Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2009-2010, 11143-11146 [2013-03481]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2013 / Notices
has been or will be exported from the
United States and which is owned,
possessed or controlled by the Denied
Person, or service any item, of whatever
origin, that is owned, possessed or
controlled by the Denied Person if such
service involves the use of any item
subject to the Regulations that has been
or will be exported from the United
States. For purposes of this paragraph,
servicing means installation,
maintenance, repair, modification or
testing.
III. After notice and opportunity for
comment as provided in Section 766.23
of the Regulations, any other person,
firm, corporation, or business
organization related to Kraegel by
affiliation, ownership, control or
position of responsibility in the conduct
of trade or related services may also be
subject to the provisions of this Order if
necessary to prevent evasion of the
Order.
IV. This Order does not prohibit any
export, reexport, or other transaction
subject to the Regulations where the
only items involved that are subject to
the Regulations are the foreignproduced direct product of U.S.-origin
technology.
V. This Order is effective immediately
and shall remain in effect until August
24, 2021.
VI. In accordance with Part 756 of the
Regulations, Kraegel may file an appeal
of this Order with the Under Secretary
of Commerce for Industry and Security.
The appeal must be filed within 45 days
from the date of this Order and must
comply with the provisions of Part 756
of the Regulations.
VII. A copy of this Order shall be
delivered to the Kraegel. This Order
shall be published in the Federal
Register.
Issued this 8th day of February, 2013.
Bernard Kritzer,
Director, Office of Exporter Services .
[FR Doc. 2013–03547 Filed 2–14–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Transportation and Related Equipment
Technical Advisory Committee; Notice
of Partially Closed Meeting
The Transportation and Related
Equipment Technical Advisory
Committee will meet on
March 7, 2013, 9:30 a.m., in the
Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room
6087B, 14th Street between Constitution
& Pennsylvania Avenues NW.
Washington, DC. The Committee
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:09 Feb 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
advises the Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Export Administration
with respect to technical questions that
affect the level of export controls
applicable to transportation and related
equipment or technology.
Agenda
Public Session
1. Welcome and Introductions.
2. Status reports by working group
chairs.
3. Public comments and Proposals.
Closed Session
4. Discussion of matters determined to
be exempt from the provisions relating
to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C.
app. 2 §§ 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3).
The open session will be accessible
via teleconference to 20 participants on
a first come, first serve basis. To join the
conference, submit inquiries to Ms.
Yvette Springer at
Yvette.Springer@bis.doc.gov no later
than February 28, 2013.
A limited number of seats will be
available during the public session of
the meeting. Reservations are not
accepted. To the extent time permits,
members of the public may present oral
statements to the Committee. The public
may submit written statements at any
time before or after the meeting.
However, to facilitate distribution of
public presentation materials to
Committee members, the Committee
suggests that presenters forward the
public presentation materials prior to
the meeting to Ms. Springer via email.
The Assistant Secretary for
Administration, with the concurrence of
the delegate of the General Counsel,
formally determined on October 19,
2012, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, as
amended (5 U.S.C. app. 2 § (10)(d)), that
the portion of the meeting dealing with
pre-decisional changes to the Commerce
Control List and U.S. export control
policies shall be exempt from the
provisions relating to public meetings
found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 §§ 10(a)(1) and
10(a)(3). The remaining portions of the
meeting will be open to the public.
For more information, call Yvette
Springer at (202) 482·2813.
Dated: February 11, 2013.
Yvette Springer,
Committee Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013–03617 Filed 2–14–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11143
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–900]
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2009–2010
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 6, 2011, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of the administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on diamond
sawblades and parts thereof (diamond
sawblades) from the People’s Republic
of China (the PRC). The period of review
(POR) is January 23, 2009, through
October 31, 2010. For the final results,
we continue to find that certain
companies covered by this review made
sales of subject merchandise at less than
normal value.
DATES: Effective Date: February 15,
2013.
AGENCY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Romani or Yang Jin Chun, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 1, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–0198 or (202) 482–
5760, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 6, 2011, the Department
published the preliminary results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on diamond
sawblades from the PRC.1 We received
case and rebuttal briefs with respect to
the Preliminary Results and, at the
request of interested parties, we held a
hearing on February 23, 2012.
On April 5, 2012, the Diamond
Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition (the
petitioner) alleged that Korean
respondents Ehwa Diamond Industrial
Co., Ltd., and Shinhan Diamond
Industrial Co., Ltd. and SH Trading Inc.,
and their respective Chinese
subsidiaries Weihai Xiangguang
Mechanical Industrial Co., Ltd.
(Weihai), and Qingdao Shinhan
Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd. (Qingdao
Shinhan), sold diamond sawblades into
1 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review and Intent to Rescind Review in Part, 76 FR
76135 (December 6, 2011) (Preliminary Results).
E:\FR\FM\15FEN1.SGM
15FEN1
11144
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2013 / Notices
the United States bearing false country
of origin designations.
We extended the due date for the final
results of review to June 4, 2012.2 On
June 4, 2012, the Department deferred
the final results of this administrative
review in order to address the
petitioner’s fraud allegations.3
On January 8, 2013, we issued a postpreliminary memorandum finding that
the information submitted by Weihai
and Qingdao Shinhan is reliable for the
final results of the review.4
We have conducted this
administrative review in accordance
with section 751 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act).
Fraud Allegation
We continue to find the information
Weihai and Qingdao Shinhan submitted
in this review to be reliable for the final
results of review.5
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the order
is diamond sawblades. The diamond
sawblades subject to the order are
currently classifiable under subheadings
8202 to 8206 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS),
and may also enter under 6804.21.00.
The HTSUS subheadings are provided
for convenience and customs purposes.
A full description of the scope of the
order is contained in the Final Decision
Memorandum. The written description
is dispositive.
2 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China: Extension of
Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 77 FR 14733 (March 13,
2012), and Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the Republic of Korea and the People’s
Republic of China: Extension of Time Limits for the
Final Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews, 77 FR 20788 (April 6,
2012).
3 See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, entitled
‘‘Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the
Republic of Korea and the People’s Republic of
China: Deferral of the Final Results of the First
Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews,’’ dated
June 4, 2012.
4 See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, entitled
‘‘2009/2010 Review of the Antidumping Duty
Orders on Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the Republic of Korea and the People’s
Republic of China: Post-Preliminary Analysis,’’
dated January 8, 2013. See also Memorandum to
Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, from Gary Taverman, Senior
Advisor for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, entitled ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Diamond Sawblades
and Parts Thereof From the People’s Republic of
China covering the Period January 23, 2009,
through October 31, 2010,’’ dated February 8, 2013
(Final Decision Memorandum), which is hereby
adopted by this notice, at Comment 27.
5 See Final Decision Memorandum for more
details.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:09 Feb 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case briefs by
parties to this administrative review are
addressed in the Final Decision
Memorandum. A list of the issues raised
is attached to this notice as an
appendix. The Final Decision
Memorandum is a public document and
is on file electronically via Import
Administration’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS).
Access to IA ACCESS is available to
registered users at https://
iaaccess.trade.gov and is available to all
parties in the Central Records Unit,
Room 7046 of the main Department of
Commerce building. In addition, a
complete version of the Final Decision
Memorandum can be accessed directly
on the Import Administration Web site
at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/.
The signed Final Decision
Memorandum and the electronic
versions of the Final Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Rescission of Administrative Review in
Part
We preliminarily found that Shanghai
Deda Industry & Trading Co., Ltd.
(Shanghai Deda) did not have any
exports of subject merchandise during
the POR and, on this basis, we stated
our intent to rescind the review in part.6
We continue to find that the company
had no shipments of subject
merchandise during the POR and are
rescinding this review for Shanghai
Deda.
On March 28, 2011, the petitioner
withdrew its request for review of the
following companies:
Electrolux Construction Products
(Xiamen) Co. Ltd.
Hebei Jikai Industrial Group Co., Ltd.
Huachang Diamond Tools
Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
Jiangsu Fengyu Tools Co., Ltd.
Jiangyin Likn Industry Co., Ltd.
Protech Diamond Tools
Quanzhou Shuangyang Diamond Tools
Co., Ltd.
Task Tools & Abrasives
Zhejiang Wanda Import and Export Co.
Zhejiang Wanda Tools Group Corp.
Zhejiang Wanli Super-hard Materials
Co., Ltd.
In the Preliminary Results, we
assigned the PRC-wide rate to these
companies. In its case brief, Hebei Jikai
Industrial Group Co., Ltd. (Hebei Jikai)
requested that the Department rescind
the review of these companies because
the petitioner was the only party that
requested their review and because the
6 See
PO 00000
Preliminary Results, 76 FR at 76136.
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
petitioner timely withdrew its request.
On August 8, 2012, we rescinded the
review in part for Hebei Jikai and
Jiangyin Likn Industry Co., Ltd.7
Because the other companies listed
above have not previously received a
separate rate, we did not rescind this
review with respect to those companies.
While the request for review for those
companies was timely withdrawn, those
companies remain part of the PRC-wide
entity.
Surrogate Country
In the Preliminary Results, we treated
the PRC as a non-market-economy
(NME) country and, therefore, we
calculated normal value in accordance
with section 773(c) of the Act. We
selected India as the surrogate country,
pursuant to section 773(c)(4) of the Act,
because it is a significant producer of
merchandise comparable to subject
merchandise and is at a level of
economic development comparable to
the PRC.8 For the final results of review,
we have continued to treat the PRC as
an NME country and have used the
same primary surrogate country, India.
Affiliation
In the Preliminary Results, we treated
five companies as a single entity, the
ATM Single Entity,9 for purposes of
calculating a single margin.10 We have
received and evaluated the comments
with respect to ATM Single Entity and
whether to expand it to include two
additional companies. For these final
results, we have determined not to
include any additional companies in
ATM Single Entity.11
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.12 It is
7 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China: Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part,
77 FR 47362 (August 8, 2012).
8 See Preliminary Results, 76 FR at 76136.
9 ATM Single Entity includes Advanced
Technology & Materials Co., Ltd., Beijing Gang Yan
Diamond Products Co., Ltd., HXF Saw Co., Ltd.,
AT&M International Trading Co., Ltd., and Cliff
International Ltd.
10 See Preliminary Results, 76 FR at 76136.
11 See Final Decision Memorandum at Comments
1 and 2.
12 See, e.g.,Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and Final Partial Affirmative
Determination of Critical Circumstances: Diamond
Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People’s
Republic of China, 71 FR 29303 (May 22, 2006), and
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value, and Affirmative Critical Circumstances,
E:\FR\FM\15FEN1.SGM
15FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2013 / Notices
the Department’s policy to assign all
exporters of merchandise subject to
review 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.13
In the Preliminary Results, we found
that, in addition to the companies we
selected for individual examination,
certain companies demonstrated their
eligibility for separate rate status by
demonstrating that they operated free of
de jure and de facto government
control.14 We received comments from
interested parties regarding the separate
rate status of ATM Single Entity. Based
on the information on the record of this
review, we continue to find that ATM
Single Entity has demonstrated an
absence of de jure and de facto
government control and is, thus, eligible
for a separate rate.15 We also continue
to find that the other respondents that
received separate rates in the
Preliminary Results are eligible for
separate rates.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Separate Rate for a Non-Selected
Company
In the Preliminary Results, with
regard to companies not selected for
individual examination, we explained
that, because (1) the statute and the
Department’s regulations do not address
the establishment of a rate to be applied
to individual companies not selected for
examination when the Department
limits its examination in an
administrative review pursuant to
section 777A(c)(2) of the Act, and (2) the
Department’s usual practice has been to
average the margins for the selected
companies, excluding margins that are
zero, de minimis, or based entirely on
facts available,16 we assigned the
antidumping duty margin for Weihai to
companies not selected for individual
examination and eligible for a separate
rate. We are continuing to assign them
Weihai’s rate, 9.55 percent, for these
final results. In assigning this separate
rate, we did not impute the actions of
any other companies to the behavior of
the companies not individually
In Part: Certain Lined Paper Products From the
People’s Republic of China, 71 FR 53079
(September 8, 2006).
13 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and
Requests for Revocation in Part, 75 FR 81565, 81566
(December 28, 2010) (Initiation).
14 See Preliminary Results, 76 FR at 76136–37.
15 See Final Decision Memorandum at Comments
1 and 2.
16 See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From
France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United
Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews and Rescission of Reviews
in Part, 73 FR 52823, 52824 (September 11, 2008),
and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 16.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:09 Feb 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
examined but based this determination
on record evidence that is reasonably
reflective of the potential dumping
margin for the companies not selected
for individual examination and eligible
for a separate rate in this administrative
review.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of comments
received, we have made revisions that
have changed the results for certain
companies. Additionally, we have made
calculation programming changes for
the final results. For further details on
the changes we made for these final
results, see the company-specific
analysis memoranda, the Final Decision
Memorandum, and the final surrogate
value memorandum dated concurrently
with this notice.
Final Results of the Review
As a result of the administrative
review, we determine that the following
weighted-average percentage dumping
margins exist for the period January 23,
2009, through October 31, 2010:
Margin
(percent)
Company 17
Advanced Technology &
Materials Co., Ltd. .........
ASHINE Diamond Tools
Co., Ltd. ........................
AT&M International Trading Co., Ltd. ..................
Beijing Gang Yan Diamond Products Co. .......
Bosun Tools Co., Ltd. .......
Chengdu Huifeng Diamond Tools Co., Ltd. ....
Cliff International Ltd.18 ....
Danyang Hantronic Import
& Export Co., Ltd. .........
Danyang Huachang Diamond Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd. ..............
Danyang NYCL Tools
Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
Fujian Quanzhou Wanlong
Stone Co., Ltd. ..............
Guilin Tebon Superhard
Material Co., Ltd. ..........
Hangzhou Deer King Industrial & Trading Co.,
Ltd. ................................
Hebei Husqvarna-Jikai Diamond Tools Co., Ltd. ..
Hebei XMF Tools Group
Co., Ltd.19 .....................
Henan Huanghe Whirlwind
Co., Ltd. ........................
Henan Huanghe Whirlwind
International Co., Ltd. ...
Huzhou Gu’s Import & Export Co., Ltd. .................
HXF Saw Co., Ltd. ...........
Jiangsu Fengtai Diamond
Tool Manufacture Co.,
Ltd. ................................
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
0.15
9.55
0.15
0.15
9.55
9.55
0.15
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
0.15
9.55
Company 17
Jiangsu Inter-China Group
Corporation ...................
Jiangsu Youhe Tool Manufacturer Co., Ltd. .........
Qingdao Shinhan Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd.
Quanzhou Zhongzhi Diamond Tool Co. Ltd. .......
Rizhao Hein Saw Co., Ltd.
Saint-Gobain Abrasives
(Shanghai) Co., Ltd. ......
Shanghai Robtol Tool
Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
Shijiazhuang Global New
Century Tools Co., Ltd.
Weihai Xiangguang Mechanical Industrial Co.,
Ltd. ................................
Wuhan Wanbang Laser
Diamond Tools Co. .......
Xiamen ZL Diamond
Technology Co., Ltd. .....
Zhejiang Wanli Tools
Group Co., Ltd. .............
PRC-Wide Entity 20 ...........
11145
Margin
(percent)
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
164.09
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties
on all appropriate entries. In accordance
with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have
calculated, whenever possible, an
exporter/importer (or customer)-specific
assessment rate or value for
merchandise subject to this review as
described below.
For ATM Single Entity, we will
instruct CBP to liquidate all entries
17 For explanations on the names of certain
companies, see Preliminary Results, 76 FR at
76136–37.
18 Cliff International Ltd. also used the company
name Cliff (Tianjin) International Ltd., according to
various documents provided in ATM Single Entity’s
May 10, 2011, section A response.
19 Hebei XMF Tools Group Co., Ltd., reported that
its correct name is Hebei XMF Tools Group Co.,
Ltd., and not Hebei XMF Tools (Group) Co., Ltd.,
which is the name we stated in the Initiation, 75
FR at 81567, and the Preliminary Results, 77 FR at
76137, 76141. See the letter from Hebei XMF Tools
Group Co., Ltd., dated December 2, 2011.
20 The PRC-wide entity includes the following
companies: Central Iron and Steel Research
Institute Group, Danyang Aurui Hardware Products
Co., Ltd., Danyang Dida Diamond Tools
Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Danyang Tsunda Diamond
Tools Co., Ltd., Danyang Weiwang Tools
Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Electrolux Construction
Products (Xiamen) Co. Ltd., Huachang Diamond
Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Hua Da
Superabrasive Tools Technology Co., Ltd., Jiangsu
Fengyu Tools Co., Ltd., Protech Diamond Tools,
Pujiang Talent Diamond Tools Co., Ltd., Quanzhou
Shuangyang Diamond Tools Co., Ltd., Sichuan
Huili Tools Co., Task Tools & Abrasives, Wuxi
Lianhua Superhard Material Tools Co., Ltd.,
Zhejiang Tea Import & Export Co., Ltd., Zhejiang
Wanda Import and Export Co., Zhejiang Wanda
Tools Group Corp., and Zhejiang Wanli Super-hard
Materials Co., Ltd.
E:\FR\FM\15FEN1.SGM
15FEN1
11146
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2013 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
during the POR without regard to
antidumping duties in accordance with
19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). For customers or
importers of Weihai for which we do
not have entered value, we have
calculated customer/importer-specific
antidumping duty assessment amounts
based on the ratio of the total amount of
antidumping duties calculated for the
examined sales of subject merchandise
to the total quantity of subject
merchandise sold in those transactions.
For customers or importers of Weihai
for which we received entered-value
information, we have calculated
customer/importer-specific
antidumping duty assessment rates
based on customer/importer-specific ad
valorem rates in accordance with 19
CFR 351.212(b)(1). For all non-selected
respondents that received a separate
rate, we will instruct CBP to apply an
antidumping duty assessment rate of
9.55 percent to all entries of subject
merchandise that entered the United
States during the POR. For all other
companies, we will instruct CBP to
apply an antidumping duty assessment
rate of 164.09 percent to all entries of
subject merchandise exported by these
companies.
We intend to issue assessment
instructions to CBP 15 days after the
date of publication of the final results of
review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of these final results of
review for all shipments of the subject
merchandise entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or
after the publication date as provided by
section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For
subject merchandise exported by the
companies listed above that have
separate rates, the cash deposit rate will
be the rate established in this final
results of review for each exporter as
listed above, except if the rate is zero or
de minimis, then no cash deposit will be
required for that exporter; (2) for
previously investigated companies not
listed above that have separate rates, the
cash deposit rate will continue to be the
company-specific rate published for the
investigation; (3) for all other PRC
exporters of subject merchandise which
have not been found to be entitled to a
separate rate, the cash deposit rate will
be the PRC-wide rate of 164.09 percent;
(4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject
merchandise which have not received
their own rate, the cash deposit rate will
be the rate applicable to the PRC entity
that supplied that non-PRC exporter.
These deposit requirements shall
remain in effect until further notice.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:09 Feb 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
Notifications
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
This notice serves as a final reminder
to importers of their responsibility
under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a
certificate regarding the reimbursement
of antidumping duties prior to
liquidation of the relevant entries
during this review period. Failure to
comply with this requirement could
result in the Secretary’s presumption
that reimbursement of the antidumping
duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping
duties.
This notice also serves as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of
their responsibility concerning the
return or destruction of proprietary
information disclosed under APO in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3).
Timely written notification of the return
or destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a sanctionable violation.
These final results of review are
issued and published in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the
Act.
International Trade Administration
Dated: February 8, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
1. Separate Rate
2. Corporate Affiliation
3. Respondent Selection
4. Surrogate Values
Air Freight
Brokerage and Handling
Cores
Diamond Powder
Electricity
Financial Ratios
Gasoline
Paraffin Wax
Steel Types 1, 2, 3, and 6
Tin Powder
5. Status of the Order
6. Combination Rates
7. Assessment Period
8. Instructions to CBP
9. Zeroing
10. Fraud Allegations and the Reliability of
Respondents’ Submissions
[FR Doc. 2013–03481 Filed 2–14–13; 8:45 am]
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Utility Scale Wind Towers From the
People’s Republic of China:
Antidumping Duty Order
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: Based on affirmative final
determinations by the Department of
Commerce (the ‘‘Department’’) and the
International Trade Commission
(‘‘ITC’’), the Department is issuing an
antidumping duty order on utility scale
wind towers (‘‘wind towers’’) from the
People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’).
DATES: Effective Date: February 15,
2013.
AGENCY:
Lilit
Astvatsatrian, Shawn Higgins, Thomas
Martin, or Trisha Tran, 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) 482–6412, (202) 482–
0679, (202) 482–3936, or (202) 482–
4852, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Background
Appendix
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
[A–570–981]
In accordance with sections 735(d)
and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (‘‘Act’’), on December 26,
2012, the Department published the
final determination of sales at less than
fair value in the antidumping duty
investigation of wind towers from the
PRC.1 On February 8, 2013, the ITC
notified the Department of its
affirmative determination that an
industry in the United States is
materially injured or threatened with
material injury by reason of imports of
wind towers from the PRC.2
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by this
order are certain wind towers, whether
or not tapered, and sections thereof.
Certain wind towers are designed to
support the nacelle and rotor blades in
a wind turbine with a minimum rated
electrical power generation capacity in
excess of 100 kilowatts and with a
1 See Utility Scale Wind Towers From the People’s
Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value, 77 FR 75992 (December 26,
2012).
2 See Utility Scale Wind Towers from China and
Vietnam, USITC Investigation Nos. 701–TA–486
and 731–TA–1195–1196 (Final), USITC Publication
4372 (February 2013) (‘‘ITC Report’’).
E:\FR\FM\15FEN1.SGM
15FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 32 (Friday, February 15, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11143-11146]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03481]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-900]
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2009-
2010
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 6, 2011, the Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative
review of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts
thereof (diamond sawblades) from the People's Republic of China (the
PRC). The period of review (POR) is January 23, 2009, through October
31, 2010. For the final results, we continue to find that certain
companies covered by this review made sales of subject merchandise at
less than normal value.
DATES: Effective Date: February 15, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Romani or Yang Jin Chun, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
0198 or (202) 482-5760, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 6, 2011, the Department published the preliminary
results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on
diamond sawblades from the PRC.\1\ We received case and rebuttal briefs
with respect to the Preliminary Results and, at the request of
interested parties, we held a hearing on February 23, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Intent to Rescind Review in Part, 76 FR
76135 (December 6, 2011) (Preliminary Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 5, 2012, the Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition
(the petitioner) alleged that Korean respondents Ehwa Diamond
Industrial Co., Ltd., and Shinhan Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd. and SH
Trading Inc., and their respective Chinese subsidiaries Weihai
Xiangguang Mechanical Industrial Co., Ltd. (Weihai), and Qingdao
Shinhan Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd. (Qingdao Shinhan), sold diamond
sawblades into
[[Page 11144]]
the United States bearing false country of origin designations.
We extended the due date for the final results of review to June 4,
2012.\2\ On June 4, 2012, the Department deferred the final results of
this administrative review in order to address the petitioner's fraud
allegations.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's
Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77 FR 14733 (March 13,
2012), and Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the Republic of
Korea and the People's Republic of China: Extension of Time Limits
for the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative
Reviews, 77 FR 20788 (April 6, 2012).
\3\ See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration, entitled ``Diamond Sawblades and Parts
Thereof From the Republic of Korea and the People's Republic of
China: Deferral of the Final Results of the First Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews,'' dated June 4, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 8, 2013, we issued a post-preliminary memorandum finding
that the information submitted by Weihai and Qingdao Shinhan is
reliable for the final results of the review.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration, entitled ``2009/2010 Review of the
Antidumping Duty Orders on Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From
the Republic of Korea and the People's Republic of China: Post-
Preliminary Analysis,'' dated January 8, 2013. See also Memorandum
to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, from
Gary Taverman, Senior Advisor for Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Operations, entitled ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Diamond
Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China
covering the Period January 23, 2009, through October 31, 2010,''
dated February 8, 2013 (Final Decision Memorandum), which is hereby
adopted by this notice, at Comment 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have conducted this administrative review in accordance with
section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
Fraud Allegation
We continue to find the information Weihai and Qingdao Shinhan
submitted in this review to be reliable for the final results of
review.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Final Decision Memorandum for more details.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the order is diamond sawblades. The
diamond sawblades subject to the order are currently classifiable under
subheadings 8202 to 8206 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS), and may also enter under 6804.21.00. The HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. A full
description of the scope of the order is contained in the Final
Decision Memorandum. The written description is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case briefs by parties to this
administrative review are addressed in the Final Decision Memorandum. A
list of the issues raised is attached to this notice as an appendix.
The Final Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file
electronically via Import Administration's Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS).
Access to IA ACCESS is available to registered users at https://iaaccess.trade.gov and is available to all parties in the Central
Records Unit, Room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In
addition, a complete version of the Final Decision Memorandum can be
accessed directly on the Import Administration Web site at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The signed Final Decision Memorandum and
the electronic versions of the Final Decision Memorandum are identical
in content.
Rescission of Administrative Review in Part
We preliminarily found that Shanghai Deda Industry & Trading Co.,
Ltd. (Shanghai Deda) did not have any exports of subject merchandise
during the POR and, on this basis, we stated our intent to rescind the
review in part.\6\ We continue to find that the company had no
shipments of subject merchandise during the POR and are rescinding this
review for Shanghai Deda.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Preliminary Results, 76 FR at 76136.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 28, 2011, the petitioner withdrew its request for review
of the following companies:
Electrolux Construction Products (Xiamen) Co. Ltd.
Hebei Jikai Industrial Group Co., Ltd.
Huachang Diamond Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
Jiangsu Fengyu Tools Co., Ltd.
Jiangyin Likn Industry Co., Ltd.
Protech Diamond Tools
Quanzhou Shuangyang Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.
Task Tools & Abrasives
Zhejiang Wanda Import and Export Co.
Zhejiang Wanda Tools Group Corp.
Zhejiang Wanli Super-hard Materials Co., Ltd.
In the Preliminary Results, we assigned the PRC-wide rate to these
companies. In its case brief, Hebei Jikai Industrial Group Co., Ltd.
(Hebei Jikai) requested that the Department rescind the review of these
companies because the petitioner was the only party that requested
their review and because the petitioner timely withdrew its request. On
August 8, 2012, we rescinded the review in part for Hebei Jikai and
Jiangyin Likn Industry Co., Ltd.\7\ Because the other companies listed
above have not previously received a separate rate, we did not rescind
this review with respect to those companies. While the request for
review for those companies was timely withdrawn, those companies remain
part of the PRC-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's
Republic of China: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review in Part, 77 FR 47362 (August 8, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surrogate Country
In the Preliminary Results, we treated the PRC as a non-market-
economy (NME) country and, therefore, we calculated normal value in
accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. We selected India as the
surrogate country, pursuant to section 773(c)(4) of the Act, because it
is a significant producer of merchandise comparable to subject
merchandise and is at a level of economic development comparable to the
PRC.\8\ For the final results of review, we have continued to treat the
PRC as an NME country and have used the same primary surrogate country,
India.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Preliminary Results, 76 FR at 76136.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affiliation
In the Preliminary Results, we treated five companies as a single
entity, the ATM Single Entity,\9\ for purposes of calculating a single
margin.\10\ We have received and evaluated the comments with respect to
ATM Single Entity and whether to expand it to include two additional
companies. For these final results, we have determined not to include
any additional companies in ATM Single Entity.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ ATM Single Entity includes Advanced Technology & Materials
Co., Ltd., Beijing Gang Yan Diamond Products Co., Ltd., HXF Saw Co.,
Ltd., AT&M International Trading Co., Ltd., and Cliff International
Ltd.
\10\ See Preliminary Results, 76 FR at 76136.
\11\ See Final Decision Memorandum at Comments 1 and 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\12\ It is
[[Page 11145]]
the Department's policy to assign all exporters of merchandise subject
to review 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.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See, e.g.,Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value and Final Partial Affirmative Determination of Critical
Circumstances: Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's
Republic of China, 71 FR 29303 (May 22, 2006), and Notice of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Affirmative
Critical Circumstances, In Part: Certain Lined Paper Products From
the People's Republic of China, 71 FR 53079 (September 8, 2006).
\13\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews and Requests for Revocation in Part, 75 FR
81565, 81566 (December 28, 2010) (Initiation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Preliminary Results, we found that, in addition to the
companies we selected for individual examination, certain companies
demonstrated their eligibility for separate rate status by
demonstrating that they operated free of de jure and de facto
government control.\14\ We received comments from interested parties
regarding the separate rate status of ATM Single Entity. Based on the
information on the record of this review, we continue to find that ATM
Single Entity has demonstrated an absence of de jure and de facto
government control and is, thus, eligible for a separate rate.\15\ We
also continue to find that the other respondents that received separate
rates in the Preliminary Results are eligible for separate rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Preliminary Results, 76 FR at 76136-37.
\15\ See Final Decision Memorandum at Comments 1 and 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate Rate for a Non-Selected Company
In the Preliminary Results, with regard to companies not selected
for individual examination, we explained that, because (1) the statute
and the Department's regulations do not address the establishment of a
rate to be applied to individual companies not selected for examination
when the Department limits its examination in an administrative review
pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act, and (2) the Department's
usual practice has been to average the margins for the selected
companies, excluding margins that are zero, de minimis, or based
entirely on facts available,\16\ we assigned the antidumping duty
margin for Weihai to companies not selected for individual examination
and eligible for a separate rate. We are continuing to assign them
Weihai's rate, 9.55 percent, for these final results. In assigning this
separate rate, we did not impute the actions of any other companies to
the behavior of the companies not individually examined but based this
determination on record evidence that is reasonably reflective of the
potential dumping margin for the companies not selected for individual
examination and eligible for a separate rate in this administrative
review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From France, Germany,
Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Reviews and Rescission of Reviews in Part, 73 FR
52823, 52824 (September 11, 2008), and accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum at Comment 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of comments received, we have made revisions
that have changed the results for certain companies. Additionally, we
have made calculation programming changes for the final results. For
further details on the changes we made for these final results, see the
company-specific analysis memoranda, the Final Decision Memorandum, and
the final surrogate value memorandum dated concurrently with this
notice.
Final Results of the Review
As a result of the administrative review, we determine that the
following weighted-average percentage dumping margins exist for the
period January 23, 2009, through October 31, 2010:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Company \17\ (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advanced Technology & Materials Co., Ltd.............. 0.15
ASHINE Diamond Tools Co., Ltd......................... 9.55
AT&M International Trading Co., Ltd................... 0.15
Beijing Gang Yan Diamond Products Co.................. 0.15
Bosun Tools Co., Ltd.................................. 9.55
Chengdu Huifeng Diamond Tools Co., Ltd................ 9.55
Cliff International Ltd.\18\.......................... 0.15
Danyang Hantronic Import & Export Co., Ltd............ 9.55
Danyang Huachang Diamond Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd. 9.55
Danyang NYCL Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd............. 9.55
Fujian Quanzhou Wanlong Stone Co., Ltd................ 9.55
Guilin Tebon Superhard Material Co., Ltd.............. 9.55
Hangzhou Deer King Industrial & Trading Co., Ltd...... 9.55
Hebei Husqvarna-Jikai Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.......... 9.55
Hebei XMF Tools Group Co., Ltd.\19\................... 9.55
Henan Huanghe Whirlwind Co., Ltd...................... 9.55
Henan Huanghe Whirlwind International Co., Ltd........ 9.55
Huzhou Gu's Import & Export Co., Ltd.................. 9.55
HXF Saw Co., Ltd...................................... 0.15
Jiangsu Fengtai Diamond Tool Manufacture Co., Ltd..... 9.55
Jiangsu Inter-China Group Corporation................. 9.55
Jiangsu Youhe Tool Manufacturer Co., Ltd.............. 9.55
Qingdao Shinhan Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd........... 9.55
Quanzhou Zhongzhi Diamond Tool Co. Ltd................ 9.55
Rizhao Hein Saw Co., Ltd.............................. 9.55
Saint-Gobain Abrasives (Shanghai) Co., Ltd............ 9.55
Shanghai Robtol Tool Manufacturing Co., Ltd........... 9.55
Shijiazhuang Global New Century Tools Co., Ltd........ 9.55
Weihai Xiangguang Mechanical Industrial Co., Ltd...... 9.55
Wuhan Wanbang Laser Diamond Tools Co.................. 9.55
Xiamen ZL Diamond Technology Co., Ltd................. 9.55
Zhejiang Wanli Tools Group Co., Ltd................... 9.55
PRC-Wide Entity \20\.................................. 164.09
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ For explanations on the names of certain companies, see
Preliminary Results, 76 FR at 76136-37.
\18\ Cliff International Ltd. also used the company name Cliff
(Tianjin) International Ltd., according to various documents
provided in ATM Single Entity's May 10, 2011, section A response.
\19\ Hebei XMF Tools Group Co., Ltd., reported that its correct
name is Hebei XMF Tools Group Co., Ltd., and not Hebei XMF Tools
(Group) Co., Ltd., which is the name we stated in the Initiation, 75
FR at 81567, and the Preliminary Results, 77 FR at 76137, 76141. See
the letter from Hebei XMF Tools Group Co., Ltd., dated December 2,
2011.
\20\ The PRC-wide entity includes the following companies:
Central Iron and Steel Research Institute Group, Danyang Aurui
Hardware Products Co., Ltd., Danyang Dida Diamond Tools
Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Danyang Tsunda Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.,
Danyang Weiwang Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Electrolux
Construction Products (Xiamen) Co. Ltd., Huachang Diamond Tools
Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Hua Da Superabrasive Tools Technology Co.,
Ltd., Jiangsu Fengyu Tools Co., Ltd., Protech Diamond Tools, Pujiang
Talent Diamond Tools Co., Ltd., Quanzhou Shuangyang Diamond Tools
Co., Ltd., Sichuan Huili Tools Co., Task Tools & Abrasives, Wuxi
Lianhua Superhard Material Tools Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Tea Import &
Export Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Wanda Import and Export Co., Zhejiang
Wanda Tools Group Corp., and Zhejiang Wanli Super-hard Materials
Co., Ltd.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated,
whenever possible, an exporter/importer (or customer)-specific
assessment rate or value for merchandise subject to this review as
described below.
For ATM Single Entity, we will instruct CBP to liquidate all
entries
[[Page 11146]]
during the POR without regard to antidumping duties in accordance with
19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). For customers or importers of Weihai for which we
do not have entered value, we have calculated customer/importer-
specific antidumping duty assessment amounts based on the ratio of the
total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales of
subject merchandise to the total quantity of subject merchandise sold
in those transactions. For customers or importers of Weihai for which
we received entered-value information, we have calculated customer/
importer-specific antidumping duty assessment rates based on customer/
importer-specific ad valorem rates in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1). For all non-selected respondents that received a
separate rate, we will instruct CBP to apply an antidumping duty
assessment rate of 9.55 percent to all entries of subject merchandise
that entered the United States during the POR. For all other companies,
we will instruct CBP to apply an antidumping duty assessment rate of
164.09 percent to all entries of subject merchandise exported by these
companies.
We intend to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the
date of publication of the final results of review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of these final results of review for all shipments of the
subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication date as provided by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For subject merchandise exported by the
companies listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate
will be the rate established in this final results of review for each
exporter as listed above, except if the rate is zero or de minimis,
then no cash deposit will be required for that exporter; (2) for
previously investigated companies not listed above that have separate
rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific
rate published for the investigation; (3) for all other PRC exporters
of subject merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a
separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate of
164.09 percent; (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise
which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be
the rate applicable to the PRC entity that supplied that non-PRC
exporter. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until
further notice.
Notifications
This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to
comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable
violation.
These final results of review are issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: February 8, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix
1. Separate Rate
2. Corporate Affiliation
3. Respondent Selection
4. Surrogate Values
Air Freight
Brokerage and Handling
Cores
Diamond Powder
Electricity
Financial Ratios
Gasoline
Paraffin Wax
Steel Types 1, 2, 3, and 6
Tin Powder
5. Status of the Order
6. Combination Rates
7. Assessment Period
8. Instructions to CBP
9. Zeroing
10. Fraud Allegations and the Reliability of Respondents'
Submissions
[FR Doc. 2013-03481 Filed 2-14-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
