executive
Director, New England Fishery
Management Council, 50 Water Street,
Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.
• Fax: (978) 465–3116.
Paul
J. Howard, Executive Director, New
England Fishery Management Council
(978) 465–0492.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The
purpose of this notification is to alert
the interested public of the Council’s
intent to consider changes to the NE
multispecies closed areas in the
Omnibus EFH Amendment. A
description of the background and need
for the Omnibus EFH Amendment can
be found in the original NOI dated
February 24, 2004, (69 FR 8367) and is
not repeated here. The amendment has
been developed in two phases. Phase 1
included a review and update of EFH
designations, consideration of habitat
areas of particular concern, an updated
prey species list, and an update of nonfishing impacts. A notice of availability
for the Phase 1 Draft EIS (DEIS) was
published on April 6, 2007 (72 FR
17157).
Phase 2 will include an evaluation of
the effects of fishing on EFH, and
management measures to minimize the
adverse effects of fishing on EFH across
all FMPs. A subset of the alternatives to
minimize the impacts of EFH will focus
specifically on minimizing the impacts
of fishing on deep-sea corals. During
early meetings to develop Phase 2
alternatives in late 2009 and early 2010,
the Council’s Habitat Oversight
Committee concluded that development
and implementation of new or modified
habitat management areas was
complicated substantially by the
existence of the NE multispecies closed
areas. There is considerable spatial
overlap between the NE multispecies
closed areas and the current habitat
areas which are closed to bottom
tending mobile gears. Generally, the NE
multispecies closed areas are closed to
all gear capable of catching groundfish,
including but not limited to mobile
gears, although there are specific
exemptions for certain fisheries and gear
types. Specifically, the Habitat
Oversight Committee was concerned
about the feasibility of implementing
new habitat management areas outside
of the boundaries of the NE multispecies
closed areas, in particular the year
round closures, even if current habitat
management areas were eliminated, as
this would substantially increase in the
amount of seabed closed to fishing for
some types of gears/fisheries.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\17JNN1.SGM
17JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 117 (Friday, June 17, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35405-35408]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15123]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-821-801]
Solid Urea From the Russian Federation: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on solid urea from
the Russian Federation (Russia). The review covers one producer/
exporter of the subject merchandise, MCC EuroChem (EuroChem). The
period of review (POR) is July 1, 2009, through June 30, 2010. We
preliminarily determine that EuroChem sold the subject merchandise at
less than normal value during the POR.
We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary
results. Parties who submit argument in this proceeding are requested
to submit with the argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a
brief summary of the argument.
DATES: Effective Date: June 17, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dustin Ross or Minoo Hatten, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
0747 or (202) 482-1690, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 35406]]
Background
On July 14, 1987, the Department published the antidumping duty
order on solid urea from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
(Soviet Union). See Antidumping Duty Order; Urea From the Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics, 52 FR 26367 (July 14, 1987). Following the
break-up of the Soviet Union, the antidumping duty order on solid urea
from the Soviet Union was transferred to the individual members of the
Commonwealth of Independent States. See Solid Urea From the Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics; Transfer of the Antidumping Duty Order on
Solid Urea From the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to the
Commonwealth of Independent States and the Baltic States and
Opportunity to Comment, 57 FR 28828 (June 29, 1992).
Pursuant to section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(the Act), and 19 CFR 351.213(b), the Ad Hoc Committee of Domestic
Nitrogen Producers and its individual urea-producing members, CF
Industries, Inc., and PCS Nitrogen (collectively, the petitioner),
requested an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on
solid urea from Russia with respect to EuroChem on July 28, 2010. On
August 31, 2010, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we
published a notice of initiation of administrative review of the order.
See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews and Deferral of Initiation of Administrative Review, 75 FR
53274 (August 31, 2010). On March 23, 2011, we extended the deadline
for the preliminary results by 75 days to June 16, 2011. See Solid Urea
From the Russian Federation: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 76 FR 17380 (March
29, 2011). We are conducting the administrative review of the order in
accordance with section 751(a) of the Act.
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the order is solid urea, a high-nitrogen
content fertilizer which is produced by reacting ammonia with carbon
dioxide. The product is currently classified under the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item number 3102.10.00.00.
Such merchandise was classified previously under item number 480.3000
of the Tariff Schedules of the United States. Although the HTSUS
subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the merchandise subject to the order is
dispositive.
Fair-Value Comparisons
To determine whether EuroChem's sales of solid urea from Russia
were made in the United States at less than normal value, we compared
the constructed export price (CEP) to the normal value as described in
the ``Constructed Export Price'' and ``Normal Value'' sections of this
notice.
When making this comparison in accordance with section 771(16) of
the Act, we considered all products sold in the home market as
described in the ``Scope of the Order'' section of this notice, above,
that were in the ordinary course of trade for purposes of determining
an appropriate product comparison to the U.S. sale. If an identical
home-market model with identical physical characteristics as described
below was reported, we made comparisons to weighted-average home-market
prices that were based on all sales of the identical product during a
contemporaneous month. If there were no contemporaneous sales of an
identical model, we identified sales of the most similar merchandise
that were most contemporaneous with the U.S. sale in accordance with 19
CFR 351.414(e).
Product Comparisons
In accordance with section 771(16) of the Act, we compared products
produced by EuroChem and sold in the U.S. and home markets on the basis
of the comparison product which was closest in terms of the physical
characteristics to the product sold in the United States. In the order
of importance, these characteristics are form, grade, nitrogen content,
size, urea-formaldehyde content, other additive/conditioning agent,
coating agent, and biuret content.
Date of Sale
Section 351.401(i) of the Department's regulations states that,
normally, the Department will use the date of invoice, as recorded in
the producer's or exporter's records kept in the ordinary course of
business, as the date of sale. The regulation provides further that the
Department may use a date other than the date of the invoice if the
Secretary is satisfied that a different date better reflects the date
on which the material terms of sale are established. The Department has
a long-standing practice of finding that, where shipment date precedes
invoice date, shipment date better reflects the date on which the
material terms of sale are established. See Notice of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Negative Final
Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain Frozen and Canned
Warmwater Shrimp From Thailand, 69 FR 76918 (December 23, 2004), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 10; see also
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Structural Steel Beams From Germany, 67 FR 35497 (May 20, 2002), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2.
For all U.S. sales, EuroChem reported contract date as the date of
sale. EuroChem defines contract date as the date on which the material
terms of sale are established and no longer subject to change. In those
cases where a price addendum to the contract was issued, EuroChem
considers the addendum date to be the final contract date where all the
material terms of sale are established and no longer subject to change.
Based on record evidence, all material terms of sale are established on
the date of contract or the date of the price addendum to the contract.
Therefore, we have used contract date as reported by EuroChem as the
date of sale for all U.S. sales.
With respect to EuroChem's home-market sales, price and quantity
are subject to change until invoicing. Because the material terms of
sale are not established until invoicing, we have used invoice date as
the date of sale in the home market except, in cases where shipment
date precedes invoice date, we have used the shipment date as the date
of sale in the home market.
Constructed Export Price
In accordance with section 772(b) of the Act, we used CEP for
EuroChem because the subject merchandise was sold in the United States
by a U.S. seller affiliated with the producer and export price was not
otherwise indicated.
We calculated CEP based on the free-on-board or delivered price to
unaffiliated purchasers in, or for exportation to, the United States.
We also made deductions for any movement expenses in accordance with
section 772(c)(2)(A) of the Act. In accordance with section 772(d)(1)
of the Act, we calculated the CEP by deducting selling expenses
associated with economic activities occurring in the United States,
which includes direct selling expenses and indirect selling expenses.
Finally, we made an adjustment for profit allocated to these expenses
in accordance with section 772(d)(3) of the Act.
Normal Value
In order to determine whether there is a sufficient volume of sales
in the home market to serve as a viable basis for
[[Page 35407]]
calculating normal value (i.e., the aggregate volume of home-market
sales of the foreign like product is five percent or more of the
aggregate volume of U.S. sales), we compared the volume of EuroChem's
home-market sales of the foreign like product to the volume of its U.S.
sales of subject merchandise in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(C) of
the Act. Based on this comparison, we determined that EuroChem had a
viable home market during the POR. Consequently, we based normal value
on home-market sales to unaffiliated purchasers made in the usual
quantities in the ordinary course of trade and sales made to affiliated
purchasers where we find prices were made at arm's length, described in
detail below.
We based normal value on the starting prices to home-market
customers. Pursuant to section 773(a)(6)(B)(ii) of the Act, we deducted
movement expenses EuroChem incurred on its home-market sales. Pursuant
to section 773(a)(6)(B)(i) of the Act, we deducted home-market packing
costs. We made deductions for direct selling expenses, as appropriate.
Affiliation
The Department may calculate normal value based on a sale to an
affiliated party only if it is satisfied that the price to the
affiliated party is comparable to the price at which sales are made to
parties not affiliated with the exporter or producer, i.e., sales were
made at arm's-length prices. See 19 CFR 351.403(c). We exclude from our
analysis transactions to affiliated customers for consumption in the
home market that we determine were not sold at arm's-length prices.
To test whether EuroChem's sales to affiliated parties were made at
arm's-length prices, we compared the prices of sales of comparable
merchandise to affiliated and unaffiliated customers, net of all
rebates, movement charges, direct selling expenses, and packing.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.403(c) and in accordance with our practice, when
the prices charged to an affiliated party were, on average, between 98
and 102 percent of the prices charged to unaffiliated parties for
merchandise comparable to that sold to the affiliated party, we
determined that the sales to the affiliated party were at arm's-length
prices. See Antidumping Proceedings: Affiliated Party Sales in the
Ordinary Course of Trade, 67 FR 69186 (November 15, 2002). We included
in our calculation of normal value those sales to affiliated parties
that were made at arm's-length prices. Where we excluded sales because
they were not at arm's-length prices, we used, based on the information
we requested and EuroChem provided, data related to sales of the
foreign like product made by the affiliated parties' home-market
customers.
The petitioner alleges in this review that, through the provisions
of its concession agreement with its home-market franchisees, EuroChem
is in a position, potentially, to exhibit control over the franchisees.
Therefore, they assert, the Department should treat EuroChem's
franchisees as affiliates and, for sales to those franchisees that do
not pass the arm's-length test, request the data for downstream sales.
Based on information on the record, the Department preliminarily
does not find that affiliation exists between EuroChem and its
franchisees. For a detailed discussion of this issue, see Memorandum to
Laurie Parkhill dated concurrently with this notice entitled ``Solid
Urea from the Russian Federation--Affiliation Analysis.''
Level of Trade
To the extent practicable, we determined normal value for sales at
the same level of trade as the U.S. sales. When there were no sales at
the same level of trade, we compared U.S. sales to home-market sales at
a different level of trade. The normal-value level of trade is that of
the starting-price sales in the home market. To determine whether home-
market sales are at a different level of trade than U.S. sales, we
examined stages in the marketing process and selling functions along
the chain of distribution between the producer and the unaffiliated
customer.
In the home market, EuroChem reported a single channel of
distribution. Within this single channel of distribution, EuroChem
reported a single level of trade for all three customer types (i.e.,
distributors, traders, and end-users). After analyzing the data on the
record with respect to the selling functions performed for each
customer type, we find that EuroChem made all home-market sales at a
single marketing stage (i.e., one level of trade) in the home market.
In the U.S. market, EuroChem had only CEP sales through its
affiliated reseller to unaffiliated customers through a single channel
of distribution and, thus, a single level of trade. See section 772(b)
of the Act. We found that there were significant differences between
the selling activities associated with the CEP level of trade and those
associated with the home-market level of trade. For example, the CEP
level of trade involved little or no sales-strategic and economic
planning, personnel training, advertising, distributor/dealer training,
procurement/sourcing service, packing, and sales/marketing support.
Therefore, we considered the CEP level of trade to be different from
the home-market level of trade and at a less advanced stage of
distribution than the home-market level of trade. Consequently, we
could not match U.S. sales to sales at the same level of trade in the
home market nor could we determine a level-of-trade adjustment based on
EuroChem's home-market sales of the foreign like product. Because the
data available do not provide an appropriate basis to determine a
level-of-trade adjustment and the home-market level of trade is at a
more advanced stage of distribution than the CEP, we have made a CEP-
offset adjustment to normal value in accordance with section
773(a)(7)(B) of the Act. The CEP offset is the sum of indirect selling
expenses incurred on the home-market sales up to the amount of indirect
selling expenses incurred on the U.S. sales.
Preliminary Results of the Review
As a result of this review, we preliminarily determine that a
dumping margin of 1.17 percent exists for EuroChem for the period July
1, 2009, through June 30, 2010.
Disclosure and Comment
We will disclose the calculations used in our analysis to parties
to this review within five days of the date of publication of this
notice. See 19 CFR 351.224(b). Any interested party may request a
hearing within 30 days of the publication of this notice in the Federal
Register. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). If a hearing is requested, the
Department will notify interested parties of the hearing schedule.
Interested parties are invited to comment on the preliminary
results of this review. Interested parties may submit case briefs
within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. See 19 CFR
351.309(c). Rebuttal briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in
the case briefs, may be filed not later than 35 days after the date of
publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 351.309(d). Parties who submit
case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this review are requested to submit
with each argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a brief summary
of the argument with an electronic version included.
We intend to issue the final results of this administrative review,
including the results of our analysis of issues raised in the case
briefs, within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary results
are published. See 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1).
[[Page 35408]]
Assessment Rates
The Department shall determine, and the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212, we have calculated for
EuroChem an importer/customer-specific assessment rate for these
preliminary results of review. We will instruct CBP to assess the
importer/customer-specific rate on applicable entries of subject
merchandise made by the importer during the POR.
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on
May 6, 2003. This clarification applies to entries of subject
merchandise during the POR produced by EuroChem where EuroChem did not
know that its merchandise was destined for the United States. In such
instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the
all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies)
involved in the transaction. For a full discussion of this
clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15
days after the date of publication of the final results of this
administrative review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for
all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as
provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for
EuroChem will be the rate established in the final results of this
review; (2) 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 period; (3) if the exporter
is not a firm covered in this review or the less-than-fair-value
investigation but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be
the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of
the merchandise; (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers
or exporters will continue to be 64.93 percent, the all-others rate
established in Urea From the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 52 FR 19557 (May 26,
1987). These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in
effect until further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice also 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 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 duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: June 10, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011-15123 Filed 6-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
