Wire Decking From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 31691-31696 [E9-15703]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 126 (Thursday, July 2, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31691-31696]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15703]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-949]


Wire Decking From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of 
Antidumping Duty Investigation

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

DATES: Effective Date: July 2, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Riggle or Andrea Staebler 
Berton, AD/CVD Operations, Office 8, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
0650 and (202) 482-4037, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petition

    On June 5, 2009, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') 
received an antidumping duty (``AD'') petition concerning imports of 
wire decking from the People's Republic of China (``PRC'') filed in 
proper form by AWP Industries, Inc., ITC Manufacturing, Inc., J&L Wire 
Cloth, Inc., and Nashville Wire Products Mfg. Co., Inc., (collectively, 
``Petitioners'').\1\ On June 11, 2009, and June 12, 2009, the 
Department issued requests 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 16, 2009, and 
June 17, 2009 (respectively, ``Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions and 
Supplement to the AD Petition''). The Department requested further 
clarifications from Petitioners by supplemental questionnaire and phone 
on June 18, 2009, regarding scope, export price, and

[[Page 31692]]

surrogate values (``SV'').\2\ On June 19, 2009, Petitioners filed the 
information requested regarding export price and on June 22, 2009, 
Petitioners filed the information requested in the additional 
supplemental questionnaire, including a revised scope (respectively 
``Second Supplement to the AD Petition, and Second Supplement to the 
AD/CVD Petitions'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See the Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties Pursuant to Sections 701 and 731 of the Tariff 
Act of 1930, as amended (``Petition''), filed on June 5, 2009. On 
June 22, 2009, Petitioners submitted a letter stating that another 
domestic producer of the like product, Wireway Husky Corporation, 
had joined the petition.
    \2\ See Memorandum to the File, ``Wire Decking form the People's 
Republic of China: Phone Call with Petitioners Regarding Antidumping 
Petition Questions,'' dated June 19, 2009; see also Memorandum to 
the File ``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties and 
Countervailing Duties on Wire Decking from the People's Republic of 
China: Suggested Scope Changes,'' dated June 22, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 23 and 24, 2009, the Department contacted Petitioners to 
suggest additional changes to the scope language. On June 24, 2009, 
Petitioners filed a final version of the scope language.
    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (``the Act''), Petitioners allege that imports of wire decking 
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 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 wire decking 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 15, 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 wire decking 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 wire decking, 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 15, 2009. 
Additionally, rebuttal comments must be received by July 22, 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 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 (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.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 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 title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the

[[Page 31693]]

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 wire decking constitutes a single 
domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of 
that domestic like product.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
Wire Decking 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 2008 production of the domestic 
like product, as well as the 2008 production of the domestic like 
product for four non-petitioning companies who are supporters of the 
Petition, and compared this to total production of the domestic like 
product for the entire domestic industry. See Volume I of the Petition, 
at 4, and Exhibit General-1, and Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, 
dated June 16, 2009, at 10, and Attachment 3, and Second Supplement to 
the AD/CVD Petitions, dated June 22, 2009, at 3, and Attachment 1, and 
Petitioners' Submission, dated June 22, 2009. Petitioners calculated 
total domestic production based on their own production plus data 
provided by the four non-petitioning companies that produce the 
domestic like product in the United States, who are supporters of the 
Petition. See Volume I of the Petition, at Exhibit General-1, and 
Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, dated June 16, 2009, at Attachment 
3, and Second Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, dated June 22, 2009, 
at 3, and Attachment 1; see also Initiation Checklist as Attachment II, 
Industry Support. In addition, Petitioners identified one other company 
as a producer of the domestic like product and were able to obtain its 
2008 production of the domestic like product in order to calculate 
total domestic production of the domestic like product.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, dated June 16, 2009, 
at 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 II.
    \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 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, shipments, 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 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 III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), because this Petition was 
filed on June 5, 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 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 reexamine the information and revise the margin calculations, if 
appropriate.

Export Price

    Petitioners calculated export prices (``EPs'') for wire decking 
based on three purchase orders and the corresponding invoices.\11\ The 
Department has not made any adjustments to U.S. EP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 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.\12\ The Department has previously examined the 
PRC's market status and determined that NME status should continue for 
the PRC.\13\ In addition, in recent

[[Page 31694]]

investigations, the Department has continued to determine that the PRC 
is an NME country.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 2.
    \13\ See Memorandum from the Office of Policy to David M. 
Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, regarding 
The People's Republic of China Status as a Non-Market Economy, dated 
May 15, 2006. This document is available online at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/download/ prc-nme-status/prc-nme-status-memo.pdf.
    \14\ 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 
normal value (``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 is a significant producer of wire decking products.\15\ 
Petitioners state that the Department has determined in previous 
investigations and administrative reviews that India is at a level of 
development comparable to the PRC.\16\ Petitioners identified a major 
producer of wire decking in India, Mekins Agro Products Ltd. 
(``Mekins''), and assert that Mekins has the capacity to supply up to 
500 metric tons of wire mesh products per month, indicating that India 
is a significant producer of wire decking products.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 3.
    \16\ See id.
    \17\ 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 NVs for four wire decking 
products.
    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'') 
from the period July 2008 through December 2008.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See id. at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners state that they valued drawing powder, wire, hot-rolled 
sheet, coating powder, steel scrap, metal scrap, and pallet using 
Indian import data from the MSFTI, under the following Indian HTS 
numbers: 7217.90.99 and 7217.10.10 for wire; 7208.27.30, 7208.39.30, 
7208.54.30, 7211.19.10, 7211.19.50, and 7211.19.90 for hot-rolled 
sheet, 3907.91.20 for coating powder, 7204.41.00 for steel scrap, 
7208.39 for metal scrap, and 4415.20.00 for pallet.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 6-12, and Exhibit AD-3. 
See also Supplement to the AD Petition, dated June 17, 2009, at 5-8, 
and Attachments 6 and 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners valued drawing powder using Indian import data from the 
MSFTI, under Indian HTS number 3403.99.01 for the period April 2002 
through March 2003, because no contemporaneous data was readily 
available.\20\ Accordingly, the Department inflated April 2002 through 
March 2003 value to make it contemporaneous for our period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 8, and Exhibit AD-3. See 
also Supplement to the AD Petition, dated June 17, 2009, at 8, and 
Attachments 6 and 7. For further discussions see Initiation 
Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners valued carbon steel wire rod based on Indian domestic 
price statistics reported by the Joint Plant Committee (``JPC''). They 
adjusted these reported prices for excise and VAT taxes.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 7-8, and Exhibit AD-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners valued electricity, water and natural gas based on SVs 
used in a previous preliminary determination.\22\ In using the previous 
preliminary determination, Petitioners valued electricity using a rate 
from India's Central Electricity Authority (``CEA'') from 2006 which 
was inflated.\23\ However, the Department has determined that because 
the rates listed in this source became effective on a variety of 
different dates, the average rate should not be adjusted for 
inflation.\24\ Therefore, the electricity value for this initiation is 
based on the reported 2006 CEA rate without any inflation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 10-11, and Exhibit AD-3.
    \23\ See Initiation Checklist for further discussion.
    \24\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners submitted two values for electrogalvanization, a 
tolling process, one from JPC data and the other from Galrebars.\25\ 
The Department relied only on the value from Galrebars for 
electrogalvanization as this value was used previously by the 
Department in another proceeding.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Initiation Checklist for further discussion, and 
Supplement to the AD Petition, dated June 17, 2009, at 5-6, and 
Attachment 4.
    \26\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners valued labor using the wage rate data published on the 
Department's Web site, at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/wages/05wages/ 05wages-
051608.html.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 in ``International Financial 
Statistics'' by the International Monetary Fund.\28\ Petitioners used 
exchange rates, as provided on the Department's Web site, to convert 
Indian Rupees to U.S. Dollars.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See id. at 6-12, and Exhibit AD-3. See also Supplement to 
the AD Petition, dated June 17, 2009, at 5-10, and Attachment 6. For 
further discussion see Initiation Checklist.
    \29\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 7 and Exhibit AD-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners based factory overhead, selling, general and 
administrative expenses (``SG&A''), and profit, on the financial ratios 
of Mekins, an Indian producer of wire decking.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 12, and Exhibit AD-3. See 
also Supplement to the AD Petition, dated June 17, 2009, at 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair-Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by Petitioners, there is reason to 
believe that imports of wire decking from the PRC are being, or are 
likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Based 
on the comparison of EP to NV, as noted above, the estimated dumping 
margins for the PRC range from 143 percent to 316 percent.

Initiation of Antidumping Investigation

    Based upon the examination of the Petition concerning wire decking 
from the PRC and other information reasonably available to the 
Department, the Department finds that this Petition meets the 
requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an 
antidumping duty investigation to determine whether imports of wire 
decking from the PRC are being, or are

[[Page 31695]]

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\ See id. at 74931.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to accomplish this objective, if any interested party 
wishes to make a targeted-dumping allegation in any of these 
investigations pursuant to section 777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act, such 
allegations are due no later than 45 days before the scheduled date of 
the preliminary determination.

Respondent Selection

    For the PRC, the Department will request quantity and value 
information from all known exporters and producers identified, with 
complete contact information, in the Petition. 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 16, 2009. In addition, 
the Department will post the quantity and value questionnaire along 
with the filing instructions on the Import Administration Web site, at 
https://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-highlights-and-news.html. The Department will 
send the quantity and value questionnaire to those PRC companies 
identified in the Petition, Volume I, at Exhibit General-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 https://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-highlights-and-news.html on the date of publication 
of this initiation notice in the Federal Register. The separate-rate 
application 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 \35\ 
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 POI. 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 POI.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 
https://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf.
    \36\ See also 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, no later than July 20, 2009, 
whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of wire decking 
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.

    Dated: June 25, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I--Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of the investigation covers welded-wire rack decking, 
which is also known as, among other things, ``pallet rack decking,'' 
``wire rack decking,'' ``wire mesh decking,'' ``bulk storage 
shelving,'' or ``welded-wire decking.'' Wire decking consists of 
wire mesh that is reinforced with structural supports and designed 
to be load bearing. The structural supports include sheet metal 
support channels, or other structural supports, that reinforce the 
wire mesh and that are welded or otherwise affixed to the wire mesh, 
regardless of whether the wire mesh and supports are assembled or 
unassembled and whether shipped as a kit or packaged separately. 
Wire decking is produced from carbon or alloy steel wire that has 
been welded into a mesh pattern. The wire may be galvanized or

[[Page 31696]]

plated (e.g., chrome, zinc or nickel coated), coated (e.g., with 
paint, epoxy, or plastic), or uncoated (``raw''). The wire may be 
drawn or rolled and may have a round, square or other profile. Wire 
decking is sold in a variety of wire gauges. The wire diameters used 
in the decking mesh are 0.105 inches or greater for round wire. For 
wire other than round wire, the distance between any two points on a 
cross-section of the wire is 0.105 inches or greater. Wire decking 
reinforced with structural supports is designed generally for 
industrial and other commercial storage rack systems.
    Wire decking is produced to various profiles, including, but not 
limited to, a flat (``flush'') profile, an upward curved back edge 
profile (``backstop'') or downward curved edge profile 
(``waterfalls''), depending on the rack storage system. The wire 
decking may or may not be anchored to the rack storage system. The 
scope does not cover the metal rack storage system, comprised of 
metal uprights and cross beams, on which the wire decking is 
ultimately installed. Also excluded from the scope is wire mesh 
shelving that is not reinforced with structural supports and is 
designed for use without structural supports.
    Wire decking enters the United States through several basket 
categories in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(``HTSUS''). U.S. Customs and Border Protection has issued a ruling 
(NY F84777) that wire decking is to be classified under HTSUS 
9403.90.8040. Wire decking has also been entered under HTSUS 
7217.10, 7217.20, 7326.20, 7326.90, 9403.20.0020 and 9403.20.0030. 
While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs 
purposes, the written description of the scope of the investigations 
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
                          Market                             in metric tons     Terms of sale      Total value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
United States:
    1. Export Price Sales.................................  ................  ................  ................
    2. a. Exporter Name...................................  ................  ................  ................
    b. Address............................................  ................  ................  ................
    c. Contact............................................  ................  ................  ................
    d. Phone No...........................................  ................  ................  ................
    e. Fax No.............................................  ................  ................  ................
    3. Constructed Export Price Sales.....................  ................  ................  ................
    4. Further Manufactured...............................  ................  ................  ................
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
        Total Sales.......................................  ................  ................  ................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Quantity

     Please report quantity on a metric ton basis. If any 
conversions were used, please provide the conversion formula and 
source.

Terms of Sales

     Please report all sales on the same terms (e.g., free 
on board 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. E9-15703 Filed 7-1-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P