2344 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Notices 

1The petitioners are the United States Steel 

Corporation, Nucor Corporation, and ArcelorMittal 

USA Inc. (collectively ‘‘petitioners’’). 

occurred and the subsequent assessment 

of double antidumping duties. 

We are issuing and publishing the 

preliminary results determination in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 

777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: January 7, 2011. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2011–627 Filed 1–12–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–533–820] 

Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 

Products From India: Notice of 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: In response to requests from 

petitioners,1 the Department of 

Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) is 

conducting an administrative review of 

the antidumping duty order on certain 

hot-rolled carbon steel flat products 

from India (‘‘Indian Hot-Rolled’’) 

manufactured by Essar Steel Limited 

(‘‘Essar’’), Ispat Industries Limited 

(‘‘Ispat’’), JSW Steel Limited (‘‘JSW’’), and 

Tata Steel Limited (‘‘Tata’’). The period 

of review (‘‘POR’’) covers December 1, 

2008, through November 30, 2009. We 

preliminarily determine that Essar, 

Ispat, JSW, and Tata had no reviewable 

entries of subject merchandise during 

the POR. 

Interested parties are invited to 

comment on these preliminary results. 

We intend to issue the final results no 

later than 120 days from the date of 

publication of this notice, pursuant to 

section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). 

DATES: Effective Date: January 13, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher Hargett or James Terpstra, 

AD/CVD Operations Office 3, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–4161 and (202) 

482–3965, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On December 3, 2001, the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

antidumping duty order on Indian HotRolled. See Notice of Amended Final 

Antidumping Duty Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 

Antidumping Duty Order: Certain HotRolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From 

India, 66 FR 60194 (December 3, 2001) 

(‘‘Amended Final Determination’’). On 

December 1, 2009, the Department 

published in the Federal Register a 

notice titled ‘‘Opportunity to Request 

Administrative Review’’ of the 

antidumping duty order on Indian HotRolled. See Antidumping or 

Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or 

Suspended Investigation; Opportunity 

To Request Administrative Review, 74 

FR 62743 (December 1, 2009). On 

December 31, 2009, petitioners 

requested an administrative review of 

the antidumping duty order on Indian 

Hot-Rolled, for subject merchandise 

produced or exported by Ispat, JSW, 

Tata, and Essar. On January 29, 2010, 

the Department published a notice of 

initiation of antidumping duty 

administrative review of Indian HotRolled for the period December 1, 2008, 

through November 30, 2009. See 

Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Reviews, Request for Revocation in Part, 

and Deferral of Initiation of 

Administrative Review, 75 FR 4770 

(January 29, 2010) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’). 

On February 2, 2010, Ispat and Essar, 

and on February 17, 2010, JSW, each 

informed the Department that they did 

not have shipments of subject 

merchandise to the United States during 

the POR. 

In February 2010, the Department 

exercised its discretion to toll deadlines 

for the duration of the closure of the 

Federal Government from February 5, 

through February 12, 2010. Thus all 

deadlines in this segment of the 

proceeding have been extended for 

seven days. See Memorandum to the 

Record from Ronald Lorentzen, DAS for 

Import Administration, regarding 

‘‘Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As 

a Result of the Government Closure 

During the Recent Snowstorm,’’ dated 

February 12, 2010. 

On February 16, 2010, the Department 

issued its antidumping questionnaire to 

Tata. On February 18, 2010, Tata 

informed the Department that it had one 

shipment of subject merchandise that 

was entered into the United States 

during the POR, but that shipment was 

not of normal commercial quantities 

and was a one-off transaction for testing 

purposes only. Tata informed the 

Department that it would, therefore, not 

respond to the antidumping 

questionnaire. 

On August 23, 2010, the Department 

placed on the record and invited 

interested parties to comment on U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) 

data obtained to corroborate the claims 

of the respondents. See Memorandum to 

the File from Christopher Hargett, 

International Trade Compliance 

Analyst, through James Terpstra, 

Program Manager, and Melissa Skinner, 

Office Director, concerning ‘‘Customs 

and Border Protection (‘CBP’) Data for 

Corroboration of Claims of No 

Shipments,’’ dated August 23, 2010 

(‘‘August 23 Comment Memorandum’’); 

clarified by Memorandum to the File 

from Christopher Hargett, International 

Trade Compliance Analyst, through 

James Terpstra, Program Manager, and 

Melissa Skinner, Office Director, 

concerning ‘‘Clarification of Customs 

and Border Protection (‘CBP’) Data for 

Corroboration of Claims of No 

Shipments,’’ dated August 25, 2010 

(‘‘August 25 Clarification 

Memorandum’’). On August 31, 2010, 

we received timely comments from 

Nucor Corporation. 

On September 14, 2010, the 

Department extended the deadline for 

the preliminary results to January 7, 

2011. See Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon 

Steel Flat Products from India: 

Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary 

Results of the Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 75 FR 55742 

(September 14, 2010). 

On November 23, 2010, we requested 

CBP to provide documents associated 

with certain entries. See Memorandum 

to Michael Walsh, Director, AD/CVD/ 

Revenue Policy and Programs, Office of 

International Trade, U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection, from Melissa 

Skinner, Office Director, entitled 

‘‘Request for U.S. Entry Documents— 

Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products 

from India (A–533–820),’’ dated 

November 23, 2010 (‘‘November 23 CBP 

Request Memorandum’’). We received 

such documents on December 23, 2010. 

See Memorandum from Christopher 

Hargett, International Trade Compliance 

Analyst, Office 3, through Melissa 

Skinner, Office Director, Office 3, AD/ 

CVD Operations, to the File, entitled 

‘‘Entry Documentation for Corroboration 

of Claims of No Shipments,’’ dated 

January 7, 2011 (‘‘January 7 Entry 

Documentation Memorandum’’). 

Period of Review 

The POR covered by this review is 

December 1, 2008, through November 

30, 2009. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Notices 2345 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise subject to this order 

is 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 nonmetallic 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 

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 

this order. 

Specifically included in the scope of 

this order are vacuum-degassed, fully 

stabilized (commonly referred to as 

interstitial-free (‘‘IF’’)) steels, highstrength low-alloy (‘‘HSLA’’) steels, and 

the substrate for motor lamination 

steels. IF steels are recognized as lowcarbon 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 included in the scope 

of this 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 this order 

unless otherwise excluded. The 

following products, by way of example, 

are outside or specifically excluded 

from the scope of this order: 

• Alloy hot-rolled carbon steel 

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 bearings 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. 

• United States Steel (‘‘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 this order 

is currently classifiable 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 covered 

by this order, including: vacuumdegassed 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 

Department’s written description of the 

merchandise subject to this order is 

dispositive. 

Preliminary Results of Review 

As noted in the ‘‘Background’’ section 

above, Essar, Ispat and JSW have each 

submitted timely-filed certifications 

indicating that they had no shipments of 

subject merchandise to the United 

States during the POR. In addition, Tata 

informed the Department that it had 

made one small shipment of subject 

merchandise that entered the United 

States during the POR. However, Tata 

claimed that the shipment was not of 

normal commercial quantities in the 

ordinary course of trade. Further, Tata 

claimed that the shipment to the United 

States was a one-off transaction for 

testing purposes only. 

In August, 2010, the Department 

released to interested parties under 

Administrative Protective Order 

(‘‘APO’’) information it intended to use 

for corroboration of the respondents’ 

claims. See August 23 Comment 

Memorandum; clarified by August 25 

Clarification Memorandum. In 

comments submitted on August 31, 

2010, Nucor asserted that the data 

presented failed to confirm the absence 

of sales, entries, or shipments; alleging 

instead that the data raise additional 

questions that the Department should 

address. 

On November 23, 2010, the 

Department requested from CBP the 

entry documents associated with certain 

entries which Nucor alleged raised 

questions with respect to the assertions 

of respondent(s). See November 23 CBP 

Request Memorandum. 

On December 23, 2010, the 

Department received the entry 

documents from CBP. These documents 

and our analysis are proprietary. See 

January 7 Entry Document 

Memorandum. Based on the claims of 

the parties and our analysis of CBP data, 

we preliminarily determine that the 

evidence on the record indicates that 

Essar, Ispat, and JSW did not export 

subject merchandise to the United 

States during the POR. Further, the 

Department preliminary determines that 

record evidence indicates that Tata had 

no reviewable transactions of subject 

merchandise during the POR. However, 

based on our review of the recently 

obtained entry documentation, we 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
2346 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Notices 

intend to seek clarifying information 

from Tata after our preliminary results 

with respect to its exports. 

Disclosure 

The Department will disclose these 

preliminary results to the parties within 

five days of the date of publication of 

this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.224(b). 

Comments 

Interested parties are invited to 

comment on the preliminary results and 

may submit case briefs and/or written 

comments within 30 days of the date of 

publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 

351.309(c)(1)(ii). Rebuttal briefs, limited 

to issues raised in the case briefs, will 

be due five days later, pursuant to 19 

CFR 351.309(d). Parties who submit 

case or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding 

are requested to submit with each 

argument (1) a statement of the issue, 

and (2) a brief summary of the 

argument. Parties are requested to 

provide a summary of the arguments not 

to exceed five pages and a table of 

statutes, regulations, and cases cited. 

See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2). Additionally, 

parties are requested to provide their 

case brief and rebuttal briefs in 

electronic format (e.g., Microsoft Word, 

pdf, etc.). Interested parties, who wish 

to request a hearing or to participate if 

one is requested, must submit a written 

request to the Assistant Secretary for 

Import Administration within 30 days 

of the date of publication of this notice. 

Requests should contain: (1) The party’s 

name, address, and telephone number; 

(2) the number of participants; and (3) 

a list of issues to be discussed. See 19 

CFR 351.310(c). Issues raised in the 

hearing will be limited to those raised 

in case and rebuttal briefs. The 

Department will issue the final results 

of this review, including the results of 

its analysis of issues raised in any such 

written briefs or at the hearing, if held, 

not later than 120 days after the date of 

publication of this notice. 

Assessment Rate 

The Department intends to issue 

appropriate assessment instructions 

directly to CBP 15 days after the 

publication of the final results of this 

review. 

Since the implementation of the 1997 

regulations, our practice concerning noshipment respondents has been to 

rescind the administrative review if the 

respondent certifies that it had no 

shipments and we have confirmed 

through our examination of CBP data 

that there were no shipments of subject 

merchandise during the POR. See 

Antidumping Duties; Countervailing 

Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27393 (May 19, 

1997). As a result, in such 

circumstances, we normally instruct 

CBP to liquidate any entries from the 

no-shipment company at the deposit 

rate in effect on the date of entry. 

In our May 6, 2003, ‘‘automatic 

assessment’’ clarification, we explained 

that, where respondents in an 

administrative review demonstrate that 

they had no knowledge of sales through 

resellers to the United States, we would 

instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at 

the all-others rate applicable to the 

proceeding. See Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment 

Policy Notice). 

Because ‘‘as entered’’ liquidation 

instructions do not alleviate the 

concerns which the May 2003 

clarification was intended to address, 

we find it appropriate in this case to 

instruct CBP to liquidate any existing 

entries of merchandise produced by 

Essar, Ispat, JSW, or Tata and exported 

by other parties at the all-others rate, 

should we continue to find that Essar, 

Ispat, and JSW had no shipments of 

subject merchandise to the United 

States, and Tata had no reviewable 

transactions, during the POR, in our 

final results. See, e.g., Magnesium Metal 

From the Russian Federation: Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 75 FR 56989 

(September 17, 2010). In addition, the 

Department finds that it is more 

consistent with the May 2003 

clarification not to rescind the review in 

part in these circumstances but, rather, 

to complete the review with respect to 

Essar, Ispat, JSW, and Tata and issue 

appropriate instructions to CBP based 

on the final results of the review. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following deposit rates will be 

effective upon publication of the final 

results of this administrative review for 

all shipments of hot-rolled carbon steel 

flat products from India 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 Essar, Ispat, JSW, and 

Tata, and 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 final results in which 

that manufacturer or exporter 

participated; (2) if the exporter is not a 

firm covered in these reviews, a prior 

review, or the original less-than-fairvalue (‘‘LTFV’’) investigation, but the 

manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate 

will be the rate established for the most 

recent final results for the manufacturer 

of the merchandise; and (3) if neither 

the exporter nor the manufacturer is a 

firm covered in this or any previous 

review or the LTFV conducted by the 

Department, the cash deposit rate will 

be 23.87 percent, the all-others rate 

established in the LTFV. See Amended 

Final Determination. These cash deposit 

requirements, when imposed, shall 

remain in effect until further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice serves as a preliminary 

reminder to importers of their 

responsibility under 19 CFR 

351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 

regarding the reimbursement of 

antidumping and countervailing 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 and countervailing duties 

occurred and the subsequent assessment 

of double antidumping and 

countervailing duties. 

These preliminary results of review 

are issued and published in accordance 

with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the 

Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4). 

Dated: January 7, 2011. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2011–619 Filed 1–12–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

Quarterly Update to Annual Listing of 

Foreign Government Subsidies on 

Articles of Cheese Subject to an InQuota Rate of Duty 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: January 13, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gayle Longest, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 3, Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 

482–3338. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

702 of the Trade Agreements Act of 

1979 (as amended) (‘‘the Act’’) requires 

the Department of Commerce (‘‘the 

Department’’) to determine, in 

consultation with the Secretary of 

Agriculture, whether any foreign 

government is providing a subsidy with 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES