First Administrative Review of Sodium Hexametaphosphate From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 64695-64696 [2010-26458]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 2010 / Notices
final results of an administrative review
within 120 days after the date on which
the Preliminary Results have been
published. If it is not practicable to
complete the review within the time
period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act
allows the Department to extend this
deadline to a maximum of 180 days.
The current deadline for the completion
of the final results of this review is
November 11, 2010.
The Department has determined that
completion of the final results of this
review by the current deadline is not
practicable. The Department requires
more time to analyze a significant
amount of information pertaining to the
respondents’ corporate structure and
ownership, sales practices and
manufacturing methods, as well as the
labor wage rate surrogate value.
Therefore, given the number and
complexity of issues in this case, and in
accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of
the Act, we are extending the time
period for issuing the final results of
review until December 20, 2010.
This notice is published pursuant to
sections 751(1)(3)(A) and 777(i)(1) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2).
Dated: October 13, 2010.
Susan H. Kuhbach,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2010–26457 Filed 10–19–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–908]
First Administrative Review of Sodium
Hexametaphosphate From the
People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On April 15, 2010, the
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) published the
Preliminary Results of the first
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on sodium
hexametaphosphate (‘‘sodium hex’’)
from the People’s Republic of China
(‘‘PRC’’).1 We gave interested parties an
opportunity to comment on the
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
1 See First Administrative Review of Sodium
Hexametaphosphate from the People’s Republic of
China: Notice of Preliminary Results of the
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR
19613 (April 15, 2010) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:17 Oct 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
Preliminary Results. Based upon our
analysis of the comments and
information received, we made changes
to the margin calculation for the final
results. We find that the sole
participating respondent in this review,
Hubei Xingfa Chemical Group Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Xingfa’’), sold subject merchandise at
less than normal value (‘‘NV’’) during the
period of review (‘‘POR’’), September 14,
2007–February 28, 2009.
DATES: Effective Date: October 20, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Walker, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9,
Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0413.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
As noted above, on April 15, 2010, the
Department published the Preliminary
Results of this administrative review.
On August 10, 2010, the Department
published a notice extending the time
period for issuing the final results by 53
days to October 5, 2010.2 On October 5,
2010, the Department extended the time
period for issuing the final results by an
additional 7 days to October 12, 2010.3
On July 26, 2010, the Department placed
wage rate data on the record for
comment following the recent decision
in Dorbest Limited et al. v. United
States, 2009–1257, –1266, issued by the
United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit (‘‘CAFC’’) on May 14,
2010.4 Between May 21, 2010 and
August 13, 2010, we received case and
rebuttal briefs from the Petitioners 5 and
Xingfa.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties are addressed
in the ‘‘First Administrative Review of
Sodium Hexametaphosphate from the
People’s Republic of China: Issues and
Decision Memorandum for the Final
Results,’’ which is dated concurrently
with this notice (‘‘I&D Memo’’). A list of
the issues which parties raised, and to
which we respond in the I&D Memo, is
2 See First Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review of Sodium Hexametaphosphate from the
People’s Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit
for the Final Results, 75 FR 48309 (August 10,
2010).
3 See First Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review of Sodium Hexametaphosphate from the
People’s Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit
for the Final Results, dated October 5, 2010.
4 See the ‘‘Changes Since the Preliminary Results’’
section below for a detailed explanation of the
Department’s revised wage rate for these final
results.
5 ICL Performance Products and Innophos, Inc.
(collectively, the ‘‘Petitioners’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64695
attached to this notice as an Appendix.
The I&D Memo is a public document
and is on file in the Central Records
Unit (‘‘CRU’’), Main Commerce Building,
Room 7046, and is accessible on the
Department’s Web site at
https://www.trade.gov/ia. The paper
copy and electronic version of the
memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on a review of the record, as
well as comments received from parties
regarding our Preliminary Results, we
have made revisions to Xingfa’s margin
calculation for the final results. We have
revised classifications for certain
expenses in the surrogate financial
ratios used in the Preliminary Results.
Specifically, we have excluded packing
costs and freight and forwarding costs
because it is the Department’s practice
to exclude certain expenses in order to
avoid double-counting costs where the
requisite data are available to do so.6
Moreover, consistent with the
Department’s practice, we have
included purchased goods in the
denominator of the SG&A and profit
ratio calculations.7
Pursuant to a recent decision by the
CAFC,8 we have calculated a revised
hourly wage rate to use in valuing
Xingfa’s reported labor. The revised
wage rate is calculated by averaging
earnings and/or wages in countries that
are economically comparable to the PRC
and that are significant producers of
comparable merchandise.9 Additionally,
we have revised the surrogate value for
sodium pyrophosphate.10
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to this
review is sodium hexametaphosphate.
Sodium hexametaphosphate is a watersoluble polyphosphate glass that
6 See, e.g., Helical Spring Lock Washers From the
People’s Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR
4175 (January 24, 2008) (where the Department
clearly articulated its practice to avoid doublecounting costs in calculating dumping margins); see
also I&D Memo at Comment 4.
7 See Amended Final Results of the First
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Folding
Metal Tables and Chairs From the People’s
Republic of China, 70 FR 3187 (January 21, 2005);
see also I&D Memo at Comment 4.
8 Dorbest v. United States, 604 F. 3d 1363 (Fed.
Cir. 2010).
9 See I&D Memo at Comment 3E; see also Final
SV Memo for the details of the calculation and
supporting data.
10 See I&D Memo at Comment 3A; see also
Memorandum to the File, through Scot T. Fullerton,
Program Manager, Office IX, from Paul Walker, Case
Analyst, Office IX, ‘‘First Administrative Review of
Sodium Hexametaphosphate from the People’s
Republic of China: Surrogate Factor Valuations for
the Final Results’’ (‘‘Final SV Memo’’), dated
concurrently with this notice.
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
64696
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 2010 / Notices
consists of a distribution of
polyphosphate chain lengths. It is a
collection of sodium polyphosphate
polymers built on repeating NaPO3
units. Sodium hexametaphosphate has a
P2O5 content from 60 to 71 percent.
Alternate names for sodium
hexametaphosphate include the
following: Calgon; Calgon S; Glassy
Sodium Phosphate; Sodium
Polyphosphate, Glassy; Metaphosphoric
Acid; Sodium Salt; Sodium Acid
Metaphosphate; Graham’s Salt; Sodium
Hex; Polyphosphoric Acid, Sodium Salt;
Glass H; Hexaphos; Sodaphos; Vitrafos;
and BAC–N–FOS. Sodium
hexametaphosphate is typically sold as
a white powder or granule (crushed)
and may also be sold in the form of
sheets (glass) or as a liquid solution. It
is imported under heading
2835.39.5000, HTSUS. It may also be
imported as a blend or mixture under
heading 3824.90.3900, HTSUS. The
American Chemical Society, Chemical
Abstract Service (‘‘CAS’’) has assigned
the name ‘‘Polyphosphoric Acid,
Sodium Salt’’ to sodium
hexametaphosphate. The CAS registry
number is 68915–31–1. However,
sodium hexametaphosphate is
commonly identified by CAS No.
10124–56–8 in the market. For purposes
of the review, the narrative description
is dispositive, not the tariff heading,
CAS registry number or CAS name.
The product covered by this review
includes sodium hexametaphosphate in
all grades, whether food grade or
technical grade. The product covered by
this review includes sodium
hexametaphosphate without regard to
chain length i.e., whether regular or
long chain. The product covered by this
review includes sodium
hexametaphosphate without regard to
physical form, whether glass, sheet,
crushed, granule, powder, fines, or other
form, and whether or not in solution.
However, the product covered by this
review does not include sodium
hexametaphosphate when imported in a
blend with other materials in which the
sodium hexametaphosphate accounts
for less than 50 percent by volume of
the finished product.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Final Results of Review
The weighted-average dumping
margin for the POR is as follows:
Manufacturer/exporter
Hubei Xingfa .............................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:17 Oct 19, 2010
Assessment
Upon issuance of the final results, the
Department will determine, and U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’)
shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries. The Department
intends to issue assessment instructions
to CBP 15 days after the date of
publication of the final results of
review. Pursuant to 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1), we will calculate
importer-specific (or customer) ad
valorem duty assessment rates based on
the ratio of the total amount of the
dumping margins calculated for the
examined sales to the total entered
value of those same sales. In accordance
with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will
instruct CBP to liquidate, without regard
to antidumping duties, all entries of
subject merchandise during the POR for
which the importer-specific assessment
rate is zero or de minimis.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of these final results of this
administrative review for all shipments
of the subject merchandise entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date, as provided for by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the
exporters listed above, the cash deposit
rate will be the rate established in these
final results of review (except, if the rate
is zero or de minimis, i.e., less than 0.5
percent, a zero cash deposit rate will be
required for that company); (2) for
previously investigated or reviewed PRC
and non-PRC exporters not listed above
that have separate rates, the cash
deposit rate will continue to be the
exporter-specific rate published for the
most recent period; (3) for all PRC
exporters of subject merchandise which
have not been found to be entitled to a
separate rate, the cash deposit rate will
be the PRC-wide rate of 188.05 percent;
and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of
subject merchandise which have not
received their own rate, the cash deposit
rate will be the rate applicable to the
PRC exporters that supplied that nonPRC exporter. These deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until publication of the
final results of the next administrative
review.
Reimbursement of Duties
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)
to file a certificate regarding the
reimbursement of antidumping duties
82.62
prior to liquidation of the relevant
Weighted
average
margin
(percent)
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
entries during this POR. Failure to
comply with this requirement could
result in the Department’s presumption
that reimbursement of antidumping
duties has occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping
duties.
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective orders (‘‘APO’’) of their
responsibility concerning the return or
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues
to govern business proprietary
information in this segment of the
proceeding. Timely written notification
of the return/destruction of APO
materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested.
Failure to comply with the regulations
and terms of an APO is a violation
which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing this
administrative review and notice in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i) of the Act.
Dated: October 12, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I—Issues & Decision
Memorandum
Comment 1: Inputs to Inputs—Electricity
Comment 2: Date of Sale
Comment 3: Surrogate Values
A. Sodium Pyrophosphate
B. Coal
C. Coke
D. Phosphate Slag
E. Labor
Comment 4: Surrogate Financial Ratios
Comment 5: Placement of By-products in the
Normal Value Calculation
[FR Doc. 2010–26458 Filed 10–19–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–549–502]
Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes
and Tubes From Thailand: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On April 13, 2010, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on circular
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 202 (Wednesday, October 20, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64695-64696]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-26458]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-908]
First Administrative Review of Sodium Hexametaphosphate From the
People's Republic of China: Final Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On April 15, 2010, the Department of Commerce (``Department'')
published the Preliminary Results of the first administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on sodium hexametaphosphate (``sodium hex'')
from the People's Republic of China (``PRC'').\1\ We gave interested
parties an opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results. Based
upon our analysis of the comments and information received, we made
changes to the margin calculation for the final results. We find that
the sole participating respondent in this review, Hubei Xingfa Chemical
Group Co., Ltd. (``Xingfa''), sold subject merchandise at less than
normal value (``NV'') during the period of review (``POR''), September
14, 2007-February 28, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See First Administrative Review of Sodium Hexametaphosphate
from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Preliminary Results
of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 19613 (April
15, 2010) (``Preliminary Results'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: October 20, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Walker, AD/CVD Operations, Office
9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0413.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
As noted above, on April 15, 2010, the Department published the
Preliminary Results of this administrative review. On August 10, 2010,
the Department published a notice extending the time period for issuing
the final results by 53 days to October 5, 2010.\2\ On October 5, 2010,
the Department extended the time period for issuing the final results
by an additional 7 days to October 12, 2010.\3\ On July 26, 2010, the
Department placed wage rate data on the record for comment following
the recent decision in Dorbest Limited et al. v. United States, 2009-
1257, -1266, issued by the United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit (``CAFC'') on May 14, 2010.\4\ Between May 21, 2010 and
August 13, 2010, we received case and rebuttal briefs from the
Petitioners \5\ and Xingfa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See First Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Sodium
Hexametaphosphate from the People's Republic of China: Extension of
Time Limit for the Final Results, 75 FR 48309 (August 10, 2010).
\3\ See First Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Sodium
Hexametaphosphate from the People's Republic of China: Extension of
Time Limit for the Final Results, dated October 5, 2010.
\4\ See the ``Changes Since the Preliminary Results'' section
below for a detailed explanation of the Department's revised wage
rate for these final results.
\5\ ICL Performance Products and Innophos, Inc. (collectively,
the ``Petitioners'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties are
addressed in the ``First Administrative Review of Sodium
Hexametaphosphate from the People's Republic of China: Issues and
Decision Memorandum for the Final Results,'' which is dated
concurrently with this notice (``I&D Memo''). A list of the issues
which parties raised, and to which we respond in the I&D Memo, is
attached to this notice as an Appendix. The I&D Memo is a public
document and is on file in the Central Records Unit (``CRU''), Main
Commerce Building, Room 7046, and is accessible on the Department's Web
site at https://www.trade.gov/ia. The paper copy and electronic version
of the memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on a review of the record, as well as comments received from
parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we have made revisions to
Xingfa's margin calculation for the final results. We have revised
classifications for certain expenses in the surrogate financial ratios
used in the Preliminary Results. Specifically, we have excluded packing
costs and freight and forwarding costs because it is the Department's
practice to exclude certain expenses in order to avoid double-counting
costs where the requisite data are available to do so.\6\ Moreover,
consistent with the Department's practice, we have included purchased
goods in the denominator of the SG&A and profit ratio calculations.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See, e.g., Helical Spring Lock Washers From the People's
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 73 FR 4175 (January 24, 2008) (where the Department clearly
articulated its practice to avoid double-counting costs in
calculating dumping margins); see also I&D Memo at Comment 4.
\7\ See Amended Final Results of the First Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Folding Metal Tables and Chairs From the
People's Republic of China, 70 FR 3187 (January 21, 2005); see also
I&D Memo at Comment 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to a recent decision by the CAFC,\8\ we have calculated a
revised hourly wage rate to use in valuing Xingfa's reported labor. The
revised wage rate is calculated by averaging earnings and/or wages in
countries that are economically comparable to the PRC and that are
significant producers of comparable merchandise.\9\ Additionally, we
have revised the surrogate value for sodium pyrophosphate.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Dorbest v. United States, 604 F. 3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2010).
\9\ See I&D Memo at Comment 3E; see also Final SV Memo for the
details of the calculation and supporting data.
\10\ See I&D Memo at Comment 3A; see also Memorandum to the
File, through Scot T. Fullerton, Program Manager, Office IX, from
Paul Walker, Case Analyst, Office IX, ``First Administrative Review
of Sodium Hexametaphosphate from the People's Republic of China:
Surrogate Factor Valuations for the Final Results'' (``Final SV
Memo''), dated concurrently with this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to this review is sodium hexametaphosphate.
Sodium hexametaphosphate is a water-soluble polyphosphate glass that
[[Page 64696]]
consists of a distribution of polyphosphate chain lengths. It is a
collection of sodium polyphosphate polymers built on repeating
NaPO3 units. Sodium hexametaphosphate has a
P2O5 content from 60 to 71 percent. Alternate
names for sodium hexametaphosphate include the following: Calgon;
Calgon S; Glassy Sodium Phosphate; Sodium Polyphosphate, Glassy;
Metaphosphoric Acid; Sodium Salt; Sodium Acid Metaphosphate; Graham's
Salt; Sodium Hex; Polyphosphoric Acid, Sodium Salt; Glass H; Hexaphos;
Sodaphos; Vitrafos; and BAC-N-FOS. Sodium hexametaphosphate is
typically sold as a white powder or granule (crushed) and may also be
sold in the form of sheets (glass) or as a liquid solution. It is
imported under heading 2835.39.5000, HTSUS. It may also be imported as
a blend or mixture under heading 3824.90.3900, HTSUS. The American
Chemical Society, Chemical Abstract Service (``CAS'') has assigned the
name ``Polyphosphoric Acid, Sodium Salt'' to sodium hexametaphosphate.
The CAS registry number is 68915-31-1. However, sodium
hexametaphosphate is commonly identified by CAS No. 10124-56-8 in the
market. For purposes of the review, the narrative description is
dispositive, not the tariff heading, CAS registry number or CAS name.
The product covered by this review includes sodium
hexametaphosphate in all grades, whether food grade or technical grade.
The product covered by this review includes sodium hexametaphosphate
without regard to chain length i.e., whether regular or long chain. The
product covered by this review includes sodium hexametaphosphate
without regard to physical form, whether glass, sheet, crushed,
granule, powder, fines, or other form, and whether or not in solution.
However, the product covered by this review does not include sodium
hexametaphosphate when imported in a blend with other materials in
which the sodium hexametaphosphate accounts for less than 50 percent by
volume of the finished product.
Final Results of Review
The weighted-average dumping margin for the POR is as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted
average
Manufacturer/exporter margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hubei Xingfa............................................... 82.62
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment
Upon issuance of the final results, the Department will determine,
and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') shall assess,
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department intends
to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of
publication of the final results of review. Pursuant to 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1), we will calculate importer-specific (or customer) ad
valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of
the dumping margins calculated for the examined sales to the total
entered value of those same sales. In accordance with 19 CFR
351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate, without regard to
antidumping duties, all entries of subject merchandise during the POR
for which the importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of these final results of this administrative review for
all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as
provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporters
listed above, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in
these final results of review (except, if the rate is zero or de
minimis, i.e., less than 0.5 percent, a zero cash deposit rate will be
required for that company); (2) for previously investigated or reviewed
PRC and non-PRC exporters not listed above that have separate rates,
the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate
published for the most recent period; (3) for all PRC exporters of
subject merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a
separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate of
188.05 percent; and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject
merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit
rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporters that supplied
that non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next
administrative review.
Reimbursement of Duties
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding
the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the Department's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties has occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues
to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the
proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of
APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO
is a violation which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing this administrative review and notice
in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: October 12, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I--Issues & Decision Memorandum
Comment 1: Inputs to Inputs--Electricity
Comment 2: Date of Sale
Comment 3: Surrogate Values
A. Sodium Pyrophosphate
B. Coal
C. Coke
D. Phosphate Slag
E. Labor
Comment 4: Surrogate Financial Ratios
Comment 5: Placement of By-products in the Normal Value Calculation
[FR Doc. 2010-26458 Filed 10-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P