Magnesium Metal From the Russian Federation: Notice of Reinstated Final Results of Administrative Review Pursuant to Court Decision, 73979-73980 [2012-29990]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 12, 2012 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with
establishment or reorganization of
general-purpose zones;
Whereas, the Triangle J Council of
Governments, grantee of Foreign-Trade
Zone 93, submitted an application to the
Board (FTZ Docket 13, 2012, filed
03/07/2012) for authority to reorganize
under the ASF with a service area of
Chatham, Durham, Franklin, Granville,
Harnett, Johnston, Lee, Moore, Orange,
Person, Vance, Wake and Warren
Counties, North Carolina, within and
adjacent to the Raleigh-Durham
Customs and Border Protection port of
entry. Sites 1 and 1A would be
renumbered as Sites 4 and 1,
respectively. FTZ 93’s Sites 1, 3, and 4
would be categorized as magnet sites,
and FTZ 93’s existing Site 2 would be
categorized as a usage-driven site.
Whereas, notice inviting public
comment was given in the Federal
Register (77 FR 16536–16537, 03/21/12)
and the application has been processed
pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board’s
regulations; and,
Whereas, the Board adopts the
findings and recommendations of the
examiner’s report, and finds that the
requirements of the FTZ Act and the
Board’s regulations are satisfied, and
that the proposal is in the public
interest;
Now, therefore, the Board hereby
orders:
The application to reorganize FTZ 93
under the alternative site framework is
approved, subject to the FTZ Act and
the Board’s regulations, including
Section 400.13, to the Board’s standard
2,000-acre activation limit for the zone,
to a five-year ASF sunset provision for
magnet sites that would terminate
authority for Site 3 and 4 if not activated
by November 30, 2017, and to a threeyear sunset provision for usage-driven
sites that would terminate authority for
Site 2 if no foreign-status merchandise
is admitted for a bona fide customs
purpose by November 30, 2015.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 30th day of
November 2012.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for
Import Administration, Alternate Chairman,
Foreign-Trade Zones Board.
Attest:
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–29883 Filed 12–11–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:48 Dec 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–821–819]
Magnesium Metal From the Russian
Federation: Notice of Reinstated Final
Results of Administrative Review
Pursuant to Court Decision
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On July 27, 2012, the United
States Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit (CAFC) reversed and remanded
a decision of the United States Court of
International Trade (CIT) and ordered it
to reinstate the final results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on magnesium
metal from the Russian Federation
covering the period April 1, 2006,
through March 31, 2007, as applied to
PSC VSMPO–AVISMA Corporation
(VSMPO–AVISMA). See PSC VSMPO–
AVISMA Corp. v. United States, 688
F.3d 751 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (AVISMA IV);
see also Magnesium Metal from the
Russian Federation: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 73 FR 52642 (September 10,
2008) (Final Results). On November 20,
2012, the CIT issued final judgment
pursuant to the CAFC’s remand order in
AVISMA IV reinstating the final results
of administrative review with respect to
VSMPO–AVISMA. See PSC VSMPO–
AVISMA Corp. v. United States, Consol.
Court No 08–00321, Slip Op. 12–142
(Ct. Int’l Trade November 20, 2012)
(AVISMA V). Having previously
amended the final results of
administrative review pursuant to the
earlier CIT decision, the Department of
Commerce (the Department) is, in
accordance with AVISMA V, once again
amending the final results of the
administrative review with respect to
VSMPO–AVISMA to reinstate its
original determination. See Final
Results.
DATES: Effective Date: March 11, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dmitry Vladimirov or Minoo Hatten,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–0665 or (202) 482–
1690, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On September 10, 2008, the
Department published the final results
of the administrative review of the
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
73979
antidumping duty order on magnesium
metal from the Russian Federation for
the period of review April 1, 2006,
through March 31, 2007. See Final
Results. In the Final Results the
Department determined that it was
appropriate to treat raw magnesium and
chlorine gas manufactured by VSMPO–
AVISMA as co-products and to employ
a net-realizable-value (NRV) analysis to
allocate joint costs incurred up to the
split-off point where raw magnesium
and chlorine gas become separately
identifiable products. The Department
calculated a weighted-average dumping
margin for AVISMA of 15.77 percent for
the period April 1, 2006, through March
31, 2007. See Final Results, 73 FR at
52643.
The CIT remanded the Final Results
to the Department to take into account
an affidavit from Dr. George Foster, an
accounting professor (the Foster
Affidavit), when considering the best
methodology for calculating the NRV for
the chlorine gas.1 See PSC VSMPO–
AVISMA Corp. v. United States, Consol.
Court No 08–00321, Slip Op. 09–120
(Ct. Int’l Trade October 20, 2009)
(AVISMA I). In accordance with the
CIT’s order in AVISMA I, the
Department admitted the Foster
Affidavit into the record, considered the
arguments of Dr. Foster upon remand,
and, as a result of that consideration,
determined not to recalculate the
dumping margin for VSMPO–AVISMA
upon concluding that Dr. Foster’s
proposed methodology was not
appropriate to use in this case. See
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to
Remand, dated March 30, 2010 (First
Remand) (available at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/remands). As a result, in
the First Remand the Department used
the same allocation methodology it used
in the Final Results.
In PSC VSMPO–AVISMA Corp. v.
United States, 724 F. Supp. 2d 1308 (Ct.
Int’l Trade 2010) (AVISMA II), the CIT
remanded the Final Results again,
instructing the Department to consider
VSMPO–AVISMA’s entire production
process, including titanium production,
in allocating joint costs to the subject
merchandise. The CIT found the
Department’s cost-allocation
methodology in the Final Results to be
unsupported by substantial record
evidence and not in accordance with
section 773(e)(1) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act). See
AVISMA II, 724 F. Supp. 2d at 1313–16.
In accordance with the CIT’s order in
1 VSMPO–AVISMA submitted the Foster
Affidavit as part of its administrative case brief,
dated June 11, 2008, which the Department rejected
as untimely new factual information.
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with
73980
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 12, 2012 / Notices
AVISMA II, and under respectful
protest, the Department reexamined its
calculation methodology to take
VSMPO–AVISMA’s entire production
process into account, including the
stages of production encompassing and
following ilmenite catalyzation, and,
based on that examination, the
Department recalculated the weightedaverage dumping margin for VSMPO–
AVISMA. See Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Remand,
dated November 22, 2010 (Second
Remand) (available at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/remands). As a result of
the Department’s recalculations, the
weighted-average dumping margin for
the period April 1, 2006, through March
31, 2007, for magnesium metal from the
Russian Federation became 8.51 percent
for VSMPO–AVISMA. See Second
Remand. The CIT sustained the
Department’s Second Remand on March
1, 2011. See PSC VSMPO–AVISMA
Corp. v. United States, Consol. Court No
08–00321, Slip Op. 11–22 (Ct. Int’l
Trade March 1, 2011) (AVISMA III).
On March 11, 2011, consistent with
Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d
337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken), as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs.
Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d
1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010), and pursuant to
section 516A(c) of the Act, the
Department notified the public that the
final CIT judgment in AVISMA III was
not in harmony with the Department’s
final determination and amended the
final results of the administrative review
with respect to VSMPO–AVISMA to
reflect the final CIT judgment in
AVISMA III. See Magnesium Metal from
the Russian Federation: Notice of Court
Decision Not in Harmony With Final
Results of Administrative Review and
Notice of Amended Final Results of
Administrative Review Pursuant to
Court Decision, 76 FR 13355 (March 11,
2011).
On July 27, 2012, the CAFC reversed
and remanded the decision of the CIT
and ordered it to reinstate the final
results of the administrative review as
applied to VSMPO–AVISMA. See
AVISMA IV, 688 F.3d at 765. In
AVISMA IV, the CAFC found that the
CIT infringed upon the Department’s
authority to implement and enforce
proper procedures for constructing an
agency record in its proceedings by
requiring the Department to consider
the untimely submitted Foster Affidavit.
See id. at 761–62. Further, in AVISMA
IV, the CAFC found that the CIT erred
in its interpretation of section 773(e)(1)
of the Act by mandating the Department
to adopt the facility-wise cost allocation
methodology and that the Department’s
choice of accounting methodology in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:48 Dec 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
the Final Results was supported by
substantial record evidence and in
accordance with law. See id. at 762–65.
On November 20, 2012, the CIT issued
final judgment implementing the
CAFC’s remand order in AVISMA IV
and ordering reinstatement of the Final
Results. See AVISMA V.
Reinstatement of Final Results
Because AVISMA V is a final court
decision with respect to VSMPO–
AVISMA, the Department is amending
the final results of administrative review
by reinstating the weighted-average
dumping margin established in the
Final Results for VSMPO–AVISMA.
Accordingly, the weighted-average
dumping margin for the period April 1,
2006, through March 31, 2007, for
magnesium metal from the Russian
Federation is 15.77 percent for VSMPO–
AVISMA. See Final Results, 73 FR at
52643. The Department will instruct
U.S. Customs and Border Protection to
assess antidumping duties on entries of
the subject merchandise manufactured
and exported during the POR by
VSMPO–AVISMA using the assessment
rates calculated by the Department in
the Final Results. See id.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1),
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 5, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012–29990 Filed 12–11–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–831]
Fresh Garlic From the People’s
Republic of China: Preliminary Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2010–2011
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Department) is conducting the
administrative review (AR) of the
antidumping duty order on fresh garlic
from the People’s Republic of China
(PRC), covering the period of review
(POR) November 1, 2010, through
October 31, 2011. The mandatory
respondents in this AR are: Hebei
Golden Bird Trading Co., Ltd. (Golden
Bird) and Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial
Co., Ltd. (Xinboda). The Department has
preliminarily determined that during
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the POR the respondents in this
proceeding have made sales of subject
merchandise at less than normal value
(NV). The Department is also
preliminarily determining that five
companies made no shipments.1
DATES: Effective Date: December 12,
2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Lindgren or Lingjun Wang, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 6, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–3870 or (202) 482–
2316, respectively.
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the order
includes all grades of garlic, whole or
separated into constituent cloves. Fresh
garlic that are subject to the order are
currently classified under the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) 0703.20.0010,
0703.20.0020, 0703.20.0090,
0710.80.7060, 0710.80.9750,
0711.90.6000, and 2005.90.9700.
Although the HTSUS numbers are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written product
description, available in Antidumping
Duty Order: Fresh Garlic from the
People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 59209
(November 16, 1994), remains
dispositive.
Preliminary Determination of No
Shipments
Of the remaining 20 companies
subject to the review, five companies
listed in Appendix I timely filed ‘‘no
shipment’’ certifications stating that
they had no entries of subject
merchandise during the POR. The
Department subsequently confirmed
with the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) the ‘‘no shipment’’
claim made by these companies. Based
on the certifications by these companies
and our analysis of CBP information, we
preliminarily determine that the
companies listed in Appendix I did not
have any reviewable transactions during
the POR. In addition, the Department
finds that consistent with its recently
announced refinement to its assessment
practice in non-market economy (NME)
cases, further discussed below, it is
appropriate not to rescind the review in
part in these circumstances but, rather,
1 On June 11, 2012, the Department issued a
partial rescission, rescinding the AR for 100
companies for whom requests for review were
withdrawn. See Fresh Garlic From the People’s
Republic of China: Partial Rescission of the 2010–
2011 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77
FR 36480 (June 19, 2012).
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 239 (Wednesday, December 12, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73979-73980]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29990]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-821-819]
Magnesium Metal From the Russian Federation: Notice of Reinstated
Final Results of Administrative Review Pursuant to Court Decision
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On July 27, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit (CAFC) reversed and remanded a decision of the United
States Court of International Trade (CIT) and ordered it to reinstate
the final results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty
order on magnesium metal from the Russian Federation covering the
period April 1, 2006, through March 31, 2007, as applied to PSC VSMPO-
AVISMA Corporation (VSMPO-AVISMA). See PSC VSMPO-AVISMA Corp. v. United
States, 688 F.3d 751 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (AVISMA IV); see also Magnesium
Metal from the Russian Federation: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 73 FR 52642 (September 10, 2008) (Final
Results). On November 20, 2012, the CIT issued final judgment pursuant
to the CAFC's remand order in AVISMA IV reinstating the final results
of administrative review with respect to VSMPO-AVISMA. See PSC VSMPO-
AVISMA Corp. v. United States, Consol. Court No 08-00321, Slip Op. 12-
142 (Ct. Int'l Trade November 20, 2012) (AVISMA V). Having previously
amended the final results of administrative review pursuant to the
earlier CIT decision, the Department of Commerce (the Department) is,
in accordance with AVISMA V, once again amending the final results of
the administrative review with respect to VSMPO-AVISMA to reinstate its
original determination. See Final Results.
DATES: Effective Date: March 11, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dmitry Vladimirov or Minoo Hatten, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
0665 or (202) 482-1690, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On September 10, 2008, the Department published the final results
of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on magnesium
metal from the Russian Federation for the period of review April 1,
2006, through March 31, 2007. See Final Results. In the Final Results
the Department determined that it was appropriate to treat raw
magnesium and chlorine gas manufactured by VSMPO-AVISMA as co-products
and to employ a net-realizable-value (NRV) analysis to allocate joint
costs incurred up to the split-off point where raw magnesium and
chlorine gas become separately identifiable products. The Department
calculated a weighted-average dumping margin for AVISMA of 15.77
percent for the period April 1, 2006, through March 31, 2007. See Final
Results, 73 FR at 52643.
The CIT remanded the Final Results to the Department to take into
account an affidavit from Dr. George Foster, an accounting professor
(the Foster Affidavit), when considering the best methodology for
calculating the NRV for the chlorine gas.\1\ See PSC VSMPO-AVISMA Corp.
v. United States, Consol. Court No 08-00321, Slip Op. 09-120 (Ct. Int'l
Trade October 20, 2009) (AVISMA I). In accordance with the CIT's order
in AVISMA I, the Department admitted the Foster Affidavit into the
record, considered the arguments of Dr. Foster upon remand, and, as a
result of that consideration, determined not to recalculate the dumping
margin for VSMPO-AVISMA upon concluding that Dr. Foster's proposed
methodology was not appropriate to use in this case. See Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Remand, dated March 30, 2010 (First Remand)
(available at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/remands). As a result, in the First
Remand the Department used the same allocation methodology it used in
the Final Results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ VSMPO-AVISMA submitted the Foster Affidavit as part of its
administrative case brief, dated June 11, 2008, which the Department
rejected as untimely new factual information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In PSC VSMPO-AVISMA Corp. v. United States, 724 F. Supp. 2d 1308
(Ct. Int'l Trade 2010) (AVISMA II), the CIT remanded the Final Results
again, instructing the Department to consider VSMPO-AVISMA's entire
production process, including titanium production, in allocating joint
costs to the subject merchandise. The CIT found the Department's cost-
allocation methodology in the Final Results to be unsupported by
substantial record evidence and not in accordance with section
773(e)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). See AVISMA
II, 724 F. Supp. 2d at 1313-16. In accordance with the CIT's order in
[[Page 73980]]
AVISMA II, and under respectful protest, the Department reexamined its
calculation methodology to take VSMPO-AVISMA's entire production
process into account, including the stages of production encompassing
and following ilmenite catalyzation, and, based on that examination,
the Department recalculated the weighted-average dumping margin for
VSMPO-AVISMA. See Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Remand, dated
November 22, 2010 (Second Remand) (available at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/remands). As a result of the Department's recalculations, the weighted-
average dumping margin for the period April 1, 2006, through March 31,
2007, for magnesium metal from the Russian Federation became 8.51
percent for VSMPO-AVISMA. See Second Remand. The CIT sustained the
Department's Second Remand on March 1, 2011. See PSC VSMPO-AVISMA Corp.
v. United States, Consol. Court No 08-00321, Slip Op. 11-22 (Ct. Int'l
Trade March 1, 2011) (AVISMA III).
On March 11, 2011, consistent with Timken Co. v. United States, 893
F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken), as clarified by Diamond Sawblades
Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010), and
pursuant to section 516A(c) of the Act, the Department notified the
public that the final CIT judgment in AVISMA III was not in harmony
with the Department's final determination and amended the final results
of the administrative review with respect to VSMPO-AVISMA to reflect
the final CIT judgment in AVISMA III. See Magnesium Metal from the
Russian Federation: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final
Results of Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of
Administrative Review Pursuant to Court Decision, 76 FR 13355 (March
11, 2011).
On July 27, 2012, the CAFC reversed and remanded the decision of
the CIT and ordered it to reinstate the final results of the
administrative review as applied to VSMPO-AVISMA. See AVISMA IV, 688
F.3d at 765. In AVISMA IV, the CAFC found that the CIT infringed upon
the Department's authority to implement and enforce proper procedures
for constructing an agency record in its proceedings by requiring the
Department to consider the untimely submitted Foster Affidavit. See id.
at 761-62. Further, in AVISMA IV, the CAFC found that the CIT erred in
its interpretation of section 773(e)(1) of the Act by mandating the
Department to adopt the facility-wise cost allocation methodology and
that the Department's choice of accounting methodology in the Final
Results was supported by substantial record evidence and in accordance
with law. See id. at 762-65. On November 20, 2012, the CIT issued final
judgment implementing the CAFC's remand order in AVISMA IV and ordering
reinstatement of the Final Results. See AVISMA V.
Reinstatement of Final Results
Because AVISMA V is a final court decision with respect to VSMPO-
AVISMA, the Department is amending the final results of administrative
review by reinstating the weighted-average dumping margin established
in the Final Results for VSMPO-AVISMA. Accordingly, the weighted-
average dumping margin for the period April 1, 2006, through March 31,
2007, for magnesium metal from the Russian Federation is 15.77 percent
for VSMPO-AVISMA. See Final Results, 73 FR at 52643. The Department
will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to assess antidumping
duties on entries of the subject merchandise manufactured and exported
during the POR by VSMPO-AVISMA using the assessment rates calculated by
the Department in the Final Results. See id.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 5, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-29990 Filed 12-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P