Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Notices 54089 

1As explained in the memorandum from the 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, the Department has exercised its 

discretion to toll deadlines for the duration of the 

closure of the Federal Government from February 

5, through February 12, 2010. See Memorandum to 

the Record from Ronald Lorentzen, DAS for Import 

Administration, regarding ‘‘Tolling of 

Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the 

Government Closure During the Recent 

Snowstorm,’’ dated February 12, 2010. Thus, all 

deadlines in this segment of the proceeding were 

extended by seven days. The revised deadline for 

the preliminary results of the 2008–2009 

antidumping duty administrative review is 

therefore September 9, 2010. The final results of 

this review continue to be due 120 days after the 

publication of the preliminary results. 

meals, interpreters, and incidentals will 

be the responsibility of each mission 

participant. 

Conditions for Participation 

• Applicants must submit a 

completed and signed mission 

application and supplemental 

application materials, including 

adequate information on the schools 

accreditation, primary market 

objectives, and goals for participation. If 

the U.S. Department of Commerce 

receives an incomplete application, the 

Department may reject the application, 

request additional information, or take 

the lack of information into account 

when evaluating the applications. 

• Applicants must provide detailed 

information on their mission objectives, 

and specify their options for 

matchmaking with agents and/or 

meetings with local schools in each city. 

• Each applicant must also certify 

that the services it seeks to export 

through the mission benefit a U.S. based 

institution. 

Selection Criteria for Participation 

Selection will be based on the 

following criteria: 

• Applicant must be appropriately 

accredited as per paragraph one. 

• Suitability of the education 

institution to the mission’s goals 

• Applicant’s potential for business 

in Vietnam and Indonesia, including 

likelihood of exports resulting from the 

trade mission 

• Consistency of the applicant’s goals 

and objectives with the stated scope of 

the trade mission (as an example—be in 

the education sectors indicated in the 

mission description) 

Referrals from political organizations 

and any documents containing 

references to partisan political activities 

(including political contributions) will 

be removed from an applicant’s 

submission and not considered during 

the selection process. 

Timeframe for Recruitment and 

Applications 

Mission recruitment will be 

conducted in an open and public 

manner, including publication in the 

Federal Register, posting on the 

Commerce Department trade mission 

calendar (http://www.ita.doc.gov/ 

doctm/tmcal.html) and other Internet 

Web sites, press releases to general and 

trade media, direct mail, notices by 

industry trade associations and other 

multiplier groups, and publicity at 

industry meetings, symposia, 

conferences, and trade shows. 

Recruitment for the mission will 

begin immediately and conclude no 

later than Friday, January 14, 2011. The 

U.S. Department of Commerce will 

review all applications immediately 

after the deadline. We will inform 

applicants of selection decisions as soon 

as possible after January 14, 2011. 

Applications received after that date 

will be considered only if space and 

scheduling constraints permit. 

Contacts 

U.S. Commercial Service Domestic 

Contact 

Debra Rogers, 312–353–6988, 

Debra.Rogers@trade.gov. 

Gabriela Zelaya, (408) 535–2757, x107, 

Gabriela.Zelaya@trade.gov. 

Bernadette Rojas, (216) 522–4740, 

Bernadette.Rojas@trade.gov. 

Greg Thompson, 214–712–1932, 

Greg.Thompson@trade.gov. 

U.S. Commercial Service Vietnam 

Contacts 

Ho Chi Minh City: 

Dave Averne, Commercial Officer, 

Dave.Averne@trade.gov. 

Le Anh, Commercial Specialist, 

Le.Anh@trade.gov. 

Hanoi: 

Yasue Pai, Commercial Officer, 

Yasue.Pai@trade.gov. 

Tuyet Trees, Tuyet.trees@trade.gov. 

Ngo Anh, Ngo.Anh@trade.gov. 

U.S. Commercial Service Indonesia 

Contacts 

Jakarta: 

Joe Kaesshaefer, Senior Commercial 

Officer, Joe.Kaesshaefer@trade.gov. 

Henry Sutanto, Commercial Specialist, 

Henry.Sutanto@trade.gov. 

Sean Timmins, 

Trade Promotion Programs, Commercial 

Service Trade Missions Program. 

[FR Doc. 2010–22136 Filed 9–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–FP–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–827] 

Certain Cased Pencils From the 

People’s Republic of China: Extension 

of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of 

the Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patricia Tran at (202) 482–1503 or 

Mahnaz Khan at (202) 482–0914; AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 1, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On January 29, 2010, the Department 

of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) published 

a notice of initiation of administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on certain cased pencils from the 

People’s Republic of China, covering the 

period December 1, 2008 through 

November 30, 2009. See Initiation of 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Administrative Reviews, Requests for 

Revocation in Part, and Deferral of 

Initiation of Administrative Review, 75 

FR 4770 (January 29, 2010). The current 

deadline for the preliminary results of 

this administrative review is September 

9, 2010.1

Statutory Time Limits 

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 order for 

which a review is requested and the 

final results of review within 120 days 

after the date on which the preliminary 

results are published. If it is not 

practicable to complete the review 

within the time period, section 

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

Department to extend these deadlines to 

a maximum of 365 days and 180 days, 

respectively. 

Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary 

Results 

The Department requires additional 

time to review and analyze the sales and 

factors of production responses in this 

administrative review. The Department 

has also found the need to issue 

additional supplemental questionnaires 

to respondents in this review. Moreover, 

the Department requires additional time 

to analyze complex issues related to 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
54090 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Notices 

1For the reasons explained in the Preliminary 

Results, we have determined that Venus Wire 

Industries Pvt. Ltd. and its affiliates, Precision 

Metals and Sieves Manufacturers (India) Pvt. Ltd., 

should be treated as a single entity and collapsed 

for the purposes of this review. See Memorandum 

from Erika McDonald to the File, ‘‘Relationship of 

Venus Wire Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Sieves 

Manufacturers (India) Pvt. Ltd.,’’ dated September 

15, 2009; see also Memorandum from Erika 

McDonald to the File, ‘‘Relationship of Venus Wire 

Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Precision Metals,’’ dated 

September 14, 2009. The collapsed entity is referred 

to as ‘‘Venus.’’ 

surrogate value selections. Thus, it is 

not practicable to complete this review 

within the originally anticipated time 

limit (i.e., by September 9, 2010). 

Therefore, the Department is extending 

the time limit for completion of the 

preliminary results by 120 days to not 

later than January 7, 2011, in 

accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of 

the Act. 

We are issuing and publishing this 

notice in accordance with sections 

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

Dated: August 30, 2010. 

Edward C. Yang, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2010–22083 Filed 9–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–533–810] 

Stainless Steel Bar From India: Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On March 15, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce 

(the ‘‘Department’’) published the 

preliminary results of the administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on stainless steel bar (‘‘SSB’’) from India 

for the period February 1, 2008, through 

January 31, 2009. See Stainless Steel Bar 

From India: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 75 FR 12199 (March 15, 2010) 

(‘‘Preliminary Results’’). The Department 

conducted a post-preliminary analysis 

and released the results of the analysis 

on May 19, 2010. We gave the interested 

parties an opportunity to comment on 

the Preliminary Results and the postpreliminary analysis. Based on our 

analysis of the comments received, we 

have made changes to the margin 

calculation. The final weighted-average 

dumping margins for the reviewed 

firms, Ambica Steels Limited 

(‘‘Ambica’’) and Venus Wire Industries 

Pvt. Ltd.,1 are listed below in the section 

entitled ‘‘Final Results of Review.’’ 

DATES: Effective Date: September 3, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patricia Tran, Seth Isenberg, or Austin 

Redington, 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) 482–1503, 

(202) 482–0588, or (202) 482–1664, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

In the Preliminary Results, we relied 

on ‘‘facts otherwise available’’ in 

determining that there was linkage 

between Venus’ costs and prices, which 

resulted in Venus’ antidumping margin 

being calculated using quarterly costs. 

We also noted in the Preliminary 

Results that we would reexamine this 

issue based on additional information 

submitted by the company. On May 19, 

2010, we released our post-preliminary 

analysis in which we determined that 

the application of the quarterly costing 

methodology to Venus was not 

warranted because we did not find 

correlation between cost and price 

trends. See Memorandum from Susan 

Kuhbach through John M. Andersen to 

Ronald K. Lorentzen: ‘‘2008–2009 

Administrative Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order on Stainless 

Steel Bar From India—Post-Preliminary 

Analysis Calculation Memorandum for 

Venus Wire Industries Pvt. Ltd.’’ and 

‘‘Memorandum From LaVonne Clark 

Through Theresa C. Deeley to Neal 

Halper: Cost of Production and 

Constructed Value Calculation 

Adjustments for the Post-Preliminary 

Results—Venus Wire Industries Pvt. 

Ltd.,’’ dated May 19, 2010. 

On July 16, 2010, the Department 

published in the Federal Register an 

extension of the time limit for the 

completion of the final results of this 

review until no later than August 27, 

2010, in accordance with section 

751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (‘‘the Act’’), and 19 CFR 

351.213(h)(2). See Stainless Steel Bar 

From India: Extension of Time Limit for 

the Final Results of the 2008–2009 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review, 75 FR 41438 (July 16, 2010). 

We invited parties to comment on the 

Preliminary Results. We received case 

briefs on June 3, 2010, from Venus and 

June 7, 2010, from Carpenter 

Technology Corporation, Valbruna 

Slater Stainless, Inc., Electralloy 

Corporation, a Division of G.O. Carlson, 

Inc., Universal Stainless (‘‘Petitioners’’). 

On June 16, 2010, Venus submitted a 

rebuttal brief, and on June 18, 2010, 

Petitioners submitted a rebuttal brief. 

Ambica did not submit any comments. 

None of the parties requested a hearing. 

Scope of the Order 

Imports covered by the order are 

shipments of SSB. SSB 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 cold-finished 

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 semifinished products, cut-to-length flatrolled products (i.e., cut-to-length 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 this review is 

currently classifiable under subheadings 

7222.11.00.05, 7222.11.00.50, 

7222.19.00.05, 7222.19.00.50, 

7222.20.00.05, 7222.20.00.45, 

7222.20.00.75, and 7222.30.00.00 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the 

HTSUS subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, our 

written description of the scope of the 

order is dispositive. 

On May 23, 2005, the Department 

issued a final scope ruling that SSB 

manufactured in the United Arab 

Emirates out of stainless steel wire rod 

from India is not subject to the scope of 

the order. See Memorandum from Team 

to Barbara E. Tillman, ‘‘Antidumping 

Duty Orders on Stainless Steel Bar From 

India and Stainless Steel Wire Rod from 

India: Final Scope Ruling,’’ dated May 

23, 2005, which is on file in the Central 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES