[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 15, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55581-55585]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E4-2194]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-803]


Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without 
Handles, From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Final Partial Rescission of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, and Determination Not To 
Revoke in Part

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

ACTION: Notice of final results of antidumping duty administrative 
reviews.

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

SUMMARY: On March 10, 2004, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published the preliminary results of the administrative reviews of the 
antidumping duty orders on heavy forged hand tools (HFHTs) from the 
People's Republic of China (PRC). These reviews cover HFHTs exported to 
the United States by multiple PRC manufacturers/exporters during the 
period February 1, 2002 through January 31, 2003. We provided 
interested parties with an opportunity to comment on the preliminary 
results of review. After analyzing the comments received, we made two 
changes in the margin calculations: (1) We are no longer applying total 
adverse facts available (AFA) to sales of products covered by the bars/
wedges order made by Shandong Machinery Import & Export Corporation 
(SMC) and are instead calculating a margin using the reported sales and 
factors of production (FOP) data, and (2) we have applied partial AFA 
to SMC for its failure to report a FOP for finish coating. The final 
weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed firms are listed 
below in the section entitled ``Final Results of Review.'' We will 
instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess

[[Page 55582]]

antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.

DATES: Effective September 15, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Martin or Mark Manning, Office 
of AD/CVD Enforcement, Office 4, Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
3936 and (202) 482-5253, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 10, 2004, the Department published in the Federal Register 
the preliminary results of the antidumping administrative reviews of 
HFHTs from the PRC. See Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or 
Unfinished, With or Without Handles, From the People's Republic of 
China: Preliminary Results of Administrative Reviews, Preliminary 
Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, and 
Determination Not To Revoke in Part, 69 FR 11371 (March 10, 2004) 
(Preliminary Results). In response to the Department's invitation to 
comment on the Preliminary Results of these reviews, the petitioner, 
Ames True Temper, and the respondents filed case briefs on April 16, 
2004 and rebuttal briefs on April 21, 2004. The respondents in these 
reviews are Shangdong Huarong Machinery Co., Ltd. (Huarong), Liaoning 
Machinery Import & Export Corporation and Liaoning Machinery Import & 
Export Corporation, Ltd. (LMC/LIMAC), SMC, and Tianjin Machinery Import 
& Export Corporation (TMC). No interested party requested a public 
hearing in these reviews.

Scope of Review

    The products covered by these administrative reviews are HFHTs 
comprising the following classes or kinds of merchandise: (1) Hammers 
and sledges with heads over 1.5 kg (3.33 pounds) (hammers/sledges); (2) 
bars over 18 inches in length, track tools and wedges (bars/wedges); 
(3) picks and mattocks (picks/mattocks); and (4) axes, adzes and 
similar hewing tools (axes/adzes).
    HFHTs include heads for drilling hammers, sledges, axes, mauls, 
picks and mattocks, which may or may not be painted, which may or may 
not be finished, or which may or may not be imported with handles; 
assorted bar products and track tools including wrecking bars, digging 
bars, and tampers; and steel woodsplitting wedges. HFHTs are 
manufactured through a hot forge operation in which steel is sheared to 
required length, heated to forging temperature, and formed to final 
shape on forging equipment using dies specific to the desired product 
shape and size. Depending on the product, finishing operations may 
include shot blasting, grinding, polishing and painting, and the 
insertion of handles for handled products. HFHTs are currently provided 
for under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) subheadings: 8205.20.60, 8205.59.30, 8201.30.00, and 
8201.40.60. Specifically excluded from these investigations are hammers 
and sledges with heads 1.5 kg. (3.33 pounds) in weight and under, hoes 
and rakes, and bars 18 inches in length and under.
    The Department has issued four conclusive scope rulings regarding 
the merchandise covered by these orders: (1) On August 16, 1993, the 
Department found the ``Max Multi-Purpose Axe,'' imported by the Forrest 
Tool Company, to be within the scope of the axes/adzes order; (2) on 
March 8, 2001, the Department found ``18-inch'' and ``24-inch'' pry 
bars, produced without dies, imported by Olympia Industrial, Inc. and 
SMC Pacific Tools, Inc., to be within the scope of the bars/wedges 
order; (3) on March 8, 2001, the Department found the ``Pulaski'' tool, 
produced without dies by TMC, to be within the scope of the axes/adzes 
order; and (4) on March 8, 2001, the Department found the ``skinning 
axe,'' imported by Import Traders, Inc., to be within the scope of the 
axes/adzes order.

Period of Review

    The period of review (POR) is February 1, 2002 through January 31, 
2003.

Rescission of Review

    We preliminarily rescinded these reviews with respect to Zhenjiang 
All Joy Light Industrial Products & Textiles; Linshu Jinrun Ironware & 
Tools Co., Ltd.; Jinhua Runhua Foreign Trade Co., Ltd.; Tian Rui 
International Trade Co., Ltd.; Jinhua Twin-Star Tools Co., Ltd.; Jinma, 
Ltd.; Hebei Machinery Import & Export Corporation; Chenzhou Estar 
Enterprises Ltd.; China National Machinery Import & Export Corporation; 
and Ningbo Tiangong Tools Co., Ltd., which reported that they did not 
sell merchandise subject to any of the four HFHT antidumping orders 
during the POR. We also preliminarily rescinded the review of Huarong 
and LMC/LIMAC with respect to the hammers/sledges and picks/mattocks 
orders, since Huarong and LMC/LIMAC reported that they made no 
shipments of subject hammers/sledges and picks/mattocks during the POR.
    The Department reviewed CBP data, which supports the claims that 
these companies did not export subject merchandise during the POR. 
Furthermore, no party has placed evidence on the record demonstrating 
that these companies exported the merchandise identified above during 
the POR. We received comments on these preliminary rescissions from the 
petitioner, Huarong, and LMC/LIMAC. After analyzing these comments we 
continue to find that it is appropriate to rescind these reviews. For a 
discussion of these comments, see Memorandum from Jeffrey May, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to James J. Jochum, 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, ``Issues and Decision 
Memorandum for the Twelfth Administrative Review of the Antidumping 
Duty Orders on Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the People's Republic of 
China,'' dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision 
Memorandum). Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) and 
consistent with the Department's practice, we are rescinding these 
administrative reviews with respect to the companies and merchandise 
identified above.

Determination To Not Revoke in Part

    We preliminarily determined that SMC does not qualify for 
revocation of the order on hammers/sledges under 19 CFR 351.222(b) and 
(e) because SMC did not ship hammers/sledges produced by its supplier 
to the United States in commercial quantities during the three 
consecutive years under consideration. Furthermore, we preliminarily 
determined that LMC/LIMAC does not qualify for revocation of the order 
on bars/wedges under 19 CFR 351.222(b) and (e) because the Department 
preliminarily found that the use of AFA was warranted with respect to 
LMC/LIMAC's sales of bars/wedges during the POR. The petitioner, SMC, 
and LMC/LIMAC submitted comments on these preliminary determinations 
not to revoke in part. After analyzing these comments, we continue to 
find that, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b) and (e), SMC does not qualify 
for revocation of the order on hammers/sledges and LMC/LIMAC does not 
qualify for revocation of the order on bars/wedges. For a discussion of 
these comments, see Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
these administrative reviews are addressed in

[[Page 55583]]

the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this 
notice. A list of the issues that parties have raised is attached to 
this notice as an appendix. Parties can find a complete discussion of 
all issues raised in these reviews, and the corresponding 
recommendations, in the Issues and Decision Memorandum that is on file 
in the Central Records Unit, room B-099 of the main Department of 
Commerce building. In addition, the Issues and Decision Memorandum can 
be accessed directly on Import Administration's Web site at http://ia.ita.doc.gov. The paper copy and the electronic version of the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Facts Available

    In the Preliminary Results, we based the dumping margins for the 
respondents Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, SMC, and TMC on total AFA for their 
sales of merchandise subject to certain HFHTs orders pursuant to 
sections 776(a) and 776(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 
Act). See Preliminary Results, 69 FR at 11375. We continue to apply 
total AFA to Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, and TMC because these respondents 
significantly impeded our ability to (1) Complete the review of the 
bars/wedges order, pursuant section 751 of the Act, and (2) impose the 
correct antidumping duties, as mandated by section 731 of the Act. 
Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, and TMC participated in an ``agent'' sales scheme 
whereby one PRC company allowed another PRC company to enter subject 
merchandise under the first company's invoices. In addition, we 
continue to apply total AFA to certain respondents that failed to 
provide sales and FOP information that was requested by the Department 
in the reviews of the axes/adzes (Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, and SMC), bars/
wedges (TMC), and picks/mattocks (SMC) antidumping orders. Lastly, we 
continue to find that the companies that constitute the PRC-wide 
entity, including Jiangsu Guotai International Group Huatai Import & 
Export Company, Ltd., which did not establish its entitlement to a 
separate rate, failed to provide certain requested information. For 
this reason, we continue to find that, in accordance with sections 
776(a)(2)(A), (B), and (C) of the Act, it is appropriate to base the 
PRC-wide margin in these reviews on total AFA.
    As in the Preliminary Results, we are assigning as AFA the PRC-wide 
rates published in the most recently completed administrative reviews 
of the HFHTs orders. See Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or 
Unfinished, With or Without Handles, From the People's Republic of 
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of the 
Order on Bars and Wedges, 68 FR 53347 (September 10, 2003) (11th Review 
Final Results). As AFA, we are assigning the sales of (1) Axes/adzes 
made by Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, and SMC the current PRC-wide rate of 55.74 
percent; (2) bars/wedges made by Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, and TMC the 
current PRC-wide rate of 139.31 percent; and (3) picks/mattocks made by 
SMC the current the PRC-wide rate of 98.77 percent. Although we are 
applying total AFA to the PRC-wide entity for all four classes or kinds 
of subject merchandise in this review, the rates assigned to this 
entity have not changed from the 11th Review Final Results.
    A complete explanation of the selection, corroboration, and 
application of AFA can be found in the Preliminary Results. See 
Preliminary Determination, 69 FR at 11375-11380. The Department 
received comments and rebuttal comments with regard to certain aspects 
of our selection and application of AFA. See Issues and Decision 
Memorandum, at Comments 17-21. Based on our analysis of the comments 
received, we have made one change in our application of AFA from the 
Preliminary Results. For the final results, the Department will not 
apply AFA to SMC's sales of bars/wedges. See Issues and Decision 
Memorandum, at Comment 18. Other than this change, nothing has changed 
since the Preliminary Results that would affect the Department's 
selection, corroboration, and application of facts available for the 
above-referenced companies and orders. Accordingly, for the final 
results, we continue to apply AFA as noted above.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following weighted-average percentage margins 
exist for the period February 1, 2002, through January 31, 2003:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Margin
                   Manufacturer/Exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shandong Huarong Machinery Corporation Limited (Huarong):
    Axes/Adzes............................................         55.74
    Bars/Wedges...........................................        139.31
Liaoning Machinery Import & Export Corporation (LMC)/
 Liaoning Machinery Import & Export Corporation Ltd.
 (LIMAC):
    Axes/Adzes............................................         55.74
    Bars/Wedges...........................................        139.31
Shandong Machinery Import & Export Corporation (SMC):
    Axes/Adzes............................................         55.74
    Bars/Wedges...........................................          5.40
    Hammers/Sledges.......................................          0.02
    Picks/Mattocks........................................         98.77
Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Corporation (TMC):
    Axes/Adzes............................................         10.49
    Bars/Wedges...........................................        139.31
    Hammers/Sledges.......................................          6.46
    Picks/Mattocks........................................          4.76
PRC-Wide Entity:
    Axes/Adzes............................................         55.74
    Bars/Wedges...........................................        139.31
    Hammers/Sledges.......................................         27.71
    Picks/Mattocks........................................         98.77
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 55584]]

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of these administrative reviews for 
all shipments of HFHTs from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of this 
notice, as provided for by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash 
deposit rates for the reviewed companies named above will be the rates 
for those firms established in the final results of these 
administrative reviews; (2) for any previously reviewed or investigated 
PRC or non-PRC exporter, not covered in these reviews, with a separate 
rate, the cash deposit rate will be the company-specific rate 
established in the most recent segment of these proceedings; (3) for 
all other PRC exporters, the cash deposit rates will be the PRC-wide 
rates established in the final results of these reviews; and (4) the 
cash deposit rate for any non-PRC exporter of subject merchandise from 
the PRC who does not have its own rate will be the rate applicable to 
the PRC exporter that supplied the non-PRC exporter. These deposit 
requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of 
the final results of the next administrative reviews.

The PRC-Wide Cash Deposit Rates

    The current PRC-wide cash deposit rates are 55.74 percent for Axes/
Adzes, 139.31 percent for Bars/Wedges, 27.71 percent for Hammers/
Sledges, and 98.77 percent for Picks/Mattocks. These rates are 
unchanged from the most recently completed administrative review. See 
11th Review Final Results. These deposit requirements shall remain in 
effect until publication of the final results of the next 
administrative reviews.

Assessment Rates

    Upon completion of these administrative reviews, the Department 
will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), for the 
respondents receiving calculated dumping margins, we calculated 
importer-specific per-unit duty assessment rates based on the ratio of 
the total amount of the dumping duties calculated for the examined 
sales to the total quantity of those same sales. These importer-
specific per-unit rates will be assessed uniformly on all entries of 
each importer that were made during the POR. In accordance with 19 CFR 
351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to 
antidumping duties any entries for which the importer-specific 
assessment rate is de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent ad valorem). 
In testing whether any importer-specific assessment rate is de minimis, 
we used the reported data to calculate the freight on board at the port 
of export (FOB) price of U.S. sales and used this FOB price as an 
estimate for the entered value. For all shipments of subject 
merchandise for the four antidumping orders covering HFHTs from the 
PRC, exported by the respondents and imported by entities not 
identified by the respondents in their questionnaire responses, we will 
instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties at the cash deposit rate in 
effect on the date of the entry. Lastly, for the respondents receiving 
dumping rates based upon AFA, the Department, upon completion of these 
reviews, will instruct CBP to liquidate entries according to the AFA ad 
valorem rate. The Department will issue appraisement instructions 
directly to CBP upon the completion of the final results of these 
administrative reviews.

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 review period. Failure to comply with this 
requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties 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 disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written notification of 
return/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.
    These final results of administrative reviews are issued and 
published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the 
Act.

    Dated: September 7, 2004.
James J. Jochum,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix--Issues in Decision Memorandum

Part I--Surrogate Value Issues

    Comment 1: The Department should use hexagonal steel bar as a 
surrogate for certain FOP.
    Comment 2: The Department should value marine insurance at 110 
percent of invoice value.
    Comment 3: The Department did not apply the proper surrogate 
value for railroad rails.
    Comment 4: The Department should value pallets using hot- and 
cold-rolled sheet/strip because respondents' claims regarding the 
use of scrap metal for pallet manufacturing are unsupported.
    Comment 5: The Department should recalculate the finished weight 
of shipped goods.
    Comment 6: The Department should recalculate movement charges to 
include additional expenses.
    Comment 7: The Department should value the coating on tool 
heads/bodies.

Part II--Company Specific Issues

1. Huarong

    Comment 8: The Department should calculate a margin and assign 
it to Huarong if Huarong is benefitting from the rate that it has 
been assigned as AFA.

2. LMC/LIMAC

    Comment 9: The Department should revoke the dumping order for 
bars/wedges produced by the Lishu factory and exported by LMC/LIMAC.

3. SMC

    Comment 10: The Department should apply AFA to SMC's ocean 
freight expense.
    Comment 11: The Department should find that SMC shipped 
commercial quantities and revoke the hammers/sledges order with 
respect to SMC.
    Comment 12: The Department should include sales made by SMC 
through an agent that are outside the POR.

4. TMC

    Comment 13: The Department should label a PRC supplier as an 
uncooperative interested party with respect to the axes/adzes and 
picks/mattocks it supplied to SMC and apply AFA to TMC's sales of 
axes/adzes, hammers/sledges, and bars/wedges produced by this PRC 
supplier.
    Comment 14: The Department should perform a Shakeproof analysis 
for TMC, which will show market economy purchases of ocean freight 
services to be insignificant.
    Comment 15: The Department should increase TMC's normal value 
(NV) to account for the commission paid to its U.S. sales office.
    Comment 16: The Department should disregard the variable Style 
(3.21) used by TMC in reporting hammer sales.

[[Page 55585]]

Part III--Issues Regarding the Use of Total AFA and Rescission of 
Certain Reviews

    Comment 17: The Department should not apply AFA while scope 
inquiries are pending.
    Comment 18: The Department should not apply AFA for the failure 
to report cast products.
    Comment 19: The Department should not apply AFA to agent sales 
made by Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, and TMC.
    Comment 20: The Department should establish ``combination'' cash 
deposit rates and utilize ``master list'' assessment rates.
    Comment 21: The Department should recalculate the AFA and PRC-
wide rate of 139.31 percent for bars/wedges because this rate 
contains subsidized prices.
    Comment 22: The Department should reconsider its determination 
to rescind the review of hammers/sledges and picks/mattocks with 
respect to Huarong and LMC/LIMAC.

Part IV--Issues Regarding Assessment Instructions

    Comment 23: The Department should deny the request by Olympia 
Industrial Incorporated to instruct CBP to liquidate entries of 
scrapers and tampers.
    Comment 24: The Department should correct the ministerial error 
in the draft assessment instructions.

 [FR Doc. E4-2194 Filed 9-14-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P