Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the People's Republic of China: Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order, 66895-66899 [2011-27972]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 209 / Friday, October 28, 2011 / Notices result of this transition, the scope language we used in the 1991 Federal Register notice is slightly different from the scope language of the original final determination and antidumping duty order. Until January 1, 1989, such merchandise was classifiable under item numbers 610.3231, 610.3234, 610.3241, 610.3242, 610.3243, 610.3252, 610.3254, 610.3256, 610.3258, and 610.4925 of the TSUSA. This merchandise is currently classifiable under HTS item numbers 7306.30.1000, 7306.30.5025, 7306.30.5032, 7306.30.5040, 7306.30.5055, 7306.30.5085, 7306.30.5090. As with the TSUSA numbers, the HTS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written product description remains dispositive.3 4 Turkey—Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube (A–489–501) sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES The products covered by this order include circular welded non-alloy steel pipes and tubes, of circular crosssection, not more than 406.4 millimeters (16 inches) in outside diameter, regardless of wall thickness, surface finish (black, or galvanized, painted), or end finish (plain end, beveled end, threaded and coupled). Those pipes and tubes are generally known as standard pipe, though they may also be called structural or mechanical tubing in certain applications. Standard pipes and tubes are intended for the low pressure conveyance of water, steam, natural gas, air, and other liquids and gases in plumbing and heating systems, air conditioner units, automatic sprinkler systems, and other related uses. Standard pipe may also be used for light load-bearing and mechanical applications, such as for fence tubing, and for protection of electrical wiring, such as conduit shells. The scope is not limited to standard pipe and fence tubing, or those types of mechanical and structural pipe that are used in standard pipe applications. All carbon steel pipes and tubes within the physical description outlined above are included in the scope of this order, except for line pipe, oil country tubular goods, boiler tubing, cold-drawn or cold-rolled mechanical tubing, pipe and tube hollows for redraws, finished scaffolding, and finished rigid conduit. 3 Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 64696 (October 20, 2010). 4 There was one scope ruling in which British Standard light pipe 387/67, Class A–1 was found to be within the scope of the order per remand. See Scope Rulings, 58 FR 27542, (May 10, 1993). VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:56 Oct 27, 2011 Jkt 226001 Imports of these products are currently classifiable under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) subheadings: 7306.30.10.00, 7306.30.50.25, 7306.30.50.32, 7306.30.50.40, 7306.30.50.55, 7306.30.50.85, and 7306.30.50.90. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive.5 [FR Doc. 2011–27957 Filed 10–27–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–918] Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the People’s Republic of China: Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. AGENCY: The Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) continues to determine that steel wire garment hangers (‘‘garment hangers’’) exported by Angang Clothes Rack Manufacture Co., Ltd. (‘‘Angang’’) and Quyky Yanglei International Co., Ltd. (‘‘Quyky’’) are circumventing the antidumping duty order 1 on garment hangers from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’), pursuant to section 781(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). SUMMARY: DATES: Effective Date: October 28, 2011. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Gorelik, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–6905. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On May 10, 2011, the Department published in the Federal Register the affirmative preliminary determination that garment hangers exported by Angang and Quyky are circumventing the Order on garment hangers from the 5 Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube From Turkey: Notice of Final Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 64250.64251 (October 19, 2010). 1 See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People’s Republic of China, 73 FR 58111 (October 6, 2008) (‘‘Order’’). PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 66895 PRC, as provided in section 781(b) of the Act.2 On June 13, 2011, Petitioner 3 and Angang filed their case briefs. On June 20, 2011, Petitioner and Angang filed their rebuttal briefs. Quyky did not file either a case brief or rebuttal brief. Based on the timely filed request by Angang, the Department held a public hearing on June 28, 2011.4 On July 1, 2011, Angang filed a letter requesting the Department to strike portions of Petitioner’s rebuttal brief dated June 20, 2011, alleging untimely filed new factual information and arguments were included. Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order The merchandise that is subject to the order is steel wire garment hangers, fabricated from carbon steel wire, whether or not galvanized or painted, whether or not coated with latex or epoxy or similar gripping materials, and/or whether or not fashioned with paper covers or capes (with or without printing) and/or nonslip features such as saddles or tubes. These products may also be referred to by a commercial designation, such as shirt, suit, strut, caped, or latex (industrial) hangers. Specifically excluded from the scope of the order are wooden, plastic, and other garment hangers that are not made of steel wire. Also excluded from the scope of the order are chrome-plated steel wire garment hangers with a diameter of 3.4 mm or greater. The products subject to the order are currently classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) subheadings 7326.20.0020, 7323.99.9060 and 7323.99.9080. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise is dispositive. Scope of the Anti-Circumvention Inquiry The products covered by this inquiry are garment hangers, as described in the ‘‘Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order’’ section above, that are exported from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (‘‘Vietnam’’), but manufactured from 2 See Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People’s Republic of China: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order and Extension of Final Determination, 76 FR 27007 (May 10, 2011) (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’). 3 Petitioner is M&B Metal Products Co. 4 During the public hearing, the Department noted that Angang provided untimely new factual information within its presentation, which was stricken from the record within the hearing transcript. See Memorandum to the File from Irene Gorelik, regarding; ‘‘revised transcript of the public hearing,’’ dated July 19, 2011. E:\FR\FM\28OCN1.SGM 28OCN1 66896 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 209 / Friday, October 28, 2011 / Notices PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers and completed in Vietnam with PRC-origin, paper attachments and other direct materials such as latex or glue. While we acknowledge that Angang has repeatedly stated on the record that it also self-produces garment hangers from steel wire rod,5 the focus and intent of this proceeding is to determine whether the semi-finished hangers: (1) Are manufactured in the PRC; (2) are exported to Angang’s facility in Vietnam for completion (by adding PRC-origin paper attachments, such as tubes, PRCorigin latex or glue); 6 and (3) then are exported by Angang to the United States as Vietnamese-origin garment hangers constitutes circumvention of the Order under section 781(b) of the Act. Analysis of Comments Received sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES All issues raised in the postpreliminary comments by parties in this proceeding are addressed in the ‘‘Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, re: Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People’s Republic of China: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination of the AntiCircumvention Inquiry’’ (‘‘Decision Memorandum’’), dated concurrently with notice and hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which the parties raised and to which the Department responds in the Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as Appendix I. The Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Import Administration’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (‘‘IA ACCESS’’). Access to IA ACCESS is available in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://www.trade.gov/ ia/. The signed Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the 5 See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27008. See also Angang’s Questionnaire Response dated January 19, 2011, at 5; Angang’s Questionnaire Response dated February 1, 2011, at Exhibit 9; and Angang’s Comments dated December 22, 2010, at 2– 5. 6 Angang has reported that the direct materials applied to the PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers are also manufactured in, and supplied from, the PRC. See, e.g., Angang’s Questionnaire Response dated November 19, 2010, at Exhibit 5; Angang’s Questionnaire Response dated March 21, 2011, at 4. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:56 Oct 27, 2011 Jkt 226001 Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention For the final determination, we continue to rely on the statutory criteria that we considered in making our Preliminary Determination.7 Based on our review of the record evidence and our analysis of the comments received, the Department continues to find that Quyky’s and Angang’s Vietnamese exports of garment hangers produced from PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers constitute circumvention of the Order and are properly considered to be within the same class or kind of merchandise subject to the Order on garment hangers from the PRC. For a complete discussion of the Department’s analysis, see the Decision Memorandum. Quyky Facts Available Section 776(a) of the Act requires the Department to rely on facts otherwise available if necessary information is not available on the record or an interested party or any other person: (A) withholds information requested by the Department; (B) fails to provide requested information by the deadlines for submission of the information or in the form and manner requested, subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782 of the Act; (C) significantly impedes a proceeding; or (D) provides requested information, but the information cannot be verified as provided in section 782(i) of the Act. As we stated in the Preliminary Determination, because Quyky failed to respond to any of the Department’s requests for information, we found that it failed to cooperate to the best of its ability pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act, and, that an adverse inference is warranted pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act.8 Further, as an adverse inference, the Department found that all of the garment hangers produced and/or exported by Quyky to the United States are circumventing the Order.9 Because no party has contested the substantial evidence on the record supporting the Department’s preliminary determination for Quyky, we continue to find, using the stated adverse inference, that all of the garment hangers produced and/or exported by Quyky to the United States are circumventing the Order. 7 See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27007. 8 See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27008. 9 See id. PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Angang Statutory Provisions Regarding Circumvention Section 781 of the Act addresses circumvention of antidumping or countervailing duty orders. With respect to merchandise assembled or completed in a third country, section 781(b)(1) of the Act provides that if: (A) The merchandise imported into the United States is of the same class or kind as any merchandise produced in a foreign country that is the subject of an antidumping duty order; (B) before importation into the United States, such imported merchandise is completed or assembled in a third country from merchandise which is subject to such an order or is produced in the foreign country with respect to which such order applies; (C) the process of assembly or completion in a third country is minor or insignificant; (D) the value of the merchandise produced in the foreign country to which the antidumping duty order applies is a significant portion of the total value of the merchandise exported to the United States; and (E) the Department determines that action is appropriate to prevent evasion of an order, then the Department, after taking into account any advice provided by the United States International Trade Commission, under section 781(e) of the Act, may include such imported merchandise within the scope of an order at any time an order is in effect. In determining whether the process of assembly or completion in a third country is minor or insignificant under section 781(b)(1)(C) of the Act, section 781(b)(2) of the Act directs the Department to consider: (A) The level of investment in the third country; (B) the level of research and development in the third country; (C) the nature of the production process in the third country; (D) the extent of production facilities in the third country; and (E) whether the value of processing performed in the third country represents a small proportion of the value of the merchandise imported into the United States. However, none of these five factors, by itself, is controlling on the Department’s determination of whether the process of assembly or completion in a third country is minor or insignificant.10 Accordingly, it is the Department’s practice to evaluate each of these factors as they exist in the third 10 See Statement of Administrative Action (‘‘SAA’’) accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, H. Doc. No. 103–316, at 893 (1994). E:\FR\FM\28OCN1.SGM 28OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 209 / Friday, October 28, 2011 / Notices country depending on the particular anti-circumvention inquiry.11 Further, another step in the circumvention inquiry asks the Department, under section 781(b)(1)(D) of the Act, to discern whether the value of the merchandise produced in the foreign country to which an antidumping duty order applies is a significant portion of the total value of the merchandise exported to the United States. The Department must answer affirmatively to find circumvention. Finally, section 781(b)(3) of the Act sets forth the factors to consider in determining whether to include merchandise assembled or completed in a third country in an antidumping duty order. Specifically, the Department shall take into account such factors as: (A) the pattern of trade, including sourcing patterns; (B) Whether the manufacturer or exporter of the merchandise is affiliated with the person who, in the third country, uses the merchandise to complete or assemble the merchandise which is subsequently imported into the United States; and (C) whether imports of the merchandise into the third country have increased after the initiation of the investigation which resulted in the issuance of an order. In making a final determination in accordance with the criteria enumerated in section 781(b) of the Act as outlined above,12 we have continued to rely on the information obtained from Angang as well as the information placed on the record by the Department at the Preliminary Determination. Consequently, for the final determination, we continue to find that, based on the statutory factors above, Angang’s process of converting the PRCorigin, semi-finished hangers in Vietnam and exporting them to the United States constitutes circumvention of the Order. Summary of Analysis of Statutory Provisions sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES We considered all of the comments submitted by Angang and Petitioner, and find that, pursuant to section 781(b) of the Act, exports to the United States of garment hangers produced by Angang 11 See Certain Tissue Paper Products from the People’s Republic of China: Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order, 73 FR 57591, 57592 (October 3, 2008) (‘‘Tissue Paper Anti-Circ 2008’’). 12 See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27008–27015. Furthermore, Angang has not opposed the Department’s preliminary finding that it has circumvented the Order, as noted in its case brief, where Angang stated that it ‘‘has not challenged the merits of the Department’s affirmative preliminary determination with respect to wires formed in China.’’ See Angang’s Case Brief, dated June 13, 2011 at 22. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:56 Oct 27, 2011 Jkt 226001 using PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers constitute circumvention of the Order. (A) Whether Merchandise Imported Into the United States Is of the Same Class or Kind as Other Merchandise That Is Subject to the Order As we stated in the Preliminary Determination, we reviewed the information provided by Angang in its questionnaire responses and found that the record evidence indicates that Angang’s garment hangers, produced from PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers and exported to the United States meet the written description of the products subject to the Order.13 Further, we preliminarily found that the products identified and described in the product list are no different than those identified in the scope of the Order.14 Finally, we noted that Angang itself admitted that, from September 2008 through August 2010, it sold garment hangers that meet the scope of the Order.15 As the facts have not changed from the Preliminary Determination, we continue to find that the merchandise subject to this inquiry is the same class or kind of merchandise as that subject to the Order, pursuant to section 781(b)(1)(A) of the Act. The Department also preliminarily determined that, based on record evidence, Angang’s affiliates in the PRC were the sole suppliers of the PRCorigin, semi-finished hangers, to which Angang added either PRC-origin powder coating or paint and paper attachments such as tubes and then exported this merchandise to the United States.16 The record clearly shows that Angang purchased semi-finished hangers from its PRC affiliates, further processed the unfinished hangers in Vietnam, packed, and exported the finished garment hangers to the United States as Vietnamese-origin.17 As the facts have not changed from the Preliminary Determination, we continue to find that the merchandise subject to this anticircumvention inquiry was completed or assembled in Vietnam from PRCorigin merchandise which is subject to the Order, pursuant to section 781(b)(1)(B) of the Act. 13 See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27009. id. 15 See id. 16 See id. 17 See id. 14 See PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 66897 (B) Whether, Before Importation Into the United States, Such Imported Merchandise Is Completed or Assembled in a Third Country From Merchandise Which Is Subject to the Order or Produced in the Foreign Country That Is Subject to the Order Pursuant to section 781(b)(1)(C) of the Act, we preliminarily determined that the record evidence of this proceeding supported a finding that the process or completion of the PRC-origin, semifinished hangers to finished garment hangers in Vietnam is minor or insignificant.18 Under section 781(b)(1)(C) of the Act, section 781(b)(2) of the Act directed us to address other criteria, which we found to have supported our preliminary finding that the processing or completion in Vietnam was minor or insignificant.19 First, pursuant to section 781(b)(2)(A) of the Act, we found that Angang’s level of investment in Vietnam was minimal in terms of converting PRC-origin, semifinished hangers into finished garment hangers.20 Second, pursuant to section 781(b)(2)(B) of the Act, we found that the lack of evidence of research and development (‘‘R&D’’) initiatives by Angang in the production of garment hangers shows that R&D is not a significant factor in Angang’s completion of PRC-origin, semi-finished garment hangers in Vietnam.21 Third, pursuant to section 781(b)(2)(C) of the Act, we found that the portion of the overall production process of garment hangers in Vietnam conducted by Angang in assembling or completing the PRC-origin, semi-finished garment hangers into finished garment hangers is limited and minor compared to the PRC affiliates’ share of the overall production process in the production of the semifinished garment hangers and the other direct materials they supply to Angang to finish the semi-finished hangers in Vietnam.22 Fourth, pursuant to section 781(b)(2)(D) of the Act, we found that the extent of Angang’s production facilities in Vietnam is minor with respect to completing PRC-origin, semifinished hangers to finished garment hangers because the energy, labor, and capital equipment used by Angang in converting the PRC-origin, semifinished hangers into finished garment hangers is not substantial in comparison to the materials, labor, energy, and capital equipment used by its PRC affiliates to produce the semi-finished 18 See id. at 27010. id. at 27009–27012. 20 See id. at 27010. 21 See id. 22 See id. at 27011. 19 See E:\FR\FM\28OCN1.SGM 28OCN1 66898 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 209 / Friday, October 28, 2011 / Notices garment hangers.23 Finally, pursuant to section 781(b)(2)(E) of the Act, we found that the value of the processing performed by Angang to convert the PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers into finished garment hangers represents a small proportion of the total value of the finished merchandise imported into the United States.24 Therefore, we preliminarily found that, pursuant to sections 781(b)(2)(A)– (E) of the Act, Angang’s processing operation to convert PRC-origin, semifinished hangers into finished garment hangers in Vietnam is minor or insignificant.25 We based our preliminary decision as to whether the processing operation to convert PRCorigin, semi-finished hangers into finished garment hangers is minor or insignificant on the totality of the record evidence of this anti-circumvention inquiry and compared the relative information regarding the production processes for Angang and its PRC affiliates. For the final determination, we continue to find that, based on the totality of the record, each statutory criterion under section 781(b)(2) of the Act and all other factors point to the conclusion that Angang’s process of converting the PRC-origin, semifinished hangers in Vietnam was minor or insignificant and, consistent with our analysis in prior anti-circumvention inquiries.26 (C) Whether the Value of the Merchandise Produced in the Foreign Country To Which the Order Applies Is a Significant Portion of the Total Value of the Merchandise Exported to the United States Under section 781(b)(1)(D) of the Act, the value of the merchandise produced in the foreign country to which an antidumping duty order applies must be a significant portion of the total value of the merchandise exported to the United States in order to find circumvention. As discussed above, we found that the production process in the PRC id. at 27011–12. id. at 27012. 25 See id. at 27012–13. 26 See, e.g., Anti-Circumvention Inquiry of the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders on Certain Pasta From Italy: Affirmative Preliminary Determinations of Circumvention of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 68 FR 46571, 46574–75 (August 6, 2003), unchanged in AntiCircumvention Inquiry of the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders on Certain Pasta from Italy: Affirmative Final Determinations of Circumvention of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 68 FR 54888 (September 19, 2003); and Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products from Germany and the United Kingdom; Negative Final Determinations of Circumvention of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 64 FR 40336, 40338–40 (July 26, 1999). manufactures the main inputs, that all the direct materials are sourced from the PRC, and that there exists only limited production processes in Vietnam, thereby evincing that a great majority of the value of the finished merchandise is based on the PRC-production of the semi-finished hangers and the other direct materials which are applied to those PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers in Vietnam.27 Based on our analysis and record evidence, we found that the value of the PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers taken as a whole constitutes a significant portion of the total value of the finished product ultimately exported to the United States. (D) Other Factors To Consider As previously noted, section 781(b)(3) of the Act instructs the Department to consider, in determining whether to include merchandise assembled or completed in a foreign country within the scope of an order, such factors as: pattern of trade, including sourcing patterns; affiliations between manufacturers or exporters of merchandise in the country subject to the order and the person who uses the merchandise to assemble or complete in the third country the merchandise that is exported to the United States; and whether imports into the third country of the merchandise described in section 781(b)(1)(B) of the Act have increased after the initiation of the investigation. We preliminarily determined that: (1) The data related to patterns of trade in this case show that PRC exports have decreased significantly whereas Vietnamese exports have increased exponentially since the initiation of the less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’) investigation; (2) Angang maintained an affiliation with two PRC companies; 28 and (3) Angang’s imports of PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers increased after the initiation of the LTFV investigation and PRC exports of the same to Vietnam similarly increased after the initiation of the LTFV investigation.29 We found at that time,30 and continue to find in this 23 See sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 24 See VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:56 Oct 27, 2011 Jkt 226001 27 See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27013. ‘‘Memorandum to the File through Catherine Bertrand, Program Manager, Office 9 from Irene Gorelik, Senior Analyst, re; Circumvention Inquiry on Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People’s Republic of China: Proprietary Analysis of Certain Statutory Factors for Angang Clothes Rack Manufacture Co., Ltd. for the Preliminary Determination,’’ (‘‘Angang Prelim Analysis Memo’’), dated May 3, 2011. For the final determination, we continue to find that affiliation exists between Angang and these two PRC entities referenced in Angang Prelim Analysis Memorandum, pursuant to section 771(33) of the Act. 29 See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27013–14. 30 See id. at 27014–15. 28 See PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 final determination, that these facts and the related record evidence all support the conclusion that circumvention of the Order has occurred. Affirmative Final Determination Summary With respect to Quyky, we preliminarily found that Quyky circumvented the Order because it failed to provide the Department with any information at all, thus we are unable to distinguish between its imports or purchase of semi-finished hangers from the PRC for purposes other than assembly into merchandise covered by the Order. Consequently, because Quyky refused to comply with the Department’s request for information, we continue to find that it failed to cooperate to the best of its ability and, therefore, that an adverse inference is warranted pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act. Accordingly, as stated above, as an adverse inference the Department preliminarily found that all of the garment hangers produced and/or exported by Quyky to the United States are circumventing the Order. Therefore, in light of our uncontested Preliminary Determination and the substantial record evidence supporting that decision, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to suspend liquidation on all entries of garment hangers produced and/or exported by Quyky that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of initiation of the anticircumvention inquiry. Further, with respect to Angang, we preliminarily found that Angang has circumvented the Order in accordance with section 781(b)(1) and (2) of the Act. Pursuant to section 781(b)(1) of the Act, we found that the merchandise sold in the United States is within the same class or kind of merchandise that is subject to the Order and was completed or assembled in a third country. Additionally, pursuant to section 781(b)(2), we found that the process or assembly of the PRC-origin semifinished hangers into finished garment hangers by Angang is minor and insignificant. Furthermore, in accordance with section 781(b)(1)(D) of the Act, we found that the value of the merchandise produced in the PRC is a significant portion of the total value of the merchandise exported to the United States. The record evidence continues to support an affirmative finding of circumvention in accordance with section 781(b)(1) and (2) of the Act. Moreover, we continue to find the factors required by section 781(b)(3) of E:\FR\FM\28OCN1.SGM 28OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 209 / Friday, October 28, 2011 / Notices sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES the Act indicate that there is circumvention of the Order. Consequently, our statutory analysis leads us to find that there was circumvention of the Order as a result of Angang’s assembly of the PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers into finished garment hangers in Vietnam for export to the United States, as discussed above. Therefore, in light of our final determination, the Department will instruct CBP to suspend liquidation on all entries of garment hangers produced and/or exported by Angang that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of initiation of the anti-circumvention inquiry. Should the Department conduct an administrative review of the Order in the future, both Quyky and Angang will have the opportunity to provide information related to their use of PRCorigin or self-produced garment hangers so that the Department may determine the appropriate assessment rate. Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation In accordance with section 733(d) of the Act, the Department will continue to direct CBP to suspend liquidation and to require a cash deposit of estimated duties, at the PRC-wide rate of 187.25 percent, on all unliquidated entries of garment hangers produced and/or exported by Angang and Quyky that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after July 16, 2010, the date of initiation of the anti-circumvention inquiry. In comments to the Department, Angang asked the Department (1) to revisit its determination to suspend liquidation of all of Angang’s entries and (2) to allow certifications for Angang’s future entries. Angang has provided conflicting statements on whether it could segregate PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers from the selfproduced, semi-finished hangers in Vietnam,31 and record evidence supports the conclusion that Angang commingles the two groups of merchandise in a work-in-progress warehouse. Therefore, the Department declines to grant Angang’s requests. For further discussion of this issue, see the Decision Memorandum.32 As stated above, if requested, should the Department conduct an administrative review in the future, and determine in the context of that review that either Quyky or Angang have not produced for export garment hangers using PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers, the Department will consider a changed circumstances review pursuant to section 751(b) of the Act to determine if the continued suspension of all garment hangers produced by Quyky or Angang is warranted. Notification to Interested Parties This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to the administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written notification of the return or 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. This final affirmative circumvention determination is published in accordance with section 781(b) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(h). Dated: October 21, 2011. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix I Discussion of the Issues Comment 1: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Circumvention Regarding Quyky Comment 2: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Circumvention Regarding Angang Comment 3: Appropriate Suspension of Liquidation of Angang’s Exports Comment 4: Whether To Require a Certification Process for Angang’s Exports Comment 5: Appropriate Rate To Assign to Angang [FR Doc. 2011–27972 Filed 10–27–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 31 See, e.g., Angang’s Questionnaire Responses dated October 8, 2010, at Exhibit 1B; November 19, 2010, at 13; March 21, 2011, at 2; Angang’s Case Brief dated June 13, 2011 at 4–9; see also Decision Memorandum at Comment 3. 32 See Decision Memorandum at Comments 3, 4, and 5. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:56 Oct 27, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 66899 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–351–809, A–201–805, A–580–809, A–583– 814, A–583–008] Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe From Brazil, Mexico, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan; and Certain Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Taiwan: Final Results of the Expedited Third Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Order Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 1, 2011 the Department of Commerce (Department) initiated the third five-year (sunset) reviews of the antidumping duty orders on certain circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from Brazil, Mexico, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan; and certain circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Taiwan, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The Department has conducted expedited (120-day) sunset reviews of these antidumping duty orders pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). As a result of these reviews, the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping duty orders would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping, at the levels indicated in the ‘‘Final Results of Sunset Reviews’’ section of this notice, infra. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Steve Bezirganian, Deborah Scott or Robert James, AD/CVD Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1131, (202) 482–2657 or (202) 482–0649, respectively. AGENCY: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On August 1, 2011, the Department published in the Federal Register the notice of initiation of the sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on certain circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from Brazil, Mexico, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan; and certain circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Taiwan, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act. See Initiation of FiveYear (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 76 FR 38613 (July 1, 2011) (Notice of Initiation). The Department received a notice of intent to participate from the following E:\FR\FM\28OCN1.SGM 28OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 209 (Friday, October 28, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66895-66899]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27972]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-918]


Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the People's Republic of China: 
Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping 
Duty Order

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') continues to 
determine that steel wire garment hangers (``garment hangers'') 
exported by Angang Clothes Rack Manufacture Co., Ltd. (``Angang'') and 
Quyky Yanglei International Co., Ltd. (``Quyky'') are circumventing the 
antidumping duty order \1\ on garment hangers from the People's 
Republic of China (``PRC''), pursuant to section 781(b) of the Tariff 
Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Steel Wire Garment 
Hangers from the People's Republic of China, 73 FR 58111 (October 6, 
2008) (``Order'').

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: October 28, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Gorelik, Office 9, Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 
20230; telephone: (202) 482-6905.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On May 10, 2011, the Department published in the Federal Register 
the affirmative preliminary determination that garment hangers exported 
by Angang and Quyky are circumventing the Order on garment hangers from 
the PRC, as provided in section 781(b) of the Act.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People's Republic of 
China: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Circumvention of the 
Antidumping Duty Order and Extension of Final Determination, 76 FR 
27007 (May 10, 2011) (``Preliminary Determination'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 13, 2011, Petitioner \3\ and Angang filed their case 
briefs. On June 20, 2011, Petitioner and Angang filed their rebuttal 
briefs. Quyky did not file either a case brief or rebuttal brief. Based 
on the timely filed request by Angang, the Department held a public 
hearing on June 28, 2011.\4\ On July 1, 2011, Angang filed a letter 
requesting the Department to strike portions of Petitioner's rebuttal 
brief dated June 20, 2011, alleging untimely filed new factual 
information and arguments were included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Petitioner is M&B Metal Products Co.
    \4\ During the public hearing, the Department noted that Angang 
provided untimely new factual information within its presentation, 
which was stricken from the record within the hearing transcript. 
See Memorandum to the File from Irene Gorelik, regarding; ``revised 
transcript of the public hearing,'' dated July 19, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order

    The merchandise that is subject to the order is steel wire garment 
hangers, fabricated from carbon steel wire, whether or not galvanized 
or painted, whether or not coated with latex or epoxy or similar 
gripping materials, and/or whether or not fashioned with paper covers 
or capes (with or without printing) and/or nonslip features such as 
saddles or tubes. These products may also be referred to by a 
commercial designation, such as shirt, suit, strut, caped, or latex 
(industrial) hangers. Specifically excluded from the scope of the order 
are wooden, plastic, and other garment hangers that are not made of 
steel wire. Also excluded from the scope of the order are chrome-plated 
steel wire garment hangers with a diameter of 3.4 mm or greater. The 
products subject to the order are currently classified under Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') subheadings 
7326.20.0020, 7323.99.9060 and 7323.99.9080.
    Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise is 
dispositive.

Scope of the Anti-Circumvention Inquiry

    The products covered by this inquiry are garment hangers, as 
described in the ``Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order'' section above, 
that are exported from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (``Vietnam''), 
but manufactured from

[[Page 66896]]

PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers and completed in Vietnam with PRC-
origin, paper attachments and other direct materials such as latex or 
glue.
    While we acknowledge that Angang has repeatedly stated on the 
record that it also self-produces garment hangers from steel wire 
rod,\5\ the focus and intent of this proceeding is to determine whether 
the semi-finished hangers: (1) Are manufactured in the PRC; (2) are 
exported to Angang's facility in Vietnam for completion (by adding PRC-
origin paper attachments, such as tubes, PRC-origin latex or glue); \6\ 
and (3) then are exported by Angang to the United States as Vietnamese-
origin garment hangers constitutes circumvention of the Order under 
section 781(b) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27008. See also 
Angang's Questionnaire Response dated January 19, 2011, at 5; 
Angang's Questionnaire Response dated February 1, 2011, at Exhibit 
9; and Angang's Comments dated December 22, 2010, at 2-5.
    \6\ Angang has reported that the direct materials applied to the 
PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers are also manufactured in, and 
supplied from, the PRC. See, e.g., Angang's Questionnaire Response 
dated November 19, 2010, at Exhibit 5; Angang's Questionnaire 
Response dated March 21, 2011, at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the post-preliminary comments by parties in 
this proceeding are addressed in the ``Memorandum from Christian Marsh, 
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Import Administration, re: Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People's 
Republic of China: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final 
Determination of the Anti-Circumvention Inquiry'' (``Decision 
Memorandum''), dated concurrently with notice and hereby adopted by 
this notice.
    A list of the issues which the parties raised and to which the 
Department responds in the Decision Memorandum is attached to this 
notice as Appendix I. The Decision Memorandum is a public document and 
is on file electronically via Import Administration's Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (``IA 
ACCESS''). Access to IA ACCESS is available in the Central Records 
Unit, room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In 
addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed 
directly on the Internet at http://www.trade.gov/ia/. The signed 
Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Decision 
Memorandum are identical in content.

Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention

    For the final determination, we continue to rely on the statutory 
criteria that we considered in making our Preliminary Determination.\7\ 
Based on our review of the record evidence and our analysis of the 
comments received, the Department continues to find that Quyky's and 
Angang's Vietnamese exports of garment hangers produced from PRC-
origin, semi-finished hangers constitute circumvention of the Order and 
are properly considered to be within the same class or kind of 
merchandise subject to the Order on garment hangers from the PRC. For a 
complete discussion of the Department's analysis, see the Decision 
Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quyky

Facts Available

    Section 776(a) of the Act requires the Department to rely on facts 
otherwise available if necessary information is not available on the 
record or an interested party or any other person: (A) withholds 
information requested by the Department; (B) fails to provide requested 
information by the deadlines for submission of the information or in 
the form and manner requested, subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of 
section 782 of the Act; (C) significantly impedes a proceeding; or (D) 
provides requested information, but the information cannot be verified 
as provided in section 782(i) of the Act.
    As we stated in the Preliminary Determination, because Quyky failed 
to respond to any of the Department's requests for information, we 
found that it failed to cooperate to the best of its ability pursuant 
to sections 776(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act, and, that an adverse 
inference is warranted pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act.\8\ 
Further, as an adverse inference, the Department found that all of the 
garment hangers produced and/or exported by Quyky to the United States 
are circumventing the Order.\9\ Because no party has contested the 
substantial evidence on the record supporting the Department's 
preliminary determination for Quyky, we continue to find, using the 
stated adverse inference, that all of the garment hangers produced and/
or exported by Quyky to the United States are circumventing the Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27008.
    \9\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Angang

Statutory Provisions Regarding Circumvention

    Section 781 of the Act addresses circumvention of antidumping or 
countervailing duty orders. With respect to merchandise assembled or 
completed in a third country, section 781(b)(1) of the Act provides 
that if: (A) The merchandise imported into the United States is of the 
same class or kind as any merchandise produced in a foreign country 
that is the subject of an antidumping duty order; (B) before 
importation into the United States, such imported merchandise is 
completed or assembled in a third country from merchandise which is 
subject to such an order or is produced in the foreign country with 
respect to which such order applies; (C) the process of assembly or 
completion in a third country is minor or insignificant; (D) the value 
of the merchandise produced in the foreign country to which the 
antidumping duty order applies is a significant portion of the total 
value of the merchandise exported to the United States; and (E) the 
Department determines that action is appropriate to prevent evasion of 
an order, then the Department, after taking into account any advice 
provided by the United States International Trade Commission, under 
section 781(e) of the Act, may include such imported merchandise within 
the scope of an order at any time an order is in effect.
    In determining whether the process of assembly or completion in a 
third country is minor or insignificant under section 781(b)(1)(C) of 
the Act, section 781(b)(2) of the Act directs the Department to 
consider: (A) The level of investment in the third country; (B) the 
level of research and development in the third country; (C) the nature 
of the production process in the third country; (D) the extent of 
production facilities in the third country; and (E) whether the value 
of processing performed in the third country represents a small 
proportion of the value of the merchandise imported into the United 
States. However, none of these five factors, by itself, is controlling 
on the Department's determination of whether the process of assembly or 
completion in a third country is minor or insignificant.\10\ 
Accordingly, it is the Department's practice to evaluate each of these 
factors as they exist in the third

[[Page 66897]]

country depending on the particular anti-circumvention inquiry.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Statement of Administrative Action (``SAA'') 
accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, H. Doc. No. 103-316, 
at 893 (1994).
    \11\ See Certain Tissue Paper Products from the People's 
Republic of China: Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention 
of the Antidumping Duty Order, 73 FR 57591, 57592 (October 3, 2008) 
(``Tissue Paper Anti-Circ 2008'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, another step in the circumvention inquiry asks the 
Department, under section 781(b)(1)(D) of the Act, to discern whether 
the value of the merchandise produced in the foreign country to which 
an antidumping duty order applies is a significant portion of the total 
value of the merchandise exported to the United States. The Department 
must answer affirmatively to find circumvention.
    Finally, section 781(b)(3) of the Act sets forth the factors to 
consider in determining whether to include merchandise assembled or 
completed in a third country in an antidumping duty order. 
Specifically, the Department shall take into account such factors as: 
(A) the pattern of trade, including sourcing patterns; (B) Whether the 
manufacturer or exporter of the merchandise is affiliated with the 
person who, in the third country, uses the merchandise to complete or 
assemble the merchandise which is subsequently imported into the United 
States; and (C) whether imports of the merchandise into the third 
country have increased after the initiation of the investigation which 
resulted in the issuance of an order.
    In making a final determination in accordance with the criteria 
enumerated in section 781(b) of the Act as outlined above,\12\ we have 
continued to rely on the information obtained from Angang as well as 
the information placed on the record by the Department at the 
Preliminary Determination. Consequently, for the final determination, 
we continue to find that, based on the statutory factors above, 
Angang's process of converting the PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers in 
Vietnam and exporting them to the United States constitutes 
circumvention of the Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27008-27015. 
Furthermore, Angang has not opposed the Department's preliminary 
finding that it has circumvented the Order, as noted in its case 
brief, where Angang stated that it ``has not challenged the merits 
of the Department's affirmative preliminary determination with 
respect to wires formed in China.'' See Angang's Case Brief, dated 
June 13, 2011 at 22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary of Analysis of Statutory Provisions

    We considered all of the comments submitted by Angang and 
Petitioner, and find that, pursuant to section 781(b) of the Act, 
exports to the United States of garment hangers produced by Angang 
using PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers constitute circumvention of the 
Order.
(A) Whether Merchandise Imported Into the United States Is of the Same 
Class or Kind as Other Merchandise That Is Subject to the Order
    As we stated in the Preliminary Determination, we reviewed the 
information provided by Angang in its questionnaire responses and found 
that the record evidence indicates that Angang's garment hangers, 
produced from PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers and exported to the 
United States meet the written description of the products subject to 
the Order.\13\ Further, we preliminarily found that the products 
identified and described in the product list are no different than 
those identified in the scope of the Order.\14\ Finally, we noted that 
Angang itself admitted that, from September 2008 through August 2010, 
it sold garment hangers that meet the scope of the Order.\15\ As the 
facts have not changed from the Preliminary Determination, we continue 
to find that the merchandise subject to this inquiry is the same class 
or kind of merchandise as that subject to the Order, pursuant to 
section 781(b)(1)(A) of the Act. The Department also preliminarily 
determined that, based on record evidence, Angang's affiliates in the 
PRC were the sole suppliers of the PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers, 
to which Angang added either PRC-origin powder coating or paint and 
paper attachments such as tubes and then exported this merchandise to 
the United States.\16\ The record clearly shows that Angang purchased 
semi-finished hangers from its PRC affiliates, further processed the 
unfinished hangers in Vietnam, packed, and exported the finished 
garment hangers to the United States as Vietnamese-origin.\17\ As the 
facts have not changed from the Preliminary Determination, we continue 
to find that the merchandise subject to this anti-circumvention inquiry 
was completed or assembled in Vietnam from PRC-origin merchandise which 
is subject to the Order, pursuant to section 781(b)(1)(B) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27009.
    \14\ See id.
    \15\ See id.
    \16\ See id.
    \17\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Whether, Before Importation Into the United States, Such Imported 
Merchandise Is Completed or Assembled in a Third Country From 
Merchandise Which Is Subject to the Order or Produced in the Foreign 
Country That Is Subject to the Order
    Pursuant to section 781(b)(1)(C) of the Act, we preliminarily 
determined that the record evidence of this proceeding supported a 
finding that the process or completion of the PRC-origin, semi-finished 
hangers to finished garment hangers in Vietnam is minor or 
insignificant.\18\ Under section 781(b)(1)(C) of the Act, section 
781(b)(2) of the Act directed us to address other criteria, which we 
found to have supported our preliminary finding that the processing or 
completion in Vietnam was minor or insignificant.\19\ First, pursuant 
to section 781(b)(2)(A) of the Act, we found that Angang's level of 
investment in Vietnam was minimal in terms of converting PRC-origin, 
semi-finished hangers into finished garment hangers.\20\ Second, 
pursuant to section 781(b)(2)(B) of the Act, we found that the lack of 
evidence of research and development (``R&D'') initiatives by Angang in 
the production of garment hangers shows that R&D is not a significant 
factor in Angang's completion of PRC-origin, semi-finished garment 
hangers in Vietnam.\21\ Third, pursuant to section 781(b)(2)(C) of the 
Act, we found that the portion of the overall production process of 
garment hangers in Vietnam conducted by Angang in assembling or 
completing the PRC-origin, semi-finished garment hangers into finished 
garment hangers is limited and minor compared to the PRC affiliates' 
share of the overall production process in the production of the semi-
finished garment hangers and the other direct materials they supply to 
Angang to finish the semi-finished hangers in Vietnam.\22\ Fourth, 
pursuant to section 781(b)(2)(D) of the Act, we found that the extent 
of Angang's production facilities in Vietnam is minor with respect to 
completing PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers to finished garment 
hangers because the energy, labor, and capital equipment used by Angang 
in converting the PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers into finished 
garment hangers is not substantial in comparison to the materials, 
labor, energy, and capital equipment used by its PRC affiliates to 
produce the semi-finished

[[Page 66898]]

garment hangers.\23\ Finally, pursuant to section 781(b)(2)(E) of the 
Act, we found that the value of the processing performed by Angang to 
convert the PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers into finished garment 
hangers represents a small proportion of the total value of the 
finished merchandise imported into the United States.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See id. at 27010.
    \19\ See id. at 27009-27012.
    \20\ See id. at 27010.
    \21\ See id.
    \22\ See id. at 27011.
    \23\ See id. at 27011-12.
    \24\ See id. at 27012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, we preliminarily found that, pursuant to sections 
781(b)(2)(A)-(E) of the Act, Angang's processing operation to convert 
PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers into finished garment hangers in 
Vietnam is minor or insignificant.\25\ We based our preliminary 
decision as to whether the processing operation to convert PRC-origin, 
semi-finished hangers into finished garment hangers is minor or 
insignificant on the totality of the record evidence of this anti-
circumvention inquiry and compared the relative information regarding 
the production processes for Angang and its PRC affiliates. For the 
final determination, we continue to find that, based on the totality of 
the record, each statutory criterion under section 781(b)(2) of the Act 
and all other factors point to the conclusion that Angang's process of 
converting the PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers in Vietnam was minor 
or insignificant and, consistent with our analysis in prior anti-
circumvention inquiries.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See id. at 27012-13.
    \26\ See, e.g., Anti-Circumvention Inquiry of the Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duty Orders on Certain Pasta From Italy: 
Affirmative Preliminary Determinations of Circumvention of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 68 FR 46571, 46574-75 
(August 6, 2003), unchanged in Anti-Circumvention Inquiry of the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders on Certain Pasta from 
Italy: Affirmative Final Determinations of Circumvention of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 68 FR 54888 (September 
19, 2003); and Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products 
from Germany and the United Kingdom; Negative Final Determinations 
of Circumvention of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 64 
FR 40336, 40338-40 (July 26, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(C) Whether the Value of the Merchandise Produced in the Foreign 
Country To Which the Order Applies Is a Significant Portion of the 
Total Value of the Merchandise Exported to the United States
    Under section 781(b)(1)(D) of the Act, the value of the merchandise 
produced in the foreign country to which an antidumping duty order 
applies must be a significant portion of the total value of the 
merchandise exported to the United States in order to find 
circumvention. As discussed above, we found that the production process 
in the PRC manufactures the main inputs, that all the direct materials 
are sourced from the PRC, and that there exists only limited production 
processes in Vietnam, thereby evincing that a great majority of the 
value of the finished merchandise is based on the PRC-production of the 
semi-finished hangers and the other direct materials which are applied 
to those PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers in Vietnam.\27\ Based on our 
analysis and record evidence, we found that the value of the PRC-
origin, semi-finished hangers taken as a whole constitutes a 
significant portion of the total value of the finished product 
ultimately exported to the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(D) Other Factors To Consider
    As previously noted, section 781(b)(3) of the Act instructs the 
Department to consider, in determining whether to include merchandise 
assembled or completed in a foreign country within the scope of an 
order, such factors as: pattern of trade, including sourcing patterns; 
affiliations between manufacturers or exporters of merchandise in the 
country subject to the order and the person who uses the merchandise to 
assemble or complete in the third country the merchandise that is 
exported to the United States; and whether imports into the third 
country of the merchandise described in section 781(b)(1)(B) of the Act 
have increased after the initiation of the investigation.
    We preliminarily determined that: (1) The data related to patterns 
of trade in this case show that PRC exports have decreased 
significantly whereas Vietnamese exports have increased exponentially 
since the initiation of the less than fair value (``LTFV'') 
investigation; (2) Angang maintained an affiliation with two PRC 
companies; \28\ and (3) Angang's imports of PRC-origin, semi-finished 
hangers increased after the initiation of the LTFV investigation and 
PRC exports of the same to Vietnam similarly increased after the 
initiation of the LTFV investigation.\29\ We found at that time,\30\ 
and continue to find in this final determination, that these facts and 
the related record evidence all support the conclusion that 
circumvention of the Order has occurred.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See ``Memorandum to the File through Catherine Bertrand, 
Program Manager, Office 9 from Irene Gorelik, Senior Analyst, re; 
Circumvention Inquiry on Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the 
People's Republic of China: Proprietary Analysis of Certain 
Statutory Factors for Angang Clothes Rack Manufacture Co., Ltd. for 
the Preliminary Determination,'' (``Angang Prelim Analysis Memo''), 
dated May 3, 2011. For the final determination, we continue to find 
that affiliation exists between Angang and these two PRC entities 
referenced in Angang Prelim Analysis Memorandum, pursuant to section 
771(33) of the Act.
    \29\ See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 27013-14.
    \30\ See id. at 27014-15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Affirmative Final Determination Summary

    With respect to Quyky, we preliminarily found that Quyky 
circumvented the Order because it failed to provide the Department with 
any information at all, thus we are unable to distinguish between its 
imports or purchase of semi-finished hangers from the PRC for purposes 
other than assembly into merchandise covered by the Order. 
Consequently, because Quyky refused to comply with the Department's 
request for information, we continue to find that it failed to 
cooperate to the best of its ability and, therefore, that an adverse 
inference is warranted pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act. 
Accordingly, as stated above, as an adverse inference the Department 
preliminarily found that all of the garment hangers produced and/or 
exported by Quyky to the United States are circumventing the Order. 
Therefore, in light of our uncontested Preliminary Determination and 
the substantial record evidence supporting that decision, the 
Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') 
to suspend liquidation on all entries of garment hangers produced and/
or exported by Quyky that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 
for consumption on or after the date of initiation of the anti-
circumvention inquiry.
    Further, with respect to Angang, we preliminarily found that Angang 
has circumvented the Order in accordance with section 781(b)(1) and (2) 
of the Act. Pursuant to section 781(b)(1) of the Act, we found that the 
merchandise sold in the United States is within the same class or kind 
of merchandise that is subject to the Order and was completed or 
assembled in a third country. Additionally, pursuant to section 
781(b)(2), we found that the process or assembly of the PRC-origin 
semi-finished hangers into finished garment hangers by Angang is minor 
and insignificant. Furthermore, in accordance with section 781(b)(1)(D) 
of the Act, we found that the value of the merchandise produced in the 
PRC is a significant portion of the total value of the merchandise 
exported to the United States.
    The record evidence continues to support an affirmative finding of 
circumvention in accordance with section 781(b)(1) and (2) of the Act. 
Moreover, we continue to find the factors required by section 781(b)(3) 
of

[[Page 66899]]

the Act indicate that there is circumvention of the Order. 
Consequently, our statutory analysis leads us to find that there was 
circumvention of the Order as a result of Angang's assembly of the PRC-
origin, semi-finished hangers into finished garment hangers in Vietnam 
for export to the United States, as discussed above. Therefore, in 
light of our final determination, the Department will instruct CBP to 
suspend liquidation on all entries of garment hangers produced and/or 
exported by Angang that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after the date of initiation of the anti-
circumvention inquiry. Should the Department conduct an administrative 
review of the Order in the future, both Quyky and Angang will have the 
opportunity to provide information related to their use of PRC-origin 
or self-produced garment hangers so that the Department may determine 
the appropriate assessment rate.

Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d) of the Act, the Department will 
continue to direct CBP to suspend liquidation and to require a cash 
deposit of estimated duties, at the PRC-wide rate of 187.25 percent, on 
all unliquidated entries of garment hangers produced and/or exported by 
Angang and Quyky that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after July 16, 2010, the date of initiation of the 
anti-circumvention inquiry.
    In comments to the Department, Angang asked the Department (1) to 
revisit its determination to suspend liquidation of all of Angang's 
entries and (2) to allow certifications for Angang's future entries. 
Angang has provided conflicting statements on whether it could 
segregate PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers from the self-produced, 
semi-finished hangers in Vietnam,\31\ and record evidence supports the 
conclusion that Angang commingles the two groups of merchandise in a 
work-in-progress warehouse. Therefore, the Department declines to grant 
Angang's requests. For further discussion of this issue, see the 
Decision Memorandum.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See, e.g., Angang's Questionnaire Responses dated October 
8, 2010, at Exhibit 1B; November 19, 2010, at 13; March 21, 2011, at 
2; Angang's Case Brief dated June 13, 2011 at 4-9; see also Decision 
Memorandum at Comment 3.
    \32\ See Decision Memorandum at Comments 3, 4, and 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated above, if requested, should the Department conduct an 
administrative review in the future, and determine in the context of 
that review that either Quyky or Angang have not produced for export 
garment hangers using PRC-origin, semi-finished hangers, the Department 
will consider a changed circumstances review pursuant to section 751(b) 
of the Act to determine if the continued suspension of all garment 
hangers produced by Quyky or Angang is warranted.

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to the 
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written 
notification of the return or 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.
    This final affirmative circumvention determination is published in 
accordance with section 781(b) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(h).

    Dated: October 21, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I

Discussion of the Issues

Comment 1: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Circumvention 
Regarding Quyky
Comment 2: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Circumvention 
Regarding Angang
Comment 3: Appropriate Suspension of Liquidation of Angang's Exports
Comment 4: Whether To Require a Certification Process for Angang's 
Exports
Comment 5: Appropriate Rate To Assign to Angang

[FR Doc. 2011-27972 Filed 10-27-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P