64252 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 19, 2010 / Notices 

7See Antidumping Duty Order; Welded Carbon 

Steel Standard Pipe and Tube Products From 

Turkey, 51 FR 17784 (May 15, 1986). 

not know their merchandise was 

destined for the United States. In such 

instances, we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate unreviewed entries at the 

country-specific all-others rate 

established in the less-than-fair-value 

(‘‘LTFV’’) investigation if there is no rate 

for the intermediate company(ies) 

involved in the transaction. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following antidumping duty 

deposit rates will be effective upon 

publication of this notice of final results 

of the administrative review for all 

shipments of welded pipe and tube from 

Turkey entered, or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption on or after 

the date of the publication of these final 

results, as provided by section 751(a)(1) 

of the Act: (1) For the companies subject 

to this review, the cash deposit rate will 

be the rates listed above; (2) for 

previously reviewed or investigated 

companies not listed above, the cash 

deposit rate will continue to be the 

company-specific rate published for the 

most recent final results 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 LTFV investigation, but the 

manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate 

will be the rate established for the most 

recent final results for the manufacturer 

of the merchandise; and, (4) 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 14.74 

percent, the all-others rate established 

in the LTFV investigation.7 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 review period. 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. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice serves as the only 

reminder to parties subject to 

administrative protective orders (‘‘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. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

results of review in accordance with 

sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the 

Act. 

Dated: October 12, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix—Issues in Decision 

Memorandum 

1. Treatment of ‘‘Negative Dumping Margins’’ 

(Zeroing) 

2. Method of Indexing Quarterly Costs 

3. Borusan’s Duty Drawback 

[FR Doc. 2010–26271 Filed 10–18–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–580–839] 

Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From 

the Republic of Korea: Final Results of 

the 2008–2009 Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On June 15, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce published the 

preliminary results of the ninth 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on certain 

polyester staple fiber from the Republic 

of Korea and invited interested parties 

to comment. The review covers 

shipments of subject merchandise to the 

United States by Huvis Corporation. 

Based on our analysis of the comments 

received from interested parties, we 

have made no changes for the final 

results. The final weighted-average 

dumping margins are listed below in the 

‘‘Final Results of the Review’’ section of 

this notice. 

DATES: Effective Date: October 19, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Seth 

Isenberg or Patricia Tran, Office 1, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–0588 and (202) 

482–1503, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On June 15, 2010, the Department of 

Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) published 

Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the 

Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results 

of the 2008–2009 Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 75 FR 33783 

(June 15, 2010) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’) 

in the Federal Register. On July 15, 

2010, we received a case brief from 

Huvis Corporation (‘‘Huvis’’) concerning 

the Preliminary Results. On July 20, 

2010, the Department released a postpreliminary calculation memo with our 

analysis of cost and price data 

submitted by Huvis on April 16, 2010, 

April 27, 2010 and May 28, 2010. See 

2008–2009 Administrative Review of 

the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain 

Polyester Staple Fiber from the Republic 

of Korea: Post-Preliminary Analysis 

Calculation Memorandum for Huvis 

Corporation (dated July 6, 2010) (‘‘PostPrelim Memo’’). 

Based on that analysis, the 

Department determined that application 

of the Department’s quarterly costing 

methodology was not warranted and, as 

a result, recommended no change to the 

findings in the Preliminary Results. 

Therefore, we invited interested parties 

to comment on the Preliminary Results 

and the Post-Prelim Memo. 

On July 26, 2010, we received case 

briefs from DAK Americas, LLC and 

Invista, S.a.r.L., (collectively, 

‘‘Petitioners’’) and Huvis concerning the 

Post-Prelim Memo. On August 2, 2010, 

the Department received a rebuttal brief 

from Huvis. A public hearing was not 

requested. 

Scope of the Order 

For the purposes of the order, the 

product covered is certain polyester 

staple fiber (‘‘PSF’’). PSF is defined as 

synthetic staple fibers, not carded, 

combed or otherwise processed for 

spinning, of polyesters measuring 3.3 

decitex (3 denier, inclusive) or more in 

diameter. This merchandise is cut to 

lengths varying from one inch (25 mm) 

to five inches (127 mm). The 

merchandise subject to the order may be 

coated, usually with a silicon or other 

finish, or not coated. PSF is generally 

used as stuffing in sleeping bags, 

mattresses, ski jackets, comforters, 

cushions, pillows, and furniture. 

Merchandise of less than 3.3 decitex 

(less than 3 denier) currently classifiable 

under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 

of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) at 

subheading 5503.20.00.25 is specifically 

excluded from the order. Also 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 19, 2010 / Notices 64253 

specifically excluded from the order are 

polyester staple fibers of 10 to 18 denier 

that are cut to lengths of 6 to 8 inches 

(fibers used in the manufacture of 

carpeting). In addition, low-melt PSF is 

excluded from the order. Low-melt PSF 

is defined as a bi-component fiber with 

an outer sheath that melts at a 

significantly lower temperature than its 

inner core. 

The merchandise subject to the order 

is currently classifiable in the HTSUS at 

subheadings 5503.20.00.45 and 

5503.20.00.65. Although the HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of the merchandise 

under the order is dispositive. 

Period of Review 

The period of review (‘‘POR’’) is May 

1, 2008, through April 30, 2009. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties to this review 

are addressed in the Department’s 

October 7, 2010, Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the 2008/09 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review of Certain Polyester Staple Fiber 

from the Republic of Korea (‘‘Decision 

Memorandum’’), which is hereby 

adopted by this notice. Attached to this 

notice as an appendix is a list of the 

issues which parties have raised and to 

which we have responded in the 

Decision Memorandum. Parties can find 

a complete discussion of all issues 

raised in this review and the 

corresponding recommendations in this 

public memorandum. This report is on 

file in the Department’s Central Records 

Unit in room 7046 of the main 

Department building. In addition, a 

complete version of the Decision 

Memorandum can be accessed directly 

on the Web at http://ia.ita doc.gov/frn/ 

index.html. The paper copy and 

electronic version of the Decision 

Memorandum are identical in content. 

Fair Value Comparisons 

To determine whether sales of PSF 

from the Republic of Korea to the 

United States were made at less than 

normal value (‘‘NV’’), we compared 

export price (‘‘EP’’) to the NV. We 

calculated EP, NV, constructed value, 

and the cost of production, based on the 

same methodologies used in the 

Preliminary Results. 

Final Results of the Review 

We find that the following margin 

percentage exists for the period May 1, 

2008, through April 30, 2009: 

Manufacturer Weighted-average margin 

percentage 

Huvis Corporation ... 0.94 

Assessment Rates 

Huvis submitted evidence 

demonstrating that it was the importer 

of record for certain of its POR sales. We 

examined the customs entry 

documentation submitted by Huvis and 

tied it to the U.S. sales listing. 

Therefore, for purposes of calculating 

the importer-specific assessment rates, 

we have treated Huvis as the importer 

of record for certain POR shipments. 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), for all 

sales where Huvis is the importer of 

record, Huvis submitted the reported 

entered value of the U.S. sales and we 

have calculated importer-specific 

assessment rates based on the ratio of 

the total amount of antidumping duties 

calculated for the examined sales to the 

total entered value of those sales. 

Regarding sales where Huvis was not 

the importer of record, we note that 

Huvis did not report the entered value 

for the U.S. sales in question. 

Accordingly, we have calculated 

importer-specific per-unit duty 

assessment rates for the merchandise in 

question by aggregating the dumping 

margins calculated for all U.S. sales to 

each importer and dividing this amount 

by the total quantity of those sales. To 

determine whether the duty assessment 

rates were de minimis, we calculated 

importer-specific ad valorem rates based 

on the estimated entered value. 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we 

will instruct U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to liquidate without 

regard to antidumping duties any 

entries for which the assessment rate is 

de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent). 

The Department intends to issue 

assessment instructions directly to CBP 

15 days after publication of the final 

results of review. 

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). This 

clarification will apply to entries of 

subject merchandise during the POR 

produced by Huvis for which Huvis did 

not know its merchandise was destined 

for the United States. In such instances, 

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. Id. 

Cash Deposit Rates 

The following antidumping duty 

deposits will be required on all 

shipments of certain PSF from the 

Republic of Korea entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption, effective on or after the 

publication date of the final results of 

this administrative review, as provided 

by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The 

cash deposit rates for the reviewed 

companies will be the rate listed above 

(except no cash deposit will be required 

if a company’s weighted-average margin 

is de minimis, i.e., less than 0.5 

percent), (2) for merchandise exported 

by manufacturers or exporters not 

covered in this review but covered in 

the original less-than-fair-value 

investigation or a previous review, the 

cash deposit rate will continue to be the 

most recent rate published in the final 

determination or final results for which 

the manufacturer or exporter received 

an individual rate; (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 will be the rate established for the 

most recent period for the manufacturer 

of the merchandise; and (4) if neither 

the exporter nor the manufacturer is a 

firm covered in this review, a prior 

review, or the investigation, the cash 

deposit rate will be 7.91 percent, the allothers rate established in Certain 

Polyester Staple Fiber from the Republic 

of Korea: Notice of Amended Final 

Determination and Amended Order 

Pursuant to Final Court Decision, 68 FR 

74552 (December 24, 2003). 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 review period. 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. 

Notification Regarding Administrative 

Protective Orders 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their 

responsibility concerning the return or 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

64254 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 19, 2010 / Notices 

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 sanctionable 

violation. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

results and this notice in accordance 

with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of 

the Act. 

Dated: October 7, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

APPENDIX I 

List of Comments in the Decision 

Memorandum 

Comment 1: Offsetting Negative Margins 

Comment 2: Quarterly Cost Methodology 

[FR Doc. 2010–26267 Filed 10–18–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–351–828] 

Certain Hot-Rolled Flat-Rolled Carbon 

Quality Steel Products From Brazil; 

Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On April 14, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published the preliminary 

results of the administrative review of 

the antidumping duty order on certain 

hot-rolled, flat-rolled carbon quality 

steel products (hot-rolled steel) from 

Brazil. See Certain Hot-Rolled FlatRolled Carbon Quality Steel Products 

From Brazil: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review and Extension of Time Limit for 

the Final Results, 75 FR 19369 (April 

14, 2010) (Preliminary Results). This 

review covers sales of subject 

merchandise made by Usinas 

Siderurgicas de Minas Gerais 

(USIMINAS) and Companhia 

Siderurgica Paulista (COSIPA) 

(collectively, USIMINAS) for the period 

March 1, 2008, to February 28, 2009. 

Based on our analysis of the comments 

received, we have made changes to the 

margin calculation; therefore, the final 

results differ from the preliminary 

results. The final weighted-average 

dumping margin for the reviewed firms 

is listed below in the section entitled 

‘‘Final Results of Review.’’ 

DATES: Effective Date: October 19, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patrick Edwards or Dena Crossland, 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 or (202) 482– 

3362, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On April 14, 2010, the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

preliminary results of the administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on hot-rolled steel from Brazil for the 

period March 1, 2008, to February 28, 

2009. See Preliminary Results. As noted 

in the preliminary results, the 

Department conducted cost and sales 

verifications of USIMINAS’ 

questionnaire responses from March 1, 

2010, through March 5, 2010, and 

March 8, 2010, through March 12, 2010, 

respectively. See Preliminary Results at 

19372. Due to the necessary 

rescheduling of the verifications, the 

Department issued its verification 

reports subsequent to the Preliminary 

Results. See Memorandum to the File, 

from Laurens Van Houten, Senior 

Accountant, titled ‘‘Verification of the 

Cost Response of Usinas Siderurgicas de 

Minas Gerais (‘Usiminas’) and 

Companhia Siderurgica Paulista 

(‘Cosipa’) in the Antidumping Review of 

Hot-Rolled Steel from Brazil,’’ dated 

April 16, 2010 (USIMINAS Cost 

Verification Report); see also, 

Memorandum to the File, from Patrick 

Edwards and Dena Crossland, Analysts, 

titled ‘‘Verification of the Sales 

Responses of Usinas Siderurgicas de 

Minas Gerais (USIMINAS) and 

Companhia Siderurgica Paulista 

(COSIPA) in the Antidumping Review 

of Certain Hot-Rolled Flat-Rolled 

Carbon Quality Steel Products from 

Brazil,’’ dated June 22, 2010 (USIMINAS 

Sales Verification Report). Following 

the release of both verification reports, 

the Department issued a letter to 

USIMINAS requesting specific changes 

to its sales database based upon 

USIMINAS’ disclosure of minor errors 

at the onset of the sales verification and 

findings made by the Department during 

the verification. See Letter from 

Angelica L. Mendoza, Program Manager, 

to USIMINAS, titled ‘‘Requested 

Changes to Sales Databases Resulting 

from Sales Verification,’’ dated June 23, 

2010. USIMINAS submitted its response 

and revised databases on July 8, 2010, 

which served as the start of the period 

in which parties could submit 

comments and rebuttal comments on 

the Preliminary Results. 

In response to the Department’s 

invitation for comments on the 

preliminary results of this review, 

USIMINAS timely submitted its case 

brief on July 1, 2010. See Letter from 

USIMINAS and COSIPA to the 

Department of Commerce, titled 

‘‘Submission of Case Brief: Hot-Rolled 

Steel from Brazil,’’ dated July 1, 2010 

(USIMINAS Case Brief). United States 

Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel), a 

petitioning party in this proceeding 

(petitioner), submitted its case brief on 

July 21, 2010. See Letter from United 

States Steel Corporation, titled ‘‘Case 

Brief: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel 

Flat Products from Brazil,’’ dated July 

21, 2010 (U.S. Steel Case Brief). On July 

28, 2010, U.S. Steel and Nucor 

Corporation (Nucor), a domestic 

interested party in this proceeding, 

submitted their rebuttal briefs. See 

Letter from United States Steel 

Corporation, titled ‘‘Rebuttal Brief: 

Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 

Products from Brazil,’’ dated July 28, 

2010 (U.S. Steel Rebuttal Brief); see 

also, Letter from Nucor Corporation, 

titled ‘‘Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel 

Flat Products from Brazil: Rebuttal 

Brief,’’ dated July 28, 2010 (Nucor 

Rebuttal Brief). No public hearing was 

requested or held. 

Period of Review 

The period of review (POR) is March 

1, 2008, to February 28, 2009. 

Scope of the Order 

For purposes of this order, the 

products covered are certain hot-rolled 

flat-rolled carbon-quality steel products 

of a rectangular shape, of a width of 0.5 

inch or greater, neither clad, plated, nor 

coated with metal and whether or not 

painted, varnished, or coated with 

plastics or other non-metallic 

substances, in coils (whether or not in 

successively superimposed layers) 

regardless of thickness, and in straight 

lengths, of a thickness less than 4.75 

mm and of a width measuring at least 

10 times the thickness. Universal mill 

plate (i.e., flat-rolled products rolled on 

four faces or in a closed box pass, of a 

width exceeding 150 mm, but not 

exceeding 1250 mm and of a thickness 

of not less than 4 mm, not in coils and 

without patterns in relief) of a thickness 

not less than 4.0 mm is not included 

within the scope of this order. 

Specifically included in this scope are 

vacuum degassed, fully stabilized 

(commonly referred to as interstitial-free 

(IF)) steels, high strength low alloy 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES