Medical University of South Carolina, et al.; Notice of Consolidated Decision on Applications for Duty-Free Entry of Electron Microscope, 46033-46034 [2012-18951]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 149 / Thursday, August 2, 2012 / Notices PRC-wide entity from any segment of this administrative proceeding. The AFA rate of 305.56 percent selected here is from the investigation.20 This rate was calculated based on information contained in the petition, which was corroborated for the final determination. No additional information has been presented in the current review which calls into question the reliability or relevance of the information and the Department’s corroboration. The Department’s corroboration analysis of a PRC-wide rate was affirmed by the Court’s recent decision in The Watanabe Group v. United States, 2010 Lexis 144; Slip Op. 2010–139 (Ct. Int’l Trade Dec. 22, 2010), where the Court held that with no evidence specific to the review and no evidence questioning the prior corroboration of the PRC-wide rate, the Department may rely on the corroborated rate from an earlier segment of the proceeding because doing so is based on a reasonable inference from the current record. Therefore, the Department finds that the information continues to be reliable and relevant and therefore the rate is corroborated. Preliminary Results The Department has determined that the following preliminary dumping margin exists for the period November 1, 2010, through October 31, 2011: Producer/manufacturer PRC-Wide Entity (which includes CMN) ..................... Weightedaverage margin (percent) 305.56 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Assessment Rates Upon issuance of the final results, the Department will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of the final results of this review. We intend to instruct CBP to liquidate entries containing subject merchandise exported by the PRC-wide entity (including CMN) at the PRC-wide rate. Cash Deposit Requirements If these preliminary results are adopted in the final results, then the following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject 20 See Antidumping Duty Order: Pure Magnesium in Granular Form From the People’s Republic of China, 66 FR 57936 (November 19, 2001). VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:15 Aug 01, 2012 Jkt 226001 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 previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recent period; (2) 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 entity rate of 305.56 percent; and (3) 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 exporter that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Disclosure and Public Comment Since no calculations were performed for these partial preliminary results, no disclosure is required under 19 CFR 351.224(b). Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.310(c). Any hearing will be held 37 days after the publication of this notice, or the first business day thereafter unless the Department alters the date pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(d). Individuals who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request within 30 days of the publication of this notice in the Federal Register to the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, pursuant to the Department’s e-filing regulations.21 Requests for a public hearing should contain: (1) The party’s name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) to the extent practicable, an identification of the arguments to be raised at the hearing. Parties should confirm by telephone the time, date, and place of the hearing within 48 hours before the scheduled time. Unless otherwise notified by the Department, interested parties may submit case briefs within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii). As part of the case brief, parties are encouraged to provide a summary of the arguments and a table of authorities cited in accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2). Rebuttal briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs, must be filed within five days after the case brief is filed in 21 See https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help/ IA%20ACCESS%20User%20Guide.pdf. PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 46033 accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(d). All briefs must be filed in accordance with the Department’s e-filing regulations.22 The Department intends to issue the final results of this review, which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised in the briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1). Notification to Importers This notice serves as a 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) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213. Dated: July 27, 2012. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. 2012–18912 Filed 8–1–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Medical University of South Carolina, et al.; Notice of Consolidated Decision on Applications for Duty-Free Entry of Electron Microscope This is a decision consolidated pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89–651, as amended by Pub. L. 106– 36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301). Related records can be viewed between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. in Room 3720, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. Docket Number: 12–025. Applicant: Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29403. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: JEOL, Ltd., Japan. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 39683, July 5, 2012. Docket Number: 12–027. Applicant: University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Company, Czech 22 Id. E:\FR\FM\02AUN1.SGM 02AUN1 46034 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 149 / Thursday, August 2, 2012 / Notices Republic. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 39683, July 5, 2012. Docket Number: 12–028. Applicant: Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433–7765. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Company, Czech Republic. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 39683, July 5, 2012. Docket Number: 12–031. Applicant: Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA 17033. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: JEOL, Ltd., Japan. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 39683, July 5, 2012. Comments: None received. Decision: Approved. No instrument of equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument, for such purposes as this instrument is intended to be used, is being manufactured in the United States at the time the instrument was ordered. Reasons: Each foreign instrument is an electron microscope and is intended for research or scientific educational uses requiring an electron microscope. We know of no electron microscope, or any other instrument suited to these purposes, which was being manufactured in the United States at the time of order of each instrument. Dated: July 26, 2012. Gregory W. Campbell, Director, Subsidies Enforcement Office, Import Administration. [FR Doc. 2012–18951 Filed 8–1–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–981] Utility Scale Wind Towers From the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce DATES: Effective Date: August 2, 2012 SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the ‘‘Department’’) preliminarily determines that utility scale wind towers (‘‘wind towers’’) from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’), as provided in section 733 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). The preliminary dumping margins are shown in the ‘‘Preliminary Determination’’ section of this notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lilit Astvatsatrian, Shawn Higgins, Thomas mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:15 Aug 01, 2012 Jkt 226001 Martin, or Trisha Tran, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–6412, (202) 482– 0679, (202) 482–3936, or (202) 482– 4852, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On December 29, 2011, the Department received a petition, filed by the Wind Tower Trade Coalition (‘‘Petitioner’’) in proper form, concerning imports of wind towers from the PRC.1 In January 2012, the Department requested information regarding, and clarification of, certain areas of the petition. Petitioner filed timely responses to these requests. The Department initiated an antidumping duty (‘‘AD’’) investigation of wind towers from the PRC on January 24, 2012.2 In the petition, Petitioner requested that the Department consider expanding the period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) to include more than two fiscal quarters (i.e., the period normally covered in an investigation involving a non-market economy (‘‘NME’’) country), because a POI of normal duration may not capture a large number of wind tower sales. Accordingly, in the Initiation Notice, the Department stated that it would give further consideration to the duration of the POI.3 In the Initiation Notice, the Department stated that it intended to issue its quantity and value (‘‘Q&V’’) questionnaire to the exporters/ producers named in the petition and to select respondents based on data provided in the responses to the Q&V questionnaire.4 On January 19, 2012, the Department requested Q&V information from 48 companies identified in the petition as potential exporters of wind towers from the PRC.5 The Department received timely responses to its Q&V questionnaire from seven companies. The Department concluded from its review of these responses that the sixmonth POI data ensure a sufficient 1 See Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Utility Scale Wind Towers from the People’s Republic of China and The Socialist Republic of Vietnam (December 29, 2011) (‘‘petition’’). 2 See Utility Scale Wind Towers From the People’s Republic of China and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 77 FR 3440 (January 24, 2012) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’). 3 Id., 77 FR at 3441. 4 Id., 77 FR at 3445. 5 The Department requested this information on the day after the Initiation Notice was signed. PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 number of sales for its analysis.6 Accordingly, the Department, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), determined to follow its normal practice of using the six-month POI.7 After further examining the responses to the Q&V questionnaire, the Department selected as mandatory respondents the two companies reporting the largest quantity of wind tower sales to the United States during the POI (i.e., Chengxi Shipyard Co., Ltd. (‘‘CXS’’) and Titan Wind Energy (Suzhou) Co., Ltd. (‘‘Titan’’)).8 On March 8, 2012, the Department issued the AD questionnaire to both CXS and Titan. In April and May 2012, CXS and Titan submitted timely responses to the Department’s AD questionnaire and Petitioner submitted comments regarding those responses. From April through July 2012, the Department issued supplemental questionnaires to CXS and Titan. From May through July 2012, CXS and Titan submitted timely responses to the Department’s supplemental questionnaires and Petitioner submitted comments regarding several of those responses. In the Initiation Notice, the Department notified parties that they had an opportunity to comment on the scope of the investigation as well as the appropriate physical characteristics of wind towers to be reported in response to the Department’s AD questionnaire. In February 2012, CS Wind China Co., Ltd. and CS Wind Corporation (collectively, ‘‘CS Wind’’) and Petitioner submitted comments to the Department regarding the scope and the physical characteristics of merchandise under consideration to be used for reporting purposes. On February 13, 2012, CS Wind requested to be treated as a voluntary respondent in this investigation.9 CS Wind, however, withdrew its request for treatment as a voluntary respondent on April 30, 2012.10 6 See Memorandum from Abdelali Elouaradia, Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Respondent Selection in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Utility Scale Wind Towers from the People’s Republic of China’’ (March 7, 2012) (‘‘Respondent Selection Memorandum’’) at 5. 7 Id. 8 Id. at 4–6; section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. 9 See Letter from CS Wind to the Secretary of Commerce, ‘‘Request To Be Voluntary Respondent in the Antidumping Duty Investigation on Utility Scale Wind Towers from the People’s Republic of China’’ (February 13, 2012). 10 See Letter from CS Wind to the Secretary of Commerce, ‘‘CS Wind China’s Withdrawal of Request for Treatment as a Voluntary Respondent in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Utility Scale Wind Towers from the People’s Republic of China’’ (April 30, 2012). E:\FR\FM\02AUN1.SGM 02AUN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 149 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46033-46034]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18951]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


Medical University of South Carolina, et al.; Notice of 
Consolidated Decision on Applications for Duty-Free Entry of Electron 
Microscope

    This is a decision consolidated pursuant to Section 6(c) of the 
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 
(Pub. L. 89-651, as amended by Pub. L. 106-36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR 
part 301). Related records can be viewed between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. 
in Room 3720, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution Avenue 
NW., Washington, DC.
    Docket Number: 12-025. Applicant: Medical University of South 
Carolina, Charleston, SC 29403. Instrument: Electron Microscope. 
Manufacturer: JEOL, Ltd., Japan. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 
39683, July 5, 2012.
    Docket Number: 12-027. Applicant: University of Wyoming, Laramie, 
WY 82071. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Company, 
Czech

[[Page 46034]]

Republic. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 39683, July 5, 2012.
    Docket Number: 12-028. Applicant: Air Force Institute of 
Technology, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7765. Instrument: Electron 
Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Company, Czech Republic. Intended Use: 
See notice at 77 FR 39683, July 5, 2012.
    Docket Number: 12-031. Applicant: Penn State College of Medicine, 
Hershey, PA 17033. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: JEOL, 
Ltd., Japan. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 39683, July 5, 2012.
    Comments: None received. Decision: Approved. No instrument of 
equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument, for such 
purposes as this instrument is intended to be used, is being 
manufactured in the United States at the time the instrument was 
ordered. Reasons: Each foreign instrument is an electron microscope and 
is intended for research or scientific educational uses requiring an 
electron microscope. We know of no electron microscope, or any other 
instrument suited to these purposes, which was being manufactured in 
the United States at the time of order of each instrument.

    Dated: July 26, 2012.
Gregory W. Campbell,
Director, Subsidies Enforcement Office, Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-18951 Filed 8-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P