Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 192 / Wednesday, October 4, 2006 / Notices 58579 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted on or before 5 p.m., December 

4, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments 

to Diana Hynek, Departmental 

Paperwork Clearance Officer, 

Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 

14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230 (or e-mail 

dhynek@doc.gov). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Obie 

G. Whichard, Chief, International 

Investment Division, (BE–50), Bureau of 

Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, Washington, DC 20230; 

phone (202) 606–9890 (or e-mail 

obie.whichard@bea.gov). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

The Transactions of U.S. Affiliates, 

Except a U.S. Banking Affiliate, with 

Foreign Parent (Form BE–605) and 

Transactions of U.S. Banking Affiliate 

with Foreign Parent (Form BE–605 

Bank) obtain quarterly sample data on 

transactions and positions between 

foreign-owned U.S. business enterprises 

and their ‘‘affiliated foreign groups’’

(i.e., their foreign parents and foreign 

affiliates of their foreign parents). The 

data collected are used in the 

preparation of the U.S. international 

transactions accounts, national income 

and product accounts, and input-output 

accounts. The data are needed to 

measure the amount of foreign direct 

investment in the United States, 

monitor changes in such investment, 

assess its impact on the U.S. and foreign 

economies and, based upon this 

assessment, make informed policy 

decisions regarding foreign direct 

investment in the United States. 

BEA proposes the following changes 

to the survey to reduce respondent 

burden: (1) Redesign Form BE–605 to 

incorporate all instructions into the 

form, placing them, for the most part, on 

the pages facing the items to be 

reported; convert the most complicated 

instructions into separate line item 

questions; and, to further clarify the 

reporting requirements, include 

illustrative diagrams adjacent to 

questions pertaining to the ownership 

structure of the U.S. business enterprise 

and its affiliated foreign groups. (2) 

Delete questions from Form BE–605 and 

BE–605 Bank requesting information on 

receipts and payments for services 

transactions between the U.S. business 

enterprise and its affiliated foreign 

groups. BEA will propose to include 

these questions on its surveys covering 

trade in services, beginning with the 

first quarter of calendar year 2007. 

II. Method of Collection 

Forms BE–605 and BE–605 Bank are 

quarterly reports that must be filed 

within 30 days after the end of each 

quarter (45 days after the final quarter 

of the respondent’s fiscal year) by every 

U.S. business enterprise that is owned 

10 percent or more by a foreign investor 

and that has total assets, sales or gross 

operating revenues, or net income 

(positive or negative) of over $30 

million. Potential respondents are those 

U.S. business enterprises that were 

required to report in the BE–12, 

Benchmark Survey of Foreign Direct 

Investment in the United States—2002, 

along with those U.S. business 

enterprises that subsequently entered 

the direct investment universe. The data 

collected are sample data covering 

transactions and positions between 

foreign-owned U.S. business enterprises 

and their affiliated foreign groups. 

Universe estimates are developed from 

the reported sample data. 

III. Data 

OMB Number: 0608–0009. 

Form Number: BE–605/BE–605 Bank. 

Type of Review: Regular submission. 

Affected Public: Businesses or other 

for-profit organizations. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

3,950 per quarter; 15,800 annually. 

Estimated Time Per Response: 1 hour. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 15,800. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost: 

$632,000 (based on an estimated 

reporting burden of 15,800 hours and an 

estimated hourly cost of $40). 

IV. Request for Comments 

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden 

(including hours and cost) of the 

proposed collection of information; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on respondents, including through the 

use of automated collection techniques 

or other forms of information 

technology. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized and/or 

included in the request for OMB 

approval of this information collection; 

they also will become a matter of public 

record. 

Dated: September 28, 2006. 

Madeleine Clayton, 

Management Analyst, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. E6–16327 Filed 10–3–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

A–570–863 

Honey from the People’s Republic of 

China: Rescission and Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty New Shipper 

Reviews 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On June 7, 2006, the U.S. 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published preliminary 

results in the new shipper reviews of 

the antidumping order on honey from 

the People’s Republic of China (PRC). 

Honey from the People’s Republic of 

China: Intent to Rescind and 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty New Shipper Reviews, 71 FR 32923 

(June 7, 2006) (NSR7 Preliminary 

Results). These reviews cover two 

exporters, Shanghai Taiside Trading 

Co., Ltd. (Taiside) and Wuhan Shino–

Food Trade Co., Ltd. (Shino–Food). The 

period of review (POR) is December 1, 

2004, through May 31, 2005. While we 

have analyzed the record and comments 

from interested parties, we have made 

no changes to the preliminary results 

based on these comments. However, we 

have made a slight change to the 

calculation of Taiside’s margin based on 

the discovery of a clerical error. For 

these final results, therefore, we have 

determined that the new shipper review 

for Shino–Food should be rescinded 

because the sale made by Shino–Food 

was not bona fide. We have also 

determined that the sale made by 

Taiside is bona fide and that the sale has 

been made below normal value. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 4, 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kristina Boughton or Bobby Wong, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 9, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–8173 or (202) 482–

0409, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On June 7, 2006, the Department 

published the preliminary results of 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
58580 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 192 / Wednesday, October 4, 2006 / Notices 

1On July 28, 2006, we received a case brief from 

Shino-Food, which we subsequently rejected as 

containing new information. On August 4, 2006, 

Shino-Food re-filed its brief, per the Department’s 

instructions, without the new information. 

2On August 18, 2006, petitioners filed a letter 

requesting that the Department implement the new 

bonding provisions and suspend the bonding 

privileges for Taiside and Shino-Food in 

accordance with the Pension Protection Act. 

these reviews. NSR7 Preliminary 

Results. Since the NSR7 Preliminary 

Results the following events have 

occurred: 

On June 22, 2006, we extended the 

time limit for submitting further 

information to value the factors of 

production until July 18, 2006. On July 

12, 2006, we received a surrogate value 

submission from Taiside and Shino–

Food. On July 18, 2006, we received a 

rebuttal surrogate value submission 

from the American Honey Producers 

Association and the Sioux Honey 

Association (collectively, petitioners). 

We invited parties to comment on the 

NSR7 Preliminary Results and received 

one case brief each from Shino–Food 

and Taiside, on August 4, 2006,1 and 

July 28, 2006, respectively. We received 

a rebuttal brief from petitioners on 

August 3, 2006. None of the parties 

requested a public hearing. On August 

18, 2006, the Department implemented 

the temporary suspension of the new 

shipper bonding provision in these 

reviews, in accordance with the Pension 

Protection Act of 2006, Pub. L. No. 109–

280, § 1632, 120 Stat. 780 (2006), which 

was signed into law on August 17, 

2006.2 The legislation suspended the 

ability of a U.S. importer to satisfy the 

antidumping duty deposit requirements 

by posting a bond or other security 

deposit in lieu of a cash deposit with 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(CBP) during the period April 1, 2006, 

to June 30, 2009. 

On August 28, 2006, the Department 

extended the deadline for the final 

results to September 27, 2006. Honey 

from the People’s Republic of China: 

Notice of Extension of Time Limit for 

Final Results of 2004/2005 New Shipper 

Review, 71 FR 50885 (August 28, 2006). 

Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order 

The products covered by this order 

are natural honey, artificial honey 

containing more than 50 percent natural 

honey by weight, preparations of natural 

honey containing more than 50 percent 

natural honey by weight, and flavored 

honey. The subject merchandise 

includes all grades and colors of honey 

whether in liquid, creamed, comb, cut 

comb, or chunk form, and whether 

packaged for retail or in bulk form. 

The merchandise subject to this order 

is currently classifiable under 

subheadings 0409.00.00, 1702.90.90, 

and 2106.90.99 of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). 

Although the HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, the Department’s written 

description of the merchandise under 

order is dispositive. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the briefs are 

addressed in the ‘‘Memorandum to the 

Assistant Secretary: Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Results of 

the 2004–2005 New Shipper Reviews of 

Honey from the People’s Republic of 

China,’’ dated September 27, 2006 

(Issues & Decision Memorandum), 

which is hereby adopted by this notice. 

A list of the issues raised, all of which 

are in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum, is attached to this notice 

as Appendix I. Parties can find a 

complete discussion of all issues raised 

in the briefs and the corresponding 

recommendations in this public 

memorandum which is on file in the 

Central Records Unit (CRU), room B–

099 of the Department of Commerce 

building. In addition, a complete 

version of the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum can be accessed directly 

on the Web at http://www.trade.gov/ia/ 

. The paper copy and electronic version 

of the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum are identical in content. 

New Shipper Status 

For these final results, no party 

contested the bona fides of Taiside’s 

sale, therefore we continue to find, as in 

the NSR7 Preliminary Results, that 

Taiside has met the requirements to 

qualify as a new shipper during the POR 

and that Taiside’s sale of honey to the 

United States is an appropriate 

transaction for a new shipper review. 

Regarding Shino–Food, as further 

discussed in the Issues & Decision 

Memorandum at Comments 1–1c, we 

are continuing to find that Shino–Food’s 

sale in question was not a bona fide sale 

and that Shino–Food did not meet the 

requirements to qualify for a new 

shipper review during the POR. See 

NSR7 Preliminary Results and 

‘‘Rescission of New Shipper Review,’’

below. 

Rescission of New Shipper Review 

As discussed in the Issues & Decision 

Memorandum at Comments 1–1c, 

because the Department found Shino–

Food’s single POR sale to be non–bona 

fide, it is not subject to review. 

Therefore, the Department is rescinding 

this review because Shino–Food had no 

reviewable sales during the POR. See 

Tianjin Tiancheng Pharmaceutical Co., 

Ltd. v. United States, 366 F. Supp. 2d 

1246, 1249 (CIT 2005) (‘‘{P}ursuant to 

the rulings of the Court, Commerce may 

exclude sales from the export price 

calculation where it finds that they are 

not bona fide’’). 

Changes since the NSR7 Preliminary 

Results 

We have not made any changes to the 

margin–specific calculations for Taiside 

based on comments received from 

interested parties. However, for these 

final results, instead of rounding 

Taiside’s gross unit price to two digits 

after the decimal point, as we did in the 

preliminary results, we used a more 

exact gross unit price from Taiside’s 

reported Section C database, which 

included four digits after the decimal 

point. This affected the margin 

calculation for Taiside. For a discussion 

of this change, please see 

‘‘Memorandum to the File: Seventh 

Antidumping Duty New Shipper 

Review of the Antidumping Duty Order 

on Honey from the People’s Republic of 

China for Shanghai Taiside Trading Co., 

Ltd. (Taiside),’’ dated September 27, 

2006 (Taiside Analysis Memo). 

Final Results of Review 

We determine that the following 

antidumping duty margin exists: 

Exporter Margin 

(percent) 

Shanghai Taiside Trading Co., 

Ltd. .......................................... 39.63% 

For details on the calculation of the 

antidumping duty weighted–average 

margin for Taiside, see Taiside Analysis 

Memo. A public version of this 

memorandum is on file in the CRU. 

Assessment Rates 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b), the 

Department will determine, and CBP 

shall assess, antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries. The Department 

will issue appropriate assessment 

instructions directly to CBP within 15 

days of publication of these final results 

of review. For assessment purposes, 

where possible, we calculated importer–

specific assessment rates for honey from 

the PRC on a per–unit basis. 

Specifically, we divided the total 

dumping margins (calculated as the 

difference between normal value and 

export price or constructed export price) 

for each importer by the total quantity 

of subject merchandise sold to that 

importer during the POR to calculate a 

per–unit assessment amount. We will 

direct CBP to levy importer–specific 

assessment rates based on the resulting 

per–unit (i.e., per–kilogram) rates by the 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 192 / Wednesday, October 4, 2006 / Notices 58581 

weight in kilograms of each entry of the 

subject merchandise during the POR. 

Cash Deposits 

The following cash–deposit 

requirement will be effective upon 

publication of these final results for 

shipments of the subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date of the final results, as 

provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 

For subject merchandise produced and 

exported by Taiside, we will establish a 

per–kilogram cash deposit rate that is 

equivalent to the company–specific cash 

deposit established in this review. With 

respect to these reviews, the Department 

will also notify CBP that a cash deposit 

of 212.39 percent ad valorem should be 

collected for any entries produced/ 

exported by Shino–Food. These deposit 

requirements shall remain in effect until 

publication of the final results of the 

next administrative review. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice also serves as the 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 

presumption that reimbursement of 

antidumping duties occurred and in the 

subsequent assessment of double 

antidumping duties. 

This notice also serves as the only 

reminder to parties subject to 

administrative protective order (APO) of 

their responsibility concerning the 

return/destruction or conversion to 

judicial protective order of proprietary 

information disclosed under APO in 

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

Failure to comply is a violation of the 

APO. 

These new shipper reviews and this 

notice are published in accordance with 

sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i)(1) of the 

Act. 

Dated: September 27, 2006. 

James C. Leonard, III 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I 

List of Issues 

Company–Specific Issues 

Wuhan Shino–Food-Related Issues 

Comment 1: Rescission of Shino–Food 

Comment 1a: Price & Quantity 

Comment 1b: Payment of Freight and 

Antidumping Duty Expenses 

Comment 1c: Other Indicia of Non–

Bona Fides Sale 

Shanghai Taiside–Related Issues 

Comment 2 Appropriate Surrogate 

Value for Bottles & Caps 

Comment 3 Appropriate Surrogate 

Value for Honey 

[FR Doc. 06–8486 Filed 10–3–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

A–580–839 

Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from 

Korea: Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review and Partial 

Rescission of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On May 31, 2006, the 

Department of Commerce published the 

preliminary results of the administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on certain polyester staple fiber from the 

Republic of Korea. We gave interested 

parties an opportunity to comment on 

the preliminary results. Based on our 

analysis of the comments received and 

an examination of our calculations, we 

have made certain changes for the final 

results. The final weighted–average 

dumping margin for Huvis Corporation 

is listed below in the ‘‘Final Results of 

the Review’’ section of this notice. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 4, 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Yasmin Bordas or Andrew McAllister, 

Office 1, AD/CVD Operations, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–3813 or (202) 482–

1174, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On May 31, 2006, the Department of 

Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) 

published Certain Polyester Staple Fiber 

from Korea: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review, Intent to Rescind, and Partial 

Rescission of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 71 FR 30867 

(May 31, 2006) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’) 

in the Federal Register. 

We invited parties to comment on the 

Preliminary Results. On June 30, 2006, 

Arteva Specialties S.a.r.l.; d/b/a KoSa; 

and Wellman, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘the 

petitioners’’); and the respondent, Huvis 

Corporation (‘‘Huvis’’), filed case briefs. 

On July 7, 2006, the petitioners and 

Huvis filed rebuttal briefs. On July 26, 

2006, consistent with 19 CFR 

351.301(b)(2) and 19 CFR 

351.104(a)(2)(ii)(A), we rejected the 

petitioners’ rebuttal brief because it 

contained untimely filed new 

information. On July 27, 2006, we 

received a revised rebuttal brief from the 

petitioners. 

Scope of the Order 

For the purposes of this order, the 

product covered is certain polyester 

staple fiber (‘‘PSF’’). PSF is defined as 

synthetic staple fibers, not carded, 

combed or otherwise processed for 

spinning, of polyesters measuring 3.3 

decitex (3 denier, inclusive) or more in 

diameter. This merchandise is cut to 

lengths varying from one inch (25 mm) 

to five inches (127 mm). The 

merchandise subject to this order may 

be coated, usually with a silicon or 

other finish, or not coated. PSF is 

generally used as stuffing in sleeping 

bags, mattresses, ski jackets, comforters, 

cushions, pillows, and furniture. 

Merchandise of less than 3.3 decitex 

(less than 3 denier) currently classifiable 

under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 

of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) at 

subheading 5503.20.00.25 is specifically 

excluded from this order. Also 

specifically excluded from this order are 

polyester staple fibers of 10 to 18 denier 

that are cut to lengths of 6 to 8 inches 

(fibers used in the manufacture of 

carpeting). In addition, low–melt PSF is 

excluded from this order. Low–melt PSF 

is defined as a bi–component fiber with 

an outer sheath that melts at a 

significantly lower temperature than its 

inner core. 

The merchandise subject to this order 

is currently classifiable in the HTSUS at 

subheadings 5503.20.00.45 and 

5503.20.00.65. Although the HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of the merchandise 

under the order is dispositive. 

Period of Review 

The period of review (‘‘POR’’) is May 

1, 2004, through April 30, 2005. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties to this review 

are addressed in the September 28, 

2006, Issues and Decision Memorandum 

for the Fifth Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review of Certain 

Polyester Staple Fiber from the Republic 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES