Bottom Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers From the Republic of Korea and Mexico: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 23281-23286 [2011-10048]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2011 / Notices
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 PRCwide rate of 118.04 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 further notice.
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.
These amended final results are
published in accordance with sections
751(h) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: April 18, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011–10083 Filed 4–25–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–580–865, A–201–839]
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce
DATES: Effective Date: April 26, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Goldberger (Republic of Korea) or
Henry Almond (Mexico), AD/CVD
Operations, Office 2, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–4136 or (202) 482–
0049, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:09 Apr 25, 2011
Jkt 223001
On March 30, 2011, the Department of
Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) received
antidumping duty petitions concerning
imports of bottom mount combination
refrigerator-freezers (‘‘bottom mount
refrigerators’’) from the Republic of
Korea (‘‘Korea’’) and Mexico filed in
proper form by Whirlpool Corporation
(‘‘the petitioner’’), a domestic producer
of bottom mount refrigerators. See
Bottom Mount Combination
Refrigerator-Freezers from the Republic
of Korea and Mexico; Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Petitions
(collectively, ‘‘the petitions’’). On April
5 and 12, 2011, the Department issued
requests for additional information and
clarification of certain areas of the
antidumping petitions on Korea and
Mexico. Based on the Department’s
request, the petitioner filed supplements
to the petitions on Korea and Mexico on
April 11 and 14, 2011.
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), the petitioner alleges that imports
of bottom mount refrigerators from
Korea and Mexico 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 the
petitioner filed these petitions on behalf
of the domestic industry because the
petitioner is an interested party as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act,
and it has demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the
investigations that it is requesting the
Department to initiate (see
‘‘Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions’’ below).
Scope of Investigations
Bottom Mount Combination
Refrigerator-Freezers From the
Republic of Korea and Mexico:
Initiation of Antidumping Duty
Investigations
AGENCY:
The Petitions
The products covered by these
investigations are bottom mount
refrigerators from Korea and Mexico.
For a full description of the scope of the
investigations, please see the ‘‘Scope of
Investigations,’’ in Appendix I of this
notice.
Comments on Scope of Investigations
During our review of the petitions, we
discussed the scope with the petitioner
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
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23281
coverage. The Department encourages
all interested parties to submit such
comments by May 9, 2011, 20 calendar
days from the date of signature of this
notice. All comments must be filed on
the records of the Korea and Mexico
antidumping duty investigations as well
as the Korea countervailing duty
investigation. 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
bottom mount refrigerators 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 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 bottom mount
refrigerators, 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
E:\FR\FM\26APN1.SGM
26APN1
23282
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2011 / Notices
questionnaires, we must receive
comments at the above-referenced
address by May 9, 2011. Additionally,
rebuttal comments must be received by
May 16, 2011. All comments must be
filed on the records of both the Korea
and Mexico antidumping duty
investigations.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions
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 (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. 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:09 Apr 25, 2011
Jkt 223001
(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
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, the petitioner does not offer a
definition of domestic like product
distinct from the scope of the
investigations. Based on our analysis of
the information submitted on the
record, we have determined that bottom
mount refrigerators constitute a single
domestic like product and we have
analyzed industry support in terms of
that domestic like product. For a
discussion of the domestic like product
analysis in this case, see Antidumping
Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist:
Bottom Mount Combination
Refrigerator-Freezers from Korea (‘‘Korea
AD Initiation Checklist’’) and
Antidumping Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Bottom Mount
Combination Refrigerator-Freezers from
Mexico (‘‘Mexico AD Initiation
Checklist’’), at Attachment II, Analysis
of Industry Support for the Petitions
Covering Bottom Mount Combination
Refrigerator-Freezers, on file in the
Central Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’), Room
7046 of the main Department of
Commerce building.
In determining whether the petitioner
has standing under section 732(c)(4)(A)
of the Act, we considered the industry
support data contained in the petitions
with reference to the domestic like
product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of
Investigations’’ section above. To
establish industry support, the
petitioner provided its production
volume of the domestic like product in
2010, and compared it to the estimated
total production of the domestic like
product for the entire domestic
industry. See Volume I of the petitions,
at 8–11, Volume 2A of the petitions, at
Exhibits 4 and 5, and Supplement to the
AD/CVD petitions, dated April 11, 2011
(‘‘Supplement to the AD/CVD petitions’’)
at 2–4 and Exhibits S–1, S–2, and S–3.
The petitioner estimated 2010
production of the domestic like product
by non-petitioning companies based on
its knowledge of its competitors and
their production capacity. We have
relied upon data the petitioner provided
for purposes of measuring industry
support. For further discussion, see
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Korea AD Initiation Checklist and
Mexico AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment II.
Our review of the data provided in the
petitions, supplemental submissions,
and other information readily available
to the Department indicates that the
petitioner has established industry
support. First, the petitions 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). See
section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act, Korea
AD Initiation Checklist and Mexico AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
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. See Korea AD
Initiation Checklist and Mexico AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
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 petitions 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
petitions. Accordingly, the Department
determines that the petitions were filed
on behalf of the domestic industry
within the meaning of section 732(b)(1)
of the Act. See id.
The Department finds that the
petitioner filed the petitions on behalf of
the domestic industry because it is an
interested party as defined in section
771(9)(C) of the Act and it has
demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to the antidumping
duty investigations that it is requesting
the Department initiate. See id.
Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges 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, the petitioner
alleges that subject imports exceed the
negligibility threshold provided for
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.
The petitioner contends that the
industry’s injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share,
E:\FR\FM\26APN1.SGM
26APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2011 / Notices
reduced shipments, underselling and
price depression or suppression, decline
in financial performance, lost sales and
revenue, and increase in the volume of
imports and import penetration. See
Volume I of the petitions, at 114–138,
Volume 2A of the petitions, at Exhibit
6, Volume 2B of the petitions, at
Exhibits 35 and 38–42, and Supplement
to the AD/CVD petitions, at 5–10 and
Exhibits S–1, S–2, S–4, and S–5. 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. See
Korea AD Initiation Checklist and
Mexico AD Initiation Checklists, at
Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations
and Evidence of Material Injury and
Causation for the Petitions Covering
Bottom Mount Combination
Refrigerator-Freezers from the Republic
of Korea and Mexico.
Period of Investigations
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.204(b), because these petitions were
filed on March 30, 2011, the period of
investigation (‘‘POI’’) is January 1, 2010,
through December 31, 2010, for both
Korea and Mexico.
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 investigations
with respect to Korea and Mexico. The
sources of, and adjustments to, the data
relating to U.S. price and NV are
discussed in greater detail in the Korea
AD Initiation Checklist and the Mexico
AD Initiation Checklist.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Korea
U.S. Price
The petitioner provided two U.S.
prices based on average model-specific
retail prices obtained from a market
survey database. These prices were
adjusted to exclude the retailer markup,
as well as discounts and rebates, based
on the petitioner’s experience in and
knowledge of the market. The petitioner
deducted international freight based on
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(‘‘CBP’’) data. It made no other
adjustments to U.S. price. See Korea AD
Initiation Checklist.
Normal Value
The petitioner provided two home
market prices based on a survey of retail
prices in Korea. These prices were
adjusted to exclude the retailer markup,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:09 Apr 25, 2011
Jkt 223001
as well as discounts and rebates, based
on the petitioner’s experience in and
knowledge of the market. The petitioner
further adjusted home market price by
deducting Korean VAT and other taxes.
It made no other adjustments to home
market price.
In order to calculate NV, the
petitioner made an adjustment for
differences in costs attributable to
differences in the physical
characteristics of the merchandise. See
Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
Mexico
U.S. Price
The petitioner provided two U.S.
prices based on average model-specific
retail prices obtained from a market
survey database. These prices were
adjusted to exclude the retailer markup,
as well as discounts and rebates, based
on the petitioner’s experience in and
knowledge of the market. Because the
Mexican producers sell refrigerators in
the United States through affiliated
resellers, the petitioner calculated
constructed export price (‘‘CEP’’) by
deducting international freight based on
CBP data and U.S. freight and selling
expenses based on the petitioner’s own
financial statements for its U.S.
operations related to bottom mount
refrigerators. See Mexico AD Initiation
Checklist.
Normal Value
The petitioner provided two home
market prices based on retail prices
available in Mexico. These prices were
adjusted to exclude the retailer markup,
as well as discounts and rebates, based
on the petitioner’s experience in and
knowledge of the market. The petitioner
calculated a net home market price by
deducting inland freight and selling
expenses based on the petitioner’s
financial statements for its operations in
Mexico related to refrigerator
production and sales.
In order to calculate NV, the
petitioner made an adjustment for
differences in costs attributable to
differences in the physical
characteristics of the merchandise. See
Mexico AD Initiation Checklist.
Sales-Below-Cost Allegations
The petitioner provided information
demonstrating reasonable grounds to
believe or suspect that sales of bottom
mount refrigerators in the Korean and
Mexican markets were made at prices
below the fully-absorbed cost of
production (‘‘COP’’), within the meaning
of section 773(b) of the Act, and
requested that the Department conduct
a country-wide sales-below-cost
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23283
investigation. The Statement of
Administrative Action (‘‘SAA’’),
submitted to the Congress in connection
with the interpretation and application
of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act
(‘‘URAA’’), states that an allegation of
sales below COP need not be specific to
individual exporters or producers. See
SAA, URAA, H. Doc. 316, Vol. 1, 103d
Cong. (1994) at 833. The SAA, at 833,
states that ‘‘Commerce will consider
allegations of below-cost sales in the
aggregate for a foreign country, just as
Commerce currently considers
allegations of sales at less than fair value
on a country-wide basis for purposes of
initiating an antidumping
investigation.’’
Further, the SAA provides that
section 773(b)(2)(A) of the Act retains
the requirement that the Department
have ‘‘reasonable grounds to believe or
suspect’’ that below-cost sales have
occurred before initiating such an
investigation. See id. Reasonable
grounds exist when an interested party
provides specific factual information on
costs and prices, observed or
constructed, indicating that sales in the
foreign market in question are at belowcost prices.
Korea
Cost of Production
Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the
Act, COP consists of the cost of
manufacturing (‘‘COM’’); selling, general
and administrative (‘‘SG&A’’) expenses;
financial expenses; and packing
expenses. The petitioner relied on its
own production experience to calculate
the raw material, packing, and freight
costs included in the calculation of
COM. The petitioner adjusted these
inputs to account for known differences
in weights and technologies between the
petitioner’s U.S. bottom mount
refrigerator models and those of the
Korean producers’ bottom mount
refrigerator models sold in the
comparison market and the United
States. Inbound freight was calculated
based on the petitioner’s own
experience adjusted for differences in
weight between the bottom mount
refrigerator models used to calculate
COP/constructed value (‘‘CV’’) and the
Korean models.
The petitioner relied on its own labor
costs, adjusted for known differences
between the U.S. and Korean hourly
compensation rates for electrical
equipment, appliance, and component
manufacturing in 2007, as reported by
the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The
petitioner relied on its own experience
to determine the per-unit factory
overhead costs (exclusive of labor)
E:\FR\FM\26APN1.SGM
26APN1
23284
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2011 / Notices
associated with the production of
bottom mount refrigerators.
The petitioner stated that the bottom
mount refrigerator manufacturing
processes in Korea are very similar to its
own manufacturing processes, and
therefore it is reasonable to estimate the
Korean producers’ usage and factory
overhead rates based on the usage and
factory overhead rates experienced by a
U.S. bottom mount refrigerator
producer. The petitioner also asserted
that the use of Korean import data
results in aberrationally higher
weighted-average raw material and
packing costs in comparison to the
petitioner’s own raw material and
packing costs. Therefore, the reliance on
the petitioner’s own raw material and
packing costs for purposes of calculating
COP is conservative.
To value SG&A and financial expense
rates, the petitioner relied on the fiscal
year 2009 financial statements of two
Korean producers of bottom mount
refrigerators. See Korea AD Initiation
Checklist for further discussion.
Based upon a comparison of the
prices of the foreign like product in the
home market to the calculated COP of
the most comparable product, we find
reasonable grounds to believe or suspect
that sales of the foreign like product
were made below the COP, within the
meaning of section 773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the
Act. Accordingly, the Department is
initiating a country-wide cost
investigation for Korea.
Normal Value Based on Constructed
Value
Because it alleged sales below cost for
Korea, pursuant to sections 773(a)(4),
773(b) and 773(e) of the Act, the
petitioner calculated NV based on CV.
The petitioner calculated CV using the
same average COM, SG&A, financial and
packing figures used to compute the
COP. The petitioner did not include in
the CV calculation an amount for profit.
See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the
petitioner, there is reason to believe that
imports of bottom mount refrigerators
from Korea are being, or are likely to be,
sold in the United States at less than fair
value. Based on a comparison of U.S.
Price to home market price, as discussed
above, the estimated dumping margin is
61.82. Based on a comparison of U.S.
price to CV, as discussed above, the
estimated dumping margin is 34.16
percent. See id.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:09 Apr 25, 2011
Jkt 223001
initiating a country-wide cost
investigation for Mexico.
Mexico
Cost of Production
Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the
Act, COP consists of the COM; SG&A
expenses; financial expenses; and
packing expenses. The petitioner relied
on its own production experience to
calculate the quantity of the raw
material and packing inputs, as well as
the freight costs included in the
calculation of COM. The petitioner
adjusted the value of the raw material
and packing inputs using the ratio of
prices paid in Mexico by the bottom
mount refrigerator producers to its own
prices. The petitioner further adjusted
these input values to account for known
differences in weights and technologies
between the petitioner’s U.S. bottom
mount refrigerator models used for
purposes of calculating COP and CV and
the Mexican bottom mount refrigerator
models sold in the comparison market
and the United States. Inbound freight
was calculated based on the petitioner’s
own experience adjusted for differences
in weight between the bottom mount
refrigerator models used to calculate
COP/CV and the Mexican models.
The petitioner relied on its own labor
costs, adjusted for known differences
between the U.S. and Mexican hourly
compensation rates for electrical
equipment, appliance, and component
manufacturing in 2007, as reported by
the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The
petitioner relied on its own experience
to determine the per-unit factory
overhead costs (exclusive of labor)
associated with the production of
bottom mount refrigerators.
The petitioner stated that the bottom
mount refrigerator manufacturing
process in Mexico is very similar to its
own manufacturing process, and
therefore it is reasonable to estimate the
Mexican producers’ usage and factory
overhead rates based on the usage and
factory overhead rates experienced by a
U.S. bottom mount refrigerator
producer.
To value general and administrative
(G&A) expenses, the petitioner relied on
the 2010 financial statements of its
Mexican subsidiary. The petitioner
assumed a financial expense of zero. See
the Mexico AD Initiation Checklist for
further discussion.
Based upon a comparison of the
prices of the foreign like product in the
home market to the calculated COP of
the most comparable product, we find
reasonable grounds to believe or suspect
that sales of the foreign like product
were made below the COP, within the
meaning of section 773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the
Act. Accordingly, the Department is
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Normal Value Based on Constructed
Value
Because it alleged sales below cost for
Mexico, pursuant to sections 773(a)(4),
773(b) and 773(e) of the Act, the
petitioner calculated NV based on CV.
The petitioner calculated CV using the
same average COM, G&A, financial and
packing figures used to compute the
COP. The petitioner also included an
amount for profit in the CV calculation,
based upon the petitioner’s own
financial statements related to
production and sales of refrigerators in
Mexico. See Mexico AD Initiation
Checklist.
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the
petitioner, there is reason to believe that
imports of bottom mount refrigerators
from Mexico are being, or are likely to
be, sold in the United States at less than
fair value. Based on a comparison of
U.S. Price to home market price, as
discussed above, the estimated dumping
margin is 183.18 percent. Based on a
comparison of U.S. Price to CV, as
discussed above, the estimated dumping
margin is 23.10 percent. See id.
Initiation of Antidumping
Investigations
Based upon the examination of the
petitions on bottom mount refrigerators
from Korea and Mexico and other
information reasonably available to the
Department, the Department finds that
these petitions meet the requirements of
section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are
initiating antidumping duty
investigations to determine whether
imports of bottom mount refrigerators
from Korea and Mexico 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). See Withdrawal of the
Regulatory Provisions Governing
Targeted Dumping in Antidumping
Duty Investigations, 73 FR 74930
E:\FR\FM\26APN1.SGM
26APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2011 / Notices
(December 10, 2008). 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.’’ 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
country-specific preliminary
determination.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Respondent Selection
Although the Department normally
relies on import data from CBP to select
respondents in antidumping duty
investigations involving marketeconomy countries, the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) categories under which bottom
mount refrigerators may be entered are
basket categories which include many
other types of refrigerators and freezers.
Therefore, the CBP data cannot be
isolated to identify imports of subject
merchandise during the POI.
Accordingly, the Department must rely
on an alternate methodology for
respondent selection, as described
below.
Korea
The petition names two companies as
producers and/or exporters in Korea of
bottom mount refrigerators: Samsung
Electronics Co., Ltd. (‘‘Samsung’’) and
LG Electronics, Inc. (‘‘LG’’). The petition
identifies these two companies as
accounting for virtually all of the
imports of bottom mount refrigerators
from Korea. Moreover, we know of no
further exporters or producers of the
subject merchandise because, as noted
above, the CBP data does not provide for
the isolation of such sales from the
general ‘‘refrigerator-freezer’’ or
‘‘household refrigerator’’ basket HTSUS
categories. Accordingly, the Department
is selecting Samsung and LG as
mandatory respondents in this
investigation pursuant to section
777A(c)(1) of the Act. We will consider
comments from interested parties on
this respondent selection. Parties
wishing to comment must do so within
five days of the publication of this
notice in the Federal Register.
Mexico
The CBP data is not useable for
respondent selection purposes for the
reason stated above. The petition names
four Mexican producers/exporters of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:09 Apr 25, 2011
Jkt 223001
subject merchandise. Due to limited
resources, it may not be practicable to
make individual weighted-average
dumping margin determinations for
each of them. The Department,
therefore, will request quantity and
value information from the exporters
and producers of bottom mount
refrigerators that are identified in the
petition. In the event the Department
decides to limit the number of
mandatory respondents, the quantity
and value data received from Mexican
exporters and producers will be used as
the basis to select the mandatory
respondents.
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section
732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version
of the petitions and amendments thereto
have been provided to the
representatives of the Governments of
Korea and Mexico. To the extent
practicable, we will attempt to provide
a copy of the public version of the
petitions to each exporter named in the
petition, as provided under 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 Determinations by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine,
within 45 days after the date on which
the petition was filed, whether there is
a reasonable indication that imports of
bottom mount refrigerators from Korea
and Mexico materially injure, or
threaten material injury to, a U.S.
industry. A negative ITC determination
with respect to any country would
result in the termination of the
investigation with respect to that
country; see section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
Otherwise, these investigations will
proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit
applications for disclosure under
administrative protective orders in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On
January 22, 2008, the Department
published Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Documents Submission Procedures;
APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January
22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate
in these investigations should ensure
that they meet the requirements of these
procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of
appearance as discussed at 19 CFR
351.103(d)).
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23285
Any party submitting factual
information in an AD/CVD proceeding
must certify to the accuracy and
completeness of that information. See
section 782(b) of the Act. Parties are
hereby reminded that revised
certification requirements are in effect
for company/government officials as
well as their representatives in all
segments of any AD/CVD proceedings
initiated on or after March 14, 2011. See
Certification of Factual Information to
Import Administration During
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings: Interim Final Rule, 76 FR
7491 (February 10, 2011) (Interim Final
Rule) amending 19 CFR 351.303(g)(1)
and (2). The formats for the revised
certifications are provided at the end of
the Interim Final Rule. The Department
intends to reject factual submissions in
any proceeding segments initiated on or
after March 14, 2011, if the submitting
party does not comply with the revised
certification requirements.
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act and
19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: April 19, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigations
The products covered by the
investigations are all bottom mount
combination refrigerator-freezers and
certain assemblies thereof from Korea
and Mexico. For purposes of the
investigations, the term ‘‘bottom mount
combination refrigerator-freezers’’
denotes freestanding or built-in cabinets
that have an integral source of
refrigeration using compression
technology, with all of the following
characteristics:
• The cabinet contains at least two
interior storage compartments accessible
through one or more separate external
doors or drawers or a combination
thereof;
• The upper-most interior storage
compartment(s) that is accessible
through an external door or drawer is
either a refrigerator compartment or
convertible compartment, but is not a
freezer compartment;1 and
• There is at least one freezer or
convertible compartment that is
mounted below the upper-most interior
storage compartment(s).
For purposes of the investigations, a
refrigerator compartment is capable of
1 The existence of an interior sub-compartment
for ice-making in the upper-most storage
compartment does not render the upper-most
storage compartment a freezer compartment.
E:\FR\FM\26APN1.SGM
26APN1
23286
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2011 / Notices
storing food at temperatures above 32
degrees F (0 degrees C), a freezer
compartment is capable of storing food
at temperatures at or below 32 degrees
F (0 degrees C), and a convertible
compartment is capable of operating as
either a refrigerator compartment or a
freezer compartment, as defined above.
Also covered are certain assemblies
used in bottom mount combination
refrigerator-freezers, namely: (1) Any
assembled cabinets designed for use in
bottom mount combination refrigeratorfreezers that incorporate, at a minimum:
(a) an external metal shell, (b) a back
panel, (c) a deck, (d) an interior plastic
liner, (e) wiring, and (f) insulation; (2)
any assembled external doors designed
for use in bottom mount combination
refrigerator-freezers that incorporate, at
a minimum: (a) an external metal shell,
(b) an interior plastic liner, and (c)
insulation; and (3) any assembled
external drawers designed for use in
bottom mount combination refrigeratorfreezers that incorporate, at a minimum:
(a) an external metal shell, (b) an
interior plastic liner, and (c) insulation.
The products subject to the
investigations are currently classifiable
under subheadings 8418.10.0010,
8418.10.0020, 8418.10.0030, and
8418.10.0040 of the Harmonized Tariff
System of the United States (HTSUS).
Products subject to these investigations
may also enter under HTSUS
subheadings 8418.21.0010,
8418.21.0020, 8418.21.0030,
8418.21.0090, and 8418.99.4000,
8418.99.8050, and 8418.99.8060.
Although the HTSUS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description of the
merchandise subject to this scope is
dispositive.
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA), Article 1904 Binational Panel
Reviews: Notice of Completion of
Panel Review
NAFTA Secretariat, United
States Section, International Trade
Administration, Department of
Commerce.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
Notice of Completion of Panel
Review of the final remand
determination made by the United
States International Trade Commission,
in the matter of Light-Walled
Rectangular Pipe and Tube from
16:09 Apr 25, 2011
Jkt 223001
LLC (collectively Bridgestone), a
domestic interested party in the original
investigation. Based on our analysis of
the comments, we have determined that
no changes should be made in these
final results. We determine that
subsidies are being provided to
Starbright for the production and export
of OTR Tires from the PRC. The subsidy
rate is set forth in the Final Results of
Review section below.
DATES: Effective Date: April 26, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andrew Huston or Jun Jack Zhao, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 6, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–4261 and (202)
482–1396, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
[FR Doc. 2011–10005 Filed 4–25–11; 8:45 am]
The following events have occurred
since the publication of the preliminary
results of this review. See New
Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From the
People’s Republic of China: Preliminary
Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review, 75 FR 64268
(October 19, 2010) (Preliminary Results).
On November 18, 2010, the Department
received case briefs from Starbright and
Titan. On November 23, 2010, the
Department received rebuttal briefs from
Starbright, Titan and Bridgestone.
BILLING CODE 3510–GT–P
Period of Review
Dated: April 21, 2011.
Valerie Dees,
United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–570–913]
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) has conducted an
administrative review of Hebei
Starbright Tire Co., Ltd. (Starbright)
under the countervailing duty order on
certain new pneumatic off-the-road tires
(OTR Tires) from the People’s Republic
of China (PRC) for the period December
17, 2007, through December 31, 2008.
Following the preliminary results, we
received comments from Starbright,
Titan Tire Corporation (Titan), the
petitioner in the original investigation,
and Bridgestone Americas, Inc. and
Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations,
AGENCY:
International Trade Administration
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Pursuant to the Order of the
Binational Panel dated March 10, 2011,
affirming the final remand
determination described above, the
panel review was completed on April
21, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Valerie Dees, United States Secretary,
NAFTA Secretariat, Suite 2061, 14th
and Constitution Avenue, Washington,
DC 20230, (202) 482–5438.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March
10, 2011, the Binational Panel issued an
order, which affirmed the final remand
determination of the United States
International Trade Commission
concerning Light-Walled Rectangular
Pipe and Tube from Mexico. The
Secretariat was instructed to issue a
Notice of Completion of Panel Review
on the 31st day following the issuance
of the Notice of Final Panel Action, if
no request for an Extraordinary
Challenge Committee was filed. No such
request was filed. Therefore, on the
basis of the Panel Order and Rule 80 of
the Article 1904 Panel Rules, the Panel
Review was completed and the panelists
were discharged from their duties
effective April 21, 2011.
SUMMARY:
New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires
From the People’s Republic of China:
Final Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review
[FR Doc. 2011–10048 Filed 4–25–11; 8:45 am]
ACTION:
Mexico, Secretariat File No. USA–MEX–
2008–1904–04.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The period of review (POR) for which
we are measuring subsidies is December
17, 2007, through December 31, 2008.
Since there are only 15 days of 2007
entries covered in the review, the
Department preliminarily decided to
calculate a single rate for subsidies
received in calendar year 2008, and
apply this rate to entries made from
December 17, 2007, through December
31, 2007, in addition to all of 2008, for
assessment purposes. See Preliminary
Results, 75 FR at 64271. Since we did
not receive any comments on this
approach, we are not changing it in
these final results.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the scope of
the order are new pneumatic tires
designed for off-the-road (OTR) and offhighway use, subject to exceptions
identified below. Certain OTR tires are
generally designed, manufactured and
offered for sale for use on off-road or offhighway surfaces, including but not
limited to, agricultural fields, forests,
construction sites, factory and
warehouse interiors, airport tarmacs,
E:\FR\FM\26APN1.SGM
26APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 80 (Tuesday, April 26, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23281-23286]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10048]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-580-865, A-201-839]
Bottom Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers From the Republic
of Korea and Mexico: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce
DATES: Effective Date: April 26, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Goldberger (Republic of Korea)
or Henry Almond (Mexico), AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20230; telephone: (202) 482-4136 or (202) 482-0049, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petitions
On March 30, 2011, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'')
received antidumping duty petitions concerning imports of bottom mount
combination refrigerator-freezers (``bottom mount refrigerators'') from
the Republic of Korea (``Korea'') and Mexico filed in proper form by
Whirlpool Corporation (``the petitioner''), a domestic producer of
bottom mount refrigerators. See Bottom Mount Combination Refrigerator-
Freezers from the Republic of Korea and Mexico; Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Petitions (collectively, ``the petitions''). On
April 5 and 12, 2011, the Department issued requests for additional
information and clarification of certain areas of the antidumping
petitions on Korea and Mexico. Based on the Department's request, the
petitioner filed supplements to the petitions on Korea and Mexico on
April 11 and 14, 2011.
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (``the Act''), the petitioner alleges that imports of bottom
mount refrigerators from Korea and Mexico 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 the petitioner filed these petitions on
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested
party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and it has
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the
investigations that it is requesting the Department to initiate (see
``Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions'' below).
Scope of Investigations
The products covered by these investigations are bottom mount
refrigerators from Korea and Mexico. For a full description of the
scope of the investigations, please see the ``Scope of
Investigations,'' in Appendix I of this notice.
Comments on Scope of Investigations
During our review of the petitions, we discussed the scope with the
petitioner 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 May 9, 2011, 20 calendar days from
the date of signature of this notice. All comments must be filed on the
records of the Korea and Mexico antidumping duty investigations as well
as the Korea countervailing duty investigation. 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 bottom mount refrigerators 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 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 bottom mount refrigerators, 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
[[Page 23282]]
questionnaires, we must receive comments at the above-referenced
address by May 9, 2011. Additionally, rebuttal comments must be
received by May 16, 2011. All comments must be filed on the records of
both the Korea and Mexico antidumping duty investigations.
Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions
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 (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. 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 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, the petitioner does not
offer a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of
the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information submitted
on the record, we have determined that bottom mount refrigerators
constitute a single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry
support in terms of that domestic like product. For a discussion of the
domestic like product analysis in this case, see Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Bottom Mount Combination
Refrigerator-Freezers from Korea (``Korea AD Initiation Checklist'')
and Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Bottom Mount
Combination Refrigerator-Freezers from Mexico (``Mexico AD Initiation
Checklist''), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the
Petitions Covering Bottom Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers, on
file in the Central Records Unit (``CRU''), Room 7046 of the main
Department of Commerce building.
In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data
contained in the petitions with reference to the domestic like product
as defined in the ``Scope of Investigations'' section above. To
establish industry support, the petitioner provided its production
volume of the domestic like product in 2010, and compared it to the
estimated total production of the domestic like product for the entire
domestic industry. See Volume I of the petitions, at 8-11, Volume 2A of
the petitions, at Exhibits 4 and 5, and Supplement to the AD/CVD
petitions, dated April 11, 2011 (``Supplement to the AD/CVD
petitions'') at 2-4 and Exhibits S-1, S-2, and S-3. The petitioner
estimated 2010 production of the domestic like product by non-
petitioning companies based on its knowledge of its competitors and
their production capacity. We have relied upon data the petitioner
provided for purposes of measuring industry support. For further
discussion, see Korea AD Initiation Checklist and Mexico AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
Our review of the data provided in the petitions, supplemental
submissions, and other information readily available to the Department
indicates that the petitioner has established industry support. First,
the petitions 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). See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act, Korea AD Initiation
Checklist and Mexico AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 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. See Korea AD Initiation Checklist and Mexico AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II. 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 petitions 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 petitions.
Accordingly, the Department determines that the petitions were filed on
behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1)
of the Act. See id.
The Department finds that the petitioner filed the petitions on
behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has demonstrated
sufficient industry support with respect to the antidumping duty
investigations that it is requesting the Department initiate. See id.
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges 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, the
petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.
The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share,
[[Page 23283]]
reduced shipments, underselling and price depression or suppression,
decline in financial performance, lost sales and revenue, and increase
in the volume of imports and import penetration. See Volume I of the
petitions, at 114-138, Volume 2A of the petitions, at Exhibit 6, Volume
2B of the petitions, at Exhibits 35 and 38-42, and Supplement to the
AD/CVD petitions, at 5-10 and Exhibits S-1, S-2, S-4, and S-5. 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. See Korea
AD Initiation Checklist and Mexico AD Initiation Checklists, at
Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury
and Causation for the Petitions Covering Bottom Mount Combination
Refrigerator-Freezers from the Republic of Korea and Mexico.
Period of Investigations
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.204(b), because these petitions were
filed on March 30, 2011, the period of investigation (``POI'') is
January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2010, for both Korea and Mexico.
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 investigations with respect to Korea and Mexico. The sources
of, and adjustments to, the data relating to U.S. price and NV are
discussed in greater detail in the Korea AD Initiation Checklist and
the Mexico AD Initiation Checklist.
Korea
U.S. Price
The petitioner provided two U.S. prices based on average model-
specific retail prices obtained from a market survey database. These
prices were adjusted to exclude the retailer markup, as well as
discounts and rebates, based on the petitioner's experience in and
knowledge of the market. The petitioner deducted international freight
based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') data. It made no
other adjustments to U.S. price. See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
Normal Value
The petitioner provided two home market prices based on a survey of
retail prices in Korea. These prices were adjusted to exclude the
retailer markup, as well as discounts and rebates, based on the
petitioner's experience in and knowledge of the market. The petitioner
further adjusted home market price by deducting Korean VAT and other
taxes. It made no other adjustments to home market price.
In order to calculate NV, the petitioner made an adjustment for
differences in costs attributable to differences in the physical
characteristics of the merchandise. See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
Mexico
U.S. Price
The petitioner provided two U.S. prices based on average model-
specific retail prices obtained from a market survey database. These
prices were adjusted to exclude the retailer markup, as well as
discounts and rebates, based on the petitioner's experience in and
knowledge of the market. Because the Mexican producers sell
refrigerators in the United States through affiliated resellers, the
petitioner calculated constructed export price (``CEP'') by deducting
international freight based on CBP data and U.S. freight and selling
expenses based on the petitioner's own financial statements for its
U.S. operations related to bottom mount refrigerators. See Mexico AD
Initiation Checklist.
Normal Value
The petitioner provided two home market prices based on retail
prices available in Mexico. These prices were adjusted to exclude the
retailer markup, as well as discounts and rebates, based on the
petitioner's experience in and knowledge of the market. The petitioner
calculated a net home market price by deducting inland freight and
selling expenses based on the petitioner's financial statements for its
operations in Mexico related to refrigerator production and sales.
In order to calculate NV, the petitioner made an adjustment for
differences in costs attributable to differences in the physical
characteristics of the merchandise. See Mexico AD Initiation Checklist.
Sales-Below-Cost Allegations
The petitioner provided information demonstrating reasonable
grounds to believe or suspect that sales of bottom mount refrigerators
in the Korean and Mexican markets were made at prices below the fully-
absorbed cost of production (``COP''), within the meaning of section
773(b) of the Act, and requested that the Department conduct a country-
wide sales-below-cost investigation. The Statement of Administrative
Action (``SAA''), submitted to the Congress in connection with the
interpretation and application of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act
(``URAA''), states that an allegation of sales below COP need not be
specific to individual exporters or producers. See SAA, URAA, H. Doc.
316, Vol. 1, 103d Cong. (1994) at 833. The SAA, at 833, states that
``Commerce will consider allegations of below-cost sales in the
aggregate for a foreign country, just as Commerce currently considers
allegations of sales at less than fair value on a country-wide basis
for purposes of initiating an antidumping investigation.''
Further, the SAA provides that section 773(b)(2)(A) of the Act
retains the requirement that the Department have ``reasonable grounds
to believe or suspect'' that below-cost sales have occurred before
initiating such an investigation. See id. Reasonable grounds exist when
an interested party provides specific factual information on costs and
prices, observed or constructed, indicating that sales in the foreign
market in question are at below-cost prices.
Korea
Cost of Production
Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists of the cost
of manufacturing (``COM''); selling, general and administrative
(``SG&A'') expenses; financial expenses; and packing expenses. The
petitioner relied on its own production experience to calculate the raw
material, packing, and freight costs included in the calculation of
COM. The petitioner adjusted these inputs to account for known
differences in weights and technologies between the petitioner's U.S.
bottom mount refrigerator models and those of the Korean producers'
bottom mount refrigerator models sold in the comparison market and the
United States. Inbound freight was calculated based on the petitioner's
own experience adjusted for differences in weight between the bottom
mount refrigerator models used to calculate COP/constructed value
(``CV'') and the Korean models.
The petitioner relied on its own labor costs, adjusted for known
differences between the U.S. and Korean hourly compensation rates for
electrical equipment, appliance, and component manufacturing in 2007,
as reported by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The petitioner
relied on its own experience to determine the per-unit factory overhead
costs (exclusive of labor)
[[Page 23284]]
associated with the production of bottom mount refrigerators.
The petitioner stated that the bottom mount refrigerator
manufacturing processes in Korea are very similar to its own
manufacturing processes, and therefore it is reasonable to estimate the
Korean producers' usage and factory overhead rates based on the usage
and factory overhead rates experienced by a U.S. bottom mount
refrigerator producer. The petitioner also asserted that the use of
Korean import data results in aberrationally higher weighted-average
raw material and packing costs in comparison to the petitioner's own
raw material and packing costs. Therefore, the reliance on the
petitioner's own raw material and packing costs for purposes of
calculating COP is conservative.
To value SG&A and financial expense rates, the petitioner relied on
the fiscal year 2009 financial statements of two Korean producers of
bottom mount refrigerators. See Korea AD Initiation Checklist for
further discussion.
Based upon a comparison of the prices of the foreign like product
in the home market to the calculated COP of the most comparable
product, we find reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of
the foreign like product were made below the COP, within the meaning of
section 773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Accordingly, the Department is
initiating a country-wide cost investigation for Korea.
Normal Value Based on Constructed Value
Because it alleged sales below cost for Korea, pursuant to sections
773(a)(4), 773(b) and 773(e) of the Act, the petitioner calculated NV
based on CV. The petitioner calculated CV using the same average COM,
SG&A, financial and packing figures used to compute the COP. The
petitioner did not include in the CV calculation an amount for profit.
See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to
believe that imports of bottom mount refrigerators from Korea are
being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair
value. Based on a comparison of U.S. Price to home market price, as
discussed above, the estimated dumping margin is 61.82. Based on a
comparison of U.S. price to CV, as discussed above, the estimated
dumping margin is 34.16 percent. See id.
Mexico
Cost of Production
Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists of the COM;
SG&A expenses; financial expenses; and packing expenses. The petitioner
relied on its own production experience to calculate the quantity of
the raw material and packing inputs, as well as the freight costs
included in the calculation of COM. The petitioner adjusted the value
of the raw material and packing inputs using the ratio of prices paid
in Mexico by the bottom mount refrigerator producers to its own prices.
The petitioner further adjusted these input values to account for known
differences in weights and technologies between the petitioner's U.S.
bottom mount refrigerator models used for purposes of calculating COP
and CV and the Mexican bottom mount refrigerator models sold in the
comparison market and the United States. Inbound freight was calculated
based on the petitioner's own experience adjusted for differences in
weight between the bottom mount refrigerator models used to calculate
COP/CV and the Mexican models.
The petitioner relied on its own labor costs, adjusted for known
differences between the U.S. and Mexican hourly compensation rates for
electrical equipment, appliance, and component manufacturing in 2007,
as reported by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The petitioner
relied on its own experience to determine the per-unit factory overhead
costs (exclusive of labor) associated with the production of bottom
mount refrigerators.
The petitioner stated that the bottom mount refrigerator
manufacturing process in Mexico is very similar to its own
manufacturing process, and therefore it is reasonable to estimate the
Mexican producers' usage and factory overhead rates based on the usage
and factory overhead rates experienced by a U.S. bottom mount
refrigerator producer.
To value general and administrative (G&A) expenses, the petitioner
relied on the 2010 financial statements of its Mexican subsidiary. The
petitioner assumed a financial expense of zero. See the Mexico AD
Initiation Checklist for further discussion.
Based upon a comparison of the prices of the foreign like product
in the home market to the calculated COP of the most comparable
product, we find reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of
the foreign like product were made below the COP, within the meaning of
section 773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Accordingly, the Department is
initiating a country-wide cost investigation for Mexico.
Normal Value Based on Constructed Value
Because it alleged sales below cost for Mexico, pursuant to
sections 773(a)(4), 773(b) and 773(e) of the Act, the petitioner
calculated NV based on CV. The petitioner calculated CV using the same
average COM, G&A, financial and packing figures used to compute the
COP. The petitioner also included an amount for profit in the CV
calculation, based upon the petitioner's own financial statements
related to production and sales of refrigerators in Mexico. See Mexico
AD Initiation Checklist.
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to
believe that imports of bottom mount refrigerators from Mexico are
being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair
value. Based on a comparison of U.S. Price to home market price, as
discussed above, the estimated dumping margin is 183.18 percent. Based
on a comparison of U.S. Price to CV, as discussed above, the estimated
dumping margin is 23.10 percent. See id.
Initiation of Antidumping Investigations
Based upon the examination of the petitions on bottom mount
refrigerators from Korea and Mexico and other information reasonably
available to the Department, the Department finds that these petitions
meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are
initiating antidumping duty investigations to determine whether imports
of bottom mount refrigerators from Korea and Mexico 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). See Withdrawal of the Regulatory Provisions Governing
Targeted Dumping in Antidumping Duty Investigations, 73 FR 74930
[[Page 23285]]
(December 10, 2008). 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.'' 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 country-specific preliminary determination.
Respondent Selection
Although the Department normally relies on import data from CBP to
select respondents in antidumping duty investigations involving market-
economy countries, the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) categories under which bottom mount refrigerators may be
entered are basket categories which include many other types of
refrigerators and freezers. Therefore, the CBP data cannot be isolated
to identify imports of subject merchandise during the POI. Accordingly,
the Department must rely on an alternate methodology for respondent
selection, as described below.
Korea
The petition names two companies as producers and/or exporters in
Korea of bottom mount refrigerators: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
(``Samsung'') and LG Electronics, Inc. (``LG''). The petition
identifies these two companies as accounting for virtually all of the
imports of bottom mount refrigerators from Korea. Moreover, we know of
no further exporters or producers of the subject merchandise because,
as noted above, the CBP data does not provide for the isolation of such
sales from the general ``refrigerator-freezer'' or ``household
refrigerator'' basket HTSUS categories. Accordingly, the Department is
selecting Samsung and LG as mandatory respondents in this investigation
pursuant to section 777A(c)(1) of the Act. We will consider comments
from interested parties on this respondent selection. Parties wishing
to comment must do so within five days of the publication of this
notice in the Federal Register.
Mexico
The CBP data is not useable for respondent selection purposes for
the reason stated above. The petition names four Mexican producers/
exporters of the subject merchandise. Due to limited resources, it may
not be practicable to make individual weighted-average dumping margin
determinations for each of them. The Department, therefore, will
request quantity and value information from the exporters and producers
of bottom mount refrigerators that are identified in the petition. In
the event the Department decides to limit the number of mandatory
respondents, the quantity and value data received from Mexican
exporters and producers will be used as the basis to select the
mandatory respondents.
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the petitions and
amendments thereto have been provided to the representatives of the
Governments of Korea and Mexico. To the extent practicable, we will
attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the petitions to
each exporter named in the petition, as provided under 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 Determinations by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date
on which the petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable
indication that imports of bottom mount refrigerators from Korea and
Mexico materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S.
industry. A negative ITC determination with respect to any country
would result in the termination of the investigation with respect to
that country; see section 703(a)(1) of the Act. Otherwise, these
investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time
limits.
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
administrative protective orders in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On
January 22, 2008, the Department published Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents Submission Procedures; APO
Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008). Parties wishing to
participate in these investigations should ensure that they meet the
requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of
appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
Any party submitting factual information in an AD/CVD proceeding
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information. See
section 782(b) of the Act. Parties are hereby reminded that revised
certification requirements are in effect for company/government
officials as well as their representatives in all segments of any AD/
CVD proceedings initiated on or after March 14, 2011. See Certification
of Factual Information to Import Administration During Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Interim Final Rule, 76 FR 7491
(February 10, 2011) (Interim Final Rule) amending 19 CFR 351.303(g)(1)
and (2). The formats for the revised certifications are provided at the
end of the Interim Final Rule. The Department intends to reject factual
submissions in any proceeding segments initiated on or after March 14,
2011, if the submitting party does not comply with the revised
certification requirements.
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: April 19, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigations
The products covered by the investigations are all bottom mount
combination refrigerator-freezers and certain assemblies thereof from
Korea and Mexico. For purposes of the investigations, the term ``bottom
mount combination refrigerator-freezers'' denotes freestanding or
built-in cabinets that have an integral source of refrigeration using
compression technology, with all of the following characteristics:
The cabinet contains at least two interior storage
compartments accessible through one or more separate external doors or
drawers or a combination thereof;
The upper-most interior storage compartment(s) that is
accessible through an external door or drawer is either a refrigerator
compartment or convertible compartment, but is not a freezer
compartment;\1\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The existence of an interior sub-compartment for ice-making
in the upper-most storage compartment does not render the upper-most
storage compartment a freezer compartment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is at least one freezer or convertible compartment
that is mounted below the upper-most interior storage compartment(s).
For purposes of the investigations, a refrigerator compartment is
capable of
[[Page 23286]]
storing food at temperatures above 32 degrees F (0 degrees C), a
freezer compartment is capable of storing food at temperatures at or
below 32 degrees F (0 degrees C), and a convertible compartment is
capable of operating as either a refrigerator compartment or a freezer
compartment, as defined above.
Also covered are certain assemblies used in bottom mount
combination refrigerator-freezers, namely: (1) Any assembled cabinets
designed for use in bottom mount combination refrigerator-freezers that
incorporate, at a minimum: (a) an external metal shell, (b) a back
panel, (c) a deck, (d) an interior plastic liner, (e) wiring, and (f)
insulation; (2) any assembled external doors designed for use in bottom
mount combination refrigerator-freezers that incorporate, at a minimum:
(a) an external metal shell, (b) an interior plastic liner, and (c)
insulation; and (3) any assembled external drawers designed for use in
bottom mount combination refrigerator-freezers that incorporate, at a
minimum: (a) an external metal shell, (b) an interior plastic liner,
and (c) insulation.
The products subject to the investigations are currently
classifiable under subheadings 8418.10.0010, 8418.10.0020,
8418.10.0030, and 8418.10.0040 of the Harmonized Tariff System of the
United States (HTSUS). Products subject to these investigations may
also enter under HTSUS subheadings 8418.21.0010, 8418.21.0020,
8418.21.0030, 8418.21.0090, and 8418.99.4000, 8418.99.8050, and
8418.99.8060. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the
merchandise subject to this scope is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2011-10048 Filed 4-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
