Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Notices 60725 

1See Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube 

from the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 

Postponement of Final Determination, 75 FR 26716 

(May 12, 2010) (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’). 

2See the ‘‘Verification’’ section below. 

3See Letter from Petitioners to the Secretary of 

Commerce, ‘‘Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and 

Tube from the People’s Republic of China; 

Investigation; Case Brief of Petitioners’’ (July 2, 

2010); Letter from Golden Dragon to the Secretary 

of Commerce, ‘‘Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and 

Tube from the People’s Republic of China’’ (July 2, 

2010); Letter from the Hailiang Group to the 

Secretary of Commerce, ‘‘Seamless Refined Copper 

Pipe & Tube from the People’s Republic of China: 

The Hailiang Group—Administrative Case Brief’’ 

(July 2, 2010). 

4See Letter from Petitioners to the Secretary of 

Commerce, ‘‘Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and 

Tube from the People’s Republic of China; 

Investigation; Rebuttal Brief of Petitioners’’ (July 9, 

2010); Letter from Golden Dragon to the Secretary 

of Commerce, ‘‘Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and 

Tube from the People’s Republic of China’’ (July 9, 

2010); Letter from the Hailiang Group to the 

Secretary of Commerce, ‘‘Seamless Refined Copper 

Pipe & Tube from the People’s Republic of China: 

Rebuttal Brief of the Hailiang Group’’ (July 9, 2010). 

5See Memorandum from Shawn Higgins, 

International Trade Compliance Analyst, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 4, ‘‘Antidumping Duty 

Investigation of Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and 

Tube from the People’s Republic of China: Wage 

Data’’ (August 3, 2010). 

6See Letter from Petitioners to the Secretary of 

Commerce, ‘‘Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and 

Tube from China; Petitioners’ Comments on the 

Surrogate Value for Labor’’ (August 9, 2010); Letter 

from Golden Dragon to the Secretary of Commerce, 

‘‘Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the 

People’s Republic of China: Golden Dragon Precise 

Copper Tube Group, Inc.’’ (August 9, 2010). 

determines that such injury does exist, 

we 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withdrawn from warehouse, for 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. 

Destruction of Proprietary Information 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective orders (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO as explained in 

the APO itself. See 19 CFR 

351.305(a)(3). Timely written 

notification of the 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 sanctionable 

violation. 

We are issuing and publishing this 

determination and notice in accordance 

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

Act. 

Dated: September 24, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix 

List of Issues in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum 

Comment 1: Comments Regarding the 

Investigation 

Comment 2: Alternative Cost Averaging 

Methodology 

Comment 3: Cost Recovery Test 

Comment 4: Model Matching Hierarchy 

Comment 5: Nacobre’s U.S. Date of Sale 

Comment 6: Treatment of Nacobre’s General 

and Administrative Expense Ratio 

Comment 7: Nacobre’s Weight Basis 

Comment 8: Treatment of the Negative Value 

of Certain U.S. Expense Variables for 

IUSA 

Comment 9: Treatment of Early Payment 

Discounts for IUSA’s Home Market Sales 

Comment 10: IUSA’s Packing Costs 

Comment 11: Further Manufactured Line 

Sets 

Comment 12: ‘‘All Others’’ Rate 

[FR Doc. 2010–24719 Filed 9–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–964] 

Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and 

Tube 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: October 1, 2010. 

SUMMARY: On May 12, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

‘‘Department’’) published its preliminary 

determination of sales at less than fair 

value (‘‘LTFV’’) in the antidumping duty 

investigation of seamless refined copper 

pipe and tube (‘‘copper pipe and tube’’) 

from the People’s Republic of China 

(‘‘PRC’’).1 The Department invited 

interested parties to comment on the 

Preliminary Determination. Based on 

the Department’s analysis of the 

comments received, the Department has 

made changes from the Preliminary 

Determination. The Department 

determines that copper pipe and tube 

from the PRC is being, or is 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 

final dumping margins for this 

investigation are listed in the ‘‘Final 

Determination’’ section below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Karine Gziryan or Shawn Higgins, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 4, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–4081 and (202) 

482–0679, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Department published its 

Preliminary Determination of sales at 

LTFV and postponement of the final 

determination on May 12, 2010. 

Between May 24, 2010, and June 1, 

2010, the Department conducted 

verification of mandatory respondents 

Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube 

Group, Inc. (‘‘Golden Dragon’’) and 

Zhejiang Hailiang Co., Ltd., Shanghai 

Hailiang Copper Co., Ltd., and Hong 

Kong Hailiang Metal Trading Limited 

(collectively, the ‘‘Hailiang Group’’).2

Cerro Flow Products, Inc., 

KobeWieland Copper Products, LLC, 

Mueller Copper Tube Company, Inc. 

(collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’), Golden 

Dragon, and the Hailiang Group 

submitted case briefs on July 2, 2010.3

On July 9, 2010, Petitioners, Golden 

Dragon, and the Hailiang Group filed 

rebuttal briefs.4 The Department 

conducted a public hearing on August 4, 

2010. 

On August 3, 2010, the Department 

notified parties that as a result of the 

recent decision in Dorbest Ltd. v. United 

States, 604 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2010) 

(‘‘Dorbest’’), issued by the United States 

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

(‘‘CAFC’’) on May 14, 2010, the 

Department would be reconsidering its 

valuation of the labor wage rate in this 

investigation. The Department placed 

export data on the record of the 

investigation and gave parties an 

opportunity to comment on the narrow 

issue of the labor wage value in light of 

the CAFC’s decision.5 On August 9, 

2010, Petitioners and Golden Dragon 

submitted comments regarding the wage 

rate issue.6

Period of Investigation 

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

January 1, 2009, through June 30, 2009. 

This period corresponds to the two most 

recent fiscal quarters prior to the month 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
60726 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Notices 

7See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1). 

8See Memorandum from Susan H. Kuhbach, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. 

Lorentzen, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum 

for the Final Determination in the Antidumping 

Duty Investigation of Seamless Refined Copper Pipe 

and Tube from the People’s Republic of China’’ 

(September 24, 2010) (‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum’’). 

9See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 1; Memorandum to the File from Shawn 

Higgins, International Trade Compliance Analyst, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, ‘‘Investigation of 

Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the 

People’s Republic of China: Final Surrogate Value 

Memorandum,’’ (September 24, 2010) (‘‘Final 

Surrogate Value Memorandum’’) at 2, Attachment 3. 

10See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 2; Final Surrogate Value Memorandum at 

2, Attachment 4. 

11See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 4; Memorandum from Shawn Higgins, 

International Trade Compliance Analyst, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 4, to the File, ‘‘Seamless Refined 

Copper Pipe and Tube from the People’s Republic 

of China: Final Analysis Memorandum for Golden 

Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc.’’ 

(September 24, 2010) (‘‘Golden Dragon’s Final 

Analysis Memorandum’’) at 1–2, Attachment 1. 

12See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 8; Golden Dragon’s Final Analysis 

Memorandum at 2, Attachment 3. 

13See Memorandum from Shawn Higgins, 

International Trade Compliance Analyst, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 4, to the File, ‘‘Antidumping 

Duty Investigation of Seamless Refined Copper Pipe 

and Tube from the People’s Republic of China: 

Verification of the Questionnaire Responses of 

Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc.’’ 

(June 15, 2010) (‘‘Golden Dragon’s Verification 

Report’’) at 3; Golden Dragon’s Final Analysis 

Memorandum at 2. 

14 Id. 

15 Id. 

16See Golden Dragon’s Verification Report at 3; 

Golden Dragon’s Final Analysis Memorandum at 3. 

17See Golden Dragon’s Verification Report at 2, 

29; Golden Dragon’s Final Analysis Memorandum 

at 3. 

18See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 9; Golden Dragon’s Final Analysis 

Memorandum at 3. 

19 Id. 

20See Golden Dragon’s Verification Report at 33; 

Golden Dragon’s Final Analysis Memorandum at 3. 

21See Golden Dragon’s Verification Report at 32; 

Golden Dragon’s Final Analysis Memorandum at 

3–4, Attachment 4. 

22 Id. 

23See Golden Dragon’s Verification Report at 2, 

18; Golden Dragon’s Final Analysis Memorandum 

at 4. 

24See Golden Dragon’s Verification Report at 2, 

22; Golden Dragon’s Final Analysis Memorandum 

at 4. 

25See Golden Dragon’s Verification Report at 2, 

22–23; Golden Dragon’s Final Analysis 

Memorandum at 4. 

26See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 12; Memorandum from Karine Gziryan, 

International Trade Compliance Analyst, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 4, to the File, ‘‘Seamless Refined 

Copper Pipe and Tube from the People’s Republic 

of China: Final Analysis Memorandum for the 

Hailiang Group’’ (September 24, 2010) (‘‘Hailiang 

Group’s Final Analysis Memorandum’’) at 2. 

27See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 13; Hailiang Group’s Final Analysis 

Memorandum at 2. 

of the filing of the petition (i.e., 

September, 2009).7

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties to this 

investigation, as well as comments 

received pursuant to the Department’s 

requests, are addressed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum.8 A list of the 

issues which parties raised and to 

which the Department responds in the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum is 

attached to this notice as Appendix I. 

The Issues and Decision Memorandum 

is a public document that is on file in 

the Central Records Unit, Room 7046 of 

the main Commerce building and 

accessible at http://trade.gov/ia. The 

paper copy and electronic version of the 

memorandum are identical in content. 

Changes Since the Preliminary 

Determination 

Changes Applicable to Multiple 

Companies 

1. Pursuant to Dorbest, the 

Department calculated an hourly wage 

rate by averaging earnings and/or wages 

in countries that are economically 

comparable to the PRC and that are 

significant producers of comparable 

merchandise.9

2. The Department made several 

adjustments to the calculations of the 

surrogate financial ratios.10

Changes Specific to Golden Dragon 

1. The Department treated Golden 

Dragon’s copper cathode purchases from 

a certain PRC supplier as market 

economy purchases.11

2. In accordance with section 

777A(a)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.413, the Department declined to 

make certain adjustments to the 

calculation of indirect U.S. selling 

expenses for salaries paid to two 

employees of Golden Dragon who 

worked in the United States during the 

POI because these adjustments are 

insignificant in relation to the price of 

the merchandise.12

3. The Department revised the 

reported wall thickness for one control 

number (‘‘CONNUM’’).13

4. The Department revised the 

reported electricity consumption to 

account for indirect consumption of 

electricity.14

5. The Department revised the 

reported indirect labor to account for 

previously unreported labor hours.15

6. The Department revised the 

reported water consumption to reflect 

the water consumption calculated in 

Golden Dragon’s cost reconciliation.16

7. The Department revised the 

reported direct labor and electricity 

consumption to reflect the correct 

production quantities at all stages of the 

production process.17

8. The Department revised the 

reported electricity consumption to 

reflect the correct allocation of 

electricity to the different inner grooved 

tubes (‘‘IGT’’) based on the IGT forming 

processing stage consumption that 

corresponds to each type of IGT.18

9. The Department adjusted the 

reported electricity and direct labor 

consumption for a particular CONNUM 

to reflect the lower electricity and direct 

labor usage rates for a nine millimeter 

(mm) IGT product instead of the higher 

rates for a seven mm product.19

10. The Department revised the 

reported consumption of plastic plugs, 

wood boards, rubber plugs, and paper 

pads to reflect the weights measured by 

the Department during verification.20

11. The Department revised the 

distances between Golden Dragon and 

several of its suppliers.21

12. The Department revised the 

distances between Golden Dragon and 

several seaports, including the nearest 

seaport.22

13. The Department revised the gross 

unit price of eight invoices in which the 

sales amount recorded in the U.S. sales 

database was less than the sales amount 

recorded in the records of the U.S. sales 

staff.23

14. The Department revised the 

reported international freight amount to 

include a security fee that was not 

reported in the U.S. sales database.24

15. The Department revised the credit 

period over which the reported credit 

expenses are based from the period 

between the date of sale and the 

payment date to the period between the 

date of shipment and the payment 

date.25

Changes Specific to the Hailiang Group 

1. The Department determined that 

the Hailiang Group has failed to 

cooperate because it has not acted to the 

best of its ability to comply with the 

Department’s requests to provide factors 

of production (‘‘FOP’’) on a productgroup specific basis. Therefore, 

pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act, 

the Department has found that, in 

selecting from among the facts 

otherwise available (‘‘FA’’), an adverse 

inference is appropriate for the Hailiang 

Group.26

2. The Department revised the 

weighted-average per-unit FOP for water 

to include the FOP for water reported on 

a cubic meter per kilogram basis.27


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Notices 60727 

28See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 14; Hailiang Group’s Final Analysis 

Memorandum at 3. 

29See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 15; Hailiang Group’s Final Analysis 

Memorandum at 3. 

30 Id. 

31See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 15; Hailiang Group’s Final Analysis 

Memorandum at 4. 

32See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 17; Hailiang Group’s Final Analysis 

Memorandum at 4. 

33See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 18; Hailiang Group’s Final Analysis 

Memorandum at 4. 

34See Memorandum from Robert Bolling, 

Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, to 

the File, ‘‘Verification of the Sales and Factors 

Responses of Zhejiang Hailiang Co., Ltd.; Shanghai 

Hailiang Co., Ltd.; and Hong Kong Hailiang Co., 

Ltd. in the Antidumping Investigation of Seamless 

Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the People’s 

Republic of China’’ (June 18, 2010); Memorandum 

from Shawn Higgins, International Trade 

Compliance Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, 

to the File, ‘‘Antidumping Duty Investigation of 

Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the 

People’s Republic of China: Verification of the 

Questionnaire Responses of Golden Dragon Precise 

Copper Tube Group, Inc.’’ (June 15, 2010). 

35See, e.g., Preliminary Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final 

Determination: Coated Free Sheet Paper from the 

People’s Republic of China, 72 FR 30758, 30760 

(June 4, 2007), unchanged in Final Determination 

of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Coated Free Sheet 

Paper from the People’s Republic of China, 72 FR 

60632 (October 25, 2007). 

36See Preliminary Determination, 75 FR at 26719. 

3. The Department revised the 

weighted-average per-unit FOP for 

wooden crate.28

4. The Department revised its normal 

value calculation to include carbon soot, 

scale-like graphite, hydrogen, and mold 

oils as direct materials.29

5. The Department revised its normal 

value calculation to exclude polythene, 

colorant, and anti-aging master batch.30

6. The Department revised its normal 

value calculation to include nitrogen, 

kerosene and charcoal as direct 

inputs.31

7. The Department revised its normal 

value calculation to include the labor 

hours reported in the two additional 

indirect labor fields from the Hailiang 

Group’s post-verification sales 

database.32

8. The Department incorporated all 

changes from the Hailiang Group’s 

minor corrections in the final 

calculation of the Hailiang Group’s 

antidumping margin.33

Scope of Investigation 

For the purpose of this investigation, 

the products covered are all seamless 

circular refined copper pipes and tubes, 

including redraw hollows, greater than 

or equal to 6 inches (152.4 mm) in 

length and measuring less than 12.130 

inches (308.102 mm) (actual) in outside 

diameter (‘‘OD’’), regardless of wall 

thickness, bore (e.g., smooth, enhanced 

with inner grooves or ridges), 

manufacturing process (e.g., hot 

finished, cold-drawn, annealed), outer 

surface (e.g., plain or enhanced with 

grooves, ridges, fins, or gills), end finish 

(e.g., plain end, swaged end, flared end, 

expanded end, crimped end, threaded), 

coating (e.g., plastic, paint), insulation, 

attachments (e.g., plain, capped, 

plugged, with compression or other 

fitting), or physical configuration (e.g., 

straight, coiled, bent, wound on spools). 

The scope of this investigation covers, 

but is not limited to, seamless refined 

copper pipe and tube produced or 

comparable to the American Society for 

Testing and Materials (‘‘ASTM’’) ASTM– 

B42, ASTM–B68, ASTM–B75, ASTM– 

B88, ASTM–B88M, ASTM–B188, 

ASTM–B251, ASTM–B251M, ASTM– 

B280, ASTM–B302, ASTM–B306, 

ASTM–359, ASTM–B743, ASTM–B819, 

and ASTM–B903 specifications and 

meeting the physical parameters 

described therein. Also included within 

the scope of this investigation are all 

sets of covered products, including ‘‘line 

sets’’ of seamless refined copper tubes 

(with or without fittings or insulation) 

suitable for connecting an outdoor air 

conditioner or heat pump to an indoor 

evaporator unit. The phrase ‘‘all sets of 

covered products’’ denotes any 

combination of items put up for sale 

that is comprised of merchandise 

subject to the scope. 

‘‘Refined copper’’ is defined as: (1) 

Metal containing at least 99.85 percent 

by weight of copper; or (2) metal 

containing at least 97.5 percent by 

weight of copper, provided that the 

content by weight of any other element 

does not exceed the following limits: 

Element Limiting content 

percent by weight 

Ag—Silver ..................... 0 .25 

As—Arsenic .................. 0 .5 

Cd—Cadmium .............. 1 .3 

Cr—Chromium .............. 1 .4 

Mg—Magnesium ........... 0 .8 

Pb—Lead ...................... 1 .5 

S—Sulfur ...................... 0 .7 

Sn—Tin ......................... 0 .8 

Te—Tellurium ............... 0 .8 

Zn—Zinc ....................... 1 .0 

Zr—Zirconium ............... 0 .3 

Other elements (each) .. 0 .3 

Excluded from the scope of this 

investigation are all seamless circular 

hollows of refined copper less than 12 

inches in length whose OD (actual) 

exceeds its length. The products subject 

to this investigation are currently 

classifiable under subheadings 

7411.10.1030 and 7411.10.1090 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). Products 

subject to this investigation may also 

enter under HTSUS subheadings 

7407.10.1500, 7419.99.5050, 

8415.90.8065, and 8415.90.8085. 

Although the HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, the written description of the 

scope of this investigation is dispositive. 

Scope Comments 

The Department has not received 

comments on the scope of this 

investigation since the publication of 

the Preliminary Determination. 

Verification 

As provided in section 782(i) of the 

Act, the Department verified the 

information submitted by Golden 

Dragon and the Hailiang Group for use 

in the final determination. The 

Department used standard verification 

procedures including examination of 

relevant accounting and production 

records and original source documents 

provided by the respondents.34

Non-Market Economy Treatment 

The Department considers the PRC to 

be a non-market economy (‘‘NME’’) 

country.35 In accordance with section 

771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, any 

determination that a foreign country is 

an NME country shall remain in effect 

until revoked by the administering 

authority. No party has challenged the 

designation of the PRC as an NME 

country in this investigation. Therefore, 

the Department continues to treat the 

PRC as an NME country for purposes of 

this final determination. 

Surrogate Country 

In the Preliminary Determination, the 

Department stated that it 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 section 

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

Department has reliable data from India 

that it can use to value the FOPs.36 The 

Department received no comments on 

this issue after the Preliminary 

Determination and the Department has 

not made changes to its findings with 

respect to the selection of a surrogate 

country for the final determination. 

Separate Rates 

In proceedings involving NME 

countries, the Department holds a 

rebuttable presumption that all 

companies within the country are 

subject to government control and, thus, 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
60728 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Notices 

37See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers from the People’s 

Republic of China, 56 FR 20588 (May 6, 1991), as 

further developed in 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). 

38See Preliminary Determination, 75 FR at 26720. 

39See section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act. 

40See Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the 

People’s Republic of China: Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 73 FR 47587, 47591 

(August 14, 2008). 

41See Letter from the Hailiang Group to the 

Secretary of Commerce, ‘‘Certain Seamless Refined 

Copper Pipe & Tube from the People’s Republic of 

China: Supplemental Section D Questionnaire 

Response of Hailiang Group’’ (March 19, 2010) at 

Exhibit 6; Letter from the Hailiang Group to the 

Secretary of Commerce, ‘‘Certain Seamless Refined 

Copper Pipe & Tube from the People’s Republic of 

China: Supplemental Section D Questionnaire 

Response of Hailiang Group’’ (April 12, 2010) at 

Exhibit 12. 

42See Letter from Robert Bolling, Program 

Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, to the 

Hailiang Group, ‘‘Sections C&D Third Supplemental 

Questionnaire’’ (April 28, 2010) at 2–3; Letter from 

Robert Bolling, Program Manager, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 4, to the Hailiang Group, 

‘‘Sections C&D Second Supplemental 

Questionnaire’’ (March 29, 2010) at 5; Letter from 

Robert Bolling, Program Manager, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 4, to the Hailiang Group, 

‘‘Sections C&D Supplemental Questionnaire’’ 

(February 26, 2010) at 8–9; Letter from Robert 

Bolling, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 4, to Zhejiang Hailiang, ‘‘Antidumping Duty 

Investigation of Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and 

Tube from the People’s Republic of China: Request 

for Information’’ (December 4, 2009) at D–2. 

43See Letter from the Hailiang Group to the 

Secretary of Commerce, ‘‘Certain Seamless Refined 

Copper Pipe and Tube from the People’s Republic 

of China: Third Supplemental Section D 

Questionnaire & Part 1 of Post-Preliminary FOP 

Response of Hailiang Group’’ (May 11, 2010); Letter 

from the Hailiang Group to the Secretary of 

Commerce, ‘‘Certain Seamless Refined Copper Pipe 

and Tube from China: Part 2 of Post-Preliminary 

FOP Response of the Hailiang Group’’ (May 14, 

2010). 

should be assessed a single antidumping 

duty rate. It is the Department’s policy 

to assign all exporters of subject 

merchandise 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.37

In the Preliminary Determination, the 

Department found that the following 

companies demonstrated eligibility for 

separate-rate status: Luvata Tube 

(Zhongshan) Ltd.; Ningbo Jintian 

Copper Tube Co. Ltd.; Zhejiang Naile 

Copper Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang Jiahe Pipes 

Inc.; and Luvata Alltop (Zhongshan) 

Ltd. (collectively, the ‘‘Separate Rate 

Applicants’’).38 Since the publication of 

the Preliminary Determination, no party 

has commented on the eligibility of the 

Separate Rate Applicants for separaterate status. For the final determination, 

the Department continues to find that 

the evidence placed on the record of 

this investigation by the Separate Rate 

Applicants demonstrates both de jure 

and de facto absence of government 

control with respect to each company’s 

respective exports of the merchandise 

under investigation. Thus, the 

Department continues to find that the 

Separate Rate Applicants are eligible for 

separate-rate status. 

The separate rate is determined based 

on the estimated weighted-average 

dumping margins established for 

exporters and producers individually 

investigated, excluding zero and de 

minimis margins or margins based 

entirely on adverse facts available 

(‘‘AFA’’).39 In this investigation both 

mandatory respondents, Golden Dragon 

and the Hailiang Group, have estimated 

weighted-average dumping margins 

which are above de minimis and which 

are not based on total AFA. Therefore, 

because there are only two relevant 

weighted-average dumping margins for 

this final determination and because 

using a weighted average risks 

disclosure of business proprietary 

information, the separate rate is a 

simple-average of these two values, 

which is 36.05 percent.40

Use of FA and AFA 

Section 776(a) of the Act provides that 

the Department shall apply FA if (1) 

necessary information is not on the 

record, or (2) 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 

and 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 further 

provides that the Department may use 

an adverse inference in applying FA 

when a party has failed to cooperate by 

not acting to the best of its ability to 

comply with a request for information. 

Such an adverse inference may include 

reliance on information derived from 

the petition, the final determination, a 

previous administrative review, or other 

information placed on the record. 

Hailiang Group 

In the Preliminary Determination, the 

Department determined, pursuant to 

section 776(a)(1) and (2)(B) of the Act, 

that it was appropriate to base the 

Hailiang Group’s preliminary dumping 

margin, in part, on FA because (1) the 

Hailiang Group’s own information on 

the record indicates that it had the 

ability to report its FOPs on a productgroup specific basis,41 and (2) the 

Hailiang Group continued to report FOP 

values that are identical for all 

CONNUMs, despite the Department’s 

multiple requests to provide this data on 

a more specific basis.42 On April 29, 

2010, the Department issued a 

questionnaire that requested the 

Hailiang Group to report productspecific FOPs for different production 

stages and, if the Hailiang Group 

believed that this were not possible, to 

comment on the product-group specific 

processing yields that are on the record 

of this investigation. However, the 

Hailiang Group neither reported 

product-specific FOPs for different 

production stages nor explained why 

these product-group specific processing 

yields are incorrect and cannot be 

applied in the calculation of productgroup specific FOPs.43 The Hailiang 

Group had multiple opportunities both 

before and after the Preliminary 

Determination to explain why the 

cumulative yields that were calculated 

by Petitioners and used in the 

Preliminary Determination were flawed 

and could not be used in the final 

determination. The Hailiang Group, 

however, did not provide such an 

explanation. 

Because the Hailiang Group has 

continued to report FOP values that are 

identical for all CONNUMs, despite the 

Department’s multiple requests to 

provide this data on a more specific 

basis, all the information necessary for 

the Department to calculate an accurate 

dumping margin for the Hailiang Group 

is not on the record and available for 

use in the final determination. Since the 

Hailiang Group did not provide the 

requested FOPs on a product-group 

specific basis, this necessary 

information was not available on the 

record and, therefore, the Department 

has determined, pursuant to section 

776(a)(1) and (2)(B) of the Act, that it 

continues to be appropriate to base the 

Hailiang Group’s dumping margin, in 

part, on FA. Furthermore, the 

Department determines that the 

Hailiang Group has failed to cooperate 

because the Hailiang Group has not 

acted to the best of its ability to comply 

with the Department’s requests both 

before and after the Preliminary 

Determination to provide FOPs on a 

product-group specific basis or to 

explain why the cumulative yields 

calculated by Petitioners and used in 

the Preliminary Determination could 

not be used in the final determination. 

Therefore, pursuant to section 776(b) of 

the Act, the Department finds that, in 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Notices 60729 

44See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 12; Hailiang Group’s Final Analysis 

Memorandum at 6. 

45See Preliminary Determination, 75 FR at 26722. 

46 Id. 

47See, 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). 

48See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value: Static Random Access 

Memory Semiconductors From Taiwan, 63 FR 8909, 

8932 (February 23, 1998). 49See Brake Rotors From the People’s Republic of 

China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of the 

Seventh Administrative Review; Final Results of the 

Eleventh New Shipper Review, 70 FR 69937, 69939 

(November 18, 2005) (quoting the Statement of 

Administrative Action accompanying the Uruguay 

Round Agreements Act, H. Doc. No. 316, 103d 

Cong., 2d Session at 870 (1994)). 

50See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Flat-Rolled Carbon 

Quality Steel Products From The People’s Republic 

of China, 65 FR 34660 (May 31, 2000) and 

accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

‘‘Facts Available.’’ 

51See Hailiang Group’s Final Analysis 

Memorandum at 1, Attachment III. 

52See Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube 

From the People’s Republic of China and Mexico: 

Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 74 

FR 55194, 55199 (October 27, 2009) (‘‘Initiation 

Notice’’). 

selecting from among FA, an adverse 

inference is appropriate for the Hailiang 

Group.44

PRC-Wide Entity 

In the Preliminary Determination, the 

Department determimined that certain 

PRC exporters/producers did not 

respond to the Department’s requests for 

information.45 Thus, the Department 

treated these PRC exporters/producers 

as part of the PRC-wide entity and 

found that the PRC-wide entity did not 

respond to our requests for 

information.46 No additional 

information was placed on the record 

with respect to any of these companies 

after the Preliminary Determination. 

Since the PRC-wide entity did not 

provide the Department with requested 

information, pursuant to section 

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

continues to find it appropriate to base 

the PRC-wide rate on FA. 

The Department determines that, 

because the PRC-wide entity did not 

respond to our requests for information, 

the PRC-wide entity has failed to 

cooperate to the best of its ability. 

Therefore, pursuant to section 776(b) of 

the Act, the Department finds that, in 

selecting from among the FA, an adverse 

inference is appropriate for the PRCwide entity. 

Because the Department begins with 

the presumption that all companies 

within an NME country are subject to 

government control, and because only 

Separate Rate Applicants have 

overcome that presumption, the 

Department is 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.47 The 

PRC-wide entity rate applies to all 

entries of subject merchandise except 

for entries from Golden Dragon, the 

Hailiang Group, and the Separate Rate 

Applicants. 

Selection of the AFA Rate for the PRCWide Entity 

In selecting a rate for AFA, the 

Department selects a rate that is 

sufficiently adverse ‘‘as to effectuate the 

purpose of the facts available rule to 

induce respondents to provide the 

Department with complete and accurate 

information in a timely manner.’’ 48

Further, it is the Department’s practice 

to select a rate that ensures ‘‘that the 

party does not obtain a more favorable 

result by failing to cooperate than if it 

had cooperated fully.’’ 49 It is the 

Department’s practice to select, as AFA, 

the higher of the (a) highest margin 

alleged in the petition, or (b) the highest 

calculated rate of any respondent in the 

investigation.50 In the instant 

investigation, as AFA, the Department 

has assigned to the PRC-wide entity the 

highest rate on the record of this 

proceeding, which is the 60.85 percent 

weighted-average margin calculated for 

the Hailiang Group.51 The Department 

determines that this information is the 

most appropriate from the available 

sources to effectuate the purposes of 

AFA. 

The dumping margin for the PRCwide entity applies to all entries of the 

merchandise under investigation except 

for entries of merchandise under 

investigation from the exporter/ 

manufacturer combinations listed in the 

chart in the ‘‘Final Determination’’ 

section below. 

Combination Rates 

In the Initiation Notice, the 

Department stated that it would 

calculate combination rates for certain 

respondents that are eligible for a 

separate rate in this investigation.52 This 

practice is described in Policy Bulletin 

05.1, available at http://www.trade.gov/ 

ia. 

Final Determination 

The Department determines that the 

following dumping margins exist for the 

period January 1, 2009 through June 30, 

2009: 

Exporter Producer 

Weightedaverage 

percent 

margin 

Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc ......................... Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc ........................ 11.25 

Zhejiang Hailiang Co., Ltd.; Hong Kong Hailiang Metal Trading ... Zhejiang Hailiang Co., Ltd.; Shanghai Hailiang Copper Co., Ltd 60.85 

Limited; Shanghai Hailiang Copper Co., Ltd 

Zhejiang Naile Copper Co., Ltd ..................................................... Zhejiang Naile Copper Co., Ltd .................................................... 36.05 

Zhejiang Jiahe Pipes Inc ................................................................ Zhejiang Jiahe Pipes Inc .............................................................. 36.05 

Luvata Tube (Zhongshan) Ltd ........................................................ Luvata Tube (Zhongshan) Ltd ...................................................... 36.05 

Luvata Tube (Zhongshan) Ltd ........................................................ Luvata Alltop (Zhongshan) Ltd ..................................................... 36.05 

Luvata Alltop (Zhongshan) Ltd ....................................................... Luvata Alltop (Zhongshan) Ltd ..................................................... 36.05 

Ningbo Jintian Copper Tube Co. Ltd ............................................. Ningbo Jintian Copper Tube Co. Ltd ............................................ 36.05 

PRC-Wide Entity ............................................................................ PRC-Wide Entity ........................................................................... 60.85 

Disclosure 

The Department 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). 

Suspension of Liquidation 

In accordance with section 

735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department 

will instruct U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to continue to 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
60730 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Notices 

1See Notice of Amended Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping 

Duty Order: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp 

From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 70 FR 5152 

(February 1, 2005) (‘‘Order’’). 

suspend liquidation of all entries of 

copper pipe and tube from the PRC, as 

described in the ‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ 

section, entered, or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption on or after 

May 12, 2010, the date of publication of 

the Preliminary Determination in the 

Federal Register. The Department will 

instruct CBP to require a cash deposit or 

the posting of a bond equal to the 

weighted-average amount by which the 

normal value exceeds U.S. price, as 

indicated above. 

International Trade Commission 

Notification 

In accordance with section 735(d) of 

the Act, the Department has notified the 

International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’) 

of the final affirmative determination of 

sales at LTFV. As the Department’s 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: September 24, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I 

Issues for Final Determination 

Comment 1: Whether the Department should 

revise its labor rate calculation. 

Comment 2: Whether the Department should 

revise its calculation of the surrogate 

financial ratios. 

Comment 3: Whether the Department should 

issue cash deposit instructions that 

contain ad valorem rates or specific 

rates. 

Issues Specific to Golden Dragon Precise 

Copper Tube Group, Inc. 

Comment 4: Whether the Department should 

treat copper cathode purchases by 

Golden Dragon from a certain supplier in 

the Peoples’s Republic of China as nonmarket economy purchases. 

Comment 5: Whether the Department should 

recalculate Golden Dragon’s copper 

cathode cost based on the bonded and 

general trade copper cathode purchases 

during the period of investigation. 

Comment 6: Whether the Department should 

revise the surrogate value for plywood 

batten consumed by Golden Dragon. 

Comment 7: Whether the Department should 

consider solvent consumed by Golden 

Dragon to be a direct material input. 

Comment 8: Whether the Department should 

include salaries paid to two employees 

of Golden Dragon who worked in the 

United States during the period of 

investigation as indirect U.S. selling 

expenses. 

Comment 9: Whether the Department should 

adjust the factor of production for 

electricity for 7 mm and 9 mm innergrooved tube products. 

Comment 10: Whether the Department 

should make certain minor corrections. 

Issues Specific to Zhejiang Hailiang Co., Ltd., 

Shanghai Hailiang Copper Co., Ltd., and 

Hong Kong Hailiang Metal Trading Limited 

Comment 11: Whether to use facts available 

with regard to the Hailiang Group’s line 

set sales. 

Comment 12: Whether to use of facts 

available with regard to the Hailiang 

Group’s factors of production. 

Comment 13: Whether to correct the water 

usage factor of production used in the 

Preliminary Determination. 

Comment 14: Whether the Department 

should accept the post-preliminary 

correction of the consumption of 

Shanghai Hailiang’s wooden crates. 

Comment 15: Whether to continue 

considering certain raw materials as 

factors of production or exclude them 

from the calculation of the Hailiang 

Group’s normal value. 

Comment 16: Whether to continue using the 

actual weight reported by the Hailiang 

Group in its United States sales database. 

Comment 17: Whether to include two 

additional categories of indirect labor as 

labor inputs. 

Comment 18: Whether the Department 

should make certain minor corrections. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24720 Filed 9–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–552–802] 

Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp 

From the Socialist Republic of 

Vietnam: Initiation of Antidumping 

Duty New Shipper Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: October 1, 2010. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(‘‘Department’’) has determined that a 

request for a new shipper review 

(‘‘NSR’’) of the antidumping duty order 

on certain frozen warmwater shrimp 

(‘‘shrimp’’) from the Socialist Republic 

of Vietnam (‘‘Vietnam’’), received on 

August 26, 2010, meets the statutory 

and regulatory requirements for 

initiation. The period of review (‘‘POR’’) 

for this NSR is February 1, 2010–July 

31, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Walker, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, 

Import Administration, International 

Trade Administration, U.S. Department 

of Commerce, 14th Street and 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: 202–482–0413. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The notice announcing the 

antidumping duty order on shrimp from 

Vietnam was published in the Federal 

Register on February 1, 2005.1 On 

August 26, 2010, pursuant to section 

751(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 

as amended (‘‘Act’’), and section 

351.214(c) of the Department’s 

regulations, the Department received a 

NSR request from Quoc Viet 

Seaproducts Processing Trading and 

Import-Export Co., Ltd. (‘‘Quoc Viet’’). 

Quoc Viet’s request was properly made 

during August 2010, which is the semiannual anniversary of the Order. Quoc 

Viet certified that it is a producer and 

exporter of the subject merchandise 

upon which the request was based. 

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) of 

the Act and section 351.214(b)(2)(i) of 

the Department’s regulations, Quoc Viet 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES