81214 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Notices 

calculates an assessment rate for each 

importer of the subject merchandise for 

each respondent. Upon issuance of the 

final results of this administrative 

review, if any importer-specific 

assessment rates calculated in the final 

results are above de minimis (i.e., at or 

above 0.5 percent), the Department will 

issue appraisement instructions directly 

to CBP to assess antidumping duties on 

appropriate entries. 

To determine whether the duty 

assessment rates covering the period 

were de minimis, in accordance with 

the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 

351.106(c)(2), for each respondent we 

calculated importer (or customer)- 

specific ad valorem rates by aggregating 

the dumping margins calculated for all 

U.S. sales to that importer or customer 

and dividing this amount by the total 

entered value of the sales to that 

importer (or customer). Where an 

importer (or customer)-specific ad 

valorem rate is greater than de minimis, 

and the respondent has reported reliable 

entered values, we apply the assessment 

rate to the entered value of the 

importer’s/customer’s entries during the 

review period. Where an importer (or 

customer)-specific ad valorem rate is 

greater than de minimis and we do not 

have reliable entered values, we 

calculate a per-unit assessment rate by 

aggregating the dumping duties due for 

all U.S. sales to each importer (or 

customer) and dividing this amount by 

the total quantity sold to that importer 

(or customer). 

The Department clarified its 

‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on 

May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This 

clarification will apply to entries of 

subject merchandise during the POR 

produced by the respondent for which 

it did not know its merchandise was 

destined for the United States. In such 

instances, we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate unreviewed entries at the allothers rate if there is no rate for the 

intermediate company(ies) involved in 

the transaction. For a full discussion of 

this clarification, see Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following antidumping duty 

deposit rates will be effective upon 

publication of the final results of this 

administrative review for all shipments 

of pasta from Italy entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption on or after the publication 

date of these final results, as provided 

for by section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (the Act): (1) If the 

exporter is not a firm covered in this 

review, but was covered in a previous 

review or the original less-than-fairvalue (LTFV) investigation, the cash 

deposit rate will continue to be the 

company-specific rate established for 

the most recent period; (2) if the 

exporter is not a firm covered in this 

review, a prior review, or the LTFV 

investigation, but the manufacturer is, 

the cash deposit rate will be the rate 

established for the most recent period 

for the manufacturer of the subject 

merchandise; and (3) if neither the 

exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm 

covered by this review, a prior review, 

or the LTFV investigation, the cash 

deposit rate will be 15.45 percent, the 

all-others rate established in the Section 

129 determination. See Implementation 

of the Findings of the WTO Panel in 

US—Zeroing (EC): Notice of 

Determinations Under Section 129 of 

the Uruguay Round Agreements Act and 

Revocations and Partial Revocations of 

Certain Antidumping Duty Orders, 72 

FR 25261 (May 4, 2007). These cash 

deposit requirements shall remain in 

effect until further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice 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 and/or 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/or 

countervailing duties occurred and the 

subsequent increase in antidumping 

duties by the amount of antidumping 

and/or countervailing duties 

reimbursed. 

Notification Regarding APOs 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective orders (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(5). 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 sanctionable violation. 

This administrative review and notice 

are in accordance with sections 

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

Dated: December 14, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I 

List of Comments in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum 

Comment 1: Use of Quarterly Cost 

Methodology for Garofalo 

Comment 2: Whether the Department Should 

Include Transportation Recovery in the 

U.S. Sales Calculation 

Comment 3: Whether the Department Should 

Modify its Liquidation Instructions to U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection 

Comment 4: General and Administrative and 

Financial Expense Ratios 

[FR Doc. 2010–32473 Filed 12–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–475–824] 

Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils 

From Italy: Preliminary Results of the 

Full Second Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) 

Review of the Antidumping Duty Order 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On June 2, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce (‘‘the 

Department’’) initiated its second sunset 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils 

from Italy, pursuant to section 751(c) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the 

Act’’). The Department is conducting a 

full sunset review of the order pursuant 

to 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.218(e)(2)(i). As a result of this 

sunset review, the Department 

preliminarily finds that revocation of 

the antidumping duty order on stainless 

steel sheet and strip in coils from Italy 

would be likely to lead to continuation 

or recurrence of dumping. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Cordell or Angelica Mendoza, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office 7, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–0408, or (202) 

482–3019, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On June 2, 2010, the Department 

published the notice of initiation of the 

sunset review of the antidumping duty 

order on stainless steel sheet and strip 

(‘‘SSSS’’) in coils from Italy, pursuant to 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Notices 81215 

1 Domestic interested parties and the respondent 

filed substantive responses on July 2, 2010. 

section 751(c) the Act. See Initiation of 

Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 75 FR 

30777 (June 2, 2010) (‘‘Notice of 

Initiation’’). 

The Department received a notice of 

intent to participate in the sunset review 

of the antidumping duty order on SSSS 

in coils from Italy from the following 

petitioners: AK Steel Corporation; 

Allegheny Ludlum Corporation; North 

American Stainless; the United Steel, 

Paper and Forestry, Rubber, 

Manufacturing, Energy, Allied 

Industrial Service Workers International 

Union; United Auto Workers Local 

3303; and United Auto Workers Local 

4104 (collectively, ‘‘petitioners’’ or 

‘‘domestic interested parties’’) within the 

deadline specified in 19 CFR 

351.218(d)(1)(i). The petitioners claimed 

interested party status under section 

771(9)(C) and (D) of the Act stating that 

its individual members are each 

producers in the United States of a 

domestic like product or certified 

unions representing workers in the 

domestic industry producing subject 

merchandise. 

The Department received a 

substantive response to the Notice of 

Initiation from the domestic interested 

parties within the 30-day deadline 

specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). 

The Department also received a timely 

substantive response from respondent 

interested party ThyssenKrupp Acciai 

Speciali Terni S.P.A. (‘‘TKAST’’) within 

the applicable deadline specified in 19 

CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i).1

On July 6, 2010, the Department 

received a request from domestic 

interested parties for an extension of the 

deadline for filing rebuttal comments to 

the substantive responses submitted by 

the respondent. Pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.302(b), domestic interested parties 

and the respondent were granted an 

extension to file rebuttal comments to 

the substantive responses until July 9, 

2010. On July 9, 2010, the Department 

received rebuttal comments to the 

substantive responses from the domestic 

interested parties and the respondent. 

Section 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(A) of the 

Department’s regulations provides that 

the Secretary normally will conclude 

that respondent interested parties have 

provided adequate response to a notice 

of initiation where it receives complete 

substantive responses from respondent 

interested parties accounting on average 

for more than 50 percent, by volume (or 

value basis, if appropriate), of the total 

exports of the subject merchandise to 

the United States over the five calendar 

years preceding the year of publication 

of the notice of initiation. On July 22, 

2010, the Department determined that 

domestic interested parties’ and 

TKAST’s responses constituted 

adequate responses to the notice of 

initiation. In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.218(e)(2)(i), the Department 

determined to conduct a full sunset 

review of this antidumping duty order 

and notified the International Trade 

Commission. See Letter to Ms. Catherine 

DeFilippo, Director, Office of 

Investigations, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, from James Maeder, 

Director, Office 2, AD/CVD Operations, 

entitled ‘‘Expedited and Full Sunset 

Reviews of the Antidumping Duty 

Orders Initiated in June 2010,’’ dated 

July 22, 2010. 

On September 23, 2010, the 

Department extended the deadlines for 

both the preliminary and final results of 

this review by 90 days. See Certain 

Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils 

from Italy and Mexico: Extension of 

Time Limits for Preliminary and Final 

Results of Full Five-year (‘‘Sunset’’) 

Reviews of Antidumping Duty Orders, 

75 FR 57899 (September 23, 2010). 

Scope of the Order 

For purposes of the order, the 

products covered are certain stainless 

steel sheet and strip in coils. Stainless 

steel is an alloy steel containing, by 

weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 

10.5 percent or more of chromium, with 

or without other elements. The subject 

sheet and strip is a flat-rolled product in 

coils that is greater than 9.5 mm in 

width and less than 4.75 mm in 

thickness, and that is annealed or 

otherwise heat treated and pickled or 

otherwise descaled. The subject sheet 

and strip may also be further processed 

(e.g., cold-rolled, polished, aluminized, 

coated, etc.) provided that it maintains 

the specific dimensions of sheet and 

strip following such processing. The 

merchandise subject to the order is 

currently classified in the Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States 

(‘‘HTS’’) at subheadings: 7219.13.00.31, 

7219.13.00.51, 7219.13.00.71, 

7219.13.00.81, 7219.14.00.30, 

7219.14.00.65, 7219.14.00.90, 

7219.32.00.05, 7219.32.00.20, 

7219.32.00.25, 7219.32.00.35, 

7219.32.00.36, 7219.32.00.38, 

7219.32.00.42, 7219.32.00.44, 

7219.33.00.05, 7219.33.00.20, 

7219.33.00.25, 7219.33.00.35, 

7219.33.00.36, 7219.33.00.38, 

7219.33.00.42, 7219.33.00.44, 

7219.34.00.05, 7219.34.00.20, 

7219.34.00.25, 7219.34.00.30, 

7219.34.00.35, 7219.35.00.05, 

7219.35.00.15, 7219.35.00.30, 

7219.35.00.35, 7219.90.00.10, 

7219.90.00.20, 7219.90.00.25, 

7219.90.00.60, 7219.90.00.80, 

7220.12.10.00, 7220.12.50.00, 

7220.20.10.10, 7220.20.10.15, 

7220.20.10.60, 7220.20.10.80, 

7220.20.60.05, 7220.20.60.10, 

7220.20.60.15, 7220.20.60.60, 

7220.20.60.80, 7220.20.70.05, 

7220.20.70.10, 7220.20.70.15, 

7220.20.70.60, 7220.20.70.80, 

7220.20.80.00, 7220.20.90.30, 

7220.20.90.60, 7220.90.00.10, 

7220.90.00.15, 7220.90.00.60, 

7220.90.00.80. 

Although the HTS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, the Department’s written 

description of the merchandise subject 

to the order is dispositive. Excluded 

from the scope of the order are the 

following: (1) Sheet and strip that is not 

annealed or otherwise heat treated and 

pickled or otherwise descaled; (2) sheet 

and strip that is cut to length, (3) plate 

(i.e., flat-rolled stainless steel products 

of a thickness of 4.75 mm or more), (4) 

flat wire (i.e., cold-rolled sections, with 

a prepared edge, rectangular in shape, of 

a width of not more than 9.5 mm, and 

(5) razor blade steel. Razor blade steel is 

a flat-rolled product of stainless steel, 

not further worked than cold-rolled 

(cold-reduced), in coils, of a width of 

not more than 23 mm and a thickness 

of 0.266 mm or less, containing, by 

weight, 12.5 to 14.5 percent chromium, 

and certified at the time of entry to be 

used in the manufacture of razor blades. 

See Chapter 72 of the HTS, ‘‘Additional 

U.S. Note’’ 1(d). Flapper valve steel is 

also excluded from the scope of the 

order. This product is defined as 

stainless steel strip in coils containing, 

by weight, between 0.37 and 0.43 

percent carbon, between 1.15 and 1.35 

percent molybdenum, and between 0.20 

and 0.80 percent manganese. This steel 

also contains, by weight, phosphorus of 

0.025 percent or less, silicon of between 

0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of 

0.020 percent or less. The product is 

manufactured by means of vacuum arc 

remelting, with inclusion controls for 

sulphide of no more than 0.04 percent 

and for oxide of no more than 0.05 

percent. Flapper valve steel has a tensile 

strength of between 210 and 300 ksi, 

yield strength of between 170 and 270 

ksi, plus or minus 8 ksi, and a hardness 

(Hv) of between 460 and 590. Flapper 

valve steel is most commonly used to 

produce specialty flapper valves in 

compressors. Also excluded is a product 

referred to as suspension foil, a 

specialty steel product used in the 

manufacture of suspension assemblies 

for computer disk drives. Suspension 

foil is described as 302/304 grade or 202 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
81216 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Notices 

2 ‘‘Arnokrome III’’ is a trademark of the Arnold 

Engineering Company. 

3 ‘‘Gilphy 36’’ is a trademark of Imphy, S.A. 

4 ‘‘Durphynox 17’’ is a trademark of Imphy, S.A. 

5This list of uses is illustrative and provided for 

descriptive purposes only. 

6 ‘‘GIN4 Mo,’’ ‘‘GIN5’’ and ‘‘GIN6’’ are the 

proprietary grades of Hitachi Metals America, Ltd. 

grade stainless steel of a thickness 

between 14 and 127 microns, with a 

thickness tolerance of plus-or-minus 

2.01microns, and surface glossiness of 

200 to 700 percent Gs. Suspension foil 

must be supplied in coil widths of not 

more than 407 mm, and with a mass of 

225 kg or less. Roll marks may only be 

visible on one side, with no scratches of 

measurable depth. The material must 

exhibit residual stresses of 2 mm 

maximum deflection, and flatness of 1.6 

mm over 685 mm length. Certain 

stainless steel foil for automotive 

catalytic converters is also excluded 

from the scope of the order. This 

stainless steel strip in coils is a specialty 

foil with a thickness of between 20 and 

110 microns used to produce a metallic 

substrate with a honeycomb structure 

for use in automotive catalytic 

converters. The steel contains, by 

weight, carbon of no more than 0.030 

percent, silicon of no more than 1.0 

percent, manganese of no more than 1.0 

percent, chromium of between 19 and 

22 percent, aluminum of no less than 

5.0 percent, phosphorus of no more than 

0.045 percent, sulfur of no more than 

0.03 percent, lanthanum of less than 

0.002 or greater than 0.05 percent, and 

total rare earth elements of more than 

0.06 percent, with the balance iron. 

Permanent magnet iron-chromiumcobalt alloy stainless strip is also 

excluded from the scope of the order. 

This ductile stainless steel strip 

contains, by weight, 26 to 30 percent 

chromium, and 7 to 10 percent cobalt, 

with the remainder of iron, in widths 

228.6 mm or less, and a thickness 

between 0.127 and 1.270 mm. It exhibits 

magnetic remanence between 9,000 and 

12,000 gauss, and a coercivity of 

between 50 and 300 oersteds. This 

product is most commonly used in 

electronic sensors and is currently 

available under proprietary trade names 

such as ‘‘Arnokrome III.’’ 2

Certain electrical resistance alloy steel 

is also excluded from the scope of the 

order. This product is defined as a nonmagnetic stainless steel manufactured to 

American Society of Testing and 

Materials (ASTM) specification B344 

and containing, by weight, 36 percent 

nickel, 18 percent chromium, and 46 

percent iron, and is most notable for its 

resistance to high temperature 

corrosion. It has a melting point of 1390 

degrees Celsius and displays a creep 

rupture limit of 4 kilograms per square 

millimeter at 1000 degrees Celsius. This 

steel is most commonly used in the 

production of heating ribbons for circuit 

breakers and industrial furnaces, and in 

rheostats for railway locomotives. The 

product is currently available under 

proprietary trade names such as ‘‘Gilphy 

36’’.3

Certain martensitic precipitationhardenable stainless steel is also 

excluded from the scope of the order. 

This high-strength, ductile stainless 

steel product is designated under the 

Unified Numbering System (UNS) as 

S45500-grade steel, and contains, by 

weight, 11 to 13 percent chromium, and 

7 to 10 percent nickel. Carbon, 

manganese, silicon and molybdenum 

each comprise, by weight, 0.05 percent 

or less, with phosphorus and sulfur 

each comprising, by weight, 0.03 

percent or less. This steel has copper, 

niobium, and titanium added to achieve 

aging, and will exhibit yield strengths as 

high as 1700 Mpa and ultimate tensile 

strengths as high as 1750 Mpa after 

aging, with elongation percentages of 3 

percent or less in 50 mm. It is generally 

provided in thicknesses between 0.635 

and 0.787 mm, and in widths of 25.4 

mm. This product is most commonly 

used in the manufacture of television 

tubes and is currently available under 

proprietary trade names such as 

‘‘Durphynox 17’’.4

Finally, three specialty stainless steels 

typically used in certain industrial 

blades and surgical and medical 

instruments are also excluded from the 

scope of the order. These include 

stainless steel strip in coils used in the 

production of textile cutting tools (e.g., 

carpet knives).5 This steel is similar to 

AISI grade 420 but containing, by 

weight, 0.5 to 0.7 percent of 

molybdenum. The steel also contains, 

by weight, carbon of between 1.0 and 

1.1 percent, sulfur of 0.020 percent or 

less, and includes between 0.20 and 

0.30 percent copper and between 0.20 

and 0.50 percent cobalt. This steel is 

sold under proprietary names such as 

‘‘GIN4 Mo.’’ The second excluded 

stainless steel strip in coils is similar to 

AISI 420–J2 and contains, by weight, 

carbon of between 0.62 and 0.70 

percent, silicon of between 0.20 and 

0.50 percent, manganese of between 

0.45 and 0.80 percent, phosphorus of no 

more than 0.025 percent and sulfur of 

no more than 0.020 percent. This steel 

has a carbide density on average of 100 

carbide particles per 100 square 

microns. An example of this product is 

‘‘GIN5’’ steel. The third specialty steel 

has a chemical composition similar to 

AISI 420 F, with carbon of between 0.37 

and 0.43 percent, molybdenum of 

between 1.15 and 1.35 percent, but 

lower manganese of between 0.20 and 

0.80 percent, phosphorus of no more 

than 0.025 percent, silicon of between 

0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of no 

more than 0.020 percent. This product 

is supplied with a hardness of more 

than Hv 500 guaranteed after customer 

processing, and is supplied as, for 

example, ‘‘GIN6.’’ 6 Also excluded from 

the order is a permanent magnet ironchromium-cobalt stainless steel strip 

containing, by weight, 13 percent 

chromium, 6 percent cobalt, 71 percent 

iron, 6 percent nickel and 4 percent 

molybdenum. The product is supplied 

in widths up to 1.27 cm (12.7 mm), 

inclusive, with a thickness between 45 

and 75 microns, inclusive. This product 

exhibits magnetic remanence between 

400 and 780 nWb, and coercivity of 

between 60 and 100 oersteds. This 

product is currently supplied under the 

trade name ‘‘SemiVac 90.’’ 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in this sunset review 

are addressed in the ‘‘Issues and 

Decision Memorandum for the 

Preliminary Results of the Full FiveYear (‘‘Sunset’’) Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order on Stainless 

Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Italy’’ 

from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 

Secretary for Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Operations, to 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, Deputy Assistant 

Secretary for Import Administration 

(‘‘Decision Memorandum’’), which is 

hereby adopted by, and issued 

concurrently with, this notice. The 

issues discussed in the Decision 

Memorandum are the likelihood of 

continuation or recurrence of dumping 

and the magnitude of the margins likely 

to prevail if the order is revoked. Parties 

can find a complete discussion of all 

issues raised in this review and the 

corresponding recommendations in this 

public memorandum which is on file in 

the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of 

the main Department building. In 

addition, a complete version of the 

Decision Memorandum can be accessed 

directly on the Web at http:// 

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

electronic version of the Decision 

Memorandum are identical in content. 

Preliminary Results of Review 

We preliminarily determine that 

revocation of the antidumping duty 

order on SSSS in coils from Italy would 

be likely to lead to continuation or 

recurrence of dumping at the following 

weighted-average percentage margins: 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Notices 81217 

1On May 11, 2007, the Department received a 

scope inquiry request from U&A Belgium regarding 

whether the scope of the orders on SSPC from 

Belgium excludes stainless steel products with an 

actual thickness less than 4.75mm, regardless of its 

nominal thickness. The Department conducted a 

scope inquiry applicable to all countries subject to 

the SSPC antidumping and CVD orders. In the 

Department’s scope ruling, dated December 3, 2008, 

the Department determined that SSPC with a 

nominal thickness of 4.75mm, but with an actual 

thickness less than 4.75mm, and within the 

dimensional tolerances for this thickness of plate, 

is included in the scope of the antidumping duty 

orders on SSPC from Belgium, Italy, South Africa, 

the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan and CVD orders 

on SSPC from Belgium and South Africa. See 

Memorandum from Melissa G. Skinner to Stephen 

J. Claeys, entitled ‘‘Stainless Steel Plate in Coils 

from Belgium: Final Scope Ruling,’’ dated December 

3, 2008. 

Manufacturers/Exporters/Producers 

Weighted-Average 

margin 

(percent) 

TKAST ................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 .11 

All Others ............................................................................................................................................................................... 2 .11 

Any interested party may request a 

hearing within 30 days of publication of 

this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.310(c). Consistent with 19 CFR 

351.310(d)(1), any hearing, if requested, 

will generally be held two days after the 

scheduled date for submission of 

rebuttal briefs, in accordance with 19 

CFR 351.309(d). Interested parties may 

submit case briefs no later than 50 days 

after the date of publication of these 

preliminary results of review, in 

accordance with 19 CFR 

351.309(c)(1)(i). Rebuttal briefs, which 

must be limited to issues raised in the 

case briefs, may be filed not later than 

five days after the time limit for filing 

the case brief, unless the Secretary alters 

this time limit. 19 CFR 351.309(d). The 

Department will issue a notice of final 

results of this sunset review, which will 

include the results of its analysis of 

issues raised in any such briefs, no later 

than April 28, 2011. 

This five-year (‘‘sunset’’) review and 

notice are in accordance with sections 

751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: December 20, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32476 Filed 12–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–423–809] 

Stainless Steel Plate in Coils From 

Belgium: Preliminary Results of Full 

Sunset Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On June 2, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce (‘‘the 

Department’’) initiated the second 

sunset review of the countervailing duty 

(‘‘CVD’’) order on certain stainless steel 

plate in coils from Belgium (‘‘subject 

merchandise’’) pursuant to section 

751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (‘‘the Act’’). On the basis of a 

notice of intent to participate and an 

adequate substantive response filed on 

behalf of the domestic interested parties 

and adequate substantive responses 

from ArcelorMittal Stainless Belgium 

N.V. (‘‘AMS’’) and the Government of 

Belgium (‘‘GOB’’), the Department 

determined to conduct a full sunset 

review of the CVD order pursuant to 

section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.218(e)(2). As a result of our 

analysis, the Department preliminarily 

finds that revocation of the CVD order 

would likely lead to continuation or 

recurrence of a countervailable subsidy. 

DATES: Effective Date: December 27, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alexander Montoro or David 

Neubacher, AD/CVD Operations, Office 

1, Import Administration, U.S. 

Department of Commerce, 14th Street 

and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–0238 or (202) 482–5823. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On June 2, 2010, the Department 

initiated the second sunset review of the 

CVD order on stainless steel plate in 

coils (‘‘SSPC’’) from Belgium in 

accordance with section 751(c) of the 

Act. See Initiation of Five-Year 

(‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 75 FR 30777 (June 2, 

2010). 

Within the deadline specified in 19 

CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i), the Department 

received notices of intent to participate 

on behalf of Allegheny Ludlum 

Corporation and the United Steel, Paper 

and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, 

Energy, Allied Industrial and Service 

Workers International Union 

(collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’). The 

submitters claimed interested party 

status under sections 771(9)(C) and (D) 

of the Act, as a manufacturer of a 

domestic like product and as a certified 

union representing workers in the 

domestic industry producing certain 

SSPC, respectively. The Department 

received a substantive response from 

Petitioners within the deadline 

specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). 

The Department also received 

substantive responses in a timely 

manner from the following respondent 

interested parties: AMS and the GOB 

(collectively, ‘‘Respondents’’). Timely 

rebuttal comments were received from 

Petitioners and Respondents on July 9, 

2010. On July 22, 2010, after analyzing 

the submissions and rebuttals from 

interested parties and finding the 

substantive responses adequate, the 

Department determined to conduct a 

full sunset review. See Memorandum 

from Yasmin Nair, International Trade 

Compliance Analyst, to Susan H. 

Kuhbach, Director, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 1, entitled ‘‘Adequacy 

Determination in Countervailing Duty 

Sunset Review of Certain Stainless Steel 

Plate in Coils from Belgium,’’ dated July 

22, 2010. 

On September 24, 2010, the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register an extension of the time limit 

for the completion of the preliminary 

results of this sunset review until no 

later than December 20, 2010, as 

permitted by section 751(c)(5)(B) of the 

Act. See Stainless Steel Plate in Coils 

from Belgium: Extension of Time Limits 

for Preliminary and Final Results of Full 

Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review of 

Countervailing Duty Order, 75 FR 58351 

(September 24, 2010). 

On November 23, 2010, the GOB, at 

the request of the Department, placed on 

the record a verification report from the 

CVD investigation of SSPC from 

Belgium, which the GOB cited in its 

substantive response. See GOB’s 

November 23, 2010, submission. 

Scope of the Order 

The products covered by the order are 

imports of certain stainless steel plate in 

coils. Stainless steel is an alloy steel 

containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or 

less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more 

of chromium, with or without other 

elements. The subject plate products are 

flat-rolled products, 254 mm or over in 

width and 4.75 mm1 or more in 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES