12798 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 47 / Wednesday, March 11, 2015 / Notices 

1See Initiation of Five-year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 79 

FR 65186 (November 3, 2014) (Initiation Notice) 

and Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From 

the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of 

Korea: Antidumping Duty Orders, 74 FR 57145 

(November 4, 2009). The Department previously 

initiated and published final results of expedited 

sunset review in Diamond Sawblades and Parts 

Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Final 

Results of the Expedited Sunset Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order, 79 FR 40062 (July 11, 

2014) (Sunset Review Final). The Court of 

International Trade (CIT) ordered the rescission of 

the Sunset Review Final and a November 4, 2014, 

initiation of the sunset review. See Diamond 

Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. United States 

Department of Commerce, 11 F. Supp. 3d 1303, 

1316 (CIT 2014). Thus, pursuant to the CIT’s order, 

the effective date of this initiation is November 4, 

2014. See Initiation Notice, 79 FR at 65186, n.1. See 

also the notices of intent to participate from the 

domestic interested parties, dated November 7, 

2014, and November 12, 2014. 

2See the Memorandum from Deputy Assistant 

Secretary Christian Marsh to Assistant Secretary 

Paul Piquado entitled ‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Results of Expedited 

First Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order 

on Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the 

People’s Republic of China,’’ dated concurrently 

with and hereby adopted by this notice (Issues and 

Decision Memorandum). 

3On November 24, 2014, Enforcement and 

Compliance changed the name of Enforcement and 

Compliance’s AD and CVD Centralized Electronic 

Service System (‘‘IA ACCESS’’) to AD and CVD 

Centralized Electronic Service System (‘‘ACCESS’’). 

The Web site location was changed from http://

iaaccess.trade.gov to http://access.trade.gov. The 

Final Rule changing the references to the 

Regulations can be found at 79 FR 69046 

(November 20, 2014). 

1See Stainless Steel Bar From Spain: Preliminary 

Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review; 2013–2014, 79 FR 68662 (November 18, 

2014) (Preliminary Results). 

of the antidumping duty order on 

diamond sawblades and parts thereof 

(diamond sawblades) from the People’s 

Republic of China (the PRC) would be 

likely to lead to continuation or 

recurrence of dumping as indicated in 

the ‘‘Final Results of Sunset Review’’ 

section of this notice. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 11, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Yang Jin Chun or Minoo Hatten, AD/

CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement 

and Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–5760 or (202) 482– 

1690, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.218(d)(1)(i) and (ii), the Department 

received notices of intent to participate 

in this sunset review from Diamond 

Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition and 

Husqvarna Construction Products North 

America (collectively, the domestic 

interested parties) within 15 days after 

the date of publication of the Initiation 

Notice and the effective date of the 

initiation of this sunset review.1 The 

domestic interested parties claimed 

interested party status under sections 

771(9)(A), (C), and (F) of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (the Act). 

The Department received adequate 

substantive responses to the Initiation 

Notice from the domestic interested 

parties within the 30-day period 

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

The Department received no substantive 

response from any respondent 

interested parties. In accordance with 

section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), the 

Department conducted an expedited 

(120-day) sunset review of the 

antidumping duty order on diamond 

sawblades from the PRC. 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise subject to the order 

is diamond sawblades. The diamond 

sawblades subject to the order are 

currently classifiable under subheadings 

8202 to 8206 of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), 

and may also enter under 6804.21.00. 

While the HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, the written description is 

dispositive. A full description of the 

scope of the order is contained in the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum.2

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in this review are 

addressed in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum, including the likelihood 

of continuation or recurrence of 

dumping in the event of revocation and 

the magnitude of dumping margins 

likely to prevail if the order was 

revoked. Parties can find a complete 

discussion of all issues raised in this 

review and the corresponding 

recommendations in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum, which is on file 

electronically via Enforcement and 

Compliance’s Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Centralized 

Electronic Service System (ACCESS).3

ACCESS is available to registered users 

at http://access.trade.gov and to all 

parties in the Central Records Unit in 

Room 7046 of the main Department of 

Commerce building. In addition, a 

complete version of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum can be accessed 

directly on the internet at http://

enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. 

Final Results of Sunset Review 

Pursuant to sections 752(c) of the Act, 

the Department determines that 

revocation of the antidumping duty 

order on diamond sawblades from the 

PRC would be likely to lead to 

continuation or recurrence of dumping 

at weighted-average margins up to 

164.09 percent. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice serves as a reminder to 

parties subject to administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a). Timely written 

notification of the 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 violation 

which is subject to sanction. 

The Department is issuing and 

publishing the final results and notice 

in accordance with sections 751(c), 

752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.221(c)(5)(ii). 

Dated: March 4, 2015. 

Paul Piquado, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2015–05558 Filed 3–10–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–469–805] 

Stainless Steel Bar From Spain: Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; 2013–2014 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On November 18, 2014, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published in the Federal 

Register the preliminary results of the 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on stainless 

steel bar (SSB) from Spain.1 The period 

of review (POR) is March 1, 2013, 

through February 28, 2014. The review 

covers one producer/exporter of the 

subject merchandise, Gerdau Aceros 

Especiales Europa, S.L. (Gerdau). We 

invited parties to comment on the 

Preliminary Results. None were 

received. Accordingly, these final 

results are unchanged from the 

Preliminary Results, and we continue to 

find that Gerdau did not have 

reviewable entries during the POR. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 11, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dmitry Vladimirov or Minoo Hatten, 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 47 / Wednesday, March 11, 2015 / Notices 12799 

2See Gerdau’s letter entitled ‘‘Stainless Steel Bar 

from Spain; Entry of appearance and notification of 

no shipments’’ dated May 10, 2014. 

3See Preliminary Results, 79 FR at 68663. 

4 Id. 

5 Id. 

6 Id. 

7 Id. 

8See 19 CFR 351.212(b). 

9For a full discussion, see Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of 

Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) 

(Assessment Policy Notice). 

10See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value: Stainless Steel Bar From 

Spain, 59 FR 66931 (December 28, 1994). 

AD/CVD Operations, Office I, 

Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–1690, and (202) 482–1690, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise subject to the order 

is SSB. The term SSB with respect to the 

order means articles of stainless steel in 

straight lengths that have been either 

hot-rolled, forged, turned, cold-drawn, 

cold-rolled or otherwise cold-finished, 

or ground, having a uniform solid cross 

section along their whole length in the 

shape of circles, segments of circles, 

ovals, rectangles (including squares), 

triangles, hexagons, octagons or other 

convex polygons. SSB includes coldfinished SSBs that are turned or ground 

in straight lengths, whether produced 

from hot-rolled bar or from straightened 

and cut rod or wire, and reinforcing bars 

that have indentations, ribs, grooves, or 

other deformations produced during the 

rolling process. Except as specified 

above, the term does not include 

stainless steel semi-finished products, 

cut-length flat-rolled products (i.e., cutlength rolled products which if less than 

4.75 mm in thickness have a width 

measuring at least 10 times the 

thickness, or if 4.75 mm or more in 

thickness having a width which exceeds 

150 mm and measures at least twice the 

thickness), wire (i.e., cold-formed 

products in coils, of any uniform solid 

cross section along their whole length, 

which do not conform to the definition 

of flat-rolled products), and angles, 

shapes and sections. 

The SSB subject to the order is 

currently classifiable under subheadings 

7222.10.00, 7222.11.00, 7222.19.00, 

7222.20.00, 7222.30.00 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS). 

Although the HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, the written description of the 

scope of the order is dispositive. 

Background 

We received a timely submission from 

Gerdau reporting that it did not have 

sales, shipments, or entries of the 

subject merchandise during the POR.2

In addition, in response to the 

Department’s query, U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) did not provide 

any evidence that contradicted Gerdau’s 

claim of no shipments.3 We received no 

comments from interested parties 

concerning the results of our query with 

the CBP. Therefore, based on Gerdau’s 

certification and our analysis of CBP 

information, we preliminarily 

determined that Gerdau did not have 

any reviewable entries during the POR.4

We invited interested parties to 

comment on the Preliminary Results.5

None were received. The Department 

conducted this review in accordance 

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

Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 

Final Determination of No Shipments 

As explained above, in the 

Preliminary Results, we found that 

Gerdau did not have reviewable entries 

during the POR.6 Also in the 

Preliminary Results, we stated that 

consistent with our recently announced 

refinement to our assessment practice, it 

is not appropriate to rescind the review 

with respect to Gerdau but, rather, to 

complete the review with respect to 

Gerdau and issue appropriate 

instructions to CBP based on the final 

results of this review.7

After issuing the Preliminary Results, 

we received no comments from 

interested parties, nor have we received 

any information that would cause us to 

revisit our preliminary determination. 

Therefore, for these final results, we 

continue to find that Gerdau did not 

have any reviewable entries during the 

POR. 

Assessment 

We determine, and CBP shall assess, 

antidumping duties on all appropriate 

entries of subject merchandise in 

accordance with these final results of 

review.8 Consistent with the 

Department’s refinement to its 

assessment practice, because we 

determined that Gerdau had no 

shipments of subject merchandise 

during the POR, for entries of subject 

merchandise during the POR produced 

by Gerdau for which it did not know 

that the merchandise was destined for 

the United States, we will instruct CBP 

to liquidate un-reviewed entries at the 

all-others rate if there is no rate for the 

intermediate company(ies) involved in 

the transaction.9

We intend to issue instructions to 

CBP 15 days after the publication date 

of the final results of this review. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective for all 

shipments of the subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date of this notice of final 

results of the administrative review, as 

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

Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for Gerdau 

remains unchanged from the rate 

assigned to the company in the most 

recently completed review of the 

company; (2) for other manufacturers 

and exporters covered in a prior 

segment of the proceeding, the cash 

deposit rate continues to be the 

company-specific rate published for the 

most recently completed segment of this 

proceeding in which that manufacturer 

or exporter participated; (3) if the 

exporter is not a firm covered in this 

review, a prior review, or the original 

investigation, but the manufacturer is, 

the cash deposit rate is the rate 

established for the most recently 

completed segment of this proceeding 

for the manufacturer of subject 

merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit 

rate for all other manufacturers or 

exporters continues to be 25.77 percent, 

the all-others rate established in the 

investigation.10 These cash deposit 

requirements, when imposed, 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 duties prior to 

liquidation of the relevant entries 

during this POR. Failure to comply with 

this requirement could result in the 

Secretary’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 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 the return or 

destruction of APO materials, or 

conversion to judicial protective order, 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
12800 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 47 / Wednesday, March 11, 2015 / Notices 

1See Commodity Matchbooks from India: 

Countervailing Duty Order, 74 FR 65740 (December 

11, 2009). 

2See Initiation of Five Year (‘‘Sunset) Review, 79 

FR 65186 (November 3, 2014). 

3See Letter from D.D. Bean to the Department, 

‘‘Five Year (‘‘Sunset Review’’) Countervailing Duty 

Order on Commodity Matchbooks from India— 

Notice of Intent to Participate,’’ dated November 18, 

2014. 

4 In its response, D.D. Bean claims to be the sole 

U.S. producer of the domestic like product. Id. at 

1. 

5See Letter from D.D. Bean to the Department, 

‘‘Commodity Matchbooks from India,’’ dated 

December 3, 2014; see also Memo to the File from 

David Crespo, Senior Analyst, AD/CVD Operations 

Office II, ‘‘RE: Telephone Conversation with D.D. 

Bean & Sons Co.,’’ dated December 4, 2014. 

6Such commodity matchbooks are also referred 

to as ‘‘for resale’’ because they always enter into 

retail channels, meaning businesses that sell a 

general variety of tangible merchandise, e.g., 

convenience stores, supermarkets, dollar stores, 

drug stores and mass merchandisers. 

7The gross distinctions between commodity 

matchbooks and promotional matchbooks may be 

summarized as follows: (1) If it has no printing, or 

is printed with a generic message such as ‘‘Thank 

You’’ or a generic image such as the American Flag, 

or printed with national or regional store brands or 

corporate brands, it is commodity; (2) if it has 

printing, and the printing includes the name of a 

bar, restaurant, resort, hotel, club, cafe ́/coffee shop, 

grill, pub, eatery, lounge, casino, barbecue, or 

individual establishment prominently displayed on 

the matchbook cover, it is promotional. 

is hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and terms of an 

APO is a sanctionable violation. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

final results of administrative review 

and notice in accordance with sections 

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

Dated: March 3, 2015. 

Paul Piquado, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2015–05561 Filed 3–10–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–533–849] 

Commodity Matchbooks From India: 

Final Results of Expedited Sunset 

Review of the Countervailing Duty 

Order 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) finds that revocation 

of the countervailing duty (CVD) order 

on commodity matchbooks from India 

would be likely to lead to continuation 

or recurrence of a countervailable 

subsidy at the levels indicated in the 

final results of review section of this 

notice. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 11, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jacqueline Arrowsmith, Office VII, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone (202) 482–5255. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On November 3, 2014, the Department 

initiated a sunset review of the CVD 

order on commodity matchbooks from 

India 1 pursuant to section 751(c) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

Act).2 On November 18, 2014, D.D. Bean 

& Sons Co. (D.D. Bean) filed a notice of 

intent to participate in the review.3 D.D. 

Bean claimed interested party status 

under section 771(9)(C) of the Act, as a 

domestic producer of the domestic like 

product.4

The Department received an adequate 

substantive response from the domestic 

industry within the 30-day deadline 

specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i).5

The Department did not receive a 

response from the Government of India 

or any respondent interested party to 

the proceeding. Because the Department 

received no response from the 

respondent interested parties, the 

Department conducted an expedited 

review of this CVD order, pursuant to 

section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.218(e)(l)(ii)(B)(2) and (C)(2). 

Scope of the Order 

The scope of this order covers 

commodity matchbooks, also known as 

commodity book matches, paper 

matches or booklet matches.6

Commodity matchbooks typically, but 

do not necessarily, consist of twenty 

match stems which are usually made 

from paperboard or similar material 

tipped with a match head composed of 

any chemical formula. The match stems 

may be stitched, stapled or otherwise 

fastened into a matchbook cover of any 

material, on which a striking strip 

composed of any chemical formula has 

been applied to assist in the ignition 

process. 

Commodity matchbooks included in 

the scope of this order may or may not 

contain printing. For example, they may 

have no printing other than the 

identification of the manufacturer or 

importer. Commodity matchbooks may 

also be printed with a generic message 

such as ‘‘Thank You’’ or a generic image 

such as the American Flag, with store 

brands (e.g., Kroger, 7-Eleven, Shurfine 

or Giant); product brands for national or 

regional advertisers such as cigarettes or 

alcoholic beverages; or with corporate 

brands for national or regional 

distributors (e.g., Penley Corp. or 

Diamond Brands). They all enter retail 

distribution channels. Regardless of the 

materials used for the stems of the 

matches and regardless of the way the 

match stems are fastened to the 

matchbook cover, all commodity 

matchbooks are included in the scope of 

this investigation. All matchbooks, 

including commodity matchbooks, 

typically comply with the United States 

Consumer Product Safety Commission 

(CPSC) Safety Standard for Matchbooks, 

codified at 16 CFR 1202.1 et seq. 

The scope of this order excludes 

promotional matchbooks, often referred 

to as ‘‘not for resale,’’ or ‘‘specialty 

advertising’’ matchbooks, as they do not 

enter into retail channels and are sold 

to businesses that provide hospitality, 

dining, drinking or entertainment 

services to their customers, and are 

given away by these businesses as 

promotional items. Such promotional 

matchbooks are distinguished by the 

physical characteristic of having the 

name and/or logo of a bar, restaurant, 

resort, hotel, club, cafe ́/coffee shop, 

grill, pub, eatery, lounge, casino, 

barbecue or individual establishment 

printed prominently on the matchbook 

cover. Promotional matchbook cover 

printing also typically includes the 

address and the phone number of the 

business or establishment being 

promoted.7 Also excluded are all other 

matches that are not fastened into a 

matchbook cover such as wooden 

matches, stick matches, box matches, 

kitchen matches, pocket matches, penny 

matches, household matches, strikeanywhere matches (aka ‘‘SAW’’ 

matches), strike-on-box matches (aka 

‘‘SOB’’ matches), fireplace matches, 

barbeque/grill matches, fire starters, and 

wax matches. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in this review are 

addressed in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. The issues discussed in 

the Issues and Decision Memorandum 

include the likelihood of continuation 

or recurrence of a countervailable 

subsidy and the net countervailable 

subsidy likely to prevail if the CVD 

Order were revoked. Parties can find a 

complete discussion of all issues raised 

in this expedited sunset review and the 

corresponding recommendations in this 

public memorandum which is on file 

electronically via the Enforcement and 

Compliance’s Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Centralized 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES