International Trade Administration 2005 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

In response to a request made on July 29, 2005, by Pastificio Antonio Pallante, S.r.L., the Department of Commerce initiated an administrative review of the countervailing duty order on certain pasta from Italy, covering the period January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2004. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Requests for Revocation in Part, 70 FR 51009 (August 29, 2005). As a result of a timely withdrawal of the request for review by Pastificio Antonio Pallante, S.r.L., we are rescinding this review, in part.

The Department of Commerce (the Department) has determined that the antidumping duty administrative review for the period March 1, 2004, through February 28, 2005, of Companhia Siderurgica Nacional (CSN) and Companhia Siderurgica de Tubarao (CST) should be rescinded.

The President's Export Council (PEC) will hold a full Council meeting to discuss topics related to export expansion. The meeting will include discussion of trade priorities and initiatives, PEC subcommittee activity and proposed letters of recommendation. The PEC was established on December 20, 1973, and reconstituted May 4, 1979, to advise the President on matters relating to U.S. trade. It was most recently renewed by Executive Order 13385.

The United States Travel and Tourism Advisory Board (``Board'') will hold a meeting to discuss topics related to the travel and tourism industry. The meeting will include discussion of the enhanced mandate of the Board, the international advertising and promotion campaign which seeks to encourage individuals to travel to the United States for the express purpose of engaging in tourism, and future issues and initiatives the Board may pursue. The meeting will be open to the public. Time will be permitted for public comment, which is limited to three minutes per speaker. To sign up for public comment, please contact J. Marc Chittum, U.S. Travel and Tourism Advisory Board, Room 4043, Washington, DC 20230 (Phone: 202-482-1124), Marc.Chittum@mail.doc.gov, no later than close of business, Friday, November 25, 2005. The Board is mandated by Public Law 108-7, Section 210, was initially chartered in 2003, and was re-chartered on September 21, 2005, for a two-year period to end September 20, 2007.

On November 7, 2005, The U.S. Department of Commerce issued an amended Export Trade Certificate of Review to Great Lakes Fruit Exporters Association, LLC (``GLFEA'').

The Departments of Commerce and the Interior (the Departments) amend their regulations governing watch duty-exemption allocations and the watch and jewelry duty-refund benefits for producers in the United States insular possessions (the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands). The rule amends the regulations by making technical changes required by passage of the Miscellaneous Trade and Technical Corrections Act of 2004; extending the duty refund benefits to include the value of usual and customary health insurance, life insurance and pension benefits; raising the ceiling on the amount of jewelry that qualifies for the duty refund benefit; allowing new insular jewelry producers to assemble jewelry and have such jewelry treated as an article of the insular possessions for up to 18 months after the jewelry company commences assembly operations; allowing duty refund certificate holders to secure a duty refund on any articles that are imported into the customs territory of the United States by the certificate holder duty paid; providing a more comprehensive definition of ``unit;'' adjusting the amount of watch repairs that are eligible for the duty refund; providing compensation to insular watch producers if tariffs on watches and watch movements are reduced; and clarifying which wages are eligible for purposes of determining the duty refund and identifying which records are needed for the audit.

On May 6, 2005, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain steel concrete reinforcing bars (rebar) from Turkey (70 FR 23990). This review covers four producers/ exporters of the subject merchandise to the United States. The period of review (POR) is April 1, 2003, through March 31, 2004. We are rescinding the review with respect to 18 companies because they had no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. In addition, we have determined to revoke the antidumping duty order with respect to an additional exporter, ICDAS Celik Enerji Tersane ve Ulasim Sanayi, A.S. (ICDAS). Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made changes in the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled ``Final Results of Review.''

On July 1, 2005, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated the second sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on light-walled welded rectangular carbon steel tubing from Argentina and Taiwan pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). On the basis of a notice of intent to participate and adequate substantive responses filed on behalf of domestic interested parties and no responses from respondent interested parties, the Department conducted expedited (120-day) sunset reviews. See section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act. As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping duty orders would lead (or likely lead) to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the levels listed in the ``Final Results of Reviews'' section below.

On July 1, 2005, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') initiated a sunset review of the antidumping duty (``AD'') orders on Heavy Forged Hand Tools (i.e., Axes & Adzes, Bars & Wedges, Hammers & Sledges, and Picks & Mattocks) (``HFHTs'') from the People's Republic of China pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). On the basis of notices of intent to participate and adequate substantive responses filed on behalf of the domestic interested parties and lack of response from respondent interested parties, the Department conducted an expedited sunset review of the AD orders pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and section 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2) of the Department's regulations. As a result of this sunset review, the Department finds that revocation of the AD orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the levels indicated in the ``Final Results of Review'' section of this notice.

On July 1, 2005, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') initiated the sunset review of the antidumping duty order on paper clips from the People's Republic of China (``China''). See Initiation of Five-year (``Sunset'') Reviews, 70 FR 38101 (July 1, 2005). On the basis of Notices of Intent to Participate, adequate substantive responses filed on behalf of domestic interested parties, and a lack of response from respondent interested parties, the Department conducted an expedited (120-day) sunset review. As a result of this sunset review, the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping duty order would likely lead to the continuation or recurrence of dumping. The dumping margins are identified in the Final Results of Review section of this notice.

In response to timely requests by Agro Dutch Industries, Ltd. (Agro Dutch) and the petitioner,\1\ the Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from India with respect to Agro Dutch. The period of review (POR) is February 1, 2004, through January 31, 2005.

On July 1, 2005, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated the second sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on stainless steel wire rods from Brazil, France and India, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). On the basis of notices of intent to participate and adequate substantive responses filed on behalf of the domestic interested parties and inadequate response from respondent interested parties, the Department has conducted expedited sunset reviews of these antidumping duty orders. As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping duty orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the level indicated in the ``Final Results of Reviews'' section of this notice.

On July 1, 2005, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated a sunset review of the antidumping duty order on Certain Cased Pencils from the People's Republic of China (PRC). On the basis of a Notice of Intent to Participate, and an adequate substantive response filed on behalf of domestic interested parties, as well as a lack of response from respondent interested parties, the Department conducted an expedited (120-day) sunset review. As a result of the sunset review, the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping duty order would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping. The dumping margins are identified in the Final Results of Review section of this notice.

On April, 1, 2005, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') initiated a sunset review of the countervailing duty order (``CVD'') on brass sheet and strip from Brazil pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). On the basis of a notice of intent to participate and an adequate substantive response filed on behalf of the domestic interested parties and inadequate response from respondent interested parties (in this case, no response), the Department determined to conduct an expedited sunset review of this CVD order pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(B). As a result of this sunset review, the Department finds that revocation of the CVD order would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of a countervailable subsidy at the level indicated in the ``Final Results of Review'' section of this notice.

On July 1, 2005, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on forged stainless steel flanges (flanges) from India and Taiwan, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). On the basis of the notice of intent to participate and an adequate substantive response filed on behalf of domestic interested parties and no responses from respondent interested parties, the Department conducted expedited sunset reviews. As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on flanges from India and Taiwan would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the levels listed below in the section entitled ``Final Results of Reviews.''

The U.S. Department of Commerce (Department), pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), has determined that revocation of the antidumping duty order on certain non-frozen apple juice concentrate (NFAJC) from the People's Republic of China (PRC) would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping. On October 21, 2005, the International Trade Commission (ITC), pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, determined that revocation of the antidumping duty order on certain NFAJC from the PRC would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. Therefore, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4), the Department is publishing notice of the continuation of the antidumping duty order on certain NFAJC from the PRC.

The Department of Commerce determines that imports of superalloy degassed chromium from Japan are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value, as provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The final weighted-average dumping margins are listed below in the section entitled ``Final Determination of Investigation.''

Pursuant to the Order of the Binational Panel dated September 9, 2005, affirming the final remand determination described above, the panel review was completed on October 21, 2005.