Notices. Notice of Upcoming Sunset Reviews Background Every five years, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) and the International Trade Commission automatically initiate and conduct a review to determine whether revocation of a countervailing or antidumping duty order or termination of an investigation suspended under section 704 or 734 would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or a countervailable subsidy (as the case may be) and of material injury

7,420 words·~34 min read·/register/2007/04/02/07-1637·

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

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board (Docket 8-2007) Foreign-Trade Zone 183 - Austin, Texas, Expansion of Manufacturing Authority -- Subzone 183B, Samsung Austin Semiconductor L.L.C., Correction The **Federal Register** notice published on March 20, 2007 (72 FR 13081-) describing the application by the Foreign-Trade Zone of Central Texas, Inc., grantee of FTZ 183, requesting an expansion of the scope of manufacturing authority conducted under zone procedures within Subzone 183B at the Samsung Austin Semiconductor L.L.C. facility in Austin, Texas, is corrected as follows:

In paragraph 2, beginning on the 13th line, the text that reads ``Site 3--Three Way Inc. facilities (1.9 acres; 50,000 sq. ft.)--located at 4009 Commercial Center Drive in Austin'' should be corrected to read ``Site 3--Three Way Logistics facilities (1.9 acres; 50,000 sq. ft.) - located at 8410 Tuscany Way in Austin''. Dated: March 26, 2007. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-5926 Filed 3-30-02; 8:45 am] Billing Code: 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board (Docket 45-2006) Foreign-Trade Zone 86 - Tacoma, Washington, Withdrawal of Request for Manufacturing Authority Notice is hereby given of the withdrawal of the application requesting manufacturing authority on behalf of Panasonic Consumer Electronics Co., and its warehouse/FTZ operator Norvanco International Inc.

The application was filed on November 8, 2006 (71 FR 69203, 11/30/06). The withdrawal was requested because of changed circumstances, and the case has been closed without prejudice. Dated: March 27, 2007. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6087 Filed 3-30-02; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review AGENCY:

Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sheila E. Forbes, Office of AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230, telephone:

(202)482-4697. Background Each year during the anniversary month of the publication of an antidumping or countervailing duty order, finding, or suspension of investigation, an interested party, as defined in section 771(9) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), may request, in accordance with section 351.213(2004) of the Department of Commerce (the Department) Regulations, that the Department conduct an administrative review of that antidumping or countervailing duty order, finding, or suspended investigation. Opportunity to Request a Review Not later than the last day of April 2007 1 , interested parties may request administrative review of the following orders, findings, or suspended investigations, with anniversary dates in April for the following periods: 1 Or the next business day, if the deadline falls on a weekend, federal holiday or any other day when the Department is closed. Antidumping Duty Proceedings Period FRANCE: Sorbitol A-427-001 4/1/06 - 3/31/07 NORWAY: Fresh and Chilled Atlantic Salmon A-403-801 4/1/06 - 3/31/07 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields A-570-867 4/1/06 - 3/31/07 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Brake Rotors A-570 -846 4/1/06 - 3/31/07 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Magnesium Metal A-570-896 4/1/06 - 3/31/07 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Non-Malleable Cast Iron Pipe Fittings A-570-875 4/1/06 - 3/31/07 RUSSIA: Magnesium Metal A-821-819 4/1/06 - 3/31/07 TURKEY: Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars A-489-807 4/1/06 - 3/31/07 Countervailing Duty Proceedings NORWAY: Fresh and Chilled Atlantic Salmon C-403-802 1/1/06 - 12/31/06 Suspension Agreements None In accordance with section 351.213

(b)of the regulations, an interested party as defined by section 771(9) of the Act may request in writing that the Secretary conduct an administrative review. For both antidumping and countervailing duty reviews, the interested party must specify the individual producers or exporters covered by an antidumping finding or an antidumping or countervailing duty order or suspension agreement for which it is requesting a review, and the requesting party must state why it desires the Secretary to review those particular producers or exporters. If the interested party intends for the Secretary to review sales of merchandise by an exporter (or a producer if that producer also exports merchandise from other suppliers) which were produced in more than one country of origin and each country of origin is subject to a separate order, then the interested party must state specifically, on an order-by-order basis, which exporter(s) the request is intended to cover. Please note that, for any party the Department was unable to locate in prior segments, the Department will not accept a request for an administrative review of that party absent new information as to the party's location. Moreover, if the interested party who files a request for review is unable to locate the producer or exporter for which it requested the review, the interested party must provide an explanation of the attempts it made to locate the producer or exporter at the same time it files its request for review, in order for the Secretary to determine if the interested party's attempts were reasonable, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.303(f)(3)(ii). As explained in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003), the Department has clarified its practice with respect to the collection of final antidumping duties on imports of merchandise where intermediate firms are involved. The public should be aware of this clarification in determining whether to request an administrative review of merchandise subject to antidumping findings and orders. See also the Import Administration web site at http://ia.ita.doc.gov. Six copies of the request should be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230. The Department also asks parties to serve a copy of their requests to the Office of Antidumping/Countervailing Operations, Attention: Sheila Forbes, in room 3065 of the main Commerce Building. Further, in accordance with section 351.303(f)(l)(i) of the regulations, a copy of each request must be served on every party on the Department's service list. The Department will publish in the Federal Register a notice of “Initiation of Administrative Review of Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation” for requests received by the last day of April 2007. If the Department does not receive, by the last day of April 2007, a request for review of entries covered by an order, finding, or suspended investigation listed in this notice and for the period identified above, the Department will instruct the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to assess antidumping or countervailing duties on those entries at a rate equal to the cash deposit of (or bond for) estimated antidumping or countervailing duties required on those entries at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption and to continue to collect the cash deposit previously ordered. This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community. Dated: March 26, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-6070 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Advance Notification of Sunset Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce ACTION: Notice of Upcoming Sunset Reviews Background Every five years, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) and the International Trade Commission automatically initiate and conduct a review to determine whether revocation of a countervailing or antidumping duty order or termination of an investigation suspended under section 704 or 734 would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or a countervailable subsidy (as the case may be) and of material injury. Upcoming Sunset Reviews for May 2007 The following Sunset Review is scheduled for initiation in May 2007 and will appear in that month's Notice of Initiation of Five-Year Sunset Reviews. Antidumping Duty Proceedings Department Contact Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the PRC (A-570-868) Juanita Chen

(202)482-1904 Countervailing Duty Proceedings No countervailing duty orders are scheduled for initiation in May 2007 Suspended Investigations No suspended investigations are scheduled for initiation in May 2007. The Department's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth in 19 CFR 351.218. Guidance on methodological or analytical issues relevant to the Department's conduct of Sunset Reviews is set forth in the Department's Policy Bulletin 98.3--Policies Regarding the Conduct of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders; Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 1998). The Notice of Initiation of Five-year (“Sunset”) Reviews provides further information regarding what is required of all parties to participate in Sunset Reviews. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), the Department will maintain and make available a service list for these proceedings. To facilitate the timely preparation of the service list(s), it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding contact the Department in writing within 15 days of the publication of the Notice of Initition. Please note that if the Department receives a Notice of Intent to Participate from a member of the domestic industry within 15 days of the date of initiation, the review will continue. Thereafter, any interested party wishing to participate in the Sunset Review must provide substantive comments in response to the notice of initiation no later than 30 days after the date of initiation. This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community. Dated: March 23, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-6067 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Initiation of Five-year (“Sunset”) Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: In accordance with section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) is automatically initiating a five-year (“Sunset Review”) of the antidumping duty orders listed below. The International Trade Commission (“the Commission”) is publishing concurrently with this notice its notice of *Institution of Five-year Review* which covers the same orders. EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Department official identified in the Initiation of Review(s) section below at AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th & Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20230. For information from the Commission contact Mary Messer, Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission at

(202)205-3193. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Department's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth in its *Procedures for Conducting Five-year (“Sunset”) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders* , 63 FR 13516 (March 20, 1998) and 70 FR 62061 (October 28, 2005). Guidance on methodological or analytical issues relevant to the Department's conduct of Sunset Reviews is set forth in the Department's Policy Bulletin 98.3 - *Policies Regarding the Conduct of Five-year (“Sunset”) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders; Policy Bulletin* , 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 1998) (“ *Sunset Policy Bulletin* ”). Initiation of Reviews In accordance with 19 CFR 351.218(c), we are initiating the Sunset Review of the following antidumping duty order: DOC Case No. ITC Case No. Country Product Department Contact A-533-823 731-TA-929 India Silicomanganese Dana Mermelstein(202) 482-1391 A-834-807 731-TA-930 Kazakhstan Silicomanganese Dana Mermelstein(202) 482-1391 A-307-820 731-TA-931 Venezuela Silicomanganese Dana Mermelstein(202) 482-1391 Countervailing Duty Proceedings No countervailing duty proceedings are scheduled for initiation in April 2007. Suspended Investigations No suspended investigations are scheduled for initiation in April 2007 Filing Information As a courtesy, we are making information related to Sunset proceedings, including copies of the Department's regulations regarding Sunset Reviews (19 CFR 351.218) and *Sunset Policy Bulletin* , the Department's schedule of Sunset Reviews, case history information ( *i.e.* , previous margins, duty absorption determinations, scope language, import volumes), and service lists available to the public on the Department's sunset Internet website at the following address: “http://ia.ita.doc.gov/sunset/.” All submissions in these Sunset Reviews must be filed in accordance with the Department's regulations regarding format, translation, service, and certification of documents. These rules can be found at 19 CFR 351.303. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), the Department will maintain and make available a service list for these proceedings. To facilitate the timely preparation of the service list(s), it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding contact the Department in writing within 10 days of the publication of the Notice of Initiation.Because deadlines in Sunset Reviews can be very short, we urge interested parties to apply for access to proprietary information under administrative protective order (“APO”) immediately following publication in the **Federal Register** of the notice of initiation of the sunset review. The Department's regulations on submission of proprietary information and eligibility to receive access to business proprietary information under APO can be found at 19 CFR 351.304-306. Information Required from Interested Parties Domestic interested parties (defined in section 771(9)(C), (D), (E), (F), and

(G)of the Act and 19 CFR 351.102(b)) wishing to participate in these Sunset Reviews must respond not later than 15 days after the date of publication in the **Federal Register** of this notice of initiation by filing a notice of intent to participate. The required contents of the notice of intent to participate are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(ii). In accordance with the Department's regulations, if we do not receive a notice of intent to participate from at least one domestic interested party by the 15-day deadline, the Department will automatically revoke the orders without further review. *See* 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(iii). For sunset reviews of countervailing duty orders, parties wishing the Department to consider arguments that countervailable subsidy programs have been terminated must include with their substantive responses information and documentation addressing whether the changes to the program were

(1)limited to an individual firm or firms and

(2)effected by an official act of the government. Further, a party claiming program termination is expected to document that there are no residual benefits under the program and that substitute programs have not been introduced. *Cf* . 19 CFR 351.526(b) and (d). If a party maintains that any of the subsidies countervailed by the Department were not conferred pursuant to a subsidy program, that party should nevertheless address the applicability of the factors set forth in 19 CFR 351.526(b) and (d). Similarly, parties wishing the Department to consider whether a company's change in ownership has extinguished the benefit from prior non-recurring, allocable, subsidies must include with their substantive responses information and documentation supporting their claim that all or almost all of the company's shares or assets were sold in an arm's length transaction, at a price representing fair market value, as described in the *Notice of Final Modification of Agency Practice Under Section 123 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act* , 68 FR 37125 (June 23, 2003) *(Modification Notice). See Modification Notice* for a discussion of the types of information and documentation the Department requires. If we receive an order-specific notice of intent to participate from a domestic interested party, the Department's regulations provide that *all parties* wishing to participate in the Sunset Review must file complete substantive responses not later than 30 days after the date of publication in the **Federal Register** of this notice of initiation. The required contents of a substantive response, on an order-specific basis, are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3). Note that certain information requirements differ for respondent and domestic parties. Also, note that the Department's information requirements are distinct from the Commission's information requirements. Please consult the Department's regulations for information regarding the Department's conduct of Sunset Reviews. 1 Please consult the Department's regulations at 19 CFR Part 351 for definitions of terms and for other general information concerning antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings at the Department. This notice of initiation is being published in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c). 1 In comments made on the interim final sunset regulations, a number of parties stated that the proposed five-day period for rebuttals to substantive responses to a notice of initiation was insufficient. This requirement was retained in the final sunset regulations at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(4). As provided in 19 CFR 351.302(b), however, the Department will consider individual requests for extension of that five-day deadline based upon a showing of good cause. Dated: March 23, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-6071 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-552-801] Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2, 2007. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (“Department”) has determined that three requests for a new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on certain frozen fish fillets from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (“Vietnam”), received on January 31, February 18 and February 28, 2007, respectively, meet the statutory and regulatory requirements for initiation. For reasons discussed below, the Department also determined that a fourth request for a new shipper review does not meet the requirements for initiation. The period of review (“POR”) for the three new shipper reviews which the Department is initiating is August 1, 2006, through January 31, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Lai Robinson and Michael Holton, 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)482-3797, and

(202)482-1324, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The notice announcing the antidumping duty order on certain frozen fish fillets from Vietnam was published in the **Federal Register** on August 12, 2003. 1 *See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam* , 68 FR 47909 (August 12, 2003). On January 31, February 21, and February 28, 2007, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(c), the Department received four new shipper review requests from Vinh Quang Fisheries Corporation (“Vinh Quang”), Ngoc Thai Company, Ltd. (“Ngoc Thai”), Anvifish Co., Ltd., (“Anvifish”), and Southern Fishery Industries Company, Ltd. (“South Vina”), respectively. Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish certified that they are both the producer and exporter of the subject merchandise upon which the request for a new shipper review is based. In its new shipper review request dated February 28, 2007 (“original request”), South Vina claimed that it is an exporter of frozen fish fillets from Vietnam; however, it did not provide any information or documents supporting its request for a new shipper review. 1 Therefore, a request for a new shipper review based on the semiannual anniversary month, February, was due to the Department by the final day of February 2007. *See* 19 CFR 351.214(d)(1). On March 8, 2007, Catfish Farmers of America and individual U.S. catfish processors (“Petitioners”) submitted comments requesting that the Department reject South Vina's original request because it failed to provide any of the required certifications or documents set forth in 19 CFR 351.214. 2 On March 9, 2007, South Vina submitted a certification and other supporting documents alleging that the certification was not available, and that the new shipper regulation does not require that the certification and accompanying documentation be submitted with the original request. Furthermore, South Vina claimed that the pertinent regulation merely requires that the request for review be made within one year of the date referred to in 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv)(A). On March 15, 2007, Petitioners submitted additional comments urging the Department to reject both South Vina's original new shipper review request and its March 9, 2007, submission. Petitioners reiterated their arguments that South Vina's original request failed to meet any of the submission requirements and should therefore be rejected. Petitioners also argued that South Vina's March 9, 2007, submission was untimely filed and should therefore also be rejected. Citing 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2), Petitioners argued that the Department's regulations unequivocally require applicants to include the necessary certifications and documentation with their new shipper review request. In support of their arguments, Petitioners also referred to the Department's “standard initiation checklist” for new shipper reviews which indicates that, if an application does not satisfy the regulatory requirements, the applicant may only correct such deficiencies “{i}if sufficient time remains ... prior to the end of the appropriate anniversary month or semi-annual anniversary month.” 3 Petitioners contended that the submission deadline in this case was February 28, 2007. In other words, Petitioners argued that South Vina should have submitted all of the regulatory requirements, including the submission of the certifications and supporting documentation, by the deadline, February 28, 2007. Because South Vina failed to do so in its original request, Petitioners argued that South Vina's submissions should be rejected. 2 *See* below in Section *Initiation of New Shipper Reviews* at B. *South Vina* for the requirements specified in 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2). 3 *See* Petitioners' March 15, 2007, submission at pages 2 and 3. On March 22, 2007, South Vina submitted a response to Petitioners' objections of March 15, 2007, comments. Citing several cases in which the Department sent supplemental questionnaires prior to initiation, South Vina argued that the Department should keep South Vina's March 9, 2007, supporting documentation and initiate a new shipper review. Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended (“the Act”), and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i), Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish certified that they did not export certain frozen fish fillets to the United States during the period of investigation (“POI”). In addition, pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A), Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish certified that, since the initiation of the investigation, they have never been affiliated with any Vietnamese exporter or producer who exported certain frozen fish fillets to the United States during the POI, including those not individually examined during the investigation. As required by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(B), Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish also certified that their export activities were not controlled by the central government of Vietnam. In addition to the certifications described above, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv), Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish submitted documentation establishing the following:

(1)The date on which Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish first shipped certain frozen fish fillets for export to the United States and the date on which the frozen fish fillets were first entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption;

(2)the volume of their first shipment; 4 and

(3)the date of their first sale to an unaffiliated customer in the United States. 4 Vinh Quang made no subsequent shipments to the United States, while Ngoc Thai made one subsequent shipment during the POR, which the Department corroborated using data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”). On page 2 of its submission, Anvifish claimed no subsequent shipments to the United States after its first sale; however, the CBP data indicates that there were subsequent shipments made by Anvifish. The Department conducted CBP database queries to confirm that Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish's shipments of subject merchandise had entered the United States for consumption and that liquidation of such entries had been properly suspended for antidumping duties. Initiation of New Shipper Reviews A. Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(d)(1), the Department finds that Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish's requests meet the threshold requirements for initiation of a new shipper review for the shipment of certain frozen fish fillets from Vietnam they produced and exported. *See Memorandum to File from Cindy Lai Robinson, Senior Analyst, through Alex Villanueva, Program Manager, Office 9, Initiaion of AD New Shipper Review: Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from Vietnam (A-552-801)* , dated March 26, 2007. B. South Vina The Department finds that South Vina's original review request dated February 28, 2007, did not provide any required supporting documents and therefore, it does not meet the threshold requirements for initiation of a new shipper review for the shipment of certain frozen fish fillets from Vietnam, pursuant to sections 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) and

(II)of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i), 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A) and (B), and 351.214(b)(2)(iv). With respect to South Vina's submission on March 9, 2007, the Department agrees with Petitioners that it was submitted untimely for this semi-annual anniversary month because it was received nine days after the deadline, February 28, 2007, which is the last day of the semi-annual anniversary month. The Department disagrees with South Vina's arguments that:

(1)the new shipper regulation does not require that the certification and accompanying documentation be submitted with the original request; and

(2)the pertinent regulation merely requires that the request for review be made “within one year of the date referred to” in paragraph 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv)(A). To the contrary, 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2) clearly specifies the “contents of request,” which includes:

(1)A certification from the requester or its producer stating that no subject merchandise was exported to the United States (“U.S.”) during the POI;

(2)a certification stating that since the initiation of the investigation, the requester has never been affiliated with any exporter or producer who exported subject merchandise to the U.S. during the POI;

(3)a certification stating no government control over the requester's export activities in a nonmarket economy case; and

(4)information regarding the date of the requester's first entry or shipment of subject merchandise, the volume of the first and all subsequent shipments of subject merchandise to the U.S., and the date of requester's first sale to an unaffiliated U.S. customer. Furthermore, 19 CFR 351.214(a) points out that the purpose of the URAA to establish a new shipper review procedure is to allow new shippers the opportunity to attain their own individual dumping margin on an expedited basis. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.214(d), the Department is required to initiate the new shipper review within a month immediately following the semi-annual anniversary month or the anniversary month depending on the date of the request. Accordingly, the Department must have all required supporting documents on the record by the submission deadline in order to initiate a new shipper review in a timely manner. As noted above, on March 22, 2007, South Vina submitted a list of cases where the Department sent supplemental questionnaires prior to initiation and therefore, South Vina argues, the Department should accept its March 9, 2007, supporting documentation and initiate a new shipper review. However, in each case cited by South Vina, the requestor included the documents required by section 351.214(b)(2) in its original request, which South Vina did not include in its February 28, 2007, request. Because South Vina did not provide any of the “contents of request” in its original request, and its submission on March 9, 2007, is untimely, the Department has determined that South Vina's request does not meet the statutory and regulatory requirements for initiation. Therefore, the Department has removed South Vina's February 28, 2007, and its March 9, 2007, submissions from the record, and rejected South Vina's new shipper review request, in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) and

(II)of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.214. The POR for the three new shipper reviews is August 1, 2006, through January 31, 2007. See 19 CFR 351.214(g)(1)(ii)(A). The Department intends to issue the preliminary results of these reviews no later than 180 days from the date of initiation, and final results of these reviews no later than 270 days from the date of initiation. See section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act. Interested parties requiring access to proprietary information in this new shipper review should submit applications for disclosure under administrative protective order in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 and 351.306. This initiation and notice are published in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214 and 351.221(c)(1)(i). Dated: March 26, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-6063 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (A-570-863) Honey from the People's Republic of China: Expedited Partial Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On January 3, 2007, the Department published the Preliminary Results of the fourth administrative review of the antidumping duty order on honey from the People's Republic of China (PRC). *See Honey from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 72 FR 102 (January 3, 2007) (Preliminary Results). This review covers five exporters or producer/exporters:

(1)Anhui Honghui Foodstuff (Group) Co., Ltd. (Anhui Honghui);

(2)Chengdu Waiyuan Bee Products Co., Ltd. (Chengdu);

(3)Jiangsu Kanghong Natural Healthfoods Co., Ltd. (Jiangsu);

(4)Kunshan Xin'an Trade Co., Ltd. (Kunshan Xin'an); and

(5)Wuhan Shino-Food Trade Co., Ltd. (Shino-Food). The period of review

(POR)is December 1, 2004, through November 30, 2005. In response to a request from the American Honey Producers Association and the Sioux Honey Association (collectively, petitioners), the Department is expediting the final results of this review for Chengdu, an uncooperative respondent, because of its extraordinary surge of exports and the significant difference between Chengdu's current cash deposit rate of 22.03 percent and Chengdu's preliminary cash deposit rate of 212.39 percent based on total facts available with adverse inference. EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy Lao or Angelica Mendoza, AD/CVD Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-7924 or

(202)482-3019, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Since the Preliminary Results the following events have occurred. On January 12 and 29, 2007, counsel to the petitioners met with Department officials to discuss their concerns about a surge in entries by Chengdu and resultant injury to the domestic honey industry. *See* Memoranda to the File dated January 18 and 29, 2007, respectively. Subsequently, the petitioners filed a request that the Department expedite the final results of review with respect to Chengdu. *See* Letter from the petitioners to the Secretary, dated February 6, 2007. In their request, the petitioners argue that Chengdu has “misused” the lowest cash deposit rate for any Chinese exporter of honey (22.03 percent) to ship huge quantities to the United States, causing immense harm to the domestic industry, while refusing to participate in administrative reviews. 1 1 Chengdu did not request a review for the fifth review period of 12/1/2005-11/30/2006. On February 7, 2007, the Department informed counsel to Chengdu of the petitioners' submission and our decision to accept the new information contained therein. We indicated that any comments on the submission were due on February 16, 2007. *See* Memorandum to the File from Patrick Edwards dated February 7, 2007. On February 15, 2007, the Department received a letter from Chengdu stating that its U.S. customer had informed them of the petitioners' letter dated February 7, 2007, and requesting an opportunity to comment or provide its own data to verify the accuracy of the petitioners' information. On February 16, 2007, the counsel of record for Chengdu notified the Department that it does not represent Chengdu. On the same day, the Department sent a letter via facsimile to Chengdu extending the comment period until February 23, 2007. On February 23, 2007, the Department received a facsimile letter from Chengdu restating some of the same points made in its previous letter but providing no new information. The letter was not properly filed and the Department gave Chengdu until February 26, 2007, to file its letter for the record. However, Chengdu did not submit its letter until March 5, 2007, and the Department rejected it as untimely. *See* Letter to Chengdu dated March 5, 2007. On February 28, 2007, the Department issued a Decision Memorandum expediting the final results of review for Chengdu and extending the deadline for case briefs for all parties in this review until March 14, 2007, and for rebuttal briefs until March 21, 2007. *See* Memorandum to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Expedited Final Results of Administrative Review for Chengdu Waiyuan Bee Products Co., Ltd. (February 28, 2007) (Decision Memo). No comments with respect to the expedited final results for Chengdu were filed. According to section 751(a)(3) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department “shall make . . . a final determination . . . within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary determination is published.” *See also* 19 CFR § 351.213(h)(1). The Department's normal practice is to issue a final determination for all companies simultaneously. In this case, however, extraordinary circumstances support our issuance of the final results of this review with respect solely to Chengdu prior to 120 days after publication of the preliminary results. Specifically, the surge in Chengdu's shipments, its failure to participate in administrative reviews to enable the Department to calculate a dumping margin, and the large difference between the current cash deposit rate and the rate assigned to Chengdu in the preliminary results of this review constitute extraordinary circumstances in support of expediting the final results for Chengdu. We believe that under these extraordinary circumstances a departure from our normal practice is warranted. For further analysis, *see* the proprietary version of Decision Memo. Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order The products covered by this order are natural honey, artificial honey containing more than 50 percent natural honey by weight, preparations of natural honey containing more than 50 percent natural honey by weight, and flavored honey. The subject merchandise includes all grades and colors of honey whether in liquid, creamed, comb, cut comb, or chunk form, and whether packaged for retail or in bulk form. The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable under subheadings 0409.00.00, 1702.90.90, and 2106.90.99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the Department's written description of the merchandise under the order is dispositive. Rate for Chengdu The PRC-wide rate applies to all PRC entities with the exception of those exporters that have demonstrated their eligibility for a separate rate. While Chengdu failed to demonstrate its eligibility for a separate rate on the record of this review, and thus is considered to be part of the PRC entity, the Department has determined that circumstances warrant expedited final results of review solely with respect to Chengdu. As a result, for these expedited final results, the Department is issuing a rate applicable solely to Chengdu. In its preliminary results, the Department assigned a rate to the PRC-wide entity (including Chengdu) based on adverse facts available (AFA). No party to the proceeding commented on the rate to be assigned to Chengdu for purposes of the final results. Based upon our review of the record, the Department will continue to assign the rate of 212.39 percent to Chengdu, which is the rate assigned to the PRC-wide entity (including Chengdu) in the preliminary results. The final PRC-wide rate will be determined in the final results of review that will cover all entities other than Chengdu. These non-expedited final results of review are currently due for issuance by May 3, 2007. Final Results of Review We determine that the following antidumping duty margin applies: Producer/Exporter Margin (percent) Chengdu Waiyuan Bee Products Co., Ltd. 212.39 Assessment of Antidumping Duties Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review. Cash Deposits The following cash-deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of these expedited partial final results for shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of these partial final results, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act:

(1)for subject merchandise exported by Chengdu, the cash deposit rate will be 212.39 percent;

(2)the cash deposit rate for PRC exporters who received a separate rate in a prior segment of the proceeding will continue to be the rate assigned in that segment of the proceeding;

(3)for all other PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash-deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate of 212.39 percent; and

(4)for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise, the cash-deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC supplier of that exporter. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of this administrative review for Anhui Honghui, Jiangsu, Kunshan Xin'an, Shino-Food and companies subject to the PRC-wide rate with the exception of Chengdu. For Chengdu, these deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review. Notification to Interested Parties This notice also serves as the final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 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 in the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order

(APO)of their responsibility concerning the return/destruction or conversion to judicial protective order of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Failure to comply is a violation of the APO. This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: March 27, 2007. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-6069 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-851] Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Initiation of New Shipper Antidumping Duty Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2, 2007. SUMMARY: On February 20, 2007, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) received a request from the exporter and producer Ayecue (Liaocheng) Foodstuff Co., Ltd. (“Ayecue”) to conduct a new shipper review (“NSR”) of the antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”). In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), and 19 CFR 351.214(d), we are initiating a NSR of Ayecue. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Martin or Mark Manning; AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-3936 or

(202)482-5253, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Department received a timely request from Ayecue on February 20, 2007, in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(c), for a NSR of the antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from the PRC, which has a February anniversary month. *See Notice of Amendment of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic of China* , 64 FR 8308 (February 19, 1999). Upon review, the Department determinated that Ayecue's February 20, 2007, request was deficient in certain areas. The Department issued a supplemental to Ayecue on February 27, 2007. On March 19, 2007, Ayecue submitted a revised request for a NSR that provided the requested information. Ayecue identified itself as a producer and exporter of preserved mushrooms. As required by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i) and (iii)(A), Ayecue certified that it did not export preserved mushrooms to the United States during the period of investigation (“POI”), and that it has never been affiliated with any exporter or producer which exported preserved mushrooms to the United States during the POI. Furthermore, the company also certified that its export activities are not controlled by the government of the PRC, satisfying the requirements of 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(B). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv), Ayecue submitted documentation establishing the date on which the subject merchandise was first entered for consumption in the United States, the volume of that first shipment and any subsequent shipments, and the date of the first sale to an unaffiliated customer in the United States. Based on the information submitted by Ayecue, we have determined that Ayecue has met the statutory and regulatory requirements for the initiation of a NSR. The Department queried the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) entry database to confirm that the shipment made by Ayecue had officially entered the United States via assignment of an entry date in the Customs database by CBP. In addition, the Department confirmed the existence of Ayecue and its U.S. customer. Initiation of Review In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(d)(1), and based on information on the record, we are initiating a NSR for Ayecue. See Memorandum to the File, from Thomas Martin, International Trade Compliance Analyst, through Abdelali Elouaradia, Director, Office 4, AD/CVD Operations, “Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review: Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China,” dated March 27, 2007. We intend to issue the preliminary results of this review not later than 180 days after the date on which this review was initiated, and the final results of this review within 90 days after the date on which the preliminary results were issued. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(g)(1)(i)(A), the period of review (“POR”) for a NSR, initiated in the month immediately following the anniversary month, will be the 12-month period immediately preceding the anniversary month. Therefore, the POR for the NSR of Ayecue is February 1, 2006, through January 31, 2007. In cases involving non-market economies, the Department requires that a company seeking to establish eligibility for an antidumping duty rate separate from the country-wide rate provide evidence of *de jure* and *de facto* absence of government control over the company's export activities. *See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Bicycles From the People's Republic of China* , 61 FR 19026, 19027 (April 30, 1996). Accordingly, we will issue a questionnaire to Ayecue, including a separate rates section. The review will proceed if the responses provide sufficient indication that Ayecue is not subject to either *de jure* or *de facto* government control with respect to its exports of preserved mushrooms. However, if Ayecue does not demonstrate its eligibility for a separate rate, then the company will be deemed not separate from other companies that exported during the POI and the NSR will be rescinded as to the company. On August 17, 2006, the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (H.R. 4) was signed into law. Section 1632 of H.R. 4 temporarily suspends the authority of the Department to instruct CBP to collect a bond or other security in lieu of a cash deposit in NSRs. Therefore, the posting of a bond under section 751(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(e) in lieu of a cash deposit is not available in this case. Importers of subject merchandise manufactured and exported by Ayecue must continue to pay a cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties on each entry of subject merchandise at the current PRC-wide rate of 198.63 percent. Interested parties that require access to proprietary information in this NSR should submit applications for disclosure under administrative protective orders in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 and 351.306. This initiation and notice are in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act, 19 CFR 351.214(d), and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i). Dated: March 27, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-6062 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE Sunshine Act Notice The President's Council on Service and Civic Participation gives notice of the following meeting: Date and Time: Monday, April 9, 2:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. Place: Washington, DC—DCJCC, 1529 16th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036. Status: Open. Matters to be Considered: I. Opening Remarks and Welcome from Council Chair. II. Approval of Meeting Minutes from October 6, 2006. III. Report on Council Activities. IV. Presentation of President's Volunteer Service Awards. V. Consideration of National Volunteer Week Resolution. VI. Closing Remarks. VII. Adjournment. Accommodations: Anyone who needs an interpreter or other accommodation should notify the Corporation's contact person by Wednesday, April 4. CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Brendan Murphy, Corporation for National and Community Service, 10th Floor, Room 10302E, 1201 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20525. Phone

(202)606-6945. Fax

(202)606-3460. TDD:

(202)606-3472. e-mail: *dpremo@cns.gov.* Dated: March 29, 2007. Frank R. Trinity, General Counsel. [FR Doc. 07-1637 Filed 3-29-07; 3:40 pm]

Connectionstraces to 12

Traces to 12 documents

CFR

2 references not yet in our index

19 CFR 351.304-306
19 CFR 351

Citation graph

cites case law

Notices

Notice of Upcoming Sunset Reviews Background Every five years, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) and the International Trade Commission automatically initiate and conduct a review to determine whether revocation of a countervailing or antidumping duty order or termination of an investigation suspended under section 704 or 734 would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or a countervailable subsidy (as the case may be) and of material injury

Cite19 CFR 351.304-306

Cite19 CFR 351

Cites 14 · showing 11Cited by 0 across 0 sources