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

5,086 words·~23 min read·/register/2006/07/18/06-6300

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

BILLING CODE 3510-DT-M DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-831] Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 2004-2005 Semi-Annual New Shipper Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On May 4, 2006, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) published the preliminary results of new shipper reviews of the antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”). *See Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China:

Preliminary Results of 2004-2005 Semi-Annual New Shipper Reviews* , 71 FR 26322 (May 4, 2006) (“ *Preliminary Results* ”). The merchandise covered by this order is fresh garlic as described in the “Scope of the Order” section of this notice. The period of review (“POR”) is November 1, 2004, through April 30, 2005. We invited parties to comment on our *Preliminary Results* . We received no comments, and no new evidence was placed on the record to cause us to question that determination.

Therefore, the final results are unchanged from those presented in the *Preliminary Results* . The final dumping margins for these reviews are listed in the “Final Results of the Reviews” section below. EFFECTIVE DATE: July 18, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan Douglas or Katharine Huang, AD/CVD Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-1277 and

(202)482-1271, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On May 4, 2006, the Department published the preliminary results of the 2004-2005 semi-annual new shipper reviews of fresh garlic from the PRC. *See Preliminary Results* . These new shipper reviews cover four respondents, 1 and the period November 1, 2004, through April 30, 2005. In the *Preliminary Results* , we invited parties to comment. We received no comments. 1 The four respondents are Shandong Chengshun Farm Produce Trading Company, Ltd. (“Chengshun”), Shenzhen Fanhui Import and Export Co., Ltd. (“Fanhui”), Qufu Dongbao Import and Export Trade Co., Ltd. (“Dongbao”), and Anqiu Friend Food Co., Ltd. (“Anqiu Friend”). These new shipper reviews cover shipments of fresh garlic from the PRC that were produced by Jinxiang Chengsen Agricultural Trade Company, Ltd. (“CATC”) and exported by Chengshun, produced and exported by Fanhui, produced and exported by Dongbao, and produced and exported by Anqiu Friend. Scope of the Order The products subject to the antidumping duty order are all grades of garlic, whole or separated into constituent cloves, whether or not peeled, fresh, chilled, frozen, provisionally preserved, or packed in water or other neutral substance, but not prepared or preserved by the addition of other ingredients or heat processing. The differences between grades are based on color, size, sheathing, and level of decay. The scope of this order does not include the following:

(a)garlic that has been mechanically harvested and that is primarily, but not exclusively, destined for non-fresh use; or

(b)garlic that has been specially prepared and cultivated prior to planting and then harvested and otherwise prepared for use as seed. The subject merchandise is used principally as a food product and for seasoning. The subject garlic is currently classifiable under subheadings 0703.20.0010, 0703.20.0020, 0703.20.0090, 0710.80.7060, 0710.80.9750, 0711.90.6000, and 2005.90.9700 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. In order to be excluded from the antidumping duty order, garlic entered under the HTSUS subheadings listed above that is

(1)mechanically harvested and primarily, but not exclusively, destined for non-fresh use or

(2)specially prepared and cultivated prior to planting and then harvested and otherwise prepared for use as seed must be accompanied by declarations to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to that effect. Separate Rates In our *Preliminary Results* , we preliminarily found that Chengshun, Fanhui, Dongbao, and Anqiu Friend had met the criteria for the application of a separate antidumping duty rate. *See Preliminary Results* , 71 FR at 26325. We have not received any information since the issuance of the *Preliminary Results* that provides a basis for reconsideration of these determinations. Final Results of the Reviews The Department has determined that the following final dumping margins exist for the period November 1, 2004, through April 30, 2005: Exporter Producer Margin (percent) Shandong Chengshun Farm Produce Trading Company, Ltd. Jinxiang Chengsen Agricultural Trade Company, Ltd. 0.00 Shenzhen Fanhui Import and Export Co., Ltd. Shenzhen Fanhui Import and Export Co., Ltd. 0.00 Qufu Dongbao Import and Export Trade Co., Ltd. Qufu Dongbao Import and Export Trade Co., Ltd. 0.00 Anqiu Friend Food Co., Ltd. Anqiu Friend Food Co., Ltd. 0.00 Duty Assessment and Cash-Deposit Requirements The Department will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate, without regard to antidumping duties, all entries of subject merchandise during the POR for which the importer- (or customer-) specific assessment rate is zero. Bonding will no longer be permitted to fulfill security requirements for shipments of fresh garlic from the PRC produced by CATC and exported by Chengshun, produced and exported by Fanhui, produced and exported by Dongbao, and produced and exported by Anqiu Friend that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of these new shipper reviews. The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of these new shipper reviews for all shipments of subject merchandise from Chengshun, Fanhui, Dongbao, and Anqiu Friend entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act:

(1)For subject merchandise produced by CATC and exported by Chengshun; produced and exported by Fanhui; produced and exported by Dongbao; or produced and exported by Anqiu Friend, the cash deposit rate will be zero;

(2)for subject merchandise exported by Chengshun but not produced by CATC, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the PRC-wide rate ( *i.e.* , 376.67 percent);

(3)for subject merchandise exported by Fanhui, Dongbao, or Anqiu Friend, but produced by any party other than itself, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate ( *i.e.* , 376.67 percent);

(4)for subject merchandise produced by Fanhui, Dongbao, or Anqiu Friend, but exported by any party other than itself, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate ( *i.e.* , 376.67 percent); and

(5)for subject merchandise produced by CATC but exported by any party other than Chengshun, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate ( *i.e.* , 376.67 percent). Notification of Interested Parties This notice 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 the review period. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.402(f)(3), failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (“APO”) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO as explained in the administrative protective order itself. 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 the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, 19 CFR 351.214(i)(1), and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5). Dated: July 11, 2006. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-11290 Filed 7-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-533-820] Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On January 12, 2006, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products

(HRS)from India. *See Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 71 FR 2018 (January 12, 2006) ( *Preliminary Results* ). This review covers one producer/exporter of HRS, Essar Steel Ltd. (Essar). The period of review

(POR)is December 1, 2003, through November 30, 2004. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we made changes to the preliminary dumping margin calculation. Despite these changes, the calculated dumping margin for these final results does not differ from the dumping margin determined in 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: July 18, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Pedersen or Howard Smith, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230, telephone:

(202)482-2769 or

(202)482-5193, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On January 12, 2006, the Department published the *Preliminary Results* in the **Federal Register** and invited interested parties to comment on those results. In response to the Department's invitation to comment on the *Preliminary Results* of this review, Essar and Nucor Corporation (Nucor), one of two petitioners, filed case briefs on February 22, 2006. Essar, Nucor and United States Steel Corporation (USSC), the other petitioner, filed rebuttal briefs on February 27, 2006. At the Department's request, Nucor excluded certain factual information from its brief and rebuttal brief and resubmitted its briefs on March 17, 2006. On March 3, 2006, Essar withdrew its February 10, 2006, request for a hearing. Scope of the Order The products covered by the antidumping duty order are certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products of a rectangular shape, of a width of 0.5 inch or greater, neither clad, plated, nor coated with metal and whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances, in coils (whether or not in successively superimposed layers), regardless of thickness, and in straight lengths, of a thickness of less than 4.75 mm and of a width measuring at least 10 times the thickness. Universal mill plate ( *i.e.* , flat-rolled products rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 mm, but not exceeding 1250 mm, and of a thickness of not less than 4.0 mm, not in coils and without patterns in relief) of a thickness not less than 4.0 mm is not included within the scope of the order. Specifically included within the scope of the order are vacuum degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to as interstitial-free (IF)) steels, high strength low alloy

(HSLA)steels, and the substrate for motor lamination steels. IF steels are recognized as low carbon steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as titanium or niobium (also commonly referred to as columbium), or both, added to stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper, niobium, vanadium, and molybdenum. The substrate for motor lamination steels contains micro-alloying levels of elements such as silicon and aluminum. Steel products to be included in the scope of the order, regardless of definitions in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), are products in which: i) iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; ii) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by weight; and iii) none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated: 1.80 percent of manganese, or 2.25 percent of silicon, or 1.00 percent of copper, or 0.50 percent of aluminum, or 1.25 percent of chromium, or 0.30 percent of cobalt, or 0.40 percent of lead, or 1.25 percent of nickel, or 0.30 percent of tungsten, or 0.10 percent of molybdenum, or 0.10 percent of niobium, or 0.15 percent of vanadium, or 0.15 percent of zirconium. All products that meet the physical and chemical description provided above are within the scope of the order unless otherwise excluded. The following products, by way of example, are outside or specifically excluded from the scope of the order: • Alloy HRS products in which at least one of the chemical elements exceeds those listed above (including, e.g., American Society for Testing and Materials

(ASTM)specifications A543, A387, A514, A517, A506). • Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)/American Iron & Steel Institute

(AISI)grades of series 2300 and higher. • Ball bearing steels, as defined in the HTSUS. • Tool steels, as defined in the HTSUS. • Silico-manganese (as defined in the HTSUS) or silicon electrical steel with a silicon level exceeding 2.25 percent. • ASTM specifications A710 and A736. • USS abrasion-resistant steels (USS AR 400, USS AR 500). • All products (proprietary or otherwise) based on an alloy ASTM specification (sample specifications: ASTM A506, A507). • Non-rectangular shapes, not in coils, which are the result of having been processed by cutting or stamping and which have assumed the character of articles or products classified outside chapter 72 of the HTSUS. The merchandise subject to the order is classified in the HTSUS at subheadings: 7208.10.15.00, 7208.10.30.00, 7208.10.60.00, 7208.25.30.00, 7208.25.60.00, 7208.26.00.30, 7208.26.00.60, 7208.27.00.30, 7208.27.00.60, 7208.36.00.30, 7208.36.00.60, 7208.37.00.30, 7208.37.00.60, 7208.38.00.15, 7208.38.00.30, 7208.38.00.90, 7208.39.00.15, 7208.39.00.30, 7208.39.00.90, 7208.40.60.30, 7208.40.60.60, 7208.53.00.00, 7208.54.00.00, 7208.90.00.00, 7211.14.00.90, 7211.19.15.00, 7211.19.20.00, 7211.19.30.00, 7211.19.45.00, 7211.19.60.00, 7211.19.75.30, 7211.19.75.60, and 7211.19.75.90. Certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products covered by the order, including: vacuum degassed fully stabilized; high strength low alloy; and the substrate for motor lamination steel may also enter under the following tariff numbers: 7225.11.00.00, 7225.19.00.00, 7225.30.30.50, 7225.30.70.00, 7225.40.70.00, 7225.99.00.90, 7226.11.10.00, 7226.11.90.30, 7226.11.90.60, 7226.19.10.00, 7226.19.90.00, 7226.91.50.00, 7226.91.70.00, 7226.91.80.00, and 7226.99.00.00. Subject merchandise may also enter under 7210.70.30.00, 7210.90.90.00, 7211.14.00.30, 7212.40.10.00, 7212.40.50.00, and 7212.50.00.00. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise under review is dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received The issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated concurrently herewith (the Decision Memorandum), which is adopted herein, by reference. Attached, as an appendix to this notice, is a list of the comments the Department received from interested parties, all of which are discussed in the Decision Memorandum. The Decision Memorandum is on file in the Central Record Unit, Room B-099 of the Herbert C. Hoover Building, and may be accessed on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/index.html. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of comments received, we made the following changes in the comparison and margin calculation programs. For a full discussion of these changes, *see* the Decision Memorandum. 1. We corrected our ministerial error related to the addition to costs of credits granted under the Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme. 2. We corrected ministerial errors related to increases of general and administrative (G&A) and interest expenses that were added in addition to increases of material costs by the Department under the major input rule. Final Results of Review As a result of this review, we determine that the following weighted-average dumping margin exists for the period December 1, 2003, through November 30, 2004: Manufacturer/Exporter Margin (percent) Essar Steel Limited 0.00 (de minimis) Assessment The Department has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries, pursuant to 19 CFR § 351.212(b). The Department calculated an importer-specific duty assessment rate on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of the examined sales. Where the importer-specific assessment rate is above *de minimis* , the Department will instruct CBP to assess the importer-specific rate uniformly on the entered value of all entries of subject merchandise by that importer. The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of publication of the final results of review. The Department clarified its “automatic assessment” regulation on May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the period of review produced by companies included in these final results of review for which the reviewed companies did not know their merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company involved in the transaction. For a full discussion of this clarification, *see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties* , 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). Cash Deposits The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review 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 Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). In the instant matter:

(1)since the dumping margin for Essar is *de minimis* (less than 0.50 percent), no cash deposit will be required for Essar;

(2)for previously investigated or reviewed 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 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 subject merchandise; and

(4)the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be the “all others” rate of 23.87 percent, which is the “all others” rate established in the LTFV investigation (38.72 percent), adjusted for the export subsidy rate in the companion countervailing duty investigation. These cash deposit rates, when imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review. *See* section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act. Notification to Parties This notice 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 the antidumping duties occurred and the concomitant assessment of double antidumping duties. This notice is also the only reminder to parties subject to the administrative protective order

(APO)of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR § 351.305. 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 the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. The Department is publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: July 11, 2006. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix List of Issues Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum *Comment 1:* Determining the Market Price of Electricity in Applying the Major Input Rule *Comment 2:* Whether to Adjust U.S. Prices for Duties Imposed to Offset Export Subsidies *Comment 3:* Whether to Recalculate Interest and General and Administrative Expenses After Applying the Major Input Rule *Comment 4:* Adding Import Duties to Reported Costs [FR Doc. E6-11292 Filed 7-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-580-834] Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea; Notice of Extension of Time Limits for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: July 18, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irina Itkin or Brianne Riker, 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)482-0656 and

(202)482-0629, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Department of Commerce (the Department) published an antidumping duty order on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils (SSSSC) from the Republic of Korea on July 27, 1999. *See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order; Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils From United Kingdom, Taiwan and South Korea* , 64 FR 40555 (July 27, 1999). On August 29, 2005, the Department published a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the order on SSSSC from Korea for the period July 1, 2004, through June 30, 2005. *See* 70 FR 51009. The respondents in this administrative review are: Boorim Corporation, Dae Kyung Corporation, DaiYang Metal Co., Ltd., Dine Trading Co., Ltd., and Dosko Co., Ltd. On April 10, 2005, the Department published in the **Federal Register** its preliminary results. *See Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea; Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 71 FR 18074 (Apr. 10, 2006). The final results are currently due no later than August 8, 2006. Extension of the Time Limit for Final Results of Administrative Review Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) requires the Department to make a final determination in an administrative review within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary determination is published. However, if it is not practicable to complete the review within this time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the time limit for the final results to 180 days (or 300 days if the Department does not extend the time limit for the preliminary results) from the date of publication of the preliminary results. In accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2), the Department finds that it is not practicable to complete the review within the original time frame because analysis of the issues presented in the case briefs, including the issue related to the U.S. price adjustment for countervailing duties imposed to offset export subsidies, requires additional time. Because it is not practicable to complete this administrative review within the time limit mandated by section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2), the Department is fully extending the time limit for completion of the final results to 300 days. Therefore, the final results are due no later than February 5, 2007, the next business day after 300 days from publication of the preliminary results. This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. Dated: July 11, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-11370 Filed 7-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-533-808] Stainless Steel Wire Rods From India: Notice of Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On May 19, 2006, the Department of Commerce (The Department) published a notice of its intent to rescind the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel wire rods from India for Viraj Alloys, Ltd., Viraj Forgings, Ltd., Viraj Impoexpo, Ltd., Viraj Smelting, Viraj Profiles, and VSL Wires, Ltd. (collective, the Viraj entities), and Mukand Limited (Mukand) due to the lack of suspended entries of merchandise subject to the order during the period December 1, 2004, through November 30, 2005. See *Stainless Steel Wire Rods from India: Notice of Intent of Rescind Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,* 71 FR 29124 (May 19, 2006). The Department received comments from Mukand and rebuttal comments from the petitioner, Carpenter Technology Corporation, regarding Mukand but did not receive any comments from any parties regarding the Viraj entities. We are now rescinding the administrative review with respect to the Viraj entities and Mukand. DATES: *Effective Date:* July 18, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristin Case or John Holman, 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)482-3174 or

(202)482-3683, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background After initiating an administrative review of the Viraj entities and Mukand (see *Notice of Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part,* 71 FR 5241 (February 1, 2006)), the Department determined that there were no suspended entries of merchandise subject to the order involving any of the Viraj entities or Mukand for the period of review (POR). Therefore, it published a notice of intent to rescind the administrative review and requested comments with respect to its intent to rescind the administrative review of wire rods from India. See *Stainless Steel Wire Rods from India: Notice of Intent to Rescind Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,* 71 FR 29124 (May 19, 2006) ( *Intent to Rescind* ). On May 18, 2006, Mukand submitted a letter claiming that it had an entry of subject merchandise during the POR. The letter included a copy of U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)form 7501 which indicated a November 2005 entry date. On June 5, 2006, Mukand submitted a case brief and documentation to support its claim that it had an entry during the POR. On June 16, 2006, the petitioner submitted comments rebutting Mukand's arguments. At the request of Mukand, on June 21, 2006, we held a hearing on our intent to rescind the administrative review with respect to Mukand. The Department did not receive comments concerning its intent to rescind the administrative review of the Viraj entities. Scope of the Order The products covered by this order are certain stainless steel wire rods, which are hot-rolled or hot-rolled annealed and/or pickled rounds, squares, octagons, hexagons or other shapes, in coils. Wire rods are made of alloy steels containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 10.5 percent or ore of chromium, with or without other elements. These products are only manufactured by hot-rolling, are normally sold in coiled form, and are of solid cross section. The majority of wire rods sold in the United States are round in cross-section shape, annealed, and pickled. The most common size is 5.5 millimeters in diameter. The products are currently classifiable under subheadings 7221.00.0005, 7221.00.0015, 7221.00.0030, 7221.00.0045, and 7221.00.0075 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 proceeding remains dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received All issues concerning the *Intent to Rescind* raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to the administrative review of the order on stainless steel wire rods from India are addressed in the “Issues and Decision Memorandum” (Decision Memo) from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary, dated July 12, 2006, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The Decision Memo, which is a public document, is on file in the Central Records Unit, main Commerce building, Room B-099, and is accessible on the Web at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/index.html.* The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Rescission of Administrative Review Section 751(a) of the Act provides that, when conducting administrative reviews, the Department shall determine the dumping margin for entries during the POR. Further, according to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), the Department may rescind an administrative review in whole or only with respect to a particular exporter or producer if it concludes that, during the POR, there were no entries, exports, or sales of the subject merchandise, as the case may be. The Department has consistently interpreted the statutory and regulatory language as requiring “that there be entries during the period of review upon which to assess antidumping duties.” See *Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Japan: Notice of Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 70 FR 44088, 44088 (August 1, 2005), and *Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from Taiwan: Final Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 66 FR 18610 (April 10, 2001). In *Allegheny Ludlum Corp.* v. *United States* , 346 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2003), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the Department's practice of rescinding annual reviews when there are no entries of subject merchandise during the POR. See also *Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from Taiwan: Final Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 68 FR 63067, 63068 (November 7, 2003) (stating that “the Department's interpretation of its statute and regulations, as affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, supports not conducting an administrative review when the evidence on the record indicates that respondents had no entries of subject merchandise during the POR”). Viraj Entities Previously we determined that “there are no suspended entries of merchandise subject to the order involving any of the Viraj entities for the POR.” See *Intent to Rescind.* Further, we received no comments with respect to this determination. Therefore, we are rescinding the review with respect to the Viraj Entities. Mukand Previously we determined that “there were no entries of merchandise subject to the order from Mukand during the POR.” See *Intent to Rescind* . After a review of all of the facts on the record, we have determined that Mukand's entry in question entered after the POR. We found that the entry documentation submitted by Mukand was actually pre-filed and indicated the broker's elected date of entry and not the actual date of entry. Morever, Mukand confirmed this fact when it stated in its case brief that “wire rod then moved in bond from Los Angeles to Chicago. When it arrived in Chicago Customs, Customs indicated a December 5, 2006, release date as the arrival date in the Port of Chicago.” See Mukand's Letter to the Secretary, dated June 5, 2006. Thus, we are rescinding the review with respect to Mukand. For a detailed discussion of this issue, see the Decision Memo and also the “Memorandum to the File” from the analyst through Minoo Hatten, Program Manager, “2004-2005 Entry of Stainless Steel Wire Rods from India by Mukand Limited,” dated July 12, 2006. Thus, the regulations, previous administrative decisions, and case law all support rescission of the administrative review in this case. Therefore, the Department rescinds the administrative review with respect to the Viraj entities and Mukand. This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(l) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d). Dated: July 12, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. 06-6300 Filed 7-7-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 7

Traces to 7 documents

CFR