Certain Steel Nails From the United Arab Emirates: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 17029-17032 [2012-7067]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17029-17032]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7067]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-520-804]


Certain Steel Nails From the United Arab Emirates: Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) has determined 
that imports of certain steel nails (nails) from the United Arab 
Emirates are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at 
less than fair value (LFTV), as provided in section 735 of the Tariff 
Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The estimated margins of sales at 
LTFV are listed in the ``Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation'' 
section of this notice.

DATES: Effective Date: March 23, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dmitry Vladimirov or Minoo Hatten, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-0665 
or (202) 482-1690, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Case History

    On November 3, 2011, the Department published in the Federal 
Register its preliminary determination in the antidumping duty 
investigation of nails from the United Arab Emirates. See Certain Steel 
Nails from the United Arab Emirates: Preliminary Determination of Sales 
at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 76 FR 
68129 (November 3, 2011) (Preliminary Determination).
    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we conducted sales and 
cost verifications of the questionnaire responses submitted by the 
participating respondents, Dubai Wire FZE (Dubai Wire) and Precision 
Fasteners LLC (Precision). We used standard verification procedures, 
including examination of relevant accounting and production records, as 
well as original source documents provided by both companies.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Memorandum to the File entitled ``Verification of the 
Export-Price Sales Responses of Dubai Wire FZE in the Antidumping 
Investigation of Certain Steel Nails from the United Arab 
Emirates,'' dated January 3, 2012, Memorandum to the File entitled 
``Verification of the Export-Price Sales Responses of Precision 
Fasteners, LLC in the Antidumping Investigation of Certain Steel 
Nails from the United Arab Emirates,'' dated January 3, 2012, 
Memorandum to the File entitled ``Verification of the Cost Response 
of Dubai Wire FZE in the Antidumping Investigation of Certain Steel 
Nails from the United Arab Emirates,'' dated January 17, 2012, and 
Memorandum to the File entitled ``Verification of the Cost Response 
of Precision Fasteners, LLC in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of 
Certain Steel Nails from the United Arab Emirates,'' dated January 
17, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We received case briefs from Mid Continent Nail Corporation 
(hereinafter, the petitioner), Dubai Wire, and Precision on January 27, 
2012. These parties submitted rebuttal comments on February 1, 2012. No 
hearing was requested.
    Subsequent to the Preliminary Determination, the Department revised 
the SAS program to ensure that it accurately reflected the 
methodological choices made in that determination. These revisions to 
the programming, had they been included in the preliminary 
determination, would not have altered the weighted average dumping 
margins calculated there. See company-specific analysis memoranda, 
dated concurrently with this notice (company-specific analysis 
memoranda) (containing the revised preliminary AD margin program, 
output, and the weighted-average dumping margins).

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation is January 1, 2010, through December 
31, 2010.

Scope of Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation includes certain 
steel nails having a shaft length up to 12 inches. Certain steel nails 
include, but are not limited to, nails made of round wire and nails 
that are cut. Certain steel nails may be of one piece construction or 
constructed of two or more pieces. Certain steel nails may be produced 
from any type of steel, and have a variety of finishes, heads, shanks, 
point types, shaft lengths and shaft diameters. Finishes include, but 
are not limited to, coating in vinyl, zinc (galvanized, whether by 
electroplating or hot-dipping one or more times), phosphate cement, and 
paint. Head styles include, but are not limited to, flat, projection, 
cupped, oval, brad, headless, double, countersunk, and sinker. Shank 
styles include, but are not limited to, smooth, barbed, screw threaded, 
ring shank and fluted shank styles. Screw-threaded nails subject to 
this investigation are driven using direct force and not by turning the 
fastener using a tool that engages with the head. Point styles include, 
but are not limited to, diamond, blunt, needle, chisel and no point. 
Certain steel nails may be sold in bulk, or they may be collated into 
strips

[[Page 17030]]

or coils using materials such as plastic, paper, or wire.
    Certain steel nails subject to this investigation are currently 
classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) subheadings 7317.00.55, 7317.00.65, and 7317.00.75.
    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are steel nails 
specifically enumerated and identified in ASTM Standard F 1667 (2011 
revision) as Type I, Style 20 nails, whether collated or in bulk, and 
whether or not galvanized.
    Also excluded from the scope of this investigation are the 
following products:
     Non-collated (i.e., hand-drive or bulk), two-piece steel 
nails having plastic or steel washers (``caps'') already assembled to 
the nail, having a bright or galvanized finish, a ring, fluted or 
spiral shank, an actual length of 0.500 to 8, 
inclusive; an actual shank diameter of 0.1015 to 
0.166, inclusive; and an actual washer or cap diameter of 
0.900 to 1.10, inclusive;
     Non-collated (i.e., hand-drive or bulk), steel nails 
having a bright or galvanized finish, a smooth, barbed or ringed shank, 
an actual length of 0.500 to 4, inclusive; an 
actual shank diameter of 0.1015 to 0.166, 
inclusive; and an actual head diameter of 0.3375 to 
0.500, inclusive;
     Wire collated steel nails, in coils, having a galvanized 
finish, a smooth, barbed or ringed shank, an actual length of 
0.500 to 1.75, inclusive; an actual shank 
diameter of 0.116 to 0.166, inclusive; and an 
actual head diameter of 0.3375 to 0.500, 
inclusive;
     Non-collated (i.e., hand-drive or bulk), steel nails 
having a convex head (commonly known as an umbrella head), a smooth or 
spiral shank, a galvanized finish, an actual length of 1.75 
to 3, inclusive; an actual shank diameter of 
0.131 to 0.152, inclusive; and an actual head 
diameter of 0.450 to 0.813, inclusive;
     Corrugated nails. A corrugated nail is made of a small 
strip of corrugated steel with sharp points on one side;
     Thumb tacks, which are currently classified under HTSUS 
7317.00.10.00;
     Fasteners suitable for use in powder-actuated hand tools, 
not threaded and threaded, which are currently classified under HTSUS 
7317.00.20 and 7317.00.30;
     Certain steel nails that are equal to or less than 0.0720 
inches in shank diameter, round or rectangular in cross section, 
between 0.375 inches and 2.5 inches in length, and that are collated 
with adhesive or polyester film tape backed with a heat seal adhesive; 
and
     Fasteners having a case hardness greater than or equal to 
50 HRC, a carbon content greater than or equal to 0.5 percent, a round 
head, a secondary reduced-diameter raised head section, a centered 
shank, and a smooth symmetrical point, suitable for use in gas-actuated 
hand tools.
    While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this 
investigation is dispositive.

Changes to the Scope of Investigation

    In the Preliminary Determination we stated that we are revising the 
scope of this investigation, as set forth in the Initiation Notice,\2\ 
by removing the language referring to the packaging characteristics of 
certain nails excluded from the scope. See Preliminary Determination, 
76 FR at 68130. Further, we also stated that we are modifying the scope 
of the investigation to reflect the ASTM Standard F 1667 (2011 
revision) instead of the 2005 revision. Id. We invited interested 
parties to comment on these proposed changes to the scope of this 
investigation. We received no comments. Accordingly, for the final 
determination we adopted the revisions to the scope of this 
investigation discussed in the Preliminary Determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Certain Steel Nails From the United Arab Emirates: 
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 76 FR 23559 (April 27, 
2011) (Initiation Notice).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adverse Facts Available

    For the final determination, we continue to find that, by failing 
to provide information we requested, Tech Fast International Ltd. (Tech 
Fast), a respondent selected for individual examination in this 
investigation, did not act to the best of its ability. Thus, we 
continue to find that the use of adverse facts available (AFA) is 
warranted for this company under sections 776(a)(2) and (b) of the Act. 
See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 68130-32.
    In the Preliminary Determination, we selected the lowest rate 
alleged in the petition, 61.54 percent, as the AFA rate for Tech 
Fast.\3\ See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 68131. In this final 
determination, however, we are relying on the average-to-transaction 
comparison methodology for both Dubai Wire and Precision, pursuant to 
section 777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act, as explained below. Therefore, we 
reexamined the appropriate AFA rate for Tech Fast for the final 
determination and corroborated such rate pursuant to section 776(c) of 
the Act. It is the Department's practice to use the highest rate from 
the petition in an investigation when a respondent fails to act to the 
best of its ability to provide the necessary information.\4\ Consistent 
with our practice, for the final determination we find that the highest 
rate in the petition of 184.41 percent is appropriate for Tech Fast. 
See Initiation Notice, 76 FR at 23563.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See the Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on 
Certain Steel Nails from the United Arab Emirates, dated March 31, 
2011. See also Initiation Notice, 76 FR at 23653.
    \4\ See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination: 
Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From Finland, 69 FR 77216 (December 
27, 2004) (unchanged in Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value: Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From Finland, 
70 FR 28279 (May 17, 2005)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Preliminary Determination, we explained our rationale for 
finding that the rates in the petition have probative value and, thus, 
are both reliable and relevant to Tech Fast. See Preliminary 
Determination, 76 FR at 68131-32. Further for the final determination, 
we compared the normal values and net U.S. prices we calculated for 
Dubai Wire and Precision Fasteners in the final determination to the 
normal value and net U.S. price underlying the calculation of 184.41 
percent rate in the petition. We found that certain normal values we 
calculated for Dubai Wire and Precision Fasteners in this investigation 
were higher than or within the range of the normal value in the 
petition; we found that certain net U.S. prices we calculated for Dubai 
Wire and Precision Fasteners in this investigation were lower than or 
within the range of the U.S. price in the petition. See company-
specific analysis memoranda.
    Accordingly, by using information that was corroborated in the pre-
initiation stage of this investigation and determining it to be 
relevant for the uncooperative respondent in this investigation, we 
have corroborated the AFA rate of 184.41 percent ``to the extent 
practicable'' as provided in section 776(c) of the Act.\5\ Therefore, 
with respect to Tech Fast, for the final determination we have used, as 
AFA, the margin in the petition of 184.41 percent, as set forth in the 
notice of initiation. See Initiation Notice, 76 FR at 23563.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See also 19 CFR 351.308(d). See, e.g., Chapter 6 of the 
Department's 2009 Antidumping Manual at 17, and Notice of 
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Postponement of Final Determination: Stainless Steel Bar from the 
United Kingdom, 66 FR 40192 (August 2, 2001) (unchanged in Notice of 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Stainless 
Steel Bar from the United Kingdom, 67 FR 3146 (January 23, 2002).

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

[[Page 17031]]

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this antidumping investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration (Issues and Decision 
Memorandum), which is dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by 
this notice. A list of the issues raised is attached to this notice as 
Appendix I. The Issues and 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 (CRU), 
room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a 
complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed 
directly on the Internet at https://www.trade.gov/ia/. The signed Issues 
and Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Targeted Dumping

    Pursuant to section 777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department may 
employ the average-to-transaction margin-calculation methodology when: 
(1) There is a pattern of export prices that differ significantly among 
purchasers, regions, or periods of time; (2) the Department explains 
why such differences cannot be taken into account using the average-to-
average or transaction-to-transaction methodology. See section 
777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act.
    In the Preliminary Determination, based on the methodology adopted 
in Nails,\6\ as modified in Bags \7\ and Wood Flooring \8\ to correct 
certain ministerial errors, for both Dubai Wire and Precision we found 
a pattern of export prices for comparable merchandise that differs 
significantly among certain customers, regions, and time periods. See 
Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 68133. We determined preliminarily, 
however, that these price differences could be taken into account using 
the standard average-to-average methodology because the alternative 
average-to-transaction methodology yielded a difference in the margin 
that was not meaningful relative to the size of the resulting margin. 
Id. Accordingly, in the Preliminary Determination we applied the 
standard average-to-average methodology to all U.S. sales reported by 
Dubai Wire and Precision. Id
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Certain Steel Nails from the United Arab Emirates: 
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Not Less Than Fair Value, 
73 FR 33985 (June 16, 2008) (Nails).
    \7\ See Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags From Taiwan: 
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Postponement of Final Determination, 74 FR 55183 (October 27, 2009) 
(unchanged in Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from Taiwan: Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 75 FR 14569 (March 
26, 2010)) (Bags).
    \8\ See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of 
China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 76 FR 
64318 (October 18, 2011) (Wood Flooring) and accompanying Issues and 
Decision Memorandum at Comment 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the final determination, for both Dubai Wire and Precision we 
continue to find a pattern of export prices for comparable merchandise 
that differs significantly among customers, regions, or by time period. 
See company-specific analysis memoranda. As a result of certain changes 
to the margin calculations for Dubai Wire and Precision, for the final 
determination we find that that the standard average-to-average 
methodology does not take into account the price differences because 
the alternative average-to-transaction methodology yields a difference 
in the margin that is significant relative to the size of the resulting 
margin. See company-specific analysis memoranda. Accordingly, for the 
final determination we find that the average-to-average methodology 
masks differences in the patterns of prices between the targeted and 
non-targeted groups by averaging low-priced sales to the targeted group 
with high-priced sales to the non-targeted group. See section 
777A(d)(1) of the Act. Therefore, consistent with our practice, for 
this final determination we have applied the average-to-transaction 
methodology to all U.S. sales reported by Dubai Wire and Precision in 
this investigation.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See, e.g., Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from Taiwan: 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 75 FR 14569 
(March 26, 2010) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at 
Comment 1. See Comment 4 of accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum to this final determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at 
verifications, we have made certain changes to the margin calculations 
for Dubai Wire and Precision. For a discussion of these changes, see 
Memorandum to Neal Halper from Gary Urso (Dubai Wire) or from James 
Balog (Precision Fasteners), entitled ``Cost of Production and 
Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final Determination'' 
dated concurrently with this notice (Final Determination Cost 
Calculation Memos) and company-specific analysis memoranda.

Affiliation and Collapsing

    As explained in the Preliminary Determination, we found that Dubai 
Wire and its affiliate, Global Fasteners Limited (GFL), a producer of 
screws, are not a single entity pursuant to 19 CFR 351.401(f) and, 
thus, should not be collapsed for purposes of calculating a dumping 
margin for Dubai Wire. See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 68132. 
Because no party presented new arguments on the issues and we have no 
new information that challenges our finding in the Preliminary 
Determination, we continue to find that Dubai Wire and GFL are not a 
single entity. Further, as explained in the Preliminary Determination, 
we found that, pursuant to section 771(33)(F) of the Act, Precision is 
not affiliated with Millennium Steel and Wire LLC (MSW). For the final 
determination, we continue to find that Precision and MSW are not 
affiliated. See Comment 12 of accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum to this final determination.

Cost of Production

    As explained in the Preliminary Determination, in accordance with 
section 773(a)(4) of the Act, we used constructed value as the basis 
for normal value for Dubai Wire and Precision because neither company 
had a viable comparison market. See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 
68134-35. We calculated constructed value in accordance with section 
773(e) of the Act. Because Dubai Wire and Precision did not have a 
viable comparison market, we determined selling expenses and profit 
under section 773(e)(2)(B) of the Act. In the Preliminary 
Determination, for both Dubai Wire and Precision, we used the profit 
rate derived from the publicly available financial statements for the 
fiscal year most contemporaneous with the POI for a company in the 
United Arab Emirates, Arab Heavy Industries (AHI). Based on record 
evidence provided since the Preliminary Determination and parties' 
comments, we find that for the final determination it is more 
appropriate to use a different source of information to derive the 
constructed value profit. See Comment 6 of accompanying Issues and 
Decision Memorandum to this final determination. Specifically, we find 
that the publicly available financial statements for Abu Dhabi National 
Company for Building Materials best

[[Page 17032]]

meet the requirements of section 773(e)(2)(B) of the Act because it is 
predominately a trading company in building materials, while AHI is 
predominately a provider of services and products to a customer base of 
marine, offshore, and engineering industries which is substantially 
divergent from that of Precision and Dubai Wire. Further, because this 
source of information did not provide enough detail to calculate 
selling expenses for Dubai Wire and Precision Fasteners, we used the 
companies' respective company-wide selling-expense rates. See company-
specific analysis memoranda. With respect to Precision, see also 
Comment 7 of accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum to this final 
determination. We find that this approach satisfies sufficiently the 
criteria of section 773(e) because the selling expenses were derived 
for subject merchandise as well as for products in the same general 
category as subject merchandise.

Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will instruct U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation 
of all entries of nails from the United Arab Emirates which were 
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after 
November 3, 2011, the date of publication of the Preliminary 
Determination. We will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit or the 
posting of a bond equal to the weighted-average margins, as indicated 
below, as follows: (1) The rates for Dubai Wire, Precision, and Tech 
Fast will be the rates we have determined in this final determination; 
(2) if the exporter is not a firm identified in this investigation but 
the producer is, the rate will be the rate established for the producer 
of the subject merchandise; (3) the rate for all other producers or 
exporters will be 4.55 percent, as discussed in the ``All-Others Rate'' 
section, below. These suspension-of-liquidation instructions will 
remain in effect until further notice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Weighted-
                                                               average
                   Manufacturer/exporter                        margin
                                                              (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dubai Wire FZE.............................................         6.29
Precision Fasteners LLC....................................         2.80
Tech Fast International Ltd................................       184.41
------------------------------------------------------------------------

All-Others Rate

    Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated all-
others rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the 
estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters 
and producers individually investigated excluding any zero or de 
minimis margins and any margins determined entirely under section 776 
of the Act. Dubai Wire and Precision Fasteners are the only respondents 
in this investigation for which we calculated a company-specific rate 
that is not zero or de minimis or determined entirely under section 776 
of the Act. Therefore, because there are only two relevant weighted-
average dumping margins for this final determination and because using 
a weighted-average calculation risks disclosure of business proprietary 
information of Dubai Wire and Precision Fasteners, the ``all-others'' 
rate is a simple-average of these two values, which is 4.55 percent. 
See Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube From Mexico: Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 75 FR 60723, 60724 
(October 1, 2010).

Disclosure

    We intend to disclose to parties in this proceeding the 
calculations performed within five days of the date of publication of 
this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the 
International Trade Commission (ITC) of our final determination. As our 
final determination is affirmative and in accordance with section 
735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will determine, within 45 days, whether 
the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or 
threatened with material injury, by reason of imports or sales (or the 
likelihood of sales) for importation of the subject merchandise. If the 
ITC determines that such injury does exist, the Department will issue 
an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess antidumping duties on 
all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the 
suspension of liquidation.

Notification Regarding APO

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of the 
destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order 
is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the 
terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
    This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 
735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: March 19, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I

Issues and Decision Memorandum

1. Targeting Dumping Allegations
2. Methodologies Underlying Targeted Dumping Test
3. De Minimis Standard in the Targeted Dumping Test
4. Application of the Average-to-Transaction Comparison Methodology
5. Zeroing under the Average-to-Transaction Comparison Methodology 
in Investigations
6. Constructed Value Profit
7. Constructed Value Selling Expenses
8. Affiliated Loans
9. Cost Differences Unrelated to Differences in Physical 
Characteristics
10. General and Administrative Expenses
11. Quarterly Cost Methodology
12. Affiliation
13. Adverse Facts Available

[FR Doc. 2012-7067 Filed 3-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P