[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 33 (Tuesday, February 20, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7763-7764]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-2836]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

(A-570-803)


Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the People's Republic of China: 
Notice of Court Decision Not In Harmony With Final Results of 
Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On January 9, 2007, the United States Court of International 
Trade (``CIT'') sustained the final remand redetermination made by the 
Department of Commerce (``the Department'') pursuant to the CIT's 
remand of the final results of the eleventh administrative review of 
the antidumping duty orders on heavy forged hand tools from the 
People's Republic of China. See Shandong Huarong Machinery Co. v. 
United States and Ames True Temper, Slip Op. 2007-3 (CIT, 2007) 
(``Shandong Huarong II''). This case arises out of the Department's 
final results in the administrative review covering the period February 
1, 2001, through January 31, 2002. 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) (``Final Results''). Consistent with the decision of the United 
States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (``Federal Circuit'') 
in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) 
(``Timken''), the Department is notifying the public that Shandong 
Huarong II is not in harmony with the Department's Final Results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 20, 2007

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In Shandong Huarong Machinery Co. v. United 
States, No. 03-00676 (CIT, 2005) (``Shandong Huarong I''), the CIT 
remanded the underlying final results to the Department to: (1) reopen 
the record in order to afford Shandong Huarong Machinery Co. 
(``Huarong'') a second opportunity to provide a scrap offset in which 
its scrap sales are allocated to the production of bars/wedges; (2) 
explain why its methodology of including distances greater than the 
distance from the nearest port to the factory, when calculating the 
weighted-average freight distance for multiple suppliers of one 
particular factor of production (``FOP''), satisfies the reasoning in 
Sigma Corp. v. United States, 117 F.3d 1401 (Fed. Cir. 1997) 
(``Sigma'') and Lasko Metal Products Inc. v. United States, 43 F.3d 
1442, 1446 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (``Lasko''), or adjust its methodology; (3) 
explain its decision to disregard the effect of subsidies from the 
United States and other countries, in light of Fuyao Glass Indus. Group 
Co. v. United States, Slip Op. 2003-169 (CIT, 2003) (``Fuyao I'') and 
Fuyao Glass Indus. Group Co. v. United States, Slip Op. 2005-06 (CIT, 
2005) (``Fuyao II''); (4) supply a more complete explanation to support 
its determination that labor costs and other factor inputs for making 
steel pallets are included in the cost of brokerage and handling; and 
(5) provide a more complete explanation to support its decision that 
the cost of movement from the truck to the container yard, demurrage 
and storage charges, and other port charges are included in the 
brokerage and handling cost.
    The Department released the Draft Results of Redetermination 
Pursuant to Court Remand (``Draft Redetermination'') to Huarong and 
Ames True Temper \1\ (``Ames'') for comment on October 7, 2005. The 
Department received timely filed comments from both Huarong and Ames on 
October 14, 2005, and rebuttal comments from Huarong on October 19, 
2005. On October 16, 2006, the Department issued to the CIT its final 
results of redetermination pursuant to remand on November 30, 2005. In 
the remand redetermination the Department did the following: (1) 
reopened the record, and applied a steel scrap offset in its 
calculation of normal value to adjust for sales of steel scrap that was 
generated from the production of the subject bars and wedges; (2) 
applied the Sigma cap in its analysis and capped the distance for each 
supplier before calculating the weighted-average inland freight 
distance; (3) explained its decision in the Final Results to not 
exclude U.S. export data from the Indian import statistics used as the 
surrogate value because it would have resulted in an insignificant 
adjustment to normal value; (4) revised its FOP methodology to include 
labor costs and other factor inputs for making steel pallets in normal 
value; and (5) explained its reasoning for finding that movement 
expenses incurred at the port

[[Page 7764]]

of export were included in the calculation of brokerage and handing 
expenses. The Department recalculated the antidumping duty rate 
applicable to Huarong, and included the changes noted above. On January 
9, 2007, the CIT sustained all aspects of the remand redetermination 
made by the Department pursuant to the CIT's remand of the Final 
Results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Ames True Temper is a domestic interested party to the 
proceeding, and was the petitioner in the underlying review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, the Federal Circuit 
held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (``the Act''), the Department must publish a notice of a court 
decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a Department determination, 
and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a ``conclusive'' court 
decision. The CIT's decision in this case on January 9, 2007, 
constitutes a final decision of the court that is not in harmony with 
the Department's Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment 
of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the Department 
will continue the suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise 
pending the expiration of the period of appeal or, if appealed, pending 
a final and conclusive court decision. In the event the CIT's ruling is 
not appealed or, if appealed, upheld by the Federal Circuit, the 
Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to revise 
the cash deposit rates covering the subject merchandise.
    This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 
516A(c)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: February 13, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-2836 Filed 2-19-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S