Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 75980-75984 [2012-30951]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
75980
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2012 / Notices
Export Buyer’s Credits Program
Comment 7: Application of Adverse Facts
Available (AFA) to the Export Buyer’s
Credits Program
Comment 8: Selection of AFA Rate for Export
Buyer’s Credits
Comment 9: Treatment of the AFA Rate for
Export Buyer’s Credits in the AD
Investigation
Provision of Hot-Rolled Steel (HRS) for Less
Than Adequate Remuneration (LTAR)
Comment 10: Whether HRS Allegation Was
Sufficient to Initiate an Investigation
Comment 11: Whether Application of AFA
for HRS for LTAR Establishes the Existence
of a Financial Contribution
Comment 12: Whether HRS Producers are
Authorities
Comment 13: Specificity Finding for HRS for
LTAR
Comment 14: Whether HRS Purchases are
Alloy or Non-Alloy
Comment 15: Construction of HRS
Benchmark
Republic of Vietnam (‘‘Vietnam’’).1 We
invited interested parties to comment on
our Preliminary Determination of sales
at LTFV. We continue to determine that
steel wire garment hangers from
Vietnam are being, or are likely to be,
sold in the United States at LTFV as
provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). The
estimated margins of sales at LTFV are
shown in the ‘‘Final Determination
Margins’’ section of this notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Irene Gorelik or Robert Palmer, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 9, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–6905 or (202) 482–
9068, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Case History
Provision of Electricity for LTAR
Comment 16: Electricity Benchmarks
[FR Doc. 2012–30947 Filed 12–21–12; 8:45 am]
The Department published its
Preliminary Determination on August 2,
2012.2 On August 2, 2012, Petitioners3
filed an allegation of critical
circumstances.4 On August 3, 2012, the
TJ Group5 filed a letter withdrawing its
participation from this investigation.6
On August 24, 2012, the Department
published its preliminary affirmative
determination of critical
circumstances.7 On August 31, 2012, we
received a case brief from Godoxa
International LLC and Joobles LLC, two
U.S. importers of the merchandise
under consideration.8 We did not
receive case or rebuttal briefs from any
other interested parties.
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
Period of Investigation
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is
April 1, 2011, through September 30,
2011.
Tax Programs
Comment 17: De Jure Specificity of Three
Tax Programs; Whether the Tax Programs
Are Limited to Certain Enterprises or
Groups of Enterprises
Company-Specific Issues
Comment 18: Allocation of CS Wind’s Grants
Comment 19: Value Added Tax and Import
Duties in the HRS Benchmark Used to
Calculate CS Wind’s Benefit
Comment 20: Whether the Department
Should Apply Total AFA for HRS for
LTAR with Respect to Titan Companies
Comment 21: Titan Companies’ Sales
Denominator
International Trade Administration
[A–552–812]
Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Final Affirmative
Determination of Critical
Circumstances
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: December 24,
2012.
SUMMARY: On August 2, 2012, the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) published its notice of
preliminary determination of sales at
less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’) in the
antidumping investigation of steel wire
garment hangers from the Socialist
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
06:31 Dec 22, 2012
Jkt 229001
1 See Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Preliminary
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Postponement of Final Determination, 77 FR 46044
(August 2, 2012) (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’).
2 See id.
3 M&B Metal Products Company, Inc.; Innovative
Fabrication LLC/Indy Hanger; and US Hanger
Company, LLC.
4 See Letter from Petitioners re; Allegation of
Critical Circumstances, dated August 2, 2012.
5 The TJ Group consists of: the Pre-Supreme
Entity, Infinite Industrial Hanger Limited, and TJ
Co., Ltd. See, e.g., Preliminary Determination, 77 FR
at 46047–48, 46053 n. 109.
6 See TJ Group’s Letter of Withdrawal, dated
August 3, 2012, at 1–2.
7 See Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Preliminary
Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances
in the Antidumping Duty Investigation, 77 FR
51514 (August 24, 2012) (‘‘Preliminary Critical
Circumstances Determination’’).
8 See Godoxa’s and Joobles’ Submission dated
August 31, 2012.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Verification
The Department did not verify the
information submitted by TJ Group
pursuant to section 782(i) of the Act
because the TJ Group withdrew its
participation after the Preliminary
Determination, including from the
Department’s planned verification. As a
result, the Department did not rely upon
the TJ Group’s submitted information in
reaching the final determination.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case brief to
this investigation are addressed in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum
(‘‘Decision Memo’’). A list of the issues
which parties have raised and to which
we have responded in the Decision
Memo is attached to this notice as
Appendix I. The Decision Memo is a
public document and is on file
electronically via Import
Administration’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (‘‘IA
ACCESS’’). Access to IA ACCESS is
available in the Central Records Unit
(‘‘CRU’’), room 7046 of the main
Department of Commerce building. In
addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memo can be accessed directly
on the Internet at https://www.trade.gov/
ia/. The paper copy and electronic
version of the Decision Memo are
identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary
Determination
For the final determination, we have
based the TJ Group’s margin on total
adverse facts available (‘‘AFA’’) because
of its failure to participate and consider
it as part of the Vietnam-wide entity, as
detailed below. Furthermore, for the
final determination, the separate rate
has been revised for the nonindividually examined respondents that
received a preliminary separate rate
margin which had been based on the TJ
Group’s calculated margin.
Scope of Investigation
The merchandise subject to this
investigation is steel wire garment
hangers, fabricated from carbon steel
wire, whether or not galvanized or
painted, whether or not coated with
latex or epoxy or similar gripping
materials, and whether or not fashioned
with paper covers or capes (with or
without printing) or nonslip features
such as saddles or tubes. These products
may also be referred to by a commercial
designation, such as shirt, suit, strut,
caped, or latex (industrial) hangers.
Specifically excluded from the scope
of the investigation are (a) Wooden,
plastic, and other garment hangers that
E:\FR\FM\26DEN1.SGM
26DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2012 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
are not made of steel wire; (b) steel wire
garment hangers with swivel hooks; (c)
steel wire garment hangers with clips
permanently affixed; and (d) chrome
plated steel wire garment hangers with
a diameter of 3.4 mm or greater.
The products subject to the
investigation are currently classified
under U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule
(‘‘HTSUS’’) subheadings 7326.20.0020
and 7323.99.9080. Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the merchandise
is dispositive.
Use of Facts Available, Adverse Facts
Available, and the Vietnam-Wide Rate
Section 776(a) of the Act provides that
if necessary information is not available
on the record or if an interested party:
(A) Withholds information that has been
requested by the Department; (B) fails to
provide such information in a timely
manner or in the form or manner
requested, subject to subsections
782(c)(1) and (e) of the Act; (C)
significantly impedes a determination
under the antidumping statute; or (D)
provides such information but the
information cannot be verified, the
Department shall, subject to subsection
782(d) of the Act, use facts otherwise
available in reaching the applicable
determination.
Section 782(c)(1) of the Act provides
that if an interested party ‘‘promptly
after receiving a request {from the
Department} for information, notifies
{the Department} that such party is
unable to submit the information in the
requested form and manner, together
with a full explanation and suggested
alternative form in which such party is
able to submit the information,’’ the
Department may modify the
requirements to avoid imposing an
unreasonable burden on that party.
Section 782(d) of the Act provides
that, if the Department determines that
a response to a request for information
does not comply with the request, the
Department will inform the person
submitting the response of the nature of
the deficiency and shall, to the extent
practicable, provide that person the
opportunity to remedy or explain the
deficiency. If that person submits
further information that continues to be
unsatisfactory, or this information is not
submitted within the applicable time
limits, the Department may, subject to
section 782(e) of the Act, disregard all
or part of the original and subsequent
responses, as appropriate.
Section 782(e) of the Act states that
the Department shall not decline to
consider information deemed
‘‘deficient’’ under section 782(d) of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
06:31 Dec 22, 2012
Jkt 229001
Act if: (1) The information is submitted
by the established deadline; (2) the
information can be verified; (3) the
information is not so incomplete that it
cannot serve as a reliable basis for
reaching the applicable determination;
(4) the interested party has
demonstrated that it acted to the best of
its ability; and (5) the information can
be used without undue difficulties.
Furthermore, section 776(b) of the Act
states that if the Department finds that
an interested party has not acted to the
best of its ability to comply with a
request for information, the Department
may, in reaching its determination, use
an inference that is adverse to that
party. The adverse inference may be
based upon: (1) The petition, (2) a final
determination in the investigation under
this title, (3) any previous review under
section 751 of the Act or determination
under section 753 of the Act, or (4) any
other information placed on the record.
In this investigation, the Department
selected South East Asia Hamico Export
Joint Stock Company (‘‘Hamico’’) and
the TJ Group as mandatory respondents
for individual examination.9 In the
Preliminary Determination, the
Department determined that there were
exporters/producers of the merchandise
under investigation during the POI from
Vietnam, including Hamico,10 that
either did not respond to the
Department’s request for information or
failed to provide information that was
not available on the record but
necessary to calculate an accurate
dumping margin. Therefore, pursuant to
776(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act, we
treated these Vietnamese exporters/
producers, including Hamico, as part of
the Vietnam-wide entity because they
did not qualify for a separate rate.11
Further, we preliminarily found that the
Vietnam-wide entity was noncooperative because certain companies
did not respond to our requests for
information.12 As a result, pursuant to
section 776(b) of the Act, we
9 See ‘‘Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations, from James C.
Doyle, Director, Office 9; Antidumping Duty
Investigation of Steel Wire Garment Hangers from
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Respondent
Selection,’’ dated February 16, 2012.
10 We preliminarily found that Hamico failed to
provide the information requested by the
Department in a timely manner and in the form
required, and significantly impeded the
Department’s ability to calculate an accurate
margin. The Department was unable to calculate a
margin without the necessary information,
requiring the application of facts otherwise
available to Hamico for the purpose of the
Preliminary Determination. See Preliminary
Determination, 77 FR at 46049–51.
11 See id.
12 See id.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
75981
preliminarily found that the use of AFA
was warranted to determine the
Vietnam-wide rate.13 As AFA, we
preliminarily assigned to the Vietnamwide entity a rate of 187.51 percent,
which was the highest transactionspecific rate calculated for the TJ Group
at the Preliminary Determination.14
Because no information has been placed
on the record to contradict our
Preliminary Determination, we continue
to find, for the final determination, that
the application of AFA to the Vietnamwide entity, including Hamico and the
TJ Group, is appropriate.
The TJ Group
As noted above, on August 3, 2012,
the TJ group withdrew its participation
from this investigation, including the
scheduled verification of its books and
records. By ceasing to participate in the
investigation and withdrawing from the
verification of its questionnaire
responses, the TJ Group withheld
information requested by the
Department, failed to provide such
information in a timely manner, and
prevented the Department from
verifying the accuracy of its information
as provided by section 782(i) of the Act,
pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A), (C),
and (D) of the Act. These actions also
have caused the TJ Group to fail to
demonstrate its eligibility for a separate
rate.15 Therefore, for the final
determination, the Department finds
that the TJ Group is considered to be
part of the Vietnam-wide entity (along
with Hamico and the companies
unresponsive to the Q&V
questionnaires).
The Vietnam-Wide Rate
Because we begin with the
presumption that all companies within
a non-market economy (‘‘NME’’)
country are subject to government
control, and because only the
companies listed under the ‘‘Final
Determination Margins’’ section, below,
have overcome that presumption, we are
applying a single antidumping rate (i.e.,
the Vietnam-wide rate) to all other
exporters of the merchandise under
consideration. Consistent with our
practice, we find that these other
companies did not demonstrate
entitlement to a separate rate.16 The
Vietnam-wide rate applies to all entries
of merchandise under consideration
except for entries from CTN Limited
13 See
id.
id., 77 FR at 46053.
15 See section 776(a)(2)(D) of the Act.
16 See, e.g., Synthetic Indigo From the People’s
Republic of China; Notice of Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 65 FR 25706, 25707
(May 3, 2000).
14 See
E:\FR\FM\26DEN1.SGM
26DEN1
75982
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2012 / Notices
Company, Ju Fu Co., Ltd., and Triloan
Hangers, Inc., which are listed in the
‘‘Final Determination Margins’’ section
below.
In the Preliminary Determination, the
Department determined that, in
selecting from among the facts available
(‘‘FA’’), an adverse inference is
appropriate because the Vietnam-wide
entity failed to cooperate by not acting
to the best of its ability to comply with
requests for information.17 As AFA, we
preliminarily assigned to the Vietnamwide entity a rate of 187.51 percent, the
highest transaction-specific rate
calculated for the TJ Group.18 However,
since the TJ Group is now part of the
Vietnam-wide entity the Department
can no longer rely on the TJ Group’s
highest transaction-specific margin of
187.51 percent as the AFA rate.
As stated above, the Vietnam-wide
entity did not respond to our requests
for information and withheld
information requested by the
Department pursuant to sections
776(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act. Because
the Vietnam-wide entity now also
includes the TJ Group, we also find that
the Vietnam-wide entity withheld
information requested by the
Department, significantly impeded the
Department’s proceeding, and refused to
allow verification of its data, pursuant
to sections 776(a)(2)(A), (C), and (D) of
the Act. Therefore, we determine, as in
the Preliminary Determination, that the
use of facts otherwise available is
appropriate to determine the Vietnamwide rate.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
Selection of the Adverse Facts Available
Rate
As noted above, section 776(b) of the
Act provides that, in selecting from
among the facts otherwise available, the
Department may employ an adverse
inference if an interested party fails to
cooperate by not acting to the best of its
ability to comply with requests for
information. As outlined above, the
Vietnam-wide entity withheld
information requested by the
Department, failed to provide such
information in a timely manner,
significantly impeded the Department’s
proceeding, and refused to allow
verification of its data, pursuant to
sections 776(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), and (D) of
the Act. For these reasons, we find that
the Vietnam-wide entity has failed to
cooperate to the best of its ability and
that it is appropriate, in selecting from
17 See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at
46049–51.
18 See id., 77 FR at 46051; see also Statement of
Administrative Action accompanying the URAA,
H.R. Rep. No. 103–316, vol. 1, at 870 (1994)
(‘‘SAA’’).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
06:31 Dec 22, 2012
Jkt 229001
among the facts otherwise available, to
determine an adverse inference for the
Vietnam-wide entity.
In selecting a rate for AFA, the
Department selects a rate that is
sufficiently adverse to ensure that the
uncooperative party does not obtain a
more favorable result by failing to
cooperate than if it had fully
cooperated. It is the Department’s
practice to select, as AFA, the higher of
the (a) highest margin alleged in the
petition, or (b) the highest calculated
rate of any respondent in the
investigation.19 Because there are no
longer any mandatory respondents on
whose information we can rely,
consistent with our practice, we
determine that the appropriate rate to
select as AFA is 220.68 percent, the
highest margin alleged in the Petition.20
Corroboration
Section 776(c) of the Act provides
that, when the Department relies on
secondary information, rather than on
information obtained in the course of an
investigation as facts available, it must,
to the extent practicable, corroborate
that information from independent
sources reasonably at its disposal.
Secondary information is described in
the SAA as ‘‘information derived from
the petition that gave rise to the
investigation or review, the final
determination concerning subject
merchandise, or any previous review
under Section 751 concerning the
subject merchandise.’’21 The SAA
provides that to ‘‘corroborate’’ means
simply that the Department will satisfy
itself that the secondary information to
19 See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at 46050
n.79; see also Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon
Quality Steel Products from the People’s Republic
of China, 65 FR 34660 (May 21, 2000) and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 1; Circular Welded Austenitic Stainless
Pressure Pipe, 74 FR at 4915; Certain Circular
Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the
People’s Republic of China: Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 74 FR 14514, 14515
(March 31, 2009) (‘‘Circular Welded Carbon Quality
Steel Pipe’’).
20 See Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam and Taiwan:
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 77
FR 3731, 3735 (‘‘Initiation Notice’’) (where the
Department stated that ‘‘the estimated dumping
margins for steel wire garment hangers from
Vietnam range from 117.48 percent to 220.68
percent.’’); see also ‘‘Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Steel Wire
Garment Hangers from Vietnam’’ (‘‘Initiation
Checklist’’) at 9 and Appendix V.; and ‘‘Petitions for
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Steel
Wire Garment Hangers From Taiwan and
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Steel
Wire Garment Hangers from the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam,’’ filed on December 29, 2011 (the
‘‘Petition’’).
21 See SAA at 870.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
be used has probative value.22 The SAA
also states that independent sources
used to corroborate may include, for
example, published price lists, official
import statistics and customs data, and
information obtained from interested
parties during the particular
investigation.23 To corroborate
secondary information, the Department
will, to the extent practicable, examine
the reliability and relevance of the
information used.24
At the Preliminary Determination, as
AFA, we preliminarily assigned to the
Vietnam-wide entity a rate of 187.51
percent, the highest transaction-specific
rate calculated for the TJ Group.25
However, since that rate is no longer
reliable, the Department has determined
to rely on the highest Petition26 margin
of 220.68 percent to assign, as AFA, to
the Vietnam-wide entity.
For the final determination, because
there were no margins calculated for the
mandatory respondents, to corroborate
the 220.68 percent margin used as AFA
for the Vietnam-wide entity, to the
extent appropriate information was
available, we are affirming our preinitiation analysis of the adequacy and
accuracy of the information in the
Petition.27 During our pre-initiation
analysis, we examined evidence
supporting the calculations in the
Petition and the supplemental
information provided by Petitioners
prior to initiation to determine the
probative value of the margins alleged
in the Petition. During our pre-initiation
analysis, we examined the information
used as the basis of export price and
normal value (‘‘NV’’) in the Petition,
and the calculations used to derive the
alleged margins. Also during our preinitiation analysis, we examined
22 See
id.
id.
24 See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof,
Finished and Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered
Roller Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside
Diameter, and Components Thereof, From Japan;
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews and Partial Termination of
Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 57391, 57392
(November 6, 1996), unchanged in Tapered Roller
Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and
Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered Roller
Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter,
and Components Thereof, From Japan; Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Reviews and Termination in Part, 62 FR 11825
(March 13, 1997).
25 See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at 46051;
see also SAA at 870.
26 See Initiation Notice, 77 FR at 3735 (where the
Department stated that ‘‘the estimated dumping
margins for steel wire garment hangers from
Vietnam range from 117.48 percent to 220.68
percent.’’); see also Initiation Checklist at 9 and
Appendix V; and the Petition.
27 See Initiation Notice, 77 FR at 3731, 3735; see
also Initiation Checklist at 9 and Appendix V and
the Petition.
23 See
E:\FR\FM\26DEN1.SGM
26DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2012 / Notices
information from various independent
sources provided either in the Petition
or, based on our requests, in
supplements to the Petition, which
corroborated key elements of the export
price and NV calculations.28 For the
final determination, we have
corroborated our AFA margin by reexamining and affirming our preinitiation analysis. Moreover, we have
found no record evidence that
contradicts our conclusion.
Additionally, no parties commented on
the selection of the Vietnam-wide rate.
Therefore, we continue to find that the
margin of 220.68 percent has probative
value. Accordingly, we find that the rate
of 220.68 percent is corroborated within
the meaning of section 776(c) of the Act.
Separate Rates
In proceedings involving NME
countries, the Department begins with a
rebuttable presumption that all
companies within the country are
subject to government control and, thus,
should be assigned a single
antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the
Department’s policy to assign all
exporters of merchandise subject to an
investigation in an NME country this
single rate unless an exporter can
demonstrate that it is sufficiently
independent so as to be entitled to a
separate rate.29
In the Preliminary Determination, we
found that CTN Limited Company, Ju
Fu Co., Ltd., and Triloan Hangers, Inc.,
demonstrated their eligibility for, and
were hence assigned, separate rate
status. No party has commented on the
eligibility of these companies for
separate rate status. Therefore, for the
final determination, we continue to find
that the evidence placed on the record
of this investigation by these companies
demonstrates both a de jure and de facto
absence of government control with
respect to their exports of the
merchandise under investigation. Thus,
we continue to find that they are eligible
for separate rate status.
Calculation of Separate Rate
As stated in the Preliminary
Determination, the statute and our
regulations do not address directly how
we should establish a rate to apply to
imports from companies which we did
not select for individual examination in
accordance with section 777A(c)(2) of
the Act in a NME investigation.30
Generally, we have used section
735(c)(5) of the Act, which provides
instructions for calculating the allothers rate in a market economy (‘‘ME’’)
investigation, as guidance when we
establish the rate for respondents not
examined individually in a NME
investigation.31 Section 735(c)(5)(A) of
the Act provides that ‘‘the estimated allothers rate shall be an amount equal to
the weighted average of the estimated
weighted-average dumping margins
established for exporters and producers
individually investigated * * *.’’
However, section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act
provides that if the estimated weightedaverage margins for all individually
investigated respondents are de minimis
or based entirely on FA, the Department
may use any reasonable method to
determine the separate rate margin.
In this final determination, the rates
assigned to the mandatory respondents
are based entirely upon FA.
Consequently, pursuant to section
735(c)(5)(B) of the Act, we have
determined the separate rate margin
using a reasonable method that is
consistent with our established practice.
Specifically, we have assigned to the
separate rate respondents the simple
average of all of the margins alleged in
the Petition,32 as noted in the Initiation
Notice,33 which is 157.00 percent.34
Critical Circumstances
On August 2, 2012, Petitioners
submitted an allegation of critical
circumstances with respect to the
merchandise under consideration. On
August 24, 2012, we issued the
Preliminary Critical Circumstances
Determination, stating that we had
reason to believe or suspect critical
circumstances exist with respect to
imports of steel wire garment hangers
from Vietnam. For the final
determination, we are affirming our
preliminary affirmative determination of
critical circumstances and continue to
find that critical circumstances exist
with respect to imports of steel wire
garment hangers from Vietnam.35
Final Determination Margins
We determine that the following
margins exist for the following entities
for the POI: 36
Margin
(percent)
Exporter
Producer
CTN Limited Company ...............................................................
Ju Fu Co., Ltd .............................................................................
Triloan Hangers, Inc ...................................................................
CTN Limited Company ..............................................................
Ju Fu Co., Ltd ............................................................................
Triloan Hangers, Inc ..................................................................
Vietnam-Wide Entity 36
28 See
id.
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Sparklers From the People’s Republic of
China, 56 FR 20588 (May 6, 1991) (‘‘Sparklers’’), as
amplified by Notice of Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the
People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 (May 2,
1994) (‘‘Silicon Carbide’’); see also 19 CFR
351.107(d).
30 See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at 46049.
31 See, e.g., Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells,
Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the
People’s Republic of China: Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Affirmative
Final Determination of Critical Circumstances, in
Part, 77 FR 63791, 63794 (Oct. 17, 2012).
32 See the Petition.
33 See Initiation Notice, 77 FR at 3731.
34 See, e.g., Aluminum Extrusions From the
People’s Republic of China: Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 76 FR 18524, 18525
(April 4, 2011) (‘‘For the final determination, we
have assigned the 29 separate rate applicants to
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
29 See
VerDate Mar<15>2010
06:31 Dec 22, 2012
Jkt 229001
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
157.00
157.00
157.00
220.68
whom we are granting a separate rate a dumping
margin of 32.79 percent, based on the simple
average of the margins alleged in the petition
* * *’’); see also Notice of Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Final
Determination of Critical Circumstances: Circular
Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe From the
People’s Republic of China, 73 FR 31970, 31971–
31972 (June 5, 2008) (‘‘* * * we have assigned to
the separate rate companies the simple average of
the margins alleged in the petition.’’); see also Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Sodium Hexametaphosphate From the People’s
Republic of China, 73 FR 6479, 6480–6481
(February 4, 2008) (‘‘Specifically, we have assigned
an average of the margins calculated for purposes
of initiation as the separate rate for the final
determination.’’).
35 See Decision Memo at Comment 1.
36 The Vietnam-wide entity includes South East
Asia Hamico Export Joint Stock Company, the TJ
Group (consisting of the Pre-Supreme Entity,
Infinite Industrial Hanger Limited, and TJ Co., Ltd.)
and the following companies: Acton Co., Ltd.;
PO 00000
75983
Angang Clothes Rack Manufacture Co.; Asmara
Home Vietnam; B2B Co., Ltd.; Capco Wai Shing
Viet Nam Co., Ltd.; Dai Nam Investment JSC; Diep
Son Hangers One Member Co. Ltd.; Dong Nam A
Co., Ltd.; Dong Nam A Trading Co.; EST Glory
Industrial Ltd.; Focus Shipping Corp.; Godoxa Viet
Nam Ltd.; HCMC General Import And Export
Investment JSC; Hongxiang Business And Product
Co., Ltd.; Linh Sa Hamico Company, Ltd.; Minh
Quang Steel Joint Stock Company; Moc Viet
Manufacture Co., Ltd.; Nam A Hamico Export Joint
Stock; N-Tech Vina Co., Ltd.; NV Hanger Co., Ltd.
(A/K/A Nguyen Hoang Vu Co., Ltd.); Ocean Star
Transport Co., Ltd.; Quoc Ha Production Trading
Service; Quyky (Factory); Quyky Group/Quyky Co.,
Ltd./Quyky-Yanglei International Co., Ltd.; S.I.I.C.;
Tan Minh Textile Sewing Trading Co., Ltd.; Thanh
Hieu Manufacturing Trading Co. Ltd.; The Xuong
Co., Ltd.; Thien Ngon Printing Co., Ltd.; Top Sharp
International Trading Limited; Trung Viet My Joint
Stock Company; Viet Anh Imp-Exp Joint Stock Co.;
Viet Hanger Investment, LLC/Viet Hanger; Vietnam
Hangers Joint Stock Company; VNS/VN Sourcing/
Vietnam Sourcing; and Yen Trang Co., Ltd.
E:\FR\FM\26DEN1.SGM
26DEN1
75984
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2012 / Notices
Disclosure
We will disclose the calculations
performed within five days of the date
of publication of this notice to parties in
this proceeding in accordance with 19
CFR 351.224(b).
Continuation of Suspension of
Liquidation
As noted above, the Department
found that critical circumstances exist
with respect to imports of merchandise
under consideration from the Vietnamwide entity and the separate rate
recipients, CTN Limited Company, Ju
Fu Co., Ltd., and Triloan Hangers, Inc.
In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B)
of the Act, the Department will instruct
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(‘‘CBP’’) to continue to suspend
liquidation of all appropriate entries of
subject merchandise, as described in the
‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ section of this
notice, from the separate rate recipients
and the Vietnam-wide entity that were
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse
for consumption on or after the date 90
days prior to the publication in the
Federal Register of the Preliminary
Determination.
Further, the Department will instruct
CBP to require a cash-deposit equal to
the weighted-average amount by which
the normal value exceeds U.S. price,
adjusted where appropriate for export
subsidies, as follows: (1) The rate for the
exporter/producer combinations listed
in the table above will be the rate we
have determined in this final
determination; (2) for all Vietnamese
exporters of merchandise under
consideration which have not received
their own rate, the cash-deposit rate will
be the Vietnam-wide rate; and (3) for all
non-Vietnamese exporters of
merchandise under consideration which
have not received their own rate, the
cash-deposit rate will be the rate
applicable to the Vietnamese exporter/
producer combination that supplied that
non-Vietnamese exporter. These cashdeposit instructions will remain in
effect until further notice.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 735(d) of
the Act, we have notified the
International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’)
of our final determination of sales at
LTFV. As our final determination is
affirmative, in accordance with section
735(b)(2) of the Act, within 45 days the
ITC will determine whether the
domestic industry in the United States
is materially injured, or threatened with
material injury, by reason of imports or
sales (or the likelihood of sales) for
importation of the merchandise under
VerDate Mar<15>2010
06:31 Dec 22, 2012
Jkt 229001
investigation. If the ITC determines that
material injury or threat of material
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 merchandise under
investigation entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or
after the effective date of the suspension
of liquidation.
Notification Regarding APO
This notice also serves as a reminder
to the parties subject to administrative
protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their
responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely
notification of return or destruction of
APO materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested.
Failure to comply with the regulations
and the terms of an APO is a
sanctionable violation.
This determination and notice are
issued and published in accordance
with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the
Act.
Dated: December 17, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I
Comment 1: The Department’s Preliminary
Affirmative Determination of Critical
Circumstances
[FR Doc. 2012–30951 Filed 12–21–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–552–814]
Utility Scale Wind Towers From the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: December 24,
2012.
SUMMARY: On August 2, 2012, the
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) published its
preliminary determination of sales at
less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’) and
postponement of final determination in
the antidumping investigation of utility
scale wind towers (‘‘wind towers’’) from
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
(‘‘Vietnam’’).1 Based on the
Department’s analysis of the comments
received, the Department has made
changes from the Preliminary
Determination. The Department
determines that wind towers from
Vietnam are being, or are likely to be,
sold in the United States at LTFV, as
provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the ‘‘Act’’). The
final weighted-average dumping
margins for this investigation are listed
in the ‘‘Final Determination’’ section
below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Magd Zalok or Charles Riggle, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 4, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–4162 or (202) 482–
0650, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department published its
preliminary determination of sales at
LTFV and postponement of final
determination on August 2, 2012.2
Between August 13, 2012, and August
24, 2012, the Department conducted
verifications of the mandatory
respondent CS Wind Vietnam Co., Ltd.
(‘‘CS Wind Vietnam’’) and its parent
company CS Wind Corporation (‘‘CS
Wind Corp.’’) (collectively, ‘‘CS Wind
Group’’).3 Between September 14, 2012,
and September 24, 2012, CS Wind
Group and the Wind Tower Trade
Coalition (‘‘Petitioner’’) 4 submitted
surrogate value and rebuttal surrogate
value comments.
On October 2, 2012, CS Wind Group
and Petitioner submitted case briefs. On
October 9, 2012, CS Wind Group and
Petitioner submitted rebuttal briefs.
On September 4, 2012, Petitioner
requested a hearing. However, on
October 23, 2012, Petitioner withdrew
its request for a hearing, and no other
parties requested a hearing.
1 See Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam: Preliminary Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement
of Final Determination, 77 FR 29315 (August 2,
2012) (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’).
2 See Preliminary Determination.
3 See the ‘‘Verification’’ section below.
4 The Wind Tower Trade Coalition is comprised
of Broadwind Towers, Inc., DMI Industries, Katana
Summit LLC, and Trinity Structural Towers, Inc.
See Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping
and Countervailing Duties on Utility Scale Wind
Towers from the People’s Republic of China and
Antidumping Duties on Utility Scale Wind Towers
from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (December
29, 2011) (‘‘Petition’’).
E:\FR\FM\26DEN1.SGM
26DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75980-75984]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30951]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-552-812]
Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final
Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: December 24, 2012.
SUMMARY: On August 2, 2012, the Department of Commerce (``the
Department'') published its notice of preliminary determination of
sales at less than fair value (``LTFV'') in the antidumping
investigation of steel wire garment hangers from the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam (``Vietnam'').\1\ We invited interested parties to comment
on our Preliminary Determination of sales at LTFV. We continue to
determine that steel wire garment hangers from Vietnam are being, or
are likely to be, sold in the United States at LTFV as provided in
section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). The
estimated margins of sales at LTFV are shown in the ``Final
Determination Margins'' section of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 77 FR 46044 (August
2, 2012) (``Preliminary Determination'').
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Gorelik or Robert Palmer, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6905
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
or (202) 482-9068, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Case History
The Department published its Preliminary Determination on August 2,
2012.\2\ On August 2, 2012, Petitioners\3\ filed an allegation of
critical circumstances.\4\ On August 3, 2012, the TJ Group\5\ filed a
letter withdrawing its participation from this investigation.\6\ On
August 24, 2012, the Department published its preliminary affirmative
determination of critical circumstances.\7\ On August 31, 2012, we
received a case brief from Godoxa International LLC and Joobles LLC,
two U.S. importers of the merchandise under consideration.\8\ We did
not receive case or rebuttal briefs from any other interested parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See id.
\3\ M&B Metal Products Company, Inc.; Innovative Fabrication
LLC/Indy Hanger; and US Hanger Company, LLC.
\4\ See Letter from Petitioners re; Allegation of Critical
Circumstances, dated August 2, 2012.
\5\ The TJ Group consists of: the Pre-Supreme Entity, Infinite
Industrial Hanger Limited, and TJ Co., Ltd. See, e.g., Preliminary
Determination, 77 FR at 46047-48, 46053 n. 109.
\6\ See TJ Group's Letter of Withdrawal, dated August 3, 2012,
at 1-2.
\7\ See Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Critical
Circumstances in the Antidumping Duty Investigation, 77 FR 51514
(August 24, 2012) (``Preliminary Critical Circumstances
Determination'').
\8\ See Godoxa's and Joobles' Submission dated August 31, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (``POI'') is April 1, 2011, through
September 30, 2011.
Verification
The Department did not verify the information submitted by TJ Group
pursuant to section 782(i) of the Act because the TJ Group withdrew its
participation after the Preliminary Determination, including from the
Department's planned verification. As a result, the Department did not
rely upon the TJ Group's submitted information in reaching the final
determination.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case brief to this investigation are
addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum (``Decision Memo''). A
list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have
responded in the Decision Memo is attached to this notice as Appendix
I. The Decision Memo is a public document and is on file electronically
via Import Administration's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (``IA ACCESS''). Access to IA
ACCESS is available in the Central Records Unit (``CRU''), room 7046 of
the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete
version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Internet
at https://www.trade.gov/ia/. The paper copy and electronic version of
the Decision Memo are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Determination
For the final determination, we have based the TJ Group's margin on
total adverse facts available (``AFA'') because of its failure to
participate and consider it as part of the Vietnam-wide entity, as
detailed below. Furthermore, for the final determination, the separate
rate has been revised for the non-individually examined respondents
that received a preliminary separate rate margin which had been based
on the TJ Group's calculated margin.
Scope of Investigation
The merchandise subject to this investigation is steel wire garment
hangers, fabricated from carbon steel wire, whether or not galvanized
or painted, whether or not coated with latex or epoxy or similar
gripping materials, and whether or not fashioned with paper covers or
capes (with or without printing) or nonslip features such as saddles or
tubes. These products may also be referred to by a commercial
designation, such as shirt, suit, strut, caped, or latex (industrial)
hangers.
Specifically excluded from the scope of the investigation are (a)
Wooden, plastic, and other garment hangers that
[[Page 75981]]
are not made of steel wire; (b) steel wire garment hangers with swivel
hooks; (c) steel wire garment hangers with clips permanently affixed;
and (d) chrome plated steel wire garment hangers with a diameter of 3.4
mm or greater.
The products subject to the investigation are currently classified
under U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule (``HTSUS'') subheadings
7326.20.0020 and 7323.99.9080. Although the HTSUS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description
of the merchandise is dispositive.
Use of Facts Available, Adverse Facts Available, and the Vietnam-Wide
Rate
Section 776(a) of the Act provides that if necessary information is
not available on the record or if an interested party: (A) Withholds
information that has been requested by the Department; (B) fails to
provide such information in a timely manner or in the form or manner
requested, subject to subsections 782(c)(1) and (e) of the Act; (C)
significantly impedes a determination under the antidumping statute; or
(D) provides such information but the information cannot be verified,
the Department shall, subject to subsection 782(d) of the Act, use
facts otherwise available in reaching the applicable determination.
Section 782(c)(1) of the Act provides that if an interested party
``promptly after receiving a request {from the Department{time} for
information, notifies {the Department{time} that such party is unable
to submit the information in the requested form and manner, together
with a full explanation and suggested alternative form in which such
party is able to submit the information,'' the Department may modify
the requirements to avoid imposing an unreasonable burden on that
party.
Section 782(d) of the Act provides that, if the Department
determines that a response to a request for information does not comply
with the request, the Department will inform the person submitting the
response of the nature of the deficiency and shall, to the extent
practicable, provide that person the opportunity to remedy or explain
the deficiency. If that person submits further information that
continues to be unsatisfactory, or this information is not submitted
within the applicable time limits, the Department may, subject to
section 782(e) of the Act, disregard all or part of the original and
subsequent responses, as appropriate.
Section 782(e) of the Act states that the Department shall not
decline to consider information deemed ``deficient'' under section
782(d) of the Act if: (1) The information is submitted by the
established deadline; (2) the information can be verified; (3) the
information is not so incomplete that it cannot serve as a reliable
basis for reaching the applicable determination; (4) the interested
party has demonstrated that it acted to the best of its ability; and
(5) the information can be used without undue difficulties.
Furthermore, section 776(b) of the Act states that if the
Department finds that an interested party has not acted to the best of
its ability to comply with a request for information, the Department
may, in reaching its determination, use an inference that is adverse to
that party. The adverse inference may be based upon: (1) The petition,
(2) a final determination in the investigation under this title, (3)
any previous review under section 751 of the Act or determination under
section 753 of the Act, or (4) any other information placed on the
record.
In this investigation, the Department selected South East Asia
Hamico Export Joint Stock Company (``Hamico'') and the TJ Group as
mandatory respondents for individual examination.\9\ In the Preliminary
Determination, the Department determined that there were exporters/
producers of the merchandise under investigation during the POI from
Vietnam, including Hamico,\10\ that either did not respond to the
Department's request for information or failed to provide information
that was not available on the record but necessary to calculate an
accurate dumping margin. Therefore, pursuant to 776(a)(2)(A) and (B) of
the Act, we treated these Vietnamese exporters/producers, including
Hamico, as part of the Vietnam-wide entity because they did not qualify
for a separate rate.\11\ Further, we preliminarily found that the
Vietnam-wide entity was non-cooperative because certain companies did
not respond to our requests for information.\12\ As a result, pursuant
to section 776(b) of the Act, we preliminarily found that the use of
AFA was warranted to determine the Vietnam-wide rate.\13\ As AFA, we
preliminarily assigned to the Vietnam-wide entity a rate of 187.51
percent, which was the highest transaction-specific rate calculated for
the TJ Group at the Preliminary Determination.\14\ Because no
information has been placed on the record to contradict our Preliminary
Determination, we continue to find, for the final determination, that
the application of AFA to the Vietnam-wide entity, including Hamico and
the TJ Group, is appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See ``Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, from
James C. Doyle, Director, Office 9; Antidumping Duty Investigation
of Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam: Respondent Selection,'' dated February 16, 2012.
\10\ We preliminarily found that Hamico failed to provide the
information requested by the Department in a timely manner and in
the form required, and significantly impeded the Department's
ability to calculate an accurate margin. The Department was unable
to calculate a margin without the necessary information, requiring
the application of facts otherwise available to Hamico for the
purpose of the Preliminary Determination. See Preliminary
Determination, 77 FR at 46049-51.
\11\ See id.
\12\ See id.
\13\ See id.
\14\ See id., 77 FR at 46053.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The TJ Group
As noted above, on August 3, 2012, the TJ group withdrew its
participation from this investigation, including the scheduled
verification of its books and records. By ceasing to participate in the
investigation and withdrawing from the verification of its
questionnaire responses, the TJ Group withheld information requested by
the Department, failed to provide such information in a timely manner,
and prevented the Department from verifying the accuracy of its
information as provided by section 782(i) of the Act, pursuant to
sections 776(a)(2)(A), (C), and (D) of the Act. These actions also have
caused the TJ Group to fail to demonstrate its eligibility for a
separate rate.\15\ Therefore, for the final determination, the
Department finds that the TJ Group is considered to be part of the
Vietnam-wide entity (along with Hamico and the companies unresponsive
to the Q&V questionnaires).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See section 776(a)(2)(D) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Vietnam-Wide Rate
Because we begin with the presumption that all companies within a
non-market economy (``NME'') country are subject to government control,
and because only the companies listed under the ``Final Determination
Margins'' section, below, have overcome that presumption, we are
applying a single antidumping rate (i.e., the Vietnam-wide rate) to all
other exporters of the merchandise under consideration. Consistent with
our practice, we find that these other companies did not demonstrate
entitlement to a separate rate.\16\ The Vietnam-wide rate applies to
all entries of merchandise under consideration except for entries from
CTN Limited
[[Page 75982]]
Company, Ju Fu Co., Ltd., and Triloan Hangers, Inc., which are listed
in the ``Final Determination Margins'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See, e.g., Synthetic Indigo From the People's Republic of
China; Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value, 65 FR 25706, 25707 (May 3, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Preliminary Determination, the Department determined that,
in selecting from among the facts available (``FA''), an adverse
inference is appropriate because the Vietnam-wide entity failed to
cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with
requests for information.\17\ As AFA, we preliminarily assigned to the
Vietnam-wide entity a rate of 187.51 percent, the highest transaction-
specific rate calculated for the TJ Group.\18\ However, since the TJ
Group is now part of the Vietnam-wide entity the Department can no
longer rely on the TJ Group's highest transaction-specific margin of
187.51 percent as the AFA rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at 46049-51.
\18\ See id., 77 FR at 46051; see also Statement of
Administrative Action accompanying the URAA, H.R. Rep. No. 103-316,
vol. 1, at 870 (1994) (``SAA'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated above, the Vietnam-wide entity did not respond to our
requests for information and withheld information requested by the
Department pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act.
Because the Vietnam-wide entity now also includes the TJ Group, we also
find that the Vietnam-wide entity withheld information requested by the
Department, significantly impeded the Department's proceeding, and
refused to allow verification of its data, pursuant to sections
776(a)(2)(A), (C), and (D) of the Act. Therefore, we determine, as in
the Preliminary Determination, that the use of facts otherwise
available is appropriate to determine the Vietnam-wide rate.
Selection of the Adverse Facts Available Rate
As noted above, section 776(b) of the Act provides that, in
selecting from among the facts otherwise available, the Department may
employ an adverse inference if an interested party fails to cooperate
by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with requests for
information. As outlined above, the Vietnam-wide entity withheld
information requested by the Department, failed to provide such
information in a timely manner, significantly impeded the Department's
proceeding, and refused to allow verification of its data, pursuant to
sections 776(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), and (D) of the Act. For these reasons,
we find that the Vietnam-wide entity has failed to cooperate to the
best of its ability and that it is appropriate, in selecting from among
the facts otherwise available, to determine an adverse inference for
the Vietnam-wide entity.
In selecting a rate for AFA, the Department selects a rate that is
sufficiently adverse to ensure that the uncooperative party does not
obtain a more favorable result by failing to cooperate than if it had
fully cooperated. It is the Department's practice to select, as AFA,
the higher of the (a) highest margin alleged in the petition, or (b)
the highest calculated rate of any respondent in the investigation.\19\
Because there are no longer any mandatory respondents on whose
information we can rely, consistent with our practice, we determine
that the appropriate rate to select as AFA is 220.68 percent, the
highest margin alleged in the Petition.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at 46050 n.79; see
also Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain
Cold-Rolled Carbon Quality Steel Products from the People's Republic
of China, 65 FR 34660 (May 21, 2000) and accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum at Comment 1; Circular Welded Austenitic
Stainless Pressure Pipe, 74 FR at 4915; Certain Circular Welded
Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the People's Republic of China:
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 74 FR 14514,
14515 (March 31, 2009) (``Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel
Pipe'').
\20\ See Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam and Taiwan: Initiation of Antidumping Duty
Investigations, 77 FR 3731, 3735 (``Initiation Notice'') (where the
Department stated that ``the estimated dumping margins for steel
wire garment hangers from Vietnam range from 117.48 percent to
220.68 percent.''); see also ``Antidumping Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Steel Wire Garment Hangers from Vietnam''
(``Initiation Checklist'') at 9 and Appendix V.; and ``Petitions for
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Steel Wire Garment Hangers
From Taiwan and Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Steel Wire
Garment Hangers from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam,'' filed on
December 29, 2011 (the ``Petition'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corroboration
Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies
on secondary information, rather than on information obtained in the
course of an investigation as facts available, it must, to the extent
practicable, corroborate that information from independent sources
reasonably at its disposal. Secondary information is described in the
SAA as ``information derived from the petition that gave rise to the
investigation or review, the final determination concerning subject
merchandise, or any previous review under Section 751 concerning the
subject merchandise.''\21\ The SAA provides that to ``corroborate''
means simply that the Department will satisfy itself that the secondary
information to be used has probative value.\22\ The SAA also states
that independent sources used to corroborate may include, for example,
published price lists, official import statistics and customs data, and
information obtained from interested parties during the particular
investigation.\23\ To corroborate secondary information, the Department
will, to the extent practicable, examine the reliability and relevance
of the information used.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See SAA at 870.
\22\ See id.
\23\ See id.
\24\ See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and
Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches or
Less in Outside Diameter, and Components Thereof, From Japan;
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and
Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 57391, 57392
(November 6, 1996), unchanged in Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered Roller
Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, and Components
Thereof, From Japan; Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews and Termination in Part, 62 FR 11825 (March
13, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the Preliminary Determination, as AFA, we preliminarily assigned
to the Vietnam-wide entity a rate of 187.51 percent, the highest
transaction-specific rate calculated for the TJ Group.\25\ However,
since that rate is no longer reliable, the Department has determined to
rely on the highest Petition\26\ margin of 220.68 percent to assign, as
AFA, to the Vietnam-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at 46051; see also SAA
at 870.
\26\ See Initiation Notice, 77 FR at 3735 (where the Department
stated that ``the estimated dumping margins for steel wire garment
hangers from Vietnam range from 117.48 percent to 220.68
percent.''); see also Initiation Checklist at 9 and Appendix V; and
the Petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the final determination, because there were no margins
calculated for the mandatory respondents, to corroborate the 220.68
percent margin used as AFA for the Vietnam-wide entity, to the extent
appropriate information was available, we are affirming our pre-
initiation analysis of the adequacy and accuracy of the information in
the Petition.\27\ During our pre-initiation analysis, we examined
evidence supporting the calculations in the Petition and the
supplemental information provided by Petitioners prior to initiation to
determine the probative value of the margins alleged in the Petition.
During our pre-initiation analysis, we examined the information used as
the basis of export price and normal value (``NV'') in the Petition,
and the calculations used to derive the alleged margins. Also during
our pre-initiation analysis, we examined
[[Page 75983]]
information from various independent sources provided either in the
Petition or, based on our requests, in supplements to the Petition,
which corroborated key elements of the export price and NV
calculations.\28\ For the final determination, we have corroborated our
AFA margin by re-examining and affirming our pre-initiation analysis.
Moreover, we have found no record evidence that contradicts our
conclusion. Additionally, no parties commented on the selection of the
Vietnam-wide rate. Therefore, we continue to find that the margin of
220.68 percent has probative value. Accordingly, we find that the rate
of 220.68 percent is corroborated within the meaning of section 776(c)
of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Initiation Notice, 77 FR at 3731, 3735; see also
Initiation Checklist at 9 and Appendix V and the Petition.
\28\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate Rates
In proceedings involving NME countries, the Department begins with
a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are
subject to government control and, thus, should be assigned a single
antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the Department's policy to assign
all exporters of merchandise subject to an investigation in an NME
country this single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is
sufficiently independent so as to be entitled to a separate rate.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Sparklers From the People's Republic of China, 56 FR 20588 (May 6,
1991) (``Sparklers''), as amplified by Notice of Final Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the People's
Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994) (``Silicon Carbide'');
see also 19 CFR 351.107(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Preliminary Determination, we found that CTN Limited
Company, Ju Fu Co., Ltd., and Triloan Hangers, Inc., demonstrated their
eligibility for, and were hence assigned, separate rate status. No
party has commented on the eligibility of these companies for separate
rate status. Therefore, for the final determination, we continue to
find that the evidence placed on the record of this investigation by
these companies demonstrates both a de jure and de facto absence of
government control with respect to their exports of the merchandise
under investigation. Thus, we continue to find that they are eligible
for separate rate status.
Calculation of Separate Rate
As stated in the Preliminary Determination, the statute and our
regulations do not address directly how we should establish a rate to
apply to imports from companies which we did not select for individual
examination in accordance with section 777A(c)(2) of the Act in a NME
investigation.\30\ Generally, we have used section 735(c)(5) of the
Act, which provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in
a market economy (``ME'') investigation, as guidance when we establish
the rate for respondents not examined individually in a NME
investigation.\31\ Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that ``the
estimated all-others rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted
average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established
for exporters and producers individually investigated * * *.'' However,
section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act provides that if the estimated
weighted-average margins for all individually investigated respondents
are de minimis or based entirely on FA, the Department may use any
reasonable method to determine the separate rate margin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at 46049.
\31\ See, e.g., Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether
or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People's Republic of China:
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and
Affirmative Final Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part,
77 FR 63791, 63794 (Oct. 17, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this final determination, the rates assigned to the mandatory
respondents are based entirely upon FA. Consequently, pursuant to
section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act, we have determined the separate rate
margin using a reasonable method that is consistent with our
established practice. Specifically, we have assigned to the separate
rate respondents the simple average of all of the margins alleged in
the Petition,\32\ as noted in the Initiation Notice,\33\ which is
157.00 percent.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See the Petition.
\33\ See Initiation Notice, 77 FR at 3731.
\34\ See, e.g., Aluminum Extrusions From the People's Republic
of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 76
FR 18524, 18525 (April 4, 2011) (``For the final determination, we
have assigned the 29 separate rate applicants to whom we are
granting a separate rate a dumping margin of 32.79 percent, based on
the simple average of the margins alleged in the petition * * *'');
see also Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value and Affirmative Final Determination of Critical Circumstances:
Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe From the People's Republic
of China, 73 FR 31970, 31971-31972 (June 5, 2008) (``* * * we have
assigned to the separate rate companies the simple average of the
margins alleged in the petition.''); see also Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sodium Hexametaphosphate From the
People's Republic of China, 73 FR 6479, 6480-6481 (February 4, 2008)
(``Specifically, we have assigned an average of the margins
calculated for purposes of initiation as the separate rate for the
final determination.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical Circumstances
On August 2, 2012, Petitioners submitted an allegation of critical
circumstances with respect to the merchandise under consideration. On
August 24, 2012, we issued the Preliminary Critical Circumstances
Determination, stating that we had reason to believe or suspect
critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of steel wire
garment hangers from Vietnam. For the final determination, we are
affirming our preliminary affirmative determination of critical
circumstances and continue to find that critical circumstances exist
with respect to imports of steel wire garment hangers from Vietnam.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See Decision Memo at Comment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Determination Margins
We determine that the following margins exist for the following
entities for the POI: \36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ The Vietnam-wide entity includes South East Asia Hamico
Export Joint Stock Company, the TJ Group (consisting of the Pre-
Supreme Entity, Infinite Industrial Hanger Limited, and TJ Co.,
Ltd.) and the following companies: Acton Co., Ltd.; Angang Clothes
Rack Manufacture Co.; Asmara Home Vietnam; B2B Co., Ltd.; Capco Wai
Shing Viet Nam Co., Ltd.; Dai Nam Investment JSC; Diep Son Hangers
One Member Co. Ltd.; Dong Nam A Co., Ltd.; Dong Nam A Trading Co.;
EST Glory Industrial Ltd.; Focus Shipping Corp.; Godoxa Viet Nam
Ltd.; HCMC General Import And Export Investment JSC; Hongxiang
Business And Product Co., Ltd.; Linh Sa Hamico Company, Ltd.; Minh
Quang Steel Joint Stock Company; Moc Viet Manufacture Co., Ltd.; Nam
A Hamico Export Joint Stock; N-Tech Vina Co., Ltd.; NV Hanger Co.,
Ltd. (A/K/A Nguyen Hoang Vu Co., Ltd.); Ocean Star Transport Co.,
Ltd.; Quoc Ha Production Trading Service; Quyky (Factory); Quyky
Group/Quyky Co., Ltd./Quyky-Yanglei International Co., Ltd.;
S.I.I.C.; Tan Minh Textile Sewing Trading Co., Ltd.; Thanh Hieu
Manufacturing Trading Co. Ltd.; The Xuong Co., Ltd.; Thien Ngon
Printing Co., Ltd.; Top Sharp International Trading Limited; Trung
Viet My Joint Stock Company; Viet Anh Imp-Exp Joint Stock Co.; Viet
Hanger Investment, LLC/Viet Hanger; Vietnam Hangers Joint Stock
Company; VNS/VN Sourcing/Vietnam Sourcing; and Yen Trang Co., Ltd.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Exporter Producer (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTN Limited Company............ CTN Limited Company.... 157.00
Ju Fu Co., Ltd................. Ju Fu Co., Ltd......... 157.00
Triloan Hangers, Inc........... Triloan Hangers, Inc... 157.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vietnam-Wide Entity \36\ 220.68
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 75984]]
Disclosure
We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the
date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation
As noted above, the Department found that critical circumstances
exist with respect to imports of merchandise under consideration from
the Vietnam-wide entity and the separate rate recipients, CTN Limited
Company, Ju Fu Co., Ltd., and Triloan Hangers, Inc. In accordance with
section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department will instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to continue to suspend
liquidation of all appropriate entries of subject merchandise, as
described in the ``Scope of Investigation'' section of this notice,
from the separate rate recipients and the Vietnam-wide entity that were
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption on or after the
date 90 days prior to the publication in the Federal Register of the
Preliminary Determination.
Further, the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash-deposit
equal to the weighted-average amount by which the normal value exceeds
U.S. price, adjusted where appropriate for export subsidies, as
follows: (1) The rate for the exporter/producer combinations listed in
the table above will be the rate we have determined in this final
determination; (2) for all Vietnamese exporters of merchandise under
consideration which have not received their own rate, the cash-deposit
rate will be the Vietnam-wide rate; and (3) for all non-Vietnamese
exporters of merchandise under consideration which have not received
their own rate, the cash-deposit rate will be the rate applicable to
the Vietnamese exporter/producer combination that supplied that non-
Vietnamese exporter. These cash-deposit instructions will remain in
effect until further notice.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the
International Trade Commission (``ITC'') of our final determination of
sales at LTFV. As our final determination is affirmative, in accordance
with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, within 45 days the ITC will
determine whether the domestic industry in the United States is
materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of
imports or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation of the
merchandise under investigation. If the ITC determines that material
injury or threat of material 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 merchandise under investigation entered,
or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective
date of the suspension of liquidation.
Notification Regarding APO
This notice also serves as a reminder to the parties subject to
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of return or
destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order
is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the
terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
This determination and notice are issued and published in
accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 17, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I
Comment 1: The Department's Preliminary Affirmative Determination of
Critical Circumstances
[FR Doc. 2012-30951 Filed 12-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
