International Trade Administration August 6, 2012 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

On July 25, 2012, the United States Court of International Trade (``CIT'') sustained the Department of Commerce's (``Department'') results of redetermination, which construed the scope of the Order \1\ as including steel nails found within Target Corporation's toolkits from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''), pursuant to the CIT's remand order in Mid Continent Nail Corp. v. United States, Slip Op. 12- 31, Court No. 10-00247 (March 7, 2012) (``Mid Continent II''). See May 14, 2012 ``Final Results of Second Remand Redetermination Pursuant To Remand Order'' (second remand redetermination); Mid Continent Nail Corp. v. United States, Slip Op. 12-97, Court No. 10-00247 (July 25, 2012) (``Mid Continent III''). 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 judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department's final scope ruling and is amending its final scope ruling on certain steel nails from the PRC contained within toolkits. See Final Scope Ruling: Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China, Request by Target Corporation, Memorandum from James C. Doyle, Director Office 9, to Edward C. Yang, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, dated August10, 2010 (``Final Scope Ruling'').

On April 2, 2012, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published in the Federal Register its preliminary results of administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on certain welded carbon steel standard pipe from Turkey for the January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2010, period of review (POR).\1\ The Department preliminarily found that the following producers/exporters of subject merchandise covered by this review had de minimis net subsidy rates for the POR: (1) Borusan Group, Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (BMB), and Borusan Istikbal Ticaret T.A.S. (Istikbal) (collectively, Borusan); and (2) Tosyali dis Ticaret A.S. (Tosyali) and Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. (Toscelik Profil), (collectively, Toscelik).\2\ The Department has now completed the administrative review in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff of 1930, as amended (the Act). Based on our analysis of comments received, the Department has not revised the net subsidy rate for Borusan and Toscelik. Further discussion of our analysis of the comments received is provided in the accompanying issues and decision memorandum.\3\ The final net subsidy rate for Borusan and Toscelik is listed below in the ``Final Results of Review'' section.

The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain pasta (pasta) from Turkey for the period of review (POR) July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011. The Department initiated the review covering TAT Makarnacilik Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (TAT) and Marsan Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S (Marsan) and its claimed affiliates Birlik Pazarlama Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (Birlik), Bellini Gida Sanayi A.S. (Bellini), and Marsa Yag Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (Marsa Yag). We preliminarily determine that during the POR, TAT did not sell subject merchandise at less than normal value (NV). In addition, we preliminarily determine that Birlik, Bellini, and Marsan did not sell subject merchandise at less than NV. If these preliminary results are adopted in the final results of this administrative review, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise during the POR. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results. See ``Preliminary Results of Review'' section of this notice.

As discussed below, the U.S. Department of Commerce (``the Department'') preliminarily determines that Dongtai Peak Honey Industry Co., Ltd. (``Peak'') failed to cooperate to the best of its ability and is, therefore, applying adverse facts available (``AFA''). If these preliminary results are adopted in the final results of review, the Deparment will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to assess antidumping duties on entries of subject merchandise during the period of review (``POR'').

The Office of Competition and Economic Analysis (``OCEA'') of the International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, has received an application to amend an Export Trade Certificate of Review (``Certificate''). This notice summarizes the proposed amendment and requests comments relevant to whether the amended Certificate should be issued.