Notices. Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce

4,641 words·~21 min read·/register/2006/03/02/06-1932·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-848] Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Notice of Intent to Rescind New Shipper Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) is conducting new shipper reviews of the antidumping duty order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) in response to requests from Jiangsu Jiushoutang Organisms-Manufacturers Co.

Ltd. (“Jiangsu JOM”), Shanghai Sunbeauty Trading Co., Ltd. (“Shanghai Sunbeauty”), and Qingdao Wentai Trading Co. Ltd. (“Wentai”). The period of review (“POR”) is September 1, 2004, through February 28, 2005. We have preliminarily determined that the new shipper reviews of Jiangsu JOM, Shanghai Sunbeauty, and Wentai should all be rescinded because the sales made by each were not *bona fide* . Much of the information upon which we relied to analyze the *bona fides* of the sales is business proprietary; therefore, our full analysis is set forth in: *Memorandum to James C.

Doyle, Director, Office 9, from Scot T. Fullerton and Prentiss Lee Smith, Case Analysts, Office 9: Bona Fides Analysis and Intent to Rescind New Shipper Review of Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic of China for Jiangsu Jiushoutang Organisms-Manufactures Co., Ltd.* , dated February 23, 2006 (“ *Jiangsu JOM Memo* ”), *Memorandum to James C. Doyle, Director, Office 9, from Scot T. Fullerton and Prentiss Lee Smith, Case Analysts, Office 9: Bona Fides Analysis and Intent to Rescind New Shipper Review of Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic of China for Shanghai Sunbeauty Trading Co.

Ltd.* , dated February 23, 2006 (“ *Sunbeauty Memo* ”), and *Memorandum to James C. Doyle, Director, Office 9, from Scot T. Fullerton and Prentiss Lee Smith, Case Analysts, Office 9: Bona Fides Analysis and Intent to Rescind New Shipper Review of Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic of China for Qingdao Wentai Trading Co. Ltd.* , dated February 23, 2006 (“ *Wentai Memo* ”), public versions of which are on file in the Central Records Unit, room B-099 of the main Commerce Building.

Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary rescission determination. EFFECTIVE DATE: March 2, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scot Fullerton or P. Lee Smith, 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)482-1386 or

(202)482-1655, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On March 17, 2005, the Department received properly filed requests for a new shipper review, in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”) and sections 351.214(b) and

(c)of the Department's regulations, from Shanghai Sunbeauty and Jiangsu JOM under the antidumping duty order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the PRC. On March 18, 2005, the Department received a properly filed request for a new shipper review, in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and section 351.214(b) and

(c)of the Department's regulations, from Wentai under the antidumping duty order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the PRC. The Department determined that the requests met the requirements stipulated in section 351.214 of the Department's regulations. On April 29, 2005, the Department published its initiation of these new shipper reviews for the period September 1, 2004, through February 28, 2004. *See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of New Shipper Antidumping Administrative Reviews* , 70 FR 23987 (May 6, 2005). On June 2, 2005, the Department received Jiangsu JOM, Shanghai Sunbeauty and Wentai's section A questionnaire responses. On June 22, 2005, the Department received Jiangsu JOM and Shanghai Sunbeauty's section C & D questionnaire responses. On June 30, 2005, the Department received Wentai's section C & D questionnaire responses. On July 21, 2005, the Department issued its first supplemental questionnaire to Jiangsu JOM and Shanghai Sunbeauty. On July 25, 2005, the Department issued its first supplemental questionnaire to Wentai. On August 12, 2005, Wentai submitted its response to the Department's first supplemental questionnaire. On August 17, 2005, Jiangsu JOM and Shanghai Sunbeauty submitted their responses to the Department's first supplemental questionnaire. On August 18, 2005, Jiangsu JOM submitted a supplement to their August 17, 2005, submission. On September 19, 2005, the Department issued its second supplemental questionnaire to Jiangsu JOM and Shanghai Sunbeauty. On September 20, 2005, the Department issued its second supplemental questionnaire to Wentai. On October 3, 2005, Jiangsu JOM and Shanghai Sunbeauty submitted their responses to the Department's second supplemental questionnaire. On October 5, 2005, Wentai submitted its response to the Department's second supplemental questionnaire. On October 21, 2005, the Department rejected Jiangsu JOM's response to the Department's second supplemental questionnaire. On October 26, 2005, Jiangsu JOM resubmitted its response to the Department's second supplemental questionnaire. On October 14, 2005, the Department extended the due date for the preliminary results of this new shipper review by 120 days from the original October 26, 2005, deadline until February 23, 2005. *See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Extension of Time Limit of Preliminary Results of New Shipper Review* , 70 FR 61117 (October 20, 2005). From October 18 through October 21, 2005, the Department conducted verification of Jiangsu JOM's questionnaire responses at the company's facilities in Xinghua City, Jiangsu, China. *See* “Verification Report for Jiangsu JOM,” dated February 17, 2006. From January 23 through January 24, 2006, the Department conducted verification of Jiangsu JOM's affiliated U.S. importer, Easy River Seafood Corp. (“Easy River”), in Alhambra, CA. *See* “Verification Report for Easy River,” dated February 17, 2006. From October 31 through November 1, 2005, the Department conducted verification of Shanghai Sunbeauty's questionnaire responses at the company's sales office in Shanghai, China. *See* “Verification Report for Shanghai Sunbeauty,” dated February 17, 2006. From November 3 through November 4, 2005, the Department conducted verification of Shanghai Sunbeauty's questionnaire responses relating to its producer for the POR, Wuwei Xinhua Food Co. Ltd. (“Wuwei Xinhua”), in Wuwei County, Anhui Province, China. *See* “Verification Report for Wuwei Xinhua,” dated February 21, 2006. From January 26 through January 27, 2006, the Department conducted verification of Shanghai Sunbeauty's affiliated importer, Seawind Inc. (“Seawind”), in Redmond, WA. *See* “Verification Report for Seawind,” dated February 17, 2006. From January 19 through 20, 2006, the Department conducted verification of Qingdao Wentai's questionnaire responses at the company's facilities in Qingdao, Shandong Province, China. *See* “Verification Report for Qingdao Wentai,” dated February 17, 2006. The Department also conducted verification at the Qingdao Wentai's producer, Nanxian Shunxiang Aquatic Products Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.'s (“Shunxiang”) facilities, from January 16 to January 17, 2006. *See* “Verification Report for Nanxian Shunxiang,” dated February 17, 2006. Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order The product covered by this order is freshwater crawfish tail meat, in all its forms (whether washed or with fat on, whether purged or unpurged), grades, and sizes; whether frozen, fresh, or chilled; and regardless of how it is packed, preserved, or prepared. Excluded from the scope of the order are live crawfish and other whole crawfish, whether boiled, frozen, fresh, or chilled. Also excluded are saltwater crawfish of any type, and parts thereof. Freshwater crawfish tail meat is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers 1605.40.10.10 and 1605.40.10.90, which are the new HTSUS numbers for prepared foodstuffs, indicating peeled crawfish tail meat and other, as introduced by the U.S. Customs Service in 2000, and HTSUS items 0306.19.00.10 and 0306.29.00, which are reserved for fish and crustaceans in general. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of this order is dispositive. Preliminary Intent to Rescind Concurrent with this notice, we are issuing our memoranda detailing our analysis of the *bona fides* of Jiangsu JOM, Shanghai Sunbeauty, and Wentai's U.S. sales and our preliminary decision to rescind based on the totality of the circumstances of the sales. Although much of the information relied upon by the Department to analyze the issues is business proprietary, the Department based its determination that the new shipper sale made by Jiangsu JOM was not bona fide on the following:

(1)The price and quantity for Jiangsu JOM's sale of crawfish tail meat were atypical of its post-POR sales and of other exports from the PRC of the subject merchandise into the United States during the period of review,

(2)the relationship between Jiangsu JOM, and other crawfish tail meat exporters and producers,

(3)customer of the single POR sale as compared to subsequent sales, and

(4)other indicia of a non- *bona fide* transaction. The Department based its determination that the new shipper sale made by Shanghai Sunbeauty was not *bona fide* on the following:

(1)The price and quantity for Shanghai Sunbeauty's sale of crawfish tail meat were atypical of its post-POR sales and of other exports from the PRC of the subject merchandise into the United States during the period of review,

(2)payment of Seawind's POR purchase and cash deposit,

(3)source and timeliness of payment from the POR customer, and

(4)other indicia of a non- *bona fide* transaction. The Department based its determination that the new shipper sale made by Wentai was not *bona fide* on the following:

(1)The price and quantity for Wentai's sale of crawfish tail meat were atypical vis-a-vis other exports from the PRC of the subject merchandise into the United States during the period of review,

(2)circumstances surrounding the sale and negotiation for the single POR sale,

(3)exporter and producer's unreported business relationships, and

(4)circumstances surrounding the formation of Wentai and Shunxiang. Because the Department has found these sales to be non- *bona fide* they are not subject to review. *See Jiangsu JOM Memo* , *Sunbeauty Memo* , and *Wentai Memo* . Wentai, Shanghai Sunbeauty, and Jiangsu JOM each only made a single, non- *bona fide* sale during the POR. Therefore, the Department intends to rescind these reviews because there are no reviewable sales during the POR. *See Tianjin Tiancheng Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. v. United States* , 366 F. Supp. 2d 1246, 1249 (CIT 2005). Schedule for Final Results of Review Unless otherwise notified by the Department, interested parties may submit case briefs within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with § 351.309(c)(ii) of the Department's regulations. As part of the case brief, parties are encouraged to provide a summary of the arguments not to exceed five pages and a table of statutes, regulations, and cases cited. Rebuttal briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs, must be filed within five days after the case brief is filed. Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of publication of this notice in accordance with § 351.310(c) of the Department's regulations. Any hearing would normally be held 37 days after the publication of this notice, or the first workday thereafter, at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. Individuals who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request within 30 days of the publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** to the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 1870, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. Requests for a public hearing should contain:

(1)The party's name, address, and telephone number;

(2)the number of participants; and,

(3)to the extent practicable, an identification of the arguments to be raised at the hearing. If a hearing is held, an interested party must limit its presentation only to arguments raised in its briefs. Parties should confirm by telephone the time, date, and place of the hearing 48 hours before the scheduled time. The Department will issue the final results of this new shipper review, which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised in the briefs, within 90 days from the date of the preliminary results, unless the time limit is extended. Notification At the completion of this new shipper review, either with a final rescission or a notice of final results, the Department will notify the U.S. Customs and Border Protection that bonding is no longer permitted to fulfill security requirements for shipments by the exporter/producter combinations Jiangsu JOM, Shanghai Sunbeauty, and Wentai of freshwater crawfish tail meat from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication of the final rescission or results notice in the **Federal Register** . If a final rescission notice is published, a cash deposit of 223.01 percent *ad valorem* shall be collected for any entries exported/produced by Jiangsu JOM, Shanghai Sunbeauty, and Wentai. Should the Department reach a final result other than a rescission, an appropriate antidumping duty rate will be calculated for both assessment and cash deposit purposes. This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders

(APO)of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO material or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanctions. This new shipper review and this notice are published in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: February 23, 2006. Joseph A. Spetrini, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-2967 Filed 3-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-533-813] Certain Preserved Mushrooms From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On November 7, 2005, the Department of Commerce published the preliminary results of the 2004-2005 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from India. The review covers one manufacturer/exporter, Agro Dutch Industries, Ltd. (Agro Dutch). The period of review is February 1, 2004, through January 31, 2005. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made changes in the margin calculations for Agro Dutch in this review. Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping margin for the reviewed firm is listed below in the section entitled “Final Results of Review.” EFFECTIVE DATE: March 2, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David J. Goldberger or Gemal Brangman, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-4136 or

(202)482-3773, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The review covers one manufacturer/exporter: Agro Dutch. The period of review is February 1, 2004, through January 31, 2005. On November 7, 2005, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from India (70 FR 67440) (“Preliminary Results”). We invited interested parties to comment on the preliminary results of review. Agro Dutch filed its case brief on December 7, 2005. The petitioner filed a rebuttal brief on December 14, 2005. 1 Neither party requested a hearing. We have conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). 1 The petitioner is the Coalition for Fair Preserved Mushroom Trade which includes the following domestic companies: L.K. Bowman, Inc., Monterey Mushrooms, Inc., Mushroom Canning Company, and Sunny Dell Foods, Inc. Scope of the Order The products covered by this order are certain preserved mushrooms, whether imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. The preserved mushrooms covered under this order are the species *Agaricus bisporus* and *Agaricus bitorquis* . “Preserved mushrooms” refer to mushrooms that have been prepared or preserved by cleaning, blanching, and sometimes slicing or cutting. These mushrooms are then packed and heated in containers including but not limited to cans or glass jars in a suitable liquid medium, including but not limited to water, brine, butter or butter sauce. Preserved mushrooms may be imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. Included within the scope of this order are “brined” mushrooms, which are presalted and packed in a heavy salt solution to provisionally preserve them for further processing. Excluded from the scope of this order are the following:

(1)All other species of mushroom, including straw mushrooms;

(2)all fresh and chilled mushrooms, including “refrigerated” or “quick blanched mushrooms”;

(3)dried mushrooms;

(4)frozen mushrooms; and

(5)“marinated,” “acidified” or “pickled” mushrooms, which are prepared or preserved by means of vinegar or acetic acid, but may contain oil or other additives. The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable under subheadings 2003.10.0127, 2003.10.0131, 2003.10.0137, 2003.10.0143, 2003.10.0147, 2003.10.0153 and 0711.51.0000 of the *Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States* (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of this order dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this antidumping duty administrative review are addressed in the “Issues and Decision Memorandum” (“Decision Memo”) from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated February, XX, 2006, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in the Decision Memo, is attached to this notice as an Appendix. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room B-099 of the main Department building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn* . The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Changes From the Preliminary Results Based on the information submitted and our analysis of the comments received, we have made certain changes to the margin calculations for Agro Dutch. Specifically, we corrected certain arithmetic errors in the calculation of normal value in the margin calculation program. *See* Comment 1 of the Decision Memo. Final Results of Review We determine that the following weighted-average margin percentage exists: Manufacturer/exporter Margin (percent) Agro Dutch Industries Ltd. 0.76 Assessment The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department will issue appropriate appraisement instructions for the company subject to this review directly to CBP within 15 days of publication of these final results of review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c), we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review if any importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above *de minimis* ( *i.e.* , is not less than 0.50 percent). With respect to Agro Dutch, we calculated importer-specific assessment rates for the subject merchandise by aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all the U.S. sales examined and dividing this amount by the total entered value of the sales examined. Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act:

(1)The cash deposit rate for Agro Dutch will be 0.76 percent;

(2)for previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period;

(3)if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original less-than-fair-value (“LTFV”) investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and

(4)the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 11.30 percent. This rate is the “All Others” rate from the LTFV investigation. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review. This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f(2)) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order

(APO)of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: February 23, 2006. Joseph A. Spetrini, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix—List of Issues *Comment 1:* Programming Errors in the Margin Calculation Program *Comment 2:* Currency Conversion Errors in the Margin Calculation Program [FR Doc. E6-2985 Filed 3-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-475-829] Stainless Steel Bar From Italy: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administration Review and Rescission of Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On October 28, 2005, the Department of Commerce published the preliminary results of the third administrative review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel bar from Italy. The period of review is March 1, 2005, through February 28, 2005. This review covers imports of stainless steel bar to the United States from UGITECH S.A. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we conclude that the final results do not differ from the preliminary results of review, in which we found that UGITECH S.A. did not make shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the period of review. Therefore, we are rescinding the administrative review. DATES: *Effective Date:* March 2, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Holland, 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)482-1279. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Since the publication of the preliminary results of this review ( *see Stainless Steel Bar from Italy: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administration Review and Preliminary Rescission of Review* , 70 FR 62096 (October 28, 2005) (“Preliminary Results”)), the following events have occurred: We invited interested parties to comment on the preliminary results of this review. On November 28, 2005, we received a case brief from UGITECH S.A. (“UGITECH”), an Italian exporter/producer of the subject merchandise. No rebuttal briefs were submitted. Scope of the Order For purposes of this order, the term “stainless steel bar” includes articles of stainless steel in straight lengths that have been either hot-rolled, forged, turned, cold-drawn, cold-rolled or otherwise cold-finished, or ground, having a uniform solid cross section along their whole length in the shape of circles, segments of circles, ovals, rectangles (including squares), triangles, hexagons, octagons, or other convex polygons. Stainless steel bar includes cold-finished stainless steel bars that are turned or ground in straight lengths, whether produced from hot-rolled bar or from straightened and cut rod or wire, and reinforcing bars that have indentations, ribs, grooves, or other deformations produced during the rolling process. Except as specified above, the term does not include stainless steel semi-finished produced, cut length flat-rolled products ( *i.e.,* cut length rolled products which if less than 4.75 mm in thickness have a width measuring at least 10 times the thickness, or if 4.75 mm or more in thickness having a width which exceeds 150 mm and measures at least thick the thickness), products that have been cut from stainless steel sheet, strip or plate, wire ( *i.e.,* cold-formed products in coils, or any uniform solid cross section along their whole length, which do not conform to the definition of flat-rolled products), and angles, shapes and sections. The stainless steel bar subject to this order is currently classifiable under subheadings 7222.11.00.05, 7222.11.00.50, 7222.19.00.05, 7222.19.00.50, 7222.20.00.05, 7222.20.00.45, 7222.20.00.75, and 7222.30.00.00 of the *Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States* (“HTSUS”). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this order is dispositive. Period of Review The period of review (“POR”) is March 1, 2004, through February 28, 2005. Analysis of Comments Received In its November 28, 2005, submission, UGITECH agreed with the Department's findings in the *Preliminary Results* and asserted that the review should be rescinded. We received no other comments on the *Preliminary Results* . Rescission of Administrative Review In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), and consistent with the *Preliminary Results,* we are rescinding this review with respect to UGITECH, which reported that it made no shipments of the subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. As stated in the *Preliminary Results,* we examined shipment data furnished by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”). *See* Memorandum to the File, “U.S. Customs and Border Protection Data,” dated July 12, 2005. Based on this information, we are satisfied that there were no U.S. shipments of subject merchandise from UGITECH during the POR. Assessment The Department will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. For UGITECH, antidumping duties shall be assessed at the rate equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). In accordance with the Department's clarification of its assessment policy (see *Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties,* 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003)), in the event any entries were made during the POR through intermediaries under the CBP case number for UGITECH, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the all-others rate in effect on the date of entry. The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of publication of this notice. Cash Deposit Rates For UGITECH, the cash deposit rate will continue to be 33.00 percent. *See Stainless Steel Bar from Italy: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,* 69 FR 32984 (June 14, 2004). This cash deposit rate shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review involving UGITECH. Notification to Importers This notice serves as a reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. Notification Regarding APOs This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (“APOs”) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction. These results of administrative review and notice are published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: February 23, 2006. Joseph A. Spetrini, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. 06-1932 Filed 3-1-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 5

Traces to 5 documents

CFR

1 reference not yet in our index

366 F. Supp. 2d 1246

Citation graph

cites case law

Notices

Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce

F. Supp.366 F. Supp. 2d 1246

Cites 6Cited by 0 across 0 sources