2007 Calculation of Expected Non-Market Economy Wages, 26363-26364 [E8-10525]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 91 / Friday, May 9, 2008 / Notices
2. If approved, the action will result
in authorizing small entities to furnish
the products and services to the
Government.
3. There are no known regulatory
alternatives which would accomplish
the objectives of the Javits-WagnerO’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in
connection with the products and
services proposed for addition to the
Procurement List.
Comments on this certification are
invited. Commenters should identify the
statement(s) underlying the certification
on which they are providing additional
information.
End of Certification
The following products and services
are proposed for addition to
Procurement List for production by the
nonprofit agencies listed:
Products
Aircraft Assembly Parts
NSN: 1560–00–870–1656—Cover Access.
NSN: 1560–00–875–6001—Support,
Structural.
NSN: 1560–01–114–0870—Bracket
Assembly.
NSN: 1560–01–153–9682—Weather Strip.
NSN: 5365–00–159–3781—Shim.
NSN: 5365–00–159–3792—Shim.
NPA: The Lighthouse for the Blind, Inc.
(Seattle Lighthouse), Seattle, WA.
Coverage: C-List for the requirement of the
Defense Supply Center Richmond,
Richmond, VA.
Contracting Activity: Defense Supply Center
Richmond, Richmond, VA.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Cap, Garrison, Unisex U.S. Navy
NSN: 8405–01–539–5868—Size 63⁄8.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5869—Size 61⁄2.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5873—Size 65⁄8.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5887—Size 63⁄4.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5888—Size 67⁄8.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5889—Size 7.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5891—Size 71⁄8.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5892—Size 71⁄4.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5894—Size 73⁄8.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5895—Size 71⁄2.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5897—Size 75⁄8.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5900—Size 73⁄4.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5934—Size 77⁄8.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5937—Size 8.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5939—Size 81⁄8.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5962—Size 81⁄4.
NSN: 8405–01–539–5969—Size 83⁄8.
NSN: 8405–01–539–6335—Size 81⁄2.
NPA: Goodwill Industries of South Florida,
Inc., Miami, FL.
Coverage: C-List for 25% of the requirement
of the Defense Supply Center
Philadelphia. Philadelphia, PA.
Contracting Activity: Defense Supply Center
Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA.
Services
Service Type/Location: Mailroom Operations,
Fort Stewart, 1042 William H. Wilson
Avenue, Fort Stewart, GA.
NPA: Abilities, Inc. of Florida, Clearwater,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:01 May 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
FL.
Contracting Activity: Army Contracting
Agency, Directorate of Contracting, Fort
Stewart, GA.
Service Type/Location: Mailroom Operations,
Internal Revenue Service, 10715 David
Taylor Drive, Charlotte, NC.
NPA: Employment Source, Inc., Fayetteville,
NC,
NPA: ServiceSource, Inc., Alexandria, VA
(PRIME CONTRACTOR).
Contracting Activity: U.S. Department of the
Treasury, Internal Revenue Service
Headquarters, Oxon Hill, MD.
Deletion
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
I certify that the following action will not
have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The major factors
considered for this certification were:
1. If approved, the action should not result
in additional reporting, recordkeeping or
other compliance requirements for small
entities.
2. If approved, the action may result in
authorizing small entities to furnish the
services to the Government.
3. There are no known regulatory
alternatives which would accomplish the
objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act (41
U.S.C. 46–48c) in connection with the
services proposed for deletion from the
Procurement List.
Comments on this certification are invited.
Commenters should identify the statement(s)
underlying the certification on which they
are providing additional information.
End of Certification
The following service is proposed for
deletion from the Procurement List:
Service
Service Type/Location: Janitorial/Custodial,
Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Seattle,
WA.
NPA: Seattle Mental Health Institute, Inc.,
Seattle, WA.
Contracting Activity: Department of Veterans
Affairs, Seattle, WA.
Dennis Lockard,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E8–10373 Filed 5–8–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6353–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
2007 Calculation of Expected Non–
Market Economy Wages
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Finalization and Effective Date
of 2007 Expected Non–Market Economy
Wage Calculation.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: On April 11, 2008, the
Department of Commerce
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26363
(‘‘Department’’) published the
preliminary 2007 expected non–market
economy (‘‘NME’’) wages (the ‘‘2007
calculation’’), and provided the public
with an opportunity to comment on
potential clerical errors. See Expected
Non–Market Economy Wages: Request
for Comments on 2007 Calculation, 73
FR 19812 (April 11, 2008). The 2007
calculation was based on 2005 data and
the methodology described in the
Federal Register notice entitled
Antidumping Methodologies: Market
Economy Inputs, Expected Non–Market
Economy Wages, Duty Drawback; and
Request for Comments, 71 FR 61716,
Oct. 19, 2006 (hereafter, the
‘‘Antidumping Methodologies notice’’).
The Department received two sets of
comments in response to this notice and
has made one change to its calculation,
as described below, based on those
comments. This notice constitutes the
Department’s announcement of the
finalization and effective date of the
2007 calculation.
These expected NME wage rates
are finalized on the date of publication
of this notice in the Federal Register
and will be in effect for all antidumping
proceedings for which the Department’s
final decision is due after the
publication of this notice.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anthony Hill, Economist, Office of
Policy, or Juanita Chen, Special
Assistant to the Senior Enforcement
Coordinator, China/ NME Group, Import
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–1843 and (202)
482–1904, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments
Two parties commented that the
Department used the incorrect exchange
rate for Madagascar when converting
wages reported for that country into
U.S. dollars. They pointed out that
Madagascar has two currencies, the
ariary and the Malagasy franc (‘‘FMG’’),
and that the International Labour
Organization (‘‘ILO’’) reported wage
data for Madagascar in FMG. However,
they noted, it seems as though the
exchange rate used by the Department
was an ariary rate per U.S. dollar. They
also pointed out that the rate of ariary
to FMG was 1 to 5. Parties provided a
source that showed an FMG per U.S.
dollar exchange rate and argued that the
Department should use this exchange
rate to convert the ILO wage data
reported for Madagascar into U.S.
dollars.
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
26364
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 91 / Friday, May 9, 2008 / Notices
Two parties also argued that the
Department should have excluded
Indian and South Korean wage rates
from the regression analysis because of
subsidy programs in these countries.
They contend that the Department’s
normal practice is to exclude surrogate
data from countries with generally
available subsidies and that India and
South Korea are countries in which
these subsidies are available.
One party argued that the Ordinary
Least Squares (‘‘OLS’’) regression
analysis used by the Department will
inherently lead to inaccurate results
when applying it to the dataset used in
the expected NME wages calculation
because the dataset exhibits
heteroscedasticity. They argue that the
Department should use a Generalized
Least Squares regression to predict NME
wages because this method would give
more reliable results.
Department’s Position
With respect to the use of the
incorrect exchange rate in converting
Madagascar’s labor rate, the Department
agrees that this is a clerical error and
will change the 2007 calculation. The
ILO wage data for Madagascar are
reported in FMG per hour. The
International Financial Statistics (‘‘IFS’’)
exchange rate data do not specify the
name of the currency; however, the IFS
does say that the exchange rates are
reported in units of the national
currency per U.S. dollar. Moreover, the
International Monetary Fund’s 2007
Annual Report on Exchange
Arrangements and Exchange
Restrictions (‘‘IMF Report’’) states that,
‘‘The currency of Madagascar is the
ariary.’’ Instead of converting the ILO
wage data reported for Madagascar
directly into U.S. dollars using the
exchange rate suggested by the parties,
the Department converted the
Madagascar wage data from FMG to
ariary, and then from ariary to US
dollars, using the ariary/FMG rate in the
IMF Report and the IFS ariary/dollar
rate. The IMF Report notes that
Madagascar’s two currencies are
convertible at the rate of 1 ariary per 5
FMG.
The suggestion that the wage rates
from India and South Korea should be
excluded from the expected NME wage
rate analysis is a comment on the
calculation methodology and not a
clerical error. India and South Korea are
countries for which the Department has
reason to believe or suspect maintain
generally available export subsidies;
however, this practice has no bearing on
the use of domestic prices, including
labor rates, within these countries.
The argument that the Department
should use a Generalized Least Squares
Country
regression instead of an Ordinary Least
Squares regression is also a comment on
the methodology and not a clerical
error. The specific issue of
heteroscedasticity has been recently
addressed by the court, which
concluded that, given (i) the inherent
difficulties in identifying
heteroscedasticity and (ii) the fact that
the OLS estimators remain unbiased and
consistent even in the face of
heteroscedasticity, the Department’s
decision not to account for the
possibility of heteroscedasticity was
reasonable. See Dorbest Ltd., et al. v.
United States, Slip Op. 2008–24 (CIT
feb. 27, 2008) at 4–19.
Results
Following the data compilation and
regression methodology described in the
Antidumping Methodologies notice, and
using Gross National Income and wage
data for 2005, the regression results are:
Wage = 0.2721729 + 0.0004477* GNI.
The final expected NME wage rates, as
calculated with the above mentioned
change, are shown in Attachment 1.
Dated: May 6, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Attachment 1
2005 GNI (USD per annum)
Armenia ................................................................................................................
Azerbaijan ............................................................................................................
Belarus .................................................................................................................
China ....................................................................................................................
Georgia ................................................................................................................
Kyrgyz Republic ...................................................................................................
Moldova ...............................................................................................................
Tajikistan ..............................................................................................................
Uzbekistan ...........................................................................................................
Vietnam ................................................................................................................
The World Bank did not publish a
GNI for Turkmenistan.
The final results and underlying data
for the 2007 calculation have been
posted on the Import Administration
Web site at (https://ia.ita.doc.gov).
[FR Doc. E8–10525 Filed 5–8–04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
1,470
1,270
2,760
1,740
1,300
450
960
330
530
620
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
Antidumping Methodologies for
Proceedings that Involve Significant
Cost Changes Throughout the Period
of Investigation (POI)/Period of Review
(POR) that May Require Using Shorter
Cost Averaging Periods; Request for
Comment
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Request for comment.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Department) seeks public comment on
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:01 May 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Expected NME wage rate
(USD per hour)
0.93
0.84
1.51
1.05
0.85
0.47
0.70
0.42
0.51
0.55
its development of a predictable
methodology for determining when the
use of shorter cost averaging periods is
more appropriate than the established
practice of using annual cost averages
due to the occurrence of significant cost
changes throughout the POI/POR.
Although the Department maintains that
the established practice of using annual
cost averages is the most appropriate
methodology to use in a majority of
proceedings, it may be preferable to use
an alternative methodology in certain
cases. The Department now seeks
comments from the public on the factors
to consider, the tests to apply, and the
thresholds to adhere to in determining
whether or not shorter cost averaging
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 91 (Friday, May 9, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26363-26364]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-10525]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
2007 Calculation of Expected Non-Market Economy Wages
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Finalization and Effective Date of 2007 Expected Non-Market
Economy Wage Calculation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 11, 2008, the Department of Commerce (``Department'')
published the preliminary 2007 expected non-market economy (``NME'')
wages (the ``2007 calculation''), and provided the public with an
opportunity to comment on potential clerical errors. See Expected Non-
Market Economy Wages: Request for Comments on 2007 Calculation, 73 FR
19812 (April 11, 2008). The 2007 calculation was based on 2005 data and
the methodology described in the Federal Register notice entitled
Antidumping Methodologies: Market Economy Inputs, Expected Non-Market
Economy Wages, Duty Drawback; and Request for Comments, 71 FR 61716,
Oct. 19, 2006 (hereafter, the ``Antidumping Methodologies notice'').
The Department received two sets of comments in response to this notice
and has made one change to its calculation, as described below, based
on those comments. This notice constitutes the Department's
announcement of the finalization and effective date of the 2007
calculation.
DATES: These expected NME wage rates are finalized on the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal Register and will be in
effect for all antidumping proceedings for which the Department's final
decision is due after the publication of this notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Hill, Economist, Office of
Policy, or Juanita Chen, Special Assistant to the Senior Enforcement
Coordinator, China/ NME Group, Import Administration, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC
20230; telephone: (202) 482-1843 and (202) 482-1904, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments
Two parties commented that the Department used the incorrect
exchange rate for Madagascar when converting wages reported for that
country into U.S. dollars. They pointed out that Madagascar has two
currencies, the ariary and the Malagasy franc (``FMG''), and that the
International Labour Organization (``ILO'') reported wage data for
Madagascar in FMG. However, they noted, it seems as though the exchange
rate used by the Department was an ariary rate per U.S. dollar. They
also pointed out that the rate of ariary to FMG was 1 to 5. Parties
provided a source that showed an FMG per U.S. dollar exchange rate and
argued that the Department should use this exchange rate to convert the
ILO wage data reported for Madagascar into U.S. dollars.
[[Page 26364]]
Two parties also argued that the Department should have excluded
Indian and South Korean wage rates from the regression analysis because
of subsidy programs in these countries. They contend that the
Department's normal practice is to exclude surrogate data from
countries with generally available subsidies and that India and South
Korea are countries in which these subsidies are available.
One party argued that the Ordinary Least Squares (``OLS'')
regression analysis used by the Department will inherently lead to
inaccurate results when applying it to the dataset used in the expected
NME wages calculation because the dataset exhibits heteroscedasticity.
They argue that the Department should use a Generalized Least Squares
regression to predict NME wages because this method would give more
reliable results.
Department's Position
With respect to the use of the incorrect exchange rate in
converting Madagascar's labor rate, the Department agrees that this is
a clerical error and will change the 2007 calculation. The ILO wage
data for Madagascar are reported in FMG per hour. The International
Financial Statistics (``IFS'') exchange rate data do not specify the
name of the currency; however, the IFS does say that the exchange rates
are reported in units of the national currency per U.S. dollar.
Moreover, the International Monetary Fund's 2007 Annual Report on
Exchange Arrangements and Exchange Restrictions (``IMF Report'') states
that, ``The currency of Madagascar is the ariary.'' Instead of
converting the ILO wage data reported for Madagascar directly into U.S.
dollars using the exchange rate suggested by the parties, the
Department converted the Madagascar wage data from FMG to ariary, and
then from ariary to US dollars, using the ariary/FMG rate in the IMF
Report and the IFS ariary/dollar rate. The IMF Report notes that
Madagascar's two currencies are convertible at the rate of 1 ariary per
5 FMG.
The suggestion that the wage rates from India and South Korea
should be excluded from the expected NME wage rate analysis is a
comment on the calculation methodology and not a clerical error. India
and South Korea are countries for which the Department has reason to
believe or suspect maintain generally available export subsidies;
however, this practice has no bearing on the use of domestic prices,
including labor rates, within these countries.
The argument that the Department should use a Generalized Least
Squares regression instead of an Ordinary Least Squares regression is
also a comment on the methodology and not a clerical error. The
specific issue of heteroscedasticity has been recently addressed by the
court, which concluded that, given (i) the inherent difficulties in
identifying heteroscedasticity and (ii) the fact that the OLS
estimators remain unbiased and consistent even in the face of
heteroscedasticity, the Department's decision not to account for the
possibility of heteroscedasticity was reasonable. See Dorbest Ltd., et
al. v. United States, Slip Op. 2008-24 (CIT feb. 27, 2008) at 4-19.
Results
Following the data compilation and regression methodology described
in the Antidumping Methodologies notice, and using Gross National
Income and wage data for 2005, the regression results are: Wage =
0.2721729 + 0.0004477* GNI. The final expected NME wage rates, as
calculated with the above mentioned change, are shown in Attachment 1.
Dated: May 6, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Attachment 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expected NME wage rate (USD
Country 2005 GNI (USD per annum) per hour)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armenia............................................. 1,470 0.93
Azerbaijan.......................................... 1,270 0.84
Belarus............................................. 2,760 1.51
China............................................... 1,740 1.05
Georgia............................................. 1,300 0.85
Kyrgyz Republic..................................... 450 0.47
Moldova............................................. 960 0.70
Tajikistan.......................................... 330 0.42
Uzbekistan.......................................... 530 0.51
Vietnam............................................. 620 0.55
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The World Bank did not publish a GNI for Turkmenistan.
The final results and underlying data for the 2007 calculation have
been posted on the Import Administration Web site at (https://
ia.ita.doc.gov).
[FR Doc. E8-10525 Filed 5-8-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
