Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices 14957 

1Prior to the reorganization effective April 1, 

2008, Ternium was a holding company and did not 

have any production or sales operations. 

A copy of the application will be 

available for public inspection at the 

Office of the Foreign–Trade Zones 

Board’s Executive Secretary at the 

address listed above and in the 

‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the Board’s 

website, which is accessible via 

www.trade.gov/ftz. For further 

information, contact Pierre Duy at: 

pierrelduy@ita.doc.gov, or (202) 482– 

1378. 

Dated: March 25, 2009. 

Andrew McGilvray, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–7441 Filed 4–1–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–201–830] 

Notice of Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Changed 

Circumstances Review: Carbon and 

Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From 

Mexico 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On November 12, 2008, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published in the Federal 

Register a notice of initiation of a 

changed circumstances review of the 

antidumping duty order of carbon and 

certain alloy steel wire rod (wire rod) 

from Mexico in order to determine 

whether Ternium Mexico, S.A. de C.V. 

(Ternium) is the successor-in-interest to 

Hylsa S.A. de C.V. (Hylsa) for purposes 

of determining antidumping duty 

liability. See Notice of Initiation of 

Antidumping Duty Changed 

Circumstances Review: Carbon and 

Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from 

Mexico, (73 FR 66839) November 12, 

2008 (Notice of Initiation). We have 

preliminarily determined that Ternium 

is the successor-in-interest to Hylsa, for 

purposes of determining antidumping 

duty liability in this proceeding. 

Interested parties are invited to 

comment on these preliminary results. 

DATES: Effective Date: April 2, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jolanta Lawska, Office of AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 3, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–8362. 

Background 

On October 29, 2002, the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

antidumping duty order on wire rod 

from Mexico. See Notice of 

Antidumping Duty Orders: Carbon and 

Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from 

Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, 

Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine, 67 

FR 65945 (October 29, 2002) (Wire Rod 

Order). On September 3, 2008, Ternium 

requested that the Department conduct 

a changed circumstances review of the 

antidumping duty order on wire rod 

from Mexico claiming that it is the 

successor-in-interest to Hylsa, in 

accordance with section 751(b) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) 

and 19 CFR 351.216. In its request, 

Ternium indicated that effective April 1, 

2008, the production and sales 

operations of Hylsa were transferred to 

Ternium.1 In response to this request 

the Department initiated a changed 

circumstances review of the 

antidumping duty order on wire rod 

from Mexico. See Notice of Initiation. 

On November 18, 2008, the Department 

issued a questionnaire to Ternium 

requesting additional information 

regarding its successor-in-interest 

changed circumstances review request. 

On December 10, 2008, Ternium 

submitted its response to the 

Department’s questionnaire 

(Questionnaire Response). In our Notice 

of Initiation we invited interested 

parties to comment. We did not receive 

any comments. 

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 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS) definitions for 

(a) stainless steel; (b) tool steel; (c) high 

nickel steel; (d) ball bearing steel; (e) 

concrete reinforcing bars and rods; and 

(f) free machining steel products (i.e., 

products that contain by weight one or 

more of the following elements: 0.03 

percent or more of lead, 0.05 percent or 

more of bismuth, 0.08 percent or more 

of sulfur, more than 0.04 percent of 

phosphorus, more than 0.05 percent of 

selenium, or more than 0.01 percent of 

tellurium). 

Also excluded from the scope are 

1080 grade tire cord quality wire rod 

and 1080 grade tire bead quality wire 

rod. This grade 1080 tire cord quality 

rod is defined as: (i) Grade 1080 tire 

cord quality wire rod measuring 5.0 mm 

or more but not more than 6.0 mm in 

cross-sectional diameter; (ii) with an 

average partial decarburization of no 

more than 70 microns in depth 

(maximum individual 200 microns); (iii) 

having no non-deformable inclusions 

greater than 20 microns and no 

deformable inclusions greater than 35 

microns; (iv) having a carbon 

segregation per heat average of 3.0 or 

better using European Method NFA 04– 

114; (v) having a surface quality with no 

surface defects of a length greater than 

0.15 mm; (vi) capable of being drawn to 

a diameter of 0.30 mm or less with 3 or 

fewer breaks per ton, and (vii) 

containing by weight the following 

elements in the proportions shown: (1) 

0.78 percent or more of carbon, (2) less 

than 0.01 percent of aluminum, (3) 

0.040 percent or less, in the aggregate, 

of phosphorus and sulfur, (4) 0.006 

percent or less of nitrogen, and (5) not 

more than 0.15 percent, in the aggregate, 

of copper, nickel and chromium. 

This grade 1080 tire bead quality rod 

is defined as: (i) Grade 1080 tire bead 

quality wire rod measuring 5.5 mm or 

more but not more than 7.0 mm in 

cross-sectional diameter; (ii) with an 

average partial decarburization of no 

more than 70 microns in depth 

(maximum individual 200 microns); (iii) 

having no non-deformable inclusions 

greater than 20 microns and no 

deformable inclusions greater than 35 

microns; (iv) having a carbon 

segregation per heat average of 3.0 or 

better using European Method NFA 04– 

114; (v) having a surface quality with no 

surface defects of a length greater than 

0.2 mm; (vi) capable of being drawn to 

a diameter of 0.78 mm or larger with 0.5 

or fewer breaks per ton; and (vii) 

containing by weight the following 

elements in the proportions shown: (1) 

0.78 percent or more of carbon, (2) less 

than 0.01 percent of soluble aluminum, 

(3) 0.040 percent or less, in the 

aggregate, of phosphorus and sulfur, (4) 

0.008 percent or less of nitrogen, and (5) 

either not more than 0.15 percent, in the 

aggregate, of copper, nickel and 

chromium (if chromium is not 

specified), or not more than 0.10 percent 

in the aggregate of copper and nickel 

and a chromium content of 0.24 to 0.30 

percent (if chromium is specified). 

For purposes of the grade 1080 tire 

cord quality wire rod and the grade 

1080 tire bead quality wire rod, an 

inclusion will be considered to be 

deformable if its ratio of length 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

14958 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices 

2 In our Notice of Initiation, we referred to 

Ternium’s request as a name change, however, as 

explained above it is related to the transfer of 

production and sales functions from Hylsa to 

Ternium. Effective April 1, 2008, Hylsa exists solely 

as a service company which employs workers at the 

former Hylsa facilities and provides its services to 

Ternium on a contract basis. 

3Hylsamex is the former parent company of 

Hylsa. On February 12, 2008, Ternium merged with 

Hylsamex into Ternium Grupo IMSA SAB de C.V. 

(GISA). 

(measured along the axis—that is, the 

direction of rolling—of the rod) over 

thickness (measured on the same 

inclusion in a direction perpendicular 

to the axis of the rod) is equal to or 

greater than three. The size of an 

inclusion for purposes of the 20 microns 

and 35 microns limitations is the 

measurement of the largest dimension 

observed on a longitudinal section 

measured in a direction perpendicular 

to the axis of the rod. This measurement 

methodology applies only to inclusions 

on certain grade 1080 tire cord quality 

wire rod and certain grade 1080 tire 

bead quality wire rod that are entered, 

or withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption on or after July 24, 2003. 

The designation of the products as 

‘‘tire cord quality’’ or ‘‘tire bead quality’’ 

indicates the acceptability of the 

product for use in the production of tire 

cord, tire bead, or wire for use in other 

rubber reinforcement applications such 

as hose wire. These quality designations 

are presumed to indicate that these 

products are being used in tire cord, tire 

bead, and other rubber reinforcement 

applications, and such merchandise 

intended for the tire cord, tire bead, or 

other rubber reinforcement applications 

is not included in the scope. However, 

should the petitioners or other 

interested parties provide a reasonable 

basis to believe or suspect that there 

exists a pattern of importation of such 

products for other than those 

applications, end-use certification for 

the importation of such products may be 

required. Under such circumstances, 

only the importers of record would 

normally be required to certify the end 

use of the imported merchandise. 

All products meeting the physical 

description of subject merchandise that 

are not specifically excluded are 

included in this scope. 

The products subject to this order are 

currently classifiable under subheadings 

7213.91.3011, 7213.91.3015, 

7213.91.3092, 7213.91.4500, 

7213.91.6000, 7213.99.0030, 

7213.99.0090, 7227.20.0000, 

7227.90.6010, and 7227.90.6080 of the 

HTSUS. Although the HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of the scope of this 

proceeding is dispositive. 

Preliminary Results 

In making a successor-in-interest 

determination, the Department typically 

examines several factors including, but 

not limited to, changes in: (1) 

Management; (2) production facilities; 

(3) supplier relationships; and (4) 

customer base. See, e.g., Notice of Final 

Results of Changed Circumstances 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review: Polychloroprene Rubber From 

Japan, 67 FR 58 (Jan. 2, 2002); Brass 

Sheet and Strip from Canada: Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 57 FR 20460, 

20462 (May 13, 1992). While no single 

factor or combination of factors will 

necessarily provide a dispositive 

indication of a successor-in-interest 

relationship, the Department will 

generally consider the new company to 

be the successor to the previous 

company if the new company’s resulting 

operation is not materially dissimilar to 

that of its predecessor. See, e.g., Fresh 

and Chilled Atlantic Salmon from 

Norway; Final Results of Changed 

Circumstances Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 64 FR 9979 

(March 1, 1999); Industrial Phosphoric 

Acid from Israel; Final Results of 

Changed Circumstances Review, 59 FR 

6944 (February 14, 1994). Thus, if the 

evidence demonstrates that, with 

respect to the production and sale of the 

subject merchandise, the new company 

operates as the same business entity as 

the former company, the Department 

will accord the new company the same 

antidumping treatment as its 

predecessor. 

In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.221(c)(3)(i), we preliminarily 

determine that Ternium is the 

successor-in-interest to Hylsa. In its 

September 3, 2008, and December 10, 

2008, submissions Ternium provided 

evidence supporting its claim to be the 

successor-in-interest to Hylsa.2

Documentation attached to Ternium’s 

September 3, 2008, and December 10, 

2008, submissions shows that the 

transfer of production and sales 

operations from Hylsa to Ternium 

resulted in little or no change in 

management, production facilities, 

supplier relationships, or customer base. 

This documentation consists of: (1) A 

copy of documentation of merger of 

Hylsamex 3 into Ternium; (2) diagram 

depicting the organizational structure of 

Hylsa and Ternium; (3) tables depicting 

the management structure of Hylsa as of 

November 30, 2007, and the current 

management structure of Ternium as of 

July 2008; (4) listings of Hylsa’s 

suppliers of major inputs for production 

of subject merchandise in 2007 and of 

Ternium’s suppliers of inputs for 

production of subject merchandise in 

the second quarter of 2008 (after the 

transfer took effect); (5) a list of Hylsa’s 

and Ternium’s facilities at which 

subject merchandise is produced; (6) 

listings of Hylsa’s wire rod customers in 

the home and U.S. markets in 2007 and 

of Ternium’s wire rod customers in the 

home and U.S. markets in the second 

quarter of 2008 (after the transfer took 

effect). The documentation described 

above demonstrates that there was little 

to no change in management structure, 

supplier relationships, production 

facilities, or customer base. For these 

reasons, we preliminarily find that 

Ternium is the successor-in-interest to 

Hylsa and, thus, should receive the 

same antidumping duty treatment with 

respect to steel wire rod from Mexico as 

Hylsa. 

Public Comment 

Any interested party may request a 

hearing within 10 days of publication of 

this notice. Any hearing, if requested, 

will be held no later than 37 days after 

the date of publication of this notice, or 

the first workday thereafter. Case briefs 

from interested parties may be 

submitted not later than 14 days after 

the date of publication of this notice. 

Rebuttal briefs, limited to the issues 

raised in those comments, may be filed 

not later than 21 days after the date of 

publication of this notice. All written 

comments shall be submitted in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.303. 

Persons interested in attending the 

hearing, if one is requested, should 

contact the Department for the date and 

time of the hearing. In accordance with 

19 CFR 351.216(e), the Department will 

issue the final results of its antidumping 

duty changed circumstances review not 

later than 270 days after the date on 

which the review is initiated. 

During the course of this antidumping 

duty changed circumstances review, 

deposit requirements for the subject 

merchandise exported and 

manufactured by Ternium will continue 

to be the all others rate established in 

the investigation. See Notice of 

Antidumping Duty Orders: Carbon and 

Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from 

Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, 

Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine, 67 

FR 65945, 65947 (October 29, 2002). 

The cash deposit rate will be altered, if 

warranted, pursuant only to the final 

results of this review. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

preliminary results and notice in 

accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 

777(i)(1) and (2) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.216. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices 14959 

1On October 9, and October 10, 2008, 

respectively, Akzo Nobel and petitioner withdrew 

their requests for review of Akzo Nobel’s sales of 

merchandise covered by the order. Therefore, the 

Department rescinded the review with respect to 

Akzo Nobel. See Purified Carboxymethylcellulose 

from the Netherlands: Partial Recession of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR 

66841. 

Dated: March 26, 2009. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E9–7437 Filed 4–1–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–421–811] 

Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From 

the Netherlands; Extension of Time 

Limit for Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) finds that it is not 

practicable to complete the preliminary 

results of this review within the original 

time frame due to the need to complete 

a scheduled cost verification, report the 

procedures and results of the 

Department’s sales verifications, and 

possibly request additional information 

from CP Kelco B.V. Accordingly, the 

Department is extending the time limit 

for completion of the preliminary 

results of this administrative review by 

46 days, to May 18, 2009. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patrick Edwards, Brian Davis, 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) 482–8029, (202) 482– 

7924, or (202) 482–3019, respectively. 

Background 

The Department published an 

antidumping duty order on purified 

carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) from the 

Netherlands on July 11, 2005. See 

Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: 

Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from 

Finland, Mexico, the Netherlands and 

Sweden, 70 FR 39734 (July 11, 2005). 

On July 11, 2008, the Department 

published a notice of ‘‘Opportunity to 

Request an Administrative Review’’ of 

this antidumping duty order for the 

period July 1, 2007, through June 30, 

2008. See Antidumping or 

Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or 

Suspended Investigation; Opportunity 

To Request Administrative Review, 73 

FR 39948 (July 11, 2008). Also on July 

11, 2008, CP Kelco B.V. and its U.S. 

affiliates (CP Kelco U.S., Inc. and J.M. 

Huber Corporation) timely requested 

that the Department initiate and 

conduct an administrative review for 

the period of review. On July 14, 2008, 

Aqualon Company, a division of 

Hercules Incorporated (petitioner), 

timely requested that the Department 

conduct an administrative review of 

sales of subject merchandise by Akzo 

Nobel Functional Chemicals B.V. (Akzo 

Nobel) and CP Kelco B.V. covered by 

the order. On July 31, 2008, Akzo Nobel 

timely requested that the Department 

conduct an administrative review of its 

sales of merchandise covered by the 

order. 

In response to all three requests, the 

Department initiated an administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on purified CMC from the Netherlands 

on August 26, 2008. See Initiation of 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Administrative Reviews, 73 FR 50308 

(August 26, 2008).1 The current 

deadline for the preliminary results of 

this review is April 2, 2009. 

Extension of Time Limits for 

Preliminary Results 

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

of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires 

the Department to complete the 

preliminary results of an administrative 

review within 245 days after the last day 

of the anniversary month of an order for 

which a review is requested. However, 

if it is not practicable to complete the 

review within this time period, section 

751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the 

Department to extend the time limit for 

the preliminary results to a maximum of 

365 days after the last day of the 

anniversary month of an order for which 

a review is requested. 

The Department finds that it is not 

practicable to complete the preliminary 

results of this review within the original 

time frame due to the need to complete 

a scheduled cost verification, report the 

procedures and results of the 

Department’s sales verifications, and 

possibly request additional information 

from CP Kelco B.V. Accordingly, the 

Department is extending the time limit 

for completion of the preliminary 

results of this administrative review by 

46 days to May 18, 2009. We intend to 

issue the final results no later than 120 

days after publication of the preliminary 

results. 

This extension is issued and 

published in accordance with sections 

751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i) of the Act. 

Dated: March 27, 2009. 

John M. Andersen, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations. 

[FR Doc. E9–7451 Filed 4–1–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–580–810] 

Welded ASTM A–312 Stainless Steel 

Pipe From South Korea: Extension of 

Time Limit for Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: April 2, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jacqueline Arrowsmith or Douglas 

Kirby, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, 

Import Administration, International 

Trade Administration, Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–5255 and (202) 

482–3782, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On December 17, 2008, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) issued the preliminary 

results of the administrative review of 

the antidumping duty order on ASTM 

A–312 stainless steel pipe from South 

Korea. See Certain Welded Stainless 

Steel Pipes from the Republic of Korea: 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR 

79050 (December 24, 2008). The period 

of review is December 1, 2006 through 

November 30, 2007. The final results for 

this administrative review are currently 

due no later than April 23, 2009. 

Extension of Time Limit for Final 

Results 

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

of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires 

the Department to issue the preliminary 

results of an administrative review 

within 245 days after the last day of the 

anniversary month of an antidumping 

duty order for which a review is 

requested, and issue the final results 

within 120 days after the date on which 

the preliminary results are published. 

However, if the Department finds it is 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES