Federal Register / Vol. 71, No.
241 / Friday, December 15, 2006 / Notices
This notice is published pursuant to
sections 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) and 777(i)(1) of
the Act.
Dated: December 8, 2006.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–21442 Filed 12–14–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A–570–827
Notice of Amended Final Results in
Accordance With Court Decision:
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review of Sebacic Acid from the
People’s Republic of China
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 18, 2006, the
United States Court of International
Trade (‘‘CIT’’) affirmed the
redetermination of the Department of
Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) in the
antidumping duty (‘‘AD’’)
administrative review of sebacic acid
from the People’s Republic of China
(‘‘PRC’’). See Guangdong Chemicals
Import and Export Corporation v. the
United States, Court No. 05–00023;
Slip–Op 06–142 (CIT 2006); see also
Department’s Final Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Order: Guangdong Chemicals Import
and Export Corporation v. United States
(dated May 3, 2006). As there is now a
final and conclusive court decision in
this case, the Department is amending
the final results of this administrative
review.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 15, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennifer Moats at (202) 482–5047, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 8, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
December 16, 2004, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
final results of the 2002–2003
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on sebacic acid
from the PRC. See Sebacic Acid From
the People’s Republic of China: Final
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Results Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 69 FR 75303
(‘‘Final Results’’). In that review, the
Department relied on Monthly Statistics
of the Foreign Trade of India (MSFTI)
for the period of review (‘‘POR’’) to
VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:47 Dec 14, 2006 Jkt 211001
75503
value sebacic acid, a surrogate value
used to allocate the respondent’s
reported inputs between the production
of the subject merchandise, sebacic acid,
and non–subject merchandise.
Additionally, in that review the
Department deducted the by–product
offset from normal value.
The respondent in the 2002–2003
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on sebacic acid
from the PRC filed a complaint with the
CIT contesting both the surrogate value
assigned to sebacic acid and the location
of the deduction of the by–product
offset in the Final Results. The
Department filed a motion with the CIT
for a voluntary remand with respect to
the application of the by–product offset.
On January 25, 2006, the CIT remanded
this case to the Department to re–
evaluate the surrogate value selected to
value sebacic acid and granted the
Department’s request for a voluntary
remand with respect to the application
of the by–product offset. On May 3,
2006, the Department issued its final
results of remand redetermination on
the surrogate value selected to value
sebacic acid and its voluntary
redetermination to further explain its
application of the by–product offset.
In its redetermination, the Department
concluded that it was appropriate to
value sebacic acid using MSFTI data
after removing aberrational amounts
(‘‘MSFTI data’’), rather than the
Chemical Weekly ChemImpEx database
(‘‘ChemImpEx’’) as suggested by the
respondent. The Department reached
this conclusion because, unlike the
ChemImpEx data, the MSFTI data is
official government data and had a
greater variety of data points. On
September 18, 2006, the CIT affirmed
the Department’s remand
redetermination. See Guangdong
Chemicals Import & Export Corporation
v. United States, Ct. No. 05–00023 Slip
Op. 06–142 (September 18, 2006).
Consistent with the decision of the
United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit in Timken Company v.
United States and China National
Machinery and Equipment Import and
Export Corporation, 893 F. 2d 337 (Fed.
Cir. 1990) (‘‘Timken’’), on October 4,
2006, the Department published a notice
announcing that the CIT’s decision was
not in harmony with the Department’s
determination in the 2002–2003
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on sebacic acid
from the PRC. No party appealed the
CIT’s decision. Therefore, there is now
a final and conclusive court decision in
this case.
PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15DEN1.SGM
Amended Final Results of Review
As the litigation in this case has
concluded, the Department is amending
the Final Results. The dumping margins
in the amended final results of review
are as follows:
Margin
Exporter/Manufacturer (percent)
Guangdong Chemicals Import
and Export Corporation ........... 19.82
The PRC–wide rate continues to be
243.40 percent.
Assessment
The Department intends to issue
assessment instruction to U.S. Customs
and Border Protection 15 days after the
date of publication of these amended
final results of review.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended.
Dated: December 8, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–21439 Filed 12–14–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–469–805]
Correction to Notice of Extension of
Time Limit for Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Stainless Steel Bar From
Spain
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce
DATES: Effective Date: December 15,
2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dmitry Vladimirov or Minoo Hatten,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 5, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–0665 and (202)
482–1690, respectively.
Correction
On December 1, 2006, the Department
of Commerce published a notice of
extension of time limit for the
preliminary results of the antidumping
duty administrative review of the order
on stainless steel bar from Spain for the
period March 1, 2005, through February
15DEN1
 75504 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 2006 / Notices
28, 2006. See Notice of Extension of
Time Limit for Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Stainless Steel Bar from Spain,
71 FR 69550 (December 1, 2006)
(Extension Notice). Subsequent to the
publication of the Extension Notice in
the Federal Register we identified an
inadvertent error.
The Extension Notice states
incorrectly that we are extending the
time period for issuing the preliminary
results of this review to February 13,
2006. The Extension Notice is hereby
corrected to read that we are extending
the time period for issuing the
preliminary results of this review to
February 13, 2007.
This correction is issued and
published in accordance with section
777(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended.
Dated: December 11, 2006.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–21438 Filed 12–14–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A–583–831
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils
From Taiwan; Final Results and Partial
Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
AGENCY: AGENCY: Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, Department of
Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 9, 2006, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published in the Federal
Register the preliminary results and
partial rescission of the administrative
review of the antidumping duty order
on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils
from Taiwan. This review covers 15
manufacturers/exporters. The period of
review (POR) is July 1, 2004, through
June 30, 2005.
We provided interested parties with
an opportunity to comment on the
preliminary results of review. After
analyzing the comments received, we
corrected one programming error in the
margin calculation for one respondent,
Chia Far Industrial Factory Co., Ltd.
(Chia Far). Therefore, the final results of
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
review differ from the preliminary
results of review. The final weighted–
average dumping margins for the
reviewed firms are listed below in the
section entitled ‘‘Final Results of
Review.’’
VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:47 Dec 14, 2006 Jkt 211001
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 15, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Melissa Blackledge or Howard Smith,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–3518 or (202) 482–
5193, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The following events occurred after
the Department published the
preliminary results of the instant
administrative review in the Federal
Register. See Stainless Steel Sheet and
Strip in Coils from Taiwan: Preliminary
Results and Rescission in Part of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 71 FR 45521 (August 9, 2006)
(Preliminary Results). In response to the
Department’s invitation to comment on
the Preliminary Results, the petitioners1
and Chia Far filed case briefs on
September 8, 2006. Chia Far and
petitioners filed rebuttal briefs on
September 15, 2006.
Period of Review
The POR is July 1, 2004, through June
30, 2005.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the order are
certain stainless steel sheet and strip in
coils. Stainless steel is an alloy steel
containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or
less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more
of chromium, with or without other
elements. The subject sheet and strip is
a flat–rolled product in coils that is
greater than 9.5 mm in width and less
than 4.75 mm in thickness, and that is
annealed or otherwise heat treated and
pickled or otherwise descaled. The
subject sheet and strip may also be
further processed (e.g., cold–rolled,
polished, aluminized, coated, etc.)
provided that it maintains the specific
dimensions of sheet and strip following
such processing.
The merchandise subject to the order
is classified in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTS) at
subheadings: 7219.13.0031,
7219.13.0051, 7219.13.0071,
7219.1300.812, 7219.14.0030,
1 The petitioners are Allegheny Ludlum
Corporation, United Auto Workers Local 3303
(formerly Butler Armco Independent Union), North
American Stainless (except as to Ta Chen and its
affiliates), United Steelworkers of America, AFL-
CIO/CLC, and Zanesville Armco Independent
Organization (collectively, ‘‘petitioners’’).
2 Due to changes to the HTS numbers in 2001,
7219.13.0030, 7219.13.0050, 7219.13.0070, and
7219.13.0080 are now 7219.13.0031, 7219.13.0051,
7219.13.0071, and 7219.13.0081, respectively.
PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15DEN1.SGM
7219.14.0065, 7219.14.0090,
7219.32.0005, 7219.32.0020,
7219.32.0025, 7219.32.0035,
7219.32.0036, 7219.32.0038,
7219.32.0042, 7219.32.0044,
7219.33.0005, 7219.33.0020,
7219.33.0025, 7219.33.0035,
7219.33.0036, 7219.33.0038,
7219.33.0042, 7219.33.0044,
7219.34.0005, 7219.34.0020,
7219.34.0025, 7219.34.0030,
7219.34.0035, 7219.35.0005,
7219.35.0015, 7219.35.0030,
7219.35.0035, 7219.90.0010,
7219.90.0020, 7219.90.0025,
7219.90.0060, 7219.90.0080,
7220.12.1000, 7220.12.5000,
7220.20.1010, 7220.20.1015,
7220.20.1060, 7220.20.1080,
7220.20.6005, 7220.20.6010,
7220.20.6015, 7220.20.6060,
7220.20.6080, 7220.20.7005,
7220.20.7010, 7220.20.7015,
7220.20.7060, 7220.20.7080,
7220.20.8000, 7220.20.9030,
7220.20.9060, 7220.90.0010,
7220.90.0015, 7220.90.0060, and
7220.90.0080. Although the HTS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
Department’s written description of the
merchandise under the order is
dispositive.
Excluded from the scope of the order
are the following: (1) sheet and strip that
is not annealed or otherwise heat treated
and pickled or otherwise descaled, (2)
sheet and strip that is cut to length, (3)
plate (i.e., flat–rolled stainless steel
products of a thickness of 4.75 mm or
more), (4) flat wire (i.e., cold–rolled
sections, with a prepared edge,
rectangular in shape, of a width of not
more than 9.5 mm), and (5) razor blade
steel. Razor blade steel is a flat–rolled
product of stainless steel, not further
worked than cold–rolled (cold–
reduced), in coils, of a width of not
more than 23 mm and a thickness of
0.266 mm or less, containing, by weight,
12.5 to 14.5 percent chromium, and
certified at the time of entry to be used
in the manufacture of razor blades. See
Chapter 72 of the HTS, ‘‘Additional U.S.
Note’’ 1(d).
In response to comments by interested
parties, the Department has determined
that certain specialty stainless steel
products are also excluded from the
scope of the order. These excluded
products are described below.
Flapper valve steel is defined as
stainless steel strip in coils containing,
by weight, between 0.37 and 0.43
percent carbon, between 1.15 and 1.35
percent molybdenum, and between 0.20
and 0.80 percent manganese. This steel
also contains, by weight, phosphorus of
0.025 percent or less, silicon of between
15DEN1