61128 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2010 / Notices 

Period of Review 

The period of review (POR) is January 

30, 2008, through April 30, 2009. 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise subject to this order 

is certain welded carbon quality light– 

walled steel pipe and tube, of 

rectangular (including square) cross 

section, having a wall thickness of less 

than 4 mm. The term carbon–quality 

steel includes both carbon steel and 

alloy steel which contains only small 

amounts of alloying elements. 

Specifically, the term carbon–quality 

includes products in which none of the 

elements listed below exceeds the 

quantity by weight respectively 

indicated: 1.80 percent of manganese, or 

2.25 percent of silicon, or 1.00 percent 

of copper, or 0.50 percent of aluminum, 

or 1.25 percent of chromium, or 0.30 

percent of cobalt, or 0.40 percent of 

lead, or 1.25 percent of nickel, or 0.30 

percent of tungsten, or 0.10 percent of 

molybdenum, or 0.10 percent of 

niobium, or 0.15 percent vanadium, or 

0.15 percent of zirconium. The 

description of carbon–quality is 

intended to identify carbon–quality 

products within the scope. The welded 

carbon–quality rectangular pipe and 

tube subject to this order is currently 

classified under the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 

subheadings 7306.61.50.00 and 

7306.61.70.60. While HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and CBP’s customs 

purposes, our written description of the 

scope of the order is dispositive. 

Final Results of Review 

The Department has determined that 

the following margins exist for the 

period January 30, 2008, through April 

30, 2009: 

Manufacturer 

Weighted Average 

Margin (percentage) 

Tosc ̧elik Profil Ve Sac 

Endustrisi A.S ........... 0.00% 

Assessment Rates 

Pursuant to these final results, the 

Department has determined, and CBP 

shall assess, antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries. The Department 

intends to issue assessment instructions 

for Toscelik to CBP 15 days after the 

date of publication of these final results. 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we 

calculated importer–specific (or 

customer–specific) ad valorem duty 

assessment rates based on the ratio of 

the total amount of the dumping 

margins calculated for the examined 

sales to the total entered value of those 

same sales. We will instruct CBP to 

assess antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries covered by this 

review if any importer–specific (or 

customer–specific) assessment rate 

calculated in the final results of this 

review are above de minimis. 

The Department clarified its 

‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on 

May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment of 

Antidumping Duties). This clarification 

will apply to entries of subject 

merchandise during the POR produced 

by Tosc ̧elik for which Tosc ̧elik did not 

know the merchandise was destined for 

the United States. In such instances, we 

will instruct CBP to liquidate un– 

reviewed entries at the 27.04 percent 

all–others rate from the LTFV 

investigation if there is no company– 

specific rate for an intermediary 

involved in the transaction. See Notice 

of Antidumping Duty Order: Light– 

Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube 

From Turkey, 73 FR 31065 (May 30, 

2008). See Assessment of Antidumping 

Duties for a full discussion of this 

clarification. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

Furthermore, the following deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

publication of these final results for all 

shipments of light–walled rectangular 

pipe and tube from Turkey 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)(1) of the Tariff Act: 1) the 

cash deposit rate for Toscelik Profil Ve 

Sac Endustrisi A.S. will be the rate 

established in the final results of review; 

2) if the exporter is not a firm covered 

in this review or the less–than-fair– 

value (LTFV) investigation, but the 

manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate 

will be the rate established for the most 

recent period for the manufacturer of 

the merchandise; and 3) if neither the 

exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm 

covered in this or any previous review 

conducted by the Department, the cash 

deposit rate will be the all–others rate 

from the LTFV investigation. Id. These 

deposit requirements, when imposed, 

shall remain in effect until further 

notice. 

Reimbursement of Duties 

This notice also serves as a final 

reminder to importers of their 

responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 

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 doubled antidumping 

duties. 

Administrative Protective Orders 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective orders (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the return or 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which 

continues to govern business 

proprietary information in this segment 

of the proceeding. Timely written 

notification of the return/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. 

We are issuing and publishing this 

notice in accordance with sections 

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

Dated: September 27, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24831 Filed 10–1–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–557–813] 

Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags From 

Malaysia: Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On June 15, 2010, the 

Department published its preliminary 

results of the administrative review of 

the antidumping duty order on 

polyethylene retail carrier bags (PRCBs) 

from Malaysia. The review covers one 

manufacturer/exporter. The period of 

review is August 1, 2008, through July 

31, 2009. 

We gave interested parties an 

opportunity to comment on the 

preliminary results. We have made no 

changes to the margin calculation for 

the final results of this review. The final 

weighted-average margin is listed below 

in the ‘‘Final Results of the Review’’ 

section of this notice. 

DATES: Effective Date: October 4, 2010. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2010 / Notices 61129 

1The Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bag Committee 

and its individual members, Hilex Poly Co., LLC, 

and Superbag Corporation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jerrold Freeman or Yang Chun, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 5, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–0180 or (202) 482– 

5760, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On June 15, 2010, the Department 

published the preliminary results of 

review and invited parties to comment. 

See Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags 

From Malaysia: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review, 75 FR 33772 (June 15, 2010) 

(Preliminary Results). Although we 

received comments from interested 

parties, those comments are no longer 

on the record of the review. See ‘‘Return 

of Comments’’ section below. 

We have conducted this review in 

accordance with section 751(a) of the 

Tariff Act, as amended (the Act). 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise subject to the 

antidumping duty order is PRCBs which 

may be referred to as t-shirt sacks, 

merchandise bags, grocery bags, or 

checkout bags. The subject merchandise 

is defined as non-sealable sacks and 

bags with handles (including 

drawstrings), without zippers or integral 

extruded closures, with or without 

gussets, with or without printing, of 

polyethylene film having a thickness no 

greater than 0.035 inch (0.889 mm) and 

no less than 0.00035 inch (0.00889 mm), 

and with no length or width shorter 

than 6 inches (15.24 cm) or longer than 

40 inches (101.6 cm). The depth of the 

bag may be shorter than 6 inches (15.24 

cm) but not longer than 40 inches (101.6 

cm). 

PRCBs are typically provided without 

any consumer packaging and free of 

charge by retail establishments, e.g., 

grocery, drug, convenience, department, 

specialty retail, discount stores, and 

restaurants, to their customers to 

package and carry their purchased 

products. The scope of the order 

excludes (1) polyethylene bags that are 

not printed with logos or store names 

and that are closeable with drawstrings 

made of polyethylene film and (2) 

polyethylene bags that are packed in 

consumer packaging with printing that 

refers to specific end-uses other than 

packaging and carrying merchandise 

from retail establishments, e.g., garbage 

bags, lawn bags, trash-can liners. 

Imports of the subject merchandise 

are currently classifiable under 

statistical category 3923.21.0085 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS). This 

subheading also covers products that are 

outside the scope of the order. 

Furthermore, although the HTSUS 

subheading is provided for convenience 

and customs purposes, the written 

description of the scope of the order is 

dispositive. 

Return of Comments 

On July 15, 2010, Target Corporation 

(Target), an importer of subject 

merchandise, filed a case brief. On July 

16, 2010, Target filed a correction letter 

with respect to its July 15, 2010, case 

brief. On July 20, 2010, the petitioners 1

filed a rebuttal brief. 

On August 4, 2010, we returned the 

July 15, 2010, case brief and July 16, 

2010, correction letter to Target in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.302(d) (see 

August 4, 2010, letter to Target). In our 

letter to Target, we stated that its case 

brief contained unsolicited and 

untimely new factual information and 

that we will not rely on the new factual 

information in the case brief and 

correction letter in making our final 

determination. See 19 CFR 

351.104(a)(2). Accordingly, we provided 

Target an opportunity to refile its case 

brief omitting the new factual 

information. The deadline for Target to 

resubmit its case brief was August 10, 

2010. 

On August 5, 2010, we returned the 

July 20, 2010, rebuttal brief to the 

petitioners because in it they had 

referred to the new factual information 

Target raised improperly in its case brief 

and correction letter (see August 5, 

2010, letter to the petitioners). In our 

letter, we provided the petitioners an 

opportunity to refile their rebuttal brief 

omitting the new factual information. 

The deadline for the petitioners to 

resubmit their rebuttal brief was August 

11, 2010. 

Target did not submit a revised case 

brief by the August 10 deadline. The 

petitioners did not submit a revised 

rebuttal brief by the August 11 deadline. 

See Memorandum to the File dated 

August 19, 2010. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Because the interested parties in this 

administrative review did not refile 

their respective case or rebuttal briefs, 

there are no comments to address 

concerning the Department’s 

determination in the Preliminary 

Results. Therefore, we have made no 

changes to our determination to apply 

adverse facts available, as discussed in 

the Preliminary Results (75 FR at 

33773–74), to Euro Plastics Malaysia 

Sdn. Bhd. (Euro Plastics). 

Final Results of the Review 

As a result of our review, we 

determine that a weighted-average 

dumping margin of 101.74 percent 

exists for Euro Plastics for the period 

August 1, 2008, through July 31, 2009. 

Assessment Rates 

Because we are relying on total 

adverse facts available to establish the 

dumping margin for Euro Plastics, we 

will instruct U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP) to apply a dumping 

margin of 101.74 percent to all entries 

of PRCBs from Malaysia that were 

produced and/or exported by Euro 

Plastics and entered, or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption during the 

period of review. 

The Department intends to issue 

appropriate assessment instructions to 

CBP 15 days after publication of these 

final results of review. 

Cash-Deposit Requirements 

The following cash-deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

publication of this notice of final results 

of administrative review for all 

shipments of PRCBs from Malaysia 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the date of 

publication, as provided by section 

751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cashdeposit rate for Euro Plastics will be 

101.74 percent; (2) for other previously 

reviewed or investigated companies, the 

cash-deposit rate will continue to be the 

company-specific rate published for the 

most recent period; (3) if the exporter is 

not a firm covered in this review, a prior 

review, or the less-than-fair-value 

investigation but the manufacturer is, 

the cash-deposit rate will be the rate 

established for the most recent period 

for the manufacturer of the 

merchandise; (4) if neither the exporter 

nor the manufacturer has its own rate, 

the cash-deposit rate will be 84.94 

percent, the all-others rate established 

in the Notice of Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 

Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags From 

Malaysia, 69 FR 34128 (June 18, 2004). 

These deposit requirements 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) 

to file a certificate regarding the 

reimbursement of antidumping duties 

prior to liquidation of the relevant 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
61130 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2010 / Notices 

1The Fresh Garlic Producers Association: 

Christopher Ranch L.L.C., the Garlic Company, 

Valley Garlic, and Vessey and Company, Inc. 

(collectively, Petitioners). 

entries during the period of review. 

Failure to comply with this requirement 

could result in the Department’s 

presumption that reimbursement of 

antidumping duties occurred and the 

subsequent assessment of doubled 

antidumping duties. See 19 CFR 

351.402(f)(3). 

Notification Regarding APO 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to the administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO as explained in 

the APO itself. See also 19 CFR 

351.305(a)(3). 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 sanctionable 

violation. 

We are publishing these final results 

of administrative review and notice in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 

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

351.221(b)(5). 

Dated: September 27, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24837 Filed 10–1–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–831] 

Fresh Garlic From the People’s 

Republic of China: Final Results of 

New Shipper Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Department) is conducting a new 

shipper review (NSR) of Qingdao Sealine Trading Co. Ltd. (Qingdao Sea-line) 

under the antidumping duty order on 

fresh garlic from the People’s Republic 

of China (PRC) covering the period of 

review (POR) of November 1, 2008 

through April 30, 2009. As discussed 

below, we determine that a sale has 

been made in the United States at a 

price below normal value (NV) with 

respect to Qingdao Sea-line, an exporter 

who participated fully and 

demonstrated its eligibility for separate 

rate. See Fresh Garlic From the People’s 

Republic of China: Preliminary Results 

of New Shipper Review, 75 FR 24578 

(May 5, 2010) (Preliminary Results). We 

are continuing to find Qingdao Sealine’s sale to be bona fide for the final 

results of this review. We intend to 

instruct U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping 

duties on entries of subject merchandise 

during the POR for which importerspecific assessment rates are above de 

minimis. 

DATES: Effective Date: October 4, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Scott Lindsay, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 6, Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–0780. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On May 5, 2010, the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

preliminary results of the NSR of the 

antidumping duty order on fresh garlic 

from the PRC. See Preliminary Results. 

Since the Preliminary Results, the 

following events have occurred. 

On May 21, 2010, the Department 

extended the deadline for filing case 

briefs. See Letter from the Department to 

All Interested Parties (May 21, 2010). 

On July 19, 2010, Qingdao Sea-line 

submitted a document on the record of 

this review that contained new factual 

information within the meaning of 19 

CFR 351.301(b)(4) and 19 CFR 351.301 

(c)(1). As a result, on July 23, 2010, the 

Department issued a letter to Qingdao 

Sea-line rejecting its July 19, 2010 

submission. Also on July 23, 2010, the 

Department notified the parties of the 

briefing schedule for the final results. 

See Memorandum to the File, 

Antidumping Duty New Shipper 

Review of Fresh Garlic From the 

People’s Republic of China: Briefing 

Schedule (July 23, 2010). On August 6, 

2010, Qingdao Sea-line timely 

submitted its case brief and requested a 

hearing. On August 16, 2010, 

Petitioners 1 timely submitted their 

rebuttal brief. 

On August 27, 2010, the Department 

placed on the record a memorandum 

indicating that, pursuant to a telephone 

discussion, Qingdao Sea-line was 

withdrawing its request for a hearing. 

See Memorandum to the File, 

Antidumping Duty New Shipper 

Review of Fresh Garlic From the 

People’s Republic of China: Canceled 

Hearing Request (August 27, 2010). 

On September 3, 2010, as a result of 

the recent decision issued by the Court 

of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s 

(CAFC) ruling in Dorbest Limited et al. 

v. United States, 604 F.3d 1363 (Fed. 

Cir. 2010) (Dorbest), the Department 

placed a memorandum on the record 

regarding its reconsideration of its 

valuation of the labor wage rate for this 

review. The Department gave interested 

parties until September 15, 2010 to 

comment specifically to the proposed 

labor wage rate methodology. See 

Memorandum to the File, Fresh Garlic 

from the People’s Republic of China: 

Wage Rate Data (September 3, 2010). 

The Department received no comments. 

Scope of the Order 

The products covered by this Order 

are all grades of garlic, whole or 

separated into constituent cloves, 

whether or not peeled, fresh, chilled, 

frozen, provisionally preserved, or 

packed in water or other neutral 

substance, but not prepared or 

preserved by the addition of other 

ingredients or heat processing. The 

differences between grades are based on 

color, size, sheathing, and level of 

decay. The scope of this order does not 

include the following: (a) Garlic that has 

been mechanically harvested and that is 

primarily, but not exclusively, destined 

for non-fresh use; or (b) garlic that has 

been specially prepared and cultivated 

prior to planting and then harvested and 

otherwise prepared for use as seed. The 

subject merchandise is used principally 

as a food product and for seasoning. The 

subject garlic is currently classifiable 

under subheadings 0703.20.0010, 

0703.20.0020, 0703.20.0090, 

0710.80.7060, 0710.80.9750, 

0711.90.6000, and 2005.90.9700 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 this 

order is dispositive. In order to be 

excluded from the Order, garlic entered 

under the HTSUS subheadings listed 

above that is (1) mechanically harvested 

and primarily, but not exclusively, 

destined for non-fresh use or 

(2) specially prepared and cultivated 

prior to planting and then harvested and 

otherwise prepared for use as seed must 

be accompanied by declarations to CBP 

to that effect. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

Issues raised in the case and rebuttal 

briefs by parties to this proceeding and 

to which we have responded are listed 

in the Appendix to this notice and 

addressed in the Memorandum from 

Susan Kuhbach, Acting Deputy 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES