[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 143 (Friday, July 25, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44040-44043]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-19025]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-888]


Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Investigation: Floor-
Standing, Metal-Top Ironing Tables and Certain Parts Thereof from the 
People's Republic of China

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Initiation of Antidumping Investigation

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 25, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paige Rivas or Sam Zengotitabengoa, 
AD/CVD Enforcement Office IV, Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
0651 or (202) 482-4195, respectively.

INITIATION OF INVESTIGATION:

The Petition

    On June 30, 2003, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received a Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Floor-
Standing, Metal-Top Ironing Tables and Certain Parts Thereof from the 
People's Republic of China (the petition), filed in proper form, by 
Home Products International, Inc. (the petitioner). The Department 
received information supplementing the petition on July 2, 2003, and 
July 8, 2003.
    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the 
Act), as amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, the petitioner 
alleges that imports of floor-standing, metal-top ironing tables and 
certain parts thereof (ironing tables) from the People's Republic of 
China (PRC) are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States 
at less than fair value (LTFV) within the meaning of section 731 of the 
Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or are threatening 
to materially injure, an industry in the United States.
    The Department finds that the petitioner filed this petition on 
behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and has demonstrated sufficient 
industry support with respect to the antidumping investigation that it 
is requesting the Department to initiate. See Determination of Industry 
Support for the Petition section below.

Period of Investigation

    The anticipated period of investigation (POI) for this 
investigation is October 1, 2002, through March 31, 2003.

Scope of Investigation

    For purposes of this investigation, the product covered consists of 
floor-standing, metal-top ironing tables, assembled or unassembled, 
complete or incomplete, and certain parts thereof. The subject tables 
are designed and used principally for the hand ironing or pressing of 
garments or other articles of fabric. The subject tables have full-
height leg assemblies that support the ironing surface at an 
appropriate (often adjustable) height above the floor. The subject 
tables are produced in a variety of leg finishes, such as painted, 
plated, or matte, and they are available with various features, 
including iron rests, linen racks, and others. The subject ironing 
tables may be sold with or without a pad and/or cover. All types and 
configurations of floor-standing, metal-top ironing tables are covered 
by this investigation.
    Furthermore, this investigation specifically covers imports of 
ironing tables, assembled or unassembled, complete or incomplete, and 
certain parts thereof. For purposes of this investigation, the term 
``unassembled'' ironing table means product requiring the attachment of 
the leg assembly to the top or the attachment of an included feature 
such as an iron rest or linen rack. The term ``complete'' ironing table 
means product sold as a ready-to-use ensemble consisting of the metal-
top table and a pad and cover, with or without additional features, 
e.g. iron rest or linen rack. The term ``incomplete'' ironing table 
means product shipped or sold as a ``bare board'' i.e., a metal-top 
table only, without the pad and cover- with or without additional 
features, e.g. iron rest or linen rack. The major parts or components 
of ironing tables that are intended to be covered by this investigation 
under the term ``certain parts thereof'' consist of the metal top 
component (with or without assembled supports and slides) and/or the 
leg components, whether or not attached together as a leg assembly. The 
investigation covers separately shipped metal top components and leg 
components, without regard to whether the respective quantities would 
yield an exact quantity of assembled ironing tables.

[[Page 44041]]

    Ironing tables without legs (such as models that mount on walls or 
over doors) are not floor-standing and are specifically excluded. 
Additionally, tabletop or countertop models with short legs that do not 
exceed 12 inches in length (and which may or may not collapse or 
retract) are specifically excluded.
    The subject ironing tables were previously classified under 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheading 
9403.20.0010. Effective July 1, 2003, the subject ironing tables are 
classified under new HTSUS subheading 9403.20.0011. The subject metal 
top and leg components are classified under HTSUS subheading 
9403.90.8040. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for 
convenience and for the purposes of U.S. Bureau of Customs and Border 
Protection (Customs), the Department's written description of the scope 
remains dispositive.
    During our review of the petition, we discussed the scope with the 
petitioner and the commodity specialist at the United States Bureau of 
Customs and Border Protection to ensure that it accurately reflects the 
product for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as 
discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations (62 FR 27296, 
27323), we are setting aside a period for parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all parties to 
submit such comments within 20 days of publication of this notice. 
Comments should be addressed to Import Administration's Central Records 
Unit (CRU), at Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20230. The period of scope 
consultations is intended to provide the Department with ample 
opportunity to consider all comments and consult with parties prior to 
the issuance of our preliminary determination.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (1) at least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and, 
(2) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product 
produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or 
opposition to, the petition. Finally, section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act 
provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic 
producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product, the administering agency 
shall: (i) poll the industry or rely on other information in order to 
determine if there is support for the petition as required by 
subparagraph (A), or (ii) determine industry support using any 
statistically valid sampling method to poll the industry.
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether the 
petition has the requisite industry support, the Act directs the 
Department to look to producers and workers who account for production 
of the domestic like product. See sections 771(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the 
Act. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible for 
determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has been injured, must 
also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to 
define the industry. See section 771(10) of the Act. While both the 
Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition 
regarding the domestic like product (section 771(10) of the Act), they 
do so for different purposes and pursuant to separate and distinct 
authority. In addition, the Department's determination is subject to 
limitations of time and information. Although this may result in 
different definitions of the domestic like product, such differences do 
not render the decision of either agency contrary to the law.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd., v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 
639, 642-44 (CIT 1988); High Information Content Flat Panel Displays 
and Display Glass Therefore from Japan: Final Determination; 
Rescission of Investigation and Partial Dismissal of Petition, 56 FR 
32376, 32380-81 (July 16, 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product that is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation,'' i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
petition. Moreover, the petitioner does not offer a definition of 
domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigation.
    Based on our analysis of the information presented by the 
petitioner, we have determined that there is a single domestic like 
product, which is defined in the ``Scope of Investigation'' section of 
the notice. The Department has no basis on the record to find this 
definition of the domestic like product to be inaccurate. The 
Department, therefore, has adopted this domestic like product 
definition. See Import Administration Antidumping Investigation 
Checklist, dated July 18, 2003, (Initiation Checklist), at page 2 
(public version on file in the CRU of the Department, Room B-099).
    The Department has further determined that this petition contains 
adequate evidence of industry support. As HPI is the only producer of 
floor-standing metal-top ironing tables in the United States, there is 
no production data for any other domestic producers of floor-standing 
metal-top ironing tables. The petitioner provided actual production 
volume for January through December 2002. We conducted a search of the 
information reasonably available on the Internet and could find no 
information that contradicted the petitioner's assertion. Information 
contained in the petition demonstrates that the domestic producer or 
workers who support the petition account for over 50 percent of total 
production of the domestic like product. Therefore, the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for at least 25 
percent of the total production of the domestic like product, and the 
requirements of section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act are met. See 
Initiation Checklist, at pages 3 and 4. Furthermore, because the 
Department received no opposition to the petition, the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for more than 50 
percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that 
portion of the industry expressing support for or opposition to the 
petition. See Initiation Checklist, at pages 3 and 4. Thus, the 
requirements of section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act are also met.
    Accordingly, the Department determines that this petition was filed 
on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 
732(b)(1) of the Act. See Id.

Export Price and Normal Value

    The following are descriptions of the allegations of sales at LTFV 
upon which our decision to initiate this investigation is based. Based 
on the information submitted in the petition, adjusted where 
appropriate, we are initiating this investigation, as discussed below 
and in the Initiation Checklist.
    The Department has analyzed the information in the petition and 
considers the country-wide import statistics for the anticipated POI 
and market information used to calculate the

[[Page 44042]]

estimated margin for the subject country to be sufficient for purposes 
of initiation. See Initiation Checklist, at page 3. Should the need 
arise to use any of this information in our preliminary or final 
determination for purposes of facts available under section 776 of the 
Act, we may re-examine the information and revise the margin 
calculation, if appropriate.

Export Price

    To calculate export price (EP), the petitioner provided: (1) a 
direct price quotation of a mesh-top T-leg unit, with pad and cover, 
from a major Chinese producer and exporter of ironing tables to the 
United States; and, (2) a bid offer from an unknown competing vendor. 
The price quotation provided by the petitioner for the subject 
merchandise was determined to be sufficient for initiation purposes. 
Since the petitioner was unable to document who the supplier was, we 
did not consider the bid offer as a basis for EP. Should the need arise 
to use any of this information as facts available under section 776 of 
Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) in our preliminary or final 
determinations, we may reexamine the information and revise the margin 
calculations, if appropriate. See Petition, at page 17.
    The ironing table model referenced in the price quotation 
represents the single dominant design that pervades the U.S. market. 
See Initiation Checklist, at page 6. Given the terms of sale applicable 
to the price quotation, the petitioner made no adjustments to EP 
because the reliance upon the sale price offered by the seller reflects 
a conservative approach.

Normal Value

    The petitioner asserted that the PRC is an NME country and no 
determination to the contrary has yet been made by the Department. In 
previous investigations, the Department determined that the PRC is an 
NME. See, e.g., Final Determination on Ferrovanadium from the People's 
Republic of China, 67 FR 71137 (November 29, 2002); Final Determination 
on Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from the People's Republic of 
China, 67 FR 62107 (October 3, 2002). In accordance with section 
771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the presumption of NME status remains in 
effect until revoked by the Department. The presumption of NME status 
for the PRC has not been revoked by the Department and, therefore, 
remains in effect for purposes of the initiation of this investigation. 
Because the PRC's status as an NME remains in effect, the petitioner 
determined the dumping margin using a factors of production (FOP) 
analysis.
    For the normal value (NV) calculation, the petitioner based the FOP 
analysis, with respect to raw materials, labor, and energy, as defined 
by section 772(c)(3) of the Act, on its knowledge and experience of the 
ironing board industry and ironing board production process, and, where 
applicable, on a physical examination of a Chinese mesh-top T-leg 
ironing table. The petitioner also added to the FOP values an amount 
for factory overhead, selling, general, and administrative expenses, 
and profit, as well as an amount for packing.
    Pursuant to section 773(c) of the Act, the petitioner asserted that 
India is the most appropriate surrogate country for the PRC, claiming 
that India is: (1) at a level of development comparable to the PRC in 
terms of per capita gross national income (GNI), which is the current 
World Bank term for what was previously termed ``Gross National 
Product'' (GNP); and, (2) a significant producer of comparable 
merchandise. The petitioner further notes that India has often been the 
primary surrogate country for PRC cases. See, e.g., Notice of 
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Saccharin 
From the People's Republic of China, 67 FR 79049, 79054 (December 27, 
2002). Furthermore, the petitioner has been able to obtain all of the 
necessary data to value the factors of ironing table production in 
India. Based on the information provided by the petitioner, we believe 
that the petitioner's use of India as a surrogate country is 
appropriate for purposes of initiating this investigation. See 
Initiation Checklist, at page 7.
    The petitioner identified and quantified the material inputs (e.g., 
cold-rolled flat-rolled steel, washers, cloth, etc.) based on its 
knowledge and experience, as well as its physical examination of a 
Chinese mesh-top T-leg ironing table. The petitioner valued these 
material inputs based on Indian import statistics for the period of 
July 2002 through December 2002, as published by the World Trade Atlas 
subscription service, which, in turn, obtains data from the Indian 
Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Director General, Commercial 
Intelligence & Statistics. Because some of these values are from a 
period preceding the POI, the petitioner adjusted for inflation the 
values to reflect the POI levels, where appropriate, using the Indian 
Wholesale Price Index (WPI) (compiled by the Indian ministry of 
Commerce and Industry, Office of the Economic Advisor). See Initiation 
Checklist, at page 6.
    Based on its knowledge of Chinese ironing-table producing 
equipment, the petitioner was able to quantify the amount of 
electricity consumed. The petitioner valued electricity based on the 
Indian publication Electricity for Industry, for the fourth quarter 
2001, as maintained by the International Energy Agency on its website 
(http://www.iea.org/statist/keyworld2002/key2002/ p--0505.htm). That 
value was then adjusted for inflation on the basis of the Indian 
monthly WPI for Electricity for Industry. See Initiation Checklist, at 
page 7.
    To determine the quantity of natural gas used in the heat curing 
finishing process, the petitioner relied on its own knowledge and 
experience. To value natural gas, the petitioner used a value derived 
from the Indian company Gail (India) Ltd., for May through September 
2002. See Initiation Checklist, at page 7.
    The petitioner valued labor by applying the Department's 
regression-based wage rate for the PRC, in accordance with section 
351.408(c)(3) of the Department's regulations, to the corresponding 
yield rates for each process.
    For manufacturing overhead, selling, general, and administrative 
expenses, and profit, the petitioner relied upon the publicly available 
financial data of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. (Godrej). 
The Department recently relied upon this data in another antidumping 
investigation. See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 
Fair Value: Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People's Republic 
of China, 67 FR 20090 (April 24, 2002). Godrej is an Indian producer of 
metal furniture, including folding metal tables that is sufficiently 
similar to metal-top ironing tables in terms of materials and 
production processes to be considered comparable merchandise. See 
Initiation Checklist, at page 8.
    Based on the information provided by the petitioner, we believe 
that the surrogate values represent information reasonably available to 
the petitioner and are acceptable for purposes of initiating this 
investigation. See Initiation Checklist, at page 8.

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to 
believe that imports of ironing tables from the PRC are being, or are 
likely to be, sold at LTFV.
    Based on a comparison of EP to NV, the petitioner calculated an 
estimated dumping margin of 59.32 percent. A summary of the margin 
calculation is

[[Page 44043]]

contained in the Initiation Checklist at Attachment III.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the 
domestic like product is being materially injured, and is threatened 
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject 
merchandise sold at less than NV. The allegations of injury and 
causation are supported by relevant evidence including the petitioner's 
import data, lost sales data, and pricing information. The Department 
assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material 
injury and causation and determined that these allegations are 
supported by accurate and adequate evidence and meet the statutory 
requirements for initiation. See Initiation Checklist, at page 4 and 
Attachment II.

Initiation of Antidumping Investigation

    Based on our examination of the petition, we have found that the 
petition meets the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, 
we are initiating an antidumping investigation to determine whether 
imports of ironing tables from the PRC are being, or are likely to be, 
sold in the United States at LTFV. Should the need arise to use any of 
this information as facts available under section 776 of the Act in our 
preliminary or final determinations, we may reexamine the information 
and revise the margin calculations, if appropriate. Unless this 
deadline is extended, we will make our preliminary determination no 
later than 140 days after the date of this initiation.

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, copies of the 
public version of the petition have been provided to representatives of 
the government of the PRC.

International Trade Commission Notification

    We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 
732(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will determine by August 14, 2003, whether there is a 
reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is 
materially injured, or is threatened with material injury, by reason of 
imports of ironing tables from the PRC. A negative ITC determination 
will result in the investigation being terminated; otherwise, this 
investigation will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time 
limits.
    This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 
777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: July 21, 2003.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary
[FR Doc. 03-19025 Filed 7-24-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S