Certain Steel Nails From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of the First Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY:

Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY:

On September 15, 2010, the Department of Commerce (“Department”) published the Preliminary Results of the first administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain steel nails (“steel nails”) from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”). We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results. Based upon our analysis of the comments and information received, we made changes to the margin calculations for the final results of this review. The final weighted-average margins are listed below in the “Final Results of the Review” section of this notice. The period of review (“POR”) is January 23, 2008, through July 31, 2009.

DATES:

Effective Date: March 23, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Emeka Chukwudebe or Matthew Renkey, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0219 or (202) 482-2312, respectively.

Case History

On September 15, 2010, the Department published the Preliminary Results of this administrative review. On October 7, 2010, we sent a supplemental questionnaire to separate-rate respondent Yitian Nanjing Hardware Co., Ltd. (“Yitian Nanjing”). On October 12, 2010, one of the individually-reviewed respondents who had received a calculated rate at the Preliminary Results, Shandong Minmetal Co., Ltd. (“Shandong Minmetal”), informed the Department that it would not participate in verification and withdrew from the administrative review. On October 20, 2010, we confirmed with counsel for Yitian Nanjing that a response to the Department's supplemental questionnaire was not filed by the stipulated deadline. On October 21, 2010, following the decision in Dorbest, the Department placed wage rate data on the record for comment. The Department conducted verification of: (1) Tianjin Jinchi Metal Products Co., Ltd. (“Tianjin Jinchi”) on November 12, 2010; (2) Stanley's PRC offices and factory from November 15, 2010, through November 17, 2010; (3) a wire-drawing subcontractor for Stanley from November 18, 2010, through November 19, 2010; and (4) Stanley's U.S. office from December 14, 2010, through December 16, 2010. We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. Between November 3, 2010, and January 25, 2011, we received case and rebuttal briefs from Petitioner, one individually-reviewed respondent, Stanley, and other interested parties in this administrative review.

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties are addressed in the “Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the First Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,” dated concurrently with this notice (“I&D Memo”), which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which parties raised, and to which we responded in the I&D Memo, is attached to this notice as an Appendix. The I&D Memo is a public document and is on file in the Central Records Unit (“CRU”), Main Commerce Building, Room 7046, and is accessible on the Department's Web site at http://www.trade.gov/ia . The paper copy and electronic version of the memorandum are identical in content.

Final Partial Rescission of Administrative Review

In the Preliminary Results, the Department announced its intent to rescind the review with respect to certain companies that certified they made no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. For the final results, we continue to find that these companies did not make shipments during the POR. Thus, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), and consistent with our practice, we are rescinding this review with respect to these companies.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

Based on a review of the record, verification, as well as comments received from parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we have made certain changes to the margin calculations. Specifically, we have updated the calculation for labor and several surrogate values used in the Preliminary Results. We also revised our labor wage rate methodology. See the “Wage Rate Methodology” section below. For all changes to the calculations, see the I&D Memo and company-specific analysis memoranda. For changes to the surrogate values, see “Memorandum to the File, through Alex Villanueva, Program Manager, AC/CVD Operations, Office 9, from Emeka Chukwudebe, case analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, First Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China: Surrogate Values for the Final Results,” dated concurrently with this notice.

Scope of the Order

The merchandise covered by the order includes certain steel nails having a shaft length up to 12 inches. Certain steel nails include, but are not limited to, nails made of round wire and nails that are cut. Certain steel nails may be of one piece construction or constructed of two or more pieces. Certain steel nails may be produced from any type of steel, and have a variety of finishes, heads, shanks, point types, shaft lengths and shaft diameters. Finishes include, but are not limited to, coating in vinyl, zinc (galvanized, whether by electroplating or hot-dipping one or more times), phosphate cement, and paint. Head styles include, but are not limited to, flat, projection, cupped, oval, brad, headless, double, countersunk, and sinker. Shank styles include, but are not limited to, smooth, barbed, screw threaded, ring shank and fluted shank styles. Screw-threaded nails subject to this proceeding are driven using direct force and not by turning the fastener using a tool that engages with the head. Point styles include, but are not limited to, diamond, blunt, needle, chisel and no point. Finished nails may be sold in bulk, or they may be collated into strips or coils using materials such as plastic, paper, or wire. Certain steel nails subject to this proceeding are currently classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) subheadings 7317.00.55, 7317.00.65 and 7317.00.75.

Excluded from the scope of this proceeding are roofing nails of all lengths and diameter, whether collated or in bulk, and whether or not galvanized. Steel roofing nails are specifically enumerated and identified in ASTM Standard F 1667 (2005 revision) as Type I, Style 20 nails. Also excluded from the scope of this proceeding are corrugated nails. A corrugated nail is made of a small strip of corrugated steel with sharp points on one side. Also excluded from the scope of this proceeding are fasteners suitable for use in powder-actuated hand tools, not threaded and threaded, which are currently classified under HTSUS 7317.00.20 and 7317.00.30. Also excluded from the scope of this proceeding are thumb tacks, which are currently classified under HTSUS 7317.00.10.00. Also excluded from the scope of this proceeding are certain brads and finish nails that are equal to or less than 0.0720 inches in shank diameter, round or rectangular in cross section, between 0.375 inches and 2.5 inches in length, and that are collated with adhesive or polyester film tape backed with a heat seal adhesive. Also excluded from the scope of this proceeding are fasteners having a case hardness greater than or equal to 50 HRC, a carbon content greater than or equal to 0.5 percent, a round head, a secondary reduced-diameter raised head section, a centered shank, and a smooth symmetrical point, suitable for use in gas-actuated hand tools.

While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive.

Non-Market Economy Treatment

The Department considers the PRC to be a non-market economy (“NME”) country. In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“Act”), any determination that a foreign country is an NME country shall remain in effect until revoked by the administering authority. No party has challenged the designation of the PRC as an NME country in this review. Therefore, the Department continues to treat the PRC as an NME country for purposes of these final results.

Surrogate Country

In the Preliminary Results, the Department stated that it selected India as the appropriate surrogate country to use in this administrative review for the following reasons: (1) It is a significant producer of comparable merchandise; (2) it is at a similar level of economic development pursuant to section 773(c)(4) of the Act; and (3) the Department has reliable data from India that it can use to value the factors of production. As no party submitted additional comments challenging our selection of the primary surrogate country, we are continuing to use India as the surrogate country for the final results of this administrative review.

Wage Rate Methodology

Pursuant to Dorbest, we have calculated a revised hourly wage rate to use in valuing Stanley's reported labor. The revised wage rate is calculated by averaging earnings and/or wages in countries that are economically comparable to the PRC and that are significant producers of comparable merchandise, pursuant to section 773 of the Act. See I&D Memo at Comment 2.

Separate Rates

In proceedings involving NME countries, the Department holds a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are subject to government control and, thus, should be assessed a single antidumping duty rate. It is the Department's policy to assign all exporters of subject merchandise 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.

In the Preliminary Results, we determined that in addition to the mandatory respondents, Stanley and Shandong Minmetal, the Separate-Rate Applicants also met the criteria for separate rate status. Since the publication of the Preliminary Results, Shandong Minmetal withdrew from the review. Therefore, the Department has, as adverse facts available (“AFA”), treated Shandong Minmetal as part of the PRC-wide entity. Moreover, we note that the information that Shangdong Minmetal provided to the Department to demonstrate the absence of de facto and de jure control could not be verified due to its failure to cooperate. Consequently we have not granted Shandong Minmetal a separate rate.

The separate rate is determined based on the estimated weighted-average antidumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding zero and de minimis margins or margins based entirely on AFA. In this administrative review, one mandatory respondent, Stanley, has an estimated weighted-average antidumping margin which is above de minimis and which is not based on total AFA. Therefore, because there is only one relevant weighted-average antidumping margin for these final results, we have assigned Stanley's margin, which is 13.90 percent, to the separate-rate companies.

PRC-Wide Entity

In the Preliminary Results, the Department determined that certain PRC exporters subject to this review failed to recertify their separate rates using the separate rate certification provided at the Department's Web site at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/nme/nme-sep-rate.html to demonstrate their continued eligibility for separate-rate status. Thus, the Department treated these PRC exporters as part of the PRC-wide entity. The Department also found that the PRC-wide entity did not respond to our requests for information. As the PRC-wide entity did not provide the Department with requested information, pursuant to section 776(a)(2)(A) of the Act, we continue to treat such entities as part of the PRC-wide entity.

Final Results of the Review

The weighted-average dumping margins for the POR are as follows:

The following companies are not eligible for a separate rate and will be considered part of the PRC-wide entity:

Assessment Rates

Upon issuance of the final results, the Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of review, excluding any reported sales that entered during the gap period. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we will calculate importer-specific (or customer-specific) ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of the dumping margins calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of those same sales. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate, without regard to antidumping duties, all entries of subject merchandise during the POR for which the importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis. For the companies receiving a separate rate that were not selected for individual review, we will calculate an assessment rate based on the simple average of the cash deposit rates calculated for the companies selected for individual review pursuant to section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act.

Cash Deposit Requirements

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of these final results of administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporters listed above, the cash deposit rate will be established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis, i.e., less than 0.5 percent, no cash deposit will be required for that company); (2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters not listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) for all 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 118.04 percent; and (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 exporters that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

Reimbursement of Duties

This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties has occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

Administrative Protective Orders

This notice also serves as a 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, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

We are issuing and publishing this administrative review and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.

Appendix I—Issues & Decision Memorandum

General Issues

Comment 1: Cash Deposit and Liquidation Instructions

Comment 2: Labor Rate Methodology

Comment 3: Surrogate Financial Ratios

Comment 4: Steel Wire Rod Surrogate Value

Comment 5: Electricity Surrogate Value

Comment 6: Other Surrogate Values

A. Copper Coated Steel Welding Wire

B. Coatings

C. Glass Balls

D. Sodium Hydroxide

E. Sodium Sulfate

F. Plastic Cores

G. Labels

H. Shrink Film

I. Borax

J. Cardboard Trays

Comment 7: Zeroing

Company-Specific Issues

Separate Rate Respondents

Comment 8: Rate for Separate Rate Respondents

CPI

Comment 9: Entries Incorrectly Attributed to CPI

Tengyu and Curvet

Comment 10: Rate for Final Results

Rizhao and Wuxi Qiangye

Comment 11: Rate for Final Results

Chiieh Yung, Jisco, and Koram Panagene

Comment 12: Withdrawal of Review Request

Shandong Minmetal

Comment 13: Application of Total Adverse Facts Available (“AFA”)

Yitian Nanjing

Comment 14: PRC-wide Rate

Tianjin Shenyuan and Shaoxing Chengye

Comment 15: Correction of Company Names

Oriental Cherry Group

Comment 16: Rate for Final Results

Stanley

Comment 17: Application of Total or Partial AFA

Comment 18: Intermediate Input Methodology

Comment 19: Indirect Selling Expenses