Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China and the United Arab Emirates:Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 38816-38823 [E7-13721]
Download as PDF
38816
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 135 / Monday, July 16, 2007 / Notices
matters the premature disclosure of
which would be likely to significantly
frustrate implementation of an agency
action as described in 5 U.S.C.
552b(c)(9)(B), and the portion of the
meeting dealing with matters that are
(A) specifically authorized under
criteria established by an Executive
Order to be kept secret in the interests
of national defense or foreign policy and
(B) in fact properly classified pursuant
to such Executive Order (5 U.S.C.
552b(c)(1)(A) and (1)(B)), shall be
exempt from the provisions relating to
public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app.
2 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). All other
portions of the DEAC meeting will be
open to the public.
For more information, please call
Yvette Springer at (202) 482–2813.
Dated: July 10, 2007.
Yvette Springer,
Committee Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 07–3452 Filed 7–13–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–JT–M
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–912]
[C–570–913]
Extension of the Deadline for
Determining the Adequacy of the
Antidumping Duty and Countervailing
Duty Petitions: New Pneumatic Off–
The-Road Tires from The People’s
Republic of China
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 16, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laurel LaCivita or Charles Riggle, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 8
(antidumping); or Mark Hoadley or
Thomas Gilgunn, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 6 (countervailing), Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–4243, (202) 482–
0650, (202) 482–3148, and (202) 482–
4236, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
BACKGROUND
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
The Petitions
On June 18, 2007, the Department of
Commerce (‘‘Department’’) received
antidumping duty and countervailing
duty petitions (‘‘petitions’’) filed in
proper form by Titan Tire Corporation,
a subsidiary of Titan International, Inc.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jul 13, 2007
Jkt 211001
(‘‘Titan’’), and the United Steel, Paper
and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing,
Energy, Allied Industrial and Service
Workers International Union, AFL–CIOCLC (‘‘USW’’) (collectively,
‘‘Petitioners’’), on behalf of the domestic
industry producing new pneumatic off–
the-road tires (‘‘OTR tires’’).
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions
Sections 702(b)(1) and 732(b)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘Act’’)
require that antidumping and
countervailing duty petitions be filed by
or on behalf of the domestic industry.
Sections 702(c)(4)(A) and 732(c)(4)(A) of
the Act provide that the Department’s
industry support determination be
based on whether a minimum
percentage of the relevant industry
supports the petition. A petition meets
this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the
petition account for: (i) at least 25
percent of the total production of the
domestic like product; and (ii) more
than 50 percent of the production of the
domestic like product produced by that
portion of the industry expressing
support for, or opposition to, the
petition. Moreover, sections 702(c)(4)(D)
and 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act provide that,
if the petition does not establish support
of domestic producers or workers
accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like
product, the Department shall: (i) poll
the industry or rely on other
information in order to determine if
there is support for the petition, as
required by subparagraph (A); or (ii) if
there is a large number of producers,
determine industry support using a
statistically valid sampling method to
poll the industry.
Extension of Time
Sections 702(c)(1)(A)(ii) and
732(c)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act provide that
within 20 days of the filing of
antidumping and countervailing duty
petitions, the Department will
determine, inter alia, whether the
petitions have been filed by or on behalf
of the U.S. industry producing the
domestic like product. Sections
702(c)(1)(B) and 732(c)(1)(B) of the Act
provide that the deadline for the
initiation determination can be
extended by 20 days in any case in
which the Department must ‘‘poll or
otherwise determine support for the
petition by the industry . . . .’’ Because
it is not clear from the petitions whether
the industry support criteria have been
met, we have determined to extend the
time limit for initiating the
investigations in order to poll the
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
domestic industry. We intend to issue
polling questionnaires to all known
domestic producers of OTR tires
identified in the petitions. The
questionnaires will be on file in the
Central Records Unit in room B–099 of
the main Department of Commerce
building. The questionnaire requests
each company to respond to the
questions and fax its response to the
Department.
We will need additional time to
analyze the domestic producers’
responses to our request for information.
See the ‘‘Determination of Industry
Support for the Petitions’’ section of this
notice, above. Therefore, in accordance
with sections 702(c)(1)(B) and
732(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we are extending
the deadline for determining the
adequacy of the petitions until July 28,
2007, which is 40 days from the filing
date of the petitions. Because July 28,
2007, falls on a Saturday, the initiation
determination will be due no later than
Monday, July 30, 2007, the first business
day following the statutory deadline.
International Trade Commission
Notification
Because the Department has extended
the deadline for the initiation
determinations, the Department has
contacted the International Trade
Commission (‘‘ITC’’) and has made this
extension notice available to the ITC.
Dated: July 6, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–13719 Filed 7–13–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–909, A–520–802]
Certain Steel Nails from the People’s
Republic of China and the United Arab
Emirates:Initiation of Antidumping
Duty Investigations
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 16, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nicole Bankhead (People’s Republic of
China) or David Goldberger (United
Arab Emirates), AD/CVD Operations,
Offices 9 and 2, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 135 / Monday, July 16, 2007 / Notices
482–9068 or (202) 482–4136,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
The Petitions
On May 29, 2007, the Department of
Commerce (the Department) received
petitions concerning imports of certain
steel nails from the People’s Republic of
China (PRC) (PRC petition) and the
United Arab Emirates (UAE) (UAE
petition) filed in proper form by Mid
Continent Nail Corporation, Davis Wire
Corporation, Gerdau Ameristeel
Corporation (Atlas Steel & Wire
Division), Maze Nails (Division of W.H.
Maze Company), Treasure Coast
Fasteners, Inc., and the United Steel,
Paper and Forestry, Rubber,
Manufacturing, Energy, Allied
Industrial and Service Workers
International Union (collectively,
petitioners). See the Petitions on Certain
Steel Nails from the People’s Republic
of China and the United Arab Emirates
filed on May 29, 2007, and the
petitioners’ submission dated June 22,
2007. On June 1 and June 18, 2007, the
Department issued requests for
additional information and clarification
of certain areas of the petitions. Based
on the Department’s requests, the
petitioners filed additional information
on June 1, June 7 (three distinct
submissions on General, PRC–only, and
UAE–only material), and June 20, 2007.
The period of investigation (POI) for the
UAE is April 1, 2006, through March 31,
2007. The POI for the PRC is October 1,
2006, through March 31, 2007. See 19
CFR 351.204(b).
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), the petitioners allege that imports
of certain steel nails from the PRC and
the UAE are being, or are likely to be,
sold in the United States at less than fair
value, within the meaning of section
731 of the Act, and that such imports
are materially injuring, or threatening
material injury to, an industry in the
United States.
The Department finds that the
petitioners filed these petitions on
behalf of the domestic industry because
the petitioners are interested parties as
defined in section 771(9)(C) and (D) of
the Act, and have demonstrated
sufficient industry support with respect
to the antidumping duty investigations
that the petitioners are requesting that
the Department initiate (see
‘‘Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions’’ section below).
Scope of Investigations
The merchandise covered by each of
these investigations includes certain
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jul 13, 2007
Jkt 211001
steel nails having a shaft length up to 12
inches. Certain steel nails include, but
are not limited to, nails made of round
wire and nails that are cut. Certain steel
nails may be of one piece construction
or constructed of two or more pieces.
Certain steel nails may be produced
from any type of steel, and have a
variety of finishes, heads, shanks, point
types, shaft lengths and shaft diameters.
Finishes include, but are not limited to,
coating in vinyl, zinc (galvanized,
whether by electroplating or hot–
dipping one or more times), phosphate
cement, and paint. Head styles include,
but are not limited to, flat, projection,
cupped, oval, brad, headless, double,
countersunk, and sinker. Shank styles
include, but are not limited to, smooth,
barbed, screw threaded, ring shank and
fluted shank styles. Screw–threaded
nails subject to these proceedings are
driven using direct force and not by
turning the fastener using a tool that
engages with the head. Point styles
include, but are not limited to,
diamond, blunt, needle, chisel and no
point. Finished nails may be sold in
bulk, or they may be collated into strips
or coils using materials such as plastic,
paper, or wire.
Certain steel nails subject to these
proceedings are currently classified
under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule
of the United States (HTSUS)
subheadings 7317.00.55, 7317.00.65 and
7317.00.75.
Excluded from the scope of these
proceedings are roofing nails of all
lengths and diameter, whether collated
or in bulk, and whether or not
galvanized. Steel roofing nails are
specifically enumerated and identified
in ASTM Standard F 1667 (2005
revision) as Type I, Style 20 nails. Also
excluded from the scope of these
proceedings are corrugated nails. A
corrugated nail is made of a small strip
of corrugated steel with sharp points on
one side. Also excluded from the scope
of these proceedings are fasteners
suitable for use in powder–actuated
hand tools, not threaded and threaded,
which are currently classified under
HTSUS 7317.00.20 and 7317.00.30. Also
excluded from the scope of these
proceedings are thumb tacks, which are
currently classified under HTSUS
7317.00.10.00.
While the HTSUS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description of the
scope of these investigations is
dispositive.
Comments on Scope of Investigations
During our review of the petitions, we
discussed the scope with the petitioners
to ensure that it is an accurate reflection
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38817
of the products for which the domestic
industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as
discussed in the preamble to the
regulations (Antidumping Duties;
Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR
27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)), we are
setting aside a period for interested
parties to raise issues regarding product
coverage. The Department encourages
all interested parties to submit such
comments within 20 calendar days of
signature of this notice. Comments
should be addressed to Import
Administration’s Central Records Unit
(CRU), Room 1870, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.
The period of scope consultations is
intended to provide the Department
with ample opportunity to consider all
comments and to consult with parties
prior to the issuance of the preliminary
determinations.
Comments on Product Characteristics
for Antidumping Duty Questionnaires
We are requesting comments from
interested parties regarding the
appropriate physical characteristics of
certain steel nails to be reported in
response to the Department’s
antidumping questionnaires. For
example, we are considering whether
physical characteristics such as steel
grade, shaft length, finish type, head
style, shank style, and point style are
relevant. This information will be used
to identify the key physical
characteristics of the subject
merchandise in order to more accurately
report the relevant factors and costs of
production, as well as to develop
appropriate product comparison
criteria.
Interested parties may provide any
information or comments that they feel
are relevant to the development of an
accurate listing of physical
characteristics. Specifically, they may
provide comments as to which
characteristics are appropriate to use 1)
as general product characteristics and 2)
as the product comparison criteria. We
note that it is not always appropriate to
use all product characteristics as
product comparison criteria. We base
product comparison criteria on
meaningful commercial differences
among products. In other words, while
there may be some physical product
characteristics utilized by
manufacturers to describe certain steel
nails, it may be that only a select few
product characteristics take into account
commercially meaningful physical
characteristics. In addition, interested
parties may comment on the order in
which the physical characteristics
should be used in model matching.
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
38818
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 135 / Monday, July 16, 2007 / Notices
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
Generally, the Department attempts to
list the most important physical
characteristics first and the least
important characteristics last.
In order to consider the suggestions of
interested parties in developing and
issuing the antidumping duty
questionnaires, we must receive
comments at the above–referenced
address by July 30, 2007. Additionally,
rebuttal comments must be received by
August 9, 2007.
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires
that a petition be filed by or on behalf
of the domestic industry. In order to
determine whether a petition has been
filed by or on behalf of the domestic
industry, the Department, pursuant to
section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act,
determines whether a minimum
percentage of the relevant industry
supports the petition. A petition meets
this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the
petition account for: (i) at least 25
percent of the total production of the
domestic like product; and (ii) more
than 50 percent of the production of the
domestic like product produced by that
portion of the industry expressing
support for, or opposition to, the
petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D)
of the Act provides that, if the petition
does not establish support of domestic
producers or workers accounting for
more than 50 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product,
the Department shall: (i) poll the
industry or rely on other information in
order to determine if there is support for
the petition, as required by
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine
industry support using any statistically
valid sampling method.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines
the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers of a
domestic like product. Thus, to
determine whether a petition has the
requisite industry support, the statute
directs the Department to look to
producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The International
Trade Commission (ITC), which is
responsible for determining whether
‘‘the domestic industry’’ has been
injured, must also determine what
constitutes a domestic like product in
order to define the industry. While both
the Department and the ITC must apply
the same statutory definition regarding
the domestic like product (section
771(10) of the Act), they do so for
different purposes and pursuant to a
separate and distinct authority. In
addition, the Department’s
determination is subject to limitations of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jul 13, 2007
Jkt 211001
time and information. Although this
may result in different definitions of the
like product, such differences do not
render the decision of either agency
contrary to law. See Algoma Steel Corp.
Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639,
642–44 (CIT 1988); see also High
Information Content Flat Panel Displays
and Display Glass Therefor From Japan:
Final Determination; Rescission of
Investigation and Partial Dismissal of
Petition, 56 FR 32376, 32380–81 (July
16, 1991).
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the
domestic like product as ‘‘a product
which is like, or in the absence of like,
most similar in characteristics and uses
with, the article subject to an
investigation under this subtitle.’’ Thus,
the reference point from which the
domestic like product analysis begins is
‘‘the article subject to an investigation,’’
i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to
be investigated, which normally will be
the scope as defined in the petition.
With regard to the domestic like
product, the petitioners do not offer a
definition of domestic like product
distinct from the scope of the
investigations. Based on our analysis of
the information submitted in the
petitions, we have determined there is
a single domestic like product, certain
steel nails, which is defined further in
the ‘‘Scope of the Investigations’’
section above, and we have analyzed
industry support in terms of that
domestic like product. See PRC
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II and
UAE Initiation Checklist at Attachment
II.
Based on information provided in the
petitions, the share of total estimated
U.S. production of the domestic like
product in calendar year 2006
represented by the petitioners did not
account for more than 50 percent of the
total production of the domestic like
product. Therefore, in accordance with
section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act, we
polled the industry.
On June 1, 2007, we issued polling
questionnaires to all known domestic
producers of certain steel nails
identified in the petitions and by the
Department’s research. On June 6, 2007,
we issued a polling questionnaire to an
additional producer whose identity we
learned from the ITC. The
questionnaires are on file in the CRU in
room B–099 of the main Department of
Commerce building. We requested that
each company complete the polling
questionnaire and certify its response by
faxing its response to the Department by
the due date. For a detailed discussion
of the responses received, see PRC
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II and
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
UAE Initiation Checklist at Attachment
II.
Section 732(c)(4)(B) of the Act states
that (i) the Department ‘‘shall disregard
the position of domestic producers who
oppose the petition if such producers
are related to foreign producers, as
defined in section 771(4)(B)(ii), unless
such domestic producers demonstrate
that their interests as domestic
producers would be adversely affected
by the imposition of an antidumping
duty order’’ and (ii) the Department
‘‘may disregard the position of domestic
producers of a domestic like product
who are importers of the subject
merchandise.’’ In addition, 19 CFR
351.203(e)(4) states that the position of
a domestic producer that opposes the
petition (i) will be disregarded if such
producer is related to a foreign producer
or to a foreign exporter under section
771(4)(B)(ii) of the Act, unless such
domestic producer demonstrates to the
Secretary’s satisfaction that its interests
as a domestic producer would be
adversely affected by the imposition of
an antidumping order, and (ii) may be
disregarded if the producer is an
importer of the subject merchandise or
is related to such an importer under
section 771(4)(B)(ii) of the Act.
Certain producers of the domestic like
product that opposed the petition
against the PRC are related to foreign
producers and/or imported subject
merchandise from the PRC. We have
analyzed the information provided by
these producers in their polling
questionnaire responses and
information provided in other
submissions to the Department (see the
petitioners’ June 18, 2007, submission
and Illinois Tool Works Inc.’s June 25,
2007, submission). Based on our
analysis, we have determined that it
would be appropriate to disregard the
position of any of the opposing
producers under section 732(c)(4)(B) of
the Act. When the position of any of
these producers is disregarded, the
petitioners satisfy the statutory industry
support requirements of section
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act. See PRC
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II and
UAE Initiation Checklist at Attachment
II.
With regard to the PRC petition, the
data collected demonstrate that the
domestic producers of certain steel nails
who support the PRC petition account
for at least 25 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product
and, once the opposition of certain
producers is disregarded, more than 50
percent of the production of the
domestic like product produced by that
portion of the industry expressing
support for, or opposition to, the PRC
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 135 / Monday, July 16, 2007 / Notices
petition. See PRC Initiation Checklist at
Attachment II.
Our analysis of the data collected
with regard to the UAE petition
indicates that the domestic producers of
certain steel nails who support the UAE
petition account for at least 25 percent
of the total production of the domestic
like product and more than 50 percent
of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the
industry expressing support for, or
opposition to, the UAE petition. See
UAE Initiation Checklist at Attachment
II. We note that certain U.S. producers
oppose the petition against the UAE;
however, despite such opposition, the
petitioners still account for more than
50 percent of the production of the
domestic like product produced by that
portion of the industry expressing
support for, or opposition to, the UAE
petition. As a result, we need not
examine whether the U.S. producers
that opposed the petition against the
UAE are related to, or import from,
producers of the subject merchandise in
the UAE.
Therefore, the Department determines
that the petitioners filed these petitions
on behalf of the domestic industry
because they are interested parties as
defined in sections 771(9)(C) and (D) of
the Act and they have demonstrated
sufficient industry support with respect
to the antidumping investigations that
they are requesting the Department
initiate. See PRC Initiation Checklist at
Attachment II and UAE Initiation
Checklist at Attachment II.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation
The petitioners allege that the U.S.
industry producing the domestic like
product is being materially injured, or is
threatened with material injury, by
reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at less than normal
value (NV). The petitioners contend that
the industry’s injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share, lost
sales, reduced production, reduced
capacity and capacity utilization rate,
reduced shipments, underselling and
price depression or suppression, lost
revenue, reduced employment, decline
in financial performance, and an
increase in import penetration. We have
assessed the allegations and supporting
evidence regarding material injury and
causation, and we have determined that
these allegations are properly supported
by adequate evidence and meet the
statutory requirements for initiation. See
PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment
III (Injury) and UAE Initiation Checklist
at Attachment III (Injury).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jul 13, 2007
Jkt 211001
Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value
The following is a description of the
allegations of sales at less than fair value
upon which the Department based its
decision to initiate these investigations
of imports of certain steel nails from the
PRC and the UAE. The sources of data
for the deductions and adjustments
relating to the U.S. price, constructed
value (CV) (for the UAE), and the factors
of production (for the PRC) are also
discussed in the country–specific
initiation checklists. See PRC Initiation
Checklist and UAE Initiation Checklist.
Should the need arise to use any of this
information as facts available under
section 776 of the Act in our
preliminary or final determinations, we
will reexamine the information and
revise the margin calculations, if
appropriate.
UAE
Export Price (EP)
The petitioners calculated two EPs
using price offers for UAE–produced
steel nails obtained from customer
contacts. The petitioners made
adjustments for the importer’s markup,
U.S. inland freight, ocean freight,
marine insurance, U.S. port fees, and
foreign inland freight. The petitioners
derived the importer profit margin from
published financial statement data of a
trading company that imports nails into
the United States. The petitioners
estimated U.S. inland freight based on
their knowledge and experience in
shipping steel nails within the United
States. They calculated ocean freight
and marine insurance based on the
difference between the average per–unit
customs value and the average per–unit
CIF value reported in U.S. import
statistics for the HTSUS category
corresponding to the price data at the
likely U.S. port of entry. U.S. port fees
were based on standard U.S.
government percentages, as applied to
the petitioners’ estimate of entered
value. Finally, the petitioners calculated
foreign inland freight based on a UAE
freight quote obtained through market
research. See UAE Initiation Checklist.
NV Based on CV
With respect to NV, the petitioners
provided information that the UAE
home market is not viable. According to
the petitioners, the UAE steel nail
industry is geared almost exclusively to
exports. See, e.g., Volume III of the UAE
petition at 9 and Exhibit UAE 5.
Through market research, the
petitioners learned that the type of
wood–frame construction used
predominantly in North America makes
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38819
the United States a desirable market for
exports, while other types of specialty
fasteners are more prevalent in the UAE
home market. See Supplement to the
UAE petition, dated June 1, 2007.
Further, the petitioners provided
information that no third–country
market for the UAE’s principal exporter
of the merchandise, Dubai Wire, is
viable. Based on available export data
from the UAE, the petitioners state that
Germany is the next largest country to
which subject merchandise was
exported, and that the volume of
merchandise exported to Germany was
1.01 percent of the volume exported to
the United States. See Volume III of the
UAE petition at 9 and Exhibit UAE 5,
and Supplement to the UAE petition,
dated June 1, 2007. As this is less than
the 5–percent threshold provided for in
section 773(a)(1)(B)(ii)(II) of the Act,
Germany is not a viable third–country
market. Accordingly, the petitioners
based NV on CV.
Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act,
CV consists of the cost of manufacture
(COM); selling, general and
administrative (SG&A) expenses;
financial expenses; packing expenses;
and profit. In calculating COM and
packing, the petitioners based the
quantity of each of the inputs used to
manufacture and pack steel nails on the
production experience of two U.S. steel
nail producers during the prospective
POI, and multiplied it by the value of
inputs used to manufacture steel nails
in the UAE using either publicly
available data or data obtained from a
market research study. See Volume III of
the UAE petition at 10–14, the June 7,
2007, supplement to the UAE petition at
Exhibit UAE Supp–12 and the June 20,
2007, supplement to the UAE petition at
3–5 and Exhibits UAE Supp2–12A,
Supp2–12B and Supp2–20.
Raw material (i.e., steel wire rod) is
the most significant input used in the
production of steel nails. The
petitioners determined the usage of steel
wire rod based on the quantities used by
two U.S. manufacturers to produce a
metric ton of steel nails. The value of
steel wire rod was based on price data
obtained through market research. The
price data from the market research
study were contemporaneous with the
POI. The values for other inputs and
packing (i.e., scrap, stearic acid,
polypropylene, and vinyl resins) were
based on statistics from the World Trade
Atlas for the period of July 2005 to
August 2006. See Volume III of the UAE
petition at 10–11 and Exhibits UAE 13–
14, the June 1, 2007, supplement to the
UAE petition at Exhibit 1, and the June
7, 2007, supplement to the UAE petition
at Exhibit UAE Supp–12.
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
38820
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 135 / Monday, July 16, 2007 / Notices
The petitioners determined labor
costs using the labor inputs derived
from the experience of two U.S. steel
nail producers and valued these inputs
using UAE labor costs obtained from a
market research study. Based on the
study, the petitioners calculated an
hourly rate using an average of four
industrial sources in the UAE. For the
value of indirect labor, the petitioners
calculated an hourly rate using an
average of two industrial sources in the
UAE for accountants, engineers,
managers, supervisors, and general
managers. See Volume III of the UAE
petition at 11 and Exhibit UAE 8, the
June 1, 2007, supplement to the UAE
petition at Exhibit 1, and the June 7,
2007, supplement to the UAE petition at
Exhibit UAE Supp–12.
To calculate energy, factory overhead,
and SG&A expenses, the petitioners
relied on the financial statements of a
steel fabricating company in the UAE,
Arab Heavy Industries (AHI), for the
fiscal year ending December 31, 2006,
the period most contemporaneous with
the POI. The petitioners stated that the
surrogate financial statements did not
separately itemize other operating
expenses (i.e., energy, SG&A); therefore,
to avoid double–counting energy
expenses in the calculation of CV it was
necessary to use a combined ratio for
energy, factory overhead, and SG&A
expenses. Specifically, the petitioners
calculated the total of depreciation,
other operating expenses, and other
income from AHI’s financial statements
as a percentage of materials and labor
from AHI’s financial statements. This
ratio was then applied to the materials
(excluding packing) and labor costs
calculated as discussed above. The
petitioners believe this is a conservative
calculation of the energy, factory
overhead, and SG&A expenses as they
have included all other income from
AHI’s financial statements.
Additionally, based on AHI’s financial
statements, they believe packing
expenses were included in the
denominator of the energy, factory
overhead, and SG&A ratio calculation,
but not in the materials and labor figure
to which they applied it (packing
expenses were added after this
calculation), thus potentially
understating CV. See the June 20, 2007,
supplement to the UAE petition at 3–5
and Exhibits UAE Supp2–12A, Supp2–
12B and Supp2–20.
To calculate the average financial
expense and profit rates, the petitioners
relied on the financial statements of the
same UAE steel fabricator, AHI. The
petitioners note that based on the
surrogate financial statements, the
financial expense ratio was zero. See the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jul 13, 2007
Jkt 211001
June 20, 2007, supplement to the UAE
petition at 3–5 and Exhibits UAE
Supp2–12A, Supp2–12B and Supp2–20.
PRC
EP
The petitioners relied on three U.S.
prices for certain steel nails
manufactured in the PRC and offered for
sale in the United States. The prices
quoted were for three different types of
steel nails falling within the scope of the
PRC petition, for delivery to the U.S.
customer within the POI. The
petitioners deducted from the prices the
costs associated with exporting and
delivering the product, including U.S.
inland freight, ocean freight and
insurance charges, U.S. duty, port and
wharfage fees, foreign inland freight
costs, and foreign brokerage and
handling. See PRC Initiation Checklist.
The petitioners based the importer
profit margin and U.S. inland freight on
their knowledge and experience. The
petitioners used the Department’s
standard all–distance freight rate for
foreign inland freight. They calculated
ocean freight and marine insurance
based on the difference between the
average per–unit customs value and the
average per–unit CIF value reported in
U.S. import statistics for the HTSUS
category corresponding to the price data
at the likely U.S. port of entry. U.S. port
fees were based on standard percentages
of U.S. government fees. The petitioners
estimated foreign brokerage and
handling based on Indian surrogate
value data applied in another
Department proceeding. See Volume II
of the PRC petition at 1–15, and Exhibits
PRC 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B, 6A - 10F,
and the June 7, 2007, PRC–only
submission at 15–18, and Exhibit 10.
PRC NV
The petitioners stated that the PRC
remains a non–market economy (NME)
country and no determination to the
contrary has yet been made by the
Department. Recently, the Department
examined the PRC’s market status and
determined that NME status should
continue for the PRC. See Memorandum
from the Office of Policy to David M.
Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, Regarding The People’s
Republic of China Status as a Non–
Market Economy, dated May 15, 2006
(This document is available online at
https://ia.ita.doc.gov/download /prc–
nme-status/prc–nme-status–memo.pdf.)
In addition, in two recent investigations,
the Department also determined that the
PRC is an NME country. See Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Certain Activated Carbon
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
from the People’s Republic of China, 72
FR 9508 (March 2, 2007) and Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Partial Affirmative
Determination of Critical
Circumstances: Certain Polyester Staple
Fiber from the People’s Republic of
China, 72 FR 19690 (April 19, 2007). In
accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of
the Act, the presumption of NME status
remains in effect until revoked by the
Department. The presumption of NME
status for the PRC has not been revoked
by the Department and remains in effect
for purposes of the initiation of this
investigation. Accordingly, the NV of
the product is appropriately based on
factors of production valued in a
surrogate market economy country in
accordance with section 773(c) of the
Act. In the course of this investigation,
all parties will have the opportunity to
provide relevant information related to
the issues of the PRC’s NME status and
the granting of separate rates to
individual exporters.
The petitioners selected India as the
surrogate country arguing that, pursuant
to section 773(c)(4) of the Act, India is
an appropriate surrogate because it is a
market economy country that is at a
level of economic development
comparable to that of the PRC and is a
significant producer and exporter of
certain steel nails. See Volume II of the
PRC petition at 16–20. Based on the
information provided by the petitioners,
we believe that the use of India as a
surrogate country is appropriate for
purposes of initiation. After the
initiation of the investigation, we will
solicit comments regarding surrogate
country selection.
The petitioners provided dumping
margin calculations using the
Department’s NME methodology as
required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C)
and 19 CFR 351.408. However, because
information regarding the factors of
production consumed by Chinese
producers is not available to the
petitioners, the petitioners calculated
NVs for each U.S. price discussed above
based on consumption rates for
producing certain steel nails as
experienced by U.S. producers. See
Volume II of the PRC petition at 19–20.
The petitioners used U.S. producer
consumption figures for 2006, stating
that such information provides as
contemporaneous a time period as
possible with the POI and is reasonably
available to the petitioners. See id. With
the exception of labor, the petitioners
state that U.S. input consumption
quantities reflect efficient production
methods and they provide a
conservative estimate of the factors of
production used by the Chinese. See id.
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 135 / Monday, July 16, 2007 / Notices
For labor, the petitioners adjusted the
number of labor hours per unit of output
to account for a known difference
between the U.S. and Chinese
production processes. Specifically, the
petitioners stated that the production of
subject merchandise is more labor
intensive in the PRC than in the United
States, requiring significantly more
labor to produce the same amount of
finished product. The petitioners
provide affidavits to support this labor
adjustment. See Volume II of the PRC
petition at 20, Exhibits PRC 11A - 11C,
and the June 7, 2007, PRC–only
supplement to the PRC petition at 4 and
Exhibit PRC 11. Accordingly, we found
the petitioners use of the production
data to be reasonable.
For the NV calculations, the
petitioners were unable to obtain
surrogate value figures
contemporaneous with the POI for all
material inputs, and accordingly relied
upon the most recent information
available. The sources of these data
include the published national market
prices for carbon steel commodities by
Joint Plant Committee of India and the
World Trade Atlas compilation of
Indian import statistics, which provided
data through September 2006 at the time
the petition was filed. See Volume II of
the PRC petition at Exhibits PRC 14A
and PRC 15. Where an input price
reflected a period preceding the POI, the
petitioners adjusted it for inflation using
the wholesale price index for India
reported by the Reserve Bank of India.
See Volume II of the PRC petition at
Exhibit PRC 13. For fuel-, energy-, and
lubricant–related inputs, the petitioners
used the energy–specific inflators
published by the International Monetary
Fund. See id. The petitioners excluded
those values from countries previously
determined by the Department to be
NME countries and imports into India
from Indonesia, the Republic of Korea
and Thailand, because the Department
has previously excluded prices from
these countries because they maintain
broadly available, non–industry-specific
export subsidies, as well as imports
from unspecified countries. See Hand
Trucks and Certain Parts Thereof From
the People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of Administrative Review and
Final Results of New Shipper Review, 72
FR 27287 (May 15, 2007), and
accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 23. The
surrogate values used by the petitioners
for the material and packing inputs
consist of information reasonably
available to the petitioners and are,
therefore, acceptable for purposes of
initiation.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jul 13, 2007
Jkt 211001
With respect to the surrogate financial
expenses, the petitioners relied on the
factory overhead, SG&A expenses and
profitability of an Indian steel fastener
producer, Lakshmi Precision Screws
Ltd. (‘‘LPS’’), taken from the company’s
most recently available annual report
that is closest to the POI. See Volume II
of the PRC petition at Exhibit PRC 20.
The petitioners claim that LPS is a
modern producer using state of the art
equipment and is India’s only publicly
traded producer of steel fasteners. The
petitioners stated that they were unable
to find public financial statements from
other Indian nail producers; therefore,
the petitioners argue, LPS provides the
best information reasonably available as
a surrogate for the production of certain
steel nails in the PRC. We find that the
petitioners’ use of LPS as the source for
the surrogate financial expenses is
appropriate for purposes of initiation.
The Department made minor
modifications to the surrogate financial
ratios calculated by the petitioners. As
a result, the calculations for the three
NVs and the resulting margin
calculations changed slightly. See PRC
Initiation Checklist at Attachment V.
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the
petitioners, there is reason to believe
that imports of certain steel nails from
the PRC and the UAE are being, or are
likely to be, sold in the United States at
less than fair value. Based on
comparisons of EP to CV, calculated in
accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the
Act, the estimated dumping margins for
certain steel nails from the UAE are
70.77 and 71.50 percent. Based on
comparisons of EP to NV, calculated in
accordance with section 773(c) of the
Act, the estimated dumping margins for
certain steel nails from the PRC are
55.19, 97.15 and 118.04 percent.
Initiation of Antidumping
Investigations
Based upon the examination of the
petitions on certain steel nails from the
PRC and the UAE, the Department finds
that the petitions meet the requirements
of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we
are initiating antidumping duty
investigations to determine whether
imports of certain steel nails from the
PRC and the UAE are being, or are likely
to be, sold in the United States at less
than fair value. In accordance with
section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act, unless
postponed, we will make our
preliminary determinations no later
than 140 days after the date of this
initiation.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38821
Separate Rates and Quantity and Value
Questionnaire
The Department recently modified the
process by which exporters and
producers may obtain separate–rate
status in NME investigations. See Policy
Bulletin 05.1: Separate–Rates Practice
and Application of Combination Rates
in Antidumping Investigations
involving Non–Market Economy
Countries (April 5, 2005) (Separate
Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin),
available on the Department’s website at
https://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/bull05–
1.pdf. The process requires the
submission of a separate–rate status
application. Based on our experience in
processing the separate–rate
applications in the following
antidumping duty investigations, we
have modified the application for this
investigation to make it more
administrable and easier for applicants
to complete. See Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Investigations:
Certain Lined Paper Products From
India, Indonesia, and the People’s
Republic of China, 70 FR 58374, 58379
(October 6, 2005), Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Investigation:
Certain Artist Canvas From the People’s
Republic of China, 70 FR 21996, 21999
(April 28, 2005), and Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Investigations:
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
from the People’s Republic of China and
the Republic of Korea, 70 FR 35625,
35629 (June 21, 2005). The specific
requirements for submitting the
separate–rate application in this
investigation are outlined in detail in
the application itself, which will be
available on the Department’s website at
https://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia–highlights-and–
news.html on the date of publication of
this initiation notice in the Federal
Register. The separate–rate application
is due no later than September 7, 2007.
NME Respondent Selection and
Quantity and Value Questionnaire
For NME investigations, it is the
Department’s practice to request
quantity and value information from all
known exporters identified in the PRC
petition. Although many NME exporters
respond to the quantity and value
information request, at times some
exporters may not have received the
quantity and value questionnaire or may
not have received it in time to respond
by the specified deadline. Therefore, the
Department typically requests the
assistance of the NME government in
transmitting the Department’s quantity
and value questionnaire to all
companies that manufacture and export
subject merchandise to the United
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
38822
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 135 / Monday, July 16, 2007 / Notices
States, as well as to manufacturers that
produce the subject merchandise for
companies that were engaged in
exporting subject merchandise to the
United States during the POI. The
quantity and value data received from
NME exporters is used as the basis to
select the mandatory respondents.
The Department requires that the
respondents submit a response to both
the quantity and value questionnaire
and the separate–rate application by the
respective deadlines in order to receive
consideration for separate–rate status.
Appendix I of this notice contains the
quantity and value questionnaire that
must be submitted by all NME exporters
no later than July 30, 2007. In addition,
the Department will post the quantity
and value questionnaire along with the
filing instructions on the IA website at
https://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia–highlights-and–
news.html. The Department will send
the quantity and value questionnaire to
those companies identified in Exhibit I–
5 of Volume I of the PRC petition and
those identified by the NME
government.
one rate is calculated for the
exporter and all of the producers
which supplied subject
merchandise to it during the period
of investigation. This practice
applies both to mandatory
respondents receiving an
individually calculated separate
rate as well as the pool of non–
investigated firms receiving the
weighted–average of the
individually calculated rates. This
practice is referred to as the
application of ‘‘combination rates’’
because such rates apply to specific
combinations of exporters and one
or more producers. The cash–
deposit rate assigned to an exporter
will apply only to merchandise
both exported by the firm in
question and produced by a firm
that supplied the exporter during
the period of investigation.
See Separate Rates and Combination
Rates Bulletin, at 6.
Use of Combination Rates in an NME
Investigation
In accordance with section
732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, copies of the
public versions of the petitions have
been provided to the representatives of
the Governments of the PRC and the
UAE. We will attempt to provide a copy
of the public version of the petitions to
the foreign producers/exporters,
consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
The Department will calculate
combination rates for certain
respondents that are eligible for a
separate rate in the PRC investigation.
The Separate Rates and Combination
Rates Bulletin, states:
[w]hile continuing the practice of
assigning separate rates only to
exporters, all separate rates that the
Department will now assign in its
NME investigations will be specific
to those producers that supplied the
exporter during the period of
investigation. Note, however, that
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
International Trade Commission
Notification
We have notified the ITC of our
initiations, as required by section 732(d)
of the Act.
Preliminary Determinations by the
International Trade Commission
The ITC will preliminarily determine,
no later than July 30, 2007, whether
there is a reasonable indication that
imports of certain steel nails from the
PRC and the UAE are materially
injuring, or threatening material injury
to, a U.S. industry. A negative ITC
determination with respect to either of
the investigations will result in that
investigation being terminated;
otherwise, these investigations will
proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: July 9, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
Appendix – I
Where it is not practicable to examine
all known producers/exporters of
subject merchandise, section 777A(c)(2)
of the Tariff Act of 1930 (as amended)
permits us to investigate 1) a sample of
exporters, producers, or types of
products that is statistically valid based
on the information available at the time
of selection, or 2) exporters and
producers accounting for the largest
volume and value of the subject
merchandise that can reasonably be
examined.
In the chart below, please provide the
total quantity and total value of all your
sales of merchandise covered by the
scope of this investigation (see scope
section of this notice), produced in the
PRC, and exported/shipped to the
United States during the period October
1, 2006, through March 31, 2007.
Market
Total Quantity
Terms of Sale
Total Value
United States ...............................................................................................................................
1. Export Price Sales ...................................................................................................................
2. ..................................................................................................................................................
a. Exporter name .........................................................................................................................
b. Address ....................................................................................................................................
c. Contact .....................................................................................................................................
d. Phone No. ................................................................................................................................
e. Fax No. ....................................................................................................................................
3. Constructed Export Price Sales ..............................................................................................
4. Further Manufactured ..............................................................................................................
TOTAL SALES ................................................................................................................................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
terms (e.g., free on board).
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
Total Quantity:
• Please report quantity on a metric
ton basis. If any conversions were
used, please provide the conversion
formula and source.
Total Value:
Terms of Sales:
• Please report all sales on the same
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jul 13, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
• All sales values should be reported
in U.S. dollars. Please indicate any
exchange rates used and their
respective dates and sources.
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Export Price Sales:
• Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as
an export price sale when the first
sale to an unaffiliated person occurs
before importation into the United
States.
• Please include any sales exported by
your company directly to the
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 135 / Monday, July 16, 2007 / Notices
United States;
• Please include any sales exported by
your company to a third–country
market economy reseller where you
had knowledge that the
merchandise was destined to be
resold to the United States.
• If you are a producer of subject
merchandise, please include any
sales manufactured by your
company that were subsequently
exported by an affiliated exporter to
the United States.
• Please do not include any sales of
merchandise manufactured in Hong
Kong in your figures.
Constructed Export Price Sales:
• Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as
a constructed export price sale
when the first sale to an unaffiliated
person occurs after importation.
However, if the first sale to the
unaffiliated person is made by a
person in the United States
affiliated with the foreign exporter,
constructed export price applies
even if the sale occurs prior to
importation.
• Please include any sales exported by
your company directly to the
United States;
• Please include any sales exported by
your company to a third–country
market economy reseller where you
had knowledge that the
merchandise was destined to be
resold to the United States.
• If you are a producer of subject
merchandise, please include any
sales manufactured by your
company that were subsequently
exported by an affiliated exporter to
the United States.
• Please do not include any sales of
merchandise manufactured in Hong
Kong in your figures.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
Further Manufactured:
• Further manufacture or assembly
costs include amounts incurred for
direct materials, labor and
overhead, plus amounts for general
and administrative expense, interest
expense, and additional packing
expense incurred in the country of
further manufacture, as well as all
costs involved in moving the
product from the U.S. port of entry
to the further manufacturer.
[FR Doc. E7–13721 Filed 7–13–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jul 13, 2007
Jkt 211001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
Trade Mission Statement
International Trade
Administration, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Mission Statement
Renewable Energy and Alternative
Fuels Mission to Europe. September 10–
19, 2007.
Mission Description
The United States Department of
Commerce, International Trade
Administration, U.S. and Foreign
Commercial Service will organize a
Renewable Energy and Alternative Fuels
Trade Mission to Germany, Hungary,
the Slovak Republic, the Czech Republic
and Poland, September 10–19, 2007.
This event offers a timely and costeffective means for U.S. firms to enter
promising markets for renewable
energies equipment, technology and
services. Target sectors holding high
potential for U.S. exporters include
biomass, biofuels, waste-to-energy,
hydropower, wind, geothermal, solar
and clean coal. During the Munich,
Germany stop, the program will include
a country briefing, a European Unionwide perspective on renewable energy,
a reception for business and government
contacts hosted by the U.S. Consulate,
and one-on-one appointments with
prospective business contacts. Each of
the stops in Central Europe will include
a country briefing, reception for
business and government contacts
hosted by the U.S. Ambassador or other
high-ranking embassy official, one-onone appointments with prospective
business contacts, and high-level
meetings with government officials and
business leaders.
Commercial Setting
Germany: The German economy is the
world’s third largest and, after the
expansion of the EU, accounts for nearly
one-fifth of European Union GDP.
Germany is the United States’ largest
European trading partner and is the
sixth largest market for U.S. exports.
German business and consumer
confidence is increasing rapidly as
Germany continues to build upon last
year’s 2.7 percent increase in GDP.
Germany is once again becoming
Europe’s economic engine with an
expected GDP growth rate this year of
approximately 2.3–2.8 percent. Since
EU accession 2004, Hungary, the Slovak
Republic and Czech Republic and
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38823
Poland have experienced robust rates of
economic growth, dramatically
increased inflows of foreign direct
investment and enhanced access to EU
development funds. The need to reduce
dependence on non-EU sources and the
ambitious target set by the EU for
renewables to comprise 20% of general
energy consumption by 2020 are driving
a significant demand for new
equipment, technology and services.
These developments have created robust
business opportunities for U.S. firms
operating within these sectors.
Germany’s power plant capacity is
currently roughly 11,000 MW, which is
unlikely to increase as new power
plants under construction or being
planned will only replace older, existing
plants. However, Germany’s energy
supply is still based mainly on fossil
resources. The finiteness of these
resources and negative effects on the
environment necessitate increased
development of renewable energies to
ensure future energy supply. Due to
rising prices of fossil products, and to
environmental protection measures
mandated by Germany’s federal
government and the EU, the use of
regenerative energy in Germany has
increased considerably in recent years
and is expected to increase further,
creating areas of opportunities for
companies offering technology and
know-how for this market segment.
Germany’s energy industry is one of the
largest investors in the country with 80
billion euros ($106.5 billion USD) to be
invested in networks and power plants
by the end of 2020. However, as the
world’s sixth largest producer of CO2
emissions, Germany is trying to slash its
output of greenhouse gases and is
planning to have renewable energy
sources supply a quarter of its energy
needs by 2020. Currently, renewable
energy sources supply 12% of
Germany’s energy, primarily from wind,
water, biomass and photovoltaics. By
2010, experts predict an increase in
sales for the whole renewable energy
sector of 45 billion euros ($60 billion
USD) with an export share of 16 billion
euros ($21.3 billion USD).
Hungary: Hungary relies heavily on
oil and gas from Russia, together with
one nuclear plant, for most of its energy
needs. Future diversity is key, and
renewable sources are a priority. With
power demand increasing 2% yearly,
Hungary needs another 6,300 MW of
capacity over 10–15 years. The
renewable portion is expected to reach
600 MW by 2020, from 170 MW now.
U.S. know-how can help Hungary meet
its goals.
Slovak Republic: In 2005, nuclear
plants provided almost 60% of the
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 135 (Monday, July 16, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38816-38823]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-13721]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-909, A-520-802]
Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China and the
United Arab Emirates:Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 16, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicole Bankhead (People's Republic of
China) or David Goldberger (United Arab Emirates), AD/CVD Operations,
Offices 9 and 2, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
[[Page 38817]]
482-9068 or (202) 482-4136, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petitions
On May 29, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
received petitions concerning imports of certain steel nails from the
People's Republic of China (PRC) (PRC petition) and the United Arab
Emirates (UAE) (UAE petition) filed in proper form by Mid Continent
Nail Corporation, Davis Wire Corporation, Gerdau Ameristeel Corporation
(Atlas Steel & Wire Division), Maze Nails (Division of W.H. Maze
Company), Treasure Coast Fasteners, Inc., and the United Steel, Paper
and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and
Service Workers International Union (collectively, petitioners). See
the Petitions on Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of
China and the United Arab Emirates filed on May 29, 2007, and the
petitioners' submission dated June 22, 2007. On June 1 and June 18,
2007, the Department issued requests for additional information and
clarification of certain areas of the petitions. Based on the
Department's requests, the petitioners filed additional information on
June 1, June 7 (three distinct submissions on General, PRC-only, and
UAE-only material), and June 20, 2007. The period of investigation
(POI) for the UAE is April 1, 2006, through March 31, 2007. The POI for
the PRC is October 1, 2006, through March 31, 2007. See 19 CFR
351.204(b).
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of certain steel
nails from the PRC and the UAE are being, or are likely to be, sold in
the United States at less than fair value, within the meaning of
section 731 of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring,
or threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States.
The Department finds that the petitioners filed these petitions on
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested
parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) and (D) of the Act, and have
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the
antidumping duty investigations that the petitioners are requesting
that the Department initiate (see ``Determination of Industry Support
for the Petitions'' section below).
Scope of Investigations
The merchandise covered by each of these investigations includes
certain steel nails having a shaft length up to 12 inches. Certain
steel nails include, but are not limited to, nails made of round wire
and nails that are cut. Certain steel nails may be of one piece
construction or constructed of two or more pieces. Certain steel nails
may be produced from any type of steel, and have a variety of finishes,
heads, shanks, point types, shaft lengths and shaft diameters. Finishes
include, but are not limited to, coating in vinyl, zinc (galvanized,
whether by electroplating or hot-dipping one or more times), phosphate
cement, and paint. Head styles include, but are not limited to, flat,
projection, cupped, oval, brad, headless, double, countersunk, and
sinker. Shank styles include, but are not limited to, smooth, barbed,
screw threaded, ring shank and fluted shank styles. Screw-threaded
nails subject to these proceedings are driven using direct force and
not by turning the fastener using a tool that engages with the head.
Point styles include, but are not limited to, diamond, blunt, needle,
chisel and no point. Finished nails may be sold in bulk, or they may be
collated into strips or coils using materials such as plastic, paper,
or wire.
Certain steel nails subject to these proceedings are currently
classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) subheadings 7317.00.55, 7317.00.65 and 7317.00.75.
Excluded from the scope of these proceedings are roofing nails of
all lengths and diameter, whether collated or in bulk, and whether or
not galvanized. Steel roofing nails are specifically enumerated and
identified in ASTM Standard F 1667 (2005 revision) as Type I, Style 20
nails. Also excluded from the scope of these proceedings are corrugated
nails. A corrugated nail is made of a small strip of corrugated steel
with sharp points on one side. Also excluded from the scope of these
proceedings are fasteners suitable for use in powder-actuated hand
tools, not threaded and threaded, which are currently classified under
HTSUS 7317.00.20 and 7317.00.30. Also excluded from the scope of these
proceedings are thumb tacks, which are currently classified under HTSUS
7317.00.10.00.
While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and
customs purposes, the written description of the scope of these
investigations is dispositive.
Comments on Scope of Investigations
During our review of the petitions, we discussed the scope with the
petitioners to ensure that it is an accurate reflection of the products
for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as
discussed in the preamble to the regulations (Antidumping Duties;
Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)),
we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues
regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all interested
parties to submit such comments within 20 calendar days of signature of
this notice. Comments should be addressed to Import Administration's
Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce,
14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230. The
period of scope consultations is intended to provide the Department
with ample opportunity to consider all comments and to consult with
parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations.
Comments on Product Characteristics for Antidumping Duty Questionnaires
We are requesting comments from interested parties regarding the
appropriate physical characteristics of certain steel nails to be
reported in response to the Department's antidumping questionnaires.
For example, we are considering whether physical characteristics such
as steel grade, shaft length, finish type, head style, shank style, and
point style are relevant. This information will be used to identify the
key physical characteristics of the subject merchandise in order to
more accurately report the relevant factors and costs of production, as
well as to develop appropriate product comparison criteria.
Interested parties may provide any information or comments that
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate listing of
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to
which characteristics are appropriate to use 1) as general product
characteristics and 2) as the product comparison criteria. We note that
it is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as
product comparison criteria. We base product comparison criteria on
meaningful commercial differences among products. In other words, while
there may be some physical product characteristics utilized by
manufacturers to describe certain steel nails, it may be that only a
select few product characteristics take into account commercially
meaningful physical characteristics. In addition, interested parties
may comment on the order in which the physical characteristics should
be used in model matching.
[[Page 38818]]
Generally, the Department attempts to list the most important physical
characteristics first and the least important characteristics last.
In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in
developing and issuing the antidumping duty questionnaires, we must
receive comments at the above-referenced address by July 30, 2007.
Additionally, rebuttal comments must be received by August 9, 2007.
Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed by
or on behalf of the domestic industry. In order to determine whether a
petition has been filed by or on behalf of the domestic industry, the
Department, pursuant to section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, determines
whether a minimum percentage of the relevant industry supports the
petition. A petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers
or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least 25
percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii)
more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product
produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or
opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act
provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic
producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product, the Department shall: (i) poll
the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if
there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or
(ii) determine industry support using any statistically valid sampling
method.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the
producers of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a
petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs the
Department to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic
like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which is
responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has been
injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product
in order to define the industry. While both the Department and the ITC
must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like
product (section 771(10) of the Act), they do so for different purposes
and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, the
Department's determination is subject to limitations of time and
information. Although this may result in different definitions of the
like product, such differences do not render the decision of either
agency contrary to law. See Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd. v. United States,
688 F. Supp. 639, 642-44 (CIT 1988); see also High Information Content
Flat Panel Displays and Display Glass Therefor From Japan: Final
Determination; Rescission of Investigation and Partial Dismissal of
Petition, 56 FR 32376, 32380-81 (July 16, 1991).
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation
under this subtitle.'' Thus, the reference point from which the
domestic like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an
investigation,'' i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the
petition.
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not
offer a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of
the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information submitted
in the petitions, we have determined there is a single domestic like
product, certain steel nails, which is defined further in the ``Scope
of the Investigations'' section above, and we have analyzed industry
support in terms of that domestic like product. See PRC Initiation
Checklist at Attachment II and UAE Initiation Checklist at Attachment
II.
Based on information provided in the petitions, the share of total
estimated U.S. production of the domestic like product in calendar year
2006 represented by the petitioners did not account for more than 50
percent of the total production of the domestic like product.
Therefore, in accordance with section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act, we
polled the industry.
On June 1, 2007, we issued polling questionnaires to all known
domestic producers of certain steel nails identified in the petitions
and by the Department's research. On June 6, 2007, we issued a polling
questionnaire to an additional producer whose identity we learned from
the ITC. The questionnaires are on file in the CRU in room B-099 of the
main Department of Commerce building. We requested that each company
complete the polling questionnaire and certify its response by faxing
its response to the Department by the due date. For a detailed
discussion of the responses received, see PRC Initiation Checklist at
Attachment II and UAE Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
Section 732(c)(4)(B) of the Act states that (i) the Department
``shall disregard the position of domestic producers who oppose the
petition if such producers are related to foreign producers, as defined
in section 771(4)(B)(ii), unless such domestic producers demonstrate
that their interests as domestic producers would be adversely affected
by the imposition of an antidumping duty order'' and (ii) the
Department ``may disregard the position of domestic producers of a
domestic like product who are importers of the subject merchandise.''
In addition, 19 CFR 351.203(e)(4) states that the position of a
domestic producer that opposes the petition (i) will be disregarded if
such producer is related to a foreign producer or to a foreign exporter
under section 771(4)(B)(ii) of the Act, unless such domestic producer
demonstrates to the Secretary's satisfaction that its interests as a
domestic producer would be adversely affected by the imposition of an
antidumping order, and (ii) may be disregarded if the producer is an
importer of the subject merchandise or is related to such an importer
under section 771(4)(B)(ii) of the Act.
Certain producers of the domestic like product that opposed the
petition against the PRC are related to foreign producers and/or
imported subject merchandise from the PRC. We have analyzed the
information provided by these producers in their polling questionnaire
responses and information provided in other submissions to the
Department (see the petitioners' June 18, 2007, submission and Illinois
Tool Works Inc.'s June 25, 2007, submission). Based on our analysis, we
have determined that it would be appropriate to disregard the position
of any of the opposing producers under section 732(c)(4)(B) of the Act.
When the position of any of these producers is disregarded, the
petitioners satisfy the statutory industry support requirements of
section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act. See PRC Initiation Checklist at
Attachment II and UAE Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
With regard to the PRC petition, the data collected demonstrate
that the domestic producers of certain steel nails who support the PRC
petition account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the
domestic like product and, once the opposition of certain producers is
disregarded, more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic
like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing
support for, or opposition to, the PRC
[[Page 38819]]
petition. See PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
Our analysis of the data collected with regard to the UAE petition
indicates that the domestic producers of certain steel nails who
support the UAE petition account for at least 25 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product and more than 50 percent of the
production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the
industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the UAE petition.
See UAE Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. We note that certain
U.S. producers oppose the petition against the UAE; however, despite
such opposition, the petitioners still account for more than 50 percent
of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion
of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the UAE
petition. As a result, we need not examine whether the U.S. producers
that opposed the petition against the UAE are related to, or import
from, producers of the subject merchandise in the UAE.
Therefore, the Department determines that the petitioners filed
these petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because they are
interested parties as defined in sections 771(9)(C) and (D) of the Act
and they have demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to
the antidumping investigations that they are requesting the Department
initiate. See PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment II and UAE
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioners allege that the U.S. industry producing the
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). The petitioners
contend that the industry's injured condition is illustrated by reduced
market share, lost sales, reduced production, reduced capacity and
capacity utilization rate, reduced shipments, underselling and price
depression or suppression, lost revenue, reduced employment, decline in
financial performance, and an increase in import penetration. We have
assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material
injury and causation, and we have determined that these allegations are
properly supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory
requirements for initiation. See PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment
III (Injury) and UAE Initiation Checklist at Attachment III (Injury).
Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less
than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to
initiate these investigations of imports of certain steel nails from
the PRC and the UAE. The sources of data for the deductions and
adjustments relating to the U.S. price, constructed value (CV) (for the
UAE), and the factors of production (for the PRC) are also discussed in
the country-specific initiation checklists. See PRC Initiation
Checklist and UAE Initiation Checklist. Should the need arise to use
any of this information as facts available under section 776 of the Act
in our preliminary or final determinations, we will reexamine the
information and revise the margin calculations, if appropriate.
UAE
Export Price (EP)
The petitioners calculated two EPs using price offers for UAE-
produced steel nails obtained from customer contacts. The petitioners
made adjustments for the importer's markup, U.S. inland freight, ocean
freight, marine insurance, U.S. port fees, and foreign inland freight.
The petitioners derived the importer profit margin from published
financial statement data of a trading company that imports nails into
the United States. The petitioners estimated U.S. inland freight based
on their knowledge and experience in shipping steel nails within the
United States. They calculated ocean freight and marine insurance based
on the difference between the average per-unit customs value and the
average per-unit CIF value reported in U.S. import statistics for the
HTSUS category corresponding to the price data at the likely U.S. port
of entry. U.S. port fees were based on standard U.S. government
percentages, as applied to the petitioners' estimate of entered value.
Finally, the petitioners calculated foreign inland freight based on a
UAE freight quote obtained through market research. See UAE Initiation
Checklist.
NV Based on CV
With respect to NV, the petitioners provided information that the
UAE home market is not viable. According to the petitioners, the UAE
steel nail industry is geared almost exclusively to exports. See, e.g.,
Volume III of the UAE petition at 9 and Exhibit UAE 5. Through market
research, the petitioners learned that the type of wood-frame
construction used predominantly in North America makes the United
States a desirable market for exports, while other types of specialty
fasteners are more prevalent in the UAE home market. See Supplement to
the UAE petition, dated June 1, 2007.
Further, the petitioners provided information that no third-country
market for the UAE's principal exporter of the merchandise, Dubai Wire,
is viable. Based on available export data from the UAE, the petitioners
state that Germany is the next largest country to which subject
merchandise was exported, and that the volume of merchandise exported
to Germany was 1.01 percent of the volume exported to the United
States. See Volume III of the UAE petition at 9 and Exhibit UAE 5, and
Supplement to the UAE petition, dated June 1, 2007. As this is less
than the 5-percent threshold provided for in section
773(a)(1)(B)(ii)(II) of the Act, Germany is not a viable third-country
market. Accordingly, the petitioners based NV on CV.
Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the cost of
manufacture (COM); selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses;
financial expenses; packing expenses; and profit. In calculating COM
and packing, the petitioners based the quantity of each of the inputs
used to manufacture and pack steel nails on the production experience
of two U.S. steel nail producers during the prospective POI, and
multiplied it by the value of inputs used to manufacture steel nails in
the UAE using either publicly available data or data obtained from a
market research study. See Volume III of the UAE petition at 10-14, the
June 7, 2007, supplement to the UAE petition at Exhibit UAE Supp-12 and
the June 20, 2007, supplement to the UAE petition at 3-5 and Exhibits
UAE Supp2-12A, Supp2-12B and Supp2-20.
Raw material (i.e., steel wire rod) is the most significant input
used in the production of steel nails. The petitioners determined the
usage of steel wire rod based on the quantities used by two U.S.
manufacturers to produce a metric ton of steel nails. The value of
steel wire rod was based on price data obtained through market
research. The price data from the market research study were
contemporaneous with the POI. The values for other inputs and packing
(i.e., scrap, stearic acid, polypropylene, and vinyl resins) were based
on statistics from the World Trade Atlas for the period of July 2005 to
August 2006. See Volume III of the UAE petition at 10-11 and Exhibits
UAE 13-14, the June 1, 2007, supplement to the UAE petition at Exhibit
1, and the June 7, 2007, supplement to the UAE petition at Exhibit UAE
Supp-12.
[[Page 38820]]
The petitioners determined labor costs using the labor inputs
derived from the experience of two U.S. steel nail producers and valued
these inputs using UAE labor costs obtained from a market research
study. Based on the study, the petitioners calculated an hourly rate
using an average of four industrial sources in the UAE. For the value
of indirect labor, the petitioners calculated an hourly rate using an
average of two industrial sources in the UAE for accountants,
engineers, managers, supervisors, and general managers. See Volume III
of the UAE petition at 11 and Exhibit UAE 8, the June 1, 2007,
supplement to the UAE petition at Exhibit 1, and the June 7, 2007,
supplement to the UAE petition at Exhibit UAE Supp-12.
To calculate energy, factory overhead, and SG&A expenses, the
petitioners relied on the financial statements of a steel fabricating
company in the UAE, Arab Heavy Industries (AHI), for the fiscal year
ending December 31, 2006, the period most contemporaneous with the POI.
The petitioners stated that the surrogate financial statements did not
separately itemize other operating expenses (i.e., energy, SG&A);
therefore, to avoid double-counting energy expenses in the calculation
of CV it was necessary to use a combined ratio for energy, factory
overhead, and SG&A expenses. Specifically, the petitioners calculated
the total of depreciation, other operating expenses, and other income
from AHI's financial statements as a percentage of materials and labor
from AHI's financial statements. This ratio was then applied to the
materials (excluding packing) and labor costs calculated as discussed
above. The petitioners believe this is a conservative calculation of
the energy, factory overhead, and SG&A expenses as they have included
all other income from AHI's financial statements. Additionally, based
on AHI's financial statements, they believe packing expenses were
included in the denominator of the energy, factory overhead, and SG&A
ratio calculation, but not in the materials and labor figure to which
they applied it (packing expenses were added after this calculation),
thus potentially understating CV. See the June 20, 2007, supplement to
the UAE petition at 3-5 and Exhibits UAE Supp2-12A, Supp2-12B and
Supp2-20.
To calculate the average financial expense and profit rates, the
petitioners relied on the financial statements of the same UAE steel
fabricator, AHI. The petitioners note that based on the surrogate
financial statements, the financial expense ratio was zero. See the
June 20, 2007, supplement to the UAE petition at 3-5 and Exhibits UAE
Supp2-12A, Supp2-12B and Supp2-20.
PRC
EP
The petitioners relied on three U.S. prices for certain steel nails
manufactured in the PRC and offered for sale in the United States. The
prices quoted were for three different types of steel nails falling
within the scope of the PRC petition, for delivery to the U.S. customer
within the POI. The petitioners deducted from the prices the costs
associated with exporting and delivering the product, including U.S.
inland freight, ocean freight and insurance charges, U.S. duty, port
and wharfage fees, foreign inland freight costs, and foreign brokerage
and handling. See PRC Initiation Checklist. The petitioners based the
importer profit margin and U.S. inland freight on their knowledge and
experience. The petitioners used the Department's standard all-distance
freight rate for foreign inland freight. They calculated ocean freight
and marine insurance based on the difference between the average per-
unit customs value and the average per-unit CIF value reported in U.S.
import statistics for the HTSUS category corresponding to the price
data at the likely U.S. port of entry. U.S. port fees were based on
standard percentages of U.S. government fees. The petitioners estimated
foreign brokerage and handling based on Indian surrogate value data
applied in another Department proceeding. See Volume II of the PRC
petition at 1-15, and Exhibits PRC 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B, 6A - 10F,
and the June 7, 2007, PRC-only submission at 15-18, and Exhibit 10.
PRC NV
The petitioners stated that the PRC remains a non-market economy
(NME) country and no determination to the contrary has yet been made by
the Department. Recently, the Department examined the PRC's market
status and determined that NME status should continue for the PRC. See
Memorandum from the Office of Policy to David M. Spooner, Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, Regarding The People's Republic of
China Status as a Non-Market Economy, dated May 15, 2006 (This document
is available online at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/download/prc-nme-status/
prc-nme-status-memo.pdf.) In addition, in two recent investigations,
the Department also determined that the PRC is an NME country. See
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Activated
Carbon from the People's Republic of China, 72 FR 9508 (March 2, 2007)
and Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Partial
Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain Polyester
Staple Fiber from the People's Republic of China, 72 FR 19690 (April
19, 2007). In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the
presumption of NME status remains in effect until revoked by the
Department. The presumption of NME status for the PRC has not been
revoked by the Department and remains in effect for purposes of the
initiation of this investigation. Accordingly, the NV of the product is
appropriately based on factors of production valued in a surrogate
market economy country in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. In
the course of this investigation, all parties will have the opportunity
to provide relevant information related to the issues of the PRC's NME
status and the granting of separate rates to individual exporters.
The petitioners selected India as the surrogate country arguing
that, pursuant to section 773(c)(4) of the Act, India is an appropriate
surrogate because it is a market economy country that is at a level of
economic development comparable to that of the PRC and is a significant
producer and exporter of certain steel nails. See Volume II of the PRC
petition at 16-20. Based on the information provided by the
petitioners, we believe that the use of India as a surrogate country is
appropriate for purposes of initiation. After the initiation of the
investigation, we will solicit comments regarding surrogate country
selection.
The petitioners provided dumping margin calculations using the
Department's NME methodology as required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C)
and 19 CFR 351.408. However, because information regarding the factors
of production consumed by Chinese producers is not available to the
petitioners, the petitioners calculated NVs for each U.S. price
discussed above based on consumption rates for producing certain steel
nails as experienced by U.S. producers. See Volume II of the PRC
petition at 19-20. The petitioners used U.S. producer consumption
figures for 2006, stating that such information provides as
contemporaneous a time period as possible with the POI and is
reasonably available to the petitioners. See id. With the exception of
labor, the petitioners state that U.S. input consumption quantities
reflect efficient production methods and they provide a conservative
estimate of the factors of production used by the Chinese. See id.
[[Page 38821]]
For labor, the petitioners adjusted the number of labor hours per unit
of output to account for a known difference between the U.S. and
Chinese production processes. Specifically, the petitioners stated that
the production of subject merchandise is more labor intensive in the
PRC than in the United States, requiring significantly more labor to
produce the same amount of finished product. The petitioners provide
affidavits to support this labor adjustment. See Volume II of the PRC
petition at 20, Exhibits PRC 11A - 11C, and the June 7, 2007, PRC-only
supplement to the PRC petition at 4 and Exhibit PRC 11. Accordingly, we
found the petitioners use of the production data to be reasonable.
For the NV calculations, the petitioners were unable to obtain
surrogate value figures contemporaneous with the POI for all material
inputs, and accordingly relied upon the most recent information
available. The sources of these data include the published national
market prices for carbon steel commodities by Joint Plant Committee of
India and the World Trade Atlas compilation of Indian import
statistics, which provided data through September 2006 at the time the
petition was filed. See Volume II of the PRC petition at Exhibits PRC
14A and PRC 15. Where an input price reflected a period preceding the
POI, the petitioners adjusted it for inflation using the wholesale
price index for India reported by the Reserve Bank of India. See Volume
II of the PRC petition at Exhibit PRC 13. For fuel-, energy-, and
lubricant-related inputs, the petitioners used the energy-specific
inflators published by the International Monetary Fund. See id. The
petitioners excluded those values from countries previously determined
by the Department to be NME countries and imports into India from
Indonesia, the Republic of Korea and Thailand, because the Department
has previously excluded prices from these countries because they
maintain broadly available, non-industry-specific export subsidies, as
well as imports from unspecified countries. See Hand Trucks and Certain
Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Administrative Review and Final Results of New Shipper Review, 72 FR
27287 (May 15, 2007), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum
at Comment 23. The surrogate values used by the petitioners for the
material and packing inputs consist of information reasonably available
to the petitioners and are, therefore, acceptable for purposes of
initiation.
With respect to the surrogate financial expenses, the petitioners
relied on the factory overhead, SG&A expenses and profitability of an
Indian steel fastener producer, Lakshmi Precision Screws Ltd.
(``LPS''), taken from the company's most recently available annual
report that is closest to the POI. See Volume II of the PRC petition at
Exhibit PRC 20. The petitioners claim that LPS is a modern producer
using state of the art equipment and is India's only publicly traded
producer of steel fasteners. The petitioners stated that they were
unable to find public financial statements from other Indian nail
producers; therefore, the petitioners argue, LPS provides the best
information reasonably available as a surrogate for the production of
certain steel nails in the PRC. We find that the petitioners' use of
LPS as the source for the surrogate financial expenses is appropriate
for purposes of initiation. The Department made minor modifications to
the surrogate financial ratios calculated by the petitioners. As a
result, the calculations for the three NVs and the resulting margin
calculations changed slightly. See PRC Initiation Checklist at
Attachment V.
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the petitioners, there is reason to
believe that imports of certain steel nails from the PRC and the UAE
are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than
fair value. Based on comparisons of EP to CV, calculated in accordance
with section 773(a)(4) of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for
certain steel nails from the UAE are 70.77 and 71.50 percent. Based on
comparisons of EP to NV, calculated in accordance with section 773(c)
of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for certain steel nails from
the PRC are 55.19, 97.15 and 118.04 percent.
Initiation of Antidumping Investigations
Based upon the examination of the petitions on certain steel nails
from the PRC and the UAE, the Department finds that the petitions meet
the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are
initiating antidumping duty investigations to determine whether imports
of certain steel nails from the PRC and the UAE are being, or are
likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. In
accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act, unless postponed, we
will make our preliminary determinations no later than 140 days after
the date of this initiation.
Separate Rates and Quantity and Value Questionnaire
The Department recently modified the process by which exporters and
producers may obtain separate-rate status in NME investigations. See
Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and Application of
Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations involving Non-Market
Economy Countries (April 5, 2005) (Separate Rates and Combination Rates
Bulletin), available on the Department's website at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf. The process requires the submission
of a separate-rate status application. Based on our experience in
processing the separate-rate applications in the following antidumping
duty investigations, we have modified the application for this
investigation to make it more administrable and easier for applicants
to complete. See Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Certain
Lined Paper Products From India, Indonesia, and the People's Republic
of China, 70 FR 58374, 58379 (October 6, 2005), Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Investigation: Certain Artist Canvas From the People's
Republic of China, 70 FR 21996, 21999 (April 28, 2005), and Initiation
of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
from the People's Republic of China and the Republic of Korea, 70 FR
35625, 35629 (June 21, 2005). The specific requirements for submitting
the separate-rate application in this investigation are outlined in
detail in the application itself, which will be available on the
Department's website at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-highlights-and-
news.html on the date of publication of this initiation notice in the
Federal Register. The separate-rate application is due no later than
September 7, 2007.
NME Respondent Selection and Quantity and Value Questionnaire
For NME investigations, it is the Department's practice to request
quantity and value information from all known exporters identified in
the PRC petition. Although many NME exporters respond to the quantity
and value information request, at times some exporters may not have
received the quantity and value questionnaire or may not have received
it in time to respond by the specified deadline. Therefore, the
Department typically requests the assistance of the NME government in
transmitting the Department's quantity and value questionnaire to all
companies that manufacture and export subject merchandise to the United
[[Page 38822]]
States, as well as to manufacturers that produce the subject
merchandise for companies that were engaged in exporting subject
merchandise to the United States during the POI. The quantity and value
data received from NME exporters is used as the basis to select the
mandatory respondents.
The Department requires that the respondents submit a response to
both the quantity and value questionnaire and the separate-rate
application by the respective deadlines in order to receive
consideration for separate-rate status. Appendix I of this notice
contains the quantity and value questionnaire that must be submitted by
all NME exporters no later than July 30, 2007. In addition, the
Department will post the quantity and value questionnaire along with
the filing instructions on the IA website at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-
highlights-and-news.html. The Department will send the quantity and
value questionnaire to those companies identified in Exhibit I-5 of
Volume I of the PRC petition and those identified by the NME
government.
Use of Combination Rates in an NME Investigation
The Department will calculate combination rates for certain
respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in the PRC
investigation. The Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin,
states:
[w]hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates only to
exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now assign in
its NME investigations will be specific to those producers that
supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note,
however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the
producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the period of
investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory respondents
receiving an individually calculated separate rate as well as the pool
of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted-average of the
individually calculated rates. This practice is referred to as the
application of ``combination rates'' because such rates apply to
specific combinations of exporters and one or more producers. The cash-
deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply only to merchandise
both exported by the firm in question and produced by a firm that
supplied the exporter during the period of investigation.
See Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin, at 6.
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, copies of the
public versions of the petitions have been provided to the
representatives of the Governments of the PRC and the UAE. We will
attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the petitions to the
foreign producers/exporters, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
International Trade Commission Notification
We have notified the ITC of our initiations, as required by section
732(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determinations by the International Trade Commission
The ITC will preliminarily determine, no later than July 30, 2007,
whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of certain steel
nails from the PRC and the UAE are materially injuring, or threatening
material injury to, a U.S. industry. A negative ITC determination with
respect to either of the investigations will result in that
investigation being terminated; otherwise, these investigations will
proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of
the Act.
Dated: July 9, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
Appendix - I
Where it is not practicable to examine all known producers/exporters of
subject merchandise, section 777A(c)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (as
amended) permits us to investigate 1) a sample of exporters, producers,
or types of products that is statistically valid based on the
information available at the time of selection, or 2) exporters and
producers accounting for the largest volume and value of the subject
merchandise that can reasonably be examined.
In the chart below, please provide the total quantity and total value
of all your sales of merchandise covered by the scope of this
investigation (see scope section of this notice), produced in the PRC,
and exported/shipped to the United States during the period October 1,
2006, through March 31, 2007.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Market Total Quantity Terms of Sale Total Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
United States................................................... .............. .............. ..............
1. Export Price Sales........................................... .............. .............. ..............
2............................................................... .............. .............. ..............
a. Exporter name............................................... .............. .............. ..............
b. Address..................................................... .............. .............. ..............
c. Contact..................................................... .............. .............. ..............
d. Phone No.................................................... .............. .............. ..............
e. Fax No...................................................... .............. .............. ..............
3. Constructed Export Price Sales............................... .............. .............. ..............
4. Further Manufactured......................................... .............. .............. ..............
Total Sales..................................................... .............. .............. ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Quantity:
Please report quantity on a metric ton basis. If any
conversions were used, please provide the conversion formula and
source.
Terms of Sales:
Please report all sales on the same terms (e.g., free on
board).
Total Value:
All sales values should be reported in U.S. dollars.
Please indicate any exchange rates used and their respective dates and
sources.
Export Price Sales:
Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as an export price
sale when the first sale to an unaffiliated person occurs before
importation into the United States.
Please include any sales exported by your company directly
to the
[[Page 38823]]
United States;
Please include any sales exported by your company to a
third-country market economy reseller where you had knowledge that the
merchandise was destined to be resold to the United States.
If you are a producer of subject merchandise, please
include any sales manufactured by your company that were subsequently
exported by an affiliated exporter to the United States.
Please do not include any sales of merchandise
manufactured in Hong Kong in your figures.
Constructed Export Price Sales:
Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as a constructed
export price sale when the first sale to an unaffiliated person occurs
after importation. However, if the first sale to the unaffiliated
person is made by a person in the United States affiliated with the
foreign exporter, constructed export price applies even if the sale
occurs prior to importation.
Please include any sales exported by your company directly
to the United States;
Please include any sales exported by your company to a
third-country market economy reseller where you had knowledge that the
merchandise was destined to be resold to the United States.
If you are a producer of subject merchandise, please
include any sales manufactured by your company that were subsequently
exported by an affiliated exporter to the United States.
Please do not include any sales of merchandise
manufactured in Hong Kong in your figures.
Further Manufactured:
Further manufacture or assembly costs include amounts
incurred for direct materials, labor and overhead, plus amounts for
general and administrative expense, interest expense, and additional
packing expense incurred in the country of further manufacture, as well
as all costs involved in moving the product from the U.S. port of entry
to the further manufacturer.
[FR Doc. E7-13721 Filed 7-13-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S