Proposed Modification to Regulation Concerning the Use of Market Economy Input Prices in Nonmarket Economy Proceedings, 38553-38556 [2012-15436]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules
be published subsequently in this
Order.
The FAA has determined that this
proposed regulation only involves an
established body of technical
regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to
keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation; (1)
is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not
a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3)
does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated
impact is so minimal. Since this is a
routine matter that will only affect air
traffic procedures and air navigation, it
is certified that this proposed rule,
when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
The FAA’s authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1,
Section 106, describes the authority for
the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency’s
authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part A,
Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that
section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use
of the airspace necessary to ensure the
safety of aircraft and the efficient use of
airspace. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority as it would
propose controlled airspace at Boise Air
Terminal (Gowen Field), Boise, ID.
This proposal will be subject to an
environmental analysis in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E,
‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final
regulatory action.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the
authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to
amend 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR
Part 71 continues to read as follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,
40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389.
§ 71.1
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR Part 71.1 of the Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points,
dated August 9, 2011, and effective
September 15, 2011 is amended as
follows:
Paragraph 6003 Class E airspace areas
designated as an extension.
*
*
*
*
*
ANM ID E3 Boise, ID [Amended]
Boise Air Terminal (Gowen Field), ID
(Lat. 43°33′52″ N., long. 116°13′22″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from the
surface within 3.5 miles each side of the
Boise Air Terminal 300° bearing extending
from the 5-mile radius of the Boise Air
Terminal to 9.5 miles northwest of the
airport; and within .5 miles west and 5.6
miles east of the Boise Air Terminal 179°
bearing extending from the 5-mile radius of
the airport to 6.1 miles south of the airport;
and that airspace within 4.3 miles each side
of the Boise Air Terminal 114° bearing
extending from the 5-mile radius of the
airport to 11.7 miles southeast of the airport.
Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas
extending upward from 700 feet or more
above the surface of the earth.
*
*
*
*
*
ANM ID E5 Boise, ID [Amended]
Boise Air Terminal (Gowen Field), ID
(Lat. 43°33′52″ N., long. 116°13′22″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface bounded by a line
beginning at lat. 43°56′00″ N., long.
116°33′04″ W.; to lat. 43°51′15″ N., long.
116°25′03″ W., thence via the 19.3-mile
radius of the Boise Air Terminal (Gowen
Field), clockwise to long. 116°14′03″ W.; to
lat. 43°45′00″ N., long. 116°14′03″ W.; to lat.
43°31′00″ N., long. 115°52′03″ W.; to lat.
43°20′00″ N., long. 115°58′03″ W.; to lat.
43°25′00″ N., long. 116°25′03″ W.; to lat.
43°27′00″ N., long. 116°29′03″ W.; to lat.
43°25′12″ N., long. 116°32′23″ W.; to lat.
43°29′25″ N., long. 116°37′53″ W.; to lat.
43°32′45″ N., long. 116°49′04″ W.; to lat.
43°37′35″ N., long. 116°47′04″ W.; to lat.
43°42′00″ N., long. 116°57′04″ W., thence to
the point of beginning; that airspace
extending upward from 1,200 feet above the
surface within the 30.5-mile radius of the
airport beginning at the 122° bearing of the
airport, thence via a line to the intersection
of the 34.8-mile radius of the airport and the
224° bearing of the airport, thence clockwise
along the 34.8-mile radius of the airport to
that airspace 7 miles each side of the 269°
bearing of the airport extending from the
34.8-mile radius to 49.6 miles west of the
airport, and within 7 miles northeast and 9.6
miles southwest of the 295° bearing of the
airport extending from the 34.8-mile radius
to 65.3 miles northwest of the airport, to lat.
44°00′27″ N., long. 117°10′58″ W., thence
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
38553
along the 042° bearing to V–253, thence
south along V–253, thence along the 30.5mile radius of the airport to the point of
beginning; that airspace southeast of the
airport extending upward from 9,000 feet
MSL bounded on the north by V–444, on the
east by V–293, on the south by V–330, on the
southwest by V–4 and on the west by the
30.5-mile radius of the airport; that airspace
northeast of the airport extending upward
from 11,500 feet MSL, bounded on the
northeast by V–293, on the south by V–444,
on the southwest by the 30.5-mile radius of
the airport, and on the west by V–253.
Issued in Seattle, Washington, on June 19,
2012.
Robert Henry
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group,
Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2012–15910 Filed 6–27–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
19 CFR Part 351
Proposed Modification to Regulation
Concerning the Use of Market
Economy Input Prices in Nonmarket
Economy Proceedings
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
The Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) proposes to modify its
regulation which states that the
Department normally will use the price
that a nonmarket economy (‘‘NME’’)
producer pays to a market economy
supplier when a factor of production is
purchased from a market economy
supplier and paid for in market
economy currency, in the calculation of
normal value (‘‘NV’’) in antidumping
proceedings involving NME countries.
The rule, if adopted, would establish (1)
a requirement that the input at issue be
produced in one or more market
economy countries, and (2) a revised
threshold requiring that ‘‘substantially
all’’ of an input be purchased from one
or more market economy suppliers
before the Department would use the
purchase price paid to value the entire
factor of production. Through this
proposed modification, the Department
is announcing its proposed definition of
‘‘substantially all’’ to be 85 percent of
the total purchased volume of the
particular input. The Department invites
public comment on this proposed
change.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
38554
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules
To be assured of consideration,
comments must be received no later
than July 30, 2012.
ADDRESSES: All comments must be
submitted through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.Regulations.gov, Docket No. ITA–
2012–0002, and the Department prefers
this means of submitting comments.
However, if a commenter does not have
access to the Internet, as an alternative,
he or she may submit the original and
two copies of each set of comments by
mail or hand delivery/courier. All
comments should be addressed to Paul
Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, Room 1870,
Department of Commerce, 14th Street
and Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20230. The comments
should be identified by Regulation
Identifier Number (RIN) 0625–AA89.
The Department will consider all
comments received before the close of
the comment period. The Department
will not accept comments accompanied
by a request that part or all of the
material be treated confidentially
because of its business proprietary
nature or for any other reason. All
comments responding to this notice will
be a matter of public record and will be
available for inspection at Import
Administration’s Central Records Unit
(Room 7046 of the Herbert C. Hoover
Building) and online at https://
www.Regulations.gov and on the
Department’s Web site at https://
www.trade.gov/ia/.
Any questions concerning file
formatting, document conversion,
access on the Internet, or other
electronic filing issues should be
addressed to Andrew Lee Beller, Import
Administration Webmaster, at (202)
482–0866, email address: webmastersupport@ita.doc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Wendy Frankel at (202) 482–5849 or
Scott McBride at (202) 482–6292.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
DATES:
Background
In antidumping proceedings involving
NME countries, the Department
calculates NV by valuing the NME
producer’s factors of production, to the
extent possible, using prices from a
market economy that is at a comparable
level of economic development and that
is also a significant producer of
comparable merchandise. See section
773(c)(4) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (‘‘the Act’’). The goal of this
surrogate factor valuation is to use the
‘‘best available information’’ to
determine NV. See section 773(c)(1) of
the Act; see also Dorbest Ltd, et al. v.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
United States, 604 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir.
2010). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.408(c)(1),
as currently written, when an NME
producer purchases inputs from market
economy suppliers and pays for those
purchases in a market economy
currency, the Department normally uses
the weighted-average price paid by the
NME producer for these inputs to value
the input in question, where possible.
When a portion of the input is
purchased from a market economy
supplier and the remainder from a
nonmarket economy supplier, the
Department will normally use the price
paid for the input sourced from market
economy suppliers to value all of the
input, provided that the volume of the
market economy input as a share of total
purchases from all sources is
‘‘meaningful.’’ See Antidumping Duties;
Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 62 FR
27296, 27366 (May 19, 1997);
Shakeproof Assembly Components Div.
of Ill. Tool Works, Inc. v. United States,
268 F. 3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2001).
In Antidumping Methodologies:
Market Economy Inputs, Expected NonMarket Economy Wages, Duty
Drawback; and Request for Comments,
71 FR 61716 (October 19, 2006), the
Department instituted a rebuttable
presumption that market economy input
prices are the best available information
for valuing all of an input when the total
volume of the input purchased by the
respondent from all market economy
sources during the period of
investigation or review exceeds 33
percent of the total volume of the input
purchased from all sources during the
period. Under this practice, unless casespecific facts provide adequate grounds
to rebut the Department’s presumption,
the Department uses the weightedaverage market economy purchase price
to value all of the input. Alternatively,
when the volume of an NME firm’s
purchases of a particular input from
market economy suppliers during the
period of investigation/review does not
exceed this 33 percent threshold, the
Department weight-averages the
(weighted-average) market economy
purchase price and an appropriate
surrogate value,1 using as weights the
relative quantities of the input imported
and purchased from domestic sources.
In determining whether market
economy purchases meet this 33 percent
threshold, the Department compares the
volume that the respondent purchased
from market economy sources during
the period of investigation or review
1 The Department will choose a surrogate value
from a market economy country which is at a level
of economic development comparable to that of the
nonmarket economy country and is a significant
producer of comparable merchandise.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
with the respondent’s total purchases
during the period. When a firm has
made market economy input purchases
that may have been dumped (e.g., the
country covered by our proceeding has
an antidumping measure on the input
from the source country) or from a
country that the Department has a
‘‘reason to believe or suspect’’ maintains
general export subsidies, are not bona
fide, or are otherwise not acceptable for
use in a dumping calculation (i.e. if the
purchases are from an affiliate and are
not made at arm’s length), the
Department excludes them from the
numerator of the ratio to ensure a fair
determination of whether valid market
economy purchases meet the 33 percent
threshold.
The Department now proposes to
revise 19 CFR 351.408(c)(1) to establish
that where substantially all (i.e., 85
percent or more) of an input is
purchased from market economy
suppliers (from one or more market
economy countries) as a share of total
purchases of that input from all sources
during a particular period of
investigation or review, the Department
will normally use the weighted-average
purchase price paid to the market
economy supplier(s) to value all of the
input. When the 85 percent threshold is
not met, the Department will weightaverage the market economy purchase
price(s) and an appropriate surrogate
value, using the respective quantities of
the input sourced, from market
economy and nonmarket economy
suppliers. One reason for this proposed
revision is a concern that, when market
economy purchases of an input do not
account for substantially all purchases
of the input (imported and domestically
supplied), a market economy input
price is not the best available
information, particularly since it would
not be possible to determine objectively
whether the price for the input would
have been the same had the firm
purchased solely from market economy
suppliers. The Department has
confidence in the market economy
purchase price(s) only when the
proportion of the total volume of the
input that is sourced from market
economies is substantially all (i.e., for
purposes of this provision, 85 percent or
more) of the total purchases of that
particular input.
The Department also proposes to add
a requirement to 19 CFR 351.408(c)(1)
that the market economy input at issue
actually be produced in one or more
market economy countries, and not just
sold through market economy countries,
to address concerns that the pricing of
an NME-produced input by a market
economy supplier (or reseller) can be
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
distorted by NME cost or supply factors.
For example, NME input prices that
reflect non-profit objectives or low or
suppressed capital, land, energy or other
factors of production costs in the NME
country can be reflected in, and
therefore distort, the prices charged by
market economy suppliers or resellers of
that input. That is not to say that prices
of market economy-produced inputs can
never be distorted, but only that they are
normally not reflective of systemic,
economy-wide distortions, as are NME
prices.
Explanation of Proposed Modification
to 19 CFR 351.408
The second sentence of 19 CFR
351.408(c)(1) states that ‘‘[w]here a
factor is purchased from a market
economy supplier and paid for in a
market economy currency, the Secretary
normally will use the price paid to the
market economy supplier.’’ The
Department proposes modifying the
existing sentence and adding two parts
to that sentence. First, the Department
proposes adding ‘‘produced in one or
more market economy countries’’ after
‘‘[w]here a factor is.’’ Second, the
Department proposes changing the
subsequent clauses to read ‘‘purchased
from one or more market economy
suppliers and paid for in market
economy currency, the Secretary
normally will use the price(s) paid to
the market economy supplier(s).’’ Third,
the Department proposes adding the
following to the end of that sentence: ‘‘If
substantially all of the total volume of
the factor is purchased from one or more
market economy suppliers. For
purposes of this provision, the Secretary
defines the term ‘substantially all’ to be
85 percent or more of the total volume
of purchases of the factor used in the
production of subject merchandise.’’ We
view these additions as necessary to
specify which inputs qualify and useful
to clearly define the proposed threshold.
The current third sentence of 19 CFR
351.408(c)(1) states ‘‘In those instances
where a portion of the factor is
purchased from a market economy
supplier and the remainder from a
nonmarket economy supplier, the
Secretary normally will value the factor
using the price paid to the market
economy supplier.’’ The Department
proposes deleting ‘‘a portion of the
factor’’ from the beginning of that
sentence and replacing it with ‘‘less
than substantially all of the total volume
of the factor.’’ The Department also
proposes adding ‘‘produced in one or
more market economy countries and’’
before ‘‘purchased from a market
economy supplier,’’ and changing the
latter clause to read ‘‘purchased from
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:15 Jun 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
one or more market economy
suppliers.’’ In addition, the Department
proposes deleting ‘‘and the remainder
from a nonmarket economy supplier.’’
The Department also proposes deleting
‘‘value the factor using the price paid to
the market economy supplier’’ at the
end of that sentence. The Department is
replacing these passages with ‘‘weightaverage the actual price(s) paid for the
market economy portion and the
surrogate value for the nonmarket
economy portion by their respective
quantities.’’ We view these changes as
necessary to explain the methodology
the Department will use when a
respondent purchases less than
substantially all of the input from
market economy suppliers or only part
of the input is produced in one or
moremarket economy countries.
Classification
Executive Order 12866
This rule has been determined to be
not significant for purposes of Executive
Order 12866.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act (IRFA)
Pursuant to Section 603 of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, the
Department has prepared the following
IRFA to analyze the potential impact
that this proposed rule, if adopted,
would have on small entities.
Description of the Reasons Why Action
Is Being Considered
The policy reasons for issuing this
proposed rule are discussed in the
Background section of this document,
and are not repeated here.
Statement of the Objectives of, and
Legal Basis for, the Proposed Rule;
Identification of All Relevant Federal
Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or
Conflict With the Proposed Rule
This proposed rule is intended to
revise 19 CFR 351.408(c)(1) to establish
that in valuing factors of production in
antidumping proceedings involving
nonmarket economies, if substantially
all of an input is purchased from market
economy suppliers as a share of total
purchases of that input from all sources
during the investigation or review
period, the Department will use the
weighted-average purchase price paid to
market economy suppliers to value all
of the input. Further, the proposed rule
is also intended to add a requirement to
19 CFR 351.408(c)(1) that the market
economy input at issue actually be
produced in one or more market
economy countries, and not just be sold
through market economy countries.
The legal basis for this rule is 5 U.S.C.
301; 19 U.S.C. 1202 note; 19 U.S.C. 1303
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
38555
note; and 19 U.S.C. 1671 et seq. No
other Federal rules duplicate, overlap or
conflict with this proposed rule.
Number and Description of Small
Entities Regulated by the Proposed Rule
The proposed rule regulates entities
that are: (1) Producing merchandise in
a nonmarket economy that is exported
to the United States and is subject to an
antidumping duty order; (2) being
individually examined in an
antidumping proceeding; and (3)
claiming that market economy purchase
prices should be used to value a factor
of production in the calculation of the
exporter’s weighted average dumping
margin and antidumping duty
assessment rate. The resulting
antidumping duty assessment rate
determines the amount of antidumping
duties to be paid by importers of record
of the subject merchandise imported
into the United States.
Entities that produce and export
merchandise subject to U.S.
antidumping duty orders are rarely U.S.
companies. Some producers and
exporters of subject merchandise do
have U.S. affiliates, some of which may
be considered small entities under the
appropriate Small Business
Administration (SBA) small business
size standard. The Department is not
able to estimate the number of exporters
and producer domestic affiliates that
may be considered small entities, but
anticipates, based on its experience in
these proceedings, that the number will
not be substantial.
Importers may be U.S. or foreign
companies, and some of these entities
may be considered small entities under
the appropriate SBA small business size
standard. There are no means by which
the Department can readily determine
whether or not a substantial number of
small importers will be impacted by this
rule, as the effect of the Department’s
change in methodology will differ from
proceeding to proceeding, on a case-bycase basis, and the importers depositing
cash deposits and/or paying
antidumping duties will also differ from
proceeding to proceeding.
Description of the Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements of the Proposed Rule
The proposed rule will require
exporters or producers to establish on
the administrative record that 85
percent or more of an input has been
purchased from market economy
suppliers from one or more market
economy countries as a share of total
purchases of that input from all sources
(domestic and foreign) during a
particular period of investigation or
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
38556
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
administrative review, if the exporter or
producer wishes the Department to use
the weighted-average purchase price
paid to the market economy supplier(s)
to value all of the input (from all
sources). Furthermore, the proposed
rule will require that exporters or
producers also establish on the
administrative record that the market
economy input at issue was produced in
a market economy, rather than merely
being sold through a market economy
supplier. There will be no additional
reporting or recordkeeping burdens on
U.S. importers as a result of this rule.
Description of Any Significant
Alternatives to the Proposed Rule That
Accomplish the Stated Objectives of
Applicable Statutes and That Minimize
Any Significant Economic Impact of the
Proposed Rule on Small Entities
As required by 5 U.S.C. 603(c), the
Department’s analysis considered
significant alternatives. The alternatives
which the Department considered are:
(1) The preferred alternative of
modifying 19 CFR 351.408(c)(1) to (a)
establish that if substantially all of an
input is purchased from market
economy suppliers as a share of total
purchases of that input from all sources
during the investigation or review
period, the Department will use the
weighted-average purchase price paid to
market economy suppliers to value all
of the input and (b) require that the
market economy input at issue actually
be produced in one or more market
economy countries, and not just be sold
through market economy countries; (2)
modify the regulation with respect to
(1)(a), but not (1)(b); (3) modify the
regulation with respect to (1)(b), but not
(1)(a); or (4) maintain the status quo
with respect to the valuation of inputs
purchased from a market economy
supplier and paid for in a market
economy currency.
Factors of production for the subject
merchandise will be assigned a value in
the calculation of the weighted average
dumping margin and antidumping duty
assessment rate, whether the assigned
value is a market economy purchase
price, a surrogate value from a market
economy country, or a combination of
the two. Accordingly, the economic
impact of providing information and
argument to the Department in relation
to the valuation of the factors of
production for entities individually
examined in the Department’s
antidumping proceedings is roughly
equivalent under each of the abovenoted alternatives.
In relation to the possible impact of
the alternatives on the amount of
antidumping duties to be paid by
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
importers of record of the subject
merchandise, the value of a factor of
production is one of numerous elements
in the calculation of a weighted average
margin of dumping. Whether a
particular factor value will have any
impact on the resulting weighted
average dumping margin is not certain.
To the extent that a small U.S. importer
will be economically impacted by this
rule, it will only be through an increase
or decrease in the cash deposits and
duties posted by that importer as a
result in the change of a weighted
average dumping margin. In those
circumstances where a change in the
value of an input as a result of this
regulatory modification does have an
impact on the weighted average
dumping margin, the impact to the
small U.S. importer will depend on
whether the publicly sourced value is
higher or lower than the market
economy purchase price(s).
In this regard, the Department is
required by 19 U.S.C. 1677b(c)(1)(b) to
rely on the best information available
for valuing the producer’s factors of
production. The proposed modification
to the regulation addresses the
Department’s concerns that a market
economy input price may not be the
best available information when: (1)
Market economy purchases of an input
are insufficient in proportion to NME
purchases for the Department to
objectively conclude that the purchase
price for the input would have been the
same had the firm purchased solely
from market economy suppliers and (2)
the reported pricing of an NMEproduced input purchased from a
market economy supplier (or reseller)
can be distorted by NME cost or supply
factors. Accordingly, the Department
considers that the first, preferred
alternative is the only alternative that
fully addresses the Department’s policy
concerns explained in the Background
section of this Notice.
Dated: June 15, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Paperwork Reduction Act
22 CFR Parts 120, 121, 122, 123, 124,
125, 126, 127, 128, 129, and 130
This rule does not contain a collection
of information for purposes of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, as
amended (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
For the reasons stated, 19 CFR part
351 is proposed to be amended as
follows:
PART 351—ANTIDUMPING AND
COUNTERVAILING DUTIES
1. The authority citation for 19 CFR
part 351 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 1202
note; 19 U.S.C. 1303 note; 19 U.S.C. 1671 et
seq.; and 19 U.S.C. 3538.
2. In § 351.408, revise paragraph (c)(1)
to read as follows:
Information used to value factors. The
Secretary normally will use publicly
available information to value factors.
However, where a factor is produced in
one or more market economy countries,
purchased from one or more market
economy suppliers and paid for in
market economy currency, the Secretary
normally will use the price(s) paid to
the market economy supplier(s) if
substantially all of the total volume of
the factor is purchased from the market
economy supplier(s). For purposes of
this provision, the Secretary defines the
term ‘‘substantially all’’ to be 85 percent
or more of the total purchase volume of
the factor used in the production of
subject merchandise. In those instances
where less than substantially all of the
total volume of the factor is produced in
one or more market economy countries
and purchased from one or more market
economy suppliers, the Secretary
normally will weight-average the actual
price(s) paid for the market economy
portion and the surrogate value for the
nonmarket economy portion by their
respective quantities.
[FR Doc. 2012–15436 Filed 6–27–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice [7927]]
Export Control Reform Transition Plan
List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 351
Correction
Administrative practice and
procedure, Antidumping, Business and
industry, Cheese, Confidential business
information, Countervailing duties,
Freedom of information, Investigations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
In proposed rule document 2012–
15070 appearing on pages 37346–37349
in the issue of Thursday, June 21, 2012
make the following correction:
On page 37346, in the third column,
in the document’s heading, the CFR
parts affected should read ‘‘22 CFR Parts
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 125 (Thursday, June 28, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38553-38556]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15436]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
19 CFR Part 351
Proposed Modification to Regulation Concerning the Use of Market
Economy Input Prices in Nonmarket Economy Proceedings
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``Department'') proposes to modify
its regulation which states that the Department normally will use the
price that a nonmarket economy (``NME'') producer pays to a market
economy supplier when a factor of production is purchased from a market
economy supplier and paid for in market economy currency, in the
calculation of normal value (``NV'') in antidumping proceedings
involving NME countries. The rule, if adopted, would establish (1) a
requirement that the input at issue be produced in one or more market
economy countries, and (2) a revised threshold requiring that
``substantially all'' of an input be purchased from one or more market
economy suppliers before the Department would use the purchase price
paid to value the entire factor of production. Through this proposed
modification, the Department is announcing its proposed definition of
``substantially all'' to be 85 percent of the total purchased volume of
the particular input. The Department invites public comment on this
proposed change.
[[Page 38554]]
DATES: To be assured of consideration, comments must be received no
later than July 30, 2012.
ADDRESSES: All comments must be submitted through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://www.Regulations.gov, Docket No. ITA-2012-
0002, and the Department prefers this means of submitting comments.
However, if a commenter does not have access to the Internet, as an
alternative, he or she may submit the original and two copies of each
set of comments by mail or hand delivery/courier. All comments should
be addressed to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, Room 1870, Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20230. The comments should be
identified by Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) 0625-AA89.
The Department will consider all comments received before the close
of the comment period. The Department will not accept comments
accompanied by a request that part or all of the material be treated
confidentially because of its business proprietary nature or for any
other reason. All comments responding to this notice will be a matter
of public record and will be available for inspection at Import
Administration's Central Records Unit (Room 7046 of the Herbert C.
Hoover Building) and online at https://www.Regulations.gov and on the
Department's Web site at https://www.trade.gov/ia/.
Any questions concerning file formatting, document conversion,
access on the Internet, or other electronic filing issues should be
addressed to Andrew Lee Beller, Import Administration Webmaster, at
(202) 482-0866, email address: webmaster-support@ita.doc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wendy Frankel at (202) 482-5849 or
Scott McBride at (202) 482-6292.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In antidumping proceedings involving NME countries, the Department
calculates NV by valuing the NME producer's factors of production, to
the extent possible, using prices from a market economy that is at a
comparable level of economic development and that is also a significant
producer of comparable merchandise. See section 773(c)(4) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). The goal of this surrogate
factor valuation is to use the ``best available information'' to
determine NV. See section 773(c)(1) of the Act; see also Dorbest Ltd,
et al. v. United States, 604 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2010). Pursuant to 19
CFR 351.408(c)(1), as currently written, when an NME producer purchases
inputs from market economy suppliers and pays for those purchases in a
market economy currency, the Department normally uses the weighted-
average price paid by the NME producer for these inputs to value the
input in question, where possible. When a portion of the input is
purchased from a market economy supplier and the remainder from a
nonmarket economy supplier, the Department will normally use the price
paid for the input sourced from market economy suppliers to value all
of the input, provided that the volume of the market economy input as a
share of total purchases from all sources is ``meaningful.'' See
Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 62 FR 27296,
27366 (May 19, 1997); Shakeproof Assembly Components Div. of Ill. Tool
Works, Inc. v. United States, 268 F. 3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2001).
In Antidumping Methodologies: Market Economy Inputs, Expected Non-
Market Economy Wages, Duty Drawback; and Request for Comments, 71 FR
61716 (October 19, 2006), the Department instituted a rebuttable
presumption that market economy input prices are the best available
information for valuing all of an input when the total volume of the
input purchased by the respondent from all market economy sources
during the period of investigation or review exceeds 33 percent of the
total volume of the input purchased from all sources during the period.
Under this practice, unless case-specific facts provide adequate
grounds to rebut the Department's presumption, the Department uses the
weighted-average market economy purchase price to value all of the
input. Alternatively, when the volume of an NME firm's purchases of a
particular input from market economy suppliers during the period of
investigation/review does not exceed this 33 percent threshold, the
Department weight-averages the (weighted-average) market economy
purchase price and an appropriate surrogate value,\1\ using as weights
the relative quantities of the input imported and purchased from
domestic sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Department will choose a surrogate value from a market
economy country which is at a level of economic development
comparable to that of the nonmarket economy country and is a
significant producer of comparable merchandise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In determining whether market economy purchases meet this 33
percent threshold, the Department compares the volume that the
respondent purchased from market economy sources during the period of
investigation or review with the respondent's total purchases during
the period. When a firm has made market economy input purchases that
may have been dumped (e.g., the country covered by our proceeding has
an antidumping measure on the input from the source country) or from a
country that the Department has a ``reason to believe or suspect''
maintains general export subsidies, are not bona fide, or are otherwise
not acceptable for use in a dumping calculation (i.e. if the purchases
are from an affiliate and are not made at arm's length), the Department
excludes them from the numerator of the ratio to ensure a fair
determination of whether valid market economy purchases meet the 33
percent threshold.
The Department now proposes to revise 19 CFR 351.408(c)(1) to
establish that where substantially all (i.e., 85 percent or more) of an
input is purchased from market economy suppliers (from one or more
market economy countries) as a share of total purchases of that input
from all sources during a particular period of investigation or review,
the Department will normally use the weighted-average purchase price
paid to the market economy supplier(s) to value all of the input. When
the 85 percent threshold is not met, the Department will weight-average
the market economy purchase price(s) and an appropriate surrogate
value, using the respective quantities of the input sourced, from
market economy and nonmarket economy suppliers. One reason for this
proposed revision is a concern that, when market economy purchases of
an input do not account for substantially all purchases of the input
(imported and domestically supplied), a market economy input price is
not the best available information, particularly since it would not be
possible to determine objectively whether the price for the input would
have been the same had the firm purchased solely from market economy
suppliers. The Department has confidence in the market economy purchase
price(s) only when the proportion of the total volume of the input that
is sourced from market economies is substantially all (i.e., for
purposes of this provision, 85 percent or more) of the total purchases
of that particular input.
The Department also proposes to add a requirement to 19 CFR
351.408(c)(1) that the market economy input at issue actually be
produced in one or more market economy countries, and not just sold
through market economy countries, to address concerns that the pricing
of an NME-produced input by a market economy supplier (or reseller) can
be
[[Page 38555]]
distorted by NME cost or supply factors. For example, NME input prices
that reflect non-profit objectives or low or suppressed capital, land,
energy or other factors of production costs in the NME country can be
reflected in, and therefore distort, the prices charged by market
economy suppliers or resellers of that input. That is not to say that
prices of market economy-produced inputs can never be distorted, but
only that they are normally not reflective of systemic, economy-wide
distortions, as are NME prices.
Explanation of Proposed Modification to 19 CFR 351.408
The second sentence of 19 CFR 351.408(c)(1) states that ``[w]here a
factor is purchased from a market economy supplier and paid for in a
market economy currency, the Secretary normally will use the price paid
to the market economy supplier.'' The Department proposes modifying the
existing sentence and adding two parts to that sentence. First, the
Department proposes adding ``produced in one or more market economy
countries'' after ``[w]here a factor is.'' Second, the Department
proposes changing the subsequent clauses to read ``purchased from one
or more market economy suppliers and paid for in market economy
currency, the Secretary normally will use the price(s) paid to the
market economy supplier(s).'' Third, the Department proposes adding the
following to the end of that sentence: ``If substantially all of the
total volume of the factor is purchased from one or more market economy
suppliers. For purposes of this provision, the Secretary defines the
term `substantially all' to be 85 percent or more of the total volume
of purchases of the factor used in the production of subject
merchandise.'' We view these additions as necessary to specify which
inputs qualify and useful to clearly define the proposed threshold.
The current third sentence of 19 CFR 351.408(c)(1) states ``In
those instances where a portion of the factor is purchased from a
market economy supplier and the remainder from a nonmarket economy
supplier, the Secretary normally will value the factor using the price
paid to the market economy supplier.'' The Department proposes deleting
``a portion of the factor'' from the beginning of that sentence and
replacing it with ``less than substantially all of the total volume of
the factor.'' The Department also proposes adding ``produced in one or
more market economy countries and'' before ``purchased from a market
economy supplier,'' and changing the latter clause to read ``purchased
from one or more market economy suppliers.'' In addition, the
Department proposes deleting ``and the remainder from a nonmarket
economy supplier.'' The Department also proposes deleting ``value the
factor using the price paid to the market economy supplier'' at the end
of that sentence. The Department is replacing these passages with
``weight-average the actual price(s) paid for the market economy
portion and the surrogate value for the nonmarket economy portion by
their respective quantities.'' We view these changes as necessary to
explain the methodology the Department will use when a respondent
purchases less than substantially all of the input from market economy
suppliers or only part of the input is produced in one or moremarket
economy countries.
Classification
Executive Order 12866
This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act (IRFA)
Pursuant to Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the
Department has prepared the following IRFA to analyze the potential
impact that this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small
entities.
Description of the Reasons Why Action Is Being Considered
The policy reasons for issuing this proposed rule are discussed in
the Background section of this document, and are not repeated here.
Statement of the Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, the Proposed Rule;
Identification of All Relevant Federal Rules That May Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rule
This proposed rule is intended to revise 19 CFR 351.408(c)(1) to
establish that in valuing factors of production in antidumping
proceedings involving nonmarket economies, if substantially all of an
input is purchased from market economy suppliers as a share of total
purchases of that input from all sources during the investigation or
review period, the Department will use the weighted-average purchase
price paid to market economy suppliers to value all of the input.
Further, the proposed rule is also intended to add a requirement to 19
CFR 351.408(c)(1) that the market economy input at issue actually be
produced in one or more market economy countries, and not just be sold
through market economy countries.
The legal basis for this rule is 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 1202 note;
19 U.S.C. 1303 note; and 19 U.S.C. 1671 et seq. No other Federal rules
duplicate, overlap or conflict with this proposed rule.
Number and Description of Small Entities Regulated by the Proposed Rule
The proposed rule regulates entities that are: (1) Producing
merchandise in a nonmarket economy that is exported to the United
States and is subject to an antidumping duty order; (2) being
individually examined in an antidumping proceeding; and (3) claiming
that market economy purchase prices should be used to value a factor of
production in the calculation of the exporter's weighted average
dumping margin and antidumping duty assessment rate. The resulting
antidumping duty assessment rate determines the amount of antidumping
duties to be paid by importers of record of the subject merchandise
imported into the United States.
Entities that produce and export merchandise subject to U.S.
antidumping duty orders are rarely U.S. companies. Some producers and
exporters of subject merchandise do have U.S. affiliates, some of which
may be considered small entities under the appropriate Small Business
Administration (SBA) small business size standard. The Department is
not able to estimate the number of exporters and producer domestic
affiliates that may be considered small entities, but anticipates,
based on its experience in these proceedings, that the number will not
be substantial.
Importers may be U.S. or foreign companies, and some of these
entities may be considered small entities under the appropriate SBA
small business size standard. There are no means by which the
Department can readily determine whether or not a substantial number of
small importers will be impacted by this rule, as the effect of the
Department's change in methodology will differ from proceeding to
proceeding, on a case-by-case basis, and the importers depositing cash
deposits and/or paying antidumping duties will also differ from
proceeding to proceeding.
Description of the Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements of the Proposed Rule
The proposed rule will require exporters or producers to establish
on the administrative record that 85 percent or more of an input has
been purchased from market economy suppliers from one or more market
economy countries as a share of total purchases of that input from all
sources (domestic and foreign) during a particular period of
investigation or
[[Page 38556]]
administrative review, if the exporter or producer wishes the
Department to use the weighted-average purchase price paid to the
market economy supplier(s) to value all of the input (from all
sources). Furthermore, the proposed rule will require that exporters or
producers also establish on the administrative record that the market
economy input at issue was produced in a market economy, rather than
merely being sold through a market economy supplier. There will be no
additional reporting or recordkeeping burdens on U.S. importers as a
result of this rule.
Description of Any Significant Alternatives to the Proposed Rule That
Accomplish the Stated Objectives of Applicable Statutes and That
Minimize Any Significant Economic Impact of the Proposed Rule on Small
Entities
As required by 5 U.S.C. 603(c), the Department's analysis
considered significant alternatives. The alternatives which the
Department considered are: (1) The preferred alternative of modifying
19 CFR 351.408(c)(1) to (a) establish that if substantially all of an
input is purchased from market economy suppliers as a share of total
purchases of that input from all sources during the investigation or
review period, the Department will use the weighted-average purchase
price paid to market economy suppliers to value all of the input and
(b) require that the market economy input at issue actually be produced
in one or more market economy countries, and not just be sold through
market economy countries; (2) modify the regulation with respect to
(1)(a), but not (1)(b); (3) modify the regulation with respect to
(1)(b), but not (1)(a); or (4) maintain the status quo with respect to
the valuation of inputs purchased from a market economy supplier and
paid for in a market economy currency.
Factors of production for the subject merchandise will be assigned
a value in the calculation of the weighted average dumping margin and
antidumping duty assessment rate, whether the assigned value is a
market economy purchase price, a surrogate value from a market economy
country, or a combination of the two. Accordingly, the economic impact
of providing information and argument to the Department in relation to
the valuation of the factors of production for entities individually
examined in the Department's antidumping proceedings is roughly
equivalent under each of the above-noted alternatives.
In relation to the possible impact of the alternatives on the
amount of antidumping duties to be paid by importers of record of the
subject merchandise, the value of a factor of production is one of
numerous elements in the calculation of a weighted average margin of
dumping. Whether a particular factor value will have any impact on the
resulting weighted average dumping margin is not certain. To the extent
that a small U.S. importer will be economically impacted by this rule,
it will only be through an increase or decrease in the cash deposits
and duties posted by that importer as a result in the change of a
weighted average dumping margin. In those circumstances where a change
in the value of an input as a result of this regulatory modification
does have an impact on the weighted average dumping margin, the impact
to the small U.S. importer will depend on whether the publicly sourced
value is higher or lower than the market economy purchase price(s).
In this regard, the Department is required by 19 U.S.C.
1677b(c)(1)(b) to rely on the best information available for valuing
the producer's factors of production. The proposed modification to the
regulation addresses the Department's concerns that a market economy
input price may not be the best available information when: (1) Market
economy purchases of an input are insufficient in proportion to NME
purchases for the Department to objectively conclude that the purchase
price for the input would have been the same had the firm purchased
solely from market economy suppliers and (2) the reported pricing of an
NME-produced input purchased from a market economy supplier (or
reseller) can be distorted by NME cost or supply factors. Accordingly,
the Department considers that the first, preferred alternative is the
only alternative that fully addresses the Department's policy concerns
explained in the Background section of this Notice.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain a collection of information for purposes
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, as amended (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.)
List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 351
Administrative practice and procedure, Antidumping, Business and
industry, Cheese, Confidential business information, Countervailing
duties, Freedom of information, Investigations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 15, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
For the reasons stated, 19 CFR part 351 is proposed to be amended
as follows:
PART 351--ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTIES
1. The authority citation for 19 CFR part 351 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 1202 note; 19 U.S.C. 1303
note; 19 U.S.C. 1671 et seq.; and 19 U.S.C. 3538.
2. In Sec. 351.408, revise paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows:
Information used to value factors. The Secretary normally will use
publicly available information to value factors. However, where a
factor is produced in one or more market economy countries, purchased
from one or more market economy suppliers and paid for in market
economy currency, the Secretary normally will use the price(s) paid to
the market economy supplier(s) if substantially all of the total volume
of the factor is purchased from the market economy supplier(s). For
purposes of this provision, the Secretary defines the term
``substantially all'' to be 85 percent or more of the total purchase
volume of the factor used in the production of subject merchandise. In
those instances where less than substantially all of the total volume
of the factor is produced in one or more market economy countries and
purchased from one or more market economy suppliers, the Secretary
normally will weight-average the actual price(s) paid for the market
economy portion and the surrogate value for the nonmarket economy
portion by their respective quantities.
[FR Doc. 2012-15436 Filed 6-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P