[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 163 (Tuesday, August 25, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42852-42857]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20494]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-954, A-201-837]


Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's Republic of 
China and Mexico: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 25, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terre Keaton Stefanova at (202) 482-
1280 or David Goldberger at (202) 482-4136 (Mexico), AD/CVD Operations, 
Office 2; Jerry Huang at (202) 482-4047 or Paul Walker at (202) 482-
0413 (China), AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petitions

    On July 29, 2009, the Department of Commerce (the ``Department'') 
received petitions concerning imports of certain magnesia carbon bricks 
(``magnesia carbon bricks'') from the People's Republic of China 
(``PRC'') and Mexico filed in proper form by Resco Products, Inc. 
(``Petitioner''). See Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping 
Duties: Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's Republic of 
China, dated July 29, 2009 (``AD PRC Petition''); Petition for the 
Imposition of Antidumping Duties: Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from 
Mexico, dated July 29, 2009 (``AD Mexico Petition'')(collectively, the 
``Petitions''). On August 4 and 12, 2009, the Department issued 
additional requests for information and clarification of certain areas 
of the Petitions. Based on the Department's requests, Petitioner timely 
filed additional information pertaining to the Petitions on August 10 
and 14, 2009 (hereinafter, ``Supplement to the AD PRC Petition,'' and 
``Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition,'' both dated August 10, 2009, 
and ``Second Supplement to the AD PRC Petition,'' and ``Second 
Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition,''

[[Page 42853]]

both dated August 14, 2009). The period of investigation (``POI'') for 
the PRC is January 1, 2009, through June 30, 2009. The POI for Mexico 
is July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009. See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the ``Act''), Petitioner alleges that imports of magnesia 
carbon bricks from the PRC and Mexico 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 Act, and that such imports are materially 
injuring, or threatening material injury to, an industry in the United 
States.
    The Department finds that Petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf 
of the domestic industry because Petitioner is an interested party, as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and has demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the antidumping duty 
investigations that Petitioner is requesting the Department to initiate 
(see ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions'' section 
below).

Scope of Investigations

    The products covered by these investigations are magnesia carbon 
bricks from the PRC and Mexico. For a full description of the scope of 
the investigations, please see the ``Scope of Investigations,'' in 
Appendix I of this notice.

Comments on Scope of Investigations

    During our review of the Petitions, 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 (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 September 8, 2009.\1\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ September 8, 2009, is the first business day after twenty 
calendar days from the signature date of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on Product Characteristics for Antidumping Duty Questionnaires

    We are requesting comments from interested parties regarding the 
appropriate physical characteristics of magnesia carbon bricks 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 magnesia carbon bricks, it may be that only a 
select few product characteristics take into account commercially 
meaningful physical characteristics. In addition, interested parties 
may comment on the order in which the physical characteristics should 
be used in product matching. Generally, the Department attempts to list 
the most important physical characteristics first and the least 
important characteristics last.
    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 September 8, 2009. 
Additionally, rebuttal comments must be received by September 15, 2009.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(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 732(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.
    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 (see 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, 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 magnesia carbon bricks constitute a 
single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in 
terms

[[Page 42854]]

of that domestic like product. For a discussion of the domestic like 
product analysis in this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation 
Initiation Checklist: Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the PRC (``PRC 
Initiation Checklist'') at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support 
for the Petitions Covering Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the 
People's Republic of China and Mexico, and Antidumping Duty 
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Magnesia Carbon Bricks from Mexico 
(``Mexico Initiation Checklist'') at Attachment II, Analysis of 
Industry Support for the Petitions Covering Certain Magnesia Carbon 
Bricks from the People's Republic of China and Mexico, dated 
concurrently with this notice and on file in the Central Records Unit 
(``CRU''), Room 1117 of the main Department of Commerce building.
    In determining whether Petitioner has standing under section 
732(c)(4)(A) of the 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'', in Appendix I of this 
notice. To establish industry support, Petitioner provided its own 2008 
production of the domestic like product, as well as the production of 
the two supporters of the Petitions, and compared this to the estimated 
total production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic 
industry. See Petitions, at Exhibits 2-4, Supplement to the AD PRC 
Petition, Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition, dated August 10, 2009, 
at 8-12, and Exhibits R2-R-6, Second Supplement to the AD PRC Petition, 
and Second Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition, dated August 14, 2009, 
at 1-2. Petitioner estimated total 2008 production of the domestic like 
product based on its own production data, data from the two supporters 
of the Petitions, and knowledge of the U.S. industry. See Petitions, at 
Exhibits 2-4, Supplement to the AD PRC Petition, Supplement to the AD 
Mexico Petition, dated August 10, 2009, at 8-12, and Exhibits R2-R-6, 
Second Supplement to the AD PRC Petition, and Second Supplement to the 
AD Mexico Petition, dated August 14, 2009, at 1-2; see also PRC 
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II, and Mexico Initiation Checklist 
at Attachment II.
    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 (e.g., 
polling). See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also PRC Initiation 
Checklist at Attachment II, and Mexico Initiation Checklist at 
Attachment II. Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the 
statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) 
of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the 
Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of 
the domestic like product. See PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment 
II, and Mexico Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. Finally, the 
domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for 
industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the 
domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions 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 Petitions. Accordingly, the Department determines 
that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within 
the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act. See id.
    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 Act and it has demonstrated sufficient 
industry support with respect to the antidumping duty investigations 
that it is requesting the Department initiate. See id.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    Petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the domestic 
like product is being materially injured, or is threatened with 
material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject merchandise 
sold at less than normal value (``NV''). In addition, Petitioner 
alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold 
provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.
    Petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share, underselling and price depressing 
and suppressing effects, increased import penetration, lost sales and 
revenue, reduced production, reduced capacity utilization, reduced 
shipments, reduced employment, and overall poor 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. See PRC 
Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and 
Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Petitions Covering 
Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's Republic of China and 
Mexico, and Mexico Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, Analysis of 
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 
Petitions Covering Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's 
Republic of China and Mexico.

Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

    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 magnesia carbon bricks from 
the PRC and Mexico. The sources of data for the deductions and 
adjustments relating to the U.S. price, the factors of production (for 
the PRC) and constructed value (``CV'') (for Mexico) are also discussed 
in the country-specific initiation checklists. See PRC Initiation 
Checklist and Mexico Initiation Checklist.

U.S. Price

The PRC

    For the PRC, Petitioner calculated export price (``EP'') based on 
documentation of actual sales and offers for sale obtained from a 
confidential source. See PRC Initiation Checklist; see also AD PRC 
Petition at Exhibit 11, and Second Supplement to the AD PRC Petition, 
dated August 14, 2009, at 4. Petitioner made adjustments for 
distributor mark-ups, international freight and U.S. movement expenses. 
See PRC Initiation Checklist; see also Second Supplement to the AD PRC 
Petition, at Exhibit R-11.

Mexico

    For Mexico, Petitioner based U.S. price on POI prices of magnesia 
carbon bricks produced by the Mexican manufacturer RHI-Refmex S.A. de 
C.V. (``RHI-Refmex''). Petitioner substantiated the U.S. prices used 
with affidavits from persons who obtained the information. Petitioner 
believes that these prices include selling expenses incurred by RHI-
Refmex's U.S. affiliate but conservatively assumed such expenses to be 
zero in its calculation of net U.S. price. Petitioner deducted, where 
appropriate, freight expenses (U.S. inland freight), but made no other 
adjustments. See Mexico Initiation Checklist; see also AD Mexico 
Petition

[[Page 42855]]

at 15, Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition, at 21 and Exhibits R-8, R-
10 and R-11, and Second Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition, at 3.

Normal Value

The PRC

    Petitioner states that the PRC is a non-market economy (``NME'') 
country and no determination to the contrary has been made by the 
Department. See AD PRC Petition, at 14. In accordance with section 
771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the presumption of NME status remains in 
effect until revoked by the Department. The presumption of NME status 
for the PRC has not been revoked by the Department and, therefore, 
remains in effect for purposes of the initiation of this investigation. 
Accordingly, the NV of the product for the PRC investigation is 
appropriately based on factors of production valued in a surrogate 
market-economy country in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. In 
the course of the PRC investigation, all parties, including the public, 
will have the opportunity to provide relevant information related to 
the issue of the PRC's NME status and the granting of separate rates to 
individual exporters.
    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 of 
comparable merchandise; and 3) information required to calculate unit 
factor costs and financial ratios is readily available. See AD PRC 
Petition at 14-16, and Exhibit 10. Based on the information provided by 
Petitioner, we believe that it is appropriate to use India as a 
surrogate country for initiation purposes. After initiation of the 
investigation, interested parties will have the opportunity to submit 
comments regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly 
available information to value factors of production within 40 days 
after the date of publication of the preliminary determination.
    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 its own 
consumption rates for producing magnesia carbon bricks in 2008. See AD 
PRC Petition at 17, and Exhibit 12. In calculating NV, Petitioner based 
the quantity of each of the inputs used to manufacture and pack 
magnesia carbon bricks in the PRC on its own industry knowledge and 
production experience during the POI. See AD PRC Petition at 17, and 
Exhibit 12. Petitioner states that the actual usage rates of the 
foreign manufacturers of magnesia carbon bricks are not reasonably 
available; however, Petitioner notes that to the best of Petitioner's 
knowledge, the production of magnesia carbon bricks in China relies on 
similar basic manufacturing processes as in the United States. See AD 
PRC Petition at 17.
    Petitioner determined the consumption quantities of all raw 
materials and packing materials based on its own production experience. 
See AD PRC Petition at 17, and Exhibit 12. Petitioner valued the 
factors of production based on reasonably available, public surrogate 
country data, specifically, Indian import statistics from the World 
Trade Atlas (``WTA''). See Supplement to the AD PRC Petition, at 
Exhibit R-8. Petitioner excluded from these import statistics imports 
from countries previously determined by the Department to be NME 
countries and from Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and Thailand as 
the Department has previously excluded prices from these countries 
because they maintain broadly available, non-industry-specific export 
subsidies. See id. In addition, the Petitioner made currency 
conversions, where necessary, based on the POI-average rupee/U.S. 
dollar exchange rate, as reported on the Department's website. See 
Supplement to the AD PRC Petition, at 16 and Exhibit R-8. Petitioner 
determined labor costs using the labor consumption, in hours, derived 
from its own experience. See AD PRC Petition at Exhibit 12. Petitioner 
valued labor costs using the Department's NME Wage Rate for the PRC at 
http://ia.ita.doc.gov/wages/05wages/05wages-051608.html. See Supplement 
to the AD PRC Petition, at Exhibit R-8. For purposes of initiation, the 
Department determines that the surrogate values used by Petitioner are 
reasonably available and, thus, acceptable for purposes of initiation.
    Petitioner determined electricity costs using the electricity 
consumption, in kilowatt hours, derived from its own experience. See AD 
PRC Petition at Exhibit 12. Petitioner valued electricity using the 
Indian electricity rate reported by the Central Electric Authority of 
the Government of India. See Supplement to the AD PRC Petition, at 16 
and Exhibit R-8.
    Petitioner determined natural gas costs using the natural gas 
consumption derived from its own experience. See AD PRC Petition at 
Exhibit 12. Petitioner valued natural gas using Indian import 
statistics from WTA. See Supplement to the AD PRC Petition, at Exhibit 
R-8.
    Petitioner based factory overhead, selling, general and 
administrative (``SG&A''), and profit on data from IFGL Refractories 
Ltd. (``IFGL''), a producer of refractory products, for the fiscal year 
April 2007 through March 2008. See AD PRC Petition at Exhibit 13. 
Petitioner states that, as a manufacturer of non-subject products 
within the same general category of merchandise as magnesia carbon 
bricks, IFGL's main operation in India can be considered a reasonable 
surrogate. See Supplement to the AD PRC Petition, at 17-18. Therefore, 
for purposes of the initiation, the Department finds Petitioner's use 
of IFGL's unconsolidated financial ratios appropriate.

Mexico

    Petitioner calculated NV for magnesia carbon bricks using CV 
because Petitioner was unable to obtain home market or third country 
prices. See AD Mexico Petition at 13.
    Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the cost of 
manufacturing (``COM''), SG&A expenses, packing expenses, and profit. 
In calculating COM and packing, Petitioner based the quantity of each 
of the inputs used to manufacture and pack magnesia carbon bricks in 
Mexico on its own production experience during 2008. See AD Mexico 
Petition at 14, and Exhibits 9 and 11, Supplement to the AD Mexico 
Petition, at Exhibit R-9, and Second Supplement to the AD Mexico 
Petition, at Exhibit R-14. Petitioner notes that, to the best of its 
knowledge, the magnesia carbon bricks manufacturing process in Mexico 
is very similar to its magnesia carbon bricks manufacturing process. 
Accordingly, Petitioner states that it is reasonable to estimate the 
Mexican producer's usage rates based on its own usage rates experienced 
in producing magnesia carbon bricks. Petitioner also states that 
certain ``brands'' (i.e., models) of RHI-Refmex's magnesia carbon 
bricks are identical or very similar to its corresponding brands in 
terms of quantity and type of raw materials used, energy consumed, and 
the composition of the finished product. See AD Mexico Petition at 14 
and 15, and Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition, at 14 and Exhibit R-
9.
    Petitioner multiplied the usage quantities of the inputs used to 
manufacture and pack magnesia carbon bricks by the Mexican values of 
those inputs based on publicly available data. See AD Mexico Petition, 
at 15 and Exhibit 10, Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition, at Exhibit 
R-8, and

[[Page 42856]]

Second Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition, at Exhibit R-14.
    Raw materials (e.g., magnesite) are significant inputs used in the 
production of magnesia carbon bricks. Petitioner determined the 
consumption quantities of all raw materials and packing materials based 
on its own production experience. See AD Mexico Petition, at 14, and 
Exhibits 9 and 11, and Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition, at Exhibit 
R-9. Petitioner valued all raw materials and packing materials using 
Mexican import statistics as reflected in the WTA data for the period 
from June 2008 through May 2009, the most recent data available. 
Petitioner excluded from these import statistics imports from countries 
previously determined by the Department to be NME countries and from 
India, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and Thailand, as the 
Department has previously excluded prices from these countries because 
they maintain broadly available, non-industry-specific export 
subsidies. See AD Mexico Petition at Exhibit 10, and Supplement to the 
AD Mexico Petition, at Exhibit R-8.
    Petitioner determined labor costs using the labor consumption in 
hours derived from its own experience. Petitioner relied on Mexican 
wage rate data available from the Import Administration website at 
http://ia.ita.doc.gov/wages to determine the average wage rate in 
Mexico. See AD Mexico Petition at 15, and Supplement to the AD Mexico 
Petition, at 17.
    Petitioner determined the costs of electricity and natural gas 
using consumption amounts derived from its own experience. Petitioner 
valued electricity using the POI Mexican electricity rates for medium-
sized enterprises reported by the Mexico Secretary of Energy at http://www.sener.gob.mx. Petitioner converted the Mexican electricity rates 
into U.S. dollars using the Department's POI exchange rates. Petitioner 
valued natural gas using Mexican import statistics as reflected in the 
WTA data for the period from June 2008 through May 2009, the most 
recent data available. See AD Mexico Petition at Exhibit 10, and 
Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition, at 18 and Exhibit R-8.
    To calculate factory overhead, SG&A expenses, and profit, 
Petitioner relied on the financial statements of a Mexican producer of 
ceramic products, Grupo Lamosa, S.A.B. de C.V., a company that produces 
products in the same general category of merchandise as magnesia carbon 
bricks. See Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition, at Exhibit R-8, and 
Second Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition, at Exhibit R-13. See also 
Mexico Initiation Checklist.

Fair-Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by Petitioner, there is reason to 
believe that imports of magnesia carbon bricks from the PRC and Mexico 
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 Act, the estimated dumping 
margins for magnesia carbon bricks from the PRC range from 112 percent 
to 349 percent. See PRC Initiation Checklist. Based on a comparison of 
U.S. price and CV calculated in accordance with section 773(a)(4) of 
the Act, the estimated dumping margins for magnesia carbon bricks from 
Mexico range from 153 percent to 295 percent. See Mexico Initiation 
Checklist; see also Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition, at Exhibit R-
10, and Second Supplement to the AD Mexico Petition, at Exhibit R-14 
and R-15.

Initiation of Antidumping Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the Petitions on magnesia carbon 
bricks from the PRC and Mexico, the Department finds that the Petitions 
meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are 
initiating antidumping duty investigations to determine whether imports 
of magnesia carbon bricks from the PRC and Mexico 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 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.

Targeted-Dumping Allegations

    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). See Withdrawal of the Regulatory Provisions Governing 
Targeted Dumping in Antidumping Duty Investigations, 73 FR 74930 
(December 10, 2008). The Department stated that ``{w{time} ithdrawal 
will allow the Department to exercise the discretion intended by the 
statute and, thereby, develop a practice that will allow interested 
parties to pursue all statutory avenues of relief in this area.'' See 
id. at 74931.
    In order to accomplish this objective, if any interested party 
wishes to make a targeted- dumping allegation in any of these 
investigations pursuant to section 777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act, such 
allegations are due no later than 45 days before the scheduled date of 
the country-specific preliminary determination.

Respondent Selection

The PRC

    For this investigation, the Department will request quantity and 
value information from all known exporters and producers identified 
with complete contact information in the AD PRC 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. See Circular Welded Austenitic 
Stainless Pressure Pipe from the People's Republic of China: Initiation 
of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 73 FR 10221, 10225 (February 26, 
2008); Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Certain Artist 
Canvas From the People's Republic of China, 70 FR 21996, 21999 (April 
28, 2005). The Department will post the quantity and value 
questionnaire along with the filing instructions on the Import 
Administration website at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-highlights-and-news.html, and a response to the quantity and value questionnaire is 
due no later than September 10, 2009. Also, the Department will send 
the quantity and value questionnaire to those PRC companies identified 
in the AD PRC Petition, at Exhibit 9.

Mexico

    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 6902.10.10.00 and 6902.10.50.00, the two 
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 Federal Register notice and 
make our decision regarding respondent selection within

[[Page 42857]]

20 days of publication of this notice. The Department invites comments 
regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within ten days of 
publication of this Federal Register notice.
    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 website at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/apo.

Separate Rates

    In order to obtain separate-rate status in NME investigations, 
exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate status application. 
See our practice, described in Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates 
Practice and Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping 
Investigations involving Non-Market Economy Countries, dated April 5, 
2005 (``Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin''), available on 
the Department's website at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf. 
Based on our experience in processing the separate-rate applications in 
previous antidumping duty investigations, we have modified the 
application for this investigation to make it more administrable and 
easier for applicants to complete. See, e.g., Initiation of Antidumping 
Duty Investigation: Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From the 
People's Republic of China, 72 FR 43591, 43594-95 (August 6, 2007). The 
specific requirements for submitting the separate-rate application in 
this investigation are outlined in detail in the application itself, 
which will be available on the Department's website at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-highlights-and-news.html on the date of publication 
of this initiation notice in the Federal Register. The separate-rate 
application will be due 60 days after publication of this initiation 
notice. For exporters and producers who submit a separate-rate status 
application and subsequently are selected as mandatory respondents, 
these exporters and producers will no longer be eligible for 
consideration for separate rate status unless they respond to all parts 
of the questionnaire as mandatory respondents. As noted in the 
``Respondent Selection'' section above, the Department requires that 
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. 
The quantity and value questionnaire will be available on the 
Department's website at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-highlights-and-news.html on the date of the publication of this initiation notice in 
the Federal Register.

Use of Combination Rates in an NME Investigation

    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{time} 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 and produced by a firm that 
supplied the exporter during the period of investigation.
See Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin at 6 (emphasis 
added).

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public versions of the Petitions have been 
provided to the representatives of the Governments of the PRC and 
Mexico. Because of the large number of producers/exporters identified 
in the AD PRC Petition, the Department considers the service of the 
public version of the AD PRC Petition to the foreign producers/
exporters satisfied by the delivery of the public version to the 
Government of the PRC, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

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

Preliminary Determinations by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, no later than September 14, 
2009, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of magnesia 
carbon bricks from the PRC and Mexico 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 Act.

    Dated: August 18, 2009.
Carole Showers,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations.

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigations

    Imports covered by this petition consist of certain chemically 
bonded (resin or pitch), magnesia carbon bricks with a magnesia 
component of at least 70 percent magnesia (``MgO'') by weight, 
regardless of the source of raw materials for the MgO, with carbon 
levels ranging from trace amounts to 30 percent by weight, regardless 
of enhancements, (for example, magnesia carbon bricks can be enhanced 
with coating, grinding, tar impregnation or coking, high temperature 
heat treatments, anti-slip treatments or metal casing) and regardless 
of whether or not anti-oxidants are present (for example, antioxidants 
can be added to the mix from trace amounts to 15 percent by weight as 
various metals, metal alloys, and metal carbides). Certain magnesia 
carbon bricks that are the subject of this investigation are currently 
classifiable under subheadings 6902.10.10.00, 6902.10.50.00, 
6815.91.00.00, and 6815.99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States (HTSUS). While HTSUS subheadings are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, the written description is 
dispositive.

[FR Doc. E9-20494 Filed 8-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S