[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 4, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11615-11617]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-4128]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-803]


Notice of Amended Final Results in Accordance With Court 
Decision: Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or 
Without Handles, From the People(s Republic of China

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 4, 2008.
SUMMARY: On November 20, 2007, the U.S. Court of International Trade 
(``CIT'') sustained the remand redetermination issued by the Department 
of Commerce (``the Department'') pursuant to the CIT's remand of the 
final results of the twelfth administrative review of the antidumping 
duty orders on heavy forged hand tools from the People's Republic of 
China (``PRC''). See Shandong Huarong Machinery Co. Ltd., Shandong 
Machinery Import & Export Corporation, Liaoning Machinery Import & 
Export Corporation, and Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Corporation 
v. United States, Slip Op. 07-169 (CIT, 2007) (``Shandong Huarong 
II''). The CIT issued the public version of Shandong Huarong II on 
January 8, 2008. The period of review (``POR'') for the twelfth review 
is February 1, 2002, through January 31, 2003.
    In its redetermination, the Department assigned dumping margins to 
sales of (1) bars/wedges by Shandong Huarong Machinery Corporation 
Limited (``Huarong''); (2) bars/wedges by Liaoning Machinery Import & 
Export Corporation/Liaoning Machinery Import & Export Corporation Ltd. 
(collectively ``LMC/LIMAC''); (3) bars/wedges by Shandong Machinery 
Import & Export Corporation (``SMC''); and (4) axes/adzes, bars/wedges, 
hammers/sledges,

[[Page 11616]]

and picks/mattocks by Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Corporation 
(``TMC''). As there is now a final and conclusive court decision in 
this case which is not in harmony with the underlying results of the 
disputed administrative review, the Department is amending the final 
results of the 2002-2003 antidumping duty administrative review of 
heavy forged hand tools from the PRC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Martin, AD/CVD Operations, 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.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On September 15, 2004, the Department published its final results 
of antidumping duty administrative review. 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 
Reviews, Final Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Reviews, and Determination Not to Revoke in Part, 69 FR 55581 
(September 15, 2004) (``Final Results''). In its Final Results the 
Department calculated antidumping duty margins for Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, 
SMC, and TMC. On September 16, 2004, the four respondents filed a 
summons with the CIT, and on September 20, 2004, they filed a complaint 
with the CIT in which they identified the aspects of the Final Results 
they are challenging. On September 17, 2004, the petitioner, Ames True 
Temper ((Ames(), submitted comments alleging that the Department made 
certain ministerial errors in the Final Results. On September 28, 2004, 
the Department requested a voluntary remand to consider certain 
ministerial error allegations raised by the parties. The CIT granted 
the Department(s request on November 3, 2004, and ordered the 
Department to address the alleged ministerial errors (without issuing a 
slip opinion). The Department corrected certain errors and published 
amended final results on December 1, 2004. See Heavy Forged Hand Tools, 
Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, From the People's 
Republic of China: Notice of Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Reviews, 69 FR 69892 (December 1, 2004).
    In Shandong Huarong Machinery Co. Ltd., Liaoning Machinery Import & 
Export Corp. Ltd., Shandong Machinery Import & Export Corp., and 
Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Corp. v. United States and Ames True 
Temper, Court No. 04(00460, Slip Op. 06-88 (June 9, 2006) (``Shandong 
Huarong I''), the CIT remanded the underlying final results of review 
to the Department to: (1) Explain why the failure of Huarong and TMC to 
report information on scrapers and forged tampers, respectively, 
justifies the use of total adverse facts available (``AFA''), rather 
than just partial AFA, pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the 
Tariff Act of 1930 (the ``Act''), for the axes/adzes order for Huarong 
and the bars/wedges order for TMC; (2) provide a factual basis showing 
that the rate calculated for TMC is a reasonable estimate of its actual 
rate plus an added amount to encourage cooperation; (3) explain how the 
Department(s commercial quantities methodology fulfills the purpose of 
19 CFR 351.222(e)(1), in relation to its refusal to revoke SMC from the 
hammers/sledges order; (4) analyze further the issue of valuation of 
steel pallets manufactured by certain hand tool factories; (5) revisit 
its decision that certain miscellaneous handling expenses are not 
included in the surrogate price of foreign brokerage and handling and, 
if the Department continues to find that the handling expenses in 
question are not in the surrogate price of brokerage and handling, to 
provide a thorough explanation; (6) explain why its decision to analyze 
market economy (``ME'') purchases of ocean freight in aggregate is 
reasonable; and (7) explain further its decision to deny the request 
for a circumstance of sale ((COS() adjustment to TMC's normal value 
(``NV'').
    The Department released the Draft Results of Redetermination 
Pursuant to Court Remand to the petitioner and the respondents for 
comment on December 15, 2006. The Department received comments from 
both Ames and the respondents on December 29, 2006. On January 12, 
2007, the Department issued to the CIT its final results of 
redetermination pursuant to Shandong Huarong I. See Final Results of 
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, Court No. 04-00460 (January 
12, 2007) found at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/remands/06-88.pdf. In the 
remand redetermination the Department did the following: (1)(i) 
explained that AFA was applied to all of Huarong's sales of axes/adzes, 
pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act, because it failed to 
report requested information regarding its production and sales of 
scrapers, which are subject to the axes/adzes order; (1)(ii) explained 
that total AFA was applied to TMC's sales of bars/wedges because, in 
part, it failed to report its sales of forged tampers, which are 
subject to the bars/wedges order; (2) redetermined an AFA rate for 
TMC's sales of merchandise covered by the bars/wedges order; (3) 
explained that the period of investigation sales quantity is a valid 
benchmark for determining whether the respondent sold in commercial 
quantities because it represents the respondent(s behavior without the 
discipline of an antidumping order; (4) included in the Department(s 
calculation of NV the cost of labor and welding rod consumed in making 
steel pallets; (5) examined the record of Stainless Steel Wire Rod From 
India; Final Results of Administrative Review, 63 FR 48184 (September 
9, 1998), and concluded that the brokerage and handling surrogate value 
included all expenses noted by the petitioner, except those that the 
record does not show were incurred; (6) chose to continue to apply the 
respondents' average ME ocean freight expense to sales shipped with 
non-market economy carriers; and (7) continued to deny the petitioner's 
request for a COS adjustment to TMC's NV because there was insufficient 
detail to determine whether there was a correlation between the 
expenses incurred by TMC and the surrogate producer. Based on the above 
redeterminations, the Department recalculated the antidumping duty 
rates applicable to SMC's sale of bars/wedges and TMC's sales of axes/
adzes, bars/wedges, hammers/sledges, and picks/mattocks as a result of 
the Department(s modifications to NV. The Department made no change to 
the antidumping duty rates of Huarong's and LMC/LIMAC's sales of bars/
wedges. On November 20, 2007, the CIT sustained all aspects of the 
remand redetermination made by the Department pursuant to the CIT's 
remand of the Final Results. See Shandong Huarong II. The CIT issued 
the public version of Shandong Huarong II on January 8, 2008.
    Consistent with the decision made by the Court of Appeal for the 
Federal Circuit (``CAFC'') in Timken Company v. United States, 893 F.2d 
337, 341 (Fed. Cir. 1990), on January 17, 2008, the Department 
published a ``Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony with Final 
Results of Administrative Review,'' which continued suspension of 
liquidation of the subject merchandise until there was a (final and 
conclusive( decision in this case. See Heavy Forged Hand Tools From the 
People's Republic of China: Notice of

[[Page 11617]]

Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of Administrative 
Review, 73 FR 3236 (January 17, 2008). On January 20, 2008, the 
opportunity to appeal the CIT's decision to the CAFC expired. Since no 
party has appealed this decision to the CAFC, the CIT's decision 
upholding the Department's remand redetermination is final and 
conclusive.

Amended Final Results

    The time period for appealing the CIT's final decision to the CAFC 
has expired and no party has appealed this decision. As there is now a 
final and conclusive court decision with respect to litigation for 
Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, SMC, and TMC, we are amending the final results of 
review to reflect the findings of the remand results, pursuant to 
section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). 
The amended weighted-average margins are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Exporter                 Weighted-Average Margin (Percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shandong Huarong Machinery
 Corporation Limited (Huarong)......
        Bars/Wedges.................                              139.31
Liaoning Machinery Import & Export
 Corporation (LMC)/.................
Liaoning Machinery Import & Export
 Corporation Ltd. (LIMAC)...........
        Bars/Wedges.................                              139.31
Shandong Machinery Import & Export
 Corporation (SMC)..................
        Bars/Wedges.................                                4.05
Tianjin Machinery Import & Export
 Corporation (TMC)..................
        Axes/Adzes..................                               10.39
        Bars/Wedges.................                              139.31
        Hammers/Sledges.............                                6.38
Picks/Mattocks......................                                4.61
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (``CBP'') shall assess, antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have 
calculated importer-specific assessment rates. Where the importer-
specific assessment rate is above de minimis on an ad valorem basis, 
calculated by dividing the dumping margins found on examined subject 
merchandise by the estimated entered value, we will instruct CBP to 
assess antidumping duties on that importer(s entries of subject 
merchandise. 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). Since the actual entered value of the 
merchandise was not reported to the Department, we have divided, where 
applicable, the total dumping margins (calculated as the difference 
between NV and export price) for each importer by the total number of 
units sold to the importer. We will direct CBP to assess the resulting 
unit dollar amount against each unit of subject merchandise entered by 
the importer during the POR. The Department will issue appropriate 
assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of 
these amended final results of review.
    This notice is published in accordance with section 516A(e) of the 
Act.

    Dated: February 26, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-4128 Filed 3-3-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S