Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Notices 85587 

1See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products 

from Taiwan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review and Preliminary 

Determination of No Shipments; 2021–2022, 88 FR 

50836 (August 2, 2023) (Preliminary Results), and 

accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum 

(PDM). 

2The respondents are: (1) Yieh Phui Enterprise 

Co., Ltd. (YP); (2) Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co., 

Ltd. (Prosperity); (3) Sheng Yu Steel Co., Ltd. 

(SYSCO); (4) Synn Industrial Co., Ltd. (Synn); (5) 

China Steel Corporation (CSC); (6) Chung Hung 

Steel Corporation (CHSC); (7) Great Fortune Steel 

Co., Ltd. (Great Fortune); (8) Great Grandeul Steel 

Co., Ltd. (Great Grandeul); (9) Great Grandeul Steel 

Company Limited (Somoa) (also known as, Great 

Grandeul Steel Company Limited Somoa) (Great 

Grandeul Somoa); (10) Great Grandeul Steel 

Corporation (Great Grandeul Steel); and (11) 

Xxentria. See Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 87 FR 

54463 (September 6, 2022). 

3See Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co., Ltd. and 

Yieh Phui Enterprise Co., Ltd. v. United States, 

Consolidated Court No. 16–00138, Slip Op. 23–95 

(CIT 2023) (Prosperity V). 

4See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products 

from India, Italy, the People’s Republic of China, 

the Republic of Korea and Taiwan: Amended Final 

Affirmative Antidumping Determination for India 

and Taiwan, and Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 

48390 (July 25, 2016) (Order). 

5See Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from 

Taiwan: Notice of Third Amended Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value 

Pursuant to Court Decision and Partial Exclusion 

from Antidumping Duty Order, 88 FR 58245 

(August 25, 2023) (Third Amended Final 

Determination). 

6See Preliminary Results, 88 FR at 50836. 

7See Petitioners’ Letter, ‘‘Petitioners’ Case Brief,’’ 

dated September 1, 2023. 

8See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review: Certain CorrosionContinued 

the Secretary of Commerce by the ECRA 

and delegated by the President to the 

Secretary of Commerce. This authority 

is administered by the Bureau of 

Industry and Security through the 

Export Administration Regulations 

(EAR). 

BIS administers a system of export, reexport, and in-country transfer controls 

in accordance with the EAR. In doing 

so, BIS requires that parties wishing to 

engage in certain transactions apply for 

licenses, submit Encryption Review 

Requests, or submit notifications to BIS. 

BIS also reviews, upon request, 

specifications of various items and 

determines their proper classification 

under the EAR. 

II. Method of Collection 

Electronic. 

III. Data 

OMB Control Number: 0694–0088. 

Form Number(s): BIS–748P, BIS– 

748P–A, BIS–748P–B. 

Type of Review: Regular submission, 

revision of a current information 

collection. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

75,744. 

Estimated Time per Response: 29.4 

minutes. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 36,689. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost to the 

Public: 0. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary. 

Legal Authority: Section 1761(h) of 

the Export Control Reform Act (ECRA). 

IV. Request for Comments 

We are soliciting public comments to 

permit the Department/Bureau to: (a) 

Evaluate whether the proposed 

information collection is necessary for 

the proper functions of the Department, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the 

accuracy of our estimate of the time and 

cost burden for this proposed collection, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; (c) 

Evaluate ways to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and (d) Minimize the 

reporting burden on those who are to 

respond, including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. 

Comments that you submit in 

response to this notice are a matter of 

public record. We will include or 

summarize each comment in our request 

to OMB to approve this ICR. Before 

including your address, phone number, 

email address, or other personal 

identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you may ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

Sheleen Dumas, 

Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of 

the Under Secretary for Economic Affairs, 

Commerce Department. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27010 Filed 12–7–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–583–856] 

Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel 

Products From Taiwan: Final Results 

of the Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and Final 

Determination of No Shipments; 2021– 

2022 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Commerce (Commerce) determines that 

producers/exporters subject to this 

review made sales of subject 

merchandise at less than normal value 

(NV) during the period of review (POR) 

July 1, 2021, through June 30, 2022. We 

further determine that Xxentria 

Technology Materials Company Ltd. 

(Xxentria) had no shipments of subject 

merchandise during the POR. 

DATES: Applicable December 8, 2023. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Matthew Palmer or Deborah Cohen, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement 

and Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–1678 and (202) 482–4521, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On August 2, 2023, Commerce 

published the Preliminary Results for 

this administrative review and invited 

interested parties to comment.1 On 

September 6, 2022, pursuant to section 

751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (the Act), Commerce initiated 

an administrative review of the Order 

covering 11 respondents.2 However, 

pursuant to the final judgment of the 

U.S. Court of International Trade (the 

Court) in Prosperity V,3 concerning the 

litigation for the underlying less-thanfair-value (LTFV) investigation of the 

Order,4 Commerce issued an amended 

final antidumping duty determination of 

sales at LTFV which reflects a below de 

minimis margin for the collapsed YP/ 

Synn entity which resulted in the 

exclusion of YP and Synn from the 

Order and all subsequent segments of 

the proceeding, including the instant 

administrative review.5 Accordingly, 

the Preliminary Results provided 

notification of the discontinuation of the 

instant administrative review with 

respect to a respondent selected for 

individual examination, YP, and a nonselected respondent, Synn.6 As a result, 

Prosperity remains the sole 

individually-examined respondent in 

this review. 

We received a case brief from 

Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. and Steel 

Dynamics Inc. (collectively, the 

petitioners).7 A complete summary of 

the events that occurred since 

publication of the Preliminary Results is 

found in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum.8 Commerce conducted 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
85588 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Notices 

Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan; 2021–2022,’’ 

dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, 

this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). 

9 Id. 

10See Preliminary Results, 88 FR at 50836–37. 

11See Memorandum, ‘‘No Shipment Inquiry for 

Xxentria Technology Materials Co., Ltd. during the 

period 07/01/2021 through 06/30/2022,’’ dated 

August 23, 2023. 

12See, e.g., Magnesium Metal from the Russian 

Federation: Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 26922, 26923 

(May 13, 2010), unchanged in Magnesium Metal 

from the Russian Federation: Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 

56989 (September 17, 2010). 

13 In these final results, Commerce applied the 

assessment rate calculation method adopted in 

Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the 

Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and 

Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty 

Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8101 

(February 14, 2012). 

14See section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act. 

this review in accordance with section 

751(a) of the Act. 

Scope of the Order 

The product covered by the Order is 

flat-rolled steel products, either clad, 

plated, or coated with corrosionresistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, 

or zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or ironbased alloys, whether or not corrugated 

or painted, varnished, laminated, or 

coated with plastics or other nonmetallic substances in addition to the 

metallic coating. For the full text of the 

scope of the Order, see the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum. 

Analysis of the Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case brief are 

addressed in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum.9 A list of the issues 

which parties raised, and to which we 

respond in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum, is attached in the 

appendix to this notice. The Issues and 

Decision Memorandum is a public 

document and is on file electronically 

via Enforcement and Compliance’s 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Centralized Electronic System 

(ACCESS). ACCESS is available to 

registered users at https://

access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete 

version of the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum can be accessed directly 

at https://access.trade.gov/public/ 

FRNoticesListLayout.aspx. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on a review of the record and 

analysis of the comments received from 

the petitioners regarding our 

Preliminary Results, we made changes 

to the preliminary weighted-average 

dumping margins calculations for 

Prosperity and for respondents not 

selected for individual examination. For 

detailed information, see the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum. 

Final Determination of No Shipments 

In the Preliminary Results, Commerce 

preliminarily determined that Xxentria 

made no shipments of subject 

merchandise into the United States 

during the POR.10 We have not received 

any information to contradict this 

determination, nor comment in 

opposition to our preliminary finding. 

Furthermore, on August 23, 2023, 

Commerce was notified by U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection (CBP) that it has 

no record of any subject entries during 

the POR for Xxentria.11 Therefore, we 

continue to determine that Xxentria 

made no shipments of subject 

merchandise during the POR. Consistent 

with our practice, we will instruct CBP 

to liquidate any existing entries of 

subject merchandise produced by 

Xxentria, but exported by other parties, 

at the rate for the intermediate reseller, 

if available, or at the all-others rate.12

Rate for Respondents Not Selected for 

Individual Examination 

For the rate assigned to companies not 

selected for individual examination in 

an administrative review, generally, 

Commerce looks to section 735(c)(5) of 

the Act, which provides instructions for 

calculating the all-others rate in a LTFV 

investigation. Under section 

735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the all-others 

rate is normally ‘‘an amount equal to the 

weighted average of the estimated 

weighted-average dumping margins 

established for exporters and producers 

individually investigated, excluding any 

zero or de minimis margins, and any 

margins determined entirely {on the 

basis of facts available}.’’ 

In this administrative review, we have 

calculated a weighted-average dumping 

margin for the sole mandatory 

respondent, Prosperity, that is not zero, 

de minimis, or based entirely on facts 

available (i.e., 0.71 percent). 

Accordingly, we have assigned this rate 

to the non-selected respondents CSC, 

CHSC, Great Fortune, Great Grandeul, 

Great Grandeul Somoa, Great Grandeul 

Steel, and SYSCO. 

Final Results of Review 

Commerce preliminarily determines 

the following estimated weightedaverage dumping margins exist for the 

period July 1, 2021, through June 30, 

2022: 

Exporter/producer 

Weightedaverage 

dumping 

margin 

(percent) 

Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co., 

Ltd ........................................... 0.71 

China Steel Corporation ............. 0.71 

Chung Hung Steel Corporation .. 0.71 

Great Fortune Steel Co., Ltd ...... 0.71 

Great Grandeul Steel Co., Ltd ... 0.71 

Exporter/producer 

Weightedaverage 

dumping 

margin 

(percent) 

Great Grandeul Steel Company 

Limited (Somoa) ...................... 0.71 

Great Grandeul Steel Corporation .......................................... 0.71 

Sheng Yu Steel Co., Ltd ............ 0.71 

Disclosure 

We intend to disclose to interested 

parties the calculations and analysis 

performed for these final results within 

five days of the date of the publication 

of this notice in the Federal Register in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). 

Assessment Rates 

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the 

Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), 

Commerce will determine, and CBP 

shall assess, antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries of subject 

merchandise in accordance with the 

final results of this review. Pursuant to 

19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we calculated 

importer-specific ad valorem duty 

assessment rates based on the ratio of 

the total amount of dumping calculated 

for the examined sales to the total 

entered value of those sales. Where the 

respondent did not report entered value, 

we calculated the entered value in order 

to calculate the assessment rate. Where 

either the respondent’s weightedaverage dumping margin is zero or de 

minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 

351.106(c)(1), or an importer-specific 

assessment rate is zero or de minimis, 

we will instruct CBP to liquidate the 

appropriate entries without regard to 

antidumping duties.13 For entries of 

subject merchandise during the POR 

produced by Prosperity for which it did 

not know its merchandise was destined 

for the United States, we will instruct 

CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at 

the all-others rate if there is no rate for 

the intermediate company(ies) involved 

in the transaction. 

The final results of this review shall 

be the basis for the assessment of 

antidumping duties on entries of 

merchandise covered by the final results 

of this review and for future deposits of 

estimated duties, where applicable.14

For the companies which were not 

selected for individual examination, we 

will instruct CBP to assess antidumping 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Notices 85589 

15See Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from 

Taiwan: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony 

with Final Determination of Antidumping Duty 

Investigation and Notice of Amended Final 

Determination of Investigation, 84 FR 6129 

(February 26, 2019) (Amended Final 

Determination). 

16See Third Amended Determination, 88 FR at 

58247. 

1See Silicomanganese from India: Preliminary 

Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review; 2021–2022, 88 FR 37021 (June 6, 2023) 

(Preliminary Results). 

2See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Results of the 

Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty 

Order on Silicomanganese from India; 2021–2022,’’ 

dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, 

this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). 

duties at an ad valorem assessment rate 

equal to the company-specific weightedaverage dumping margin determined in 

these final results. Commerce intends to 

issue assessment instructions to CBP no 

earlier than 35 days after the date of 

publication of the final results of this 

review in the Federal Register. If a 

timely summons is filed at the U.S. 

Court of International Trade, the 

assessment instructions will direct CBP 

not to liquidate relevant entries until the 

time for parties to file a request for a 

statutory injunction has expired (i.e., 

within 90 days of publication). 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective for all 

shipments of subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date of the final results of 

this administrative review, as provided 

by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the 

cash deposit rate for the companies 

listed above will be equal to the 

weighted-average dumping margins 

established in the final results of this 

administrative review; (2) for 

merchandise exported by producers or 

exporters not covered in this review but 

covered in a prior completed segment of 

the proceeding, the cash deposit rate 

will continue to be the companyspecific rate published for the most 

recent period; (3) if the exporter is not 

a firm covered in this review, a prior 

review, or the original investigation, but 

the producer has been covered in a prior 

complete segment of this proceeding, 

then the cash deposit rate will be the 

rate established for the most recent 

period for the producer of the 

merchandise; (4) the cash deposit rate 

for all other manufacturers or exporters 

will continue to be 11.04 percent,15 the 

all-others rate from the Third Amended 

Final Determination.16 These cash 

deposit requirements, when imposed, 

shall remain in effect until further 

notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice also 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 duties prior to liquidation 

of the relevant entries during this 

review period. Failure to comply with 

this requirement could result in 

Commerce’s presumption that 

reimbursement of antidumping duties 

occurred and the subsequent assessment 

of double antidumping duties. 

Administrative Protective Order 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to an administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

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

written notification of 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. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

We are issuing and publishing these 

final results of administrative review in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(1) of 

the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5). 

Dated: November 21, 2023. 

Abdelali Elouaradia, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement 

and Compliance. 

Appendix 

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Scope of the Order 

IV. Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

V. Discussion of the Issues 

Comment 1: Whether to Revise the Period 

Reviewed in the Comparison Market and 

Margin Calculation Programs 

Comment 2: Whether to Revise Aggregate 

Price Adjustment Variables in the 

Margin Calculation Program 

VI. Recommendation 

[FR Doc. 2023–26998 Filed 12–7–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–533–823] 

Silicomanganese From India: Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; 2021–2022 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Commerce (Commerce) determines that 

silicomanganese from India was sold in 

the United States at less than normal 

value during the period of review (POR) 

May 1, 2021, through April 30, 2022. 

DATES: Applicable December 8, 2023. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark Hoadley, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office VII, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–3148. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On June 6, 2023, Commerce published 

its preliminary results in the 2021–2022 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on 

silicomanganese from India and invited 

interested parties to comment.1 The 

review covers one mandatory 

respondent, Maithan Alloys Limited 

(MAL). A summary of the events that 

occurred since publication of the 

Preliminary Results, as well as a full 

discussion of the issues raised by parties 

for these final results, are discussed in 

the Issues and Decision Memorandum.2

Commerce conducted this 

administrative review in accordance 

with section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 

Scope of the Order 

The products covered by the order are 

all forms, sizes, and compositions of 

silicomanganese, except low-carbon 

silicomanganese, including 

silicomanganese briquettes, fines, and 

slag. Silicomanganese is properly 

classifiable under subheading 

7202.30.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). 

Some silicomanganese may also be 

classified under HTSUS subheading 

7202.99.5040. This scope covers all 

silicomanganese, regardless of its tariff 

classification. Although the HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) purposes, our 

written description of the scope remains 

dispositive. For a complete description 

of the scope of the order, see the Issues 

and Decision Memorandum. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in parties’ case and 

rebuttal briefs are addressed in the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum and 

are listed in the appendix to this notice. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES