[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 147 (Monday, August 2, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45468-45472]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-18938]
[[Page 45467]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Department of Commerce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
International Trade Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's Republic of China;
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Critical
Circumstances; Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination;
Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 75 , No. 147 / Monday, August 2, 2010 /
Notices
[[Page 45468]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-954]
Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks From the People's Republic of
China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Critical Circumstances
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: August 2, 2010.
SUMMARY: On March 12, 2010, the Department of Commerce (the
``Department'') published the Preliminary Determination of sales at
less than fair value (``LTFV'') in the antidumping investigation of
magnesia carbon bricks (``bricks'') from the People's Republic of China
(``PRC'').\1\ On April 21, 2010, the Department published the Amended
Preliminary Determination in the antidumping investigation of bricks
from the PRC.\2\ On May 20, 2010, the Department published the
Preliminary Critical Circumstances Determination in the antidumping
investigation of bricks from the PRC.\3\ The period of investigation
(``POI'') is January 1, 2009--June 30, 2009. Based on our analysis of
the comments received, we have made changes to the margin calculation
for RHI Refractories Liaoning Co., Ltd. (``RHI''). We continue to find
that bricks from the PRC 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 Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's
Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 75 FR 11847
(March 12, 2010) (``Preliminary Determination'').
\2\ See Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's
Republic of China: Amended Preliminary Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value, 75 FR 20813 (April 21, 2010) (``Amended
Preliminary Determination'').
\3\ See Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's
Republic of China: Notice of Preliminary Affirmative Determination
of Critical Circumstances, 75 FR 28237 (May 20, 2010) (``Preliminary
Critical Circumstances Determination'').
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Walker or Dana Griffies, 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-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
0413 or (202) 482-3023, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On April 1, 2010, Liaoning Mayerton Refractories Co., Ltd. and
Dalian Mayerton Refractories Co., Ltd. (collectively, ``Mayerton'')
stated that it would no longer participate in the investigation.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Mayerton's April 1, 2010 letter at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For RHI, the Department conducted sales verification from April 12-
16, 2010 and factors of production (``FOP'') verification May 17-20,
2010.\5\ For Yingkou New Century Refractories Ltd. (``New Century'')
and Fengchi Import & Export Co., Ltd. of Haicheng City (``Fengchi''),
the Department conducted separate rates verifications on May 21, and
May 24, 2010, respectively.\6\ See the ``Verification'' section below
for additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ For sales, we conducted verification of RHI's North American
affiliates, Veitsch Radix America, Inc. (incorporated in Canada)
(``VRC'') and Veitsch Radix America, Inc. (incorporated in the U.S.)
(``VRA''), which handled all of RHI's POI sales. See Memo to the
File, through Scot T. Fullerton, Program Manager, from Paul Walker
and Dana Griffies, Case Analysts, ``Investigation of Magnesia Carbon
Bricks from the People's Republic of China: Sales Verification of
Veitsch Radix America, Inc.,'' dated June 10, 2010 (``VRC
Verification Report''). For FOPs, we conducted verification of RHI,
which produced the merchandise under consideration. See Memo to the
File, through Scot T. Fullerton, Program Manager, from Paul Walker
and Dana Griffies, Case Analysts, ``Investigation of Magnesia Carbon
Bricks from the People's Republic of China: Factors of Production
Verification of RHI Refractories Liaoning Co., Ltd.,'' dated June
11, 2010 (``RHI Verification Report'').
\6\ See Memo to the File, through Scot T. Fullerton, Program
Manager, from Paul Walker and Dana Griffies, Case Analysts,
``Investigation of Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's Republic
of China: Verification of Yingkou New Century Refractories Ltd.,''
dated June 10, 2010 (``New Century Verification Report''); Memo to
the File, through Scot T. Fullerton, Program Manager, from Paul
Walker and Dana Griffies, Case Analysts, ``Investigation of Magnesia
Carbon Bricks from the People's Republic of China: Verification of
Fengchi Import & Export Co., Ltd. of Haicheng City,'' dated June 11,
2010 (``Fengchi Verification Report'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Between June 14, 2010 and July 14, 2010, the Department placed
labor wage rate data on the record and invited parties to comment on
the Department's labor wage rate methodology.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See the memoranda to the file dated June 15, 2010, June 22,
2010, July 6, 2010 and July 14, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Between June 18, 2010 and July 16, 2010, we received case and
rebuttal briefs from the Petitioner, \8\ the government of the PRC
(``GOC'') and RHI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The petitioner is Resco Products, Inc. (hereinafter referred
to as the ``Petitioner'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to
this investigation are addressed in the ``Investigation of Magnesia
Carbon Bricks from the People's Republic of China: Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final Determination'' (``I&D Memo''), dated
concurrently with this notice and which is hereby adopted by this
notice. A list of the issues which parties raised, and to which we
respond in the I&D Memo, are attached to this notice as Appendix I. The
I&D Memo is a public document and is on file in the Central Records
Unit (``CRU''), Room 1117, and is accessible on the World Wide Web at
http://trade.gov/ia/index.asp. The paper copy and electronic version of
the memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Determination
Based on our analysis of information on the record of this
investigation, we have made changes to RHI's margin calculation for the
final determination. For the final determination, we have adjusted the
surrogate value for fused magnesia to exclude certain aberrational data
and adopted a new methodology for calculating the surrogate value for
labor.\9\ In addition, we have applied certain discounts that RHI
reported to its sales database.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See I&D Memo at Comment 1a & 1b; see also Memorandum to the
File from Paul Walker, Case Analyst, through Scot T. Fullerton,
Program Manager, ``Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's Republic
of China: Surrogate Values for the Final Determination,'' dated
concurrently with this notice.
\10\ See I&D Memo at Comment 2b.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding Mayerton, for the final determination, we have applied
total adverse facts available (``AFA'') for its failure to participate
and included it as part of the PRC-wide entity. For more information
see the ``Mayerton'' section below.
Scope of Investigation
The merchandise under investigation consists of certain chemically-
bonded (resin or pitch), magnesia carbon bricks with a magnesia
component of at least 70 percent magnesia (``MgO'') by weight,
regardless of the source of raw materials for the MgO, with carbon
levels ranging from trace amounts to 30 percent by weight, regardless
of enhancements (for example, magnesia carbon bricks can be enhanced
with coating, grinding, tar impregnation or coking, high temperature
heat treatments, anti-slip treatments or metal casing) and regardless
of whether or not antioxidants are present (for example, antioxidants
can be added to the mix from trace amounts to 15 percent by weight as
various metals, metal alloys, and metal carbides). Certain magnesia
carbon bricks that are the subject of this
[[Page 45469]]
investigation are currently classifiable under subheadings
6902.10.1000, 6902.10.5000, 6815.91.0000, 6815.99.2000 and 6815.99.4000
\11\ of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(``HTSUS''). While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and
customs purposes, the written description is dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ In the Preliminary Determination, we included HTSUS
subheading 6815.99 in our description of the scope of the
investigation. Subsequently, we determined that all of the ten-digit
subheadings under subheading 6815.99 must be used instead.
Accordingly, the appropriate HTSUS ten-digit subheadings have been
listed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use of Facts Available
Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides that 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), 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) 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
administering authority finds that an interested party has not acted to
the best of its ability to comply with a request for information, the
administering authority 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.
Mayerton
As noted above, Mayerton withdrew from the instant investigation.
By ceasing to participate in the investigation, Mayerton prevented the
Department from verifying the accuracy of its information as provided
by section 782(i) of the Act, and thus, failed to demonstrate
eligibility for a separate rate.\12\ Therefore, Mayerton is considered
to be part of the PRC-wide entity. Due to its failure to act to the
best of its ability in responding to the Department's requests for
information, we find that Mayerton, as part of the PRC-wide entity,
significantly impeded the Department's proceeding.\13\ Accordingly, we
have assigned the PRC-wide rate margin to Mayerton of 236.00 percent.
For a discussion of the PRC-wide entity's rate, see the ``PRC-wide
Entity'' and ``Corroboration'' sections, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Section 776(a)(2)(D) of the Act.
\13\ See Sections 776(a)(2)(C) and (D) and 776(b) of the Act;
see also 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, 14516 (March 31, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we conducted verification
of the information submitted by RHI, New Century and Fengchi for use in
our final determination.\14\ We used standard verification procedures,
including examination of relevant accounting and production records, as
well as original source documents provided by the respondents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See VRC Verification Report, RHI Verification Report, New
Century Verification Report and Fengchi Verification Report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surrogate Country
In the Preliminary Determination, we stated that we selected India
as the appropriate surrogate country to use in this investigation 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 773(c)(4) of the Act; and (3) we have reliable data from
India that we can use to value the factors of production.\15\ For the
final determination, we received no comments and made no changes to our
findings with respect to the selection of a surrogate country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Preliminary Determination at 11848-49.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical Circumstances
In the Preliminary Critical Circumstances Determination, the
Department determined that, in accordance with section 733(e)(1) of the
Act, critical circumstances exists with respect to RHI, the separate
rate respondents \16\ and the PRC-wide entity (which includes
Mayerton).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ As noted in the ``Separate Rates'' section below, these
include Dashiqiao City Guancheng Refractor Co., Ltd.; Fengchi;
Jiangsu Sujia Group New Materials Co. Ltd.; Liaoning Fucheng
Refractories Group Co., Ltd.; Liaoning Fucheng Special Refractory
Co., Ltd.; Liaoning Jiayi Metals & Minerals Co., Ltd.; Yingkou
Bayuquan Refractories Co., Ltd.; Yingkou Dalmond Refractories Co.,
Ltd.; Yingkou Guangyang Co., Ltd.; Yingkou Kyushu Refractories Co,
Ltd.; New Century; Yingkou Wonjin Refractory Material Co., Ltd.; and
Yingkou Jiahe Refractories Co., Ltd.
\17\ See Preliminary Critical Circumstances Determination at
28239.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
No other information has been placed on the record since the
Preliminary Critical Circumstances Determination to contradict the
information upon which we based our finding that critical circumstances
exist, nor has any party commented on our preliminary critical
circumstances finding. Therefore, for the final determination, in
accordance with section 735(a)(3) of the Act, we continue to find that
critical circumstances exist with respect to RHI, the separate rate
respondents and the PRC-wide entity (including Mayerton).
Separate Rates
In proceedings involving non-market-economy (``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
[[Page 45470]]
demonstrate that it is sufficiently independent so as to be entitled to
a separate rate.\18\ In the Preliminary Determination, we found that
Dashiqiao City Guancheng Refractor Co., Ltd.; Fengchi Imp. and Exp.
Co., Ltd. of Haicheng City; Jiangsu Sujia Group New Materials Co. Ltd.;
Liaoning Fucheng Refractories Group Co., Ltd.; Liaoning Fucheng Special
Refractory Co., Ltd.; Liaoning Jiayi Metals & Minerals Co., Ltd.;
Yingkou Bayuquan Refractories Co., Ltd.; Yingkou Dalmond Refractories
Co., Ltd.; Yingkou Guangyang Co., Ltd.; Yingkou Kyushu Refractories Co,
Ltd.; Yingkou New Century Refractories Ltd.; and Yingkou Wonjin
Refractory Material Co., Ltd., demonstrated their eligibility for, and
were hence assigned, separate-rate status. In the Amended Preliminary
Determination, we found that Yingkou Jiahe Refractories Co., Ltd.
demonstrated its eligibility for, and was hence assigned, separate-rate
status. No party has commented on the eligibility of these companies
for separate rate status. Consequently, 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 the
separate rate companies are eligible for separate-rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 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''),
and 19 CFR 351.107(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the Petitioner has commented on RHI's eligibility for a
separate rate, which we have addressed in Comment 3 of the I&D Memo, we
continue to find that RHI is eligible for a separate rate. Accordingly,
for the final determination, we continue to find that the evidence
placed on the record of this investigation by RHI demonstrates both a
de jure and de facto absence of government control with respect to its
exports of the merchandise under investigation.\19\ Thus, we continue
to find that RHI is eligible for separate-rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See I&D Memo at Comment 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-wide Entity
In the Preliminary Determination, we treated PRC exporters/
producers that did not respond to the Department's request for
information, as part of the PRC-wide entity because they did not
demonstrate that they operate free of government control. No additional
information has been placed on the record with respect to these
entities after the Preliminary Determination. The PRC-wide entity, and
Mayerton, have not provided the Department with the requested
information; therefore, pursuant to section 776(a)(2)(A) of the Act,
the Department continues to find that the use of facts available is
appropriate to determine the PRC-wide rate. 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.\20\ We find that, because the PRC-wide
entity, and Mayerton, did not respond to our request for information,
they have failed to cooperate to the best of their ability. Therefore,
the Department finds that, in selecting from among the facts otherwise
available, an adverse inference is appropriate for the PRC-wide entity.
Because we begin with the presumption that all companies within a 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 PRC-wide rate, to all other exporters of
the merchandise under consideration from the PRC. Such companies,
including Mayerton, did not demonstrate entitlement to a separate
rate.\21\ The PRC-wide rate applies to all entries of the merchandise
under consideration, except for those companies which have received a
separate rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the
URAA, H.R. Rep. No. 103-316, vol. 1, at 870 (1994) (``SAA'').
\21\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 as
``information derived from the petition that gave rise to the
investigation or review, the final determination concerning merchandise
subject to this investigation, or any previous review under section 751
concerning the merchandise subject to this investigation.'' \22\ To
``corroborate'' means simply that the Department will satisfy itself
that the secondary information to be used has probative value.
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. To corroborate secondary information, the Department
will, to the extent practicable, examine the reliability and relevance
of the information used.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See SAA at 870.
\23\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The AFA rate that the Department used is from the Petition,
however, we have updated the labor wage rate used to calculate the
Petition rates. The Department's practice is not to recalculate dumping
margins provided in petitions, but rather to corroborate the applicable
petition rate when applying that rate as adverse facts available.\24\
In the instant case, however, the surrogate wage rate used in the
Petition was based upon the Department's methodology that the Federal
Circuit found unlawful in Dorbest II.\25\ In light of the Federal
Circuit decision to invalidate the wage rate methodology, the
Department has adjusted the petition rate using the surrogate value for
labor used in this final determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Certain Steel Grating from the People's Republic of
China: Final Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value, 75 FR
32366 (June 8, 2010) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum
at Comment 2.
\25\ See Comment 1b below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner's methodology for calculating the United States price
and normal value in the Petition is discussed in the Initiation
Notice.\26\ To corroborate the AFA margin that we have selected, we
compared this margin to the margins we found for RHI. We found that the
margin of 236.00 percent has probative value because it is in the range
of the model-specific margins that
[[Page 45471]]
we found for RHI.\27\ Accordingly, we find that the rate of 236.00
percent is corroborated within the meaning of section 776(c) of the
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's
Republic of China and Mexico: Initiation of Antidumping Duty
Investigations, 74 FR 42852 (August 25, 2009) (``Initiation
Notice'').
\27\ See Memorandum to the File, through Scot T. Fullerton,
Program Manager, from Paul Walker, Case Analyst, ``Investigation of
Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's Republic of China: RHI
Refractories Liaoning Co., Ltd.,'' dated concurrently with this
notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Determination Margins
We determine that the following percentage weighted-average margins
exist for the following entities for the POI:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
Exporter Producer average margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RHI Refractories Liaoning Co., RHI Refractories 128.10
Ltd. Liaoning Co., Ltd.
Dashiqiao City Guancheng Dashiqiao City 128.10
Refractor Co., Ltd. Guancheng Refractor
Co., Ltd.
Fengchi Imp. And Exp. Co., Ltd. Fengchi Refractories 128.10
of Haicheng City. Co., of Haicheng City.
Jiangsu Sujia Group New Jiangsu Sujia Group New 128.10
Materials Co., Ltd. Materials Co., Ltd.
Liaoning Fucheng Refractories Liaoning Fucheng 128.10
Group Co., Ltd. Refractories Group
Co., Ltd.
Liaoning Fucheng Special Liaoning Fucheng 128.10
Refractory Co., Ltd. Special Refractory
Co., Ltd.
Liaoning Jiayi Metals & Liaoning Jiayi Metals & 128.10
Minerals Co., Ltd. Minerals Co., Ltd.
Yingkou Bayuquan Refractories Yingkou Bayuquan 128.10
Co., Ltd. Refractories Co., Ltd.
Yingkou Dalmond Refractories Yingkou Dalmond 128.10
Co., Ltd. Refractories Co., Ltd.
Yingkou Guangyang Co., Ltd..... Yingkou Guangyang Co., 128.10
Ltd.
Yingkou Jiahe Refractories Co., Yingkou Jiahe 128.10
Ltd. Refractories Co., Ltd.
Yingkou Kyushu Refractories Co, Yingkou Kyushu 128.10
Ltd. Refractories Co, Ltd.
Yingkou New Century Yingkou New Century 128.10
Refractories Ltd. Refractories Ltd.
Yingkou Wonjin Refractory Yingkou Wonjin 128.10
Material Co., Ltd. Refractory Material
Co., Ltd.
PRC-wide Entity*............... ....................... 236.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This rate also applies to Liaoning Mayerton Refractories Co., Ltd. and
Dalian Mayerton Refractories Co., Ltd.
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 section 351.224(b) of the Department's regulations.
Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation
Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, and consistent with
our finding of critical circumstances for RHI, the separate rate
companies and the PRC-wide entity, pursuant to section 733(e)(2) of the
Act, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to
continue to suspend liquidation of all entries of the merchandise under
consideration from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after December 12, 2009, which is 90 days prior to
the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination.\28\ CBP shall
continue to require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond equal to
the estimated amount by which the normal value exceeds the U.S. price
as shown above. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain
in effect until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Correction to an inadvertent error in the date listed in
the Preliminary Critical Circumstances Determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the Department determined in its final determination
for the companion countervailing duty (``CVD'') investigation that
RHI's merchandise benefited from export subsidies.\29\ Therefore, we
will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit or posting of a bond equal
to the weighted-average amount by which normal value exceeds U.S. price
for RHI, as indicated above, minus the amount determined to constitute
an export subsidy.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's
Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination, dated concurrently with this notice.
\30\ See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from India, 69 FR
67306, 67307 (November 17, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the companies receiving a separate rate, we note
that the rate applied in this proceeding as a separate rate is the
calculated rate received by RHI. In the companion countervailing duty
investigation, the Department found that RHI merchandise benefited from
export subsidies during the POI, and, consequently, all other exporters
(besides RHI and Mayerton) were found to have benefited from export
subsidies based upon RHI results. Therefore, we will instruct CBP to
require a cash deposit or posting of a bond equal to the weighted-
average amount by which normal value exceeds U.S. price for RHI, as
indicated above, minus the amount determined to constitute an export
subsidy.
With respect to the PRC-wide entity, as AFA, we applied to highest
rate form the petition that we were able to corroborate. See the
``Corroboration'' section above. We note that, although in the
companion countervailing duty investigation the Department found that
all other exporters (besides RHI and Mayerton) were found to have
benefited from export subsidies, because we have applied AFA to the
PRC-wide entity, we will not instruct CBP to deduct any export subsidy
from the PRC-wide entity's cash deposit rate.
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 consideration. 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 subject merchandise 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
[[Page 45472]]
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: July 26, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
APPENDIX I
Comment 1: Surrogate Values
a. Magnesia
b. Labor
Comment 2: Deductions to Gross Unit Price
a. Indirect Selling Expenses
b. Discounts
Comment 3: RHI's Separate Rate
Comment 4: Service Contracts
Comment 5: Exclusion of Resin-bonded Magnesia Carbon Functional
Refractory Products from the Scope
Comment 6: Double Remedy
Comment 7: FOP Allocation Ratio
[FR Doc. 2010-18938 Filed 7-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P