Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 61 / Friday, March 30, 2007 / Notices 15101 

Continuation of Suspension of 

Liquidation 

In accordance with section 

735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will instruct 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(‘‘CBP’’) to continue to suspend 

liquidation of all entries of subject 

merchandise from the PRC. We will also 

instruct CBP to require cash deposits or 

the posting of a bond equal to the 

estimated amount by which the normal 

value exceeds the U.S. price as 

indicated in the chart above. These 

instructions suspending liquidation will 

remain in effect until further notice. 

This determination is issued and 

published pursuant to sections 735(d) 

and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 

351.224(e). 

Dated: March 22, 2007. 

David M. Spooner, 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E7–5927 Filed 3–29–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–549–813] 

Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand: 

Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 30, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Myrna Lobo, Office of AD/CVD 

Operations 6, Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, 

Washington DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–2371. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On August 30, 2006, the Department 

of Commerce (the Department) 

published in the Federal Register the 

notice of initiation of the administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on canned pineapple fruit from 

Thailand for Vita Food Factory (1989) 

Ltd. (Vita). See Initiation of 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Administrative Reviews and Requests 

for Revocation in Part, 71 FR 51573 

(August 30, 2006). On October 10, 2006 

the Department initiated a review for 

Tropical Food Industries Co. Ltd. 

(Trofco). See Initiation of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review: Canned 

Pineapple Fruit from Thailand, 71 FR 

59430 (October 10, 2006). The period of 

review for both companies is July 1, 

2005 through June 30, 2006. 

Extension of Time Limits for 

Preliminary Results 

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

of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 

section 351.213(h)(1) of the 

Department’s regulations require the 

Department to issue the preliminary 

results of a review within 245 days after 

the last day of the anniversary month of 

the order or suspension agreement for 

which the administrative review was 

requested, and final results of the 

review within 120 days after the date on 

which the notice of the preliminary 

results is published in the Federal 

Register. However, if the Department 

determines that it is not practicable to 

complete the review within the 

aforementioned specified time limits, 

section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 

section 351.213(h)(2) of the 

Department’s regulations allow the 

Department to extend the 245–day 

period to 365 days and to extend the 

120–day period to 180 days. 

Due to the initiation of a cost 

investigation for Trofco, together with 

the need for further analysis of Vita’s 

questionnaire response, the Department 

finds that it is not practicable to 

complete the preliminary results of this 

review within the original time limit. 

Therefore, the Department is extending 

the deadline for completion of the 

preliminary results of this 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on canned 

pineapple fruit from Thailand by 120 

days from April 2, 2007 until no later 

than July 31, 2007. 

This notice is issued and published 

pursuant to sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 

777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: March 26, 2007. 

Stephen J. Claeys, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E7–5929 Filed 3–29–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–892] 

Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from the 

People’s Republic of China: Notice of 

Amended Final Determination in 

Accordance With Court Decision 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 30, 2007. 

SUMMARY: On December 8, 2006, the 

United States Court of International 

Trade (‘‘CIT’’) sustained the final 

remand determination made by the 

Department of Commerce (‘‘the 

Department’’) pursuant to the CIT’s 

remand of the final determination of the 

less–than-fair–value investigation of 

Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 (‘‘CVP 23’’) 

from the People’s Republic of China. 

See Goldlink Industries Co., Ltd., Trust 

Chem Co., Ltd., Tianjin Hanchem 

International Trading Co., Ltd. v. United 

States, and Nation Ford Chemical 

Company and Sun Chemical 

Corporation, and Clariant Corporation, 

Consol. Ct. 05–00060 (CIT Dec. 8, 2006). 

As there is now a final and conclusive 

court decision in this case, the 

Department is amending the final 

determination of this investigation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Charles Riggle at (202) 482–0650, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 8, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

November 17, 2004, the Department 

published in the Federal Register its 

final determination in the above–

referenced investigation covering the 

period of April 1, 2003, through 

September 30, 2003. See Notice of Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 

from the People’s Republic of China, 69 

FR 67304 (November 17, 2004) (‘‘Final 

Determination’’). In the Final 

Determination, the Department (1) 

Applied total adverse facts available 

(‘‘AFA’’) to Tianjin Hanchem 

International Trading Co., Ltd. 

(‘‘Hanchem’’); (2) determined that the 

subsidies received by Pidilite Industries, 

Ltd. (‘‘Pidilite’’), an Indian producer of 

CVP 23, did not distort Pidilite’s 

financial ratios; (3) valued benzene 

sulfonyl chloride using HTS number 

2904.10.10; (4) valued calcium chloride 

based on 70–percent chemical 

concentration; (5) declined to value 

steam because the only steam values on 

the record were based on U.S. price 

quotes; and (6) did not include terminal 

charges and brokerage fees in movement 

costs. In Goldlink Industries Co., Ltd., 

Trust Chem Co., Ltd., Tianjin Hanchem 

International Trading Co., Ltd. v. United 

States, 431 F. Supp. 2d 1323 (CIT May 

4, 2006), the CIT remanded the 

underlying Final Determination to the 

Department: to (1) re–examine its 

determination to apply total AFA to 

Hanchem; (2) further explain its 

determination that the subsidies Pidilite 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
15102 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 61 / Friday, March 30, 2007 / Notices 

received did not distort Pidilite’s 

financial ratios; (3) re–examine the 

surrogate values for benzene sulfonyl 

chloride, calcium chloride and steam; 

(4) either include terminal charges and 

brokerage fees in movement costs, or 

precisely and reasonably explain its 

decision not to include such costs; and 

(5) re–open the record and allow parties 

to submit new information as necessary. 

On October 16, 2006, the Department 

issued to the CIT its final results of 

redetermination pursuant to remand. In 

the remand redetermination the 

Department: (1) Applied partial AFA to 

Hanchem; (2) explained how the 

subsidies Pidilite received did not 

distort Pidilite’s financial ratios; (3) re–

calculated the surrogate values for 

benzene sulfonyl chloride, calcium 

chloride and steam; (4) explained why 

it is not appropriate to include terminal 

charges and brokerage fees in movement 

costs; and (5) calculated a surrogate 

value for steam. Thus, the Department 

recalculated the antidumping duty rates 

applicable to Goldlink Industries Co., 

Ltd., Trust Chem Co., Ltd., Hanchem, 

Nantong Haidi Chemicals Co., Ltd., and 

the PRC–wide entity. On December 8, 

2006, the CIT sustained the 

Department’s final redetermination. See 

Goldlink Industries Co., Ltd., Trust 

Chem Co., Ltd., Tianjin Hanchem 

International Trading Co., Ltd. v. United 

States, and Nation Ford Chemical 

Company and Sun Chemical 

Corporation, and Clariant Corporation, 

Ct. No. 05–00060, Slip Op. 06–65 (CIT 

December 8, 2006). 

Consistent with the decision of the 

United States Court of Appeals for the 

Federal Circuit in Timken Company v. 

United States and China National 

Machinery and Equipment Import and 

Export Corporation, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. 

Cir. 1990), on January 4, 2007, the 

Department published a notice 

announcing that the CIT’s final 

judgement was not in harmony with the 

Department’s Final Determination. No 

party appealed the CIT’s decision. 

Therefore, there is now a final and 

conclusive court decision in this case. 

Amended Final Determination 

As the litigation in this case has 

concluded, the Department is amending 

the Final Determination. The revised 

dumping margins are as follows: 

Exporter/Manufacturer Margin 

(percent) 

Goldlink Industries Co., Ltd. ......... 12.46 

Trust Chem Co., Ltd. .................... 39.29 

Tianjin Hanchem International 

Trading Co., Ltd. ....................... 85.41 

Nantong Haidi Chemicals Co., 

Ltd. ............................................ 57.07 

Exporter/Manufacturer Margin 

(percent) 

PRC–Wide Rate ........................... 241.32 

This notice is issued and published in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 

777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended. 

Dated: March 22, 2007. 

David M. Spooner, 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E7–5859 Filed 3–29–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

A–122–840 

Notice of Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Changed Circumstances Review: 

Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire 

Rod from Canada 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the ‘‘Department’’) has determined that 

(1) Ivaco Rolling Mills 2004 L.P. is the 

successor–in-interest to Ivaco Rolling 

Mills L.P.; and (2) Sivaco Ontario, a 

division of Sivaco Wire Group 2004 

L.P., is the successor–in-interest to Ivaco 

Inc. As a result, Ivaco Rolling Mills 2004 

L.P., and Sivaco Ontario, a division of 

Sivaco Wire Group 2004 L.P., 

(collectively ‘‘Ivaco’’) should receive the 

same antidumping duty treatment with 

respect to carbon and certain alloy steel 

wire rod from Canada as Ivaco Rolling 

Mills L.P. and Ivaco Inc. as of the date 

of publication of this notice in the 

Federal Register. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 30, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Damian Felton or Brandon Farlander, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone (202) 482–0133 and (202) 

482–0182, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

In its January 12, 2006 response to 

Section A of the Department’s 

questionnaire in the 3rd administrative 

review, Ivaco notified the Department 

that the assets of Ivaco, Inc. and all of 

its divisions (e.g., Sivaco Ontario, and 

Sivaco Quebec) had been purchased on 

December 1, 2004. As a result, the 

Department self–initiated a changed 

circumstances review of the 

antidumping duty order on carbon and 

certain alloy steel wire rod from Canada. 

See Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review and Notice 

of Initiation of Changed Circumstances 

Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel 

Wire Rod from Canada, 71 FR 64921 

(November 6, 2006). On June 1, 2006, 

and October 27, 2006, the Department 

issued Ivaco supplemental 

questionnaires requesting further details 

on Ivaco’s successor–in-interest claims. 

The company’s responses were received 

by the Department on July 6, 2006, and 

November 20, 2006. 

On December 14, 2006, the 

Department published the preliminary 

results of this changed circumstances 

review and preliminarily determined 

that (1) Ivaco Rolling Mills 2004 L.P. is 

the successor–in-interest to Ivaco 

Rolling Mills L.P.; and (2) Sivaco 

Ontario, a division of Sivaco Wire 

Group 2004 L.P., is the successor–ininterest to Ivaco Inc. See Preliminary 

Results of Antidumping Duty Changed 

Circumstances Review: Carbon and 

Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from 

Canada, 71 FR 75229 (December 14, 

2006) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’). As a 

result, Ivaco Rolling Mills 2004 L.P., 

and Sivaco Ontario, a division of Sivaco 

Wire Group 2004 L.P., should receive 

the same antidumping duty treatment 

with respect to carbon and certain alloy 

steel wire rod from Canada as Ivaco 

Rolling Mills L.P. and Ivaco Inc. In the 

Preliminary Results, we stated that 

interested parties could request a 

hearing or submit case briefs and/or 

written comments to the Department no 

later than 30 days after publication of 

the Preliminary Results notice in the 

Federal Register, and submit rebuttal 

briefs, limited to the issues raised in the 

case briefs, five days subsequent to the 

due date of the case briefs. See 

Preliminary Results, 71 FR at 75231. We 

did not receive any hearing requests or 

comments on the Preliminary Results. 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise subject to this order 

is certain hot–rolled products of carbon 

steel and alloy steel, in coils, of 

approximately round cross section, 5.00 

mm or more, but less than 19.00 mm, in 

solid cross–sectional diameter. 

Specifically excluded are steel 

products possessing the above–noted 

physical characteristics and meeting the 

HTSUS definitions for (a) stainless steel; 

(b) tool steel; (c) high nickel steel; (d) 

ball bearing steel; and (e) concrete 

reinforcing bars and rods. Also excluded 

are (f) free machining steel products 

(i.e., products that contain by weight 

one or more of the following elements: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES