Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Final Rescission and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 54269-54272 [E6-15277]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 178 / Thursday, September 14, 2006 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A–570–803 Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Final Rescission and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On March 8, 2006, the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) published in the Federal Register the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on heavy forged hand tools, finished or unfinished, with or without handles (‘‘HFHTs’’), from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). See Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, From the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Administrative Reviews and Preliminary Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 71 FR 11580 (March 8, 2006) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’). We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results. Based upon our analysis of the comments and information received, we made changes to the dumping margin calculations for the final results. We find that certain manufacturers/exporters sold subject merchandise at less than normal value during the period of review (‘‘POR’’) February 1, 2004, through January 31, 2005. AGENCY: EFFECTIVE DATE: September 14, 2006. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Renkey (Respondents Shandong Huarong Machinery Co. Ltd. and Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Corporation), Cindy Robinson (Respondent Iron Bull Industrial Co., Ltd.), and Nicole Bankhead (Respondent Shandong Machinery Import & Export Company), AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2312, (202) 482–3797 and (202) 482–9068, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Case History The Preliminary Results in this administrative review were published VerDate Aug<31>2005 20:23 Sep 13, 2006 Jkt 208001 on March 8, 2006. See Preliminary Results. This administrative review covers four exporters or producer/ exporters of subject merchandise: Shandong Huarong Machinery Co., Ltd. (‘‘Huarong’’), Iron Bull Industrial Co., Ltd. (‘‘Iron Bull’’), Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Corporation (‘‘TMC’’), and Shandong Machinery Import & Export Company (‘‘SMC’’)1, collectively ‘‘the Respondents,’’ and exports of the subject merchandise to the United States during the period February 1, 2004, through January 31, 2005. On March 2, 2006, an importer/ customer in the instant review (‘‘Customer A’’)2 requested a second extension to respond to the Department’s February 17, 2006, letter requesting that Customer A provide its downstream sales data and additional information about its bankruptcy status. The Department granted Customer A an additional extension of eleven days to respond to the Department’s February 17, 2006, questionnaire. On March 17, 2006, Customer A submitted its questionnaire response providing additional information on its bankruptcy status but no downstream sales information. On March 20, 2006, Customer A submitted certifications from its bankruptcy lawyers. On March 28, 2006, the Department issued supplemental questionnaires to TMC and SMC. On April 4, 2006, TMC submitted its supplemental questionnaire response. On April 5, 2006, SMC submitted its supplemental questionnaire response. On April 7, 2006, the Petitioner,3 interested party Council Tool Company, and the Respondents submitted their case briefs. On April 13, 2006, the Petitioner and the Respondents submitted their rebuttal briefs. On June 9, 2006, the Department extended the time limit for completion of the final results of the instant administrative review. See Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, 1 On March 23, 2005, the Department initiated the 14th administrative review of HFHTs from the PRC, for twenty-one companies in the axes/adzes and bars/wedges orders, and twenty companies in the hammers/sledges and picks/mattocks orders. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Requests for Revocation in Part (‘‘Initiation Notice‘‘), 70 FR 14643 (March 23, 2005). The Department notes that SMC was inadvertently referred to as ‘‘Shanghai Machinery Import and Export Corporation’’ instead of Shandong Machinery Import & Export Company in the Initiation Notice of the instant review for the hammers/sledges order. 2 Please see SMC Hammers/Sledges Final Analysis Memo, SMC Bars/Wedges Final Analysis Memo, and Affiliation Memo for information regarding Customer A. 3 Ames True Temper. PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 54269 from the People’s Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for the 14th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 33438 (June 9, 2006). On July 26, 2006, the Department fully extended the final results of the instant administrative review. See Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, from the People’s Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for the 14th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 43714 (August 2, 2006). On July 26, 2006, the Department issued Customer A a questionnaire requesting additional information on its bankruptcy status. Customer A did not respond to this questionnaire. Scope of the Antidumping Duty Orders The products covered by these orders are HFHTs from the PRC, comprising the following classes or kinds of merchandise: (1) Hammers and sledges with heads over 1.5 kg (3.33 pounds); (2) bars over 18 inches in length, track tools and wedges; (3) picks and mattocks; and (4) axes, adzes and similar hewing tools. HFHTs include heads for drilling hammers, sledges, axes, mauls, picks and mattocks, which may or may not be painted, which may or may not be finished, or which may or may not be imported with handles; assorted bar products and track tools including wrecking bars, digging bars and tampers; and steel wood splitting wedges. HFHTs are manufactured through a hot forge operation in which steel is sheared to required length, heated to forging temperature, and formed to final shape on forging equipment using dies specific to the desired product shape and size. Depending on the product, finishing operations may include shot blasting, grinding, polishing and painting, and the insertion of handles for handled products. HFHTs are currently provided for under the following Harmonized Tariff System of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) subheadings: 8205.20.60, 8205.59.30, 8201.30.00, 8201.40.60, and 8205.59.5510.4 Specifically excluded from these investigations are hammers and sledges with heads 1.5 kg. (3.33 pounds) in weight and under, hoes and rakes, and bars 18 inches in length and under. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes. The written description remains dispositive. The Department issued nine conclusive scope rulings regarding the merchandise covered by these orders: (1) On August 16, 1993, the Department found the ‘‘Max Multi–Purpose Axe,’’ 4 See E:\FR\FM\14SEN1.SGM Final Decision Memo at Comment 5. 14SEN1 54270 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 178 / Thursday, September 14, 2006 / Notices imported by the Forrest Tool Company, to be within the scope of the axes/adzes order; (2) on March 8, 2001, the Department found ‘‘18–inch’’ and ‘‘24– inch’’ pry bars, produced without dies, imported by Olympia Industrial, Inc. and SMC Pacific Tools, Inc., to be within the scope of the bars/wedges order; (3) on March 8, 2001, the Department found the ‘‘Pulaski’’ tool, produced without dies by TMC, to be within the scope of the axes/adzes order; (4) on March 8, 2001, the Department found the ‘‘skinning axe,’’ imported by Import Traders, Inc., to be within the scope of the axes/adzes order; (5) on December 9, 2004, the Department found the ‘‘MUTT,’’ imported by Olympia Industrial, Inc., under HTSUS 8205.59.5510, to be within the scope of the axes/adzes order; (6) on May 23, 2005, the Department found 8–inch by 8–inch and 10–inch by 10–inch cast tampers, imported by Olympia Industrial, Inc. to be outside the scope of the orders; (7) on September 22, 2005, following remand, the U.S. Court of International Trade affirmed the Department’s determination that cast picks are outside the scope of the order; (8) on October 14, 2005, the Department found the Mean Green Splitting Machine, imported by Avalanche Industries, under HTSUS 8201.40.60, to be within the scope of the bars/wedges order, and (9) on July 27, 2006, the Department found that the gooseneck claw wrecking bar which has a length of 17 7/8’’ not including the curvature portion of the bar stock, imported by Central Purchasing, LLC. to be outside the scope of the order for bars and wedges. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES Separate Rates TMC, SMC, Huarong, and Iron Bull have requested separate, company– specific antidumping duty rates. In the Preliminary Results, we determined that TMC, SMC, Huarong, and Iron Bull met the criteria for the application of a separate antidumping duty rate. See Preliminary Results at 11583. For the final results, we continue to find that the evidence placed on the record of the instant review by TMC, SMC, Huarong, and Iron Bull demonstrate both a de jure and de facto absence of government control, with respect to their respective exports of the subject merchandise, and, thus all four companies are eligible for separate rate status. See Final Decision Memo at Comment 3. Rescission of Review In our Preliminary Results, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), we preliminarily rescinded the review for all four orders for Shanghai Xinike VerDate Aug<31>2005 20:23 Sep 13, 2006 Jkt 208001 Trading Company (‘‘SXT’’). Additionally, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we preliminarily rescinded the orders on hammers/ sledges and picks/mattocks for Huarong and Iron Bull, and also the order on axes/adzes for Iron Bull. See Preliminary Results, 71 FR 11583. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding these administrative reviews with respect to all four orders for SXT. The Department reviewed data from Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) for Huarong and Iron Bull, which supports the claims that these companies did not export subject merchandise during the POR. Furthermore, no party placed evidence on the record demonstrating that Huarong or Iron Bull exported the merchandise identified above during the POR since the issuance of the Preliminary Results. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) and consistent with the Department’s practice, we are rescinding these administrative reviews with respect to the hammers/sledges and picks/ mattocks orders for Huarong and Iron Bull, and also the order on axes/adzes for Iron Bull. Analysis of Comments Received All 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 Issues and Decision Memorandum (‘‘Final Decision Memo’’), which is hereby adopted by this notice. Parties can find a complete discussion of the issues raised in this administrative review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which is on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room B–099 of the main Department building. In addition, a copy of the Final Decision Memo can be accessed directly on our website at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/. The paper copy and electronic version of the Final Decision Memo are identical in content. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on a review of the record as well as comments received from parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we have made revisions to the margin calculations for the final results. Specific changes to SMC’s margin calculation include a recalculation of the international freight expenses and truck freight in the margin programs for both the hammers/sledges and bars/ wedges orders and a revision to the calculation of one packing freight factor, packing weight, and normal value in the margin program for the hammers/ PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 sledges order. See Final Decision Memo at Comment 8; see also Analysis for the Final Results of the 14th Administrative Review of Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the Peoples’ Republic of China: Shandong Machinery Import & Export Company (‘‘SMC’’) - Hammers/Sledges (‘‘SMC Final Hammers/Sledges Analysis Memo’’); Analysis for the Final Results of the 14th Administrative Review of Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the Peoples’ Republic of China: Shandong Machinery Import & Export Company (‘‘SMC’’) - Bars/Wedges (‘‘SMC Final Bars/Wedges Analysis Memo’’). Specific changes to Huarong’s axes/adzes calculation program include a recalculation of international freight expenses and truck freight. See Final Decision Memo at Comment 8; see also Analysis for the Final Results of the 14th Administrative Review of Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the Peoples’ Republic of China: Huarong (‘‘Huarong Final Analysis Memo’’). Specific changes to TMC’s margin calculation in the picks/mattocks order include a recalculation of truck freight in the margin program. See Final Decision Memo at Comment 8; see also Analysis for the Final Results of the 14th Administrative Review of Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the Peoples’ Republic of China: TMC (‘‘TMC Final Analysis Memo’’). The Department also notes that in the Preliminary Results the brokerage and handling value for Pidilite Industries Ltd. (‘‘Pidilite’’) was incorrectly labeled November 1, 2002, through September 30, 2003. See Memorandum from Matt Renkey, Case Analyst, through Alex Villanueva, Program Manager, Office 9, to the File, 14th Administrative Review of HFHTs from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’): Surrogate Values for the Preliminary Results, dated February 28, 2006 (‘‘Surrogate Values Memo’’) at Exhibits 2 and 12. The Department also notes that the average brokerage and handling surrogate value was incorrectly calculated. See Id. The Department has corrected the brokerage and handling value for these final results. See Memorandum from Matthew Renkey, Case Analyst, through Alex Villanueva, Program Manager, Office 9, to the File, 14th Administrative Review of HFHTs from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’): Selection of Surrogate Values for the Final Results, dated September 5, 2006. Affiliation The Department preliminarily determined that SMC is affiliated with one of its U.S. customers, Customer A. See Preliminary Results, at 11584. Specifically, the Department determined E:\FR\FM\14SEN1.SGM 14SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 178 / Thursday, September 14, 2006 / Notices rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES that SMC and Customer A are affiliated through their joint ownership of another PRC company involved in the production and export of subject merchandise. See Memorandum from Nicole Bankhead, Case Analyst, through Alex Villanueva, Program Manager, Office 9, to James C. Doyle, Director, Office 9, 14th Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, from the People’s Republic of China: Affiliation, dated February 28, 2006 (‘‘SMC Affiliation Memo’’) for further details regarding this issue. The Department continues to find that SMC is affiliated with Customer A. See Final Analysis Memo at Comment 10A and Facts Available (‘‘FA’’) Section Below. Facts Available In the Preliminary Results, we determined that the use of partial neutral facts available was appropriate for SMC’s constructed export price (‘‘CEP’’) sales through Customer A in accordance with sections 776(a)(2)(A) and 776(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). In addition, we preliminarily based the dumping margins for SMC, Huarong, TMC, and Iron Bull on total adverse facts available (‘‘AFA’’) for their sales of merchandise subject to certain HFHTs orders pursuant to sections 776(a) and 776(b) of the Act. See Preliminary Results, 71 FR 11580 at 11584–87. For these final results, in accordance with sections 776(a)(2)(A), 776(a)(2)(B) and 776(b) of the Act, we have determined that the use of partial AFA, rather than neutral facts available, is appropriate for SMC’s CEP sales through Customer A. See Final Decision Memo at Comment 10B. As partial AFA, we are applying the highest transaction margin from SMC’s sales to its other U.S. customers to those sales it made to Customer A. See SMC Hammers/Sledges Final Analysis Memo and the SMC Bars/ Wedges Final Analysis Memo. We also continue to find that the application of total AFA to SMC for axes/adzes and picks mattocks; Huarong for bars/ wedges; to TMC for axes/adzes, hammers/sledges, and bars/wedges; and Iron Bull for bars/wedges is appropriate because each respondent significantly impeded our ability to (1) conduct the reviews of these orders, and (2) instruct CBP to assess the correct antidumping duties, as mandated by section 731 of the Act. For the final results the Department is basing SMC’s sales through Customer A on partial AFA, using SMC’s own data. A complete explanation of the selection, corroboration, and application of AFA VerDate Aug<31>2005 20:23 Sep 13, 2006 Jkt 208001 for all other AFA rates can be found in the Preliminary Results. See Preliminary Results, 71 FR 11580 at 11587. The Department received comments and rebuttal comments with regard to certain aspects of our selection and application of AFA. See Final Decision Memo, at Comments 2, 3, 8, 9 and 10. The Department has made no changes since the Preliminary Results that would affect the Department’s selection, corroboration, and application of facts available for the other companies receiving AFA. Accordingly, for the final results, we continue to apply AFA as noted above. Final Results of Review The weighted–average dumping margins for the POR are as follows: HEAVY FORGED HAND TOOLS FROM THE PRC: AXES/ADZES Manufacturer/Exporter Weighted–Average Margin (Percent) TMC .............................. Huarong ........................ SMC .............................. PRC–Wide Rate ........... 189.37 189.37 189.37 189.37 HEAVY FORGED HAND TOOLS FROM THE PRC: HAMMERS/SLEDGES Manufacturer/Exporter Weighted–Average Margin (Percent) TMC .............................. SMC .............................. PRC–Wide Rate ........... 45.42 34.56 45.42 HEAVY FORGED HAND TOOLS FROM THE PRC: PICKS/MATTOCKS Manufacturer/Exporter Weighted–Average Margin (Percent) TMC .............................. SMC .............................. PRC–Wide Rate ........... 53.04 98.77 98.77 HEAVY FORGED HAND TOOLS FROM THE PRC: BARS/WEDGES Manufacturer/Exporter Weighted–Average Margin (Percent) TMC .............................. Huarong ........................ SMC .............................. Iron Bull ........................ PRC–Wide Rate ........... 139.31 139.31 104.54 139.31 139.31 Cash Deposit Requirements The following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of certain PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 54271 HFHTs from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of this notice, as provided for by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates shown above; (2) for any previously reviewed or investigated PRC or non–PRC exporter, not covered in this review, with a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the company–specific rate established in the most recent segment of those proceedings; (3) for all other PRC exporters, the cash deposit rates will be the PRC–wide rates established in the final results of this review; and (4) the cash deposit rate for any non– PRC exporter of subject merchandise from the PRC who does not have its own rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied the non– PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review. Assessment Rates The Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of publication of the final results of this administrative review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated importer–specific assessment rates for merchandise subject to this review. For SMC, TMC, and Huarong, we divided the total dumping margins of its reviewed sales by the total entered value of its reviewed sales for each applicable importer to calculate ad valorem assessment rates. We will direct CBP to assess the resulting assessment rates against the entered customs values for the subject merchandise on SMC, TMC and Huarong’s entries under the relevant order during the POR. Where an importer–specific ad valorem rate is de minimis, we will order CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. Lastly, for the respondents receiving dumping rates based upon AFA, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate entries according to the AFA ad valorem rate. The Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to CBP upon the completion of the final results of this administrative review. 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 E:\FR\FM\14SEN1.SGM 14SEN1 54272 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 178 / Thursday, September 14, 2006 / Notices B. Partial Adverse Facts Available for Constructed Export Price (‘‘CEP’’) Sales 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. C. Rate to Apply to SMC D. AFA for SMC’s Non–Reported Sales Comment 11: AFA for Iron Bull’s Sales of Bars/Wedges 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, 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 administrative review and notice in accordance with sections 751(a) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: September 5, 2006. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Appendix I Decision Memorandum I. CHANGES SINCE THE PRELIMINARY RESULTS II. GENERAL COMMENTS: rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES Comment 1: Adverse Facts Available (‘‘AFA’’) for ‘‘Agent’’ Sales Comment 2: AFA Rate for the Bars/ Wedges Order Comment 3: Separate Rates for TMC and SMC Comment 4: Rejecting the Respondents’ Case Brief Comment 5: Addition of an HTS Number to the Scope of the Order Comment 6: Application of Packing Materials and the By–product Offset in the Calculation of Normal Value Comment 7: Referral to Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) Regarding Evasion of These Orders by Huarong, TMC and Iron Bull Comment 8: Clerical Errors from the Preliminary Results A. Calculation of per unit Importer Assessment Rates B. SMC Missing Packing Variable C. CBP Instructions III. COMPANY–SPECIFIC ISSUES: Comment 9: Huarong A. Axes/Adzes Rate B. Bars/Wedges Rate Comment 10: SMC A. Affiliation Determination VerDate Aug<31>2005 21:22 Sep 13, 2006 Jkt 208001 [FR Doc. E6–15277 Filed 9–13–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (A–351–824, A–823–805, A–570–828) Silicomanganese from Brazil, Ukraine, and the People’s Republic of China: Continuation of Antidumping Duty Orders Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: As a result of the determinations by the Department of Commerce (the Department) and the International Trade Commission (ITC) that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on silicomanganese from Brazil, Ukraine, and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time, the Department is publishing notice of the continuation of these antidumping duty orders. EFFECTIVE DATE: September 14, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janis Kalnins or Minoo Hatten, Office 5, AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1392 and (202) 482–1690, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background On January 3, 2006, the Department initiated and the ITC instituted the second sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on silicomanganese from Brazil, Ukraine, and the PRC pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). See Initiation of Five-year (Sunset) Reviews, 71 FR 91 (January 3, 2006). As a result of our review, the Department found that revocation of the antidumping duty orders would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and notified the ITC of the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail were the orders to be PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 revoked. See Silicomanganese from Brazil, Ukraine, and the People’s Republic of China; Five-year Sunset Reviews of Antidumping Duty Orders; Final Results, 71 FR 26927 (May 9, 2006). On September 1, 2006, the ITC determined pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on silicomanganese from Brazil, Ukraine, and the PRC would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. See Silicomanganese from Brazil, China, and Ukraine, 71 FR 52145 (September 1, 2006), and ITC Publication 3879 (August 2006) entitled Silicomanganese from Brazil, China, and Ukraine: Investigation Nos. 731– TA–311–314, 317, and 379 (Second Review). Scope of the Orders The merchandise covered by these orders is silicomanganese. Silicomanganese, which is sometimes called ferrosilicon manganese, is a ferroalloy composed principally of manganese, silicon and iron, and normally contains much smaller proportions of minor elements, such as carbon, phosphorus, and sulfur. Silicomanganese generally contains by weight not less than 4 percent iron, more than 30 percent manganese, more than 8 percent silicon, and not more than 3 percent phosphorous. All compositions, forms, and sizes of silicomanganese are included within the orders, including silicomanganese slag, fines, and briquettes. Silicomanganese is used primarily in steel production as a source of both silicon and manganese. Silicomanganese is currently classifiable under subheading 7202.30.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Some silicomanganese may also currently be classifiable under HTSUS subheading 7202.99.5040. These orders cover all silicomanganese, regardless of its tariff classification. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of these orders remains dispositive. Determination As a result of the determinations by the Department and ITC that revocation of these antidumping duty orders would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act, the Department hereby orders the continuation of the antidumping E:\FR\FM\14SEN1.SGM 14SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 178 (Thursday, September 14, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54269-54272]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-15277]



[[Page 54269]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

A-570-803


Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without 
Handles, From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Final Rescission and 
Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On March 8, 2006, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') published in the Federal Register the preliminary results 
of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on heavy 
forged hand tools, finished or unfinished, with or without handles 
(``HFHTs''), from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''). See Heavy 
Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, 
From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of 
Administrative Reviews and Preliminary Partial Rescission of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 71 FR 11580 (March 8, 2006) 
(``Preliminary Results''). We gave interested parties an opportunity to 
comment on the Preliminary Results. Based upon our analysis of the 
comments and information received, we made changes to the dumping 
margin calculations for the final results. We find that certain 
manufacturers/exporters sold subject merchandise at less than normal 
value during the period of review (``POR'') February 1, 2004, through 
January 31, 2005.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 14, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Renkey (Respondents Shandong 
Huarong Machinery Co. Ltd. and Tianjin Machinery Import & Export 
Corporation), Cindy Robinson (Respondent Iron Bull Industrial Co., 
Ltd.), and Nicole Bankhead (Respondent Shandong Machinery Import & 
Export Company), AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; 
telephone: (202) 482-2312, (202) 482-3797 and (202) 482-9068, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Case History

    The Preliminary Results in this administrative review were 
published on March 8, 2006. See Preliminary Results. This 
administrative review covers four exporters or producer/exporters of 
subject merchandise: Shandong Huarong Machinery Co., Ltd. 
(``Huarong''), Iron Bull Industrial Co., Ltd. (``Iron Bull''), Tianjin 
Machinery Import & Export Corporation (``TMC''), and Shandong Machinery 
Import & Export Company (``SMC'')\1\, collectively ``the Respondents,'' 
and exports of the subject merchandise to the United States during the 
period February 1, 2004, through January 31, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On March 23, 2005, the Department initiated the 14th 
administrative review of HFHTs from the PRC, for twenty-one 
companies in the axes/adzes and bars/wedges orders, and twenty 
companies in the hammers/sledges and picks/mattocks orders. See 
Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative 
Reviews and Requests for Revocation in Part (``Initiation Notice``), 
70 FR 14643 (March 23, 2005). The Department notes that SMC was 
inadvertently referred to as ``Shanghai Machinery Import and Export 
Corporation'' instead of Shandong Machinery Import & Export Company 
in the Initiation Notice of the instant review for the hammers/
sledges order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 2, 2006, an importer/customer in the instant review 
(``Customer A'')\2\ requested a second extension to respond to the 
Department's February 17, 2006, letter requesting that Customer A 
provide its downstream sales data and additional information about its 
bankruptcy status. The Department granted Customer A an additional 
extension of eleven days to respond to the Department's February 17, 
2006, questionnaire. On March 17, 2006, Customer A submitted its 
questionnaire response providing additional information on its 
bankruptcy status but no downstream sales information. On March 20, 
2006, Customer A submitted certifications from its bankruptcy lawyers. 
On March 28, 2006, the Department issued supplemental questionnaires to 
TMC and SMC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Please see SMC Hammers/Sledges Final Analysis Memo, SMC 
Bars/Wedges Final Analysis Memo, and Affiliation Memo for 
information regarding Customer A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 4, 2006, TMC submitted its supplemental questionnaire 
response. On April 5, 2006, SMC submitted its supplemental 
questionnaire response. On April 7, 2006, the Petitioner,\3\ interested 
party Council Tool Company, and the Respondents submitted their case 
briefs. On April 13, 2006, the Petitioner and the Respondents submitted 
their rebuttal briefs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Ames True Temper.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 9, 2006, the Department extended the time limit for 
completion of the final results of the instant administrative review. 
See Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without 
Handles, from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit 
for the 14th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 33438 (June 
9, 2006). On July 26, 2006, the Department fully extended the final 
results of the instant administrative review. See Heavy Forged Hand 
Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, from the 
People's Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for the 14th 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 43714 (August 2, 2006).
    On July 26, 2006, the Department issued Customer A a questionnaire 
requesting additional information on its bankruptcy status. Customer A 
did not respond to this questionnaire.

Scope of the Antidumping Duty Orders

    The products covered by these orders are HFHTs from the PRC, 
comprising the following classes or kinds of merchandise: (1) Hammers 
and sledges with heads over 1.5 kg (3.33 pounds); (2) bars over 18 
inches in length, track tools and wedges; (3) picks and mattocks; and 
(4) axes, adzes and similar hewing tools. HFHTs include heads for 
drilling hammers, sledges, axes, mauls, picks and mattocks, which may 
or may not be painted, which may or may not be finished, or which may 
or may not be imported with handles; assorted bar products and track 
tools including wrecking bars, digging bars and tampers; and steel wood 
splitting wedges. HFHTs are manufactured through a hot forge operation 
in which steel is sheared to required length, heated to forging 
temperature, and formed to final shape on forging equipment using dies 
specific to the desired product shape and size. Depending on the 
product, finishing operations may include shot blasting, grinding, 
polishing and painting, and the insertion of handles for handled 
products. HFHTs are currently provided for under the following 
Harmonized Tariff System of the United States (``HTSUS'') subheadings: 
8205.20.60, 8205.59.30, 8201.30.00, 8201.40.60, and 8205.59.5510.\4\ 
Specifically excluded from these investigations are hammers and sledges 
with heads 1.5 kg. (3.33 pounds) in weight and under, hoes and rakes, 
and bars 18 inches in length and under. The HTSUS subheadings are 
provided for convenience and Customs purposes. The written description 
remains dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Final Decision Memo at Comment 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department issued nine conclusive scope rulings regarding the 
merchandise covered by these orders: (1) On August 16, 1993, the 
Department found the ``Max Multi-Purpose Axe,''

[[Page 54270]]

imported by the Forrest Tool Company, to be within the scope of the 
axes/adzes order; (2) on March 8, 2001, the Department found ``18-
inch'' and ``24-inch'' pry bars, produced without dies, imported by 
Olympia Industrial, Inc. and SMC Pacific Tools, Inc., to be within the 
scope of the bars/wedges order; (3) on March 8, 2001, the Department 
found the ``Pulaski'' tool, produced without dies by TMC, to be within 
the scope of the axes/adzes order; (4) on March 8, 2001, the Department 
found the ``skinning axe,'' imported by Import Traders, Inc., to be 
within the scope of the axes/adzes order; (5) on December 9, 2004, the 
Department found the ``MUTT,'' imported by Olympia Industrial, Inc., 
under HTSUS 8205.59.5510, to be within the scope of the axes/adzes 
order; (6) on May 23, 2005, the Department found 8-inch by 8-inch and 
10-inch by 10-inch cast tampers, imported by Olympia Industrial, Inc. 
to be outside the scope of the orders; (7) on September 22, 2005, 
following remand, the U.S. Court of International Trade affirmed the 
Department's determination that cast picks are outside the scope of the 
order; (8) on October 14, 2005, the Department found the Mean Green 
Splitting Machine, imported by Avalanche Industries, under HTSUS 
8201.40.60, to be within the scope of the bars/wedges order, and (9) on 
July 27, 2006, the Department found that the gooseneck claw wrecking 
bar which has a length of 17 7/8'' not including the curvature portion 
of the bar stock, imported by Central Purchasing, LLC. to be outside 
the scope of the order for bars and wedges.

Separate Rates

    TMC, SMC, Huarong, and Iron Bull have requested separate, company-
specific antidumping duty rates. In the Preliminary Results, we 
determined that TMC, SMC, Huarong, and Iron Bull met the criteria for 
the application of a separate antidumping duty rate. See Preliminary 
Results at 11583. For the final results, we continue to find that the 
evidence placed on the record of the instant review by TMC, SMC, 
Huarong, and Iron Bull demonstrate both a de jure and de facto absence 
of government control, with respect to their respective exports of the 
subject merchandise, and, thus all four companies are eligible for 
separate rate status. See Final Decision Memo at Comment 3.

Rescission of Review

    In our Preliminary Results, in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.213(d)(1), we preliminarily rescinded the review for all four 
orders for Shanghai Xinike Trading Company (``SXT''). Additionally, in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we preliminarily rescinded the 
orders on hammers/sledges and picks/mattocks for Huarong and Iron Bull, 
and also the order on axes/adzes for Iron Bull. See Preliminary 
Results, 71 FR 11583.
    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding these 
administrative reviews with respect to all four orders for SXT. The 
Department reviewed data from Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') 
for Huarong and Iron Bull, which supports the claims that these 
companies did not export subject merchandise during the POR. 
Furthermore, no party placed evidence on the record demonstrating that 
Huarong or Iron Bull exported the merchandise identified above during 
the POR since the issuance of the Preliminary Results. Therefore, in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) and consistent with the 
Department's practice, we are rescinding these administrative reviews 
with respect to the hammers/sledges and picks/mattocks orders for 
Huarong and Iron Bull, and also the order on axes/adzes for Iron Bull.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All 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 Issues and Decision 
Memorandum (``Final Decision Memo''), which is hereby adopted by this 
notice. Parties can find a complete discussion of the issues raised in 
this administrative review and the corresponding recommendations in 
this public memorandum which is on file in the Central Records Unit 
(CRU), room B-099 of the main Department building. In addition, a copy 
of the Final Decision Memo can be accessed directly on our website at 
http://ia.ita.doc.gov/. The paper copy and electronic version of the 
Final Decision Memo are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on a review of the record as well as comments received from 
parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we have made revisions to 
the margin calculations for the final results. Specific changes to 
SMC's margin calculation include a recalculation of the international 
freight expenses and truck freight in the margin programs for both the 
hammers/sledges and bars/wedges orders and a revision to the 
calculation of one packing freight factor, packing weight, and normal 
value in the margin program for the hammers/sledges order. See Final 
Decision Memo at Comment 8; see also Analysis for the Final Results of 
the 14th Administrative Review of Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the 
Peoples' Republic of China: Shandong Machinery Import & Export Company 
(``SMC'') - Hammers/Sledges (``SMC Final Hammers/Sledges Analysis 
Memo''); Analysis for the Final Results of the 14th Administrative 
Review of Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the Peoples' Republic of China: 
Shandong Machinery Import & Export Company (``SMC'') - Bars/Wedges 
(``SMC Final Bars/Wedges Analysis Memo''). Specific changes to 
Huarong's axes/adzes calculation program include a recalculation of 
international freight expenses and truck freight. See Final Decision 
Memo at Comment 8; see also Analysis for the Final Results of the 14th 
Administrative Review of Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the Peoples' 
Republic of China: Huarong (``Huarong Final Analysis Memo''). Specific 
changes to TMC's margin calculation in the picks/mattocks order include 
a recalculation of truck freight in the margin program. See Final 
Decision Memo at Comment 8; see also Analysis for the Final Results of 
the 14th Administrative Review of Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the 
Peoples' Republic of China: TMC (``TMC Final Analysis Memo'').
    The Department also notes that in the Preliminary Results the 
brokerage and handling value for Pidilite Industries Ltd. 
(``Pidilite'') was incorrectly labeled November 1, 2002, through 
September 30, 2003. See Memorandum from Matt Renkey, Case Analyst, 
through Alex Villanueva, Program Manager, Office 9, to the File, 14th 
Administrative Review of HFHTs from the People's Republic of China 
(``PRC''): Surrogate Values for the Preliminary Results, dated February 
28, 2006 (``Surrogate Values Memo'') at Exhibits 2 and 12. The 
Department also notes that the average brokerage and handling surrogate 
value was incorrectly calculated. See Id. The Department has corrected 
the brokerage and handling value for these final results. See 
Memorandum from Matthew Renkey, Case Analyst, through Alex Villanueva, 
Program Manager, Office 9, to the File, 14th Administrative Review of 
HFHTs from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''): Selection of 
Surrogate Values for the Final Results, dated September 5, 2006.

Affiliation

    The Department preliminarily determined that SMC is affiliated with 
one of its U.S. customers, Customer A. See Preliminary Results, at 
11584. Specifically, the Department determined

[[Page 54271]]

that SMC and Customer A are affiliated through their joint ownership of 
another PRC company involved in the production and export of subject 
merchandise. See Memorandum from Nicole Bankhead, Case Analyst, through 
Alex Villanueva, Program Manager, Office 9, to James C. Doyle, 
Director, Office 9, 14th Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty 
Order on Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or 
Without Handles, from the People's Republic of China: Affiliation, 
dated February 28, 2006 (``SMC Affiliation Memo'') for further details 
regarding this issue. The Department continues to find that SMC is 
affiliated with Customer A. See Final Analysis Memo at Comment 10A and 
Facts Available (``FA'') Section Below.

Facts Available

    In the Preliminary Results, we determined that the use of partial 
neutral facts available was appropriate for SMC's constructed export 
price (``CEP'') sales through Customer A in accordance with sections 
776(a)(2)(A) and 776(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
(``the Act''). In addition, we preliminarily based the dumping margins 
for SMC, Huarong, TMC, and Iron Bull on total adverse facts available 
(``AFA'') for their sales of merchandise subject to certain HFHTs 
orders pursuant to sections 776(a) and 776(b) of the Act. See 
Preliminary Results, 71 FR 11580 at 11584-87.
    For these final results, in accordance with sections 776(a)(2)(A), 
776(a)(2)(B) and 776(b) of the Act, we have determined that the use of 
partial AFA, rather than neutral facts available, is appropriate for 
SMC's CEP sales through Customer A. See Final Decision Memo at Comment 
10B. As partial AFA, we are applying the highest transaction margin 
from SMC's sales to its other U.S. customers to those sales it made to 
Customer A. See SMC Hammers/Sledges Final Analysis Memo and the SMC 
Bars/Wedges Final Analysis Memo. We also continue to find that the 
application of total AFA to SMC for axes/adzes and picks mattocks; 
Huarong for bars/wedges; to TMC for axes/adzes, hammers/sledges, and 
bars/wedges; and Iron Bull for bars/wedges is appropriate because each 
respondent significantly impeded our ability to (1) conduct the reviews 
of these orders, and (2) instruct CBP to assess the correct antidumping 
duties, as mandated by section 731 of the Act.
    For the final results the Department is basing SMC's sales through 
Customer A on partial AFA, using SMC's own data. A complete explanation 
of the selection, corroboration, and application of AFA for all other 
AFA rates can be found in the Preliminary Results. See Preliminary 
Results, 71 FR 11580 at 11587. The Department received comments and 
rebuttal comments with regard to certain aspects of our selection and 
application of AFA. See Final Decision Memo, at Comments 2, 3, 8, 9 and 
10. The Department has made no changes since the Preliminary Results 
that would affect the Department's selection, corroboration, and 
application of facts available for the other companies receiving AFA. 
Accordingly, for the final results, we continue to apply AFA as noted 
above.

Final Results of Review

    The weighted-average dumping margins for the POR are as follows:

            Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the PRC: Axes/Adzes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted-Average
                Manufacturer/Exporter                  Margin (Percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TMC.................................................              189.37
Huarong.............................................              189.37
SMC.................................................              189.37
PRC-Wide Rate.......................................              189.37
------------------------------------------------------------------------


          Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the PRC: Hammers/Sledges
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted-Average
                Manufacturer/Exporter                  Margin (Percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TMC.................................................               45.42
SMC.................................................               34.56
PRC-Wide Rate.......................................               45.42
------------------------------------------------------------------------


          Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the PRC: Picks/Mattocks
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted-Average
                Manufacturer/Exporter                  Margin (Percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TMC.................................................               53.04
SMC.................................................               98.77
PRC-Wide Rate.......................................               98.77
------------------------------------------------------------------------


            Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the PRC: Bars/Wedges
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted-Average
                Manufacturer/Exporter                  Margin (Percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TMC.................................................              139.31
Huarong.............................................              139.31
SMC.................................................              104.54
Iron Bull...........................................              139.31
PRC-Wide Rate.......................................              139.31
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all 
shipments of certain HFHTs from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of this 
notice, as provided for by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash 
deposit rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates shown above; 
(2) for any previously reviewed or investigated PRC or non-PRC 
exporter, not covered in this review, with a separate rate, the cash 
deposit rate will be the company-specific rate established in the most 
recent segment of those proceedings; (3) for all other PRC exporters, 
the cash deposit rates will be the PRC-wide rates established in the 
final results of this review; and (4) the cash deposit rate for any 
non-PRC exporter of subject merchandise from the PRC who does not have 
its own rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that 
supplied the non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when 
imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results 
of the next administrative review.

Assessment Rates

    The Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to CBP 
within 15 days of publication of the final results of this 
administrative review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have 
calculated importer-specific assessment rates for merchandise subject 
to this review. For SMC, TMC, and Huarong, we divided the total dumping 
margins of its reviewed sales by the total entered value of its 
reviewed sales for each applicable importer to calculate ad valorem 
assessment rates. We will direct CBP to assess the resulting assessment 
rates against the entered customs values for the subject merchandise on 
SMC, TMC and Huarong's entries under the relevant order during the POR. 
Where an importer-specific ad valorem rate is de minimis, we will order 
CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping 
duties.
    Lastly, for the respondents receiving dumping rates based upon AFA, 
the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate entries according to the 
AFA ad valorem rate. The Department will issue appraisement 
instructions directly to CBP upon the completion of the final results 
of this administrative review.

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

[[Page 54272]]

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, 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 administrative review and notice 
in accordance with sections 751(a) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: September 5, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration,

Appendix I Decision Memorandum

I. CHANGES SINCE THE PRELIMINARY RESULTS
II. GENERAL COMMENTS:
Comment 1: Adverse Facts Available (``AFA'') for ``Agent'' Sales
Comment 2: AFA Rate for the Bars/Wedges Order
Comment 3: Separate Rates for TMC and SMC
Comment 4: Rejecting the Respondents' Case Brief
Comment 5: Addition of an HTS Number to the Scope of the Order
Comment 6: Application of Packing Materials and the By-product Offset 
in the Calculation of Normal Value
Comment 7: Referral to Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') 
Regarding Evasion of These Orders by Huarong, TMC and Iron Bull
Comment 8: Clerical Errors from the Preliminary Results
A. Calculation of per unit Importer Assessment Rates
B. SMC Missing Packing Variable
C. CBP Instructions
III. COMPANY-SPECIFIC ISSUES:
Comment 9: Huarong
A. Axes/Adzes Rate
B. Bars/Wedges Rate
Comment 10: SMC
A. Affiliation Determination
B. Partial Adverse Facts Available for Constructed Export Price 
(``CEP'') Sales
C. Rate to Apply to SMC
D. AFA for SMC's Non-Reported Sales
Comment 11: AFA for Iron Bull's Sales of Bars/Wedges
[FR Doc. E6-15277 Filed 9-13-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S