Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2012 / Notices 25133 

1The EAR is currently codified at 15 CFRCFR 

parts 730–774 (2011). The EAR are issued under the 

Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 

U.S.C. app. 2401–2420 (2000)) (‘‘EAA’’). Since 

August 21, 2001, the Act has been in lapse and the 

President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 

17, 2001 (3 CFRCFR, 2001 Comp. 783 (2002)), 

which has been extended by successive presidential 

notices, the most recent being that of August 12, 

2011 (76 FR 50661 (Aug. 16, 2011)), has continued 

the Regulations in effect under the International 

Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, 

et seq.) (‘‘IEEPA’’). 

LIST OF PETITIONS RECEIVED BY EDA FOR CERTIFICATION ELIGIBILITY TO APPLY FOR TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE— 

Continued 

[02/24/2012 through 04/20/2012] 

Firm name Firm address Date accepted 

for investigation Product(s) 

Schermerhorn, Inc ................................... 165 Front Street, Chicopee, MA 01013 4/17/12 The firm manufactures cartons, boxes, 

and cases of corrugated paper and 

paperboard. 

First Aid Only, Inc .................................... 11101 N.E. 37th Circle, Vancouver, WA 

98682.

4/19/2012 The firm manufactures retail, commercial, and industrial first aid products 

and kits. 

Astro Tool and Die Corporation .............. 5201 South Whitnall Avenue, Cudahy, 

WI 53110.

4/20/12 The firm manufactures various metal 

stampings for the power tool, climate 

systems, aquarium, safety equipment, 

and screw machining industries. 

Any party having a substantial 

interest in these proceedings may 

request a public hearing on the matter. 

A written request for a hearing must be 

submitted to the Trade Adjustment 

Assistance for Firms Division, Room 

7106, Economic Development 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, no 

later than ten (10) calendar days 

following publication of this notice. 

Please follow the requirements set 

forth in EDA’s regulations at 13 CFR 

315.9 for procedures to request a public 

hearing. The Catalog of Federal 

Domestic Assistance official number 

and title for the program under which 

these petitions are submitted is 11.313, 

Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms. 

Dated: April 20, 2012. 

Bryan Borlik, 

Director, TAA for Firms. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10123 Filed 4–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–WH–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Foreign-Trade Zones Board 

[Docket T–3–2012] 

Foreign-Trade Zone 126, Temporary/ 

Interim Manufacturing Authority, 

Brightpoint North America L.P. (Cell 

Phone Kitting and Distribution); Notice 

of Approval 

On March 2, 2012, the Executive 

Secretary of the Foreign-Trade Zones 

(FTZ) Board filed an application 

submitted by the Economic 

Development Authority of Western 

Nevada, grantee of FTZ 126, requesting 

temporary/interim manufacturing 

(T/IM) authority, on behalf of 

Brightpoint North America L.P., to 

produce cell phone kits under FTZ 

procedures within FTZ 126—Site 23, in 

Reno, Nevada. 

The application was processed in 

accordance with T/IM procedures, as 

authorized by FTZ Board Orders 1347 

(69 FR 52857, 8/30/2004) and 1480 (71 

FR 55422, 9/22/2006), including notice 

in the Federal Register inviting public 

comment (77 FR 14000–14001, 03/08/ 

2012). The FTZ staff examiner reviewed 

the application and determined that it 

meets the criteria for approval under 

T/IM procedures. Pursuant to the 

authority delegated to the FTZ Board 

Executive Secretary in the abovereferenced Board Orders, the 

application is approved, effective this 

date, until April 23, 2014, subject to the 

FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations, 

including Section 400.28. 

Dated: April 23, 2012. 

Andrew McGilvray, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10244 Filed 4–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

Order Temporarily Denying Export 

Privileges 

Sayegh Group Aviation, P.O. Box 5822, 

Sharjah, United Arab Emirates; 

Aban Air, No. 1267, Vali Asr Avenue, 

Tehran, Iran 157177 36511; 

Sam Air Corporation Limited, P.O. Box 5822, 

Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, and 

18th Hill Street, Banjul, The Gambia, West 

Africa; 

Aviation Legacy (Gambia) Limited, c/o 

Mahmoud Khali Hamze, Flat 2907, 

Almeriki Tower, Sheikh Zayed Road, 

Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and 

G 15, Kanifing Housing Estate, The Gambia, 

West Africa; 

Abdullah Khaled Ramadan, Managing 

Director, Sam Air Corporation Limited, 

P.O. Box 5822, Sharjah, United Arab 

Emirates; 

Ali Mahdavi, Chairman, Aban Air, No. 1267, 

Vali Asr Avenue, Tehran, Iran 157177 

36511; 

Mahmoud Khali Hamze (a/k/a Mahmoud 

Khalil) a/k/a Mahmoud Hamza Khalil), 

Managing Director, Aviation Legacy 

(Gambia) Limited, Flat 2907, Almeriki 

Tower, Sheikh Zayed Road, Dubai, United 

Arab Emirates; 

Everex Global Cargo and Courier, Nos. 7 and 

8, Opposite Terminal 2, Mahrabad 

International Airport, Tehran, Iran, and 

No. 1267, Vali Asr Avenue, Tehran, Iran 

157177 36511; 

Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the 

Export Administration Regulations 

(‘‘EAR’’ or the ‘‘Regulations’’),1 the 

Bureau of Industry and Security (‘‘BIS’’), 

U.S. Department of Commerce, through 

its Office of Export Enforcement 

(‘‘OEE’’), has requested that I issue an 

Order temporarily denying, for a period 

of 180 days, the export privileges under 

the EAR of: 

Sayegh Group Aviation, P.O. Box 5822, 

Sharjah, United Arab Emirates; 

Aban Air, No. 1267, Vali Asr Avenue, 

Tehran, Iran 157177 36511; 

Sam Air Corporation Limited, P.O. Box 5822, 

Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, and 

18th Hill Street, Banjul, The Gambia, West 

Africa; 

Aviation Legacy (Gambia) Limited, c/o 

Mahmoud Khali Hamze, Flat 2907, 

Almeriki Tower, Sheikh Zayed Road, 

Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and 

G 15, Kanifing Housing Estate, The Gambia, 

West Africa; 

Abdullah Khaled Ramadan, Managing 

Director, Sam Air Corporation Limited; 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

25134 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2012 / Notices 

P.O. Box 5822, Sharjah, United Arab 

Emirates; 

Ali Mahdavi, Chairman Aban Air, No. 1267, 

Vali Asr Avenue, Tehran, Iran 157177 

36511; 

Mahmoud Khali Hamze a/k/a Mahmoud 

Khalil a/k/a Mahmoud Hamza Khalil, 

Managing Director, Aviation Legacy 

(Gambia) Limited, Flat 2907, Almeriki 

Tower, Sheikh Zayed Road, Dubai, United 

Arab Emirates. 

OEE also has requested pursuant to 

Sections 766.23 and 766.24 of the 

Regulations that the following party also 

be named to the TDO as a related person 

to Aban Air and Ali Mahdavi, in order 

to prevent evasion of the TDO: 

Everex Global Cargo and Courier, Nos 7 and 

8, Opposite Terminal 2, Mahrabad 

International Airport, Tehran, Iran, and 

No. 1267, Vali Asr Avenue, Tehran, Iran. 

I. Issuance of Temporary Denial Order 

A. Legal Standard 

Pursuant to Section 766.24(b) of the 

Regulations, BIS may issue a TDO upon 

a showing that the order is necessary in 

the public interest to prevent an 

‘‘imminent violation’’ of the 

Regulations. 15 CFR 766.24(b)(1). ‘‘A 

violation may be ‘imminent’ either in 

time or degree of likelihood.’’ 15 CFR 

766.24(b)(3). BIS may show ‘‘either that 

a violation is about to occur, or that the 

general circumstances of the matter 

under investigation or case under 

criminal or administrative charges 

demonstrate a likelihood of future 

violations.’’ Id. As to the likelihood of 

future violations, BIS may show that 

‘‘the violation under investigation or 

charges is significant, deliberate, covert 

and/or likely to occur again, rather than 

technical or negligent [.]’’ Id. A ‘‘lack of 

information establishing the precise 

time a violation may occur does not 

preclude a finding that a violation is 

imminent, so long as there is sufficient 

reason to believe the likelihood of a 

violation.’’ Id. 

B. Background and Findings 

OEE submits that three U.S.-origin 

Boeing 747 planes, Manufacturer Serial 

Number (‘‘MSN’’) 23408 (Tail Number 

C5–SAM), MSN 23224 (Tail Number 

C5–AKR), and MSN 23823 (Tail Number 

C5–SAG), items subject to the 

Regulations, classified under Export 

Control Classification Number 9A991.b, 

and controlled for Anti-Terrorism 

reasons, have been reexported or are 

intended for reexport to Iran, without 

the required U.S. Government 

authorization, as a result of a series of 

related transactions involving Sayegh 

Group Aviation, Sam Air Corporation 

Limited (‘‘Sam Air’’), Aviation Legacy 

(Gambia) Limited (‘‘Aviation Legacy’’), 

and Aban Air. Sayegh Group Aviation 

and Sam Air are located in the United 

Arab Emirates (‘‘U.A.E.’’), and are 

subsidiaries or affiliates of National 

Paints Factories Company Limited and 

the Sayegh Group, also located in the 

U.A.E. Aviation Legacy has addresses in 

the U.A.E. and Gambia, West Africa, 

and was, as discussed further below, 

created as a ‘‘clean’’ company for the 

purpose of facilitating the lease of the 

747s to an Iranian airline or airlines. 

Aban Air is based in and operates out 

of Tehran, Iran. 

On April 16, 2012, Abdullah Khaled 

Ramadan (‘‘Ramadan’’), Managing 

Director of both Sayegh Group Aviation 

and Sam Air, informed BIS and 

provided transaction documents 

indicating that three 747s at issue were 

obtained by Sayegh Group Aviation 

from Qantas Airlines in the United 

States in August 2010, sold to Sam Air 

in July 2011, and then sold yet again to 

Aviation Legacy on December 20, 2011. 

Less than ten days later, on or about 

December 29, 2011, Aviation Legacy 

leased one of the 747s for reexport to 

Aban Air in Iran. Ramadan also stated 

that this 747 aircraft, MSN 23408, is 

currently in Iran and is scheduled to be 

reexported again on or about April 30, 

2012. 

The lease was signed for Aviation 

Legacy by its chairman, Mahmoud 

Khalil Hamze (a/k/a Mahmoud Khalil, 

a/k/a Mahmoud Hamza Khalil), and for 

Aban Air by its chairman, Ali Mahdavi. 

Hamze was present when Ramadan 

made these statements to BIS, and did 

not contradict or seek to contradict any 

statements made by Ramadan. 

Ramadan provided details about the 

transactions and the parties and aircraft 

involved. He was in possession of all of 

the pertinent Bills of Sale for the three 

aircraft as well as the subsequent leasing 

agreement to Aban Air. He admitted that 

the transactions were structured so that 

the lease to Aban Air would appear to 

be through a ‘‘clean’’ company, Aviation 

Legacy, created for reasons he vaguely 

described as having to do with an 

administrative dispute. He also 

indicated that Sam Air had been created 

at the order of Saleem Al Sayegh, the 

chief executive officer of Sam Air’s 

parent company, the National Paints 

Factories Company Limited, but 

declined to explain the reasons why that 

had been necessary. 

Under the terms of the lease, Aban 

Air’s operations under the lease began 

on or about March 15, 2012, with the 

leased 747 (MSN 23408) to be 

reexported back and forth between 

Tehran, Iran, and Bangkok, Thailand. 

Ramadan denied that any of the TehranBangkok flights had occurred, but 

indicated that this aircraft currently is 

located in Iran with Aban Air, and is 

expected to be flown out of Iran by on 

or about April 30, 2012. 

Ramadan also indicated that the other 

two 747s have been flown in and out of 

various countries in the Middle East, 

including Syria, and that at least one of 

these 747s is currently located in the 

U.A.E. 

OEE submits, in sum, that future 

violations of the EAR are imminent as 

defined in Section 766.24 of the 

Regulations. I agree. As provided in 

Section 746.7 of the Regulations, no 

person may export or reexport any item 

that is subject to the EAR, if such 

transaction is prohibited by the Iranian 

Transactions Regulations (31 CFR part 

560) and has not been authorized by the 

Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign 

Assets Control (‘‘OFAC’’). The evidence 

shows that the respondents have already 

reexported one Boeing 747 aircraft 

(MSN 23408) to Iran without having 

received the required OFAC 

authorization. Ramadan, Managing 

Director of both Sayegh Group Aviation 

and Sam Air, admitted this 

unauthorized reexport and admitted 

another such reexport of this aircraft 

was imminent in time. As noted above, 

these statements were made in the 

presence of Hamze, Aviation Legacy’s 

chairman, who did not contradict the 

statements in any way. Moreover, 

Aviation Legacy was created by Sam 

Air/Ramadan in an attempt to make the 

lease to Aban Air appear to be by a 

‘‘clean’’ company, and as discussed 

above, two other 747 aircraft are owned 

and intended for lease through Aviation 

Legacy. 

Thus, the conduct in this case is 

deliberate, significant, and likely to 

occur again absent the issuance of a 

TDO. Therefore, I find that a TDO 

naming Sayegh Group Aviation Sam Air 

Corporation Limited, Abdullah Khaled 

Ramadan, Aviation Legacy (Gambia) 

Limited, Mahmoud Khali Hamze (a/k/a 

Mahmoud Khalil a/k/a Mahmoud 

Hamza Khalil), Aban Air, and Ali 

Mahdavi is necessary, in the public 

interest, to prevent an imminent 

violation of the EAR. 

This Order is being issued on an ex 

parte basis without a hearing based 

upon BIS’s showing of an imminent 

violation. 

II. Related Person 

A. Legal Standard 

Section 766.24(c) of the Regulations 

provides that a temporary denial order 

may be made applicable to related 

persons in accordance with Section 

766.23. 15 CFR 766.24(c). Section 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2012 / Notices 25135 

766.23 provides, in turn, that ‘‘[i]n order 

to prevent evasion, [temporary denial 

orders] under this part may be made 

applicable not only to the respondent, 

but also to other persons then or 

thereafter related to the respondent by 

ownership, control, position of 

responsibility, affiliation, or other 

connection in the conduct of trade or 

business.’’ 15 CFR 766.23(a). Pursuant 

to Section 766.23(b), a temporary denial 

order may be made applicable to a 

related person on an ex parte basis 

under Section 766.24(a) without need to 

provide prior notice. 15 CFR 766.23(a). 

B. Analysis and Findings 

Everex Global Cargo and Courier 

(‘‘Everex’’) has a significant corporate 

relationship with Aban Air and Ali 

Mahdavi. OEE has presented evidence 

that Ali Mahdavi, who is chairman of 

Aban Air and signed the lease discussed 

above that resulted in the unlawful 

reexport of a 747, also is the chairman 

of Everex. The two entities have the 

same offices at the Tehran, Iran Airport. 

Everex also lists its branch office in 

Tehran as the same location as Aban 

Air’s Iranian headquarters. Finally, 

according to open source information 

obtained by OEE, Everex acts as the 

General Sales Agent for Aban Air in 

several countries, including Iran and the 

U.A.E. 

I find pursuant to Section 766.23 that 

Everex Global Cargo and Courier is a 

related person to Aban Air and Ali 

Mahdavi, and that adding Everex Global 

Cargo and Courier to the TDO is 

necessary to prevent evasion of the 

TDO. 

III. Order 

It is therefore ordered: FIRST, that the 

Respondents, SAYEGH GROUP 

AVIATION, P.O. Box 5822, Sharjah, 

United Arab Emirates; ABAN AIR, No. 

1267, Vali Asr Avenue, Tehran, Iran 

157177 36511; SAM AIR 

CORPORATION LIMITED, P.O. Box 

5822, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, 

and 18th Hill Street, Banjul, The 

Gambia, West Africa; AVIATION 

LEGACY (GAMBIA) LIMITED, c/o 

Mahmoud Khali Hamze, Flat 2907, 

Almeriki Tower, Sheikh Zayed Road, 

Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and G 15, 

Kanifing Housing Estate, The Gambia, 

West Africa; ABDULLAH KHALED 

RAMADAN, Managing Director, Sam 

Air Corporation Limited, P.O. Box 5822, 

Sharjah, United Arab Emirates; ALI 

MAHDAVI, Chairman Aban Air, No. 

1267, Vali Asr Avenue, Tehran, Iran 

157177 36511; MAHMOUD KHALI 

HAMZE (a/k/a MAHMOUD KHALIL a/ 

k/a MAHMOUD HAMZA KHALIL), 

Managing Director, Aviation Legacy 

(Gambia) Limited, Flat 2907, Almeriki 

Tower, Sheikh Zayed Road, Dubai, 

United Arab Emirates; and EVEREX 

GLOBAL CARGO AND COURIER, Nos. 

7 and 8, Opposite Terminal 2, Mahrabad 

International Airport, Tehran, Iran, and 

No. 1267, Vali Asr Avenue, Tehran, Iran 

157177 36511, and each of their 

successors or assigns and, when acting 

for or on behalf of any of the foregoing, 

each of their officers, representatives, 

agents or employees (each a ‘‘Denied 

Person’’ and collectively the ‘‘Denied 

Persons’’) may not, directly or 

indirectly, participate in any way in any 

transaction involving any commodity, 

software or technology (hereinafter 

collectively referred to as ‘‘item’’) 

exported or to be exported from the 

United States that is subject to the 

Export Administration Regulations 

(‘‘EAR’’), or in any other activity subject 

to the EAR including, but not limited to: 

A. Applying for, obtaining, or using 

any license, License Exception, or 

export control document; 

B. Carrying on negotiations 

concerning, or ordering, buying, 

receiving, using, selling, delivering, 

storing, disposing of, forwarding, 

transporting, financing, or otherwise 

servicing in any way, any transaction 

involving any item exported or to be 

exported from the United States that is 

subject to the EAR, or in any other 

activity subject to the EAR; or 

C. Benefitting in any way from any 

transaction involving any item exported 

or to be exported from the United States 

that is subject to the EAR, or in any 

other activity subject to the EAR. 

SECOND, that no person may, directly 

or indirectly, do any of the following: 

A. Export or reexport to or on behalf 

of a Denied Person any item subject to 

the EAR; 

B. Take any action that facilitates the 

acquisition or attempted acquisition by 

a Denied Person of the ownership, 

possession, or control of any item 

subject to the EAR that has been or will 

be exported from the United States, 

including financing or other support 

activities related to a transaction 

whereby a Denied Person acquires or 

attempts to acquire such ownership, 

possession or control; 

C. Take any action to acquire from or 

to facilitate the acquisition or attempted 

acquisition from a Denied Person of any 

item subject to the EAR that has been 

exported from the United States; 

D. Obtain from a Denied Person in the 

United States any item subject to the 

EAR with knowledge or reason to know 

that the item will be, or is intended to 

be, exported from the United States; or 

E. Engage in any transaction to service 

any item subject to the EAR that has 

been or will be exported from the 

United States and which is owned, 

possessed or controlled by a Denied 

Person, or service any item, of whatever 

origin, that is owned, possessed or 

controlled by a Denied Person if such 

service involves the use of any item 

subject to the EAR that has been or will 

be exported from the United States. For 

purposes of this paragraph, servicing 

means installation, maintenance, repair, 

modification or testing. 

THIRD, that, after notice and 

opportunity for comment as provided in 

section 766.23 of the EAR, any other 

person, firm, corporation, or business 

organization related to a Denied Person 

by affiliation, ownership, control, or 

position of responsibility in the conduct 

of trade or related services may also be 

made subject to the provisions of this 

Order. 

FOURTH, that this Order does not 

prohibit any export, reexport, or other 

transaction subject to the EAR where the 

only items involved that are subject to 

the EAR are the foreign-produced direct 

product of U.S.-origin technology. 

In accordance with the provisions of 

Section 766.24(e) of the EAR, the 

Respondents may, at any time, appeal 

this Order by filing a full written 

statement in support of the appeal with 

the Office of the Administrative Law 

Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing 

Center, 40 South Gay Street, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21202–4022. 

BIS may seek renewal of this Order by 

filing a written request with the 

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for 

Export Enforcement in accordance with 

the provisions of Section 766.24(d) of 

the EAR, which currently provides that 

such a written request must be 

submitted not later than 20 days before 

the expiration date. A Respondent may 

oppose a request to renew this Order in 

accordance with Section 766.24(d), 

including by filing a written submission 

with the Assistant Secretary of 

Commerce for Export Enforcement, 

supported by appropriate evidence. Any 

opposition ordinarily must be received 

not later than seven days before the 

expiration date of the Order. 

Notice of the issuance of this Order 

shall be given to Respondents in 

accordance with Sections 766.5(b) and 

766.24(b)(5) of the Regulations. This 

Order also shall be published in the 

Federal Register. 

This Order is effective immediately 

and shall remain in effect for 180 days. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

25136 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2012 / Notices 

1The Department uses the name Golden Dragon 

when we refer to the collective group of Golden 

Dragon companies, which includes GD Affiliates. 

See ‘‘Corporate Structure’’ section below. 

2The domestic interested parties for this 

proceeding are Cerro Flow Products, LLC, Wieland 

Copper Products, LLC, Mueller Copper Tube 

Products, Inc. and Mueller Copper Tube Company, 

Inc. (collectively, the petitioners). 

Dated: Issued this 23rd day, of April 2012. 

Donald G. Salo, Jr., 

Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for 

Export Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10190 Filed 4–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–891] 

Hand Trucks and Certain Parts Thereof 

From the People’s Republic of China; 

Extension of Time Limit for Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: April 27, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Scott Hoefke or Fred Baker, 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) 482–4947 or (202) 482– 

2924, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On January 10, 2012, the Department 

of Commerce (the Department) 

published in the Federal Register the 

preliminary results of the 2009–2010 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on hand trucks 

and certain parts thereof from the 

People’s Republic of China. See Hand 

Trucks and Certain Parts Thereof from 

the People’s Republic of China: 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review, 77 FR 1464 

(January 10, 2012) (Preliminary Results). 

Extension of Time Limits for Final 

Results of Review 

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

of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires 

that the Department complete the final 

results of an administrative review 

within 120 days after the date on which 

notice of the preliminary results was 

published in the Federal Register. 

However, if it is not practicable to 

complete the review within this time 

period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act 

allows the Department to extend the 

time limit for the final results to a 

maximum of 180 days after the 

publication date of the preliminary 

results. 

The Department finds that it is not 

practicable to complete the final results 

of this review within the original time 

frame because the Department continues 

to require additional time to analyze 

issues raised in recently filed case and 

rebuttal briefs. Thus, the Department 

finds it is not practicable to complete 

this review by the current deadline (i.e., 

May 9, 2012). Accordingly, the 

Department is extending the time limit 

for completion of the final results of this 

administrative review by an additional 

60 days (i.e., until July 8, 2012), in 

accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of 

the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2). 

This extension is issued and 

published in accordance with sections 

751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i) of the Act. 

Dated: April 20, 2012. 

Christian Marsh, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10270 Filed 4–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–201–838] 

Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and 

Tube From Mexico: Preliminary 

Results of Antidumping Duty New 

Shipper Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) is conducting a new 

shipper review of the antidumping duty 

order on seamless refined copper pipe 

and tube from Mexico for the period 

November 22, 2010, through April 30, 

2011, in response to a request from GD 

Affiliates S. de R.L. de C.V. (GD 

Affiliates). 

We preliminarily find that the U.S. 

sales of subject merchandise produced 

and exported by Golden Dragon 1 were 

not sold below normal value (NV). If 

these preliminary results are adopted in 

our final results, the Department will 

instruct U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP) to collect cash deposits 

of zero percent and to liquidate without 

regard to antidumping duties any 

entries for which the assessment rate is 

zero or de minimis. See the 

‘‘Assessment Rate’’ section of this 

notice. Interested parties are invited to 

comment on these preliminary results. 

See the ‘‘Preliminary Results of New 

Shipper Review’’ section of this notice. 

DATES: Effective Date: April 27, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dennis McClure or Joy Zhang, 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) 482–5973 or (202) 482– 

1168, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Department published the 

antidumping duty order on seamless 

refined copper pipe and tube from 

Mexico on November 22, 2010. See 

Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube 

From Mexico and the People’s Republic 

of China: Antidumping Duty Orders and 

Amended Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value From Mexico, 

75 FR 71070 (November 22, 2010). On 

May 31, 2011, the Department received 

a request from GD Affiliates in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.214(c), to 

conduct a new shipper review of the 

antidumping duty order on seamless 

refined copper pipe and tube from 

Mexico. The Department found that the 

request for review met the statutory and 

regulatory requirements for initiation in 

accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

Act) and 19 CFR 351.214(d), and 

initiated the review on June 30, 2011. 

See Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and 

Tube From Mexico: Notice of Initiation 

of Antidumping Duty New Shipper 

Review, 76 FR 39850 (July 7, 2011). 

On July 1, 2011, the Department 

issued its new shipper questionnaire to 

GD Affiliates. On August 22, 2011, 

Golden Dragon submitted its section A 

through D response. On September 6, 

2011, the petitioners 2 filed a cost 

allegation. On October 6, 2011, the 

Department initiated a cost 

investigation. On September 21, 2011, 

the Department issued its first 

supplemental questionnaire for sections 

A through D, to Golden Dragon, for 

which a response was filed on October 

12, 2011. On October 26, 2011, the 

petitioners requested that the 

Department rescind the review, because 

GD Affiliates was neither the producer 

nor exporter of the subject merchandise, 

and the review was not requested by 

Golden Dragon’s affiliate, Hong Kong 

GD Trading Co., Ltd., the affiliated 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES