Targeted Dumping in Antidumping Investigations; Request for Comment, 60651-60652 [E7-21045]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 206 / Thursday, October 25, 2007 / Notices
Administration Webmaster, at (202)
482–0866, e-mail address: webmaster–
support@ita.doc.gov.
Dated: October 17, 2007.
David Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–21053 Filed 10–24–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
Targeted Dumping in Antidumping
Investigations; Request for Comment
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(‘‘the Department’’) seeks public
comment on its development of a
methodology for determining whether
targeted dumping is occurring in
antidumping investigations. The
Department seeks input on standards
and tests that may be appropriate in a
targeted dumping analysis.
DATES: Comments must be submitted
within thirty days from the publication
of this notice.
ADDRESSES: Written comments (original
and six copies) should be sent to David
Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Central Records Unit, Room
1870, 14th Street & Constitution Ave.,
NW, Washington, DC 20230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anthony Hill, Economist, Office of
Policy, or Michael Rill, Director,
Antidumping Policy, Import
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: 202–482–1843 or 202–482–
3058, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Background
Pursuant to section 777A(d)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930 (the ‘‘Act’’), the
Department normally will calculate
antidumping duty margins in
investigations by comparing weighted–
average export prices with weighted–
average normal values or transaction–
specific export prices with transaction–
specific normal values. Section
777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act allows the
Department to use an alternative
method for determining the existence of
margins of dumping in an investigation
using what is commonly referred to as
the targeted dumping comparison
methodology. The alternative method
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:26 Oct 24, 2007
Jkt 214001
allows the Department to compare
transaction–specific export prices to
weighted–average normal values. In
order to use this alternative method, the
Act requires the Department to find that
there is a pattern of export prices (or
constructed export prices) that differ
significantly among purchasers, regions,
or periods of time. See 777A(D)(1)(B)(i)
of the Act. In addition, the Act requires
the Department to explain why the
differences cannot be taken into account
using one of the normal calculation
methodologies. See 777A(D)(1)(B)(ii) of
the Act. The Department’s regulations at
19 CFR 351.414(f)(1)(i) further require
that a determination of targeted
dumping be made ‘‘through the use of,
among other things, standard and
appropriate statistical techniques.’’
The Department’s experience with
regard to the use of this methodology
has been very limited. In the
antidumping investigation of certain
pasta from Italy, petitioners made an
allegation that targeted dumping was
occurring, but the Department found
that it was unsubstantiated and did not
accept the allegation. See Notice of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Certain Pasta from Italy, 61
FR 30326 (June 14, 1996). Reviewing
that determination, the Court of
International Trade found that the
Department had dismissed the
allegation even though it had not
articulated a test by which an allegation
should be made. See Borden, Inc. v.
U.S., 4 F. Supp. 2d 1221, 1228–31 (CIT
March 26, 1998) (‘‘Borden’’). On
remand, the Department created a test
(the ‘‘Pasta Test’’) to analyze U.S. price
data in that case, but found no targeted
dumping. See Borden, Inc. v. U.S., 1999
WL 397968, *2 (CIT June 4, 1999)
(‘‘Borden Remand’’) (citing
Department’s Remand Redetermination
(‘‘Remand Redetermination’’) at 17).
However, the Department noted that it
reserved the discretion to alter its
methodology in future cases. See
Borden Remand, 1999 WL 397968, *1
(citing Remand Redetermination at 15).
An allegation of targeted dumping
was made in the investigation of fresh
tomatoes from Mexico. The Department
determined that there was not an
adequate basis on which to accept the
allegation on the grounds that
petitioners used a benchmark of ten
percent to claim that price differences
were significant even though prices for
tomatoes were very volatile, changing
by more than ten percent within a day,
and petitioners did not establish that
there was a pattern of price differences.
See Notice of Preliminary Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Postponement of Final Determination:
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60651
Fresh Tomatoes From Mexico, 61 FR
56608, 56610 (November 1, 1996).
Another allegation of targeted
dumping was made in the investigation
of stainless steel wire rod from Taiwan.
Again, the Department found that the
petitioners’ analysis failed to meet the
basic requirements of the statute. The
allegation simply compared average
prices to different customers without
any further analysis. See Notice of
Preliminary Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value and Postponement
of Final Determination: Stainless Steel
Wire Rod from Taiwan, 63 FR 10836,
10837 (March 5, 1998).
The Department’s most recent
experience was in the antidumping
investigation of coated free sheet paper
from the Republic of Korea. In that
proceeding, petitioners alleged that
certain respondents were targeting
certain customers and regions. The
Department accepted this allegation,
finding that petitioners had met the
statutory requirement for showing that
there was a pattern of prices that differ
significantly among purchasers and
regions while also acknowledging that
the Department had not yet established
a general set of standards for analyzing
an allegation of targeted dumping. See
Memorandum to David M. Spooner
entitled ‘‘Antidumping Duty
Investigation of Coated Free Sheet Paper
from South Korea - Targeted Dumping,’’
from Stephen J. Claeys, dated September
7, 2007.
Request for Comment
Given the Department’s limited
experience with targeted dumping
allegations and analysis and certain
undefined terms in the statute and
regulations, the Department requests
comments and suggestions on what
guidelines, thresholds, and tests it
should use in determining whether
targeted dumping is occurring. For
example, while the statute requires a
showing that there is a ‘‘pattern’’ of
price differences, there is no definition
or explanation as to what constitutes a
pattern. What standards or methods
should be used to show a pattern of
price differences? Another requirement
is that price differences be ‘‘significant.’’
What threshold should there be, if any,
for showing that price differences are
significant? Furthermore, the
regulations require the use of ‘‘standard
and appropriate statistical techniques.’’
What would be the appropriate
statistical techniques to use to show
targeted dumping?
Submission of Comments
Persons wishing to comment should
file a signed original and six copies of
E:\FR\FM\25OCN1.SGM
25OCN1
60652
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 206 / Thursday, October 25, 2007 / Notices
each set of comments by the date
specified above. The Department will
consider all comments received by the
close of the comment period. Comments
received after the end of the comment
period will be considered, if possible,
but their consideration cannot be
assured. The Department will not accept
comments accompanied by a request
that a part or all of the material be
treated confidentially because of its
business proprietary nature or for any
other reason. The Department will
return such comments and materials to
the persons submitting the comments
and will not consider them in its
development of a targeted dumping
analysis. The Department requires that
comments be submitted in written form.
The Department also requests
submission of comments in electronic
form to accompany the required paper
copies. Comments filed in electronic
form should be submitted either by e–
mail to the webmaster below, or on CD–
ROM, as comments submitted on
diskettes are likely to be damaged by
postal radiation treatment.
Comments received in electronic form
will be made available to the public in
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the
Internet at the Import Administration
website at the following address: http:/
ia.ita.doc.gov. Any questions
concerning file formatting, document
conversion, access on the Internet, or
other electronic filing issues should be
addressed to Andrew Lee Beller, Import
Administration Webmaster, at (202)
482–0866, email address: webmaster–
support@ita.doc.gov.
Dated: October 17, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–21045 Filed 10–24–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Proposed Information Collection;
Comment Request; Emergency
Beacon Registrations
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
SUMMARY: The Department of
Commerce, as part of its continuing
effort to reduce paperwork and
respondent burden, invites the general
public and other Federal agencies to
take this opportunity to comment on
17:26 Oct 24, 2007
Jkt 214001
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and/or
included in the request for OMB
approval of this information collection;
they also will become a matter of public
record.
Direct all written comments
to Diana Hynek, Departmental
Paperwork Clearance Officer,
Department of Commerce, Room 6625,
14th and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230 (or via the
Internet at dHynek@doc.gov).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection
instrument and instructions should be
directed to Jeffrey Shoup, 301–817–3806
or Jeffrey.Shoup@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: October 19, 2007.
Gwellnar Banks,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. E7–21026 Filed 10–24–07; 8:45 am]
I. Abstract
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
ADDRESSES:
An international system exists to use
satellites to detect and locate ships,
aircraft, or individuals in distress if they
are equipped with an emergency radio
beacon. Persons purchasing a digital,
distress beacon, operating in the
frequency range of 406.000 to 406.100
MHz, must register it with NOAA. The
data provided by registration can assist
in identifying who is in trouble and in
suppressing false alarms.
II. Method of Collection
Paper and online registration is
available.
III. Data
OMB Number: 0648–0295.
Form Number: None.
Type of Review: Regular submission.
Affected Public: Individuals or
households; business or other for profit
organizations; not-for-profit institutions;
state, local or tribal governments.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
20,000.
Estimated Time per Response: 20
minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 6,667.
Estimated Total Annual Cost to
Public: $8,200.
IV. Request for Comments
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
proposed and/or continuing information
collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted on or before December 24,
2007.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
RIN 0648–XD48
U.S. Climate Change Science Program
Synthesis and Assessment Product
Draft Report 4.7 ‘‘Impacts of Climate
Change and Variability on
Transportation Systems and
Infrastructure: Gulf Coast Study’’
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability and
request for public comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration publishes
this notice to announce a 45-day public
comment period for the draft report
titled, U.S. Climate Change Science
Program Synthesis and Assessment
Product 4.7: ‘‘Impacts of Climate Change
and Variability on Transportation
Systems and Infrastructure: Gulf Coast
Study.’’
This draft document is being released
solely for the purpose of predissemination peer review under
applicable information quality
guidelines. This document has not been
formally disseminated by NOAA. It does
not represent and should not be
construed to represent any Agency
policy or determination. After
consideration of comments received on
the draft report, a revised version along
with the comments received will be
published on the CCSP web site.
DATES: Comments must be received by
December 10, 2007.
ADDRESSES: The draft Synthesis and
Assessment Product 4.7: ‘‘Impacts of
Climate Change and Variability on
Transportation Systems and
E:\FR\FM\25OCN1.SGM
25OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 206 (Thursday, October 25, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60651-60652]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-21045]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
Targeted Dumping in Antidumping Investigations; Request for
Comment
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') seeks public
comment on its development of a methodology for determining whether
targeted dumping is occurring in antidumping investigations. The
Department seeks input on standards and tests that may be appropriate
in a targeted dumping analysis.
DATES: Comments must be submitted within thirty days from the
publication of this notice.
ADDRESSES: Written comments (original and six copies) should be sent to
David Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, Central Records Unit, Room 1870, 14th Street &
Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Hill, Economist, Office of
Policy, or Michael Rill, Director, Antidumping Policy, Import
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202-482-1843
or 202-482-3058, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Pursuant to section 777A(d)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the
``Act''), the Department normally will calculate antidumping duty
margins in investigations by comparing weighted-average export prices
with weighted-average normal values or transaction-specific export
prices with transaction-specific normal values. Section 777A(d)(1)(B)
of the Act allows the Department to use an alternative method for
determining the existence of margins of dumping in an investigation
using what is commonly referred to as the targeted dumping comparison
methodology. The alternative method allows the Department to compare
transaction-specific export prices to weighted-average normal values.
In order to use this alternative method, the Act requires the
Department to find that there is a pattern of export prices (or
constructed export prices) that differ significantly among purchasers,
regions, or periods of time. See 777A(D)(1)(B)(i) of the Act. In
addition, the Act requires the Department to explain why the
differences cannot be taken into account using one of the normal
calculation methodologies. See 777A(D)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act. The
Department's regulations at 19 CFR 351.414(f)(1)(i) further require
that a determination of targeted dumping be made ``through the use of,
among other things, standard and appropriate statistical techniques.''
The Department's experience with regard to the use of this
methodology has been very limited. In the antidumping investigation of
certain pasta from Italy, petitioners made an allegation that targeted
dumping was occurring, but the Department found that it was
unsubstantiated and did not accept the allegation. See Notice of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Pasta from
Italy, 61 FR 30326 (June 14, 1996). Reviewing that determination, the
Court of International Trade found that the Department had dismissed
the allegation even though it had not articulated a test by which an
allegation should be made. See Borden, Inc. v. U.S., 4 F. Supp. 2d
1221, 1228-31 (CIT March 26, 1998) (``Borden''). On remand, the
Department created a test (the ``Pasta Test'') to analyze U.S. price
data in that case, but found no targeted dumping. See Borden, Inc. v.
U.S., 1999 WL 397968, *2 (CIT June 4, 1999) (``Borden Remand'') (citing
Department's Remand Redetermination (``Remand Redetermination'') at
17). However, the Department noted that it reserved the discretion to
alter its methodology in future cases. See Borden Remand, 1999 WL
397968, *1 (citing Remand Redetermination at 15).
An allegation of targeted dumping was made in the investigation of
fresh tomatoes from Mexico. The Department determined that there was
not an adequate basis on which to accept the allegation on the grounds
that petitioners used a benchmark of ten percent to claim that price
differences were significant even though prices for tomatoes were very
volatile, changing by more than ten percent within a day, and
petitioners did not establish that there was a pattern of price
differences. See Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination: Fresh Tomatoes
From Mexico, 61 FR 56608, 56610 (November 1, 1996).
Another allegation of targeted dumping was made in the
investigation of stainless steel wire rod from Taiwan. Again, the
Department found that the petitioners' analysis failed to meet the
basic requirements of the statute. The allegation simply compared
average prices to different customers without any further analysis. See
Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
and Postponement of Final Determination: Stainless Steel Wire Rod from
Taiwan, 63 FR 10836, 10837 (March 5, 1998).
The Department's most recent experience was in the antidumping
investigation of coated free sheet paper from the Republic of Korea. In
that proceeding, petitioners alleged that certain respondents were
targeting certain customers and regions. The Department accepted this
allegation, finding that petitioners had met the statutory requirement
for showing that there was a pattern of prices that differ
significantly among purchasers and regions while also acknowledging
that the Department had not yet established a general set of standards
for analyzing an allegation of targeted dumping. See Memorandum to
David M. Spooner entitled ``Antidumping Duty Investigation of Coated
Free Sheet Paper from South Korea - Targeted Dumping,'' from Stephen J.
Claeys, dated September 7, 2007.
Request for Comment
Given the Department's limited experience with targeted dumping
allegations and analysis and certain undefined terms in the statute and
regulations, the Department requests comments and suggestions on what
guidelines, thresholds, and tests it should use in determining whether
targeted dumping is occurring. For example, while the statute requires
a showing that there is a ``pattern'' of price differences, there is no
definition or explanation as to what constitutes a pattern. What
standards or methods should be used to show a pattern of price
differences? Another requirement is that price differences be
``significant.'' What threshold should there be, if any, for showing
that price differences are significant? Furthermore, the regulations
require the use of ``standard and appropriate statistical techniques.''
What would be the appropriate statistical techniques to use to show
targeted dumping?
Submission of Comments
Persons wishing to comment should file a signed original and six
copies of
[[Page 60652]]
each set of comments by the date specified above. The Department will
consider all comments received by the close of the comment period.
Comments received after the end of the comment period will be
considered, if possible, but their consideration cannot be assured. The
Department will not accept comments accompanied by a request that a
part or all of the material be treated confidentially because of its
business proprietary nature or for any other reason. The Department
will return such comments and materials to the persons submitting the
comments and will not consider them in its development of a targeted
dumping analysis. The Department requires that comments be submitted in
written form. The Department also requests submission of comments in
electronic form to accompany the required paper copies. Comments filed
in electronic form should be submitted either by e-mail to the
webmaster below, or on CD-ROM, as comments submitted on diskettes are
likely to be damaged by postal radiation treatment.
Comments received in electronic form will be made available to the
public in Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the Import
Administration website at the following address: http:/ia.ita.doc.gov.
Any questions concerning file formatting, document conversion, access
on the Internet, or other electronic filing issues should be addressed
to Andrew Lee Beller, Import Administration Webmaster, at (202) 482-
0866, email address: webmaster-support@ita.doc.gov.
Dated: October 17, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-21045 Filed 10-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S