Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 185 / Friday, September 24, 2004 / Notices 57265

751(a)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act, 19 CFR 

351.214(d) and 351.221(c)(1)(i).

Dated: September 17, 2004. 

Jeffrey May, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration.

[FR Doc. E4–2373 Filed 9–23–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration 

[A–533–810] 

Stainless Steel Bar From India; 

Extension of Time Limit for the 

Preliminary Results of the 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of extension of time 

limit. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

is extending the time limit for the 

preliminary results of the administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on stainless steel bar from India. The 

period of review is February 1, 2003, 

through January 31, 2004. This 

extension is made pursuant to section 

751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended by the Act.

DATES: Effective September 24, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cole 

Kyle or Melanie Brown, Office 1, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone (202) 482-1503 and 482-4987, 

respectively. 

Background 

On March 26, 2004, the Department of 

Commerce (‘‘Department’’) published a 

notice of initiation of administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on stainless steel bar from India 

covering the period February 1, 2003, 

through January 31, 2004 (69 FR 15788). 

The preliminary results for the 

antidumping duty administrative review 

of stainless steel bar from India are 

currently due no later than October 31, 

2004. 

Extension of Time Limits for 

Preliminary Results 

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

requires the Department to issue the 

preliminary results of an administrative 

review within 245 days after the last day 

of the anniversary month of an 

antidumping duty order for which a 

review is requested and issue the final 

results within 120 days after the date on 

which the preliminary results are 

published. However, if it is not 

practicable to complete the review 

within the time period, section 

751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the 

Department to extend these deadlines to 

a maximum of 365 days and 180 days, 

respectively. 

Due to the complexity of choosing the 

appropriate third-country market 

selection, determining the accuracy of 

reported home market sales, and the late 

filing of cost allegations made by the 

petitioners, it is not practicable to 

complete the preliminary results of this 

review within the original time limit 

(i.e., October 31, 2004). Therefore, the 

Department is extending the time limit 

for completion of the preliminary 

results to no later than February 28, 

2005, in accordance with section 

751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. 

We are issuing and publishing this 

notice in accordance with sections 

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

Dated: September 17, 2004. 

Jeffrey A. May, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for AD/CVD 

Enforcement.

[FR Doc. E4–2359 Filed 9–23–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration 

[A–475–824] 

Notice of Rescission of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review: Stainless 

Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Italy

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce

ACTION: Notice of rescission of 

antidumping duty administrative 

review. 

SUMMARY: In response to a request from 

ThyssenKrupp Acciai Speciali Terni 

S.p.A., a producer and exporter of 

subject merchandise, and 

ThyssenKrupp AST USA, Inc. 

(collectively TKAST), an importer of 

subject merchandise, the U.S. 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) initiated an administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on stainless steel sheet and strip (SSSS) 

in coils from Italy. No other interested 

party requested a review of TKAST. The 

period of review (POR) is July 1, 2003, 

through June 30, 2004. For the reasons 

discussed below, the Department is 

rescinding this administrative review.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 24, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Angelica Mendoza at (202) 482–3019; 

AD/CVD Operations, Office Seven, 

Import Administration, International 

Trade Administration, U.S. Department 

of Commerce, 14th Street and 

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On July 1, 2004, the Department 

published a notice of opportunity to 

request an administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on SSSS in 

coils from Italy. See Antidumping or 

Countervailing Order, Finding, or 

Suspended Investigation; Opportunity 

to Request Administrative Review, 69 

FR 39903. On August 24, 2004, pursuant 

to a request made by TKAST, the 

Department initiated an administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on SSSS in coils from Italy. See

Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Reviews and Requests for Revocation in 

Part, 69 FR 52857 (August 30, 2004). On 

September 15, 2004, TKAST timely 

withdrew its request for an 

administrative review of SSSS in coils 

from Italy. 

Rescission of Review 

If a party that requested a review 

withdraws its request within 90 days of 

the date of publication of the notice of 

initiation of the requested review, the 

Secretary will rescind the review 

pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1) of the 

Department’s regulations. In the instant 

proceeding, TKAST withdrew its 

request for an administrative review 

within 90 days from the publication 

date of the notice of initiation. No other 

interested party requested a review. 

Therefore, the Department is rescinding 

the initiation of this administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on SSSS in coils from Italy. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice serves as a 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 assumption that 

reimbursement of antidumping duties 

occurred and subsequent assessment of 

double antidumping duties. 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

57266 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 185 / Friday, September 24, 2004 / Notices 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3) of the 

Department’s regulations. Timely 

written notification of the return/

destruction of APO materials or 

conversion to judicial protective order is 

hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and the terms of an 

APO is a sanctionable violation. 

This notice is in accordance with 

section 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 

251.213(d)(4) of the Department’s 

regulations.

Dated: September 20, 2004. 

Jeffrey A. May, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration.

[FR Doc. 04–21517 Filed 9–23–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration 

[C–427–817] 

Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality 

Steel Plate From France: Notice of 

Amended Final Determination 

Pursuant to Final Court Decision and 

Partial Revocation of Order

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of amended final 

determination pursuant to final court 

decision and partial revocation of order. 

SUMMARY: On September 24, 2002, the 

United States Court of International 

Trade (‘‘CIT’’) sustained the Department 

of Commerce’s (‘‘the Department’’) 

second remand determination of the 

Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty 

Determination: Certain Cut-to-Length 

Carbon-Quality Steel Plate From France, 

64 FR 73277 (December 29, 1999) (‘‘CTL 

Plate’’). See GTS Industries S.A. v. 

United States, 246 F. Supp. 2d 1311 

(2002) (‘‘GTS II’’). The Department 

appealed this decision to the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Federal 

Circuit (‘‘Federal Circuit’’). On May 13, 

2004, the Federal Circuit affirmed the 

CIT’s decision in GTS II. See GTS 

Industries S.A. v. United States, 97 Fed. 

Appx. 333 (CAFC, May 13, 2004) 

(‘‘Appellate Decision’’). Because all 

litigation in this matter has concluded, 

the Department is issuing this amended 

final determination in CTL Plate in 

accordance with the CIT’s decision and 

revoking the countervailing duty order 

in part.

DATES: Effective September 24, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jesse Cortes at (202) 482–3986, AD/CVD 

Operations 1, Office I, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On December 29, 1999, the 

Department published the final 

affirmative countervailing duty 

determination in CTL Plate. The 

Department published the related 

countervailing duty order on February 

10, 2000. See Notice of Amended Final 

Determinations: Certain Cut-to-Length 

Carbon-Quality Steel Plate From India 

and the Republic of Korea; and Notice 

of Countervailing Duty Orders: Certain 

Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel 

Plate From France, India, Indonesia, 

Italy, and the Republic of Korea, 65 FR 

6587 (February 10, 2000) (‘‘CVD 

Order’’). In its final determination, the 

Department found that a portion of the 

countervailable subsidy benefits 

bestowed on French steel producer 

Usinor Sacilor prior to a stock sale 

privatization passed through to Usinor, 

the privatized company and a 

respondent in the investigation. 

Furthermore, the Department found 

that, in turn, a pro rata share of the 

countervailable subsidy benefits also 

passed through to GTS Industries S.A. 

(‘‘GTS’’) in proportion to Usinor’s 

ownership share in GTS. GTS 

challenged this determination before the 

CIT. See GTS v. United States, Court No. 

00–03–00118 (also referred to as ‘‘CTL 

Plate’’). On April 5, 2001, the CIT issued 

an injunction enjoining the Department 

from liquidating GTS’s entries of subject 

merchandise that were entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption on or after July 26, 1999. 

On February 2, 2000, while CTL Plate

was pending before the CIT, the Federal 

Circuit issued a ruling in Delverde SRL

v. United States, 202 F.3d 1360 (Fed. 

Cir. 2000), reh’g granted in part, (June 

20, 2000) (‘‘Delverde III’’), which had a 

direct impact on the change-inownership methodology at issue in CTL 

Plate. Specifically, the Federal Circuit 

ruled that the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended by the Uruguay Round 

Agreements Act effective January 1, 

1995 (‘‘the Act’’), did not allow the 

Department to presume, pursuant to a 

per se ruling, that subsidies granted to 

the former owner of a company’s assets 

automatically ‘‘passed through’’ to the 

new owner following a sale; rather, the 

statute required the Department to 

examine the particular facts and 

circumstances of the sale, and 

determine whether the new owner 

directly or indirectly received both a 

financial contribution and a benefit. Id. 

at 1364. In light of Delverde III, the 

Department asked the CIT to remand 

CTL Plate for reconsideration of the 

change-in-ownership issues. On August 

9, 2000, with the parties’ consent, the 

CIT remanded CTL Plate to the 

Department to issue a determination 

consistent with U.S. law and Delverde 

III. See GTS Industries S.A. v. United 

States, Court No. 00–03–00118, Remand 

Order August 9, 2000, modified by 

Order August 24, 2000. 

On December 22, 2000, having taken 

Delverde III into consideration, the 

Department issued the Final Results of 

Redetermination Pursuant to Court 

Remand, GTS Industries S.A. v. United 

States, Court No. 00–03–00118, Remand 

Order (CIT August 24, 2000) (December 

22, 2000) (‘‘Remand Determination I’’). 

In that redetermination, having found 

(based on an analysis of certain factors) 

that Usinor was the same legal person 

before and after privatization, the 

Department continued to assign to GTS 

its pro rata share of pre-privatization 

Usinor subsidies. See Remand 

Determination I at 20.

On January 4, 2002, rejecting the 

Department’s same-person analysis as 

contrary to the requirements of Delverde 

III, the CIT again remanded CTL Plate to 

the Department. See GTS Industries S.A.

v. United States, 182 F. Supp. 2d 1369 

(2002) (‘‘GTS I’’). 

Despite disagreement with the CIT’s 

interpretation of Delverde III, the 

Department proceeded with a further 

redetermination as remanded and, on 

June 3, 2002, issued the Results of 

Redetermination Pursuant to Court 

Remand, GTS Industries S.A. v. United 

States, Court No. 00-03-00118, Remand 

Order (CIT January 4, 2002) (June 3, 

2002) (‘‘Remand Determination II’’). In 

that redetermination, applying a fairmarket-value analysis, the Department 

concluded that the purchasers/new 

owners of Usinor did not receive new 

countervailable subsidies as a result of 

the privatization transaction and, 

consequently, determined the rate of 

countervailable subsidy for the subject 

merchandise produced and sold by GTS 

during the period of investigation to be 

0.00 percent. 

On September 24, 2002, upon 

consideration of Remand Determination 

II, the CIT issued GTS II sustaining the 

results of Remand Determination II. 

The Department subsequently 

appealed the case to the Federal Circuit. 

On May 13, 2004, the Federal Circuit 

issued the Appellate Decision, which 

affirmed the CIT’s GTS II decision