Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 158 / Thursday, August 14, 2008 / Notices 47587 

merchandise produced and exported by 

Delta entered, or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption on or after 

December 27, 2007, which is 90 days 

prior to the date of publication of the 

Preliminary Determination (March 26, 

2008), and entered before March 26, 

2008. CBP shall refund any cash 

deposits and release any bond or other 

security previously posted in 

connection with merchandise produced 

and exported by Delta, the only known 

producer and exporter of EMD during 

this investigation. 

All–Others Rate 

Section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act 

provides that, where the estimated 

weighted–average dumping margins 

established for all exporters and 

producers individually investigated are 

zero or de minimis margins or are 

determined entirely under section 776 

of the Act, the Department may use any 

reasonable method to establish the 

estimated all others rate for exporters 

and producers not individually 

investigated. This provision 

contemplates that, if the data do not 

permit weight–averaging margins other 

than the zero, de minimis, or total facts 

available margins, the Department may 

use any other reasonable method. See 

also Statement of Administrative Action 

accompanying the Uruguay Round 

Agreements Act, H. Doc. No. 103–316, 

at 873 (1994). As discussed above, Delta 

is the sole respondent in this 

investigation and has been assigned a 

margin based on total adverse facts 

available. Because the petition 

contained only one estimated dumping 

margin and because there are no other 

respondents in this investigation, there 

are no additional estimated margins 

available for purposes of establishing an 

all–others rate. Therefore, with this final 

determination we are establishing 83.66 

percent as the all–others rate. 

Final Determination of Investigation 

We determine that the following 

weighted–average dumping margins 

exist for the period July 1, 2006, through 

June 30, 2007: 

Manufacturer or Exporter Margin (percent) 

Delta ............................. 83.66 

All Others ...................... 83.66 

Continuation of Suspension of 

Liquidation 

Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the 

Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b)(1), we will 

instruct CBP to continue to suspend 

liquidation of all entries of subject 

merchandise from Australia entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption on or after March 26, 

2008, the date of publication of the 

Preliminary Determination. We will 

instruct CBP to require a cash deposit or 

the posting of a bond equal to the 

weighted–average margin, as indicated 

in the chart above, as follows: (1) the 

rate for Delta will be 83.66 percent; (2) 

if the exporter is not a firm identified in 

this investigation but the producer is, 

the rate will be the rate established for 

the producer of the subject 

merchandise; (3) the rate for all other 

producers or exporters will be 83.66 

percent. These suspension–ofliquidation 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. As our final 

determination is affirmative and in 

accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the 

Act, the ITC will determine, within 45 

days, 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 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 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/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 pursuant to sections 735(d) 

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

Dated: August 8, 2008. 

David M. Spooner, 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix 

Comment: Profit for Constructed Value 

[FR Doc. E8–18848 Filed 8–13–04; 8:45 am] 

Billing Code: 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–918] 

Steel Wire Garment Hangers 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. 

DATES: Effective Date: August 14, 2008. 

SUMMARY: On March 25, 2008, the 

Department of Commerce 

(‘‘Department’’) published its 

preliminary determination of sales at 

less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’) in the 

antidumping investigation of steel wire 

garment hangers (‘‘hangers’’) from the 

People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). On 

April 14, 2008, the Department 

published its amended preliminary 

determination. The period of 

investigation (‘‘POI’’) is January 1, 2007, 

to June 30, 2007. We invited interested 

parties to comment on our preliminary 

determination of sales at LTFV. Based 

on our analysis of the comments we 

received, we have made changes to our 

calculations for the mandatory 

respondents. The final dumping 

margins for this investigation are listed 

in the ‘‘Final Determination Margins’’

section below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Irene Gorelik or Julia Hancock, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–6905 or (202) 482–

1394, respectively. 

Final Determination 

We determine that hangers from the 

PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold 

in the United States at LTFV as 

provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). The 

estimated margins of sales at LTFV are 

shown in the ‘‘Final Determination 

Margins’’ section of this notice. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
47588 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 158 / Thursday, August 14, 2008 / Notices 

1These companies are: United Wire Hanger 

Corporation, Laidlaw Company, Zhejiang Lucky 

Cloud Hanger Co., Ltd., Shangyu Baoxiang Metal 

Product Co., Ltd., Shaoxing Dingli Metal 

Clotheshorse Co., Shaoxing Meideli Metal Hanger 

Co., Ltd., Shaoxing Shunji Metal Clotheshorse Co., 

Ltd., and Shaoxing Zhongbao Metal Manufactured 

Co. Ltd., Shaoxing Liangbao Metal Manufactured 

Co. Ltd. 

2The Shaoxing Metal Companies consist of: 

Shaoxing Gangyuan Metal Manufactured Co., Ltd. 

(‘‘Gangyuan’’), Shaoxing Andrew Metal 

Manufactured Co., Ltd. (‘‘Andrew’’), Shaoxing 

Tongzhou Metal Manufactured Co., Ltd. 

(‘‘Tongzhou’’), and Company X. The Department 

normally does not consider a respondent’s 

supplier’s name to be business proprietary 

information. However, in this instance, counsel for 

the Shaoxing Metal Companies bracketed this 

information as business proprietary and the 

Department did not challenge this treatment. See 

Memorandum to the File from Julia Hancock, 

Senior Case Analyst: Program Analysis for the Final 

Determination of Antidumping Duty Investigation 

of Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People’s 

Republic of China: Shaoxing Metal Companies, 

(August 7, 2008) (‘‘Shaoxing Final Analysis Memo’’) 

for more information regarding the identity of this 

company; Shaoxing Metal Companies’ Request for 

Collapsing, (February 26, 2008) at 15. 

3The Petitioner is M&B Metal Products Company 

Inc. 

4See Memorandum to the File through Catherine 

Bertrand, Program Manager, Office 9, from Irene 

Gorelik, Senior Case Analyst: Verification of the 

Sales and Factors Response of Shanghai Wells 

Hanger Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Investigation 

of Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People’s 

Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) (July 1, 2008) 

(‘‘Shanghai Wells Verification Report’’), and 

Memorandum to the File through Catherine 

Bertrand, Program Manager, Office 9, from Julia 

Hancock, Senior Case Analyst: Verification of the 

Sales and Factors Response of the Shaoxing Metal 

Companies in the Antidumping Investigation of 

Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People’s 

Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’), (July 3, 2008) 

(‘‘Shaoxing Metal Verification Report’’). 

Case History 

The Department published its 

preliminary determination of sales at 

LTFV on March 25, 2008. See 

Preliminary Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value: Steel Wire 

Garment Hangers from the People’s 

Republic of China 73 FR 15726 (March 

25, 2008) (‘‘Preliminary 

Determination’’). Due to a significant 

ministerial error, the Department 

published its amended preliminary 

determination of sales at LTFV on April 

14, 2008. See Steel Wire Garment 

Hangers from the People’s Republic of 

China: Amended Preliminary 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value and Postponement of Final 

Determination 73 FR 20018 (April 14, 

2008) (‘‘Amended Preliminary 

Determination’’). Additionally, the 

Department postponed the deadline for 

the final determination by 60 days to 

August 7, 2008. See id. at 20020–20021. 

On April 24, 2008, certain separate rate 

respondents represented by Greenberg 

Traurig 1 (‘‘Greenberg Respondents’’) 

filed a timely request for a public 

hearing. Between May 21, 2008, and 

June 6, 2008, the Department conducted 

verifications of Shanghai Wells Hanger 

Co., Ltd. (‘‘Shanghai Wells’’) and the 

Shaoxing Metal Companies.2 See the 

‘‘Verification’’ section below for 

additional information. 

On June 27, 2008, we invited parties 

to comment on the Department’s 

proposed change to the scope language 

within the Preliminary Determination. 

On July 7, 2008, Petitioner 3 and Home 

Products (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., and 

Willert Home Products, Inc. 

(collectively ‘‘Willert’’) submitted 

comments regarding the Department’s 

proposed scope language change. 

Additionally, Willert included a scope 

clarification request in its comments 

dated July 7, 2008, which the 

Department addresses in the ‘‘Analysis 

of Comments Received’’ and ‘‘Scope 

Modifications’’ sections below. 

Upon the July 3, 2008, release of the 

second of two verification reports,4 we 

invited parties to comment on the 

Preliminary Determination. On July 10, 

2008, Petitioner, Shanghai Wells, the 

Shaoxing Metal Companies, and other 

interested parties filed case briefs. On 

July 11, 2008, the Department rejected 

the case brief submitted by the 

Greenberg Respondents because it 

contained untimely, new factual 

information. See the Department’s letter 

to all interested parties dated July 11, 

2008. On July 11, 2008, the Greenberg 

Respondents resubmitted their revised 

case brief, which the Department also 

rejected because the untimely, new 

information had not been properly 

redacted in its entirety. See the 

Department’s letter to all interested 

parties dated July 14, 2008. On July 15, 

2008, the Greenberg Respondents 

resubmitted their case brief with the 

untimely, new information redacted in 

its entirety. On July 15, 2008, the 

Shaoxing Metal Companies, Shanghai 

Wells, and Petitioner filed rebuttal 

briefs. On July 17, 2008, the Greenberg 

Traurig Respondents withdrew their 

request for a public hearing, leaving no 

public hearing request on the record. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties to this 

investigation are addressed in the 

‘‘Investigation of Steel Wire Garment 

Hangers from the People’s Republic of 

China: Issues and Decision 

Memorandum,’’ dated August 7, 2008 

(‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’), 

which is hereby adopted by this notice. 

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 Issue 

and Decision Memorandum is a public 

document and is on file in the Central 

Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’), Main Commerce 

Building, Room 1117, and is accessible 

on the World Wide Web at http:// 

www.trade.gov/ia. The paper copy and 

electronic version of the memorandum 

are identical in content. 

Changes Since the Preliminary 

Determination 

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 Shaoxing 

Metal Companies and Shanghai Wells. 

We have revalued several of the 

surrogate values used in the Preliminary 

Determination. The values that were 

modified for this final determination are 

those for surrogate financial ratios, steel 

scrap, and the wage rate. For further 

details see Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at Comments 3, 6, and 7, 

and Memorandum to the File from Julia 

Hancock, through Catherine Bertrand, 

Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 9, and James C. Doyle, Director, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office 9; Steel 

Wire Garment Hangers from the 

People’s Republic of China: Surrogate 

Values for the Final Determination, 

dated August 7, 2008 (‘‘Final Surrogate 

Value Memo’’). 

In addition, we have made some 

company-specific changes since the 

Preliminary Determination. Specifically, 

we have incorporated, where applicable, 

post-preliminary clarifications based on 

verification and corrected certain 

clerical errors for Shanghai Wells. We 

have also applied partial adverse facts 

available, where applicable, for various 

findings from verification of both 

companies. For further details on these 

company-specific changes, see Issues 

and Decision Memorandum at 

Comments 8 and 9. 

Scope Modifications 

Since the publication of the 

Preliminary Determination, the 

Department became concerned that 

certain language in the scope might 

create opportunities for circumvention. 

Therefore, on June 27, 2008, the 

Department invited interested parties to 

comment on a proposed change to the 

scope language. See Letter to All 

Interested Parties, dated June 27, 2008. 

As stated above, Willert and Petitioner 

submitted comments. Specifically, 

Petitioner stated that it supported the 

Department’s proposed change to the 

scope of the investigation. 

Consequently, we are modifying the 

scope to include language that the 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 158 / Thursday, August 14, 2008 / Notices 47589 

5Company X is business proprietary information. 

See Memorandum to the File from Julia Hancock, 

Senior Case Analyst: Program Analysis for the Final 

Determination of Antidumping Duty Investigation 

of Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People’s 

Republic of China: Shaoxing Metal Companies, 

(August 7, 2008) (‘‘Shaoxing Final Analysis Memo’’) 

for more information regarding the identity of this 

company. 

Department proposed in its June 27, 

2008, letter. 

Willert briefly referenced the 

Department’s proposed change to the 

scope but focused its comments on a 

scope clarification request regarding its 

vinyl-dipped steel wire garment 

hangers, which we address fully in the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 1. We are denying Willert’s 

scope modification request because both 

the Department and Petitioner remain 

concerned about the possibility of 

circumvention under Willert’s proposed 

exclusion. See Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at Comment 1. 

Scope of Investigation 

The merchandise that is subject to 

this investigation is steel wire garment 

hangers, fabricated from carbon steel 

wire, whether or not galvanized or 

painted, whether or not coated with 

latex or epoxy or similar gripping 

materials, and/or whether or not 

fashioned with paper covers or capes 

(with or without printing) and/or 

nonslip features such as saddles or 

tubes. These products may also be 

referred to by a commercial designation, 

such as shirt, suit, strut, caped, or latex 

(industrial) hangers. Specifically 

excluded from the scope of this 

investigation are wooden, plastic, and 

other garment hangers that are not made 

of steel wire. The products subject to 

this investigation are currently 

classified under HTSUS subheading 

7326.20.0020 and 7323.99.9060. 

Although the HTSUS subheading is 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, the written description of the 

merchandise is dispositive. 

Affiliations 

In the Preliminary Determination, the 

Department determined that, based on 

the evidence on the record in this 

investigation and based on the evidence 

presented in Gangyuan’s questionnaire 

responses, we preliminarily found that 

Gangyuan is affiliated with Andrew, 

Tongzhou, and Company X 5 pursuant 

to sections 771(33)(E), (F), and (G) of the 

Act, based on ownership and common 

control. See Preliminary Determination, 

73 FR at 15729. In addition to being 

affiliated, we stated that these 

individual companies have production 

facilities for similar or identical 

products that would not require 

substantial retooling and there is a 

significant potential for manipulation of 

production based on the level of 

common ownership and control, shared 

management, and an intertwining of 

business operations. See 19 CFR 

351.401(f)(1) and (2). Thus, we also 

found that they should be considered as 

a single entity known as the Shaoxing 

Metal Companies for purposes of this 

investigation. See 19 CFR 351.401(f). 

No other information has been placed 

on the record since the Preliminary 

Determination to contradict the above 

information upon which we based our 

finding that these companies constitute 

a single entity. Therefore, for the final 

determination, we continue to find that 

the Shaoxing Metal Companies are a 

single entity pursuant to sections 

771(33)(E), (F), and (G) of the Act, based 

on ownership and common control. We 

also continue to determine that they 

should be considered as a single entity 

for purposes of this investigation. See 19 

CFR 351.401(f). 

Use of Facts Available 

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

that, if an interested party: (A) 

Withholds information that has been 

requested by the Department; (B) fails to 

provide such information in a timely 

manner or in the form or manner 

requested, subject to sections 782(c)(1) 

and (e) of the Act; (C) significantly 

impedes a proceeding under the 

antidumping statute; or (D) provides 

such information but the information 

cannot be verified; the Department 

shall, subject to subsection 782(d) of the 

Act, use facts otherwise available in 

reaching the applicable determination. 

Section 782(c)(1) of the Act provides 

that if an interested party ‘‘promptly 

after receiving a request from {the 

Department} for information, notifies 

{the Department} that such party is 

unable to submit the information 

requested in the requested form and 

manner, together with a full explanation 

and suggested alternative form in which 

such party is able to submit the 

information,’’ the Department may 

modify the requirements to avoid 

imposing an unreasonable burden on 

that party. 

Section 782(d) of the Act provides 

that, if the Department determines that 

a response to a request for information 

does not comply with the request, the 

Department will inform the person 

submitting the response of the nature of 

the deficiency and shall, to the extent 

practicable, provide that person the 

opportunity to remedy or explain the 

deficiency. If that person submits 

further information that continues to be 

unsatisfactory, or this information is not 

submitted within the applicable time 

limits, the Department may, subject to 

section 782(e), disregard all or part of 

the original and subsequent responses, 

as appropriate. 

Section 782(e) of the Act states that 

the Department shall not decline to 

consider information deemed 

‘‘deficient’’ under section 782(d) if: (1) 

The information is submitted by the 

established deadline; (2) the information 

can be verified; (3) the information is 

not so incomplete that it cannot serve as 

a reliable basis for reaching the 

applicable determination; (4) the 

interested party has demonstrated that it 

acted to the best of its ability; and (5) 

the information can be used without 

undue difficulties. 

Furthermore, section 776(b) of the Act 

states that if the Department ‘‘finds that 

an interested party has failed to 

cooperate by not acting to the best of its 

ability to comply with a request for 

information from the administering 

authority..., the administering 

authority..., in reaching the applicable 

determination under this title, may use 

an inference that is adverse to the 

interests of that party in selecting from 

among the facts otherwise available.’’

See also Statement of Administrative 

Action (‘‘SAA’’) accompanying the 

Uruguay Round Agreements Act 

(URAA), H.R. Rep. No. 103–316, Vol. 1 

at 870 (1994), reprinted in 1994 

U.S.C.C.A.N. 4040, 4199. 

Shanghai Wells 

For the final determination, in 

accordance with sections 773(c)(3)(B) 

and 776(a)(1) of the Act, we have 

determined that the use of neutral facts 

available (‘‘FA’’) is required for 

Shanghai Wells’s consumption of 

drawing powder used in the production 

of subject merchandise as a factor of 

production rather than an overhead 

expense, as reported by Shanghai Wells. 

See Issues and Decision Memorandum 

at Comment 2. As neutral FA, we are 

using the public version of the 

consumption ratio reported by Shaoxing 

Gangyuan, one of the companies within 

the single entity, Shaoxing Metal 

Companies, the other mandatory 

respondent in this investigation. See 

Memorandum to the File from Irene 

Gorelik, Senior Case Analyst: Program 

Analysis for the Final Determination of 

Antidumping Duty Investigation of Steel 

Wire Garment Hangers from the 

People’s Republic of China: Shanghai 

Wells (August 7, 2008) (‘‘Shanghai 

Wells Final Analysis Memo’’), for 

further details on the treatment of 

drawing powder. See also Final 

Surrogate Value Memo for the surrogate 

value used to value drawing powder. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
47590 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 158 / Thursday, August 14, 2008 / Notices 

6These companies are: Jiangyin Hongji Metal 

Products Co., Ltd, Shaoxing Meideli Metal Hanger 

Co., Ltd., Shaoxing Dingli Metal Clotheshorse Co., 

Ltd., Shaoxing Liangbao Metal Manufactured Co. 

Ltd., Shaoxing Zhongbao Metal Manufactured Co. 

Ltd., Shangyu Baoxiang Metal Manufactured Co. 

Ltd., Zhejiang Lucky Cloud Hanger Co., Ltd., Pu 

Jiang County Command Metal Products Co., Ltd., 

Shaoxing Shunji Metal Clotheshorse Co., Ltd., 

Ningbo Dasheng Hanger Ind. Co., Ltd., Jiaxing Boyi 

Medical Device Co., Ltd., Yiwu Ao-Si Metal 

Products Co., Ltd., and Shaoxing Guochao Metallic 

Products Co., Ltd. 

Additionally, for the final 

determination, in accordance with 

sections 773(c)(3)(B) of the Act, section 

776(a)(2)(A), (B) and (D) of the Act, and 

section 776(b) of the Act, we have 

determined that the use of adverse facts 

available (‘‘AFA’’) is warranted for 

Shanghai Wells’s unreported 

consumption of water that is used in its 

production process. See Issues and 

Decision Memorandum at Comment 9D; 

Shanghai Wells Verification Report at 2, 

35. As partial AFA, we are using 

Gangyuan’s public version consumption 

ratios for water, which is the only 

available consumption ratio on the 

record. Additionally, in accordance 

with sections 773(c)(3)(B) of the Act, 

section 776(a)(2)(A), (B) and (D) of the 

Act, and section 776(b) of the Act, we 

have determined that the use of AFA is 

warranted for Shanghai Wells’s 

unreported consumption of lubricant 

lard that is used in the production 

process. See id. To account for Shanghai 

Wells’s lubricant lard, because 

Gangyuan did not use lubricant lard in 

the production of subject merchandise 

and as there is no lubricant lard 

consumption information on the record, 

the Department will use Gangyuan’s 

water consumption ratio a second time 

as a proxy for the lubricant lard. We 

find this to be appropriate because 

Shanghai Wells uses two lubricant 

inputs in the wire rod drawing process, 

and we are using the only record 

information on lubricant inputs as the 

AFA plug for each lubricant input used 

by Shanghai Wells. Given the limited 

information on the record, we find this 

to be a sufficient basis for an adverse 

inference. 

Shaoxing Metal Companies 

For the final determination, in 

accordance with section 776(a)(2)(B) of 

the Act, we have determined that the 

use of partial neutral FA is required for 

the Shaoxing Metal Companies’

consumption of water. See Issues and 

Decision Memorandum at Comment 8D. 

As partial FA, we are using certain 

months of reported data during the POI 

to calculate an average of the Shaoxing 

Metal Companies’ average actual 

consumption of water. See 

Memorandum to the File from Julia 

Hancock, Senior Case Analyst: Program 

Analysis for the Final Determination of 

Antidumping Duty Investigation of Steel 

Wire Garment Hangers from the 

People’s Republic of China: Shaoxing 

Metal Companies, (August 7, 2008) 

(‘‘Shaoxing Final Analysis Memo’’) for 

further details on the treatment of water. 

Additionally, for the final 

determination, in accordance with 

sections 776(a)(2)(A), (B) and (D) of the 

Act, and section 776(b) of the Act, we 

have determined that the use of AFA is 

warranted for the Shaoxing Metal 

Companies’ unverified white paper 

inputs, brown paper inputs, and steel 

scrap sales. See Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at Comment 8E; the 

Shaoxing Metal Verification Report, at 

33–34, 37, and 46–47. As partial AFA 

for Gangyuan’s and Andrew’s white 

paper, we have assigned Tongzhou’s 

highest verified usage ratio of white 

paper on the record as the usage ratio 

for Gangyuan’s and Andrew’s 

consumption of white paper. 

Additionally, as partial AFA for the 

Gangyuan’s, Andrew’s, and Tongzhou’s 

brown paper, we have assigned the 

highest usage ratio of brown paper of 

the three companies on the record as 

each company’s consumption of brown 

paper. Moreover, as partial AFA for 

Gangyuan’s, Andrew’s, and Tongzhou’s 

steel scrap sales, we have not granted 

them a by-product offset for the final 

determination. See Shaoxing Final 

Analysis Memo for further details of the 

normal value calculation. 

Finally, for the final determination, in 

accordance with sections 776(a)(2)(A), 

and (B) of the Act, we have determined 

that the use of partial neutral FA is 

required for the Shaoxing Metal 

Companies’ direct labor and packing 

labor because assembly labor was 

incorrectly included in Gangyuan’s and 

Andrew’s packing labor. See Shaoxing 

Final Analysis Memo; see also the 

Shaoxing Metal Verification Report, at 

43 and Verification Exhibit 17. As 

partial FA for the Shaoxing Metal 

Companies’ direct labor and packing 

labor, we have calculated direct labor, 

which includes assembly labor, using 

the total number of direct labor hours 

for April 2007, and calculated packing 

labor, not including assembly labor, 

using the total number of packing labor 

hours for April 2007. See Shaoxing 

Final Analysis Memo for further details 

of the normal value calSculation. 

Verification 

As provided in section 782(i) of the 

Act, we verified the information 

submitted by the respondents for use in 

our final determination. See the 

Department’s verification reports on the 

record of this investigation in the CRU 

with respect to Shanghai Wells and the 

Shaoxing Metal Companies. For both 

verified companies, we used standard 

verification procedures, including 

examination of relevant accounting and 

production records, as well as original 

source documents provided by 

respondents. 

Surrogate Country 

In the 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 similar level of economic development 

pursuant to 773(c)(4) of the Act; and (3) 

we have reliable data from India that we 

can use to value the factors of 

production. See Preliminary 

Determination, 73 FR at 15728–15729. 

For the final determination, we received 

no comments and made no changes to 

our findings with respect to the 

selection of a surrogate country. 

Separate Rates 

In proceedings involving 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 (May 6, 1991) (‘‘Sparklers’’), 

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 22585 

(May 2, 1994) (‘‘Silicon Carbide’’), and 

Section 351.107(d) of the Department’s 

regulations. 

In the Preliminary Determination, we 

found that Shanghai Wells, the 

Shaoxing Metal Companies, and certain 

separate rate applicants who received a 

separate rate 6 (‘‘Separate Rate 

Recipients’’) in the Preliminary 

Determination demonstrated their 

eligibility for separate-rate status. For 

the final determination, we continue to 

find that the evidence placed on the 

record of this investigation by Shanghai 

Wells, the Shaoxing Metal Companies, 

and the Separate Rate Recipients 

demonstrate both a de jure and de facto 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 158 / Thursday, August 14, 2008 / Notices 47591 

7The PRC-Wide entity includes Tianjin Hongtong 

Metal Manufacture Co. Ltd. 

absence of government control, with 

respect to their respective exports of the 

merchandise under investigation, and, 

thus are eligible for separate rate status. 

In the Preliminary Determination, the 

Department denied a separate rate to 

Tianjin Hongtong Metal Manufacture 

Co., Ltd. (‘‘Hongtong’’) because it was 

unable to demonstrate that it had sales 

of the merchandise under consideration 

to the United States. We found that 

Hongtong was a producer and not an 

exporter of the merchandise under 

consideration during the POI and, 

therefore, was not eligible to receive a 

separate rate in this investigation. See 

Preliminary Determination, 73 FR at 

15730–31. The Department has not 

received any information from 

Hongtong contrary to our preliminary 

finding. Therefore, we continue to find 

that Hongtong is not eligible to receive 

a separate rate in this investigation. 

Lastly, we are calculating the separate 

rate based on the simple average of the 

two mandatory respondents because 

using a weighted average risks 

disclosure of business proprietary 

information. See Fresh Garlic from the 

People’s Republic of China: Final 

Results and Partial Rescission of the 

12th Administrative Review, 73 FR 

34251, 34252 (June 17, 2008); 

Memorandum to the File, from Irene 

Gorelik, Senior Analyst, Office 9, Import 

Administration, Subject: Investigation of 

Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the 

People’s Republic of China: Final 

Simple-Averaged Margin for Separate 

Rate Companies, (August 7, 2008) at 

Attachment I. 

The PRC-Wide Rate 

In the Preliminary Determination, the 

Department stated that information on 

the record of this investigation indicates 

that there are numerous producers/ 

exporters of hangers in the PRC. As 

stated in the Preliminary Determination, 

the Department collected CBP data to 

select respondents based on imports of 

hangers classified under HTSUS 

subheading 7326.20.00.20. See 

Preliminary Determination, 73 FR at 

15731. Furthermore, upon receipt of 

separate-rates applications, we 

examined the CBP data and determined 

that a significant number of exporters of 

hangers from the PRC during the POI 

were neither selected for review nor 

filed separate-rate applications; thus, we 

determined that PRC exporters of 

hangers are not active participants in 

this investigation. Based upon our 

knowledge of the volume of imports of 

the merchandise under consideration 

from the PRC from CBP data, the 

volume of imports of the merchandise 

under consideration from Shanghai 

Wells, the Shaoxing Metal Companies, 

and the separate-rate applicants, while 

accounting for a significant share, do 

not account for all imports into the 

United States. Therefore, the 

Department continues to determine that 

there were PRC producers/exporters of 

the merchandise under consideration 

during the POI that did not apply for 

separate rates, thus establishing that 

there is a PRC-Wide entity with respect 

to this product. Therefore, consistent 

with the presumption of government 

control, we continue to determine that 

some exports of subject merchandise are 

from entities under the control of the 

PRC-Wide entity. The Department’s 

presumption that these entries were 

subject to government control has not 

been rebutted since the Preliminary 

Determination, thus we continue to 

determine that these entries should be 

assessed a single PRC-Wide 

antidumping duty rate. 

As the single PRC-Wide rate, we have 

taken the simple average of: (A) The 

weighted-average of the calculated rates 

for the Shaoxing Metal Companies and 

Shanghai Wells and (B) a simple average 

of petition rates based on U.S. prices 

and normal values within the range of 

the U.S. prices and normal values 

calculated for the Shaoxing Metal 

Companies and Shanghai Wells. This 

rate applies to all entries of the 

merchandise under investigation with 

the exception of those entries from 

Shanghai Wells, the Shaoxing Metal 

Companies, and the Separate-Rate 

Recipients. See Amended Preliminary 

Determination, 73 FR at 20020. 

Final Determination Margins 

We determine that the following 

percentage weighted-average margins 

exist for the POI: 

STEEL WIRE GARMENT HANGERS FROM THE PRC—FINAL DUMPING MARGINS

Exporter & Producer 

Weighted-average 

deposit rate 

(percent) 

Shanghai Wells Hanger Co., Ltd. ................................................................................................................................................ 15.44 

Shaoxing Metal Companies ......................................................................................................................................................... 94.06 

Jiangyin Hongji Metal Products Co., Ltd ..................................................................................................................................... 54.75 

Shaoxing Meideli Metal Hanger Co., Ltd. ................................................................................................................................... 54.75 

Shaoxing Dingli Metal Clotheshorse Co., Ltd. ............................................................................................................................ 54.75 

Shaoxing Liangbao Metal Manufactured Co. Ltd. ....................................................................................................................... 54.75 

Shaoxing Zhongbao Metal Manufactured Co. Ltd. ..................................................................................................................... 54.75 

Shangyu Baoxiang Metal Manufactured Co. Ltd. ....................................................................................................................... 54.75 

Zhejiang Lucky Cloud Hanger Co., Ltd. ...................................................................................................................................... 54.75 

Pu Jiang County Command Metal Products Co., Ltd. ................................................................................................................ 54.75 

Shaoxing Shunji Metal Clotheshorse Co., Ltd. ........................................................................................................................... 54.75 

Ningbo Dasheng Hanger Ind. Co., Ltd. ....................................................................................................................................... 54.75 

Jiaxing Boyi Medical Device Co., Ltd. ......................................................................................................................................... 54.75 

Yiwu Ao-Si Metal Products Co., Ltd. ........................................................................................................................................... 54.75 

Shaoxing Guochao Metallic Products Co., Ltd. .......................................................................................................................... 54.75 

PRC-Wide Rate 7 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 186.98 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
47592 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 158 / Thursday, August 14, 2008 / Notices 

8The Shaoxing Metal Companies consist of: 

Shaoxing Gangyuan Metal Manufactured Co., Ltd. 

(‘‘Gangyuan’’), Shaoxing Andrew Metal 

Manufactured Co., Ltd. (‘‘Andrew’’), Shaoxing 

Tongzhou Metal Manufactured Co., Ltd. 

(‘‘Tongzhou’’), and Company X. The Department 

normally does not consider a respondent’s 

supplier’s name to be business proprietary 

information. However, in this instance, counsel for 

the Shaoxing Metal Companies bracketed this 

information as business proprietary and the 

Department did not challenge this treatment. See 

Memorandum to the File from Julia Hancock, 

Senior Case Analyst: Program Analysis for the Final 

Determination of Antidumping Duty Investigation 

of Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People’s 

Republic of China: Shaoxing Metal Companies, 

(August 7, 2008) (‘‘Shaoxing Final Analysis Memo’’) 

for more information regarding the identify of this 

company; Shaoxing Metal Companies’ Request for 

Collapsing, (February 26, 2008) at 15. 

9Because of the proprietary information of this 

sales trace, for further information, please see the 

Shaoxing Metal Verification Report at 21. 

10Shanghai Wells Hanger Co., Ltd. (‘‘Shanghai 

Wells’’). 

11The name of Customer X is business 

proprietary information. See Memorandum to the 

File from Irene Gorelik, Senior Case Analyst: 

Program Analysis for the Final Determination of 

Antidumping Duty Investigation of Steel Wire 

Garment Hangers from the People’s Republic of 

China: Shanghai Wells, (August 7, 2008) (‘‘Shanghai 

Wells Final Analysis Memo’’) for more information 

regarding the identity of this customer. 

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). 

Retroactive Application of Amended 

Preliminary Determination Cash 

Deposits 

For all entries of subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date of the Preliminary 

Determination, March 25, 2008, and 

before the publication date of the 

Amended Preliminary Determination, 

April 14, 2008, we will instruct CBP to 

apply the cash deposit rates from the 

Amended Preliminary Determination. 

See Issues and Decision Memorandum 

at Comment 8H. 

Continuation of Suspension of 

Liquidation 

We will instruct CBP to continue the 

suspension of liquidation required by 

section 735(d)(2) of the Act, of all 

entries of subject merchandise from 

Shanghai Wells, the Shaoxing Metal 

Companies, the Separate-Rate 

Recipients and the PRC-wide entity 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after March 25, 

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 normal value 

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. 

ITC 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. See section 

735(c)(2) of the Act. 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. 

See id.; section 736 of the Act. 

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 and notice are 

issued and published in accordance 

with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the 

Act. 

Dated: August 7, 2008. 

David M. Spooner, 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I—Discussion of the Issues 

I. General Issues 

Comment 1: Scope 

Comment 2: Treatment of Drawing Powder 

Surrogate Values 

Comment 3: Financial Ratios 

Comment 4: Wire Rod Surrogate Value 

Comment 5: Coating Powder and Glue 

Surrogate Values 

Comment 6: Wage Rate 

Comment 7: Steel Scrap Offset Surrogate 

Value 

Company Specific Comments 

Comment 8: Shaoxing Metal Companies 8

A. Total Adverse Facts Available (‘‘AFA’’) 

for the Shaoxing Metal Companies 

B. Total AFA for Quantity and Value 

(‘‘Q&V’’) of U.S. Sales 

C. Partial AFA for Sales Trace A9

D. Partial AFA for Water 

E. Partial AFA for White Paper, Brown 

Paper, and Steel Scrap Sales 

F. Reporting of Wire and Wire Rod 

G. Management and Administrative Labor 

H. Retroactive Implementation of 

Amended Preliminary Determination 

Comment 9: Shanghai Wells 10

A. Demurrage Revenue 

B. Commission Revenue 

C. Wells USA’s Indirect Selling Expenses 

D. Treatment of Water and Lubricant Lard 

E. Treatment of Market Economy (‘‘ME’’) 

Purchase 

F. Elimination of Credit Expenses from 

Constructed Export Price (‘‘CEP’’) Profit 

G. Sales to Customer X: Export Price (‘‘EP’’) 

or CEP 11

H. Payment Terms 

I. Truck Freight and Brokerage 

[FR Doc. E8–18851 Filed 8–13–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Air Force 

Notice of Intent To Grant an Exclusive 

Patent License 

AGENCY: Department of the Air Force. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of 

Part 404 of Title 37, Code of Federal 

Regulations, which implements Public 

Law 96–517, as amended, the 

Department of the Air Force announces 

its intention to grant Parhelion Labs, 

Incorporated in the State of California, 

having a place of business at 1660 S. 

Amphlett Blvd., Suite 350, San Mateo, 

California 94402, an exclusive license in 

any right, title and interest the Air Force 

has in: 

U.S. Patent No. 6,497,718, issued 

December 24, 2002, entitled ‘‘Process 

for phase-locking human ovulation/ 

menstrual cycles’’ by Edmond M. 

Dewan. 

DATES: A license for this patent will be 

granted unless a written objection is 

received within fifteen (15) days from 

the date of publication of this Notice. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Written objection should be sent to: 

James M. Skorich, Esq., 2251 Maxwell 

Ave., SE., 377th ABW/JAN Kirtland 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES