Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 38 / Friday, February 27, 2009 / Notices 8907 

1 In the Amended Preliminary Determination, the 

Department amended the Preliminary 

Determination to correct certain ministerial errors 

with respect to the antidumping duty margin 

calculation for RMB Fasteners Ltd. and IFI and 

Morgan Ltd. 2See Memorandum to the File from Scot T. 

Fullerton, Program Manager, and Toni Dach, 

International Trade Compliance Analyst, regarding: 

‘‘Verification of the Sales Response of RMB 

Fasteners Ltd. and IFI & Morgan Ltd. in the 

Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Steel 

Threaded Rod from the People’s Republic of 

China,’’ dated January 6, 2009 (‘‘RMB & IFI 

Verification Report’’). 

3See Memorandum to the File from Scot T. 

Fullerton, Program Manager, and Toni Dach, 

International Trade Compliance Analyst, regarding: 

‘‘Verification of the Factors of Production Response 

of Jiaxing Brother Standard Part Co. in the 

Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Steel 

Threaded Rod from the People’s Republic of 

China,’’ dated January 6, 2009 (‘‘Brother Fastener 

Verification Report’’). 

4See Memorandum to the File from Scot T. 

Fullerton, Program Manager, and Toni Dach, 

International Trade Compliance Analyst, regarding: 

‘‘Verification of the Sales Response of Ningbo 

Yinzhou Foreign Trade Co., Ltd. in the 

Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Steel 

Threaded Rod from the People’s Republic of 

China,’’ dated January 6, 2009 (‘‘Ningbo Yinzhou 

Verification Report’’). 

5See Memorandum to the File from Scot T. 

Fullerton, Program Manager, and Toni Dach, 

International Trade Compliance Analyst, regarding: 

‘‘Verification of the Factors of Production Response 

of Haiyan Zhonguan Fastener Factory and Zhejiang 

Guorui Industry Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Duty 

Investigation of Certain Steel Threaded Rod from 

the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated January 6, 

2009 (‘‘Zhonghuan & Guorui Verification Report’’). 

6See Memorandum to the File from Scot T. 

Fullerton, Program Manager, and Toni Dach, 

International Trade Compliance Analyst, regarding: 

‘‘Verification of the Separate Rate Response of 

Shanghai Prime Machinery Co., Ltd. in the 

Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Steel 

Threaded Rod from the People’s Republic of 

China,’’ dated January 6, 2009 (‘‘Shanghai Prime 

Separate Rate Verification Report’’). 

Dated: February 20, 2009. 

John M. Andersen, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E9–4244 Filed 2–26–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

(A–570–932) 

Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the 

People’s Republic of China: Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 27, 2009. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(‘‘Department’’) has determined that 

certain steel threaded rod (‘‘STR’’) from 

the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) 

is being, or is 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 

(‘‘Act’’). The final dumping margins for 

this investigation are listed in the ‘‘Final 

Determination Margins’’ section below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Bobby Wong or Toni Dach, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone (202) 482–0409 or (202) 482– 

1655, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Case History 

On October 8, 2008, the Department 

published in the Federal Register its 

preliminary determination. See Certain 

Steel Threaded Rod from the People’s 

Republic of China: Preliminary 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value, 73 FR 58931 (October 8, 

2008) (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’). 

On October 27, 2008, the Department 

published in the Federal Register its 

amended preliminary determination 

that STR from the PRC are being, or are 

likely to be, sold in the United States at 

LTFV. See Certain Steel Threaded Rod 

from the People’s Republic of China: 

Amended Preliminary Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 

Postponement of Final Determination, 

73 FR 63693 (October 27, 2008) 

(‘‘Amended Preliminary 

Determination’’).1 As provided in 

section 782(i) of the Act, we verified the 

information submitted by: 1) RMB 

Fasteners Ltd. and IFI & Morgan Ltd.2

(the ‘‘RMB/IFI Group’’) from November 

3–4, 2008, and Jiaxing Brother Standard 

Part Co.3 (‘‘Jiaxing Brother’’), its 

affiliated producer from November 6–7, 

2008; 2) Ningbo Yinzhou Foreign Trade 

Co., Ltd.4 (‘‘Ningbo Yinzhou’’) from 

November 13–14, 2008, and Haiyan 

Zhonghuan Fastener Factory 

(‘‘Zhonghuan’’), one of Ningbo 

Yingzhou’s manufacturers, and Zhejiang 

Guorui Industry Co., Ltd.5 (‘‘Guorui’’), 

one of Ningbo Yinzhou’s suppliers from 

November 10–12, 2008; and 3) Shanghai 

Prime Machinery Co., Ltd.6 (‘‘Shanghai 

Prime’’), a separate rate respondent, on 

November 17, 2008. On December 12, 

2008, Vulcan Threaded Products 

(‘‘Petitioner’’) and the RMB/IFI Group 

placed new factual information on the 

record regarding surrogate valuation, 

and submitted rebuttal comments on 

December 22, 2008. In accordance with 

19 CFR 351.309(c)(i), we invited parties 

to comment on our Preliminary 

Determination. On January 16, 2009, the 

Department received case briefs from 

the RMB/IFI Group, Ningbo Yinzhou, 

and Petitioner. On January 23, 2009, we 

received rebuttal briefs from Petitioner 

and the RMB/IFI Group. On November 

6 and 7, 2008, Petitioner and the RMB/ 

IFI Group submitted requests for a 

hearing, respectively. On January 22, 

2009, Petitioner and the RMB/IFI Group 

withdrew their requests for a hearing. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by the parties to this 

investigation are addressed in the 

‘‘Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the 

People’s Republic of China: Issues and 

Decision Memorandum for the Final 

Determination of Sales at Less than Fair 

Value,’’ dated concurrently with this 

notice, which is hereby adopted by this 

notice in its entirety (‘‘Issues and 

Decision Memorandum’’). A list of the 

issues which parties raised and to 

which we respond in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum is attached to 

this notice as an Appendix. The Issues 

and Decision Memorandum is a public 

document and is on file in the Central 

Records Unit in the main Commerce 

building, Room 1117, and is accessible 

on the Web at http://www.trade.gov/ia. 

The paper copy and electronic version 

of the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum are identical in content. 

Period of Investigation 

The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is 

July 1, 2007, through December 31, 

2007. 

Scope of Investigation 

The merchandise covered by this 

investigation is steel threaded rod. Steel 

threaded rod is certain threaded rod, 

bar, or studs, of carbon quality steel, 

having a solid, circular cross section, of 

any diameter, in any straight length, that 

have been forged, turned, cold drawn, 

cold rolled, machine straightened, or 

otherwise cold finished, and into which 

threaded grooves have been applied. In 

addition, the steel threaded rod, bar, or 

studs subject to this investigation are 

non headed and threaded along greater 

than 25 percent of their total length. A 

variety of finishes or coatings, such as 

plain oil finish as a temporary rust 

protectant, zinc coating (i.e., galvanized, 

whether by electroplating or hot– 

dipping), paint, and other similar 

finishes and coatings, may be applied to 

the merchandise. 

Included in the scope of this 

investigation are steel threaded rod, bar, 

or studs, in which: (1) iron 

predominates, by weight, over each of 

the other contained elements; (2) the 

carbon content is 2 percent or less, by 

weight; and (3) none of the elements 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES2
8908 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 38 / Friday, February 27, 2009 / Notices 

7For example, the Department specifically asked 

Ningbo Yinzhou in its August 21, 2008, 

supplemental questionnaire whether any FOPs 

other than those reported were consumed by 

Zhonghuan in production of the subject 

merchandise. Ningbo Yinzhou reported in its 

September 8, 2008, response that all factors 

consumed by Zhonghuan in the production of the 

subject merchandise were reported. We discovered 

at verification that this statement was not correct, 

and unreported factors were consumed in the 

production of the subject merchandise. 

Additionally, Ningbo Yinzhou provided a sales 

reconciliation to the Department on August 8, 2008, 

that they claimed reconciled its U.S. sales database 

to its financial statements. At verification, we 

discovered that the sales reconciliation did not tie 

the U.S. sales database to Ningbo Yinzhou’s 

financial statements. For additional information 

and examples of situations where verification 

findings contradicted Ningbo Yinzhou’s 

questionnaire responses, see Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at Comment 5. 

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 

• 0.012 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. 

Steel threaded rod is currently 

classifiable under subheading 

7318.15.5050 and 7318.15.5090 of the 

HTSUS. Although the HTSUS 

subheading is provided for convenience 

and customs purposes, the written 

description of the merchandise is 

dispositive. 

Excluded from the scope of the 

investigation are: (a) threaded rod, bar, 

or studs which are threaded only on one 

or both ends and the threading covers 

25 percent or less of the total length; 

and (b) threaded rod, bar, or studs made 

to American Society for Testing and 

Materials (‘‘ASTM’’) A193 Grade B7, 

ASTM A193 Grade B7M, ASTM A193 

Grade B16, or ASTM A320 Grade L7. 

Scope–HTSUS Modification 

On September 22, 2008, U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) informed 

the Department that on July 1, 2008, it 

amended the United States Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule (‘‘HTSUS’’) category 

7318.15.5060, and replaced the category 

with two new HTSUS categories: 

7318.15.5050 and 7318.15.5090. 

Therefore, the Department has modified 

the scope to reflect the new HTSUS 

categories. 

Changes Since the Preliminary 

Determination 

Based on our findings at verification, 

and additional information placed on 

the record of this investigation, we have 

made changes since the Amended 

Preliminary Determination. As 

discussed further below, we have 

applied total adverse facts available 

(‘‘AFA’’) to Ningbo Yinzhou for 

purposes of this final determination. See 

Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 5. 

Based on our analysis of information 

on the record of this investigation, and 

comments received from the interested 

parties, we have made changes to the 

margin calculations for the RMB/IFI 

Group. We have revalued certain 

surrogate values used in the Amended 

Preliminary Determination. The values 

that were modified for this final 

determination are those for surrogate 

financial ratios, packing strips, buckles, 

and coal. For further details see I&D 

Memo at Comment 6, and Memorandum 

to the File from Bobby Wong, through 

Scot T. Fullerton, Program Manager, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, and 

James C. Doyle, Director, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 9; Certain Steel 

Threaded Rod from the People’s 

Republic of China: Surrogate Values for 

the Final Determination, dated February 

20, 2009 (‘‘Final Surrogate Value 

Memo’’). 

In addition, we have made certain 

company–specific changes since the 

Amended Preliminary Determination. 

Specifically, we have incorporated, 

where applicable, post–preliminary 

clarifications based on a post– 

preliminary supplemental questionnaire 

and verification for the RMB/IFI Group. 

For further details on these company– 

specific changes, see Memorandum to 

the File, through Scot T. Fullerton, 

Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 9, from Bobby Wong, Senior 

International Trade Analyst, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 9, regarding 

‘‘Program Analysis for the Final 

Determination of Antidumping Duty 

Investigation of Certain Steel Threaded 

Rod from the People’s Republic of 

China,’’ dated February 20, 2009 (‘‘The 

RMB/IFI Group Analysis 

Memorandum’’). 

Adverse Facts Available 

Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides 

that the Department shall apply ‘‘facts 

otherwise available’’ if, inter alia, an 

interested party or any other person (A) 

withholds information that has been 

requested, (B) fails to provide 

information within the deadlines 

established, or in the form or manner 

requested by the Department, subject to 

subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782 

of the Act, (C) significantly impedes a 

proceeding, or (D) provides information 

that cannot be verified as provided by 

section 782(i) of the Act. Section 776(b) 

of the Act provides further that the 

Department may use an adverse 

inference when a party has failed to 

cooperate by not acting to the best of its 

ability to comply with a request for 

information. 

Pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A), (B), 

(C), and (D) of the Act, we are applying 

facts otherwise available to Ningbo 

Yinzhou because it withheld certain 

information that had been requested by 

the Department which significantly 

impeded the Department’s investigation. 

Ningbo Yinzhou failed to provide 

information regarding certain factors of 

production (‘‘FOP’’) in the form and 

manner requested by the Department. 

Ningbo Yinzhou withheld certain 

information that was specifically 

requested by the Department and 

significantly impeded the proceeding by 

not providing accurate or complete 

responses to the Department’s questions 

regarding certain FOPs and the sales 

reconciliation. See Verification of the 

Sales Response of Ningbo Yinzhou 

Foreign Trade Co., Ltd. in the 

Antidumping Duty Investigation of 

Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the 

People’s Republic of China, dated 

January 6, 2009 at 2, 6–8, and 10–11; 

and Ningbo Yinzhou’s response to the 

Department’s First Supplemental 

Sections C and D Questionnaire, dated 

September 8, 2008, at 19. Additionally, 

information discovered at verification 

directly contradicted information 

contained in Ningbo Yinzhou’s 

questionnaire responses.7 Significant 

delays were experienced by the 

Department in completing verification 

procedures, which prevented the 

completion of some verification 

procedures. Due to the insufficiency of 

the respondent’s record keeping, 

numerous verification procedures could 

not be completed. For these reasons, the 

Department was unable to verify certain 

statements in Ningbo Yinzhou’s 

questionnaire responses for which the 

Department sought verification. See 

Ningbo Yinzhou Verification Report and 

Zhonghuan/Guorui Verification Report. 

Furthermore, based on the record 

evidence and pursuant to section 776(b) 

of the Act, the Department has 

determined that Ningbo Yinzhou did 

not cooperate to the best of its ability to 

comply with the Department’s requests 

for information. In particular, the 

Department gave specific instructions in 

our questionnaires and the verification 

outline as to the purpose of and 

directions for submission and 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 38 / Friday, February 27, 2009 / Notices 8909 

verification of the reconciliation of 

Ningbo Yinzhou’s U.S. sales database to 

Ningbo Yinzhou’s accounting records, 

and proper reporting of all FOPs for all 

models. Despite these extensive 

instructions, provided numerous times 

over the course of the investigation, 

Ningbo Yinzhou failed to provide the 

Department with adequate information 

and supporting documentation to fully 

verify its responses to the Department’s 

questionnaires. In addition, despite 

multiple opportunities presented by the 

Department, Ningbo Yinzhou failed to 

report certain FOPs and failed to report 

FOPs for each model in the U.S. sales 

database. For a detailed description of 

each of the deficiencies, see Issues and 

Decision Memorandum at Comment 5. 

Surrogate Country 

In the Preliminary Determination and 

unchanged in the Amended Preliminary 

Determination, we stated that we had 

selected India as the appropriate 

surrogate country to use in this 

investigation for the following reasons: 

(1) it is a significant producer of 

comparable merchandise; (2) it is at a 

level of economic development 

comparable to that of the PRC; and (3) 

we have reliable data from India that we 

can use to value FOPs. See Preliminary 

Determination. We received no 

comments on our surrogate country 

selection. Accordingly, for the final 

determination, we made no changes to 

our finding with respect to the selection 

of India as a surrogate country. 

Separate Rates 

In proceedings involving non–market 

economy (‘‘NME’’) countries, the 

Department begins with a rebuttable 

presumption that all companies within 

the country are subject to government 

control and, thus, should be assigned a 

single antidumping duty deposit rate. It 

is the Department’s policy to assign all 

exporters of merchandise subject to an 

investigation in an NME country this 

single rate unless an exporter can 

demonstrate that it is sufficiently 

independent so as to be entitled to a 

separate rate. See Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers 

from the People’s Republic of China, 56 

FR 20588, 20589 (May 6, 1991), as 

amplified by Notice of Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the 

People’s Republic of China, 59 FR at 

22585, 22587 (May 2, 1994), and 19 CFR 

351.107(d). 

In the Preliminary Determination and 

unchanged in the Amended Preliminary 

Determination, we found that Shanghai 

Recky, Suntec Industries, Hangzhou 

Grand, Shanghai Prime, Jianxing 

Xinyue, CPII, Jiashan Zhongsheng, 

Haiyan Dayu, and New Oriental 

(hereinafter referred to as ‘‘Separate Rate 

Companies’’), and Ningbo Yinzhou, a 

mandatory respondent, have provided 

company–specific information to 

demonstrate that they operate 

independently of de jure and de facto 

government control, and therefore 

satisfy the standards for the assignment 

of a separate rate. 

No party has commented on the 

eligibility of these companies for 

separate rate status. For the final 

determination, we continue to find that 

the evidence placed on the record of 

this investigation by these companies 

demonstrates both a de jure and de facto 

absence of government control with 

respect to their exports of the 

merchandise under investigation. Thus, 

we continue to find that they are eligible 

for separate rate status. Normally, the 

separate rate is determined based on the 

estimated weighted–average dumping 

margins established for exporters and 

producers individually investigated, 

excluding de minimis margins or 

margins based entirely on AFA. See 

section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act. 

In the Preliminary Determination and 

unchanged in the Amended Preliminary 

Determination, the Department stated 

that it could not deny the RMB/IFI 

Group separate rate status because the 

Department did not ask specifically for 

information relating to the RMB/IFI 

Group’s separate rate eligibility. 

However, subsequent to the Preliminary 

Determination, on October 22, 2008, in 

response to the Department’s inquiry, 

the RMB/IFI Group reported that it is a 

wholly foreign–owned company, and at 

verification the Department found no 

discrepancies in the RMB/IFI Group’s 

responses to the Department’s separate 

rate questions. As the RMB/IFI Group is 

wholly foreign–owned, a separate rate 

analysis is not necessary to determine 

whether it is independent from 

government control. See Notice of Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Creatine Monohydrate From 

the People’s Republic of China, 64 FR 

71104, 71105 (December 20, 1999) (the 

respondent was wholly foreign–owned, 

and thus, qualified for a separate rate). 

Consequently, for the final 

determination we find that the evidence 

placed on the record of this 

investigation by the RMB/IFI Group 

demonstrates that it is eligible for a 

separate rate. 

In the Preliminary Determination and 

unchanged in the Amended Preliminary 

Determination, the Department assigned 

to nine exporter/producer combinations 

that qualified for a separate rate a 

weighted–average margin based on the 

experience of the mandatory 

respondents, excluding any de minimis 

or zero rates or rates based on total AFA. 

See Preliminary Determination. For the 

final determination, because the 

Department based the rate for Ningbo 

Yinzhou on total AFA, the Department 

has applied the RMB/IFI Group’s 

calculated rate for purposes of 

establishing a separate rate. See section 

735(c)(5)(A) of the Act. Therefore, the 

Department will assign the RMB/IFI 

Group’s calculated rate as the separate 

rate for the nine exporter/producer 

combinations. This rate is corroborated, 

to the extent practicable, for the reasons 

stated below. See ‘‘Corroboration’’ 

section below. 

The PRC–Wide Rate 

In the Preliminary Determination and 

unchanged in the Amended Preliminary 

Determination, the Department found 

that certain companies did not respond 

to our requests for information. See 

Preliminary Determination, 73 FR at 

58936. In the Preliminary Determination 

we treated these PRC producers/ 

exporters as part of the PRC–wide entity 

because they did not demonstrate that 

they operate free of government control 

over their export activities. Because 

these producers/exporters did not 

provide information regarding their 

export activities, the Department has 

determined that application of facts 

available (‘‘FA’’) is warranted. No 

additional information was placed on 

the record with respect to these 

companies after the Preliminary 

Determination. Therefore, pursuant to 

section 776(a)(2)(A) of the Act, the 

Department continues to find that the 

use of FA is appropriate to determine 

the PRC–wide rate. 

Section 776(b) of the Act provides 

that, in selecting from among the facts 

otherwise available, the Department 

may employ an adverse inference if an 

interested party fails to cooperate by not 

acting to the best of its ability to comply 

with requests for information. See 

Notice of Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold– 

Rolled Flat–Rolled Carbon–Quality Steel 

Products From the Russian Federation, 

65 FR 5510, 5518 (February 4, 2000). 

See also Statement of Administrative 

Action accompanying the URAA, H.R. 

Rep. No. 103–316, vol. 1, at 870 (1994) 

(‘‘SAA’’). We determined that, because 

the PRC–wide entity did not respond to 

our request for information, it has failed 

to cooperate to the best of its ability. 

Therefore, the Department finds that, in 

selecting from among the facts 

otherwise available, an adverse 

inference is appropriate for the PRC– 

wide entity. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES2
8910 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 38 / Friday, February 27, 2009 / Notices 

Because we begin with the 

presumption that all companies within 

an NME country are subject to 

government control and because only 

the companies listed under the ‘‘Final 

Determination Margins’’ section below 

have overcome that presumption, we are 

applying a single antidumping rate (i.e., 

the PRC–wide entity rate) to all other 

exporters of subject merchandise from 

the PRC. Such companies did not 

demonstrate entitlement to a separate 

rate. See, e.g., Synthetic Indigo From the 

People’s Republic of China; Notice of 

Final Determination of Sales at Less 

Than Fair Value, 65 FR 25706 (May 3, 

2000). The PRC–wide entity rate applies 

to all entries of subject merchandise 

except for entries from the respondents 

which are listed in the ‘‘Final 

Determination Margins’’ section below. 

In the Preliminary Determination and 

unchanged in the Amended Preliminary 

Determination, we assigned to the PRC– 

wide entity the highest rate calculated 

from the petition, 206.00 percent. See 

Preliminary Determination, 73 FR at 

58936. We received no comments on 

this rate. Therefore, for the final 

determination, we have continued to 

assign to the PRC–wide entity the rate 

of 206.00 percent. 

Corroboration 

Section 776(c) of the Act provides 

that, when the Department relies on 

secondary information in using the facts 

otherwise available, it must, to the 

extent practicable, corroborate that 

information from independent sources 

that are reasonably at its disposal. We 

have interpreted ‘‘corroborate’’ to mean 

that we will, to the extent practicable, 

examine the reliability and relevance of 

the information submitted. See Tapered 

Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, 

Finished and Unfinished, From Japan, 

and Tapered Roller Bearings, Four 

Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, and 

Components Thereof, From Japan; 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Reviews and 

Partial Termination of Administrative 

Reviews, 61 FR 57391, 57392 (November 

6, 1996), unchanged in Notice of Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Certain Cold–Rolled Flat– 

Rolled Carbon–Quality Steel Products 

From Brazil, 65 FR 5554, 5568 (February 

4, 2000); see, e.g., Tapered Roller 

Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished 

and Unfinished, From Japan, and 

Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches or 

Less in Outside Diameter, and 

Components Thereof, From Japan; Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Reviews and 

Termination in Part, 62 FR 11825 

(March 13, 1997). 

To corroborate the AFA margin we 

have selected, we compared that margin 

to the margins calculated for the RMB/ 

IFI Group. We found that the margin of 

206.00 percent has probative value 

because it is in the range of margins 

calculated for the RMB/IFI Group. See 

October 1, 2008, Memorandum to the 

File, From Bobby Wong, Through Scot 

T. Fullerton, regarding: Antidumping 

Duty Investigation of Certain Steel 

Threaded Rod from the People’s 

Republic of China: RMB/IFI Program 

Analysis for the Preliminary 

Determination, at 1. Accordingly, we 

find that the rate of 206.00 percent is 

corroborated within the meaning of 

section 776(c) of the Act. 

Combination Rates 

In the Preliminary Determination, the 

Department stated that it would 

calculate combination rates for the 

respondents that are eligible for a 

separate rate in this investigation. See 

Preliminary Determination, 73 FR at 

58931. This change in practice is 

described in Policy Bulletin 05.1, 

available at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/. Policy 

Bulletin 05.1, states: 

{w}hile continuing the practice of 

assigning separate rates only to 

exporters, all separate rates that the 

Department will now assign in its 

NME investigations will be specific 

to those producers that supplied the 

exporter during the period of 

investigation. Note, however, that 

one rate is calculated for the 

exporter and all of the producers 

which supplied subject 

merchandise to it during the period 

of investigation. This practice 

applies both to mandatory 

respondents receiving an 

individually calculated separate 

rate as well as the pool of non– 

investigated firms receiving the 

weighted–average of the 

individually calculated rates. This 

practice is referred to as the 

application of ‘‘combination rates’’ 

because such rates apply to specific 

combinations of exporters and one 

or more producers. The cash– 

deposit rate assigned to an exporter 

will apply only to merchandise 

both exported by the firm in 

question and produced by a firm 

that supplied the exporter during 

the period of investigation. 

See Policy Bulletin 05.1, ‘‘Separate 

Rates Practice and Application of 

Combination Rates in Antidumping 

Investigations Involving Non–Market 

Economy Countries.’’ 

Final Determination Margins 

We determine that the following 

percentage weighted–average margins 

exist for the POI: 

CERTAIN STEEL THREADED ROD FROM THE PRC 

Exporter Producer Weighted–Average 

Margin 

RMB Fasteners Ltd., and IFI & Morgan Ltd. (‘‘RMB/IFI Group’’) Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. (aka Jiaxing Brother 

Standard Parts Co., Ltd.) 

55.16 

Ningbo Yinzhou Foreign Trade Co. Ltd. ..................................... Zhejiang Guorui Industry Co., Ltd.; or Ningbo Daxie 

Chuofeng Industrial Development Co. Ltd. 

206.00% 

Separate Rates Entities: Exporter Producer Margin 

Shanghai Recky International Trading Co., Ltd. ......................... Shanghai Xiangrong International Trading Co., Ltd.; 

Shanghai Xianglong International Trading Co., Ltd.; 

Pighu City Zhapu Screw Cap Factory; or Jiaxing Xinyue 

Standard Part Co., Ltd. 

55.16 

Suntec Industries Co., Ltd. .......................................................... Jiaxing Xinyue Standard Part Co., Ltd.; or Haiyan 

County No. 1 Fasteners Factory 

55.16 

Hangzhou Grand Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. ...................................... Zhapu Creative Standard Parts Material Co., Ltd. 55.16 

Shanghai Prime Machinery Co. Ltd. ........................................... Haiyan Yida Fasteners Co., Ltd.; or Jiaxing Xinyue 

Standard Part Co., Ltd. 

55.16 

Jiaxing Xinyue Standard Part Co., Ltd. ....................................... Jiaxing Xinyue Standard Part Co., Ltd. 55.16 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 38 / Friday, February 27, 2009 / Notices 8911 

Separate Rates Entities: Exporter Producer Margin 

Certified Products International Inc. ............................................ Jiashan Zhongsheng Metal Products Co., Ltd.; or Jiaxing 

Xinyue Standard Part Co., Ltd. 

55.16 

Zhejiang New Oriental Fastener Co., Ltd. ................................... Zhejiang New Oriental Fastener Co., Ltd. 55.16 

Jiashan Zhongsheng Metal Products Co., Ltd. ........................... Jiashan Zhongsheng Metal Products Co., Ltd. 55.16 

Haiyan Dayu Fasteners Co., Ltd. ................................................ Haiyan Dayu Fasteners Co., Ltd. 55.16 

PRC–wide Entity .......................................................................... ............................................................................................ 206.00% 

Disclosure 

We will disclose the calculations 

performed within five days of the date 

of publication of this notice to parties in 

this proceeding in accordance with 19 

CFR 351.224(b). 

Continuation of Suspension of 

Liquidation 

We will instruct U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to continue 

the suspension of liquidation required 

by section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, of all 

entries of subject merchandise from the 

RMB/IFI Group, Ningbo Yinzhou, the 

Separate Rate Companies, and the PRC– 

wide entity entered, or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption on or after 

October 8, 2008, the date of publication 

of the Preliminary Determination. CBP 

shall continue to require a cash deposit 

or the posting of a bond equal to the 

estimated amount by which the NV 

exceeds the U.S. price as shown above. 

See section 735(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act. 

The suspension of liquidation 

instructions will remain in effect until 

further notice. 

International Trade Commission 

Notification 

In accordance with section 735(d) of 

the Act, we have notified the 

International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’) 

of our final determination of sales at 

LTFV. As our final determination is 

affirmative, in accordance with section 

735(b)(2) of the Act, within 45 days the 

ITC will determine whether the 

domestic industry in the United States 

is materially injured, or threatened with 

material injury, by reason of imports or 

sales (or the likelihood of sales) for 

importation of the subject merchandise. 

If the ITC determines that material 

injury or threat of material 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, upon further instruction by 

the Department, 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. 

Notification Regarding APO 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to the parties subject to administrative 

protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely 

notification of return or 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. 

This determination is issued and 

published in accordance with sections 

735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: February 20, 2009. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix 

I. General Issues: 

Comment 1: Surrogate Financial Ratios 

Comment 2: Treatment of Drawing 

Power as a Direct Material Input 

Comment 3: Wire Rod & Round Bar 

Comment 4: Hydrochloric Acid and 

Trisodium Phosphate 

II. Ningbo Yinzhou Issues 

Comment 5: Application of Facts 

Available for Ningbo Yinzhou 

Comment 6: Ningbo Yinzhou and 

Zhonghuan/Guorui Verification Report 

Comment 7: Surrogate Value Selection 

Galvanizing Surrogate Value 

III. RMB/IFI Issues 

Comment 8: Surrogate Values Packing 

Strips, Buckles, and Coal 

Comment 9: Limits to By–Product Offset 

Comment 10: Minor Corrections for the 

RMB/IFI Group 

[FR Doc. E9–4248 Filed 2–26–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology 

Advisory Committee on Earthquake 

Hazards Reduction Meeting 

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards 

and Technology, Department of 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of open meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee on 

Earthquake Hazards Reduction (ACEHR 

or Committee), will hold a meeting on 

Wednesday, March 25, 2009 from 2 p.m. 

to 4 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST). 

The primary purpose of this meeting is 

to review and finalize the Committee’s 

draft reauthorization letter to the 

Interagency Coordinating Committee 

(ICC). The draft letter will be posted on 

the NEHRP Web site at 

http://nehrp.gov/. Interested members of 

the public will be able to participate in 

the meeting from remote locations by 

calling into a central phone number. 

DATES: The ACEHR will hold a meeting 

on Wednesday, March 25, 2009, from 2 

p.m. until 4 p.m. Eastern Standard Time 

(EST). The meeting will be open to the 

public. Interested parties may 

participate in the meeting from their 

remote location. 

ADDRESSES: Questions regarding the 

meeting should be sent to National 

Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program 

Director, National Institute of Standards 

and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail 

Stop 8630, Gaithersburg, Maryland 

20899–8630. For instructions on how to 

participate in the meeting, please see 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of this notice. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Jack Hayes, National Earthquake 

Hazards Reduction Program Director, 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail 

Stop 8630, Gaithersburg, Maryland 

20899–8630. Dr. Hayes’ e-mail address 

is jack.hayes@nist.gov and his phone 

number is (301) 975–5640. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Committee was established in 

accordance with the requirements of 

Section 103 of the NEHRP 

Reauthorization Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES2