Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Notices 22871 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on the results of verification, 

our consideration of information 

submitted by USIMINAS/COSIPA and 

the GOB in supplemental questionnaire 

responses received subsequent to the 

issuance of the Preliminary Results, and 

our analysis of comments received, we 

have made changes to the calculations 

of the Preliminary Results and PostPreliminary Decision. These changes are 

discussed in detail in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum, and the 

Memorandum to the File from The 

Team, Calculations for the Final Results: 

Usinas Siderurgicas de Minas Gerais 

S.A. and Companhia Siderugica Paulista 

(USIMINAS/COSIPA), dated 

concurrently with this notice, a public 

version of which is on file in the CRU. 

Final Results of Review 

In accordance with section 

751(a)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.221(b)(5), we calculated a net 

subsidy for USIMINAS/COSIPA, the 

only producer/exporter subject to this 

review, of 0.46 percent ad valorem. This 

rate is de minimis. See 19 CFR 

351.106(c)(1). 

Assessment and Cash Deposit 

Instructions 

The Department intends to issue 

assessment instructions to U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection (CBP) 15 days 

after the date of publication of these 

final results of review. The Department 

will instruct CBP to liquidate shipments 

of subject merchandise by USIMINAS/ 

COSIPA entered, or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption on or after 

January 1, 2008, through December 31, 

2008, without regard to countervailing 

duties. We will also instruct CBP to 

collect cash deposits for USIMINAS/ 

COSIPA at the rate of 0.00 percent on 

all shipments of the subject 

merchandise entered, or withdrawn 

from warehouse, for consumption on or 

after the date of publication of these 

final results of review. The cash deposit 

rates for all companies not covered by 

this review are not changed by the 

results of this review. 

Return or Destruction of Proprietary 

Information 

This notice serves as a reminder to 

parties subject to the administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under the APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 

written notification of return or 

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 these 

final results in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: April 18, 2011. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I 

List of Issues Addressed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum 

Comment 1: Whether it is Appropriate to 

Apply Adverse Facts Available to Find 

the FINEM Loans Countervailable 

Comment 2: Selection of an Appropriate 

Benchmark for BNDES Loans 

Comment 3: Calculation of FOB Sales Value 

[FR Doc. 2011–9965 Filed 4–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–912] 

Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road 

Tires From the People’s Republic of 

China: Final Results of the 2008–2009 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On October 19, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce 

(‘‘Department’’) published the 

preliminary results of the 2008–2009 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on certain new 

pneumatic off-the-road tires (‘‘OTR 

tires’’) from the People’s Republic of 

China (‘‘PRC’’). See Certain New 

Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the 

People’s Republic of China: Preliminary 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 75 FR 64259 

(October 19, 2010) (‘‘Preliminary 

Results’’). The period of review (‘‘POR’’) 

is February 20, 2008, through August 

31, 2009. This review covers six 

exporters. 

We invited interested parties to 

comment on our Preliminary Results. 

Based on our analysis of the comments 

received, we made certain changes to 

our margin calculations for the 

individually examined respondent, 

Hebei Starbright Tire Co., Ltd. 

(‘‘Starbright’’). The final dumping 

margins for this review are listed in the 

‘‘Final Results Margins’’ section below. 

DATES: Effective Date: April 25, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Raquel Silva or Andrew Medley, 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) 482–6475 and (202) 

482–4987, respectively. 

Background 

On October 19, 2010, the Department 

published its Preliminary Results of the 

antidumping duty administrative review 

of OTR tires from the PRC. On 

November 3, 2010, Starbright submitted 

its response to the Department’s postpreliminary supplemental questionnaire 

regarding its factors of production 

database. On November 5, 2010, 

Starbright submitted its response to the 

Department’s post-preliminary 

supplemental questionnaire regarding 

its indirect selling expense categories. 

Titan Tire Corporation (‘‘Titan’’), the 

petitioner, Bridgestone Americas 

Holding, Inc. and subsidiary 

Bridgestone Firestone North America 

Tire, LLC (‘‘Bridgestone’’), the domestic 

interested party, and Starbright each 

submitted publicly available 

information regarding surrogate values 

on November 8, 2010. On November 18, 

2010, both Titan and Bridgestone 

requested hearings. On December 9, 

2010, Starbright submitted its response 

to the Department’s fifth supplemental 

questionnaire. The Department verified 

certain aspects of Starbright’s 

questionnaire responses at GPX 

International Tire Corporation (‘‘GPX’’), 

Starbright’s U.S. sales affiliate, on 

December 13, 2010, through December 

15, 2010. On January 31, 2011, the 

Department issued its verification 

report. 

On February 3, 2011, the Department 

received Titan’s withdrawal of its 

request for a hearing. On February 7, 

2011, the Department received Titan’s 

case brief and published an extension 

for the issuance of its final results of the 

review. See Certain New Pneumatic Offthe-Road Tires from the People’s 

Republic of China: Notice of Extension 

of Time Limit for the Final Results of the 

2008–2009 Administrative Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR 6603 

(February 7, 2011). On February 8, 2011, 

the Department received both 

Bridgestone’s and Starbright’s case 

briefs. Bridgestone’s withdrawal of a 

request for a hearing was submitted on 

February 9, 2011. On February 14, 2011, 

all parties submitted their rebuttal case 

briefs. 

On February 22, 2011, the Department 

sent Starbright a letter regarding alleged 

new factual information submitted in its 

case brief. Starbright submitted its 

response to the Department’s letter on 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
22872 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Notices 

1Agricultural tractors are dual-axle vehicles that 

typically are designed to pull farming equipment in 

the field and that may have front tires of a different 

size than the rear tires. 

2Combine harvesters are used to harvest crops 

such as corn or wheat. 

3Agricultural sprayers are used to irrigate 

agricultural fields. 

4 Industrial tractors are dual-axle vehicles that 

typically are designed to pull industrial equipment 

and that may have front tires of a different size than 

the rear tires. 

5A log-skidder has a grappling lift arm that is 

used to grasp, lift and move trees that have been 

cut down to a truck or trailer for transport to a mill 

or other destination. 

6Skid-steer loaders are four-wheel drive vehicles 

with the left-side drive wheels independent of the 

right-side drive wheels and lift arms that lie 

alongside the driver with the major pivot points 

behind the driver’s shoulders. Skid-steer loaders are 

used in agricultural, construction and industrial 

settings. 

7Haul trucks, which may be either rigid frame or 

articulated (i.e., able to bend in the middle) are 

typically used in mines, quarries and construction 

sites to haul soil, aggregate, mined ore, or debris. 

8Front loaders have lift arms in front of the 

vehicle. They can scrape material from one location 

to another, carry material in their buckets, or load 

material into a truck or trailer. 

9A dozer is a large four-wheeled vehicle with a 

dozer blade that is used to push large quantities of 

soil, sand, rubble, etc., typically around 

construction sites. They can also be used to perform 

‘‘rough grading’’ in road construction. 

10A straddle carrier is a rigid frame, enginepowered machine that is used to load and offload 

containers from container vessels and load them 

onto (or off of) tractor trailers. 

11A grader is a vehicle with a large blade used 

to create a flat surface. Graders are typically used 

to perform ‘‘finish grading.’’ Graders are commonly 

used in maintenance of unpaved roads and road 

construction to prepare the base course on to which 

asphalt or other paving material will be laid. 

12A counterbalanced lift truck is a rigid framed, 

engine-powered machine with lift arms that has 

additional weight incorporated into the back of the 

machine to offset or counterbalance the weight of 

loads that it lifts so as to prevent the vehicle from 

overturning. An example of a counterbalanced lift 

truck is a counterbalanced fork lift truck. 

Counterbalanced lift trucks may be designed for use 

on smooth floor surfaces, such as a factory or 

warehouse, or other surfaces, such as construction 

sites, mines, etc. 

13While tube-type tires are subject to the scope 

of this proceeding, tubes and flaps are not subject 

merchandise and therefore are not covered by the 

scope of this proceeding, regardless of the manner 

in which they are sold (e.g., sold with or separately 

from subject merchandise). 

February 24, 2011. On March 18, 2011, 

the Department published an additional 

extension for the issuance of the final 

results of the review. See Certain New 

Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From the 

People’s Republic of China: Notice of 

Extension of Time Limit for the Final 

Results of the 2008–2009 Administrative 

Review of the Antidumping Duty Order, 

76 FR 14906 (March 18, 2011). 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs filed by parties in this 

review are addressed in the 

Memorandum from Christian Marsh, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, regarding, ‘‘Certain New 

Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the 

People’s Republic of China: Issues and 

Decision Memorandum for the Final 

Results of the 2008–2009 First 

Administrative Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order,’’ dated 

concurrently with this notice (‘‘Issues 

and Decision Memorandum’’), which is 

hereby adopted by this notice. A list of 

the issues that parties raised and to 

which we responded in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum follows as an 

appendix to this notice. The Issues and 

Decision Memorandum is a public 

document and is on file in the Central 

Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’), Main Commerce 

Building, Room 7046, and is also 

accessible on the Web at http:// 

ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and 

electronic version of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum are identical in 

content. 

Period of Review 

The POR is February 20, 2008, 

through August 31, 2009. 

Scope of the Order 

The products covered by the order are 

new pneumatic tires designed for offthe-road and off-highway use, subject to 

exceptions identified below. Certain 

OTR tires are generally designed, 

manufactured and offered for sale for 

use on off-road or off-highway surfaces, 

including but not limited to, agricultural 

fields, forests, construction sites, factory 

and warehouse interiors, airport 

tarmacs, ports and harbors, mines, 

quarries, gravel yards, and steel mills. 

The vehicles and equipment for which 

certain OTR tires are designed for use 

include, but are not limited to: (1) 

Agricultural and forestry vehicles and 

equipment, including agricultural 

tractors,1 combine harvesters,2

agricultural high clearance sprayers,3

industrial tractors,4 log-skidders,5

agricultural implements, highwaytowed implements, agricultural logging, 

and agricultural, industrial, skid-steers/ 

mini-loaders; 6 (2) construction vehicles 

and equipment, including earthmover 

articulated dump products, rigid frame 

haul trucks,7 front end loaders,8 dozers,9

lift trucks, straddle carriers,10 graders,11

mobile cranes,12 compactors; and (3) 

industrial vehicles and equipment, 

including smooth floor, industrial, 

mining, counterbalanced lift trucks, 

industrial and mining vehicles other 

than smooth floor, skid-steers/miniloaders, and smooth floor off-the-road 

counterbalanced lift trucks. The 

foregoing list of vehicles and equipment 

generally have in common that they are 

used for hauling, towing, lifting, and/or 

loading a wide variety of equipment and 

materials in agricultural, construction 

and industrial settings. Such vehicles 

and equipment, and the descriptions 

contained in the footnotes are 

illustrative of the types of vehicles and 

equipment that use certain OTR tires, 

but are not necessarily all-inclusive. 

While the physical characteristics of 

certain OTR tires will vary depending 

on the specific applications and 

conditions for which the tires are 

designed (e.g., tread pattern and depth), 

all of the tires within the scope have in 

common that they are designed for offroad and off-highway use. Except as 

discussed below, OTR tires included in 

the scope of the order range in size (rim 

diameter) generally but not exclusively 

from 8 inches to 54 inches. The tires 

may be either tube-type 13 or tubeless, 

radial or non-radial, and intended for 

sale either to original equipment 

manufacturers or the replacement 

market. The subject merchandise is 

currently classifiable under Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States 

(‘‘HTSUS’’) subheadings: 4011.20.10.25, 

4011.20.10.35, 4011.20.50.30, 

4011.20.50.50, 4011.61.00.00, 

4011.62.00.00, 4011.63.00.00, 

4011.69.00.00, 4011.92.00.00, 

4011.93.40.00, 4011.93.80.00, 

4011.94.40.00, and 4011.94.80.00. While 

HTSUS subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, our 

written description of the scope is 

dispositive. 

Specifically excluded from the scope 

are new pneumatic tires designed, 

manufactured and offered for sale 

primarily for on-highway or on-road 

use, including passenger cars, race cars, 

station wagons, sport utility vehicles, 

minivans, mobile homes, motorcycles, 

bicycles, on-road or on-highway trailers, 

light trucks, and trucks and buses. Such 

tires generally have in common that the 

symbol ‘‘DOT’’ must appear on the 

sidewall, certifying that the tire 

conforms to applicable motor vehicle 

safety standards. Such excluded tires 

may also have the following 

designations that are used by the Tire 

and Rim Association: 

Prefix letter designations: 

• P—Identifies a tire intended 

primarily for service on passenger cars; 

• LT—Identifies a tire intended 

primarily for service on light trucks; 

and, 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Notices 22873 

14See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value: Creatine Monohydrate 

from the People’s Republic of China, 64 FR 71104, 

71104–05 (December 20, 1999) (where the 

respondent was wholly foreign-owned and, thus, 

qualified for a separate rate). 

15See, e.g., Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the 

People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 

Preliminary Results of New Shipper Review and 

Partial Rescission of Administrative Review, 73 FR 

8273, 8279 (February 13, 2008) (unchanged in 

Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s 

Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper 

Review, 73 FR 49162 (August 20, 2008)). 

• ST—Identifies a special tire for 

trailers in highway service. 

Suffix letter designations: 

• TR—Identifies a tire for service on 

trucks, buses, and other vehicles with 

rims having specified rim diameter of 

nominal plus 0.156′′ or plus 0.250′′; 

• MH—Identifies tires for Mobile 

Homes; 

• HC—Identifies a heavy duty tire 

designated for use on ‘‘HC’’ 15′′ tapered 

rims used on trucks, buses, and other 

vehicles. This suffix is intended to 

differentiate among tires for light trucks, 

and other vehicles or other services, 

which use a similar designation. 

• Example: 8R17.5 LT, 8R17.5 HC; 

• LT—Identifies light truck tires for 

service on trucks, buses, trailers, and 

multipurpose passenger vehicles used 

in nominal highway service; and 

• MC—Identifies tires and rims for 

motorcycles. 

The following types of tires are also 

excluded from the scope: pneumatic 

tires that are not new, including 

recycled or retreaded tires and used 

tires; non-pneumatic tires, including 

solid rubber tires; tires of a kind 

designed for use on aircraft, all-terrain 

vehicles, and vehicles for turf, lawn and 

garden, golf and trailer applications. 

Also excluded from the scope are radial 

and bias tires of a kind designed for use 

in mining and construction vehicles and 

equipment that have a rim diameter 

equal to or exceeding 39 inches. Such 

tires may be distinguished from other 

tires of similar size by the number of 

plies that the construction and mining 

tires contain (minimum of 16) and the 

weight of such tires (minimum 1500 

pounds). 

Separate Rates 

In proceedings involving NME 

countries, the Department begins with a 

rebuttable presumption that all 

companies within the country are 

subject to government control and, thus, 

should be assigned a single 

antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the 

Department’s policy to assign all 

exporters of merchandise subject to an 

investigation in an NME country this 

single rate unless an exporter can 

demonstrate that it is sufficiently 

independent so as to be entitled to a 

separate rate. See Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers 

from the People’s Republic of China, 56 

FR 20588 (May 6, 1991) (‘‘Sparklers’’), as 

amplified by Notice of Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the 

People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 

(May 2, 1994) (‘‘Silicon Carbide’’), and 

19 CFR 351.107(d). 

In the Preliminary Results, we found 

that Starbright and the separate-rate 

respondents, Hangzhou Zhongce Rubber 

Co., Ltd. (‘‘Hangzhou Zhongce’’), KS 

Holding Limited/KS Resources Limited 

(‘‘KS Ltd.’’), Laizhou Xiongying Rubber 

Industry Co., Ltd. (‘‘Laizhou 

Xiongying’’), Qingdao Taifa Group Co., 

Ltd. (‘‘Qingdao Taifa’’), and Weihai 

Zhongwei Rubber Co., Ltd. (‘‘Weihai 

Zhongwei’’), demonstrated their 

eligibility for separate-rate status. See 

Preliminary Results, 75 FR at 64261–62. 

As stated in the Preliminary Results, 

Starbright and KS Ltd. reported that 

they are wholly foreign-owned, and 

therefore, consistent with the 

Department’s practice, a further separate 

rate analysis was not necessary to 

determine whether Starbright’s and KS 

Ltd.’s export activities were 

independent from government control, 

and we preliminarily granted a separate 

rate to Starbright and KS Ltd.14 For the 

final results, we continue to find that 

Starbright and KS Ltd. are eligible for 

separate rate status. For the final results, 

we also continue to find that the 

evidence placed on the record of this 

review by Hangzhou Zhongce, Laizhou 

Xiongying, Qingdao Taifa, and Weihai 

Zhongwei demonstrates both a de jure 

and de facto absence of government 

control, with respect to their respective 

exports of the merchandise under 

review, and, thus are eligible for 

separate-rate status. See Preliminary 

Results, 75 FR at 64262. 

Margin for the Separate Rate 

Companies 

As discussed above, the Department 

continues to find that Hangzhou 

Zhongce, KS Ltd., Laizhou Xiongying, 

Qingdao Taifa, and Weihai Zhongwei 

have demonstrated their eligibility for a 

separate rate. For the exporters subject 

to a review that are determined to be 

eligible for separate rate status, but are 

not selected as individually examined 

respondents, the Department generally 

weight-averages the rates calculated for 

the individually examined respondents, 

excluding any rates that are zero, de 

minimis, or based entirely on facts 

available.15 Consistent with the 

Department’s practice, as the separate 

rate, we have established a margin for 

Hangzhou Zhongce, KS Ltd., Laizhou 

Xiongying, Qingdao Taifa, and Weihai 

Zhongwei based on the rate we 

calculated for the individually 

examined respondent, Starbright. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on an analysis of the comments 

received, the Department has made 

certain changes to the margin 

calculations. For the final results, the 

Department has made the following 

changes to Starbright’s Margin 

Calculation: 

• Invoices: Invoice numbers, 

customer codes and payment terms have 

been revised for two invoices in the U.S. 

sales database. See Memorandum titled 

‘‘Analysis Memorandum for the Final 

Results: Hebei Starbright Tire Co., Ltd. 

(‘‘Final Analysis Memorandum’’), dated 

concurrently with this notice. See also 

Memorandum titled ‘‘First 

Administrative Review of Certain New 

Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires (‘‘OTR 

Tires’’) from the People’s Republic of 

China (‘‘PRC’’)—Verification of the Sales 

Information of Hebei Starbright Tire Co., 

Ltd. and its U.S. Affiliate GPX 

International Tire Corp.,’’ dated January 

31, 2011 (‘‘Verification Report’’). 

• Set Adjustments: Set adjustments 

have been applied to multiple sales in 

the U.S. sales database. See Final 

Analysis Memorandum. See also 

Verification Report. 

• U.S. Inland Freight from Warehouse 

to Customer: For the final results, we 

have revised the adjustment regarding 

U.S. inland freight from warehouse to 

customer. See Final Analysis 

Memorandum. See also Verification 

Report. 

• Rebate Adjustments: Regarding 

rebate adjustments, we have: eliminated 

the reliance upon facts available with 

adverse inference under sections 

776(a)(1), 776(a)(2)(B), and 776(b) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

‘‘Act’’), used in the Preliminary Results 

and, in its place, applied a rebate 

adjustment to the 2009 sales of multiple 

customers; and modified the rebate 

adjustment for one customer’s 2008 

sales. See Comment 4 of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum. See also Final 

Analysis Memorandum and Verification 

Report. 

• Credit: Regarding credit 

adjustments, we have: revised the 

adjustments to account for revisions to 

the above-mentioned rebate 

adjustments; and revised the average 

interest rate used to calculate credit 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
22874 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Notices 

16See, e.g., Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from 

India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 75 FR 38076, 38077 (July 1, 

2010), and accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at Comment 1. 

17See New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From 

the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, dated 

concurrently with this notice. 

adjustments. Regarding the sales for 

which Starbright was not able to report 

a payment date, we have used partial 

facts available in accordance with 

sections 776(a)(1) and 776(a)(2)(B) of the 

Act. See Comment 4 of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum. See also Final 

Analysis Memorandum. See also 

Verification Report. 

• Inventory Carrying Costs: We have 

modified the average number of days in 

inventory used to calculate the 

adjustment for inventory carrying costs. 

See Comment 4 of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum. See also Final 

Analysis Memorandum and Verification 

Report. 

• Indirect Selling Expenses: 

Regarding indirect selling expenses, we 

have: included two additional indirect 

selling accounts; and modified our 

calculation to more comprehensively 

capture all of GPX’s indirect selling 

expenses attributable to the sales of 

subject merchandise. See Comments 2 

and 3 of the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. See also Final Analysis 

Memorandum. 

• Indirect Labor: After the 

Preliminary Results, Starbright 

submitted data regarding its use of 

supervisory and quality control labor. 

For the final results we have added the 

new supervisory and quality control 

indirect labor usage to the original 

indirect labor usage for a new total 

indirect labor usage. See Comment 5 of 

the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 

See also Final Analysis Memorandum. 

• Non-production Electricity: For the 

final results, we are removing electricity 

consumed by Starbright in its energy 

department and supporting department 

from our calculations of energy 

consumed for production. See Comment 

6 of the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. See also Final Analysis 

Memorandum. 

• Brokerage and Handling: For the 

final results, we are no longer deflating 

brokerage and handling costs. See 

Comment 9 of the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. See also Final Analysis 

Memorandum and Memorandum titled 

‘‘Preliminary Results of the 

Administrative Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order on Certain 

New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from 

the People’s Republic of China: 

Surrogate Value Memorandum,’’ dated 

October 7, 2010 (‘‘Surrogate Value 

Memorandum’’). 

• Adjustments to Surrogate Financial 

Ratios: For the final results, in Goodyear 

India Limited’s financial statement we 

have: excluded a portion of ‘‘Liabilities/ 

Provision no longer required written 

back’’; reclassified ‘‘Retirement 

Gratuities’’ as manufacturing overhead; 

and corrected two clerical errors. See 

Comments 7 and 11 of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum. See also 

Surrogate Value Memorandum. 

• Rubber Softener (RSOFT): We have 

applied a daily exchange rate based on 

the date of sale to the surrogate value for 

RSOFT. See Comment 10 of the Issues 

and Decision Memorandum. See also 

Final Analysis Memorandum. 

• Export Subsidy Adjustment: Section 

772(c)(1)(C) of the Act unconditionally 

states that U.S. price ‘‘shall be increased 

by the amount of any countervailing 

duty imposed on the subject 

merchandise * * * to offset an export 

subsidy’’.16 The Department determined 

in its final results of the companion 

countervailing duty administrative 

review that Starbright’s merchandise 

benefited from export subsidies.17

Therefore, we have increased 

Starbright’s U.S. price for countervailing 

duties imposed attributable to export 

subsidies, where appropriate. See Final 

Analysis Memorandum. 

Adverse Facts Available 

Sections 776(a)(1) and (2) of the Act 

provide that the Department shall apply 

‘‘facts otherwise available’’ if, inter alia, 

necessary information is not on the 

record or an interested party or any 

other person: (A) withholds information 

that has been requested; (B) fails to 

provide information within the 

deadlines established, or in the form 

and manner requested by the 

Department, subject to subsections (c)(1) 

and (e) of section 782 of the Act; (C) 

significantly impedes a proceeding; or 

(D) provides information that cannot be 

verified as provided by section 782(i) of 

the Act. 

Where the Department determines 

that a response to a request for 

information does not comply with the 

request, section 782(d) of the Act 

provides that the Department will so 

inform the party submitting the 

response and will, to the extent 

practicable, provide that party the 

opportunity to remedy or explain the 

deficiency. If the party fails to remedy 

the deficiency within the applicable 

time limits and subject to section 782(e) 

of the Act, the Department may 

disregard all or part of the original and 

subsequent responses, as appropriate. 

Section 782(e) of the Act provides that 

the Department ‘‘shall not decline to 

consider information that is submitted 

by an interested party and is necessary 

to the determination but does not meet 

all applicable requirements established 

by the administering authority’’ if the 

information is timely, can be verified, is 

not so incomplete that it cannot be used, 

and if the interested party acted to the 

best of its ability in providing the 

information. Where all of these 

conditions are met, the statute requires 

the Department to use the information if 

it can do so without undue difficulties. 

Section 776(b) of the Act further 

provides that the Department may use 

an adverse inference in applying the 

facts otherwise available when a party 

has failed to cooperate by not acting to 

the best of its ability to comply with a 

request for information. Section 776(b) 

of the Act also authorizes the 

Department to use as adverse facts 

available (‘‘AFA’’) information derived 

from the petition, the final 

determination, a previous 

administrative review, or other 

information placed on the record. 

For the Preliminary Results, the 

Department applied partial AFA to a 

number of products with unreported 

factors of production. See Preliminary 

Results, 75 FR at 64265–66. No parties 

have commented on this issue since that 

time, and the record regarding the 

products in question remains the same. 

For this reason, we determine that, in 

accordance with sections 776(a)(1), 

776(a)(2)(B), 776(a)(2)(C), and 776(b) of 

the Act, continued use of partial AFA is 

appropriate for the final results with 

respect to Starbright. See Final Analysis 

Memo. 

Final Results Margins 

We determine that the following 

weighted-average dumping margins 

exist for the period February 20, 2008, 

through August 31, 2009: 

OTR TIRES FROM THE PRC 

Exporter 

Weightedaverage 

margin 

(percent) 

Hebei Starbright Tire Co., Ltd .... 28.97 

Hangzhou Zhongce Rubber Co., 

Ltd ........................................... 28.97 

KS Holding Limited/KS Resources Limited ....................... 28.97 

Laizhou Xiongying Rubber Industry Co., Ltd ........................ 28.97 

Qingdao Taifa Group Co., Ltd .... 28.97 

Weihai Zhongwei Rubber Co., 

Ltd ........................................... 28.97 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Notices 22875 

18While the instant review covered Starbright as 

the exporter, the draft cash deposit instructions 

released with the Preliminary Results inadvertently 

identified ‘‘Hebei Starbright Co., Ltd./GPX 

International Co., Ltd.’’ as the exporter. We have 

corrected the cash deposit instructions to identify 

only Starbright as the exporter. 

Assessment Rates 

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the 

Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the 

Department will determine, and CBP 

shall assess, antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries of subject 

merchandise in accordance with the 

final results of this review. For 

assessment purposes, we calculated 

importer (or customer)-specific 

assessment rates for merchandise 

subject to this review. Where 

appropriate, we calculated an ad 

valorem rate for each importer (or 

customer) by dividing the total dumping 

margins for reviewed sales to that party 

by the total entered values associated 

with those transactions. For dutyassessment rates calculated on this 

basis, we will direct CBP to assess the 

resulting ad valorem rate against the 

entered customs values for the subject 

merchandise. Where appropriate, we 

calculated a per-unit rate for each 

importer (or customer) by dividing the 

total dumping margins for reviewed 

sales to that party by the total sales 

quantity associated with those 

transactions. For duty-assessment rates 

calculated on this basis, we will direct 

CBP to assess the resulting per-unit rate 

against the entered quantity of the 

subject merchandise. Where an importer 

(or customer)-specific assessment rate is 

de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent), 

the Department will instruct CBP to 

assess that importer (or customer’s) 

entries of subject merchandise without 

regard to antidumping duties, in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). 

We intend to instruct CBP to liquidate 

entries containing subject merchandise 

exported by the PRC-wide entity at the 

PRC-wide rate of 210.48 percent. The 

Department intends to issue assessment 

instructions to CBP 15 days after the 

date of publication of these final results 

of review. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

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, as provided for by section 

751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For 

Starbright,18 Hangzhou Zhongce, KS 

Ltd., Laizhou Xiongying, Qingdao Taifa, 

and Weihai Zhongwei, the cash deposit 

rate will be the margins listed above; (2) 

for previously investigated or reviewed 

PRC and non-PRC exporters not listed 

above that have separate rates, the cash 

deposit rate will continue to be the 

exporter-specific rate published for the 

most recent period; (3) for all 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 210.48 percent 

determined in the less-than-fair-value 

investigation; and (4) for all non-PRC 

exporters of subject merchandise which 

have not received their own rate, the 

cash deposit rate will be the rate 

applicable to the PRC exporter that 

supplied that non-PRC exporter. These 

deposit requirements shall remain in 

effect until further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice also serves as a final 

reminder to importers of their 

responsibility under 19 CFR 

351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 

regarding the reimbursement of 

antidumping duties prior to liquidation 

of the relevant entries during this 

review period. Failure to comply with 

this requirement could result in the 

Secretary’s presumption that 

reimbursement of the antidumping 

duties occurred and the subsequent 

assessment of double antidumping 

duties. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their 

responsibility concerning the return or 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under the APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which 

continues to govern business 

proprietary information in this segment 

of the proceeding. Timely written 

notification of the return/destruction of 

APO materials or conversion to judicial 

protective order is hereby requested. 

Failure to comply with the regulations 

and terms of an APO is a violation 

which is subject to sanction. 

Disclosure 

We will disclose the calculations 

performed within five days of the date 

of publication of this notice to parties in 

this proceeding in accordance with 19 

CFR 351.224(b). 

We are issuing and publishing the 

final results and notice in accordance 

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

the Act. 

Dated: April 18, 2011. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I 

Comment 1: Whether to Treat Certain Inputs 

as Manufacturing Overhead or FOPs 

Comment 2: Treatment of WarehousingRelated Expenses 

Comment 3: Calculation of ISE Ratio 

Comment 4: Whether to Make Certain 

Changes Based on Verification Findings 

Comment 5: Treatment of Supervisory and 

Quality Control Labor 

Comment 6: Calculation of Starbright’s 

Electricity Consumption 

Comment 7: Correction of Alleged Ministerial 

Errors 

Comment 8: Valuation of Wage Rate 

Comment 9: Valuation of Brokerage and 

Handling 

Comment 10: Valuation of RSOFT 

Comment 11: Selection and Calculation of 

Financial Ratios 

Comment 12: Whether to Grant MOE 

Treatment 

Comment 13: Double Remedies 

Comment 14: Zeroing 

[FR Doc. 2011–9964 Filed 4–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XA355 

Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative 

Management Act Provisions; General 

Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; 

Application for Exempted Fishing 

Permits 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Regional 

Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries, 

Northeast Region, NMFS (Assistant 

Regional Administrator), has made a 

preliminary determination that an 

Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) 

application contains all of the required 

information and warrants further 

consideration. This EFP application 

would exempt commercial fishing 

vessels from the following Federal 

American lobster regulations: Trap 

escape vent requirements to allow 12 

federally permitted commercial fishing 

vessels to utilize a maximum of 500 

ventless traps to collect scientific 

information on American lobsters, 

including juveniles, in Lobster 

Conservation Management Areas 

(LCMAs) 3, 4, and 5 from June through 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES