17418 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices 

1See Galvanized Steel Wire From the People’s 

Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative 

Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment 

of Final Determination With Final Antidumping 

Determination, 76 FR 55031 (September 6, 2011) 

(Preliminary Determination). 

2Public versions of all business proprietary 

documents and all public documents are on file 

electronically via Import Administration’s 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized 

Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). Access to 

IA ACCESS is available in the Central Records Unit 

(CRU), room 7046 of the main Department of 

Commerce building. 

ITC Notification 

In accordance with section 735(d) of 

the Act, we have notified the ITC of our 

final determination. As our final 

determination is affirmative, the ITC 

will determine within 45 days whether 

imports of the subject merchandise are 

causing material injury, or threat of 

material injury, to an industry in the 

United States. If the ITC determines that 

material injury or threat of injury does 

not exist, the proceeding will be 

terminated and all securities posted will 

be refunded or canceled. If the ITC 

determines that such injury does exist, 

the Department will issue an 

antidumping duty order directing CBP 

to assess antidumping duties on all 

imports of the subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the effective 

date of the suspension of liquidation. 

Return or Destruction of Proprietary 

Information 

This notice will serve as the only 

reminder to parties subject to 

administrative protective order (APO) of 

their responsibility concerning the 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 

written notification of return/ 

destruction of APO materials or 

conversion to judicial protective order is 

hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and the terms of an 

APO is a sanctionable violation. 

We are issuing and publishing this 

determination and notice in accordance 

with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the 

Act. 

Dated: March 16, 2012. 

Paul Piquado, 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix—Issues in Decision 

Memorandum 

General Issues 

1. Targeted Dumping 

2. Zeroing in Average-to-Transaction 

Comparisons 

3. Adjustments to Expenses Paid to Affiliated 

Parties 

4. Classification of Return Freight Expenses 

Company-Specific Issues 

Daewoo 

5. General and Administrative Expenses for 

Daewoo 

LG 

6. LG’s Corrected Control Numbers 

7. LG’s Home Market Rebates 

8. LG’s Home Market Advertising Expenses 

9. LG’s Home Market Payment Dates 

10. LG’s U.S. Payment Dates 

11. LG’s U.S. Billing Adjustments 

12. LG’s U.S. Lump Sum and Sell-Out 

Rebates 

13. LG’s Non-Product-Specific Accruals for 

U.S. Rebates 

14. LG’s U.S. Freight Expenses 

15. LG’s U.S. Indirect Selling Expenses 

16. LG’s U.S. Inventory Carrying Costs 

17. LG’s Materials Purchased from Affiliated 

Parties 

18. LG’s Research and Development (R&D) 

Expenses 

Samsung 

19. Critical Circumstances 

20. Use of Total Adverse Facts Available 

(AFA) for Samsung 

21. Samsung’s Early Payment Discounts in 

the Home Market 

22. Samsung’s Home Market Rebates on 

Discontinued Models and Kimchi 

Refrigerators 

23. Samsung’s Remaining Home Market 

Rebates 

24. Samsung’s Home Market Advertising 

Expenses 

25. Samsung’s Home Market Warranty 

Expenses 

26. Corrections Presented at the Start of 

Samsung’s Sales Verifications 

27. Samsung’s U.S. Rebates 

28. Treatment of Payments for Defective 

Samsung Merchandise 

29. The Denominator of Various Expense 

Calculations for Samsung 

30. Samsung’s U.S. Credit Periods 

31. Samsung’s U.S. Interest Rate 

32. Samsung’s U.S. Indirect Selling Expenses 

33. Classification of Certain Costs as 

Packaging or Packing for Samsung 

34. Corrections Presented at the Start of 

Samsung’s Cost Verification 

35. SEC’s G&A Ratio 

36. Samsung’s Scrap Sales 

37. Samsung’s Financing Costs 

38. Samsung’s Materials Purchased from 

Affiliated Parties 

39. Samsung’s R&D Expenses 

[FR Doc. 2012–7237 Filed 3–23–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–570–976] 

Galvanized Steel Wire From the 

People’s Republic of China: Final 

Affirmative Countervailing Duty 

Determination 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) determines that 

countervailable subsidies are being 

provided to producers and exporters of 

galvanized steel wire (galvanized wire) 

from the People’s Republic of China (the 

PRC). For information on the estimated 

subsidy rates, see the ‘‘Suspension of 

Liquidation’’ section of this notice. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 26, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nicholas Czajkowski or David Lindgren, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, Room 7866, 14th Street and 

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: 202–482–1395 or 

202–482–3870, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The U.S. producers that filed the 

petition for this investigation are Davis 

Wire Corporation, Johnstown Wire 

Technologies, Inc., Mid-South Wire 

Company, Inc., National Standard, LLC, 

and Oklahoma Steel & Wire Company, 

Inc. (collectively, Petitioners). This 

investigation covers 40 programs. The 

mandatory respondents in this 

investigation are: (1) M&M Industries 

Co. Ltd. (M&M); (2) Shandong Hualing 

Hardware and Tool Co., Ltd. (Hualing); 

(3) Shanghai Bao Zhang Industry Co. 

Ltd. and its cross-owned affiliated 

companies Anhui Bao Zhang Metal 

Products Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Li Chao 

Industry Co., Ltd. (collectively, the Bao 

Zhang Companies); and, (4) Tianjin 

Huayuan Metal Wire Products Co., Ltd. 

and its cross-owned affiliated 

companies Tianjin Tianxin Metal 

Products Co., Ltd. and Tianjin Mei Jia 

Hua Trade Co., Ltd. (collectively, the 

Huayuan Companies). 

Period of Investigation 

The period of investigation for which 

we are measuring subsidies is January 1, 

2010, through December 31, 2010. 

Case History 

The following events have occurred 

since the Department published the 

Preliminary Determination 1 on 

September 6, 2011.2 The Huayuan 

Companies filed a ministerial error 

allegation on September 7, 2011, and, 

on September 12, 2011, Petitioners filed 

responses to the Huayuan Companies’ 

allegation. On September 29, 2011, the 

Department released its analysis of the 

ministerial error allegation, finding that 

no ministerial errors were made in the 

Preliminary Determination. Petitioners, 

the Huayuan Companies and the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices 17419 

3See Galvanized Steel Wire From the People’s 

Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement 

of Final Determination, 76 FR 68407 (November 4, 

2011); see also Galvanized Steel Wire From Mexico: 

Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value and Postponement of Final 

Determination, 76 FR 68422 (November 4, 2011). 

4 See Memorandum to File ‘‘Decisions Regarding 

Scope Comments from Investigations of Galvanized 

Steel Wire from the PRC and Mexico,’’ dated 

December 15, 2011. 

5See GPX Int’l Tires Corp. v. United States, 666 

F.3d 732 (Fed. Cir. 2011). 

6See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant 

Secretary for Import Administration from Barbara E. 

Tillman, Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, 

through Christian Marsh Deputy Assistant Secretary 

for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations ‘‘Countervailing Duty Investigation on 

Galvanized Steel Wire from the People’s Republic 

of China: Post-Preliminary Analysis 

Memorandum,’’ dated January 17, 2012. 

7AMH’s and Petitioners comments on the scope 

of the investigation are fully addressed in 

Galvanized Steel Wire from the People’s Republic 

of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value and accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at Comment 3, issued concurrently 

with this final determination. 

8These comments are fully addressed in Notice 

of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 

Value: Galvanized Steel Wire from Mexico and 

accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comments 3 and 4, issued concurrently with this 

final determination. 

Government of the People’s Republic of 

China (GOC) filed requests for a hearing 

on September 14, 22 and October 6, 

2011, respectively, and, on January 30, 

2012, all three parties withdrew their 

requests for a hearing. 

Between September 15 and October 

21, 2011, the GOC, Petitioners, the Bao 

Zhang Companies and the Huayuan 

Companies filed factual information 

submissions. Except for the Bao Zhang 

Companies’ October 21, 2011 wire rod 

benchmark submission, all were 

rejected by the Department as untimely 

under 19 CFR 351.301(c). The 

Department informed Petitioners they 

could re-file certain portions of their 

rejected material, which they did on 

October 31, 2011. On September 19, 

2011, the Department issued 

supplemental questionnaires to the 

GOC, the Bao Zhang Companies, and 

the Huayuan Companies, which, in 

turn, submitted responses between 

September 28 and October 3, 2011. On 

October 7, 2011, the Department issued 

additional supplemental questionnaires 

to the Bao Zhang Companies and the 

GOC, with responses filed on October 

13 and 14, 2011, respectively. Moreover, 

on October 14, 2011, Department issued 

a supplemental questionnaire to the 

Huayuan Companies, which filed a 

response on October 24, 2011. 

Between October 21 and November 2, 

2011, the Department issued verification 

outlines to the GOC, the Bao Zhang 

Companies, the Huayuan Companies 

and M&M. On October 24, 2011, 

Petitioners filed pre-verification 

comments. The Department conducted 

verification of the Bao Zhang 

Companies and the GOC from October 

31 to November 8, 2011. Although 

scheduled for verification, the Huayuan 

Companies and M&M verbally informed 

the Department on November 3, 2011 

that they would not participate in 

verification; a letter filed on November 

9, 2011 stated the reasons for their 

decision not to participate. The Bao 

Zhang Companies filed minor 

corrections on November 4, 2011, and 

on November 10 and 15, 2011, the Bao 

Zhang Companies and the GOC, 

respectively, timely filed verification 

exhibits. The Department issued 

verification reports for the Bao Zhang 

Companies and the GOC on December 

22, 2011. 

With respect to scope issues, on 

November 2, 2011, Qingdao Ant 

Hardware Manufacturing Co., Ltd. 

(AHM) placed on the record physical 

samples and other information 

pertaining to the scope of the 

investigation, and, on November 16, 

2011, a public viewing of the physical 

samples was held at the Department. On 

December 15, 2011, the Department 

placed on the record of this 

investigation the preliminary 

determinations in the corresponding 

antidumping duty (AD) investigations of 

galvanized wire from the PRC and 

Mexico 3 in which scope comments filed 

prior to the preliminary countervailing 

duty (CVD) determination were 

addressed. When placing these 

preliminary AD determinations on the 

record, we requested that parties submit 

any comments on scope issues when 

they filed their case briefs.4

On January 9, 2012, the GOC 

requested that the Department terminate 

this investigation based on the U.S. 

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

December 19, 2011 ruling in GPX 

International Tire Corp. v. United 

States.5 On January 13, 2012, Petitioners 

filed rebuttal comments in response to 

the GOC’s request for termination. 

The Department issued a postpreliminary analysis memorandum 

regarding three programs on January 17, 

2012.6 Interested parties submitted case 

briefs on January 25 and 31, 2012, and 

rebuttal briefs on February 6, 2012. On 

March 1, 2012, the Department 

requested all parties in all three 

galvanized wire investigations that filed 

scope comments in their case and 

rebuttal briefs to ensure their comments 

were placed on the records of all three 

investigations, and all parties were 

provided an opportunity to comment on 

these scope comments. No additional 

comments on scope issues were 

submitted. 

Scope Comments 

As referenced in the ‘‘Case History’’ 

section above, the Department placed 

the preliminary determinations of the 

companion galvanized wire AD 

investigations from Mexico and the PRC 

on the record of this investigation. In 

those preliminary determinations, the 

Department found that galvanized wire 

with a diameter less than one millimeter 

was subject to the scope of the 

investigation. We invited parties to 

comment on this issue. No additional 

comments were made on this issue. 

Thus, the Department continues to find, 

specifically, that galvanized wire with a 

diameter less than one millimeter but 

equal to or greater than 0.5842 

millimeters is covered by the scope. 

Also, as noted in the ‘‘Case History’’ 

section above, all scope-related 

comments submitted by parties in all 

three investigations in their case and 

rebuttal briefs are on the record of all 

three investigations. Petitioners and 

AHM provided comments on the scope 

and merchandise that is to be covered 

under the scope. Based on our analysis 

of these comments, the Department 

continues to find that hobby wire, 

which is galvanized steel wire, in 

lengths of more than 15 feet, is properly 

included in the scope of this 

investigation.7 Further, certain parties 

in the companion AD investigation 

involving Mexico provided comments 

on the scope and merchandise that is to 

be covered under the scope. Based on 

our analysis of these comments, the 

Department has clarified the scope 

language to include not only circular 

cross section material, but also out-ofround material that meets the circular 

tolerances. In addition, the Department 

has included an additional HTSUS 

subheading as part of the scope 

description.8

Scope of Investigation 

The merchandise covered by this 

investigation is galvanized steel wire. 

See Appendix I for a complete 

description of the scope of this 

investigation. 

Analysis of Subsidy Programs and 

Comments Received 

The subsidy programs under 

investigation and the issues raised in 

the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in 

this investigation are discussed in 

Memorandum to Paul Piquado, 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
17420 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices 

9See ‘‘Non-Cooperative Companies’’ in the ‘‘Use 

of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse 

Inferences’’ section of the Decision Memorandum. 

Determination in the Countervailing 

Duty Investigation of Galvanized Steel 

Wire from the People’s Republic of 

China (Decision Memorandum), which 

is hereby adopted by this notice. A list 

of the subsidy programs and the issues 

that parties raised and to which we 

responded in the Decision 

Memorandum is attached to this notice 

as Appendix II. The Decision 

Memorandum is a public document, 

which is on file electronically via IA 

ACCESS. In addition, a complete 

version of the Decision Memorandum is 

also accessible on the Web at http:// 

ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The signed Decision 

Memorandum and the electronic 

versions of the Decision Memorandum 

are identical in content. 

Use of Facts Otherwise Available, 

Including Adverse Inferences 

For purposes of this final 

determination, we have continued to 

rely on facts available and have 

continued to apply adverse inferences 

in accordance with sections 776(a) and 

(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 

(the Act) with regard to: (1) The CVD 

rate to be applied to the non-cooperative 

mandatory company respondent, 

Hualing; (2) whether the wire rod and 

zinc input producers at issue are 

government authorities that provide 

wire rod and zinc for less than adequate 

remuneration (LTAR); and, (3) the 

GOC’s provision of electricity for LTAR. 

In addition, for the purposes of this final 

determination, we are also applying 

adverse facts available (AFA) to (1) 

determine the CVD rate to be applied to 

the non-cooperating mandatory 

respondents the Huayuan Companies 

and M&M, and (2) determine that the 

Zhabei District ‘‘Save Energy Reduce 

Emission Team’’ award is specific 

pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of 

the Act. A full discussion of our 

decision to apply AFA is presented in 

the Decision Memorandum under the 

section ‘‘Use of Facts Otherwise 

Available and Adverse Inferences.’’ 

Suspension of Liquidation 

In accordance with section 

703(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, we have 

calculated a rate for each individually 

investigated producer/exporter of the 

subject merchandise. Section 

705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act states that for 

companies not investigated, we will 

determine an ‘‘all-others’’ rate equal to 

the weighted average countervailable 

subsidy rates established for exporters 

and producers individually 

investigated, excluding any zero and de 

minimis countervailable subsidy rates, 

and any rates determined entirely under 

section 776 of the Act. 

In this investigation, the only rate not 

based entirely on AFA is the rate 

calculated for the Bao Zhang 

Companies. Consequently, the rate 

calculated for the Bao Zhang Companies 

is also assigned as the ‘‘all-others’’ rate. 

For those non-cooperative companies 

that did not fully participate in this 

investigation, we have determined rates 

based solely on AFA, in accordance 

with sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act.9

Therefore, we determine the total 

estimated net countervailable subsidy 

rates to be: 

Company 

Ad Valorem net 

subsidy rate 

(percent) 

M&M Industries Co. Ltd ................................................................................................................................................................... 223.27 

Shandong Hualing Hardware and Tool Co., Ltd. ............................................................................................................................ 223.27 

Shanghai Bao Zhang Industry Co. Ltd., Anhui Bao Zhang Metal Products Co., Ltd., and Shanghai Li Chao Industry Co., Ltd. 

(collectively the Bao Zhang Companies) ..................................................................................................................................... 19.06 

Tianjin Huayuan Metal Wire Products Co., Ltd., Tianjin Tianxin Metal Products Co., Ltd., and Tianjin Mei Jia Hua Trade Co., 

Ltd. (collectively, the Huayuan Companies) ................................................................................................................................ 223.27 

All Others Rate ................................................................................................................................................................................ 19.06 

As a result of our Preliminary 

Determination and pursuant to section 

703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to 

suspend liquidation of all entries of 

subject merchandise from the PRC 

which were entered or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption on or after 

September 6, 2011, the date of the 

publication of the Preliminary 

Determination in the Federal Register. 

In accordance with section 703(d) of the 

Act, we later issued instructions to CBP 

to discontinue the suspension of 

liquidation for CVD purposes for subject 

merchandise entered, or withdrawn 

from warehouse, on or after January 4, 

2012, but to continue the suspension of 

liquidation of all entries from 

September 6, 2011, through January 3, 

2012. 

We will issue a CVD order and 

reinstate the suspension of liquidation 

under section 706(a) of the Act if the 

U.S. International Trade Commission 

(ITC) issues a final affirmative injury 

determination, and will require a cash 

deposit of estimated CVDs for such 

entries of merchandise in the amounts 

indicated above. If the ITC determines 

that material injury, or threat of material 

injury, does not exist, this proceeding 

will be terminated and all estimated 

duties deposited or securities posted as 

a result of the suspension of liquidation 

will be refunded or canceled. 

ITC Notification 

In accordance with section 705(d) of 

the Act, we will notify the ITC of our 

determination. In addition, we are 

making available to the ITC all nonprivileged and non-proprietary 

information related to this investigation. 

We will allow the ITC access to all 

privileged and business proprietary 

information in our files, provided the 

ITC confirms that it will not disclose 

such information, either publicly or 

under an administrative protective order 

(APO), without the written consent of 

the Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Return or Destruction of Proprietary 

Information 

In the event that the ITC issues a final 

negative injury determination, this 

notice will serve as the only reminder 

to parties subject to an APO of their 

responsibility concerning the 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 

written notification of the return/ 

destruction of APO materials or 

conversion to judicial protective order is 

hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and terms of an 

APO is a violation which is subject to 

sanction. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices 17421 

This determination is issued and 

published pursuant to sections 705(d) 

and 777(i) of the Act. 

Dated: March 19, 2012. 

Paul Piquado, 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I 

Scope of Investigation 

The scope of this investigation covers 

galvanized steel wire which is a cold-drawn 

carbon quality steel product in coils, of 

circular or approximately circular, solid cross 

section with any 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 this 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. 

Specifically excluded from the scope of 

this investigation is galvanized steel wire in 

coils of 15 feet or less which is pre-packed 

in individual retail packages. The products 

subject to this investigation are currently 

classified in subheadings 7217.20.30, 

7217.20.45, or 7217.90.10 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, 7217.20.4580, 

and 7217.90.1000. These products may also 

enter under HTSUS subheadings 

7229.20.0015, 7229.20.0090, 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. 

Appendix II 

Decision Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Subsidy Valuation Information 

A. Period of Investigation 

B. Attribution of Subsidies 

C. Allocation Period 

D. Discount Rates for Allocating NonRecurring Subsidies 

III. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and 

Adverse Inferences 

Non-Cooperative Companies 

Input Producers—Government Authorities 

Under Provision of Wire Rod and Zinc 

for Less Than Adequate Remuneration 

GOC—Provision of Electricity for Less 

Than Adequate Remuneration 

GOC—Specificity of Zhabei District ‘‘Save 

Energy Reduce Emission Team’’ Award 

Program 

IV. Analysis of Programs 

A. Programs Determined To Be 

Countervailable 

1. Provision of Wire Rod for Less Than 

Adequate Remuneration 

2. Provision of Zinc for Less Than 

Adequate Remuneration 

3. Provision of Electricity for Less Than 

Adequate Remuneration 

4. Export Grants From Local Governments 

5. Zhabei District ‘‘Save Energy Reduce 

Emission Team’’ Award Program 

B. Program Determined Not To Confer a 

Benefit During the POI 

Export Subsidies Characterized as ‘‘VAT 

Rebates’’ 

C. Program for Which the Benefit Has No 

Impact on the Subsidy Rate 

Exemption From City Construction Tax 

and Education Tax for Foreign Invested 

Enterprises 

D. Programs Determined To Be Not Used 

1. Policy Loans to the Galvanized Wire 

Industry 

2. Preferential Loans for Key Projects and 

Technologies 

3. Preferential Loans and Directed Credit 

4. Preferential Lending to Galvanized Wire 

Producers and Exporters Classified as 

‘‘Honorable Enterprises’’ 

5. Loans and Interest Subsidies Provided 

Pursuant to the Northeast Revitalization 

Program 

6. Provision of Land Use Rights for LTAR 

Within the Jinzhou District Within the 

City of Dalian 

7. Provision of Land Use Rights for LTAR 

to Enterprises Within the Zhaoqing HighTech Industry Development Zone in 

Guangdong Province 

8. Provision of Land Use Rights for LTAR 

to Enterprises Within the South Sanshui 

Science and Technology Industrial Park 

of Foshan City 

9. Income Tax Credits for DomesticallyOwned Companies Purchasing 

Domestically-Produced Equipment 

10. Income Tax Exemption for Investment 

in Domestic Technological Renovation 

11. Accelerated Depreciation for 

Enterprises Located in the Northeast 

Region 

12. Forgiveness of Tax Arrears for 

Enterprises in the Old Industrial Bases of 

Northeast China 

13. Income Tax Exemption for Investors in 

Designated Geographical Regions Within 

Liaoning Province 

14. VAT Deduction on Fixed Assets 

15. Import Tariff and VAT Exemptions for 

FIEs and Certain Domestic Enterprises 

Using Imported Equipment in 

Encouraged Industries 

16. Reduction in or Exemption From Fixed 

Assets Investment Orientation 

Regulatory Tax 

17. ‘‘Five Points, One Line’’ Program of 

Liaoning Province 

18. Provincial Export Interest Subsidies 

19. State Key Technology Project Fund 

20. Subsidies for Development of Famous 

Export Brands and China World Top 

Brands 

21. Sub-Central Government Programs to 

Promote Famous Export Brands and 

China World Top Brands 

22. Zhejiang Province Program to Rebate 

Antidumping Legal Fees 

23. Technology to Improve Trade Research 

and Development Fund of Jiangsu 

Province 

24. Outstanding Growth Private Enterprise 

and Small and Medium-Sized 

Enterprises Development in Jiangyin 

Fund of Jiangyin City 

25. Grants for Programs Under the 2007 

Science and Technology Development 

Plan in Shandong Province 

26. Special Funds for Encouraging Foreign 

Economic and Trade Development and 

for Drawing Significant Foreign 

Investment Projects in Shandong 

Province 

27. ‘‘Two Free, Three Half’’ Tax 

Exemptions for ‘‘Productive’’ FIEs 

28. Income Tax Exemption Program for 

Export-Oriented FIEs 

29. Local Income Tax Exemption and 

Reduction Programs for ‘‘Productive’’ 

FIEs 

30. Preferential Tax Programs for FIEs 

Recognized as High or New Technology 

Enterprises 

31. Income Tax Subsidies for FIEs Based 

on Geographic Location 

32. VAT Refunds for FIEs Purchasing 

Domestically-Produced Equipment 

33. Income Tax Credits for FIEs Purchasing 

Domestically-Produced Equipment 

V. Analysis of Comments 

General Issues 

Comment 1: Whether the Investigation 

Should Be Terminated Based on the GPX 

III Ruling 

Comment 2: Application of CVD Law to the 

PRC 

Comment 3: Whether Application of the 

CVD Law to NMEs Violates the 

Administrative Procedures Act (APA) 

Comment 4: Double Remedies 

Case-Specific Issues 

Comment 5: Whether There is a Basis for 

Countervailing Inputs Purchased From 

Input Suppliers 

Comment 6: Whether the Department 

Improperly Rejected the GOC’s 

September 15, 2011, Submission and 

Whether the Application of AFA is 

Warranted 

Comment 7: Whether the Department 

Improperly Rejected the Bao Zhang 

Companies’ September 26, 2011 

Submission 

Comment 8: Whether the Department 

Should Revise Its Benchmark for Wire 

Rod 

Comment 9: Whether the Department 

Should Apply AFA in Selecting the 

Electricity Benchmark 

Comment 10: Whether the Bao Zhang 

Companies’ Additional Electricity 

Charges Should Be Included in the Final 

Determination 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
17422 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices 

1See Notice of Preliminary Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of 

Final Determination, and Affirmative Critical 

Circumstances Determination: Bottom Mount 

Combination Refrigerator-Freezers from Mexico, 76 

FR 67688 (Nov. 2, 2011) (Preliminary 

Determination). 

2See Memorandum to The File entitled 

‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of Electrolux 

Home Products, Corp. N.V. and Electrolux Home 

Products, Inc. (collectively ‘‘Electrolux’’) in the 

Antidumping Investigation of Bottom Mount. 

Combination Refrigerator-Freezers from Mexico,’’ 

dated December 22, 2011; Memorandum to The File 

entitled ‘‘Verification of the Sales Response of 

Electrolux Home Products, Corp. N.V. and 

Electrolux Home Products, Inc. (collectively 

‘‘Electrolux’’) in the Antidumping Duty 

Investigation of Bottom Mount Combination 

Refrigerator-Freezers (BMRFs) from Mexico,’’ dated 

February 1, 2012; Memorandum to The File entitled 

‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of LG 

Electronics, Inc. in the Antidumping Investigation 

of Bottom-Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers 

from the Republic of Korea, dated December 22, 

2011; Memorandum to the File entitled 

‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of LG Electronics 

Monterrey Mexico, S.A. de C.V. in the Antidumping 

Investigation of Bottom Mount Combination 

Refrigerator-Freezers from Mexico,’’ dated 

December 22, 2011; Memorandum to The File 

entitled ‘‘Verification of the Third Country Sales 

Response of LG Electronics Monterrey Mexico, S.A, 

de C.V, and LG Electronics Canada,’’ February 1, 

2012; Memorandum to The File entitled 

‘‘Verification of the U.S. Sales Response of LG 

Electronics Monterrey Mexico, S.A. de C.V. and LG 

Electronics USA, Inc.,’’ dated February 2, 2012; 

Memorandum to the File entitled ‘‘Verification of 

the Sales Response of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd 

in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of 

Bottom-Mount Refrigerator-Freezers from Korea,’’ 

dated February 2, 2012; Memorandum to the File 

entitled ‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of 

Controladora Mabe S.A. de C.V. Mabe S.A. de C.V., 

and Leiser S. de R.L. in the Antidumping 

Investigation of Bottom-Mount Combination 

Refrigerator-Freezers from Mexico,’’ dated January 

4, 2012; Memorandum to The File entitled 

‘‘Verification of the Sales Responses of General 

Electric Company,’’ dated January 13, 2012; 

Memorandum to The File entitled ‘‘Verification of 

the Sales Responses of Controladora Mabe S.A. de 

C.V., and Mabe S.A. de C.V. (collectively, 

‘‘Mabe’’),’’ dated January 25, 2012; Memorandum to 

The File entitled ‘‘Verification of the Cost Response 

of Samsung Electronics Mexico S.A. de C.V. in the 

Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Bottom 

Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers from 

Mexico’’, dated December 21, 2011; Memorandum 

to The File entitled ‘‘Verification of the U.S. Sales 

Response of Samsung Electronics Mexico, S.A. de 

C.V.,’’ dated January 9, 2012; and Memorandum to 

The File entitled ‘‘Verification of Samsung 

Electronics America Inc.,’’ dated January 26, 2012. 

Comment 11: Whether the Department 

Should Apply the Same Electricity 

Benchmark to both ABZ and SBZ 

Comment 12: Application of AFA to the 

Huayuan Companies and M&M 

VI. Recommendation 

[FR Doc. 2012–7214 Filed 3–23–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–201–839] 

Notice of Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value and 

Affirmative Critical Circumstances 

Determination: Bottom Mount 

Combination Refrigerator-Freezers 

From Mexico 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: We determine that imports of 

bottom mount combination refrigeratorfreezers (bottom mount refrigerators) 

from Mexico are being, or are likely to 

be, sold in the United States at less than 

fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 

735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (the Act). In addition, we 

determine that critical circumstances 

exist with respect to the subject 

merchandise exported from Mexico by 

Samsung Electronics Mexico, S.A. de 

C.V. (Samsung). 

Based on our analysis of the 

comments received, we made changes 

in the margin calculations. Therefore, 

the final determination differs from the 

preliminary determination. The final 

weighted-average dumping margins for 

the investigated companies are listed 

below in the section entitled ‘‘Final 

Determination Margins.’’ 

DATES: Effective Date: March 26, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Goldberger or Katherine Johnson, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–4136 and (202) 

482–4929, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On November 2, 2011, the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

preliminary determination of sales at 

LTFV in the antidumping duty 

investigation of bottom mount 

refrigerators from Mexico.1 Since the 

preliminary determination, the 

following events have occurred. 

In November 2011, we issued 

supplemental questionnaires to, and 

received responses from, all four 

respondents: Electrolux Home Products 

Corp. NV/Electrolux Home Products De 

Mexico, S.A. de C.V. (Electrolux), LG 

Electronics Monterrey Mexico, S.A. de 

C.V. (LGEMM), Controladora Mabe, S.A. 

de C.V./Mabe, S.A. de C.V. (Mabe), and 

Samsung. Also, in November 2011, we 

received updated shipment information 

for our critical circumstances analysis 

from Electrolux, LGEMM, and Samsung. 

On December 5, 2011, Whirlpool 

Corporation (hereafter, the petitioner) 

amended its targeted dumping 

allegation with respect to Samsung to 

reflect the revised U.S. sales data 

submitted by Samsung in response to 

the Department’s November 2011, 

supplemental questionnaire. 

In November and December 2011, we 

verified the questionnaire responses of 

the four respondents in this case, in 

accordance with section 782(i) of the 

Act. In December, January and February 

2012, we issued our verification 

findings for each respondent.2

In February 2012, the Department 

requested, and the respondents 

submitted, revised U.S. and/or 

comparison-market sales listings to 

reflect certain verification findings. 

Also, in February 2012, the petitioner 

and the respondents (except for 

Electrolux) submitted case and rebuttal 

briefs. On February 22, 2012, the 

Government of Mexico submitted 

comments on certain aspects of the 

Department’s preliminary 

determination. On February 24, 2012, 

the Department held a hearing in this 

case. 

Subsequent to the Preliminary 

Determination, the Department revised 

the computer programs used to calculate 

the respondents’ dumping margins to 

ensure that they accurately reflected the 

methodological choices made in that 

determination. These revisions to the 

programming, had they been included 

in the preliminary determination, would 

not have altered the weighted-average 

dumping margins calculated there. See 

March 16, 2012, Memoranda to The File 

entitled ‘‘Final Determination Margin 

Calculation for LG Electronics 

Monterrey Mexico, S.A. de C.V. 

(LGEMM)’’ (LGEMM Calculation 

Memo); ‘‘Final Determination Margin 

Calculation for Samsung Electronics 

Mexico S.A. de C.V. (SEM)’’ (Samsung 

Calculation Memo); ‘‘Final 

Determination Margin Calculation for 

Electrolux Home Products, Corp. N.V./ 

Electrolux Home Products de Mexico, 

S.A. de C.V’’ (Electrolux Calculation 

Memo); and ‘‘Final Determination 

Margin Calculation for Controladora 

Mabe S.A. de C.V., Mabe S.A. de C.V., 

and Leiser S. de R.L. (collectively, 

Mabe),’’ which contain the revised 

preliminary antidumping duty margin 

program log and output for each 

respondent. 

Period of Investigation 

The period of investigation (POI) is 

January 1, 2010, through December 31, 

2010. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES