Mark Flessner or Robert James, AD/CVD Operations Office 7, (202) 482–6312 or (202) 482–0649, respectively (Taiwan); Susan Pulongbarit or Jerry Huang, AD/CVD Operations Office 9, (202) 482–
On September 23, 2009, the Department of Commerce (the Department) received petitions concerning imports of certain standard steel fasteners (fasteners) from the People's Republic of China (PRC) and Taiwan filed in proper form by Nucor Fastener (Petitioner).
The period of investigation (POI) for the PRC is January 1, 2009, through June 30, 2009. The POI for Taiwan is July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009.
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Tariff Act), Petitioner alleges that imports of certain standard steel fasteners from the PRC and Taiwan are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value, within the meaning of section 731 of the Tariff Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States.
The Department finds Petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because Petitioner is an interested party, as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Tariff Act, and has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the antidumping duty investigations that Petitioner is requesting the Department to initiate (
The products covered by these investigations are fasteners from the PRC and Taiwan. For a full description of the scope of the investigations, please
During our review of the Petition, we discussed the scope with Petitioner 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 (
We are requesting comments from interested parties regarding the appropriate physical characteristics of fasteners to be reported in response to the Department's antidumping questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics of the merchandise under consideration in order to more accurately report the relevant factors and costs of production, as well as to develop appropriate product comparison criteria.
Interested parties may provide information or comments that they believe are relevant to the development of an accurate listing of physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product characteristics; and (2) the product comparison criteria. We note that it is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product comparison criteria. We base product comparison criteria on meaningful commercial differences among products. In other words, while there may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers to describe fasteners, it may be that only a select few product characteristics take into account
In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in developing and issuing the antidumping duty questionnaires, we must receive comments at the above-referenced address by October 27, 2009. Additionally, rebuttal comments must be received by November 3, 2009.
Section 732(b)(1) of the Tariff Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Tariff 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 732(c)(4)(D) of the Tariff 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 Tariff 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 (the Commission), 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 Commission must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product (
Section 771(10) of the Tariff 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” (
With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioner does not offer a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that fasteners constitute 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,
In determining whether Petitioner has standing under section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Tariff Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the “Scope of Investigations” section above. To establish industry support, Petitioner provided its production of the domestic like product for the year 2008, and compared this to the estimated total production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.
Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, supplemental submissions, and other information readily available to the Department indicates that Petitioner has established industry support. First, the Petitions 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 (
The Department finds that Petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Tariff Act and it has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the antidumping duty investigations that it is requesting the Department initiate.
Petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product is being materially injured, or is
Petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is illustrated by reduced market share, underselling and price depressing and suppressing effects, increased import penetration, declining sales, reduced production, reduced capacity, increased raw material cost, abandoned product lines, reduced shipments, reduced wages and hours worked, and an overall decline in financial performance. 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.
The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to initiate these investigations of imports of fasteners from the PRC and Taiwan. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to the U.S. price, the factors of production (for the PRC), and price-based NV (for Taiwan) are also discussed in the country-specific initiation checklists.
For the PRC, Petitioner calculated export price (EP) based on documentation of offers for sale obtained from a confidential source.
For Taiwan, Petitioner based U.S. price on EP because, it maintains, Taiwanese producers typically sell the subject merchandise either directly to unaffiliated U.S. customers or via an unaffiliated trading company to the U.S. customer. Petitioner obtained POI prices of fasteners produced by the Taiwanese manufacturer Jinn Her Enterprise Co., Ltd. (Jinn Her). Petitioner substantiated the U.S. prices used with affidavits from persons who obtained the information. Petitioner deducted, where appropriate, movement expenses (foreign inland freight, foreign port, brokerage and handling charges, ocean freight, and U.S. inland freight). Petitioners also deducted an amount for imputed credit expenses, based upon the presumed terms of payment.
Petitioner claims the PRC is a non-market economy (NME) country and that no determination to the contrary has been made by the Department.
Petitioner contends that India is the appropriate surrogate country for the PRC because: (1) it is at a level of economic development comparable to that of the PRC and (2) it is a significant producer and exporter of comparable merchandise.
Petitioner calculated the NV and dumping margins using the Department's NME methodology as required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C) and 19 CFR 351.408. Petitioner calculated NV based on consumption rates of the factors of production on the average consumption rates of a fasteners producer in the United States (Surrogate Domestic Producer) for identical or similar merchandise.
Petitioner determined the consumption quantities of all raw materials and packing materials based on the production experience of the Surrogate Domestic Producer.
Petitioner determined electricity costs using the electricity consumption, in kilowatt hours, derived from the Surrogate Domestic Producer's experience.
Petitioner determined natural gas costs using the natural gas consumption derived from the Surrogate Domestic Producer's experience.
Petitioner determined nitrogen costs using a price quote from Bhoruka Gases Ltd, which was previously relied upon in
Petitioner determined the consumption of all packing materials based on the Surrogate Domestic Producer's experience.
Petitioner based factory overhead, selling, general and administrative (SG&A), and profit on data from Sundaram Fasteners Ltd. (SFL), a producer of similar merchandise, for the 2007–2008 fiscal year.
Petitioner based NV on price quotes for fasteners offered for sale in Taiwan by Jinn Her. These price and adjustment data were obtained through market research commissioned by petitioner. The price and adjustment data involve merchandise that is both commonly sold in the home market, and is substantially identical to the merchandise sold in the United States. Since the prices quoted were on an “ex-works” basis, Petitioner made no adjustments for movement expenses. Petitioner adjusted NV for imputed credit expenses. For comparison to EP, petitioner then added U.S. credit expenses.
Based on the data provided by Petitioner, there is reason to believe that imports of fasteners from the PRC and Taiwan are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Based on a comparison of U.S. prices and NV calculated in accordance with section 773(c) of the Tariff Act, the estimated dumping margins for fasteners from the PRC range from 66.87 percent to 205.97 percent.
Based upon the examination of the Petition on fasteners from the PRC and Taiwan, the Department finds the Petition meets the requirements of section 732 of the Tariff Act. Therefore, we are initiating antidumping duty investigations to determine whether imports of fasteners from the PRC and Taiwan are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation.
On December 10, 2008, the Department issued an interim final rule for the purpose of withdrawing 19 CFR 351.414(f) and (g), the regulatory provisions governing the targeted-dumping analysis in antidumping duty investigations, and the corresponding regulation governing the deadline for targeted-dumping allegations, 19 CFR 351.301(d)(5).
In order to accomplish this objective, if any interested party wishes to make a targeted-dumping allegation in either of these investigations pursuant to section 777A(d)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act, such allegations are due no later than 45 days before the scheduled date of the country-specific preliminary determination.
For this investigation, the Department will request quantity and value information from all known exporters and producers identified with complete contact information in the Petition. The quantity and value data received from NME exporters/producers will be used as the basis to select the mandatory respondents.
The Department requires that the respondents submit a response to both the quantity and value questionnaire and the separate-rate application by the respective deadlines in order to receive consideration for separate-rate status.
For this investigation, the Department intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) numbers 7318.15.2030, 7318.15.2055, 7318.15.2065, 7318.15.8065, 7318.15.8085, and 7318.16.0085, the six HTSUS categories most specific to the subject merchandise, 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 publication of this
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Instructions for filing such applications may be found on the Department's Web site at
In order to obtain separate-rate status in NME investigations, exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate status application.
The Department will calculate combination rates for certain respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this investigation. The Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin states:
[W]hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now assign in its NME investigations will be specific to those producers that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the period of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as well as the pool of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted-average of the individually calculated rates. This practice is referred to as the application of “combination rates” because such rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public versions of the Petition have been provided to the representatives of the Governments of the PRC and Taiwan. Because of the large number of producers/exporters identified in the 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 Government of the PRC and the Government of Taiwan, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
We have notified the Commission of our initiations, as required by section 732(d) of the Tariff Act.
The Commission will preliminarily determine, no later than November 7, 2009, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of fasteners from the PRC and Taiwan are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to a U.S. industry. A negative ITC determination with respect to any country will result in the investigation being terminated for that country; otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of the Tariff Act.
The merchandise covered by the investigations consists of certain standard nuts, standard bolts, and standard cap screws, of steel other than stainless steel. Standard nuts, standard bolts, and standard cap screws covered by the investigations may have a variety of finishes, including but not limited to coating in paint, phosphates, and zinc. Standard bolts and standard cap screws covered by the investigations have a shank or thread with an actual and/or nominal diameter between 6 millimeters and 32 millimeters (inclusive). Standard bolts and standard cap screws covered by the investigations also possess a circular or hexagonal head, the surface of which may be flat or rounded (also known as “dome-shaped” or “button-headed”). Standard bolts covered by the investigations may have an attached washer face or the equivalent (
Standard bolts, standard cap screws, and standard nuts are covered by the investigations whether imported alone, attached to other subject and/or non-subject merchandise (
Standard nuts, standard bolts, and standard cap screws meet the requirements of one or more nationally recognized consensus industry standard specifications (including but not limited to those referenced below). Subject merchandise is typically certified to the specifications published by one or more consensus standards organizations such as the following: the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), and the Industrial Fasteners Institute. Common specifications to which subject merchandise is certified include, but are not limited to: ASTM A194, ASTM A307, ASTM A325, ASTM A325M, ASTM A354, ASTM A449, ASTM A490, ASTM A563, ASTM F568M, ASTM F1852, ASTM F2280, SAE J429, SAE J1199, ISO 898–1, ISO 898–2, ISO 4759–1, ISO 8992, and comparable foreign and domestic specifications (including, but not limited to, metric versions of specifications such as those listed above).
Excluded from the scope of the investigations are bolts, cap screws, and nuts produced for an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) part number specific to any “automobile” as defined in 49 U.S.C. Section 32901(a)(3), any “work truck” as defined in 49 U.S.C. Section 32901(a)(19), or any “medium-duty passenger vehicle” as defined in 40 CFR Section 86.1803–01 (2009).
Also excluded from the scope of the investigations are bolts, cap screws, and nuts produced for an OEM part number specific to any “aircraft” as defined in 14 CFR Section 1.1 (2009).
Also excluded from the scope of the investigations are track bolts. Track bolts have a circular, rounded head and a shank which, immediately beneath the head, possesses an oval or elliptical shape, such that the non-round shape would restrict rotational movement of the bolt. Also excluded from the scope of the investigations are carriage bolts. Carriage bolts have a circular, rounded head and a shank which, immediately beneath the head, possesses a non-round shape (
Unless explicitly excluded from the scope of the investigations, bolts, cap screws, and nuts meeting the description of subject merchandise are covered by the investigations.
Merchandise covered by the investigations is classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheadings: 7318.15.2030, 7318.15.2055, 7318.15.2065, 7318.15.8065, 7318.15.8085, and 7318.16.0085. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise under the investigations is dispositive.