[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23564-23568]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10211]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-570-976]


Galvanized Steel Wire From the People's Republic of China: 
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation

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

DATES: Effective Date: April 27, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicholas Czajkowski or David Lindgren, 
AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street, and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
1395 or (202) 482-3870, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petition

    On March 31, 2011, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received a countervailing duty (CVD) petition concerning imports of 
galvanized steel wire from the People's Republic of China (PRC) filed 
in proper form by Davis Wire Corporation, Johnstown Wire Technologies, 
Inc., Mid-South Wire Company, Inc., National Standard, LLC, and 
Oklahoma Steel & Wire Company, Inc. (Petitioners), domestic producers 
of galvanized steel wire. See ``Petition for the Imposition of 
Countervailing Duties on Galvanized Steel Wire from the People's 
Republic of China'' (CVD Petition). On April 6, 2011, the Department 
requested additional information and clarification of certain areas of 
the CVD Petition involving the subsidy allegations. On the same day we 
issued a separate set of requests for information regarding the scope, 
industry support, and injury sections of the CVD Petition and the 
accompanying antidumping petitions for Mexico and the PRC. Petitioners 
filed timely, separate responses to these questionnaires on April 11, 
2011 (First Supplement to the CVD Petition and Supplement to the AD/CVD 
Petitions, respectively). On April 12, 2011, the Department issued a 
second set of questions regarding general issues, injury information 
and antidumping-specific topics. On April 14, 2011, Petitioners filed 
timely responses to the April 12, 2011 questionnaires (Second 
Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions). On April 12, 2011, the Department 
requested additional information regarding the CVD Petition. See Memo 
to the File from Mark E. Hoadley, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations,

[[Page 23565]]

Office 6, Import Administration ``Telephone Conversation with Counsel 
for Petitioners: Countervailing Duty Investigation on Galvanized Steel 
Wire from the People's Republic of China,'' dated April 12, 2011. On 
April 15, 2011, Petitioners filed timey responses to the April 12, 2011 
request (Second Supplement to the CVD Petition). In addition 
Petitioners provided the Department with an additional required 
certification on April 15, 2011. See Certification Letter filed April 
15, 2011.
    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), Petitioners allege that producers/exporters of 
galvanized steel wire in the PRC received countervailable subsidies 
within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, and that 
imports from these producers/exporters materially injure, or threaten 
material injury to, an industry in the United States.
    The Department finds that Petitioners filed the CVD Petition on 
behalf of the domestic industry because they are an interested party as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and the Petitioners have 
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD 
investigation that they are requesting the Department initiate (see 
``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition'' below).

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (POI) is calendar year 2010, i.e., 
January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2010. See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).

Scope of Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are galvanized steel 
wire from the PRC. For a full description of the scope of the 
investigation, please see the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' Appendix 
to this notice.

Comments on Scope of Investigation

    During our review of the CVD Petition, we discussed the scope with 
Petitioners to ensure that it is an accurate reflection of the products 
for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as 
discussed in the preamble to the regulations (Antidumping Duties; 
Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)), 
we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all interested 
parties to submit such comments by May 10, 2011, twenty calendar days 
from the signature date of this notice. All comments must be filed on 
the records of the China and Mexico antidumping duty investigations as 
well as the China countervailing duty investigation. Comments should be 
addressed to Import Administration's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 1870, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20230. The period of scope consultations is intended to 
provide the Department with ample opportunity to consider all comments 
and to consult with parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary 
determinations.

Consultations

    Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, the Department 
held consultations with the Government of the PRC (GOC) with respect to 
the CVD Petition on April 14, 2011. See Memorandum to the File, dated 
April 15, 2011, ``Consultations with Officials from the Government of 
the People's Republic of China on the Countervailing Duty Petitions 
regarding Steel Wheels and Galvanized Steel Wire'' a public document on 
file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 7046 of the main 
Department of Commerce building.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(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: (i) At least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) 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. Moreover, section 702(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 Department 
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 a 
statistically valid sampling method to poll the ``industry.''
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. 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. 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 a 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 like product, such differences do not render the decision of 
either agency contrary to law. See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. 
Supp. 2d 1, 8 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. 
v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1988), aff'd 
865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989), cert. denied 492 U.S. 919 (1989).
    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which 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).
    With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioners do not offer 
a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of the 
investigation. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on 
the record, we have determined that galvanized steel wire constitutes a 
single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in 
terms of that domestic like product. For a discussion of the domestic 
like product analysis in this case, see ``Countervailing Duty 
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Galvanized Steel Wire from the 
People's Republic of China'' (CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment 
II, ``Analysis of Industry Support for the Petitions Covering 
Galvanized Steel Wire from the People's Republic of China,'' on file in 
the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 7046 of the main Department of 
Commerce building.
    In determining whether Petitioners have standing under section 
702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the CVD Petition with reference to the domestic like 
product as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigation'' Appendix to 
this notice. To establish industry support, Petitioners provided their 
own 2010 production of the domestic like

[[Page 23566]]

product, and compared this to the estimated total production of the 
domestic like product for the entire domestic industry. See Volume I of 
the Petitions, at I-3 through I-5, and Exhibits I-1 through I-5; 
Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, dated April 11, 2011, at 1, 7 and 
Exhibit Supp-I-7; Second Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, dated 
April 14, 2011, at 2, and Exhibit 2; and Second Revised Exhibit I-1; 
see also CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
    On April 14, 2011, we received an industry support challenge from a 
Mexican producer of galvanized steel wire and its U.S. affiliate. See 
Letter from Deacero, titled ``Galvanized Steel Wire from Mexico--
Comments on Industry Support,'' dated April 14, 2011.\1\ This 
submission was placed on the record of the CVD Petition on April 18, 
2011. See Letter from Petitioners, titled ``Petitioners' Response to 
Question about U.S. industry,'' dated April 18, 2011. Petitioner 
responded to this submission on April 18, 2011. Our review of the data 
provided in the CVD Petition, supplemental submissions, and other 
information readily available to the Department indicates that 
Petitioners have established industry support. See CVD Initiation 
Checklist at Attachment II. First, the CVD Petition established support 
from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 
percent of the total production of the domestic like product and, as 
such, the Department is not required to take further action in order to 
evaluate industry support (e.g., polling). See section 702(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act; see also CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. Second, 
the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for 
industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the 
domestic producers (or workers) who support the CVD Petition account 
for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like 
product. See CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. Finally, the 
domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for 
industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the 
domestic producers (or workers) who support the CVD 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 CVD Petition. Accordingly, the Department determines 
that the CVD Petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry 
within the meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act. See CVD Initiation 
Checklist at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On April 18, 2011, the Department placed Deacero's filing on 
the records of the AD and CVD petitions concerning the PRC. See 
Memorandum to the File from Norbert Gannon, Office of Policy, 
entitled, Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on 
Imports of Galvanized Steel Wire from the People's Republic of China 
(the PRC) and Mexico and Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Galvanized Steel Wire from the PRC--Deacero S.A. de C.V.'s April 14, 
2011, Letter to the Department of Commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that Petitioners filed the CVD Petition on 
behalf of the domestic industry because they are an interested party as 
defined in sections 771(9)(C) of the Act and have demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD investigation that 
they are requesting the Department initiate. See CVD Initiation 
Checklist at Attachment II.

Injury Test

    Because the PRC is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the 
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act 
applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine 
whether imports of subject merchandise from the PRC materially injure, 
or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    Petitioners allege that imports of galvanized steel wire from the 
PRC are benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such 
imports are causing, or threatening to cause, material injury to the 
domestic industry producing galvanized steel wire. In addition, 
Petitioners allege that subsidized imports exceed the negligibility 
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.
    Petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share, lost sales and revenues, reduced 
production, reduced shipments, reduced capacity utilization rate, 
underselling and price depression and suppression, reduced workforce, 
decline in financial performance, and an increase in import 
penetration. We have assessed the allegations and supporting evidence 
regarding material injury, threat of material injury, and causation, 
and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by 
adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for initiation. 
See CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment III.

Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a 
CVD proceeding whenever an interested party files a CVD petition on 
behalf of an industry that: (1) Alleges the elements necessary for an 
imposition of a duty under section 701(a) of the Act; and (2) is 
accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioners 
supporting the allegations.
    The Department has examined the CVD Petition on galvanized steel 
wire from the PRC and finds that it complies with the requirements of 
section 702(b)(1) of the Act. Therefore, in accordance with section 
702(b)(1) of the Act, we are initiating a CVD investigation to 
determine whether producers/exporters of galvanized steel wire in the 
PRC receive countervailable subsidies. For a discussion of evidence 
supporting our initiation determination, see CVD Initiation Checklist.
    We are including in our investigation the following programs 
alleged in the CVD Petition to provide countervailable subsidies to 
producers/exporters of the subject merchandise.

A. Preferential Loans and Interest Rates

    1. Policy Loans to the Galvanized Steel Wire Industry
    2. Preferential Loans for Key Projects and Technologies
    3. Preferential Loans and Directed Credit
    4. Preferential Lending to GSW Producers and Exporters Classified 
as ``Honorable Enterprises''
    5. Loans and Interest Subsidies Provided Pursuant to the Northeast 
Revitalization Program

B. Government Provision of Inputs for Less than Adequate Remuneration 
(LTAR)

    1. Provision of Wire Rod for LTAR
    2. Provision of Zinc for LTAR
    3. Provision of Land Use Rights for LTAR
    a. Provision of Land Use Rights for LTAR within the Jinzhou 
District within the City of Dalian
    b. Provision of Land Use Rights for LTAR to Enterprises within the 
Zhaoqing High-Tech Industry Development Zone in Guangdong Province
    c. Provision of Land Use Rights for LTAR to Enterprises within the 
South Sanshui Science and Technology Industrial Park of Foshan City
    4. Provision of Electricity for LTAR

C. Income and Other Direct Taxes

    1. Income Tax Credits for Domestically-Owned Companies Purchasing 
Domestically-Produced Equipment
    2. Income Tax Exemption for Investment in Domestic Technological 
Renovation

[[Page 23567]]

    3. Accelerated Depreciation for Enterprises Located in the 
Northeast Region
    4. Forgiveness of Tax Arrears for Enterprises in the Old Industrial 
Bases of Northeast China
    5. Income Tax Exemption for Investors in Designated Geographical 
Regions within Liaoning Province

D. Indirect Tax and Tariff Exemption Programs

    1. VAT Deduction on Fixed Assets
    2. Export Subsidies Characterized as ``VAT Rebates''
    3. Import Tariff and VAT Exemptions for Foreign Invested 
Enterprises and Certain Domestic Enterprises Using Imported Equipment 
in Encouraged Industries
    4. Reduction in or Exemption from Fixed Assets Investment 
Orientation Regulatory Tax

E. Grant Programs

    1. ``Five Points, One Line'' Program of Liaoning Province
    2. Provincial Export Interest Subsidies
    3. State Key Technology Project Fund
    4. Export Assistance Grants
    5. Subsidies for Development of Famous Export Brands and China 
World Top Brands
    6. Sub-Central Government Programs to Promote Famous Export Brands 
and China World Top Brands
    7. Zhejiang Province Program to Rebate Antidumping Legal Fees
    8. Technology to Improve Trade Research and Development Fund of 
Jiangsu Province
    9. Outstanding Growth Private Enterprise and Small and Medium-Sized 
Enterprises Development in Jiangyin Fund of Jiangyin City
    10. Grants for Programs Under the 2007 Science and Technology 
Development Plan in Shandong Province
    11. Special Funds for Encouraging Foreign Economic and Trade 
Development and for Drawing Significant Foreign Investment Projects in 
Shandong Province

F. Preferential Tax Subsidies for FIEs

    1. ``Two Free, Three Half'' Tax Exemptions for ``Productive'' FIEs
    2. Income Tax Exemption Program for Export-Oriented FIEs
    3. Local Income Tax Exemption and Reduction Programs for 
``Productive'' FIEs
    4. Preferential Tax Programs for FIEs Recognized as High or New 
Technology Enterprises
    5. Income Tax Subsidies for FIEs Based on Geographic Location
    6. VAT Refunds for FIEs Purchasing Domestically-Produced Equipment
    7. Income Tax Credits for FIEs Purchasing Domestically-Produced 
Equipment
    8. Exemption from City Construction Tax and Education Fee for FIEs
    For a description of each of these programs and a full discussion 
of the Department's decision to initiate an investigation of these 
programs, see CVD Initiation Checklist.
    We are not including in our investigation the following programs 
alleged to benefit producers/exporters of the subject merchandise in 
the PRC.
    1. Export Loans from Policy Banks and State-Owned Commercial Banks 
(SOCBs)
    2. Government Restraints on Exports of Raw Materials: Wire Rod
    3. Government Restraints on Exports of Raw Materials: Zinc
    4. Tax Reduction for Enterprises Making Little Profit
    5. Provincial Fund for Fiscal and Technological Innovation
    6. International Market Exploration Fund (SME Fund)
    7. Funds for Water Treatment and Pollution Control Projects for the 
Three Rivers and Three Lakes in Shandong Province
    8. Undervaluation of Chinese Currency
    For further information explaining why the Department is not 
initiating an investigation of these programs, see CVD Initiation 
Checklist.

Respondent Selection

    For this investigation, the Department intends to select 
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for 
U.S. imports during the POI. We intend to release the CBP data under 
Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to 
information protected by APO within five days of the announcement of 
the initiation of this investigation. Interested parties may submit 
comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within seven 
calendar days of publication of this notice. We intend to make our 
decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication 
of this Federal Register notice. Interested parties must submit 
applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.305(b). Instructions for filing such applications may be found on 
the Department's Web site at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/apo.

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

    In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, copies of 
the public versions of the CVD Petition and amendments thereto have 
been provided to the GOC. Because of the particularly large number of 
producers/exporters identified in the CVD Petition, the Department 
considers the service of the public version of the petition to the 
foreign producers/exporters satisfied by the delivery of the public 
version to the GOC, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

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

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the CVD Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of allegedly subsidized galvanized steel wire 
from the PRC materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. 
industry. See section 703(a)(2) of the Act. A negative ITC 
determination will result in the investigation being terminated. See 
section 703(a)(1) of the Act. Otherwise, the investigation will proceed 
according to statutory and regulatory time limits.

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
administrative protective orders in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On 
January 22, 2008, the Department published Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents Submission Procedures; APO 
Procedures, (73 FR 3634). Parties wishing to participate in these 
investigations should ensure that they meet the requirements of these 
procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 
19 CFR 351.103(d)).
    Any party submitting factual information in an AD/CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information. See 
section 782(b) of the Act. Parties are hereby reminded that revised 
certification requirements are in effect for company/government 
officials as well as their representatives in all segments of any AD/
CVD proceedings initiated on or after March 14, 2011. See Certification 
of Factual Information to Import Administration During Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Interim Final Rule, 76 FR 7491 
(February 10, 2011) (Interim Final Rule) amending 19 CFR 351.303(g)(1) 
and (2). The formats for the revised certifications are provided at the 
end of the Interim Final Rule. The Department intends to reject factual 
submissions in any proceeding segments initiated on or after March 14, 
2011, if the submitting

[[Page 23568]]

party does not comply with the revised certification requirements.
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of 
the Act.

    Dated: April 20, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix--Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of the investigation covers galvanized steel wire which 
is a cold-drawn carbon quality steel product in coils, of solid, 
circular cross section with an actual diameter of 0.5842 mm (0.0230 
inch) or more, plated or coated with zinc (whether by hot-dipping or 
electroplating).
    Steel products to be included in the scope of the investigation, 
regardless of Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(``HTSUS'') definitions, are products in which: (1) Iron predominates, 
by weight, over each of the other contained elements; (2) the carbon 
content is two percent or less, by weight; and (3) none of the elements 
listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:

 1.80 percent of manganese, or
 1.50 percent of silicon, or
 1.00 percent of copper, or
 0.50 percent of aluminum, or
 1.25 percent of chromium, or
 0.30 percent of cobalt, or
 0.40 percent of lead, or
 1.25 percent of nickel, or
 0.30 percent of tungsten, or
 0.02 percent of boron, or
 0.10 percent of molybdenum, or
 0.10 percent of niobium, or
 0.41 percent of titanium, or
 0.15 percent of vanadium, or
 0.15 percent of zirconium.
    The products subject to the investigation are currently classified 
in subheadings 7217.20.30 and 7217.20.45 of the HTSUS which cover 
galvanized wire of all diameters and all carbon content. Galvanized 
wire is reported under statistical reporting numbers 7217.20.3000, 
7217.20.4510, 7217.20.4520, 7217.20.4530, 7217.20.4540, 7217.20.4550, 
7217.20.4560, 7217.20.4570, and 7217.20.4580. These products may also 
enter under HTSUS subheadings 7229.20.0015, 7229.90.5008, 7229.90.5016, 
7229.90.5031, and 7229.90.5051. Although the HTSUS subheadings are 
provided for convenience and Customs purposes, the written description 
of the merchandise is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2011-10211 Filed 4-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P