Galvanized Steel Wire From the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 17418-17422 [2012-7214]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
17418
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 735(d) of
the Act, we have notified the ITC of our
final determination. As our final
determination is affirmative, the ITC
will determine within 45 days whether
imports of the subject merchandise are
causing material injury, or threat of
material injury, to an industry in the
United States. If the ITC determines that
material injury or threat of injury does
not exist, the proceeding will be
terminated and all securities posted will
be refunded or canceled. 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entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,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.
Return or Destruction of Proprietary
Information
This notice will serve as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of
their responsibility concerning the
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of return/
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.
We are issuing and publishing this
determination and notice in accordance
with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the
Act.
Dated: March 16, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
12. LG’s U.S. Lump Sum and Sell-Out
Rebates
13. LG’s Non-Product-Specific Accruals for
U.S. Rebates
14. LG’s U.S. Freight Expenses
15. LG’s U.S. Indirect Selling Expenses
16. LG’s U.S. Inventory Carrying Costs
17. LG’s Materials Purchased from Affiliated
Parties
18. LG’s Research and Development (R&D)
Expenses
Samsung
19. Critical Circumstances
20. Use of Total Adverse Facts Available
(AFA) for Samsung
21. Samsung’s Early Payment Discounts in
the Home Market
22. Samsung’s Home Market Rebates on
Discontinued Models and Kimchi
Refrigerators
23. Samsung’s Remaining Home Market
Rebates
24. Samsung’s Home Market Advertising
Expenses
25. Samsung’s Home Market Warranty
Expenses
26. Corrections Presented at the Start of
Samsung’s Sales Verifications
27. Samsung’s U.S. Rebates
28. Treatment of Payments for Defective
Samsung Merchandise
29. The Denominator of Various Expense
Calculations for Samsung
30. Samsung’s U.S. Credit Periods
31. Samsung’s U.S. Interest Rate
32. Samsung’s U.S. Indirect Selling Expenses
33. Classification of Certain Costs as
Packaging or Packing for Samsung
34. Corrections Presented at the Start of
Samsung’s Cost Verification
35. SEC’s G&A Ratio
36. Samsung’s Scrap Sales
37. Samsung’s Financing Costs
38. Samsung’s Materials Purchased from
Affiliated Parties
39. Samsung’s R&D Expenses
[FR Doc. 2012–7237 Filed 3–23–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Appendix—Issues in Decision
Memorandum
International Trade Administration
General Issues
1. Targeted Dumping
2. Zeroing in Average-to-Transaction
Comparisons
3. Adjustments to Expenses Paid to Affiliated
Parties
4. Classification of Return Freight Expenses
Galvanized Steel Wire From the
People’s Republic of China: Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination
Company-Specific Issues
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Daewoo
5. General and Administrative Expenses for
Daewoo
LG
6. LG’s Corrected Control Numbers
7. LG’s Home Market Rebates
8. LG’s Home Market Advertising Expenses
9. LG’s Home Market Payment Dates
10. LG’s U.S. Payment Dates
11. LG’s U.S. Billing Adjustments
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:32 Mar 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
[C–570–976]
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) determines that
countervailable subsidies are being
provided to producers and exporters of
galvanized steel wire (galvanized wire)
from the People’s Republic of China (the
PRC). For information on the estimated
subsidy rates, see the ‘‘Suspension of
Liquidation’’ section of this notice.
DATES: Effective Date: March 26, 2012.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nicholas Czajkowski or David Lindgren,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Room 7866, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: 202–482–1395 or
202–482–3870, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The U.S. producers that filed the
petition for this investigation are Davis
Wire Corporation, Johnstown Wire
Technologies, Inc., Mid-South Wire
Company, Inc., National Standard, LLC,
and Oklahoma Steel & Wire Company,
Inc. (collectively, Petitioners). This
investigation covers 40 programs. The
mandatory respondents in this
investigation are: (1) M&M Industries
Co. Ltd. (M&M); (2) Shandong Hualing
Hardware and Tool Co., Ltd. (Hualing);
(3) Shanghai Bao Zhang Industry Co.
Ltd. and its cross-owned affiliated
companies Anhui Bao Zhang Metal
Products Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Li Chao
Industry Co., Ltd. (collectively, the Bao
Zhang Companies); and, (4) Tianjin
Huayuan Metal Wire Products Co., Ltd.
and its cross-owned affiliated
companies Tianjin Tianxin Metal
Products Co., Ltd. and Tianjin Mei Jia
Hua Trade Co., Ltd. (collectively, the
Huayuan Companies).
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation for which
we are measuring subsidies is January 1,
2010, through December 31, 2010.
Case History
The following events have occurred
since the Department published the
Preliminary Determination 1 on
September 6, 2011.2 The Huayuan
Companies filed a ministerial error
allegation on September 7, 2011, and,
on September 12, 2011, Petitioners filed
responses to the Huayuan Companies’
allegation. On September 29, 2011, the
Department released its analysis of the
ministerial error allegation, finding that
no ministerial errors were made in the
Preliminary Determination. Petitioners,
the Huayuan Companies and the
1 See Galvanized Steel Wire From the People’s
Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment
of Final Determination With Final Antidumping
Determination, 76 FR 55031 (September 6, 2011)
(Preliminary Determination).
2 Public versions of all business proprietary
documents and all public documents are 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.
E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM
26MRN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices
Government of the People’s Republic of
China (GOC) filed requests for a hearing
on September 14, 22 and October 6,
2011, respectively, and, on January 30,
2012, all three parties withdrew their
requests for a hearing.
Between September 15 and October
21, 2011, the GOC, Petitioners, the Bao
Zhang Companies and the Huayuan
Companies filed factual information
submissions. Except for the Bao Zhang
Companies’ October 21, 2011 wire rod
benchmark submission, all were
rejected by the Department as untimely
under 19 CFR 351.301(c). The
Department informed Petitioners they
could re-file certain portions of their
rejected material, which they did on
October 31, 2011. On September 19,
2011, the Department issued
supplemental questionnaires to the
GOC, the Bao Zhang Companies, and
the Huayuan Companies, which, in
turn, submitted responses between
September 28 and October 3, 2011. On
October 7, 2011, the Department issued
additional supplemental questionnaires
to the Bao Zhang Companies and the
GOC, with responses filed on October
13 and 14, 2011, respectively. Moreover,
on October 14, 2011, Department issued
a supplemental questionnaire to the
Huayuan Companies, which filed a
response on October 24, 2011.
Between October 21 and November 2,
2011, the Department issued verification
outlines to the GOC, the Bao Zhang
Companies, the Huayuan Companies
and M&M. On October 24, 2011,
Petitioners filed pre-verification
comments. The Department conducted
verification of the Bao Zhang
Companies and the GOC from October
31 to November 8, 2011. Although
scheduled for verification, the Huayuan
Companies and M&M verbally informed
the Department on November 3, 2011
that they would not participate in
verification; a letter filed on November
9, 2011 stated the reasons for their
decision not to participate. The Bao
Zhang Companies filed minor
corrections on November 4, 2011, and
on November 10 and 15, 2011, the Bao
Zhang Companies and the GOC,
respectively, timely filed verification
exhibits. The Department issued
verification reports for the Bao Zhang
Companies and the GOC on December
22, 2011.
With respect to scope issues, on
November 2, 2011, Qingdao Ant
Hardware Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
(AHM) placed on the record physical
samples and other information
pertaining to the scope of the
investigation, and, on November 16,
2011, a public viewing of the physical
samples was held at the Department. On
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:32 Mar 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
December 15, 2011, the Department
placed on the record of this
investigation the preliminary
determinations in the corresponding
antidumping duty (AD) investigations of
galvanized wire from the PRC and
Mexico 3 in which scope comments filed
prior to the preliminary countervailing
duty (CVD) determination were
addressed. When placing these
preliminary AD determinations on the
record, we requested that parties submit
any comments on scope issues when
they filed their case briefs.4
On January 9, 2012, the GOC
requested that the Department terminate
this investigation based on the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
December 19, 2011 ruling in GPX
International Tire Corp. v. United
States.5 On January 13, 2012, Petitioners
filed rebuttal comments in response to
the GOC’s request for termination.
The Department issued a postpreliminary analysis memorandum
regarding three programs on January 17,
2012.6 Interested parties submitted case
briefs on January 25 and 31, 2012, and
rebuttal briefs on February 6, 2012. On
March 1, 2012, the Department
requested all parties in all three
galvanized wire investigations that filed
scope comments in their case and
rebuttal briefs to ensure their comments
were placed on the records of all three
investigations, and all parties were
provided an opportunity to comment on
these scope comments. No additional
comments on scope issues were
submitted.
Scope Comments
As referenced in the ‘‘Case History’’
section above, the Department placed
the preliminary determinations of the
companion galvanized wire AD
investigations from Mexico and the PRC
on the record of this investigation. In
those preliminary determinations, the
3 See Galvanized Steel Wire From the People’s
Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement
of Final Determination, 76 FR 68407 (November 4,
2011); see also Galvanized Steel Wire From Mexico:
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Postponement of Final
Determination, 76 FR 68422 (November 4, 2011).
4 See Memorandum to File ‘‘Decisions Regarding
Scope Comments from Investigations of Galvanized
Steel Wire from the PRC and Mexico,’’ dated
December 15, 2011.
5 See GPX Int’l Tires Corp. v. United States, 666
F.3d 732 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
6 See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration from Barbara E.
Tillman, Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6,
through Christian Marsh Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations ‘‘Countervailing Duty Investigation on
Galvanized Steel Wire from the People’s Republic
of China: Post-Preliminary Analysis
Memorandum,’’ dated January 17, 2012.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
17419
Department found that galvanized wire
with a diameter less than one millimeter
was subject to the scope of the
investigation. We invited parties to
comment on this issue. No additional
comments were made on this issue.
Thus, the Department continues to find,
specifically, that galvanized wire with a
diameter less than one millimeter but
equal to or greater than 0.5842
millimeters is covered by the scope.
Also, as noted in the ‘‘Case History’’
section above, all scope-related
comments submitted by parties in all
three investigations in their case and
rebuttal briefs are on the record of all
three investigations. Petitioners and
AHM provided comments on the scope
and merchandise that is to be covered
under the scope. Based on our analysis
of these comments, the Department
continues to find that hobby wire,
which is galvanized steel wire, in
lengths of more than 15 feet, is properly
included in the scope of this
investigation.7 Further, certain parties
in the companion AD investigation
involving Mexico provided comments
on the scope and merchandise that is to
be covered under the scope. Based on
our analysis of these comments, the
Department has clarified the scope
language to include not only circular
cross section material, but also out-ofround material that meets the circular
tolerances. In addition, the Department
has included an additional HTSUS
subheading as part of the scope
description.8
Scope of Investigation
The merchandise covered by this
investigation is galvanized steel wire.
See Appendix I for a complete
description of the scope of this
investigation.
Analysis of Subsidy Programs and
Comments Received
The subsidy programs under
investigation and the issues raised in
the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in
this investigation are discussed in
Memorandum to Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final
7 AMH’s and Petitioners comments on the scope
of the investigation are fully addressed in
Galvanized Steel Wire from the People’s Republic
of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 3, issued concurrently
with this final determination.
8 These comments are fully addressed in Notice
of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value: Galvanized Steel Wire from Mexico and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comments 3 and 4, issued concurrently with this
final determination.
E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM
26MRN1
17420
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices
Determination in the Countervailing
Duty Investigation of Galvanized Steel
Wire from the People’s Republic of
China (Decision Memorandum), which
is hereby adopted by this notice. A list
of the subsidy programs and the issues
that parties raised and to which we
responded in the Decision
Memorandum is attached to this notice
as Appendix II. The Decision
Memorandum is a public document,
which is on file electronically via IA
ACCESS. In addition, a complete
version of the Decision Memorandum is
also accessible on the Web at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The signed Decision
Memorandum and the electronic
versions of the Decision Memorandum
are identical in content.
Use of Facts Otherwise Available,
Including Adverse Inferences
For purposes of this final
determination, we have continued to
rely on facts available and have
continued to apply adverse inferences
in accordance with sections 776(a) and
(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(the Act) with regard to: (1) The CVD
rate to be applied to the non-cooperative
mandatory company respondent,
Hualing; (2) whether the wire rod and
zinc input producers at issue are
government authorities that provide
wire rod and zinc for less than adequate
remuneration (LTAR); and, (3) the
GOC’s provision of electricity for LTAR.
In addition, for the purposes of this final
determination, we are also applying
adverse facts available (AFA) to (1)
determine the CVD rate to be applied to
the non-cooperating mandatory
respondents the Huayuan Companies
and M&M, and (2) determine that the
Zhabei District ‘‘Save Energy Reduce
Emission Team’’ award is specific
pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of
the Act. A full discussion of our
decision to apply AFA is presented in
the Decision Memorandum under the
section ‘‘Use of Facts Otherwise
Available and Adverse Inferences.’’
Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section
703(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, we have
calculated a rate for each individually
investigated producer/exporter of the
subject merchandise. Section
705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act states that for
companies not investigated, we will
determine an ‘‘all-others’’ rate equal to
the weighted average countervailable
subsidy rates established for exporters
and producers individually
investigated, excluding any zero and de
minimis countervailable subsidy rates,
and any rates determined entirely under
section 776 of the Act.
In this investigation, the only rate not
based entirely on AFA is the rate
calculated for the Bao Zhang
Companies. Consequently, the rate
calculated for the Bao Zhang Companies
is also assigned as the ‘‘all-others’’ rate.
For those non-cooperative companies
that did not fully participate in this
investigation, we have determined rates
based solely on AFA, in accordance
with sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act.9
Therefore, we determine the total
estimated net countervailable subsidy
rates to be:
Ad Valorem net
subsidy rate
(percent)
Company
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
M&M Industries Co. Ltd ...................................................................................................................................................................
Shandong Hualing Hardware and Tool Co., Ltd. ............................................................................................................................
Shanghai Bao Zhang Industry Co. Ltd., Anhui Bao Zhang Metal Products Co., Ltd., and Shanghai Li Chao Industry Co., Ltd.
(collectively the Bao Zhang Companies) .....................................................................................................................................
Tianjin Huayuan Metal Wire Products Co., Ltd., Tianjin Tianxin Metal Products Co., Ltd., and Tianjin Mei Jia Hua Trade Co.,
Ltd. (collectively, the Huayuan Companies) ................................................................................................................................
All Others Rate ................................................................................................................................................................................
As a result of our Preliminary
Determination and pursuant to section
703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
suspend liquidation of all entries of
subject merchandise from the PRC
which were entered or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after
September 6, 2011, the date of the
publication of the Preliminary
Determination in the Federal Register.
In accordance with section 703(d) of the
Act, we later issued instructions to CBP
to discontinue the suspension of
liquidation for CVD purposes for subject
merchandise entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, on or after January 4,
2012, but to continue the suspension of
liquidation of all entries from
September 6, 2011, through January 3,
2012.
We will issue a CVD order and
reinstate the suspension of liquidation
under section 706(a) of the Act if the
U.S. International Trade Commission
(ITC) issues a final affirmative injury
determination, and will require a cash
deposit of estimated CVDs for such
entries of merchandise in the amounts
indicated above. If the ITC determines
that material injury, or threat of material
injury, does not exist, this proceeding
will be terminated and all estimated
duties deposited or securities posted as
a result of the suspension of liquidation
will be refunded or canceled.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 705(d) of
the Act, we will notify the ITC of our
determination. In addition, we are
making available to the ITC all nonprivileged and non-proprietary
information related to this investigation.
We will allow the ITC access to all
privileged and business proprietary
information in our files, provided the
ITC confirms that it will not disclose
19:32 Mar 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19.06
223.27
19.06
such information, either publicly or
under an administrative protective order
(APO), without the written consent of
the Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Return or Destruction of Proprietary
Information
In the event that the ITC issues a final
negative injury determination, this
notice will serve as the only reminder
to parties subject to an APO of their
responsibility concerning the
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the return/
destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a violation which is subject to
sanction.
9 See ‘‘Non-Cooperative Companies’’ in the ‘‘Use
of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse
Inferences’’ section of the Decision Memorandum.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
223.27
223.27
E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM
26MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices
This determination is issued and
published pursuant to sections 705(d)
and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: March 19, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I
Scope of Investigation
The scope of this investigation covers
galvanized steel wire which is a cold-drawn
carbon quality steel product in coils, of
circular or approximately circular, solid cross
section with any actual diameter of 0.5842
mm (0.0230 inch) or more, plated or coated
with zinc (whether by hot-dipping or
electroplating).
Steel products to be included in the scope
of this investigation, regardless of
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTSUS) definitions, are products in
which: (1) iron predominates, by weight, over
each of the other contained elements; (2) the
carbon content is two percent or less, by
weight; and (3) none of the elements listed
below exceeds the quantity, by weight,
respectively indicated:
—1.80 percent of manganese, or
—1.50 percent of silicon, or
—1.00 percent of copper, or
—0.50 percent of aluminum, or
—1.25 percent of chromium, or
—0.30 percent of cobalt, or
—0.40 percent of lead, or
—1.25 percent of nickel, or
—0.30 percent of tungsten, or
—0.02 percent of boron, or
—0.10 percent of molybdenum, or
—0.10 percent of niobium, or
—0.41 percent of titanium, or
—0.15 percent of vanadium, or
—0.15 percent of zirconium.
Specifically excluded from the scope of
this investigation is galvanized steel wire in
coils of 15 feet or less which is pre-packed
in individual retail packages. The products
subject to this investigation are currently
classified in subheadings 7217.20.30,
7217.20.45, or 7217.90.10 of the HTSUS
which cover galvanized wire of all diameters
and all carbon content. Galvanized wire is
reported under statistical reporting numbers
7217.20.3000, 7217.20.4510, 7217.20.4520,
7217.20.4530, 7217.20.4540, 7217.20.4550,
7217.20.4560, 7217.20.4570, 7217.20.4580,
and 7217.90.1000. These products may also
enter under HTSUS subheadings
7229.20.0015, 7229.20.0090, 7229.90.5008,
7229.90.5016, 7229.90.5031, and
7229.90.5051. Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience
and Customs purposes, the written
description of the merchandise is dispositive.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Appendix II
Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Subsidy Valuation Information
A. Period of Investigation
B. Attribution of Subsidies
C. Allocation Period
D. Discount Rates for Allocating NonRecurring Subsidies
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:32 Mar 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
III. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and
Adverse Inferences
Non-Cooperative Companies
Input Producers—Government Authorities
Under Provision of Wire Rod and Zinc
for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
GOC—Provision of Electricity for Less
Than Adequate Remuneration
GOC—Specificity of Zhabei District ‘‘Save
Energy Reduce Emission Team’’ Award
Program
IV. Analysis of Programs
A. Programs Determined To Be
Countervailable
1. Provision of Wire Rod for Less Than
Adequate Remuneration
2. Provision of Zinc for Less Than
Adequate Remuneration
3. Provision of Electricity for Less Than
Adequate Remuneration
4. Export Grants From Local Governments
5. Zhabei District ‘‘Save Energy Reduce
Emission Team’’ Award Program
B. Program Determined Not To Confer a
Benefit During the POI
Export Subsidies Characterized as ‘‘VAT
Rebates’’
C. Program for Which the Benefit Has No
Impact on the Subsidy Rate
Exemption From City Construction Tax
and Education Tax for Foreign Invested
Enterprises
D. Programs Determined To Be Not Used
1. Policy Loans to the Galvanized Wire
Industry
2. Preferential Loans for Key Projects and
Technologies
3. Preferential Loans and Directed Credit
4. Preferential Lending to Galvanized Wire
Producers and Exporters Classified as
‘‘Honorable Enterprises’’
5. Loans and Interest Subsidies Provided
Pursuant to the Northeast Revitalization
Program
6. Provision of Land Use Rights for LTAR
Within the Jinzhou District Within the
City of Dalian
7. Provision of Land Use Rights for LTAR
to Enterprises Within the Zhaoqing HighTech Industry Development Zone in
Guangdong Province
8. Provision of Land Use Rights for LTAR
to Enterprises Within the South Sanshui
Science and Technology Industrial Park
of Foshan City
9. Income Tax Credits for DomesticallyOwned Companies Purchasing
Domestically-Produced Equipment
10. Income Tax Exemption for Investment
in Domestic Technological Renovation
11. Accelerated Depreciation for
Enterprises Located in the Northeast
Region
12. Forgiveness of Tax Arrears for
Enterprises in the Old Industrial Bases of
Northeast China
13. Income Tax Exemption for Investors in
Designated Geographical Regions Within
Liaoning Province
14. VAT Deduction on Fixed Assets
15. Import Tariff and VAT Exemptions for
FIEs and Certain Domestic Enterprises
Using Imported Equipment in
Encouraged Industries
16. Reduction in or Exemption From Fixed
Assets Investment Orientation
Regulatory Tax
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
17421
17. ‘‘Five Points, One Line’’ Program of
Liaoning Province
18. Provincial Export Interest Subsidies
19. State Key Technology Project Fund
20. Subsidies for Development of Famous
Export Brands and China World Top
Brands
21. Sub-Central Government Programs to
Promote Famous Export Brands and
China World Top Brands
22. Zhejiang Province Program to Rebate
Antidumping Legal Fees
23. Technology to Improve Trade Research
and Development Fund of Jiangsu
Province
24. Outstanding Growth Private Enterprise
and Small and Medium-Sized
Enterprises Development in Jiangyin
Fund of Jiangyin City
25. Grants for Programs Under the 2007
Science and Technology Development
Plan in Shandong Province
26. Special Funds for Encouraging Foreign
Economic and Trade Development and
for Drawing Significant Foreign
Investment Projects in Shandong
Province
27. ‘‘Two Free, Three Half’’ Tax
Exemptions for ‘‘Productive’’ FIEs
28. Income Tax Exemption Program for
Export-Oriented FIEs
29. Local Income Tax Exemption and
Reduction Programs for ‘‘Productive’’
FIEs
30. Preferential Tax Programs for FIEs
Recognized as High or New Technology
Enterprises
31. Income Tax Subsidies for FIEs Based
on Geographic Location
32. VAT Refunds for FIEs Purchasing
Domestically-Produced Equipment
33. Income Tax Credits for FIEs Purchasing
Domestically-Produced Equipment
V. Analysis of Comments
General Issues
Comment 1: Whether the Investigation
Should Be Terminated Based on the GPX
III Ruling
Comment 2: Application of CVD Law to the
PRC
Comment 3: Whether Application of the
CVD Law to NMEs Violates the
Administrative Procedures Act (APA)
Comment 4: Double Remedies
Case-Specific Issues
Comment 5: Whether There is a Basis for
Countervailing Inputs Purchased From
Input Suppliers
Comment 6: Whether the Department
Improperly Rejected the GOC’s
September 15, 2011, Submission and
Whether the Application of AFA is
Warranted
Comment 7: Whether the Department
Improperly Rejected the Bao Zhang
Companies’ September 26, 2011
Submission
Comment 8: Whether the Department
Should Revise Its Benchmark for Wire
Rod
Comment 9: Whether the Department
Should Apply AFA in Selecting the
Electricity Benchmark
Comment 10: Whether the Bao Zhang
Companies’ Additional Electricity
Charges Should Be Included in the Final
Determination
E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM
26MRN1
17422
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices
Comment 11: Whether the Department
Should Apply the Same Electricity
Benchmark to both ABZ and SBZ
Comment 12: Application of AFA to the
Huayuan Companies and M&M
VI. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2012–7214 Filed 3–23–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–201–839]
Notice of Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value and
Affirmative Critical Circumstances
Determination: Bottom Mount
Combination Refrigerator-Freezers
From Mexico
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: We determine that imports of
bottom mount combination refrigeratorfreezers (bottom mount refrigerators)
from Mexico are being, or are likely to
be, sold in the United States at less than
fair value (LTFV), as provided in section
735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act). In addition, we
determine that critical circumstances
exist with respect to the subject
merchandise exported from Mexico by
Samsung Electronics Mexico, S.A. de
C.V. (Samsung).
Based on our analysis of the
comments received, we made changes
in the margin calculations. Therefore,
the final determination differs from the
preliminary determination. The final
weighted-average dumping margins for
the investigated companies are listed
below in the section entitled ‘‘Final
Determination Margins.’’
DATES: Effective Date: March 26, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Goldberger or Katherine Johnson,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–4136 and (202)
482–4929, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
Background
On November 2, 2011, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
preliminary determination of sales at
LTFV in the antidumping duty
investigation of bottom mount
refrigerators from Mexico.1 Since the
1 See Notice of Preliminary Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:32 Mar 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
preliminary determination, the
following events have occurred.
In November 2011, we issued
supplemental questionnaires to, and
received responses from, all four
respondents: Electrolux Home Products
Corp. NV/Electrolux Home Products De
Mexico, S.A. de C.V. (Electrolux), LG
Electronics Monterrey Mexico, S.A. de
C.V. (LGEMM), Controladora Mabe, S.A.
de C.V./Mabe, S.A. de C.V. (Mabe), and
Samsung. Also, in November 2011, we
received updated shipment information
for our critical circumstances analysis
from Electrolux, LGEMM, and Samsung.
On December 5, 2011, Whirlpool
Corporation (hereafter, the petitioner)
amended its targeted dumping
allegation with respect to Samsung to
reflect the revised U.S. sales data
submitted by Samsung in response to
the Department’s November 2011,
supplemental questionnaire.
In November and December 2011, we
verified the questionnaire responses of
the four respondents in this case, in
accordance with section 782(i) of the
Act. In December, January and February
2012, we issued our verification
findings for each respondent.2
Final Determination, and Affirmative Critical
Circumstances Determination: Bottom Mount
Combination Refrigerator-Freezers from Mexico, 76
FR 67688 (Nov. 2, 2011) (Preliminary
Determination).
2 See Memorandum to The File entitled
‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of Electrolux
Home Products, Corp. N.V. and Electrolux Home
Products, Inc. (collectively ‘‘Electrolux’’) in the
Antidumping Investigation of Bottom Mount.
Combination Refrigerator-Freezers from Mexico,’’
dated December 22, 2011; Memorandum to The File
entitled ‘‘Verification of the Sales Response of
Electrolux Home Products, Corp. N.V. and
Electrolux Home Products, Inc. (collectively
‘‘Electrolux’’) in the Antidumping Duty
Investigation of Bottom Mount Combination
Refrigerator-Freezers (BMRFs) from Mexico,’’ dated
February 1, 2012; Memorandum to The File entitled
‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of LG
Electronics, Inc. in the Antidumping Investigation
of Bottom-Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers
from the Republic of Korea, dated December 22,
2011; Memorandum to the File entitled
‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of LG Electronics
Monterrey Mexico, S.A. de C.V. in the Antidumping
Investigation of Bottom Mount Combination
Refrigerator-Freezers from Mexico,’’ dated
December 22, 2011; Memorandum to The File
entitled ‘‘Verification of the Third Country Sales
Response of LG Electronics Monterrey Mexico, S.A,
de C.V, and LG Electronics Canada,’’ February 1,
2012; Memorandum to The File entitled
‘‘Verification of the U.S. Sales Response of LG
Electronics Monterrey Mexico, S.A. de C.V. and LG
Electronics USA, Inc.,’’ dated February 2, 2012;
Memorandum to the File entitled ‘‘Verification of
the Sales Response of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd
in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of
Bottom-Mount Refrigerator-Freezers from Korea,’’
dated February 2, 2012; Memorandum to the File
entitled ‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of
Controladora Mabe S.A. de C.V. Mabe S.A. de C.V.,
and Leiser S. de R.L. in the Antidumping
Investigation of Bottom-Mount Combination
Refrigerator-Freezers from Mexico,’’ dated January
4, 2012; Memorandum to The File entitled
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
In February 2012, the Department
requested, and the respondents
submitted, revised U.S. and/or
comparison-market sales listings to
reflect certain verification findings.
Also, in February 2012, the petitioner
and the respondents (except for
Electrolux) submitted case and rebuttal
briefs. On February 22, 2012, the
Government of Mexico submitted
comments on certain aspects of the
Department’s preliminary
determination. On February 24, 2012,
the Department held a hearing in this
case.
Subsequent to the Preliminary
Determination, the Department revised
the computer programs used to calculate
the respondents’ dumping margins to
ensure that they 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
March 16, 2012, Memoranda to The File
entitled ‘‘Final Determination Margin
Calculation for LG Electronics
Monterrey Mexico, S.A. de C.V.
(LGEMM)’’ (LGEMM Calculation
Memo); ‘‘Final Determination Margin
Calculation for Samsung Electronics
Mexico S.A. de C.V. (SEM)’’ (Samsung
Calculation Memo); ‘‘Final
Determination Margin Calculation for
Electrolux Home Products, Corp. N.V./
Electrolux Home Products de Mexico,
S.A. de C.V’’ (Electrolux Calculation
Memo); and ‘‘Final Determination
Margin Calculation for Controladora
Mabe S.A. de C.V., Mabe S.A. de C.V.,
and Leiser S. de R.L. (collectively,
Mabe),’’ which contain the revised
preliminary antidumping duty margin
program log and output for each
respondent.
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (POI) is
January 1, 2010, through December 31,
2010.
‘‘Verification of the Sales Responses of General
Electric Company,’’ dated January 13, 2012;
Memorandum to The File entitled ‘‘Verification of
the Sales Responses of Controladora Mabe S.A. de
C.V., and Mabe S.A. de C.V. (collectively,
‘‘Mabe’’),’’ dated January 25, 2012; Memorandum to
The File entitled ‘‘Verification of the Cost Response
of Samsung Electronics Mexico S.A. de C.V. in the
Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Bottom
Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers from
Mexico’’, dated December 21, 2011; Memorandum
to The File entitled ‘‘Verification of the U.S. Sales
Response of Samsung Electronics Mexico, S.A. de
C.V.,’’ dated January 9, 2012; and Memorandum to
The File entitled ‘‘Verification of Samsung
Electronics America Inc.,’’ dated January 26, 2012.
E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM
26MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 58 (Monday, March 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17418-17422]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7214]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-570-976]
Galvanized Steel Wire From the People's Republic of China: Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) determines that
countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters
of galvanized steel wire (galvanized wire) from the People's Republic
of China (the PRC). For information on the estimated subsidy rates, see
the ``Suspension of Liquidation'' section of this notice.
DATES: Effective Date: March 26, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicholas Czajkowski or David Lindgren,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Room 7866, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202-482-1395 or 202-482-3870,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The U.S. producers that filed the petition for this investigation
are Davis Wire Corporation, Johnstown Wire Technologies, Inc., Mid-
South Wire Company, Inc., National Standard, LLC, and Oklahoma Steel &
Wire Company, Inc. (collectively, Petitioners). This investigation
covers 40 programs. The mandatory respondents in this investigation
are: (1) M&M Industries Co. Ltd. (M&M); (2) Shandong Hualing Hardware
and Tool Co., Ltd. (Hualing); (3) Shanghai Bao Zhang Industry Co. Ltd.
and its cross-owned affiliated companies Anhui Bao Zhang Metal Products
Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Li Chao Industry Co., Ltd. (collectively, the
Bao Zhang Companies); and, (4) Tianjin Huayuan Metal Wire Products Co.,
Ltd. and its cross-owned affiliated companies Tianjin Tianxin Metal
Products Co., Ltd. and Tianjin Mei Jia Hua Trade Co., Ltd.
(collectively, the Huayuan Companies).
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation for which we are measuring subsidies is
January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2010.
Case History
The following events have occurred since the Department published
the Preliminary Determination \1\ on September 6, 2011.\2\ The Huayuan
Companies filed a ministerial error allegation on September 7, 2011,
and, on September 12, 2011, Petitioners filed responses to the Huayuan
Companies' allegation. On September 29, 2011, the Department released
its analysis of the ministerial error allegation, finding that no
ministerial errors were made in the Preliminary Determination.
Petitioners, the Huayuan Companies and the
[[Page 17419]]
Government of the People's Republic of China (GOC) filed requests for a
hearing on September 14, 22 and October 6, 2011, respectively, and, on
January 30, 2012, all three parties withdrew their requests for a
hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Galvanized Steel Wire From the People's Republic of
China: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and
Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping
Determination, 76 FR 55031 (September 6, 2011) (Preliminary
Determination).
\2\ Public versions of all business proprietary documents and
all public documents are 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Between September 15 and October 21, 2011, the GOC, Petitioners,
the Bao Zhang Companies and the Huayuan Companies filed factual
information submissions. Except for the Bao Zhang Companies' October
21, 2011 wire rod benchmark submission, all were rejected by the
Department as untimely under 19 CFR 351.301(c). The Department informed
Petitioners they could re-file certain portions of their rejected
material, which they did on October 31, 2011. On September 19, 2011,
the Department issued supplemental questionnaires to the GOC, the Bao
Zhang Companies, and the Huayuan Companies, which, in turn, submitted
responses between September 28 and October 3, 2011. On October 7, 2011,
the Department issued additional supplemental questionnaires to the Bao
Zhang Companies and the GOC, with responses filed on October 13 and 14,
2011, respectively. Moreover, on October 14, 2011, Department issued a
supplemental questionnaire to the Huayuan Companies, which filed a
response on October 24, 2011.
Between October 21 and November 2, 2011, the Department issued
verification outlines to the GOC, the Bao Zhang Companies, the Huayuan
Companies and M&M. On October 24, 2011, Petitioners filed pre-
verification comments. The Department conducted verification of the Bao
Zhang Companies and the GOC from October 31 to November 8, 2011.
Although scheduled for verification, the Huayuan Companies and M&M
verbally informed the Department on November 3, 2011 that they would
not participate in verification; a letter filed on November 9, 2011
stated the reasons for their decision not to participate. The Bao Zhang
Companies filed minor corrections on November 4, 2011, and on November
10 and 15, 2011, the Bao Zhang Companies and the GOC, respectively,
timely filed verification exhibits. The Department issued verification
reports for the Bao Zhang Companies and the GOC on December 22, 2011.
With respect to scope issues, on November 2, 2011, Qingdao Ant
Hardware Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (AHM) placed on the record physical
samples and other information pertaining to the scope of the
investigation, and, on November 16, 2011, a public viewing of the
physical samples was held at the Department. On December 15, 2011, the
Department placed on the record of this investigation the preliminary
determinations in the corresponding antidumping duty (AD)
investigations of galvanized wire from the PRC and Mexico \3\ in which
scope comments filed prior to the preliminary countervailing duty (CVD)
determination were addressed. When placing these preliminary AD
determinations on the record, we requested that parties submit any
comments on scope issues when they filed their case briefs.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Galvanized Steel Wire From the People's Republic of
China: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
and Postponement of Final Determination, 76 FR 68407 (November 4,
2011); see also Galvanized Steel Wire From Mexico: Preliminary
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of
Final Determination, 76 FR 68422 (November 4, 2011).
\4\ See Memorandum to File ``Decisions Regarding Scope Comments
from Investigations of Galvanized Steel Wire from the PRC and
Mexico,'' dated December 15, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 9, 2012, the GOC requested that the Department terminate
this investigation based on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit December 19, 2011 ruling in GPX International Tire Corp. v.
United States.\5\ On January 13, 2012, Petitioners filed rebuttal
comments in response to the GOC's request for termination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See GPX Int'l Tires Corp. v. United States, 666 F.3d 732
(Fed. Cir. 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department issued a post-preliminary analysis memorandum
regarding three programs on January 17, 2012.\6\ Interested parties
submitted case briefs on January 25 and 31, 2012, and rebuttal briefs
on February 6, 2012. On March 1, 2012, the Department requested all
parties in all three galvanized wire investigations that filed scope
comments in their case and rebuttal briefs to ensure their comments
were placed on the records of all three investigations, and all parties
were provided an opportunity to comment on these scope comments. No
additional comments on scope issues were submitted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration from Barbara E. Tillman, Director, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 6, through Christian Marsh Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations
``Countervailing Duty Investigation on Galvanized Steel Wire from
the People's Republic of China: Post-Preliminary Analysis
Memorandum,'' dated January 17, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope Comments
As referenced in the ``Case History'' section above, the Department
placed the preliminary determinations of the companion galvanized wire
AD investigations from Mexico and the PRC on the record of this
investigation. In those preliminary determinations, the Department
found that galvanized wire with a diameter less than one millimeter was
subject to the scope of the investigation. We invited parties to
comment on this issue. No additional comments were made on this issue.
Thus, the Department continues to find, specifically, that galvanized
wire with a diameter less than one millimeter but equal to or greater
than 0.5842 millimeters is covered by the scope.
Also, as noted in the ``Case History'' section above, all scope-
related comments submitted by parties in all three investigations in
their case and rebuttal briefs are on the record of all three
investigations. Petitioners and AHM provided comments on the scope and
merchandise that is to be covered under the scope. Based on our
analysis of these comments, the Department continues to find that hobby
wire, which is galvanized steel wire, in lengths of more than 15 feet,
is properly included in the scope of this investigation.\7\ Further,
certain parties in the companion AD investigation involving Mexico
provided comments on the scope and merchandise that is to be covered
under the scope. Based on our analysis of these comments, the
Department has clarified the scope language to include not only
circular cross section material, but also out-of-round material that
meets the circular tolerances. In addition, the Department has included
an additional HTSUS subheading as part of the scope description.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ AMH's and Petitioners comments on the scope of the
investigation are fully addressed in Galvanized Steel Wire from the
People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 3, issued concurrently with this final determination.
\8\ These comments are fully addressed in Notice of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Galvanized Steel
Wire from Mexico and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comments 3 and 4, issued concurrently with this final determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of Investigation
The merchandise covered by this investigation is galvanized steel
wire. See Appendix I for a complete description of the scope of this
investigation.
Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received
The subsidy programs under investigation and the issues raised in
the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are
discussed in Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final
[[Page 17420]]
Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Galvanized
Steel Wire from the People's Republic of China (Decision Memorandum),
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the subsidy programs
and the issues that parties raised and to which we responded in the
Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as Appendix II. The
Decision Memorandum is a public document, which is on file
electronically via IA ACCESS. In addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memorandum is also accessible on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The signed Decision Memorandum and the electronic
versions of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Use of Facts Otherwise Available, Including Adverse Inferences
For purposes of this final determination, we have continued to rely
on facts available and have continued to apply adverse inferences in
accordance with sections 776(a) and (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act) with regard to: (1) The CVD rate to be applied to the
non-cooperative mandatory company respondent, Hualing; (2) whether the
wire rod and zinc input producers at issue are government authorities
that provide wire rod and zinc for less than adequate remuneration
(LTAR); and, (3) the GOC's provision of electricity for LTAR. In
addition, for the purposes of this final determination, we are also
applying adverse facts available (AFA) to (1) determine the CVD rate to
be applied to the non-cooperating mandatory respondents the Huayuan
Companies and M&M, and (2) determine that the Zhabei District ``Save
Energy Reduce Emission Team'' award is specific pursuant to sections
776(a) and (b) of the Act. A full discussion of our decision to apply
AFA is presented in the Decision Memorandum under the section ``Use of
Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences.''
Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 703(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, we have
calculated a rate for each individually investigated producer/exporter
of the subject merchandise. Section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act states
that for companies not investigated, we will determine an ``all-
others'' rate equal to the weighted average countervailable subsidy
rates established for exporters and producers individually
investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis countervailable subsidy
rates, and any rates determined entirely under section 776 of the Act.
In this investigation, the only rate not based entirely on AFA is
the rate calculated for the Bao Zhang Companies. Consequently, the rate
calculated for the Bao Zhang Companies is also assigned as the ``all-
others'' rate. For those non-cooperative companies that did not fully
participate in this investigation, we have determined rates based
solely on AFA, in accordance with sections 776(a) and (b) of the
Act.\9\ Therefore, we determine the total estimated net countervailable
subsidy rates to be:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See ``Non-Cooperative Companies'' in the ``Use of Facts
Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences'' section of the Decision
Memorandum.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ad Valorem net
Company subsidy rate
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
M&M Industries Co. Ltd................................ 223.27
Shandong Hualing Hardware and Tool Co., Ltd........... 223.27
Shanghai Bao Zhang Industry Co. Ltd., Anhui Bao Zhang 19.06
Metal Products Co., Ltd., and Shanghai Li Chao
Industry Co., Ltd. (collectively the Bao Zhang
Companies)...........................................
Tianjin Huayuan Metal Wire Products Co., Ltd., Tianjin 223.27
Tianxin Metal Products Co., Ltd., and Tianjin Mei Jia
Hua Trade Co., Ltd. (collectively, the Huayuan
Companies)...........................................
All Others Rate....................................... 19.06
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result of our Preliminary Determination and pursuant to
section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of subject
merchandise from the PRC which were entered or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after September 6, 2011, the date of
the publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal
Register. In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we later issued
instructions to CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for
CVD purposes for subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, on or after January 4, 2012, but to continue the suspension
of liquidation of all entries from September 6, 2011, through January
3, 2012.
We will issue a CVD order and reinstate the suspension of
liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act if the U.S. International
Trade Commission (ITC) issues a final affirmative injury determination,
and will require a cash deposit of estimated CVDs for such entries of
merchandise in the amounts indicated above. If the ITC determines that
material injury, or threat of material injury, does not exist, this
proceeding will be terminated and all estimated duties deposited or
securities posted as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be
refunded or canceled.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the
ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the
ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information related to this
investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and
business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC
confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or
under an administrative protective order (APO), without the written
consent of the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information
In the event that the ITC issues a final negative injury
determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties
subject to an APO of their responsibility concerning the destruction of
proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR
351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return/destruction of
APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO
is a violation which is subject to sanction.
[[Page 17421]]
This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections
705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: March 19, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I
Scope of Investigation
The scope of this investigation covers galvanized steel wire
which is a cold-drawn carbon quality steel product in coils, of
circular or approximately circular, solid cross section with any
actual diameter of 0.5842 mm (0.0230 inch) or more, plated or coated
with zinc (whether by hot-dipping or electroplating).
Steel products to be included in the scope of this
investigation, regardless of Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) definitions, are products in which: (1) iron
predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements;
(2) the carbon content is two percent or less, by weight; and (3)
none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight,
respectively indicated:
--1.80 percent of manganese, or
--1.50 percent of silicon, or
--1.00 percent of copper, or
--0.50 percent of aluminum, or
--1.25 percent of chromium, or
--0.30 percent of cobalt, or
--0.40 percent of lead, or
--1.25 percent of nickel, or
--0.30 percent of tungsten, or
--0.02 percent of boron, or
--0.10 percent of molybdenum, or
--0.10 percent of niobium, or
--0.41 percent of titanium, or
--0.15 percent of vanadium, or
--0.15 percent of zirconium.
Specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation is
galvanized steel wire in coils of 15 feet or less which is pre-
packed in individual retail packages. The products subject to this
investigation are currently classified in subheadings 7217.20.30,
7217.20.45, or 7217.90.10 of the HTSUS which cover galvanized wire
of all diameters and all carbon content. Galvanized wire is reported
under statistical reporting numbers 7217.20.3000, 7217.20.4510,
7217.20.4520, 7217.20.4530, 7217.20.4540, 7217.20.4550,
7217.20.4560, 7217.20.4570, 7217.20.4580, and 7217.90.1000. These
products may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 7229.20.0015,
7229.20.0090, 7229.90.5008, 7229.90.5016, 7229.90.5031, and
7229.90.5051. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for
convenience and Customs purposes, the written description of the
merchandise is dispositive.
Appendix II
Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Subsidy Valuation Information
A. Period of Investigation
B. Attribution of Subsidies
C. Allocation Period
D. Discount Rates for Allocating Non-Recurring Subsidies
III. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences
Non-Cooperative Companies
Input Producers--Government Authorities Under Provision of Wire
Rod and Zinc for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
GOC--Provision of Electricity for Less Than Adequate
Remuneration
GOC--Specificity of Zhabei District ``Save Energy Reduce
Emission Team'' Award Program
IV. Analysis of Programs
A. Programs Determined To Be Countervailable
1. Provision of Wire Rod for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
2. Provision of Zinc for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
3. Provision of Electricity for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
4. Export Grants From Local Governments
5. Zhabei District ``Save Energy Reduce Emission Team'' Award
Program
B. Program Determined Not To Confer a Benefit During the POI
Export Subsidies Characterized as ``VAT Rebates''
C. Program for Which the Benefit Has No Impact on the Subsidy
Rate
Exemption From City Construction Tax and Education Tax for
Foreign Invested Enterprises
D. Programs Determined To Be Not Used
1. Policy Loans to the Galvanized Wire Industry
2. Preferential Loans for Key Projects and Technologies
3. Preferential Loans and Directed Credit
4. Preferential Lending to Galvanized Wire Producers and
Exporters Classified as ``Honorable Enterprises''
5. Loans and Interest Subsidies Provided Pursuant to the
Northeast Revitalization Program
6. Provision of Land Use Rights for LTAR Within the Jinzhou
District Within the City of Dalian
7. Provision of Land Use Rights for LTAR to Enterprises Within
the Zhaoqing High-Tech Industry Development Zone in Guangdong
Province
8. Provision of Land Use Rights for LTAR to Enterprises Within
the South Sanshui Science and Technology Industrial Park of Foshan
City
9. Income Tax Credits for Domestically-Owned Companies
Purchasing Domestically-Produced Equipment
10. Income Tax Exemption for Investment in Domestic
Technological Renovation
11. Accelerated Depreciation for Enterprises Located in the
Northeast Region
12. Forgiveness of Tax Arrears for Enterprises in the Old
Industrial Bases of Northeast China
13. Income Tax Exemption for Investors in Designated
Geographical Regions Within Liaoning Province
14. VAT Deduction on Fixed Assets
15. Import Tariff and VAT Exemptions for FIEs and Certain
Domestic Enterprises Using Imported Equipment in Encouraged
Industries
16. Reduction in or Exemption From Fixed Assets Investment
Orientation Regulatory Tax
17. ``Five Points, One Line'' Program of Liaoning Province
18. Provincial Export Interest Subsidies
19. State Key Technology Project Fund
20. Subsidies for Development of Famous Export Brands and China
World Top Brands
21. Sub-Central Government Programs to Promote Famous Export
Brands and China World Top Brands
22. Zhejiang Province Program to Rebate Antidumping Legal Fees
23. Technology to Improve Trade Research and Development Fund of
Jiangsu Province
24. Outstanding Growth Private Enterprise and Small and Medium-
Sized Enterprises Development in Jiangyin Fund of Jiangyin City
25. Grants for Programs Under the 2007 Science and Technology
Development Plan in Shandong Province
26. Special Funds for Encouraging Foreign Economic and Trade
Development and for Drawing Significant Foreign Investment Projects
in Shandong Province
27. ``Two Free, Three Half'' Tax Exemptions for ``Productive''
FIEs
28. Income Tax Exemption Program for Export-Oriented FIEs
29. Local Income Tax Exemption and Reduction Programs for
``Productive'' FIEs
30. Preferential Tax Programs for FIEs Recognized as High or New
Technology Enterprises
31. Income Tax Subsidies for FIEs Based on Geographic Location
32. VAT Refunds for FIEs Purchasing Domestically-Produced
Equipment
33. Income Tax Credits for FIEs Purchasing Domestically-Produced
Equipment
V. Analysis of Comments
General Issues
Comment 1: Whether the Investigation Should Be Terminated Based
on the GPX III Ruling
Comment 2: Application of CVD Law to the PRC
Comment 3: Whether Application of the CVD Law to NMEs Violates
the Administrative Procedures Act (APA)
Comment 4: Double Remedies
Case-Specific Issues
Comment 5: Whether There is a Basis for Countervailing Inputs
Purchased From Input Suppliers
Comment 6: Whether the Department Improperly Rejected the GOC's
September 15, 2011, Submission and Whether the Application of AFA is
Warranted
Comment 7: Whether the Department Improperly Rejected the Bao
Zhang Companies' September 26, 2011 Submission
Comment 8: Whether the Department Should Revise Its Benchmark
for Wire Rod
Comment 9: Whether the Department Should Apply AFA in Selecting
the Electricity Benchmark
Comment 10: Whether the Bao Zhang Companies' Additional
Electricity Charges Should Be Included in the Final Determination
[[Page 17422]]
Comment 11: Whether the Department Should Apply the Same
Electricity Benchmark to both ABZ and SBZ
Comment 12: Application of AFA to the Huayuan Companies and M&M
VI. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2012-7214 Filed 3-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
