Sodium Metal from France: Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Negative Critical Circumstances, 62252-62255 [E8-24912]

Download as PDF 62252 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 203 / Monday, October 20, 2008 / Notices result indicating a boron factor of 1.8 or greater. Initiation of Minor Alterations Antidumping Circumvention Proceeding Section 781(c)(1) of the Act provides that the Department may find circumvention of an antidumping duty order when products which are of the class or kind of merchandise subject to an antidumping duty order have been ‘‘altered in form or appearance in minor respects . . . whether or not included in the same tariff classification.’’ The Department notes that, while the statute is silent as to what factors to consider in determining whether alterations are properly considered ‘‘minor,’’ the legislative history of this provision indicates there are certain factors which should be considered before reaching a circumvention determination. In conducting a circumvention inquiry under section 781(c) of the Act, the Department has generally relied upon ‘‘such criteria as the overall physical characteristics of the merchandise, the expectations of the ultimate users, the use of the merchandise, the channels of marketing and the cost of any modification relative to the total value of the imported products.’’ S. Rep. No.71, 100th Cong., 1st Sess. 100 (1987) (‘‘In applying this provision, the Commerce Department should apply practical measurements regarding minor alterations, so that circumvention can be dealt with effectively, even where such alterations to an article technically transform it into a differently designated article.’’). As discussed below, certain domestic producers have presented evidence with respect to each of these criteria. mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Overall Physical Characteristics Certain domestic producers acknowledge that the presence of boron may be associated with enhanced hardenability of steel. See id. However, certain domestic producers have noted that other parameters are necessary for boron to have the effect in question (see, e.g., September 10, 2008, submission at 5–9, and September 30, 2008, memorandum at 1–2). The limitation of the scope of this circumvention inquiry accounted for such circumstances. See ‘‘Merchandise Subject to the Minor Alterations Antidumping Circumvention Proceeding’’ section above. Unless these parameters are met, the boron is assumed to have no effect upon the hardenability of the steel. See, e.g., September 10, 2008, submission at 6. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:42 Oct 17, 2008 Jkt 217001 Expectations of the Ultimate Users Certain domestic producers indicated they are unaware of any instances where customers expected or requested cut–tolength carbon steel plate with small amounts of boron added, other than to potentially avoid the added expenses to the plate products that result from the antidumping duties in place (see August 13, 2008, submission at 12), with the exception of those instances in which other parameters are fulfilled to allow enhanced hardenability of the product. As noted, the scope of the inquiry was limited to account for this exception. See Overall Physical Characteristics sub–section above. Use of the Merchandise Certain domestic producers state the product at issue is used for the same purposes as subject merchandise. See August 13, 2008, submission at 12. This is consistent with their later claim that the presence of the additional amounts of boron, in and of itself, is insignificant in terms of adding beneficial attributes to the steel. See September 10, 2008, submission at 4. Channels of Marketing Certain domestic producers state the channels of marketing for the boron– added cut–to-length plate and the subject plate are the same, noting that both products are marketed in the same manner, appeal to the same end users, and are used for the same end uses. See August 13, 2008, submission at 12. They note an electronic mail offer involving Tianjin and Toyota Tsusho directly targets U.S. customers of subject merchandise. See id. at 12–13 and Exhibit 1; see also September 10, 2008, submission at 3. Cost of Modification Certain domestic producers indicated the addition of boron at levels recognized as alloy amounts by the tariff schedule involve minimal additional cost. They cite the Department’s finding in a previous ruling that reaching the 0.0008 percent threshold involved a cost amounting to only about one–third of one percent of the sales price. See August 13, 2008, submission at 13; see also Preliminary Determination of Circumvention of Antidumping Order: Cut–to-Length Carbon Steel Plate From Canada, 65 FR 64926, 64928 (October 31, 2000) (unchanged at Final Canada Plate Determination). Based on the information provided by certain domestic producers, the Department finds there is sufficient basis to initiate an antidumping circumvention inquiry pursuant to section 781(c) of the Act to determine PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 whether the merchandise subject to the inquiry (identified in the ‘‘Merchandise Subject to the Minor Alterations Antidumping Circumvention Proceeding’’ section above) involves a minor alteration to subject merchandise that is so insignificant as to render the resulting merchandise (classified as ‘‘alloy’’ steel under the HTSUS) subject to the antidumping duty order on certain cut–to-length carbon steel plate from the PRC. The Department intends to issue its final determination within 300 days of the date of publication of this notice. The Department will not order the suspension of liquidation of entries of any additional merchandise at this time. However, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(l)(2), if the Department issues a preliminary affirmative determination, we will then instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to suspend liquidation and require a cash deposit of estimated duties on the merchandise. We intend to notify the International Trade Commission in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination of circumvention, in accordance with 781(e)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(f)(7)(i)(C). The Department will, following consultation with interested parties, establish a schedule for questionnaires and comments on the issues. As noted above, the Department intends to issue its final determinations within 300 days of the date of publication of this initiation. This notice is published in accordance with sections 781(c) and (d) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(i). Dated: October 10, 2008. David Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8–24910 Filed 10–17–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–427–827] Sodium Metal from France: Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Negative Critical Circumstances Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) has determined that sodium metal from France is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM 20OCN1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 203 / Monday, October 20, 2008 / Notices of 1930, as amended (the Act). The estimated margins of sales at LTFV are listed below in the section entitled ‘‘Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation.’’ EFFECTIVE DATE: October 20, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis McClure or Joy Zhang, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–5973 or (202) 482– 1168, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 28, 2008, the Department published in the Federal Register its preliminary determination in the antidumping duty investigation of sodium metal from France. See Sodium Metal from France: Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 73 FR 30605 (May 28, 2008) (Preliminary Determination). In the Preliminary Determination, based on our examination of E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. Inc.’s (the petitioner) targeted dumping allegation filed on April 21, 2008, we determined that there is no pattern of constructed export prices for comparable merchandise that differs significantly among purchasers. Therefore, we applied the average–toaverage methodology to all U.S. sales by MSSA S.A.S., MSSA Co., and Columbia Sales International (collectively, MSSA). In the Preliminary Determination, the Department invited comments regarding the overall application of the targeted dumping test applied in this proceeding. Accordingly, we received comments within the case briefs submitted by the petitioner and MSSA on July 25, 2008. The petitioner and MSSA submitted rebuttal comments on July 30, 2008. We conducted sales and cost verifications of the responses submitted by MSSA. See Memorandum to the File from Dennis McClure and Joy Zhang, Case Analysts, through James Terpstra, Program Manager, Office 3, entitled ‘‘Verification of the Sales Response of MSSA S.A.S., MSSA Co., and Columbia Sales International in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Sodium Metal from France,’’ dated July 18, 2008 (Sales Verification Report); see also Memorandum to the File through Neal M. Halper, from LaVonne Clark, entitled ‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of MSSA S.A.S. in the Antidumping Investigation of Sodium Metal from France,’’ dated July 1, 2008 (Cost Verification Report). All verification reports are on file and available in the VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:42 Oct 17, 2008 Jkt 217001 Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 1117 of the main Department of Commerce building. Based on the Department’s findings at verification, as well as the minor corrections presented by MSSA at the start of its respective verifications, we requested during verification that respondents submit revised sales databases. As requested, MSSA submitted its revised sales databases at verification on July 16, 2008. On September 15, 2008, the petitioner submitted an allegation of critical circumstances. MSSA submitted comments responding to the petitioner’s allegation of critical circumstances on September 25, 2008. Period of Investigation The period of investigation (POI) is October 1, 2006, to September 30, 2007. This period corresponds to the four most recent fiscal quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition. Scope of the Investigation The merchandise covered by this investigation includes sodium metal (Na), in any form and at any purity level. Examples of names commonly used to reference sodium metal are sodium metal, sodium, metallic sodium, and natrium. The merchandise subject to this investigation is classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States subheading 2805.11.0000. The American Chemical Society Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) has assigned the name ‘‘Sodium’’ to sodium metal. The CAS registry number is 7440–23–5. For purposes of the investigation, the narrative description is dispositive, not the tariff heading, CAS registry number or CAS name, which are provided for convenience and customs purposes. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this antidumping investigation are addressed in the ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Sodium Metal from France’’ from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration (Decision Memorandum), dated October 10, 2008, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in the Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as an appendix. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this investigation and the PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 62253 corresponding recommendations in the Decision Memorandum, which is on file in the CRU. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Targeted Dumping In the Preliminary Determination, with respect to targeted dumping, we followed the methodology outlined in the post–preliminary targeted dumping analysis in the investigations of Certain Steel Nails from the PRC and the UAE. SEE Memorandum to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, RE: Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Steel Nails from the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Subject: Post–Preliminary Determinations on Targeted Dumping, dated April 21, 2008 (April 21, 2008 Nails decision memorandum).1 Based on the targeted dumping test that we applied in the Preliminary Determination, we did not find a pattern of constructed export prices for comparable merchandise that differ significantly among customers.2 As a result, we applied the average–toaverage methodology to the constructed export prices of all of MSSA’s sales to the United States during the POI and calculated a preliminary margin of 62.62 percent for MSSA.3 In the Preliminary Determination, the Department applied the Nails targeted dumping test based on the methodology outlined in the April 21, 2008 Nails decision memorandum and found no targeted dumping. We have analyzed the case and rebuttal briefs4 with respect to targeted dumping issues submitted for the record in this investigation and considered the changes made to the targeted dumping test applied in the final determinations of UAE and PRC Nails and PRC Tires.5 1 See Preliminary Determination at 30606. at 30607. 3 Id. at 30609. 4 See the petitioner’s case brief, dated July 25, 2008; see also; MSSA’s rebuttal brief, dated July 30, 2008, respectively. 5 See Certain Steel Nails from the United Arab Emirates: Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Not Less Than Fair Value, 73 FR 33985 (June 16, 2008) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (Steel Nails from the UAE) dated June 6, 2008, at Comment 5; see also; Certain Steel Nails from the People’s Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of Critical 2 Id. E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM Continued 20OCN1 62254 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 203 / Monday, October 20, 2008 / Notices As a result of our analysis, we utilized the Nails targeted dumping test from the Preliminary Determination and applied certain modifications from Nails and PRC Tires for purposes of the final determination.6 As in the Preliminary Determination, we did not find a pattern of export prices for comparable merchandise that differ significantly among customers. For further discussion, see Comments 2 and 3 of the Decision Memorandum and the Memorandum to James Terpstra, Program Manager for the Office of AD/ CVD Operations, from Dennis McClure and Joy Zhang, Analysts for the Office of AD/CVD Operations, RE: Antidumping Duty Investigation of Sodium Metal from France, Subject: Final Analysis Memorandum for Sales MSSA, dated October 10, 2008 (Final Analysis Memorandum). Critical Circumstances mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES On September 15, 2008, the petitioner filed a critical circumstances allegation with respect to imports of sodium metal from France. On September 25, 2008, MSSA submitted comments and monthly shipment data in response to the petitioner’s allegation. Although the Department found that in accordance with section 735(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act, the person by whom, or for whose account, the merchandise was imported knew or should have known that the exporter was selling the subject merchandise at less than its fair value and there was likely to be material injury of such sales, the Department has made a final negative determination concerning critical circumstances for MSSA and all other French manufacturers and exporters because, in accordance with section 735(a)(3)(B) of the Act, and based on MSSA’s shipment data, MSSA and all other companies did not have massive imports during a relatively short period. See Memorandum to Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, from Melissa Skinner, Director, AD/CVD Operations, Subject: Antidumping Duty Investigation of Sodium Metal from France, Regarding: Final Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 33977 (June 16, 2008) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (Steel Nails from the PRC) dated June 6, 2008, at Comments 3, 5, and 9 (collectively, Nails); see also; Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires from the People’s Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 40480 (July 15, 2008) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (PRC Tires) dated July 7, 2008, at Comments 23. B and 23.G. 6 Id. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:42 Oct 17, 2008 Jkt 217001 Circumstances, dated October 10, 2008, which is hereby adopted by this notice. Verification As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we verified the sales and cost information submitted by MSSA for use in our final determination. We used standard verification procedures including an examination of relevant accounting and production records, and original source documents provided by MSSA. See Sales Verification Report and Cost Verification Report. Changes Since the Preliminary Determination Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at verification, we have made certain changes to the margin calculation for MSSA. For a discussion of these changes, see the Decision Memorandum at Comments 6, 8, 10, and 11, Final Analysis Memorandum, and Memorandum to Neal M. Halper, Director, Office of Accounting, from LaVonne Clark, Senior Accountant, Reference: Antidumping Duty Investigation of Sodium Metal from France, Subject: Cost of Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final Determination MSSA S.A.S., MSSA Co., and Columbia Sales International, Inc. (collectively ‘‘MSSA’’), dated October 10, 2008. Final Determination Margins We determine that the following weighted–average dumping margin exists for the period October 1, 2006, to September 30, 2007: Manufacturer/Exporter Weighted–Average Margin (percent) MSSA S.A.S. ................ All Others ...................... 66.64 66.64 Disclosure We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will instruct Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all entries of subject merchandise from France, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after May 28, 2008, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination. We will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond equal to the PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 weighted–average dumping margin, as indicated in the chart above, as follows: (1) the rate for MSSA S.A.S. will be 66.64 percent; (2) if the exporter is not a firm identified in this investigation, but the producer is, the rate will be the rate established for the producer of the subject merchandise; (3) the rate for all other producers or exporters will be 66.64 percent. The suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice. International Trade Commission Notification In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the International Trade Commission (ITC) of our final determination. As our final determination is affirmative and in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will determine, within 45 days, whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation of the subject merchandise. If the ITC determines that material injury or threat of material injury does not exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all securities posted will be refunded or canceled. See section 735(c)(2) of the Act. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess antidumping duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation. Notification Regarding APO This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM 20OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 203 / Monday, October 20, 2008 / Notices Dated: October 10, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix -- Issues in Decision Memorandum ISSUES Comment 1: Whether the Department Should Include ‘‘Form’’ As Part of Model Match Criteria Comment 2: Whether the Department Should Calculate the Antidumping Duty Margin using the Transaction–toTransaction Methodology Comment 3: Whether the Department’s Targeted Dumping Test is Flawed and Should be Replaced with the ‘‘preponderance at two percent test’’ (P/ 2 test) Comment 4: Whether the Department Should Alter Its Level of Trade Analysis Comment 5: Whether the Department Should Calculate Certain Home Market Packing Expenses Based on Facts Available Comment 6: Whether the Department Should Re–allocate Indirect Selling Expenses Based on Sales Value Comment 7: Whether the Department Should Deduct Freight from Transfer Price Before Calculating Domestic Indirect Selling Expenses Comment 8: Whether the Department Should Correct MSSA Co.’s Inventory Carrying Costs in the United States Comment 9: Whether the Department Incorrectly Characterized MSSA Co.’s Quantity and Value Reconciliation Comment 10: Whether the Department Correctly Calculated Indirect Selling Expenses Incurred in the Home Market for Purposes of the CEP Deduction Comment 11: Whether the Department Should Consider Certain Expenses Reported as Indirect Selling Expenses as Direct Deductions from the U.S. Price [FR Doc. E8–24912 Filed 10–17–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S are interested in the Vietnam’s business climate for U.S. products or services and how policy issues may have an impact on trade and investment in this sector. In 2007, the ITA launched the U.S.Vietnam ICT Commercial Dialogue with the Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) in Vietnam to discuss various ICT issues that have an impact on trade between our two countries. The U.S. and Vietnamese companies that participated in the meeting made several recommendations for future areas of cooperation. To continue facilitating input from the private sector, ITA and MIC agreed to create a Business Advisory Group under the Dialogue and encourage wide participation from both countries. The main objectives of the Business Advisory Group are to identify areas of mutual concern to be potentially addressed by the Working Group of the U.S.-Vietnam ICT Commercial Dialogue, and to coordinate activities that could be considered deliverables for the Dialogue. Examples of issues that have been covered so far include advancement of telecom infrastructure, protection of intellectual property rights for software, and supporting electronic commerce by developing legal frameworks for data privacy. DATES: November 12–13, 2008. ADDRESSES: Inquiries about participation in the Business Advisory Group should be addressed to the contact below, and received by close of business on Monday, November 10, 2008. Cora Dickson, U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Technology and Electronic Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room 4327, Washington, DC 20230; Telephone: 202–482–6083; Fax: 202–482–5834; e-mail: cora.dickson@mail.doc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Business Advisory Group is expected to have participants from U.S. and Vietnamese companies or associations and generally be responsible for developing their own internal communication and consultation mechanisms, including informal meetings. Participation in the Business Advisory Group should be open to any ICT companies and industry associations who wish to contribute to the Dialogue. However, due to space constraints, only two representatives per company and/or organization can attend the upcoming Business Advisory Group meeting, which will be hosted at the Department of Commerce in Washington on November 12 in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Notice of Request for Public Comment International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of request for public comment. mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration (ITA) is seeking U.S. companies and industry associations in the field of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) who VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:04 Oct 17, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 62255 preparation for the U.S.-Vietnam ICT Commercial Dialogue Working Group meeting on November 13. Dated: October 14, 2008. Robin Layton, Director, Office of Technology and Electronic Commerce. [FR Doc. E8–24878 Filed 10–17–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Notice of Request for Public Comment International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of request for public comment. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration (ITA) is seeking U.S. academic institutions, training centers, and other interested parties who would like to organize joint activities with their counterparts in Vietnam in the field of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). In 2007, the ITA launched the U.S.-Vietnam ICT Commercial Dialogue with the Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) in Vietnam to discuss various ICT issues that have an impact on trade between our two countries. The U.S. and Vietnamese companies that participated in the meeting recommended the establishment of a ‘‘public/private partnership for the development of human resources through technical training programs.’’ Therefore MIC has proposed that an Academic Advisory Group be created in addition to a Business Advisory Group under the Dialogue. The objective of the Academic Advisory Group would be to facilitate an exchange of ideas on the best curriculum to meet the needs of ICT growth, and to increase opportunities for Vietnamese citizens to study in the ICT field in Vietnam through distance learning mechanisms, or at United States institutions. The initial meeting of the Academic Advisory Group, to be held via videoconference, is tentatively scheduled for November 12, 2008. A representative of the group would make a brief report at the ICT Dialogue Working Group meeting on November 13 in Washington, DC. A follow-up meeting is anticipated in January 2009 in Hanoi. DATES: November 12–13, 2008. E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM 20OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 203 (Monday, October 20, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62252-62255]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24912]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-427-827]


Sodium Metal from France: Notice of Final Determination of Sales 
at Less Than Fair Value and Negative Critical Circumstances

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) has determined 
that sodium metal from France is being, or is likely to be, sold in the 
United States at less than fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 
735 of the Tariff Act

[[Page 62253]]

of 1930, as amended (the Act). The estimated margins of sales at LTFV 
are listed below in the section entitled ``Continuation of Suspension 
of Liquidation.''

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 20, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis McClure or Joy Zhang, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-5973 
or (202) 482-1168, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 28, 2008, the Department published in 
the Federal Register its preliminary determination in the antidumping 
duty investigation of sodium metal from France. See Sodium Metal from 
France: Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 73 FR 30605 (May 28, 
2008) (Preliminary Determination).
    In the Preliminary Determination, based on our examination of E.I. 
DuPont de Nemours & Co. Inc.'s (the petitioner) targeted dumping 
allegation filed on April 21, 2008, we determined that there is no 
pattern of constructed export prices for comparable merchandise that 
differs significantly among purchasers. Therefore, we applied the 
average-to-average methodology to all U.S. sales by MSSA S.A.S., MSSA 
Co., and Columbia Sales International (collectively, MSSA). In the 
Preliminary Determination, the Department invited comments regarding 
the overall application of the targeted dumping test applied in this 
proceeding. Accordingly, we received comments within the case briefs 
submitted by the petitioner and MSSA on July 25, 2008. The petitioner 
and MSSA submitted rebuttal comments on July 30, 2008.
    We conducted sales and cost verifications of the responses 
submitted by MSSA. See Memorandum to the File from Dennis McClure and 
Joy Zhang, Case Analysts, through James Terpstra, Program Manager, 
Office 3, entitled ``Verification of the Sales Response of MSSA S.A.S., 
MSSA Co., and Columbia Sales International in the Antidumping Duty 
Investigation of Sodium Metal from France,'' dated July 18, 2008 (Sales 
Verification Report); see also Memorandum to the File through Neal M. 
Halper, from LaVonne Clark, entitled ``Verification of the Cost 
Response of MSSA S.A.S. in the Antidumping Investigation of Sodium 
Metal from France,'' dated July 1, 2008 (Cost Verification Report). All 
verification reports are on file and available in the Central Records 
Unit (CRU), Room 1117 of the main Department of Commerce building.
    Based on the Department's findings at verification, as well as the 
minor corrections presented by MSSA at the start of its respective 
verifications, we requested during verification that respondents submit 
revised sales databases. As requested, MSSA submitted its revised sales 
databases at verification on July 16, 2008.
    On September 15, 2008, the petitioner submitted an allegation of 
critical circumstances. MSSA submitted comments responding to the 
petitioner's allegation of critical circumstances on September 25, 
2008.

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (POI) is October 1, 2006, to September 
30, 2007. This period corresponds to the four most recent fiscal 
quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition.

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation includes sodium metal 
(Na), in any form and at any purity level. Examples of names commonly 
used to reference sodium metal are sodium metal, sodium, metallic 
sodium, and natrium. The merchandise subject to this investigation is 
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
subheading 2805.11.0000. The American Chemical Society Chemical 
Abstract Service (CAS) has assigned the name ``Sodium'' to sodium 
metal. The CAS registry number is 7440-23-5. For purposes of the 
investigation, the narrative description is dispositive, not the tariff 
heading, CAS registry number or CAS name, which are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this antidumping investigation are addressed in the ``Issues and 
Decision Memorandum for the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Sodium 
Metal from France'' from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary 
for Import Administration, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for 
Import Administration (Decision Memorandum), dated October 10, 2008, 
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which 
parties have raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in 
the Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as an appendix. 
Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this 
investigation and the corresponding recommendations in the Decision 
Memorandum, which is on file in the CRU. In addition, a complete 
version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web 
at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The paper copy and electronic version of 
the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Targeted Dumping

    In the Preliminary Determination, with respect to targeted dumping, 
we followed the methodology outlined in the post-preliminary targeted 
dumping analysis in the investigations of Certain Steel Nails from the 
PRC and the UAE. See Memorandum to David M. Spooner, Assistant 
Secretary for Import Administration, from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, RE: Antidumping Duty 
Investigation of Certain Steel Nails from the Peoples Republic of China 
(PRC) and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Subject: Post-Preliminary 
Determinations on Targeted Dumping, dated April 21, 2008 (April 21, 
2008 Nails decision memorandum).\1\ Based on the targeted dumping test 
that we applied in the Preliminary Determination, we did not find a 
pattern of constructed export prices for comparable merchandise that 
differ significantly among customers.\2\ As a result, we applied the 
average-to-average methodology to the constructed export prices of all 
of MSSA's sales to the United States during the POI and calculated a 
preliminary margin of 62.62 percent for MSSA.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Preliminary Determination at 30606.
    \2\ Id. at 30607.
    \3\ Id. at 30609.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Preliminary Determination, the Department applied the Nails 
targeted dumping test based on the methodology outlined in the April 
21, 2008 Nails decision memorandum and found no targeted dumping. We 
have analyzed the case and rebuttal briefs\4\ with respect to targeted 
dumping issues submitted for the record in this investigation and 
considered the changes made to the targeted dumping test applied in the 
final determinations of UAE and PRC Nails and PRC Tires.\5\

[[Page 62254]]

As a result of our analysis, we utilized the Nails targeted dumping 
test from the Preliminary Determination and applied certain 
modifications from Nails and PRC Tires for purposes of the final 
determination.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See the petitioner's case brief, dated July 25, 2008; see 
also; MSSA's rebuttal brief, dated July 30, 2008, respectively.
    \5\ See Certain Steel Nails from the United Arab Emirates: 
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Not Less Than Fair Value, 
73 FR 33985 (June 16, 2008) and accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum (Steel Nails from the UAE) dated June 6, 2008, at Comment 
5; see also; Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of 
China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Partial Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 
33977 (June 16, 2008) and accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum (Steel Nails from the PRC) dated June 6, 2008, at 
Comments 3, 5, and 9 (collectively, Nails); see also; Certain New 
Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires from the People's Republic of China: 
Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Partial Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 
40480 (July 15, 2008) and accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum (PRC Tires) dated July 7, 2008, at Comments 23. B and 
23.G.
    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As in the Preliminary Determination, we did not find a pattern of 
export prices for comparable merchandise that differ significantly 
among customers. For further discussion, see Comments 2 and 3 of the 
Decision Memorandum and the Memorandum to James Terpstra, Program 
Manager for the Office of AD/CVD Operations, from Dennis McClure and 
Joy Zhang, Analysts for the Office of AD/CVD Operations, RE: 
Antidumping Duty Investigation of Sodium Metal from France, Subject: 
Final Analysis Memorandum for Sales MSSA, dated October 10, 2008 (Final 
Analysis Memorandum).

Critical Circumstances

    On September 15, 2008, the petitioner filed a critical 
circumstances allegation with respect to imports of sodium metal from 
France. On September 25, 2008, MSSA submitted comments and monthly 
shipment data in response to the petitioner's allegation. Although the 
Department found that in accordance with section 735(a)(3)(A)(ii) of 
the Act, the person by whom, or for whose account, the merchandise was 
imported knew or should have known that the exporter was selling the 
subject merchandise at less than its fair value and there was likely to 
be material injury of such sales, the Department has made a final 
negative determination concerning critical circumstances for MSSA and 
all other French manufacturers and exporters because, in accordance 
with section 735(a)(3)(B) of the Act, and based on MSSA's shipment 
data, MSSA and all other companies did not have massive imports during 
a relatively short period. See Memorandum to Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, from Melissa Skinner, 
Director, AD/CVD Operations, Subject: Antidumping Duty Investigation of 
Sodium Metal from France, Regarding: Final Negative Determination of 
Critical Circumstances, dated October 10, 2008, which is hereby adopted 
by this notice.

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we verified the sales and 
cost information submitted by MSSA for use in our final determination. 
We used standard verification procedures including an examination of 
relevant accounting and production records, and original source 
documents provided by MSSA. See Sales Verification Report and Cost 
Verification Report.

Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at 
verification, we have made certain changes to the margin calculation 
for MSSA. For a discussion of these changes, see the Decision 
Memorandum at Comments 6, 8, 10, and 11, Final Analysis Memorandum, and 
Memorandum to Neal M. Halper, Director, Office of Accounting, from 
LaVonne Clark, Senior Accountant, Reference: Antidumping Duty 
Investigation of Sodium Metal from France, Subject: Cost of Production 
and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final 
Determination MSSA S.A.S., MSSA Co., and Columbia Sales International, 
Inc. (collectively ``MSSA''), dated October 10, 2008.

Final Determination Margins

    We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margin 
exists for the period October 1, 2006, to September 30, 2007:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted-Average
                Manufacturer/Exporter                  Margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MSSA S.A.S..........................................               66.64
All Others..........................................               66.64
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the 
date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will instruct 
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation 
of all entries of subject merchandise from France, entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after May 28, 2008, the 
date of publication of the Preliminary Determination. We will instruct 
CBP to require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond equal to the 
weighted-average dumping margin, as indicated in the chart above, as 
follows: (1) the rate for MSSA S.A.S. will be 66.64 percent; (2) if the 
exporter is not a firm identified in this investigation, but the 
producer is, the rate will be the rate established for the producer of 
the subject merchandise; (3) the rate for all other producers or 
exporters will be 66.64 percent. The suspension of liquidation 
instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the 
International Trade Commission (ITC) of our final determination. As our 
final determination is affirmative and in accordance with section 
735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will determine, within 45 days, whether 
the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or 
threatened with material injury, by reason of imports or sales (or the 
likelihood of sales) for importation of the subject merchandise. If the 
ITC determines that material injury or threat of material injury does 
not exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all securities posted 
will be refunded or canceled. See section 735(c)(2) of the Act. If the 
ITC determines that such injury does exist, the Department will issue 
an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess antidumping duties on 
all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the 
suspension of liquidation.

Notification Regarding APO

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of return/
destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order 
is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the 
terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
    This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 
735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.


[[Page 62255]]


    Dated: October 10, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix -- Issues in Decision Memorandum

ISSUES

Comment 1: Whether the Department Should Include ``Form'' As Part of 
Model Match Criteria
Comment 2: Whether the Department Should Calculate the Antidumping Duty 
Margin using the Transaction-to-Transaction Methodology
Comment 3: Whether the Department's Targeted Dumping Test is Flawed and 
Should be Replaced with the ``preponderance at two percent test'' (P/2 
test)
Comment 4: Whether the Department Should Alter Its Level of Trade 
Analysis
Comment 5: Whether the Department Should Calculate Certain Home Market 
Packing Expenses Based on Facts Available
Comment 6: Whether the Department Should Re-allocate Indirect Selling 
Expenses Based on Sales Value
Comment 7: Whether the Department Should Deduct Freight from Transfer 
Price Before Calculating Domestic Indirect Selling Expenses
Comment 8: Whether the Department Should Correct MSSA Co.'s Inventory 
Carrying Costs in the United States
Comment 9: Whether the Department Incorrectly Characterized MSSA Co.'s 
Quantity and Value Reconciliation
Comment 10: Whether the Department Correctly Calculated Indirect 
Selling Expenses Incurred in the Home Market for Purposes of the CEP 
Deduction
Comment 11: Whether the Department Should Consider Certain Expenses 
Reported as Indirect Selling Expenses as Direct Deductions from the 
U.S. Price
[FR Doc. E8-24912 Filed 10-17-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S