Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes From the People's Republic of China: Amended Final Results of the First Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order, 15042-15043 [2012-6188]

Download as PDF 15042 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 14, 2012 / Notices protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction. We are issuing and publishing this administrative review and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: March 7, 2012. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix I—Issues & Decision Memorandum COMMENT I: SELECTION OF SURROGATE COUNTRY A. Economic Comparability B. Significant Producer of the Comparable Merchandise C. Data Considerations COMMENT II: SURROGATE VALUES A. Financial Ratios 1. Selection of Surrogate Companies B. By-Products Offsets 1. Fish Waste 2. Fish Oil 3. Fresh Broken Fillets 4. Frozen Broken Fillets 5. Fish Meal C. Farming Factors 1. Fingerlings, Fish Feed, Nutrients, Lime D. Other Surrogate Values 1. Labor 2. Salt 3. STPP, CO Gas, PE Bags, Cartons, Tape, Label, Plastic Sheet, Banding, Diesel, Coal 4. Brokerage & Handling COMMENT III: ZEROING Company-Specific Issues COMMENT IV: VINH HOAN A. Fish Consumption B. Revocation C. Farming Water COMMENT V: CONSIDERATION OF VINH QUANG AS A VOLUNTARY RESPONDENT COMMENT VI: SOUTH VINA SEPARATE RATE CERTIFICATION [FR Doc. 2012–6201 Filed 3–13–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES [A–570–929] Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes From the People’s Republic of China: Amended Final Results of the First Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective Date: March 14, 2012. SUMMARY: On September 13, 2011, the Department of Commerce AGENCY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:29 Mar 13, 2012 Jkt 226001 (‘‘Department’’) published the final results of the antidumping duty administrative review of small diameter graphite electrodes (‘‘SDGE’’) from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’), covering the period August 21, 2008, through January 31, 2010.1 We are amending our Final Results to correct certain ministerial errors made in the calculation of the antidumping duty margins for Fushun Jinly Petrochemical Carbon Co., Ltd. (‘‘Fushun Jinly’’); Beijing Fangda Carbon Tech Co., Ltd. (‘‘Beijing Fangda’’), Fangda Carbon New Material Co., Ltd. (‘‘Fangda Carbon’’), Fushun Carbon Co., Ltd. (‘‘‘Fushun Carbon’’), and Hefei Carbon Co., Ltd. (‘‘Hefei’’); and Xinghe County Muzi Co., Ltd. (‘‘Muzi’’) pursuant to section 751(h) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), and 19 CFR 351.224(e). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lindsey Novom or Frances Veith, 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) 482–5256 or (202) 482– 4295, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On September 13, 2011, the Department published its affirmative final results in this proceeding.2 On September 19, 2011, Fushun Jinly and Beijing Fangda, Chengdu Rongguang Carbon Co., Ltd. (‘‘Rongguang’’), Fangda Carbon, Fushun Carbon, and Hefei (collectively ‘‘the Fangda Group’’), mandatory respondents, submitted ministerial error allegations and requested, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(c), that the Department correct the alleged ministerial errors in the calculation of Fushun Jinly and the Fangda Group’s dumping margins. Muzi, a separate rate company, also submitted ministerial error allegations on September 19, 2011. SGL Carbon LLC and Superior Graphite Co. (‘‘Petitioners’’) submitted rebuttal comments on September 23, 2011. Before the Department could take action on the alleged ministerial errors, Petitioners filed a summons and complaint with the U.S. Court of International Trade (‘‘CIT’’) challenging the Final Results, which vested the CIT with jurisdiction over the administrative proceeding. On February 22, 2012, the 1 See Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of the First Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order and Final Rescission of the Administrative Review, in Part, 76 FR 56397 (September 13, 2011) (‘‘Final Results’’). 2 See Final Results. PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 CIT granted the Department leave to publish these amended final results to correct certain ministerial errors.3 Ministerial Errors A ministerial error as defined in section 751(h) of the Act includes ‘‘errors in addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical error resulting from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any other type of unintentional error which the administering authority considers ministerial.’’ 4 After analyzing all interested party comments and rebuttals, we have determined, in accordance with section 751(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(e), that we made certain ministerial errors in our calculations for the Final Results. For a detailed discussion of these ministerial errors, as well as the Department’s analysis of the errors and allegations, see the Memorandum to the File, ‘‘First Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes from the People’s Republic of China: Analysis of Ministerial Error Allegations,’’ dated concurrently with this notice (‘‘Ministerial Error Memo’’). Additionally, in the Final Results, we determined that Muzi qualified for a separate rate.5 Because the cash deposit rate for Muzi was based on the calculated rate of the mandatory respondents, Fushun Jinly and the Fangda Group, and the margins for both companies have changed since the Final Results, the separate rate has changed as well.6 Finally, we have corrected a misspelling of Muzi’s full name. The amended weighted-average dumping margins are as follows: SDGEs from the PRC Exporters Percent margin Beijing Fangda Carbon Tech Co., Ltd., Fangda Carbon New Material Co., Ltd., Fushun Carbon Co., Ltd., Hefei Carbon Co., Ltd Fushun Jinly Petrochemical Carbon Co., Ltd .............................. Xinghe County Muzi Carbon Co., Ltd ............................................. 1.10 39.83 16.00 Notification of Interested Parties This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 3 See SGL Carbon LLC v. United States, Consol. Court No. 11–00389 (Ct. Int’l Trade February 22, 2012) (order granting the Department leave to publish amended final results correcting ministerial errors no later than March 16, 2012). 4 See also 19 CFR 351.224(f). 5 See Final Results. 6 See Ministerial Error Memo. E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM 14MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 14, 2012 / Notices 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 the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (‘‘APOs’’) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation that is subject to sanction. srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Disclosure We will disclose the calculations performed for these amended final results within five days of the date of publication of this notice to interested parties in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Assessment Rate Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the amended final results of this review. For assessment purposes, we calculated importer (or customer)-specific assessment rates for merchandise subject to this review. Where appropriate, we calculated an ad valorem rate for each importer (or customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for reviewed sales to that party by the total entered values associated with those transactions. For dutyassessment rates calculated on this basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting ad valorem rate against the entered customs values for the subject merchandise. Where appropriate, we calculated a per-unit rate for each importer (or customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for reviewed sales to that party by the total sales quantity associated with those transactions. For duty-assessment rates calculated on this basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting per-unit rate VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:29 Mar 13, 2012 Jkt 226001 against the entered quantity of the subject merchandise. Where an importer (or customer)-specific assessment rate is de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent), the Department will instruct CBP to assess that importer (or customer’s) entries of subject merchandise without regard to antidumping duties, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). On September 28, 2011, the U.S. Court of International Trade issued a preliminary injunction enjoining liquidation of certain entries which are subject to the antidumping duty order on SDGEs from the PRC, for the POR.7 Accordingly, the Department will not issue assessment instructions for any entries subject to the above-mentioned injunction to CBP after publication of this notice. Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective retroactively on any entries made on or after September 13, 2011, the date of publication of the Final Results, for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For Fushun Jinly, the Fangda Group, and Muzi, the cash deposit rate will be the amended final margin rate shown above in the ‘‘Ministerial Errors’’ section of this notice; (2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and nonPRC exporters not listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the PRCwide rate of 159.64 percent; and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporters that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further notice. These amended final results are published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1), 751(h) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: March 7, 2012. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. 2012–6188 Filed 3–13–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 7 See SGL Carbon LLC and Superior Graphite Co. v. United States, CIT Court No. 11–00389 dated September 28, 2011. PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 15043 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Minority Business Development Agency Request for Tribal Consultation on the Minority Business Development Agency’s (MBDA) Native American Business Enterprise Center (NABEC) Program; Notice of Public Webinars Department of Commerce. Meeting Notice. AGENCY: ACTION: The Department of Commerce’s (Department) Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) seeks to redesign its Native American Business Center (NABEC) program. The NABEC program is a key component of MBDA’s business development assistance program and promotes the growth and competitiveness of eligible Native American and minority-owned businesses. As part of the NABEC program, businesses that are owned or controlled by the following persons or groups of persons are eligible to receive business assistance services: American Indians and Native Americans (including Alaska Natives, Alaska Native Corporations, Tribal entities, tribal universities and tribal governments), African Americans, Asian Indian Americans, Asian and Pacific Islander Americans, Hasidic Jewish Americans, and Hispanic Americans. The MBDA will conduct two webinars, on March 13 and 15, 2012, to seek input and recommendations from tribal organizations and tribal governments on the proposed redesign of the NABEC program. MBDA has planned a more cohesive program involving collaboration among the NABECs and Minority Business Enterprises (MBEs) to achieve the same program goals, and to expand and promote export initiatives and international trade opportunities aligned with President Obama’s National Export Initiative (NEI). DATES: Webinars will be held on the following dates and times: March 13, 2012, 3 p.m.–4 p.m. EDT; and March 15, 2012 at 3 p.m.–4 p.m. EDT. Registration information is provided in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dee Alexander, Senior Advisor on Native American Affairs, Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 5422, Washington, DC 20230, by telephone at (202) 482–0789, or by email at dalexander@doc.gov. You may also contact Holden Hoofnagle, Chief of the MBDA Office of Business Development, SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM 14MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 50 (Wednesday, March 14, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15042-15043]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6188]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-929]


Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes From the People's Republic of 
China: Amended Final Results of the First Administrative Review of the 
Antidumping Duty Order

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

DATES: Effective Date: March 14, 2012.
SUMMARY: On September 13, 2011, the Department of Commerce 
(``Department'') published the final results of the antidumping duty 
administrative review of small diameter graphite electrodes (``SDGE'') 
from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''), covering the period 
August 21, 2008, through January 31, 2010.\1\ We are amending our Final 
Results to correct certain ministerial errors made in the calculation 
of the antidumping duty margins for Fushun Jinly Petrochemical Carbon 
Co., Ltd. (``Fushun Jinly''); Beijing Fangda Carbon Tech Co., Ltd. 
(``Beijing Fangda''), Fangda Carbon New Material Co., Ltd. (``Fangda 
Carbon''), Fushun Carbon Co., Ltd. (```Fushun Carbon''), and Hefei 
Carbon Co., Ltd. (``Hefei''); and Xinghe County Muzi Co., Ltd. 
(``Muzi'') pursuant to section 751(h) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (``the Act''), and 19 CFR 351.224(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes from the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results of the First Administrative Review 
of the Antidumping Duty Order and Final Rescission of the 
Administrative Review, in Part, 76 FR 56397 (September 13, 2011) 
(``Final Results'').

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lindsey Novom or Frances Veith, 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) 482-5256 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
or (202) 482-4295, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On September 13, 2011, the Department published its affirmative 
final results in this proceeding.\2\ On September 19, 2011, Fushun 
Jinly and Beijing Fangda, Chengdu Rongguang Carbon Co., Ltd. 
(``Rongguang''), Fangda Carbon, Fushun Carbon, and Hefei (collectively 
``the Fangda Group''), mandatory respondents, submitted ministerial 
error allegations and requested, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(c), that 
the Department correct the alleged ministerial errors in the 
calculation of Fushun Jinly and the Fangda Group's dumping margins. 
Muzi, a separate rate company, also submitted ministerial error 
allegations on September 19, 2011. SGL Carbon LLC and Superior Graphite 
Co. (``Petitioners'') submitted rebuttal comments on September 23, 
2011. Before the Department could take action on the alleged 
ministerial errors, Petitioners filed a summons and complaint with the 
U.S. Court of International Trade (``CIT'') challenging the Final 
Results, which vested the CIT with jurisdiction over the administrative 
proceeding. On February 22, 2012, the CIT granted the Department leave 
to publish these amended final results to correct certain ministerial 
errors.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Final Results.
    \3\ See SGL Carbon LLC v. United States, Consol. Court No. 11-
00389 (Ct. Int'l Trade February 22, 2012) (order granting the 
Department leave to publish amended final results correcting 
ministerial errors no later than March 16, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ministerial Errors

    A ministerial error as defined in section 751(h) of the Act 
includes ``errors in addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic 
function, clerical error resulting from inaccurate copying, 
duplication, or the like, and any other type of unintentional error 
which the administering authority considers ministerial.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See also 19 CFR 351.224(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After analyzing all interested party comments and rebuttals, we 
have determined, in accordance with section 751(h) of the Act and 19 
CFR 351.224(e), that we made certain ministerial errors in our 
calculations for the Final Results. For a detailed discussion of these 
ministerial errors, as well as the Department's analysis of the errors 
and allegations, see the Memorandum to the File, ``First Administrative 
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Small Diameter Graphite 
Electrodes from the People's Republic of China: Analysis of Ministerial 
Error Allegations,'' dated concurrently with this notice (``Ministerial 
Error Memo'').
    Additionally, in the Final Results, we determined that Muzi 
qualified for a separate rate.\5\ Because the cash deposit rate for 
Muzi was based on the calculated rate of the mandatory respondents, 
Fushun Jinly and the Fangda Group, and the margins for both companies 
have changed since the Final Results, the separate rate has changed as 
well.\6\ Finally, we have corrected a misspelling of Muzi's full name. 
The amended weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Final Results.
    \6\ See Ministerial Error Memo.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           SDGEs from the PRC
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
                          Exporters                              margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beijing Fangda Carbon Tech Co., Ltd., Fangda Carbon New             1.10
 Material Co., Ltd., Fushun Carbon Co., Ltd., Hefei Carbon
 Co., Ltd....................................................
Fushun Jinly Petrochemical Carbon Co., Ltd...................      39.83
Xinghe County Muzi Carbon Co., Ltd...........................      16.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification of Interested Parties

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their

[[Page 15043]]

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 the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.
    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (``APOs'') of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which 
continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of 
the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction 
of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby 
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO 
is a violation that is subject to sanction.

Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed for these amended final 
results within five days of the date of publication of this notice to 
interested parties in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Assessment Rate

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.212(b), 
the Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
(``CBP'') shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries 
of subject merchandise in accordance with the amended final results of 
this review. For assessment purposes, we calculated importer (or 
customer)-specific assessment rates for merchandise subject to this 
review. Where appropriate, we calculated an ad valorem rate for each 
importer (or customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for 
reviewed sales to that party by the total entered values associated 
with those transactions. For duty-assessment rates calculated on this 
basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting ad valorem rate 
against the entered customs values for the subject merchandise. Where 
appropriate, we calculated a per-unit rate for each importer (or 
customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for reviewed sales to 
that party by the total sales quantity associated with those 
transactions. For duty-assessment rates calculated on this basis, we 
will direct CBP to assess the resulting per-unit rate against the 
entered quantity of the subject merchandise. Where an importer (or 
customer)-specific assessment rate is de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 
percent), the Department will instruct CBP to assess that importer (or 
customer's) entries of subject merchandise without regard to 
antidumping duties, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). On 
September 28, 2011, the U.S. Court of International Trade issued a 
preliminary injunction enjoining liquidation of certain entries which 
are subject to the antidumping duty order on SDGEs from the PRC, for 
the POR.\7\ Accordingly, the Department will not issue assessment 
instructions for any entries subject to the above-mentioned injunction 
to CBP after publication of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See SGL Carbon LLC and Superior Graphite Co. v. United 
States, CIT Court No. 11-00389 dated September 28, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective 
retroactively on any entries made on or after September 13, 2011, the 
date of publication of the Final Results, for all shipments of the 
subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by 
section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For Fushun Jinly, the Fangda 
Group, and Muzi, the cash deposit rate will be the amended final margin 
rate shown above in the ``Ministerial Errors'' section of this notice; 
(2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters 
not listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will 
continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recent 
period; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not 
been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate 
will be the PRC-wide rate of 159.64 percent; and (4) for all non-PRC 
exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own 
rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC 
exporters that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit 
requirements shall remain in effect until further notice.
    These amended final results are published in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1), 751(h) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: March 7, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-6188 Filed 3-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P