Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Court Decisions Not in Harmony With Final Results of Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of Administrative Review; 2006-2007, 59651-59652 [2013-23636]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 188 / Friday, September 27, 2013 / Notices
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Initiation of New Shipper Reviews
Katie Marksberry, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 9, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202–
482–7906.
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.214(d)(1), we find
that Goldenquality’s NSR request meets
the threshold requirements for initiation
of an NSR for the shipment of certain
frozen warmwater shrimp from Vietnam
produced and exported by
Goldenquality.8 The period of review
(‘‘POR’’) is February 1, 2013 through
July 31, 2013.9 The Department intends
to issue the preliminary results of this
NSR no later than 180 days from the
date of initiation, and the final results
no later than 270 days from the date of
initiation.10
It is the Department’s usual practice,
in cases involving non-market
economies (‘‘NMEs’’), to require that a
company seeking to establish eligibility
for an antidumping duty rate separate
from the NME entity-wide rate provide
evidence of de jure and de facto absence
of government control over the
company’s export activities.
Accordingly, we will issue a
questionnaire to Goldenquality, which
will include a section requesting
information with regard to its export
activities for separate rate purposes. The
NSR will proceed if the response
provides sufficient indication that
Goldenquality is not subject to either de
jure or de facto government control with
respect to its exports of subject
merchandise.
We will instruct U.S. Customs and
Border Protection to allow, at the option
of the importer, the posting, until the
completion of the NSR, of a bond or
security in lieu of a cash deposit for
each entry of the subject merchandise
from Goldenquality in accordance with
section 751(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act and
19 CFR 351.214(e). Because
Goldenquality certified that it produced
and exported the subject merchandise,
the sale of which is the basis for this
NSR request, we will apply the bonding
privilege to Goldenquality only for
subject merchandise which
Goldenquality both produced and
exported.
Interested parties requiring access to
proprietary information in this NSR
should submit applications for
disclosure under administrative
protective order in accordance with 19
CFR 351.305 and 19 CFR 351.306.
This initiation and notice are
published in accordance with section
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
The notice announcing the
antidumping duty order on shrimp from
Vietnam was published in the Federal
Register on February 1, 2005.1 On
August 30, 2013, pursuant to section
751(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (‘‘the Act’’), and 19 CFR
351.214, the Department received a
timely request to conduct an NSR of the
Order from Goldenquality Seafood
Corporation (‘‘Goldenquality’’).2
Goldenquality has certified that it is the
producer and exporter of the subject
merchandise upon which the request
was based.3
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i),
Goldenquality certified that it did not
export subject merchandise to the
United States during the period of
investigation (‘‘POI’’).4 In addition,
pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(II) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A),
Goldenquality certified that, since the
initiation of the investigation, it has
never been affiliated with any Vietnam
exporter or producer who exported
subject merchandise to the United
States during the POI, including those
respondents not individually examined
during the investigation.5 As required
by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(B),
Goldenquality also certified that its
export activities were not controlled by
the Vietnam central government.6
In addition to the certifications
described above, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.214(b)(2)(iv), Goldenquality
submitted documentation establishing
the following: (1) The date on which it
first shipped subject merchandise for
export to the United States; (2) the
volume of its first shipment; and (3) the
date of its first sale to an unaffiliated
customer in the United States.7
1 See Notice of Amended Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping
Duty Order: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp
From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 70 FR 5152
(February 1, 2005) (‘‘Order’’).
2 See, generally, Goldenquality’s NSR request
dated August 30, 2013.
3 See id., at 2.
4 See id., at 2 and Exhibit 1.
5 See id.
6 See id., at 2.
7 See id., at 2–3 and Exhibits 2–4.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:21 Sep 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
8 See ‘‘Memorandum to the File, from James C.
Doyle, Director, Office 9, ‘‘Initiation of AD New
Shipper Review: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp
From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam A–552–
802,’’ dated concurrently with this notice.
9 See 19 CFR 351.214(g)(1)(i)(B).
10 See section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
59651
751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.214 and 351.221(c)(1)(i).
Dated: September 18, 2013.
Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2013–23635 Filed 9–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–580–816]
Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon
Steel Flat Products From the Republic
of Korea: Notice of Court Decisions
Not in Harmony With Final Results of
Administrative Review and Notice of
Amended Final Results of
Administrative Review; 2006–2007
On August 8, 2013, the
United States Court of International
Trade (‘‘CIT’’ or ‘‘Court’’) enter final
judgments sustaining the Department of
Commerce’s (‘‘Department’’) final
results of the remand redeterminations 1
relating to the fourteenth administrative
review of the antidumping duty order
on certain corrosion-resistant carbon
steel flat products (‘‘CORE’’) from the
Republic of Korea (‘‘Korea’’), pursuant
to the CIT’s remand orders in Union
Steel v. United States, 755 F. Supp. 2d
1304 (CIT 2011) (‘‘Union I’’), and United
States Steel Corp. v. United States, 759
F. Supp. 2d 1349 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2011)
(‘‘U.S. Steel I’’). Consistent with the
decision of the United States Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit
(‘‘CAFC’’) in 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)
(‘‘Diamond Sawblades’’), the
Department is notifying the public that
the final CIT judgments in this case are
not in harmony with the Department’s
final results of administrative review
and is amending its final results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on CORE from
Korea covering the period of review
(‘‘POR’’) of August 1, 2006 through July
31, 2007, with respect to the weightedaverage dumping margin assigned to
Union Steel Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Union’’).
DATES: Effective August 19, 2013.
SUMMARY:
1 See Final Remand Results of Redetermination
Pursuant to Remand, CIT Court No. 09–00130 (July
15, 2011) (‘‘Union Remand Results’’); Final Remand
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Remand,
CIT Court No. 09–00156 (July 15, 2011) (‘‘U.S. Steel
Remand Results’’).
E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM
27SEN1
59652
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 188 / Friday, September 27, 2013 / Notices
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher Hargett, Office 8, AD/CVD
Operations, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–4161.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department published the final
results of the fourteenth administrative
review of the antidumping duty order
on CORE from Korea on March 16,
2009.2 Union, United States Steel
Corporation, and Nucor Corporation
respectively filed timely complaints
with the CIT to challenge various
aspects of the Final Results.
On February 15, 2011, the Court
remanded for the Department to
reconsider its positions with regard to
the model-match criteria as applied to
Union, the major input adjustment as
applied to Union, and certain
adjustments to Union’s substrate
purchases.3 On July 15, 2011, the
Department filed remand
redeterminations in which it revised its
position with regard to the model-match
criteria and purchases of substrate steel
and material purchases as applied to
Union.4 Accordingly, the Department
recalculated Union’s weighted-average
margin from 7.56 percent in the Final
Results to 7.45 percent.5 On April 25,
2012, the Court sustained the
Department’s remand redeterminations
regarding the model-match criteria and
substrate steel and material purchases as
applied to Union.6 On August 8, 2013,
after disposition of remaining issues, the
Court entered final judgments.7
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, as clarified
by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC held
2 See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel
Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Notice of
Final Results of the Fourteenth Administrative
Review and Partial Rescission, 74 FR 11082 (March
16, 2009) (‘‘Final Results’’), amended by Certain
Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from
the Republic of Korea: Notice of Amended Final
Results of the Fourteenth Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 74 FR 19199 (April 28,
2009) (amending with respect to Dongbu Steel Co.,
Ltd., Hyundai HYSCO, Pohang Iron & Steel Co.,
Ltd., and Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd.).
3 See Union I and U.S. Steel I.
4 See Union Remand Results and U.S. Steel
Remand Results.
5 Id.
6 See Union Steel v. United States, 836 F. Supp.
2d 1382 (CIT 2012); United States Steel Corp. v.
United States, 844 F. Supp. 2d 1334 (CIT 2012).
7 See Union Steel v. United States, Court No. 09–
00130, Slip Op. 13–104 (CIT August 8, 2013);
United States Steel Corp. v. United States, Consol.
Court No. 09–00156, Slip Op. 13–103 (CIT August
8, 2013).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:21 Sep 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
that, pursuant to section 516A(c) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), the Department must publish a
notice of a court decision that is not ‘‘in
harmony’’ with a Department
determination and must suspend
liquidation of entries pending a
‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The CIT’s
August 8, 2013, judgments in this case
constitute final decisions of that court
that are not in harmony with the
Department’s final results of the
administrative review. This notice is
published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken.
Accordingly, the Department will
continue the suspension of liquidation
of the subject merchandise pending
expiration of the period of appeal or, if
appealed, pending a final and
conclusive court decision. Because the
antidumping duty order on CORE from
Korea has been revoked effective
February 14, 2012, cash deposits are no
longer in effect.8
Amended Final Results
Because there are now final court
decisions with respect to this case, the
Department is amending its Final
Results with respect to Union’s
weighted-average dumping margins for
the period August 1, 2006 through July
31, 2007.9 The revised weighted-average
dumping margin is as follows:
Manufacturer/exporter
Weighted-average
dumping margin
(percent)
Union Steel ...................
7.45
In the event that the CIT’s ruling is
not appealed, or if appealed, upheld by
the CAFC, the Department will instruct
CBP to liquidate entries of subject
merchandise in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b).10
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1),
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: September 19, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013–23636 Filed 9–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
International Trade Administration
[A–580–816]
Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon
Steel Flat Products From the Republic
of Korea: Notice of Court Decision Not
in Harmony With Final Results of
Administrative Review and Notice of
Amended Final Results of
Administrative Review; 2005–2006
On August 8, 2013, the
United States Court of International
Trade (‘‘CIT’’ or ‘‘Court’’) entered final
judgment sustaining the Department of
Commerce’s (‘‘Department’’) final
results of the remand redetermination 1
relating to the thirteenth administrative
review of the antidumping duty order
on certain corrosion-resistant carbon
steel flat products (‘‘CORE’’) from the
Republic of Korea (‘‘Korea’’), pursuant
to the CIT’s remand order in Union Steel
v. United States, 753 F. Supp. 2d 1317
(CIT 2011) (‘‘Union II’’). Consistent with
the decision of the United States Court
of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
(‘‘CAFC’’) in 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)
(‘‘Diamond Sawblades’’), the
Department is notifying the public that
the final CIT judgment in this case is not
in harmony with the Department’s final
results of administrative review and is
amending its final results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on CORE from
Korea covering the period of review
(‘‘POR’’) of August 1, 2005 through July
31, 2006, with respect to the weightedaverage dumping margin assigned to
Union Steel Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Union’’).
DATES: Effective August 19, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher Hargett, Office 8, AD/CVD
Operations, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–4161.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Background
8 See Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat
Products from Germany and the Republic of Korea:
Revocation of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Orders, 78 FR 16832 (March 19, 2013)
9 The remaining weighted-average dumping
margins from the Final Results, as subsequently
amended, remain unchanged.
10 See Final Results, 74 FR 11083.
PO 00000
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Sfmt 4703
The Department published the final
results of the thirteenth administrative
review of the antidumping duty order
on CORE from Korea on March 17,
1 See Final Remand Results of Redetermination
Pursuant to Remand, CIT Court No. 08–00101
(April 11, 2011) (‘‘Second Remand Results’’).
E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM
27SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 188 (Friday, September 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59651-59652]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23636]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-580-816]
Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the
Republic of Korea: Notice of Court Decisions Not in Harmony With Final
Results of Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of
Administrative Review; 2006-2007
SUMMARY: On August 8, 2013, the United States Court of International
Trade (``CIT'' or ``Court'') enter final judgments sustaining the
Department of Commerce's (``Department'') final results of the remand
redeterminations \1\ relating to the fourteenth administrative review
of the antidumping duty order on certain corrosion-resistant carbon
steel flat products (``CORE'') from the Republic of Korea (``Korea''),
pursuant to the CIT's remand orders in Union Steel v. United States,
755 F. Supp. 2d 1304 (CIT 2011) (``Union I''), and United States Steel
Corp. v. United States, 759 F. Supp. 2d 1349 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2011)
(``U.S. Steel I''). Consistent with the decision of the United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (``CAFC'') in 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) (``Diamond Sawblades''), the Department is notifying
the public that the final CIT judgments in this case are not in harmony
with the Department's final results of administrative review and is
amending its final results of the administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on CORE from Korea covering the period of review
(``POR'') of August 1, 2006 through July 31, 2007, with respect to the
weighted-average dumping margin assigned to Union Steel Manufacturing
Co., Ltd. (``Union'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Final Remand Results of Redetermination Pursuant to
Remand, CIT Court No. 09-00130 (July 15, 2011) (``Union Remand
Results''); Final Remand Results of Redetermination Pursuant to
Remand, CIT Court No. 09-00156 (July 15, 2011) (``U.S. Steel Remand
Results'').
DATES: Effective August 19, 2013.
[[Page 59652]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Hargett, Office 8, AD/CVD
Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4161.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department published the final results of the fourteenth
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on CORE from Korea
on March 16, 2009.\2\ Union, United States Steel Corporation, and Nucor
Corporation respectively filed timely complaints with the CIT to
challenge various aspects of the Final Results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products
from the Republic of Korea: Notice of Final Results of the
Fourteenth Administrative Review and Partial Rescission, 74 FR 11082
(March 16, 2009) (``Final Results''), amended by Certain Corrosion-
Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea:
Notice of Amended Final Results of the Fourteenth Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 74 FR 19199 (April 28, 2009) (amending with
respect to Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd., Hyundai HYSCO, Pohang Iron &
Steel Co., Ltd., and Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 15, 2011, the Court remanded for the Department to
reconsider its positions with regard to the model-match criteria as
applied to Union, the major input adjustment as applied to Union, and
certain adjustments to Union's substrate purchases.\3\ On July 15,
2011, the Department filed remand redeterminations in which it revised
its position with regard to the model-match criteria and purchases of
substrate steel and material purchases as applied to Union.\4\
Accordingly, the Department recalculated Union's weighted-average
margin from 7.56 percent in the Final Results to 7.45 percent.\5\ On
April 25, 2012, the Court sustained the Department's remand
redeterminations regarding the model-match criteria and substrate steel
and material purchases as applied to Union.\6\ On August 8, 2013, after
disposition of remaining issues, the Court entered final judgments.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Union I and U.S. Steel I.
\4\ See Union Remand Results and U.S. Steel Remand Results.
\5\ Id.
\6\ See Union Steel v. United States, 836 F. Supp. 2d 1382 (CIT
2012); United States Steel Corp. v. United States, 844 F. Supp. 2d
1334 (CIT 2012).
\7\ See Union Steel v. United States, Court No. 09-00130, Slip
Op. 13-104 (CIT August 8, 2013); United States Steel Corp. v. United
States, Consol. Court No. 09-00156, Slip Op. 13-103 (CIT August 8,
2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the
CAFC held that, pursuant to section 516A(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (``the Act''), the Department must publish a notice of a
court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a Department
determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a
``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's August 8, 2013, judgments in
this case constitute final decisions of that court that are not in
harmony with the Department's final results of the administrative
review. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication
requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the Department will continue the
suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise pending expiration
of the period of appeal or, if appealed, pending a final and conclusive
court decision. Because the antidumping duty order on CORE from Korea
has been revoked effective February 14, 2012, cash deposits are no
longer in effect.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from
Germany and the Republic of Korea: Revocation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Orders, 78 FR 16832 (March 19, 2013)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Results
Because there are now final court decisions with respect to this
case, the Department is amending its Final Results with respect to
Union's weighted-average dumping margins for the period August 1, 2006
through July 31, 2007.\9\ The revised weighted-average dumping margin
is as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The remaining weighted-average dumping margins from the
Final Results, as subsequently amended, remain unchanged.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-average
Manufacturer/exporter dumping margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Union Steel......................................... 7.45
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the event that the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or if appealed,
upheld by the CAFC, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate
entries of subject merchandise in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Final Results, 74 FR 11083.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: September 19, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013-23636 Filed 9-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
