Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 29665-29669 [E9-14721]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
Average Yarn Number: 38/IMC–40/IMC; 61/IMC
Thread Count: 77 warp ends x 20 filling picks per
square centimeter
Weave Type: Stretch Dobby
Weight: 208.17–254.43 grams/m2
Width: 124.46 to 132.08 centimeters
Finish: Piece Dyed
Variance allowance of up to three percent for content, ten percent for yarn size, ten percent for
thread count, ten percent for fabric weight, and
ten percent for fabric width.
Kim-Bang Nguyen,
Acting Chairman, Committee for the
Implementation of Textile Agreements.
[FR Doc. E9–14754 Filed 6–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–945]
Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire
Strand From the People’s Republic of
China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty
Investigation
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
Effective Date: June 23, 2009.
Alex
Villanueva, AD/CVD Operations, Office
9, International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–3208.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The Petition
On May 27, 2009, the Department of
Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) received
an antidumping duty (‘‘AD’’) petition
concerning imports of prestressed
concrete steel wire strand (‘‘PC strand’’)
from the People’s Republic of China
(‘‘PRC’’) filed in proper form by
American Spring Wire Corp., Insteel
Wire Products Company, and Sumiden
Wire Products Corp., (collectively,
‘‘Petitioners’’).1 On June 1, 2009, the
Department issued a request for
additional information and clarification
of certain areas of the Petition. Based on
the Department’s request, Petitioners
filed supplements to the Petition on
June 4, 2009 (‘‘Supplement to the AD
Petition’’ and ‘‘Supplement to the AD/
CVD Petitions). On June 8, 2009, the
Department requested further
clarifications of industry support and
producers/exporters identified in the
1 See Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties:
Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand From the
People’s Republic of China, dated May 27, 2009 (the
Petition).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:15 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
Petitions. Based on the Department’s
request, Petitioners filed supplements to
the Petition on June 9, 2009 (‘‘Second
Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions’’).
On June 12, 2009 the Department again
asked for clarification regarding the
scope. Based on the Department’s
request, Petitioners filed an additional
supplement to the Petition on June 15,
2009 (‘‘Third Supplement to the AD/
CVD Petitions’’).
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), Petitioners allege that imports of
PC strand from the PRC 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 materially injure, or threaten
material injury to, an industry in the
United States.
The Department finds that Petitioners
filed the Petition on behalf of the
domestic industry because Petitioners
are interested parties as defined in
section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and that
they have demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the
investigation that they are requesting
the Department to initiate (see
‘‘Determination of Industry Support for
the Petition’’ below).
Scope of Investigation
The products covered by this
investigation are PC strand from the
PRC. For a full description of the scope
of the investigation, please see the
‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ in Appendix I
of this notice.
Comments on Scope of Investigation
During our review of the Petition, we
discussed the scope with 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 by July 6, 2009, twenty
calendar days from the signature date of
this notice. Comments should be
addressed to Import Administration’s
APO/Dockets Unit, 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29665
Comments on Product Characteristics
for Antidumping Duty Questionnaires
We are requesting comments from
interested parties regarding the
appropriate physical characteristics of
PC strand to be reported in response to
the Department’s antidumping
questionnaires. 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 as
(1) general product characteristics and
(2) 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 PC strand, 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 product matching.
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 6, 2009. Additionally,
rebuttal comments must be received by
July 13, 2009.
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petition
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires
that a petition be filed on behalf of the
domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A)
of the Act provides that 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
E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM
23JNN1
29666
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
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 a statistically
valid sampling method to poll the
industry.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines
the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a
whole 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 (See 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.2
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, Petitioners do not offer a
definition of domestic like product
distinct from the scope of the
investigation. Based on our analysis of
the information submitted on the
record, we have determined that PC
strand constitutes a single domestic like
product and we have analyzed industry
2 See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp.
2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd.
v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988),
aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989), cert. denied 492
U.S. 919 (1989).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:15 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
support in terms of that domestic like
product.3
In determining whether Petitioners
have standing under section
732(c)(4)(A), we considered the industry
support data contained in the Petition
with reference to the domestic like
product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of
Investigation’’ section above. To
establish industry support, Petitioners
provided their production of the
domestic like product for the year 2008,
and compared this to total production of
the domestic like product for the entire
domestic industry.4 Petitioners
calculated total domestic production
based on their own production plus
information provided by the two other
non-petitioning companies that produce
the domestic like product in the United
States, who are supporters of the
Petition.5
Our review of the data provided in the
Petition, supplemental submissions, and
other information readily available to
the Department indicates that
Petitioners have established industry
support. First, the Petition established
support from domestic producers (or
workers) accounting for more than 50
percent of the total production of the
domestic like product and, as such, the
Department is not required to take
further action in order to evaluate
industry support (e.g., polling).6
Second, the domestic producers (or
workers) have met the statutory criteria
for industry support under section
732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the
domestic producers (or workers) who
support the Petitions account for at least
25 percent of the total production of the
domestic like product.7 Finally, the
domestic producers (or workers) have
met the statutory criteria for industry
support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of
the Act because the domestic producers
(or workers) who support the Petition
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,
3 For
a discussion of the domestic like product
analysis in this case, see Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: PC Strand from
the PRC (‘‘Initiation Checklist’’) at Attachment II
(‘‘Industry Support’’), dated concurrently with this
notice and on file in the Central Records Unit
(‘‘CRU’’), Room 1117 of the main Department of
Commerce building.
4 See Volume I of the Petition, at 4, and Exhibit
General-1.
5 See Volume I of the Petition, at Exhibit General1, and Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, at 5–
6, and Attachment 3, and Second Supplement to
the AD/CVD Petitions, at 5, and Attachment 1; see
also Initiation Checklist as Attachment II, Industry
Support.
6 See Section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act, and
Initiation Checklist at Attachment 2.
7 See Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the Petition. Accordingly, the
Department determines that the Petition
was filed on behalf of the domestic
industry within the meaning of section
732(b)(1) of the Act.8
The Department finds that Petitioners
filed the Petition on behalf of the
domestic industry because they are
interested parties as defined in section
771(9)(C) of the Act and they have
demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to the antidumping
investigation that they are requesting
the Department initiate.9
Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation
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’’). In addition, Petitioners
allege that subject imports exceed the
negligibility threshold provided for
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.
Petitioners contend that the industry’s
injured condition is illustrated by
reduced market share, increased import
penetration, underselling and price
depressing and suppressing effects, lost
sales and revenue, reduced production,
capacity, and capacity utilization,
reduced employment, and an overall
decline in financial performance. We
have assessed the allegations and
supporting evidence regarding material
injury, threat of material injury, and
causation, and we have determined that
these allegations are properly supported
by adequate evidence and meet the
statutory requirements for initiation.10
Period of Investigation
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.204(b)(1), because this Petition was
filed on May 27, 2009, the anticipated
period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is
October 1, 2008, through March 31,
2009.
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 has based
its decision to initiate an investigation
with respect to the PRC. The sources of
data for the deductions and adjustments
relating to U.S. price and normal value
(‘‘NV’’) are discussed in the Initiation
Checklist. Should the need arise to use
any of this information as facts available
under section 776 of the Act, we may
8 See
id.
id.
10 See Initiation Checklist at Attachment 3.
9 See
E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM
23JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
reexamine the information and revise
the margin calculations, if appropriate.
Export Price
Petitioners calculated export prices
(‘‘EPs’’) for PC strand of various
diameters: 3⁄8 ″ diameter, 1⁄2 ″ diameter
and 0.6 ″ diameter. These were based on
price quotes obtained through offers of
sale. Petitioner presented affidavits for
the offers for sale attesting that the offers
were made during the POI.11
To calculate the net U.S. EP,
Petitioners deducted from the starting
U.S. prices ocean freight and insurance
charges, U.S. port fees, foreign brokerage
and, as appropriate, a re-seller mark-up.
U.S. inland freight costs were also
deducted when such information was
available. We have not made any
additional deductions.
Petitioners calculated per-unit ocean
freight and insurance using import
statistics reported by the U.S.
International Trade Commission
Dataweb. As for U.S. port fees,
Petitioners included the 0.21 percent ad
valorem harbor maintenance fee as well
as the 0.125 percent merchandise
processing fee. Foreign brokerage was
calculated using the Department’s
methodology in Certain Kitchen
Appliance Shelving and Racks from the
People’s Republic of China and then
converted to the appropriate unit.12
Petitioners calculated re-seller mark-ups
based on industry knowledge, choosing
a lower value in order to produce a
conservative estimate. Lastly, U.S.
inland freight was calculated based on
Petitioners’ experience delivering PC
strand inside the United States and the
number of miles from the closest U.S.
port to the location of the U.S.
customer.13
Normal Value
Petitioners state that in every previous
less-than-fair value investigation
involving merchandise from the PRC,
the Department has concluded that the
PRC is a non-market economy country
(‘‘NME’’) and, as the Department has not
revoked this determination, its NME
status remains in effect today.14 The
Department has previously examined
the PRC’s market status and determined
that NME status should continue for the
PRC.15 In addition, in recent
11 See
Initiation Checklist for further discussion.
Memorandum from Katie Marksberry to
The File, regarding Investigation of Certain Kitchen
Appliance Shelving and Racks from the People’s
Republic of China: Surrogate Value Determination,
dated February 26, 2009, at 17.
13 See Initiation Checklist for further discussion.
14 See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 47.
15 See Memorandum from the Office of Policy to
David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import
12 See
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:15 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
antidumping duty investigations, the
Department has continued to determine
that the PRC is an NME country.16
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, therefore, 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.
Petitioners argue that India is the
appropriate surrogate country for the
PRC because it is at a comparable level
of economic development and it has two
major producers of PC strand.17
Petitioners state that the Department has
determined in previous antidumping
duty investigations and administrative
reviews that India is at a level of
development comparable to the PRC.18
Petitioners also assert that there are two
major producers of the subject
merchandise in India, the Tata Steel
Group and the Usha Martin Group.19
Based on the information provided by
Petitioners, the Department believes that
the use of India as a surrogate country
is appropriate for purposes of initiation.
However, after initiation of the
investigation, interested parties will
have the opportunity to submit
comments regarding surrogate country
selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an
opportunity to submit publicly available
information to value factors of
production within 40 days after the date
of publication of the preliminary
determination.
Administration, regarding The People’s Republic of
China Status as a Non-Market Economy, dated May
15, 2006. This document is available online at
http://ia.ita.doc.gov/download/prc-nme-status/prcnme-status-memo.pdf.
16 See Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality
Steel Line Pipe from the People’s Republic of China:
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value, 74 FR 14514 (March 31, 2009); Frontseating
Service Valves from the People’s Republic of China:
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value and Final Negative Determination of Critical
Circumstances, 74 FR 10886 (March 13, 2009); 1–
Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1–Diphosphonic Acid From
the People’s Republic of China: Final Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 74 FR 10545
(March 11, 2009).
17 See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 47–49.
18 See id.
19 See id.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29667
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. Petitioners calculated three
NVs for PC strand, including diameters
of 3⁄8 ″, 1⁄2 ″, and 0.6 ″.
Petitioners valued the factors of
production using reasonably available,
public surrogate country data, including
India import data from the Monthly
Statistics of the Foreign Trade of India
(‘‘MSFTI’’) as compiled by the World
Trade Atlas (WTA) from the period May
2008 through October 2008, the most
current data available, information
regarding labor costs on the
Department’s Web site, the International
Energy Agency Statistics, and
information from the 2007/2008
unconsolidated financial reports of the
Tata Steel Group and the Usha Martin
Group.20 To calculate the consumption
rates, the Petitioners used the
consumption rates for U.S. producers
during the POI.21
Petitioners state that they valued hotrolled, high-carbon steel wire rod using
the WTA data, which was then
converted to the appropriate unit.22
Petitioners valued electricity using
Indian electricity rates disseminated by
the International Energy Agency.23
Petitioners valued labor using the wage
rate data published on the Department’s
Web site, at http://ia.ita.doc.gov.24
Petitioners valued natural gas according
to Indian import data compiled by the
WTA.25
Where Petitioners were unable to find
input prices contemporaneous with the
POI, Petitioners adjusted for inflation
using the wholesale price index for
India, as published by the International
Monetary Fund.26 Petitioners used
exchange rates, as reported by the
Federal Reserve, to convert Indian
Rupees to U.S. Dollars.27
Petitioners based factory overhead,
selling, general and administrative
expenses (‘‘SG&A’’), and profit, on the
financial ratios of the Tata Steel Group
and the Usha Martin Group as both
companies are significant producers of
20 See
Volume II–A of the Petition, at 51–54.
Volume II–A of the Petition, at 49–50, and
Exhibit AD–6.
22 See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 52, and
Supplement to the AD Petition, at 5.
23 See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 53, and
Exhibit AD–7.
24 See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 52, and
Exhibits AD–6 and AD–7.
25 See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 53, and
Exhibit AD–7.
26 See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 51, and
Exhibit AD–7.
27 See id.
21 See
E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM
23JNN1
29668
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
PC strand.28 The ratios were obtained
from each respective company’s 2007/
2008 unconsolidated financial reports
and then averaged together.29
Fair-Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by
Petitioners, there is reason to believe
that imports of PC strand from the PRC
are being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value.
Based on comparisons of EP to NV as
revised above, the estimated dumping
margins for the PRC range from 140.16
percent to 314.59 percent.30
Initiation of Antidumping Investigation
Based upon the examination of the
Petition concerning PC strand from the
PRC and other information reasonably
available to the Department, the
Department finds that the Petition meets
the requirements of section 732 of the
Act. Therefore, we are initiating an
antidumping duty investigation to
determine whether imports of PC strand
from the PRC 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.
Targeted-Dumping Allegations
On December 10, 2008, the
Department issued an interim final rule
for the purpose of withdrawing 19 CFR
351.414(f) and (g), the regulatory
provisions governing the targeteddumping analysis in antidumping duty
investigations, and the corresponding
regulation governing the deadline for
targeted-dumping allegations, 19 CFR
351.301(d)(5).31 The Department stated
that ‘‘{w}ithdrawal will allow the
Department to exercise the discretion
intended by the statute and, thereby,
develop a practice that will allow
interested parties to pursue all statutory
avenues of relief in this area.’’ 32
In order to accomplish this objective,
if any interested party wishes to make
a targeted-dumping allegation in this
investigation pursuant to section
777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act, such allegation
is due no later than 45 days before the
28 See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 48–49; see
also Supplement to the AD Petition, dated June 4,
2009, at 2–5.
29 See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 53–54, and
Exhibit AD–8; see also Supplement to the AD
Petition, dated June 4, 2009, at 6.
30 See Supplement to the AD Petition, at Exhibit
Supp. AD–1.
31 See Withdrawal of the Regulatory Provisions
Governing Targeted Dumping in Antidumping Duty
Investigations, 73 FR 74930 (December 10, 2008).
32 Id. at 74931.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:15 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
scheduled date of the preliminary
determination.
Respondent Selection
The Department will request quantity
and value information from the
exporters and producers identified in
the Petition with complete contact
information. The quantity and value
data received from NME exporters/
producers will be 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.33
Appendix II of this notice contains the
quantity and value questionnaire that
must be submitted by all NME
exporters/producers no later than July 7,
2009. In addition, the Department will
post the quantity and value
questionnaire along with the filing
instructions on the Department’s Web
site, at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/iahighlights-and-news.html.
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate-rate status
in an NME investigation, exporters and
producers must submit a separate-rate
status application.34 The specific
requirements for submitting the
separate-rate application in this
investigation are outlined in detail in
the application itself, available on the
Department’s Web site at http://
ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-highlights-andnews.html on the date of publication of
this initiation notice in the Federal
Register. The separate-rate application
will be due sixty (60) days from the date
of publication of this initiation notice in
the Federal Register.
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 this investigation. The
Separate Rates/Combination Rates
Bulletin states:
{w}hile continuing the practice of
assigning separate rates only to exporters, all
33 See Circular Welded Austenitic Stainless
Pressure Pipe from the People’s Republic of China:
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 73 FR
10221, 10225 (February 26, 2008); and Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Investigation: Certain Artist
Canvas From the People’s Republic of China, 70 FR
21996, 21999 (April 28, 2005).
34 See Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality
Steel Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea and the
People’s Republic of China: Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Investigations, 73 FR 23188,
23193 (April 29, 2008). (‘‘Certain Circular Welded
Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the PRC ’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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.35
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section
732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), a copy of the public version
of the Petition has been provided to the
representatives of the Government of the
PRC. Because of the particularly large
number of producers/exporters
identified in the Petition, the
Department considers the service of the
public version of the Petition to the
foreign producers/exporters satisfied by
the delivery of the public version to the
Government of the PRC, consistent with
19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We have notified the ITC of our
initiation, as required by section 732(d)
of the Act.
Preliminary Determination by the
International Trade Commission
The ITC will preliminarily determine,
no later than July 13, 2009,36 whether
there is a reasonable indication that
imports of PC strand from the PRC
materially injure, or threaten material
injury to, a U.S. industry. A negative
ITC determination covering all classes
or kinds of merchandise covered by the
Petition would result in the
investigation being terminated.
Otherwise, this investigation will
proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act.
35 See Import Administration Policy Bulletin,
Number: 05.1, ‘‘Separate-Rates Practice and
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping
Investigations involving Non-Market Economy
Countries,’’ dated April 5, 2005, available on the
Department’s Web site at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/
policy/bull05-1.pdf; See also Certain Circular
Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the
PRC, 73 FR 23188, 23193.
36 Where the deadline falls on a weekend/
holiday, the appropriate date is the next business
day.
E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM
23JNN1
29669
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
Dated: June 16, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigation
For purposes of this investigation,
prestressed concrete steel wire strand (PC
strand) is steel wire strand, other than of
stainless steel, which is suitable for use in,
but not limited to, prestressed concrete (both
pretensioned and post-tensioned)
applications. The scope of this investigation
encompasses all types and diameters of PC
strand whether uncoated (uncovered) or
coated (covered) by any substance, including
but not limited to, grease, plastic sheath, or
epoxy. This merchandise includes, but is not
limited to, PC strand produced to the
American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM) A–416 specification, or comparable
domestic or foreign specifications. PC strand
made from galvanized wire is excluded from
the scope if the zinc and/or zinc oxide
coating meets or exceeds the 0.40 oz./ft2;
standard set forth in ASTM–A–475.
The PC strand subject to this investigation
is currently classifiable under subheadings
7312.10.3010 and 7312.10.3012 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience
and customs purposes, the written
description of the scope of this investigation
is dispositive.
Appendix II
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 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 of Investigation’’
section of this notice), produced in the PRC,
and exported/shipped to the United States
during the period October 1, 2008, through
March 31, 2009.
Where it is not practicable to examine all
known exporters/producers of subject
Total quantity
in kilograms
Market
Terms of sale
Total value in
U.S. dollars
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 kilograms
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 at port of export).
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 customer occurs before
importation into the United States.
• 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 subject
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:15 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
sale to an unaffiliated customer occurs after
importation. However, if the first sale to the
unaffiliated customer 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 subject
merchandise manufactured in Hong Kong in
your figures.
Further Manufactured:
• Sales of further manufactured or
assembled (including re-packaged)
merchandise is merchandise that undergoes
further manufacture or assembly in the
United States before being sold to the first
unaffiliated customer.
• 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
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
moving the product from the U.S. port of
entry to the further manufacturer.
[FR Doc. E9–14721 Filed 6–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–822]
Certain Helical Spring Lock Washers
from the People’s Republic of China:
Extension of Time Limit for the
Preliminary Results of the 2007–2008
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 23, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shelly Atkinson or Brandon Farlander,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington DC 20230;
telephone (202) 482–0116 or (202)482–
0182, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM
23JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29665-29669]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14721]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-945]
Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand From the People's Republic
of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: June 23, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex Villanueva, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 9, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20230; telephone: (202) 482-3208.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On May 27, 2009, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'')
received an antidumping duty (``AD'') petition concerning imports of
prestressed concrete steel wire strand (``PC strand'') from the
People's Republic of China (``PRC'') filed in proper form by American
Spring Wire Corp., Insteel Wire Products Company, and Sumiden Wire
Products Corp., (collectively, ``Petitioners'').\1\ On June 1, 2009,
the Department issued a request for additional information and
clarification of certain areas of the Petition. Based on the
Department's request, Petitioners filed supplements to the Petition on
June 4, 2009 (``Supplement to the AD Petition'' and ``Supplement to the
AD/CVD Petitions). On June 8, 2009, the Department requested further
clarifications of industry support and producers/exporters identified
in the Petitions. Based on the Department's request, Petitioners filed
supplements to the Petition on June 9, 2009 (``Second Supplement to the
AD/CVD Petitions''). On June 12, 2009 the Department again asked for
clarification regarding the scope. Based on the Department's request,
Petitioners filed an additional supplement to the Petition on June 15,
2009 (``Third Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duties: Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand From
the People's Republic of China, dated May 27, 2009 (the Petition).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (``the Act''), Petitioners allege that imports of PC strand
from the PRC 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 materially injure, or threaten material injury
to, an industry in the United States.
The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition on behalf
of the domestic industry because Petitioners are interested parties as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and that they have
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the
investigation that they are requesting the Department to initiate (see
``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition'' below).
Scope of Investigation
The products covered by this investigation are PC strand from the
PRC. For a full description of the scope of the investigation, please
see the ``Scope of Investigation'' in Appendix I of this notice.
Comments on Scope of Investigation
During our review of the Petition, we discussed the scope with
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 by July 6, 2009, twenty calendar days
from the signature date of this notice. Comments should be addressed to
Import Administration's APO/Dockets Unit, 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 PC strand to be reported in
response to the Department's antidumping questionnaires. 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 as (1) general product
characteristics and (2) 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 PC strand, 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
product matching. 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 6, 2009.
Additionally, rebuttal comments must be received by July 13, 2009.
Determination of Industry Support for the Petition
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act
provides that 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
[[Page 29666]]
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 a statistically valid sampling method to poll
the industry.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the
producers as a whole 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 (See 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.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT
2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. Supp.
639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989), cert.
denied 492 U.S. 919 (1989).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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, Petitioners do not offer
a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of the
investigation. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on
the record, we have determined that PC strand constitutes a single
domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of
that domestic like product.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in
this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist:
PC Strand from the PRC (``Initiation Checklist'') at Attachment II
(``Industry Support''), dated concurrently with this notice and on
file in the Central Records Unit (``CRU''), Room 1117 of the main
Department of Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In determining whether Petitioners have standing under section
732(c)(4)(A), we considered the industry support data contained in the
Petition with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the
``Scope of Investigation'' section above. To establish industry
support, Petitioners provided their production of the domestic like
product for the year 2008, and compared this to total production of the
domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.\4\ Petitioners
calculated total domestic production based on their own production plus
information provided by the two other non-petitioning companies that
produce the domestic like product in the United States, who are
supporters of the Petition.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 4, and Exhibit General-1.
\5\ See Volume I of the Petition, at Exhibit General-1, and
Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, at 5-6, and Attachment 3, and
Second Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, at 5, and Attachment 1;
see also Initiation Checklist as Attachment II, Industry Support.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our review of the data provided in the Petition, supplemental
submissions, and other information readily available to the Department
indicates that Petitioners have established industry support. First,
the Petition established support from domestic producers (or workers)
accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the
domestic like product and, as such, the Department is not required to
take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g.,
polling).\6\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the
statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i)
of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the
Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of
the domestic like product.\7\ Finally, the domestic producers (or
workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under
section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or
workers) who support the Petition 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 Petition.
Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petition was filed on
behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1)
of the Act.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act, and Initiation
Checklist at Attachment 2.
\7\ See Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
\8\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition on behalf
of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as defined
in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they have demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the antidumping investigation that
they are requesting the Department initiate.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
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''). In addition, Petitioners
allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided
for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.
Petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share, increased import penetration,
underselling and price depressing and suppressing effects, lost sales
and revenue, reduced production, capacity, and capacity utilization,
reduced employment, and an overall decline in financial performance. We
have assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding
material injury, threat of material injury, and causation, and we have
determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate
evidence and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Initiation Checklist at Attachment 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Investigation
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), because this Petition was
filed on May 27, 2009, the anticipated period of investigation
(``POI'') is October 1, 2008, through March 31, 2009.
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 has based its decision to
initiate an investigation with respect to the PRC. The sources of data
for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and normal
value (``NV'') are discussed in the Initiation Checklist. Should the
need arise to use any of this information as facts available under
section 776 of the Act, we may
[[Page 29667]]
reexamine the information and revise the margin calculations, if
appropriate.
Export Price
Petitioners calculated export prices (``EPs'') for PC strand of
various diameters: \3/8\ '' diameter, \1/2\ '' diameter and 0.6 ''
diameter. These were based on price quotes obtained through offers of
sale. Petitioner presented affidavits for the offers for sale attesting
that the offers were made during the POI.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Initiation Checklist for further discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To calculate the net U.S. EP, Petitioners deducted from the
starting U.S. prices ocean freight and insurance charges, U.S. port
fees, foreign brokerage and, as appropriate, a re-seller mark-up. U.S.
inland freight costs were also deducted when such information was
available. We have not made any additional deductions.
Petitioners calculated per-unit ocean freight and insurance using
import statistics reported by the U.S. International Trade Commission
Dataweb. As for U.S. port fees, Petitioners included the 0.21 percent
ad valorem harbor maintenance fee as well as the 0.125 percent
merchandise processing fee. Foreign brokerage was calculated using the
Department's methodology in Certain Kitchen Appliance Shelving and
Racks from the People's Republic of China and then converted to the
appropriate unit.\12\ Petitioners calculated re-seller mark-ups based
on industry knowledge, choosing a lower value in order to produce a
conservative estimate. Lastly, U.S. inland freight was calculated based
on Petitioners' experience delivering PC strand inside the United
States and the number of miles from the closest U.S. port to the
location of the U.S. customer.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Memorandum from Katie Marksberry to The File, regarding
Investigation of Certain Kitchen Appliance Shelving and Racks from
the People's Republic of China: Surrogate Value Determination, dated
February 26, 2009, at 17.
\13\ See Initiation Checklist for further discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value
Petitioners state that in every previous less-than-fair value
investigation involving merchandise from the PRC, the Department has
concluded that the PRC is a non-market economy country (``NME'') and,
as the Department has not revoked this determination, its NME status
remains in effect today.\14\ The Department has previously examined the
PRC's market status and determined that NME status should continue for
the PRC.\15\ In addition, in recent antidumping duty investigations,
the Department has continued to determine that the PRC is an NME
country.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 47.
\15\ 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 http://ia.ita.doc.gov/download/prc-nme-status/prc-nme-status-memo.pdf.
\16\ See Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe
from the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value, 74 FR 14514 (March 31, 2009); Frontseating
Service Valves from the People's Republic of China: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final Negative
Determination of Critical Circumstances, 74 FR 10886 (March 13,
2009); 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid From the People's
Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value, 74 FR 10545 (March 11, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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, therefore, 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.
Petitioners argue that India is the appropriate surrogate country
for the PRC because it is at a comparable level of economic development
and it has two major producers of PC strand.\17\ Petitioners state that
the Department has determined in previous antidumping duty
investigations and administrative reviews that India is at a level of
development comparable to the PRC.\18\ Petitioners also assert that
there are two major producers of the subject merchandise in India, the
Tata Steel Group and the Usha Martin Group.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 47-49.
\18\ See id.
\19\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the information provided by Petitioners, the Department
believes that the use of India as a surrogate country is appropriate
for purposes of initiation. However, after initiation of the
investigation, interested parties will have the opportunity to submit
comments regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly
available information to value factors of production within 40 days
after the date of publication of the preliminary determination.
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. Petitioners calculated three NVs for PC strand,
including diameters of \3/8\ '', \1/2\ '', and 0.6 ''.
Petitioners valued the factors of production using reasonably
available, public surrogate country data, including India import data
from the Monthly Statistics of the Foreign Trade of India (``MSFTI'')
as compiled by the World Trade Atlas (WTA) from the period May 2008
through October 2008, the most current data available, information
regarding labor costs on the Department's Web site, the International
Energy Agency Statistics, and information from the 2007/2008
unconsolidated financial reports of the Tata Steel Group and the Usha
Martin Group.\20\ To calculate the consumption rates, the Petitioners
used the consumption rates for U.S. producers during the POI.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 51-54.
\21\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 49-50, and Exhibit AD-
6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioners state that they valued hot-rolled, high-carbon steel
wire rod using the WTA data, which was then converted to the
appropriate unit.\22\ Petitioners valued electricity using Indian
electricity rates disseminated by the International Energy Agency.\23\
Petitioners valued labor using the wage rate data published on the
Department's Web site, at http://ia.ita.doc.gov.\24\ Petitioners valued
natural gas according to Indian import data compiled by the WTA.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 52, and Supplement to
the AD Petition, at 5.
\23\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 53, and Exhibit AD-7.
\24\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 52, and Exhibits AD-6
and AD-7.
\25\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 53, and Exhibit AD-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where Petitioners were unable to find input prices contemporaneous
with the POI, Petitioners adjusted for inflation using the wholesale
price index for India, as published by the International Monetary
Fund.\26\ Petitioners used exchange rates, as reported by the Federal
Reserve, to convert Indian Rupees to U.S. Dollars.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 51, and Exhibit AD-7.
\27\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioners based factory overhead, selling, general and
administrative expenses (``SG&A''), and profit, on the financial ratios
of the Tata Steel Group and the Usha Martin Group as both companies are
significant producers of
[[Page 29668]]
PC strand.\28\ The ratios were obtained from each respective company's
2007/2008 unconsolidated financial reports and then averaged
together.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 48-49; see also
Supplement to the AD Petition, dated June 4, 2009, at 2-5.
\29\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 53-54, and Exhibit AD-
8; see also Supplement to the AD Petition, dated June 4, 2009, at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair-Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by Petitioners, there is reason to
believe that imports of PC strand from the PRC are being, or are likely
to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Based on
comparisons of EP to NV as revised above, the estimated dumping margins
for the PRC range from 140.16 percent to 314.59 percent.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Supplement to the AD Petition, at Exhibit Supp. AD-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of Antidumping Investigation
Based upon the examination of the Petition concerning PC strand
from the PRC and other information reasonably available to the
Department, the Department finds that the Petition meets the
requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an
antidumping duty investigation to determine whether imports of PC
strand from the PRC 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.
Targeted-Dumping Allegations
On December 10, 2008, the Department issued an interim final rule
for the purpose of withdrawing 19 CFR 351.414(f) and (g), the
regulatory provisions governing the targeted-dumping analysis in
antidumping duty investigations, and the corresponding regulation
governing the deadline for targeted-dumping allegations, 19 CFR
351.301(d)(5).\31\ The Department stated that ``{w{time} ithdrawal will
allow the Department to exercise the discretion intended by the statute
and, thereby, develop a practice that will allow interested parties to
pursue all statutory avenues of relief in this area.'' \32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See Withdrawal of the Regulatory Provisions Governing
Targeted Dumping in Antidumping Duty Investigations, 73 FR 74930
(December 10, 2008).
\32\ Id. at 74931.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to accomplish this objective, if any interested party
wishes to make a targeted-dumping allegation in this investigation
pursuant to section 777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act, such allegation is due no
later than 45 days before the scheduled date of the preliminary
determination.
Respondent Selection
The Department will request quantity and value information from the
exporters and producers identified in the Petition with complete
contact information. The quantity and value data received from NME
exporters/producers will be 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.\33\ Appendix II of this notice
contains the quantity and value questionnaire that must be submitted by
all NME exporters/producers no later than July 7, 2009. In addition,
the Department will post the quantity and value questionnaire along
with the filing instructions on the Department's Web site, at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-highlights-and-news.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See Circular Welded Austenitic Stainless Pressure Pipe from
the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty
Investigation, 73 FR 10221, 10225 (February 26, 2008); and
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Certain Artist Canvas
From the People's Republic of China, 70 FR 21996, 21999 (April 28,
2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate-rate status in an NME investigation,
exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate status
application.\34\ The specific requirements for submitting the separate-
rate application in this investigation are outlined in detail in the
application itself, available on the Department's Web site at http://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 will be due sixty (60) days from the date of publication of
this initiation notice in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe
from the Republic of Korea and the People's Republic of China:
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 73 FR 23188, 23193
(April 29, 2008). (``Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel
Line Pipe from the PRC '').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 this
investigation. The Separate Rates/Combination Rates Bulletin states:
{w{time} 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.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See Import Administration Policy Bulletin, Number: 05.1,
``Separate-Rates Practice and Application of Combination Rates in
Antidumping Investigations involving Non-Market Economy Countries,''
dated April 5, 2005, available on the Department's Web site at
http://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf; See also Certain Circular
Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the PRC, 73 FR 23188,
23193.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petition has been
provided to the representatives of the Government of the PRC. Because
of the particularly large number of producers/exporters identified in
the Petition, the Department considers the service of the public
version of the Petition to the foreign producers/exporters satisfied by
the delivery of the public version to the Government of the PRC,
consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
732(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determination by the International Trade Commission
The ITC will preliminarily determine, no later than July 13,
2009,\36\ whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of PC
strand from the PRC materially injure, or threaten material injury to,
a U.S. industry. A negative ITC determination covering all classes or
kinds of merchandise covered by the Petition would result in the
investigation being terminated. Otherwise, this investigation will
proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ Where the deadline falls on a weekend/holiday, the
appropriate date is the next business day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of
the Act.
[[Page 29669]]
Dated: June 16, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigation
For purposes of this investigation, prestressed concrete steel
wire strand (PC strand) is steel wire strand, other than of
stainless steel, which is suitable for use in, but not limited to,
prestressed concrete (both pretensioned and post-tensioned)
applications. The scope of this investigation encompasses all types
and diameters of PC strand whether uncoated (uncovered) or coated
(covered) by any substance, including but not limited to, grease,
plastic sheath, or epoxy. This merchandise includes, but is not
limited to, PC strand produced to the American Society for Testing
and Materials (ASTM) A-416 specification, or comparable domestic or
foreign specifications. PC strand made from galvanized wire is
excluded from the scope if the zinc and/or zinc oxide coating meets
or exceeds the 0.40 oz./ft\2\; standard set forth in ASTM-A-475.
The PC strand subject to this investigation is currently
classifiable under subheadings 7312.10.3010 and 7312.10.3012 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although
the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation
is dispositive.
Appendix II
Where it is not practicable to examine all known exporters/
producers 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 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 of Investigation'' section of this
notice), produced in the PRC, and exported/shipped to the United
States during the period October 1, 2008, through March 31, 2009.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total quantity Total value in
Market in kilograms Terms of sale U.S. dollars
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 kilograms 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 at port of export).
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 customer occurs before
importation into the United States.
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 subject 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 customer
occurs after importation. However, if the first sale to the
unaffiliated customer 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 subject merchandise
manufactured in Hong Kong in your figures.
Further Manufactured:
Sales of further manufactured or assembled (including
re-packaged) merchandise is merchandise that undergoes further
manufacture or assembly in the United States before being sold to
the first unaffiliated customer.
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. E9-14721 Filed 6-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P