|
FINAL RESULTS OF REDETERMINATION Court No. 00-08-00393 Slip-Op. 01-88 (CIT July 23, 2001)
In accordance with the U.S. Court of International Trade's (the Court) order in Shandong Huarong General Corp. v. the United States, Slip Op. 01-88 (CIT July 23, 2001) (Huarong v. the United States), the Department of Commerce (the Department) has prepared these final results of Redetermination on remand with respect to Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Final Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 65 FR 43,290 (July 13, 2000) (98-99 Final Results), and Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the People's Republic of China; Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 65 FR 50,4999 (August 18, 2000) (Amended 98-99 Final Results). The Court directed the Department to redetermine the surrogate value for pallet, and to recalculate the margins accordingly. As a result of this remand the antidumping duty margins for the period of review from February 1, 1998 through January 31, 1999, are:
Shandong Huarong General Group Corporation:
Axes/Adzes.................................. 55.74
Bars/Wedges................................. 27.28
Liaoning Machinery Import & Export Corporation:
Bars/Wedges ................................ 27.18
Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Corporation:
Axes/Adzes.................................. 55.74
Bars/Wedges................................. 139.31
Hammers/Sledges............................. 0.41
Picks/Mattocks.............................. 0.10
We have followed the instructions of the Court and revised the margin calculation program by redetermining the surrogate value for pallet and recalculating the margin accordingly.
In the Amended 98-99 Final Results, the Department used the HTS category 4415.20.00 in the Monthly Statistics of Foreign Trade in India (MSFTI 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, 63 FR 16758, 16765 (April 6, 1998). Upon knowledge that it had used a surrogate value that was previously rejected the Department requested that the Court remand this issue for further consideration. The Court granted this request. On September 7, 2001, we released our Draft Results of Redetermination (Draft Results) to Ames True Temper and its Woodings-Verona operations (the petitioner) and Liaoning Machinery Import & Export Corporation, Shandong Huarong General Group Corporation (Huarong) and Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Corporation (TMC)(collectively, the respondents) for comment. The petitioner submitted comments on September 13, 2001 and the respondents submitted rebuttal comments on September 17, 2001.
As the data in the MSFTI is an insufficient basis for determining a contemporaneous surrogate value of pallet, the Department has decided to use a 1998 pallet wood value from the Indonesian publication Indonesian Foreign Trade Statistics, a source which the Department has used to value pallet wood in recent PRC antidumping duty proceedings. See attachment I. These data allow the Department to calculate a per kilogram surrogate value, on which it can base its factor valuation of the respondents. As the surrogate values were taken from a period contemporaneous with the 1998-1999 period of review, the Department made no adjustments for price changes. Before applying the corrected surrogate value to the factor inputs, the Department removed all surrogate values for pallets from the previous calculations of the margins for Shandong Huarong General Group Corporation (Huarong), Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Corporation (TMC) and Liaoning Machinery Import & Export Corporation (LMC). The Department did this by replacing the previous surrogate value with a value of zero in the selected factors page of the margin calculation. As the Department used various linked pages of a Lotus 123 program in its calculations of the final margins in this review, changing the surrogate value on the factors selected page automatically changed the pallet packing costs on the normal value and margin calculation pages of the calculations of the final margins. By doing the above, the Department was able to leave all other previous calculations done in the Amended 98-99 Final Results unchanged. The remaining normal value on the margin calculation page was thus the same as used in the Amended 98-99 Final Results, except that it was reduced by the entirety of the previous surrogate pallet factor costs. To then recalculate the final margin, the Department introduced the surrogate value for pallets, in U.S. dollars, from the Indonesian Foreign Trade Statistic. As this surrogate value was in U.S. dollars per kilogram, the Department then multiplied this value by the unique per piece pallet consumption rate of each product sold by the respondents. The Department then added this amount to the normal value cited above. By embedding the above calculations in a copy of the original program, the Department was thus able to recalculate the final margin in the exact same manner as done in the Amended 98-99 Final Results. The Department determined to use adverse facts available when determining Huarong's margin for axes/adzes. This adverse facts available margin was based on TMC's calculated margin from this 1998-1999 review, which was 70.15 percent. See Amended 98-99 Final Results. As both TMC and Huarong have challenged the Department's Amended 98-99 Final Results and are thus parties to this redetermination, and because TMC's recalculated rate per this redetermination is now 55.74 percent, we have changed the adverse facts available rate as applied to Huarong to 55.74 percent, as well.
All calculations are attached, as are the results of the redetermination of the margins. See attachment II.
Redetermination Amended Final
Results Margin
Shandong Huarong General Group Corporation:
Axes/Adzes.................................. 55.74 70.15
Bars/Wedges................................. 27.28 28.96
Liaoning Machinery Import & Export Corporation:
Bars/Wedges ................................. 27.18 29.10
Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Corporation:
Axes/Adzes................................. 55.74 70.15
Bars/Wedges................................ 139.31 139.31
Hammers/Sledges............................ 0.41 1.17
Picks/Mattocks............................. 0.10 4.58
The respondents' margin for pallet for the period of February 1, 1998 through January 31, 1999, decreased as stated above as a result of this remand.
Comment 1: Misstatement of Cause for Remand The petitioner states that the Department mischaracterized the original error that was the cause of this redetermination. The petitioner addresses the Department's statement on page two of the Draft Redetermination that the "Department incorrectly used the surrogate value as if the data in the MSFTI were stated in terms of rupees per kilogram." The petitioner states that the Indian data used by the Department in its Amended 98-99 Final Results was already denominated in rupees per kilogram. The petitioner concludes that there is no need for a change in pallet value on the basis of denomination. While the respondents do not challenge the petitioner's statement directly, they do state that it is irrelevant whether the Department portrayed the original cause of this redetermination correctly. The respondents state that the Court granted their request for remand because, as the Department conceded in its brief to the Court, the Indian data had been expressly rejected in a prior segment of this proceeding. See Huarong v United States, Slip Op. 01-88 (CIT July 23, 2001) at 26-27; Defendants Memorandum in Partial Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgement Upon the Agency Record and Appendix, at p. 47, citing Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished and Unfinished, With or Without Handles, From the People's Republic of China; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 63 FR 16758, 16765 (April 6, 1998), at Comment 11. Department's Position: The Department agrees with the petitioner that the Department misstated the cause for this remand. The language has now been changed in the Background section for these final results of Redetermination. However, this inaccurate statement by the Department in the Draft Results has no bearing on the original reason the Court granted a remand, nor on the Department's proposed revaluation of the surrogate pallet value, as outlined in section IV above. Comment 2: Selection of Surrogate Value The petitioner argues that the Department has provided no clear justification for resorting to use of Indonesian surrogate values when Indian data is available. The petitioner asserts that if the Department wishes to use contemporaneous pallet data, it should use the April-August 1998 Indian data selected in the preliminary results of this 1998-1999 POR. The petitioner adds that the Indonesian Foreign Trade Statistics proffers a pallet value of 0.27 U.S. dollars per kilogram (or approximately 12 rupees per kilogram), which is much lower than the pallet value placed on the record by the respondents and is far below any value proposed by any interested party to this review. The respondents assert that the Department's choice to use a value based on 1998 pallet wood value from the Indonesian Foreign Trade Statistics was reasonable. The respondents point out that the petitioner's statement that the Department failed to provide any clear justification for resorting to use of Indonesian surrogate values is contradicted by the Department's explanation in Part IV of the Draft Redetermination that it was using Indonesian data to value pallet because these data provide both pallet weight and value, thus allowing the Department to calculate a per kilogram surrogate value. The respondents add that the petitioner's statement that the pallet value from the Indonesian Foreign Trade Statistics is lower than the pallet value placed on the record by any party is irrelevant. The respondents assert that the Department is required to select the "best available information regarding the values" of factors. See Section 773(c)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended. Further, the respondents state that the petitioner failed to identify any facts to show that the data from the Indonesian Foreign Trade Statistics is not the best available information. Finally, the respondents' suggestion that the Department should use the surrogate value used in the preliminary results of this 1998-1999 POR ignores the fact that the Department already rejected that data in the Amended 98-99 Final Results because it was "flawed" and "unreasonable." See Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Administrative Reviews of Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the People's Republic of China-February 1, 1998 through January 31, 1999, at p. 18. Department's Position: The Department will continue to base the pallet value based on data contained in the Indonesian Foreign Trade Statistics. The Department prefers to use contemporaneous data, where available. Therefore, the Department will continue to use the 1998 pallet wood value from the Indonesian publication Indonesia Foreign Trade Statistics, which the Department has used to value pallet wood in the most recent heavy forged hand tools review and three other recent Chinese antidumping duty proceedings. See Heavy Forged Hand Tools From the People's Republic of China; Final Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Determination Not To Revoke in Part, 66 FR 48026 (September 17, 2001) and accompanying Decision Memo at Comment 14; Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of Fourth New Shipper Review and Rescission of Third Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 66 FR 27063 (May 16, 2001) and accompanying Decision Memo at Comment 3; Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From the People's Republic of China; Final Results of 1998-1999 Administrative Review, Partial Recision of Review, and Determination Not to Revoke Order in Part, 66 FR 1953 (January 10, 2001) and accompanying Decision Memo at Comment 10; and Persulfates from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 66 FR 18439, 18443 (April 9, 2001). The Department is utilizing this Indonesian data because it believes pallets purchased in Indonesia are as representative as pallets in India of the pallets used by the respondents. Indonesia was identified by the Department as a country "equally comparable in terms of economic development." See Memorandum from Jeff May to Thomas Futtner re: Antidumping Duty Review of Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the People's Republic of China: Nonmarket Economy Status and Surrogate Country Selection (August 31, 2000). Although India is the primary surrogate in this review, as stated above, it is our practice to use data from another country when data from the primary surrogate is found to be unreliable. In this case, contemporaneous data from India is unreliable because no value per kilogram can be calculated. See Surrogate Values Selected in the Preliminary Results of the Eighth Administrative Reviews of Certain Heavy Forged Hand Tools From the People's Republic of China (Surrogate Value Memo). As stated above, this practice of using Indonesian import data is particularly common when the Department must identify a surrogate value for pallets used by Chinese companies. Even though we found no evidence of Indonesian production of heavy forged hand tools, this does not adversely affect its reliability as a producer of pallets. The Department also finds irrelevant the petitioner's assertion that the Department's proposed surrogate value for pallets is much less than those previously on the record. What the Department does find relevant is the fact that the surrogate value for pallets used in the preliminary results of this 1998-1999 POR, which the petitioner proposes using, was incorrectly calculated. Further, the MSFTI data on which these preliminary results were based provides no information regarding weight and thus cannot be used to provide a surrogate value per kilogram. See Surrogate Value Memo. Regarding the value the respondents placed on the record on March 28, 2000, this value is from a period that predates the end of this POR by approximately four years and is thus dated and stale. See Letter from Robert T. Hume to William M. Daley re: Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, From the People's Republic of China - Surrogate Values. In contrast, the Department's proposed surrogate value from Indonesia is taken from a period contemporaneous with the POR. Further, the Department notes that the petitioner was provided with opportunities to provide surrogate value information for pallets, and never did so. Finally, while the petitioner states that the value proposed by the Department is less than any value put on the record by any other interested party to this review, the petitioner fails to even attempt to demonstrate that this Indonesian surrogate value is not the best available information or is aberrational. VII. RESULTS OF REMAND DETERMINATION As a result of this redetermination, the effective date of these final results of Redetermination is February 1, 1998, the beginning date of the 8th administrative review of Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, from the People's Republic of China.
Faryar Shirzad (Date) ATTACHMENT I: PALLET SURROGATE VALUE ATTACHMENT II: MARGIN CALCULATIONS ATTACHMENT II.A.: LMC MARGIN CALCULATIONS ATTACHMENT II.B.: HUARONG MARGIN CALCULATIONS ATTACHMENT II.C.: TMC MARGIN CALCULATIONS
Amended Margin New Margin
Shandong Huarong General Group Corporation:
Axes/Adzes................................... 70.15 55.74
Bars/Wedges.................................. 28.96 27.28
Liaoning Machinery Import & Export Corporation:
Bars/Wedges ................................. 29.10 27.18
Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Corporation:
Axes/Adzes................................... 70.15 55.74
Bars/Wedges.................................. 139.31 139.31
Hammers/Sledges.............................. 1.17 0.41
Picks/Mattocks............................... 4.58 0.10
Shandong Machinery Import & Export Corporation:
Axes/Adzes..................................... 70.15 55.74
Bars/Wedges.................................... 139.31 139.31
Hammers/Sledges................................ 27.71 27.71
Picks/Mattocks................................. 98.77 98.77
PRC-wide rates:
Axes/Adzes..................................... 70.15 55.74
Bars/Wedges.................................... 139.31 139.31
Hammers/Sledges................................ 27.71 27.71
Picks/Mattocks................................. 98.77 98.77
|