Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29665 

1 See Petitions for the Imposition of 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: 

Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand From the 

People’s Republic of China, dated May 27, 2009 (the 

Petition). 

Average Yarn Number: 38/IMC–40/IMC; 61/IMC 

Thread Count: 77 warp ends x 20 filling picks per 

square centimeter 

Weave Type: Stretch Dobby 

Weight: 208.17–254.43 grams/m2 

Width: 124.46 to 132.08 centimeters 

Finish: Piece Dyed 

Variance allowance of up to three percent for content, ten percent for yarn size, ten percent for 

thread count, ten percent for fabric weight, and 

ten percent for fabric width. 

Kim-Bang Nguyen, 

Acting Chairman, Committee for the 

Implementation of Textile Agreements. 

[FR Doc. E9–14754 Filed 6–22–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–945] 

Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire 

Strand From the People’s Republic of 

China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty 

Investigation 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: June 23, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex 

Villanueva, AD/CVD Operations, Office 

9, International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–3208. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petition 

On May 27, 2009, the Department of 

Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) received 

an antidumping duty (‘‘AD’’) petition 

concerning imports of prestressed 

concrete steel wire strand (‘‘PC strand’’) 

from the People’s Republic of China 

(‘‘PRC’’) filed in proper form by 

American Spring Wire Corp., Insteel 

Wire Products Company, and Sumiden 

Wire Products Corp., (collectively, 

‘‘Petitioners’’).1 On June 1, 2009, the 

Department issued a request for 

additional information and clarification 

of certain areas of the Petition. Based on 

the Department’s request, Petitioners 

filed supplements to the Petition on 

June 4, 2009 (‘‘Supplement to the AD 

Petition’’ and ‘‘Supplement to the AD/ 

CVD Petitions). On June 8, 2009, the 

Department requested further 

clarifications of industry support and 

producers/exporters identified in the 

Petitions. Based on the Department’s 

request, Petitioners filed supplements to 

the Petition on June 9, 2009 (‘‘Second 

Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions’’). 

On June 12, 2009 the Department again 

asked for clarification regarding the 

scope. Based on the Department’s 

request, Petitioners filed an additional 

supplement to the Petition on June 15, 

2009 (‘‘Third Supplement to the AD/ 

CVD Petitions’’). 

In accordance with section 732(b) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the 

Act’’), Petitioners allege that imports of 

PC strand from the PRC are being, or are 

likely to be, sold in the United States at 

less than fair value, within the meaning 

of section 731 of the Act, and that such 

imports materially injure, or threaten 

material injury to, an industry in the 

United States. 

The Department finds that Petitioners 

filed the Petition on behalf of the 

domestic industry because Petitioners 

are interested parties as defined in 

section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and that 

they have demonstrated sufficient 

industry support with respect to the 

investigation that they are requesting 

the Department to initiate (see 

‘‘Determination of Industry Support for 

the Petition’’ below). 

Scope of Investigation 

The products covered by this 

investigation are PC strand from the 

PRC. For a full description of the scope 

of the investigation, please see the 

‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ in Appendix I 

of this notice. 

Comments on Scope of Investigation 

During our review of the Petition, we 

discussed the scope with Petitioners to 

ensure that it is an accurate reflection of 

the products for which the domestic 

industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as 

discussed in the preamble to the 

regulations (Antidumping Duties; 

Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 

27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)), we are 

setting aside a period for interested 

parties to raise issues regarding product 

coverage. The Department encourages 

all interested parties to submit such 

comments by July 6, 2009, twenty 

calendar days from the signature date of 

this notice. Comments should be 

addressed to Import Administration’s 

APO/Dockets Unit, Room 1870, U.S. 

Department of Commerce, 14th Street 

and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230. The period of 

scope consultations is intended to 

provide the Department with ample 

opportunity to consider all comments 

and to consult with parties prior to the 

issuance of the preliminary 

determinations. 

Comments on Product Characteristics 

for Antidumping Duty Questionnaires 

We are requesting comments from 

interested parties regarding the 

appropriate physical characteristics of 

PC strand to be reported in response to 

the Department’s antidumping 

questionnaires. This information will be 

used to identify the key physical 

characteristics of the subject 

merchandise in order to more accurately 

report the relevant factors and costs of 

production, as well as to develop 

appropriate product comparison 

criteria. 

Interested parties may provide any 

information or comments that they feel 

are relevant to the development of an 

accurate listing of physical 

characteristics. Specifically, they may 

provide comments as to which 

characteristics are appropriate to use as 

(1) general product characteristics and 

(2) the product comparison criteria. We 

note that it is not always appropriate to 

use all product characteristics as 

product comparison criteria. We base 

product comparison criteria on 

meaningful commercial differences 

among products. In other words, while 

there may be some physical product 

characteristics utilized by 

manufacturers to describe PC strand, it 

may be that only a select few product 

characteristics take into account 

commercially meaningful physical 

characteristics. In addition, interested 

parties may comment on the order in 

which the physical characteristics 

should be used in product matching. 

Generally, the Department attempts to 

list the most important physical 

characteristics first and the least 

important characteristics last. 

In order to consider the suggestions of 

interested parties in developing and 

issuing the antidumping duty 

questionnaires, we must receive 

comments at the above-referenced 

address by July 6, 2009. Additionally, 

rebuttal comments must be received by 

July 13, 2009. 

Determination of Industry Support for 

the Petition 

Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires 

that a petition be filed on behalf of the 

domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) 

of the Act provides that a petition meets 

this requirement if the domestic 

producers or workers who support the 

petition account for: (i) At least 25 

percent of the total production of the 

domestic like product; and (ii) more 

than 50 percent of the production of the 

domestic like product produced by that 

portion of the industry expressing 

support for, or opposition to, the 

29666 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

2See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 

2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd. 

v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), 

aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989), cert. denied 492 

U.S. 919 (1989). 

3For a discussion of the domestic like product 

analysis in this case, see Antidumping Duty 

Investigation Initiation Checklist: PC Strand from 

the PRC (‘‘Initiation Checklist’’) at Attachment II 

(‘‘Industry Support’’), dated concurrently with this 

notice and on file in the Central Records Unit 

(‘‘CRU’’), Room 1117 of the main Department of 

Commerce building. 

4See Volume I of the Petition, at 4, and Exhibit 

General-1. 

5See Volume I of the Petition, at Exhibit General1, and Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, at 5– 

6, and Attachment 3, and Second Supplement to 

the AD/CVD Petitions, at 5, and Attachment 1; see 

also Initiation Checklist as Attachment II, Industry 

Support. 

6See Section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act, and 

Initiation Checklist at Attachment 2. 

7See Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. 

8See id. 

9See id. 

10See Initiation Checklist at Attachment 3. 

petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) 

of the Act provides that, if the petition 

does not establish support of domestic 

producers or workers accounting for 

more than 50 percent of the total 

production of the domestic like product, 

the Department shall: (i) Poll the 

industry or rely on other information in 

order to determine if there is support for 

the petition, as required by 

subparagraph (A), or (ii) determine 

industry support using a statistically 

valid sampling method to poll the 

industry. 

Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines 

the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a 

whole of a domestic like product. Thus, 

to determine whether a petition has the 

requisite industry support, the statute 

directs the Department to look to 

producers and workers who produce the 

domestic like product. The International 

Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’), which is 

responsible for determining whether 

‘‘the domestic industry’’ has been 

injured, must also determine what 

constitutes a domestic like product in 

order to define the industry. While both 

the Department and the ITC must apply 

the same statutory definition regarding 

the domestic like product (See section 

771(10) of the Act), they do so for 

different purposes and pursuant to a 

separate and distinct authority. In 

addition, the Department’s 

determination is subject to limitations of 

time and information. Although this 

may result in different definitions of the 

like product, such differences do not 

render the decision of either agency 

contrary to law.2

Section 771(10) of the Act defines the 

domestic like product as ‘‘a product 

which is like, or in the absence of like, 

most similar in characteristics and uses 

with, the article subject to an 

investigation under this subtitle.’’ Thus, 

the reference point from which the 

domestic like product analysis begins is 

‘‘the article subject to an investigation,’’ 

(i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to 

be investigated, which normally will be 

the scope as defined in the petition). 

With regard to the domestic like 

product, Petitioners do not offer a 

definition of domestic like product 

distinct from the scope of the 

investigation. Based on our analysis of 

the information submitted on the 

record, we have determined that PC 

strand constitutes a single domestic like 

product and we have analyzed industry 

support in terms of that domestic like 

product.3

In determining whether Petitioners 

have standing under section 

732(c)(4)(A), we considered the industry 

support data contained in the Petition 

with reference to the domestic like 

product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of 

Investigation’’ section above. To 

establish industry support, Petitioners 

provided their production of the 

domestic like product for the year 2008, 

and compared this to total production of 

the domestic like product for the entire 

domestic industry.4 Petitioners 

calculated total domestic production 

based on their own production plus 

information provided by the two other 

non-petitioning companies that produce 

the domestic like product in the United 

States, who are supporters of the 

Petition.5

Our review of the data provided in the 

Petition, supplemental submissions, and 

other information readily available to 

the Department indicates that 

Petitioners have established industry 

support. First, the Petition established 

support from domestic producers (or 

workers) accounting for more than 50 

percent of the total production of the 

domestic like product and, as such, the 

Department is not required to take 

further action in order to evaluate 

industry support (e.g., polling).6

Second, the domestic producers (or 

workers) have met the statutory criteria 

for industry support under section 

732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the 

domestic producers (or workers) who 

support the Petitions account for at least 

25 percent of the total production of the 

domestic like product.7 Finally, the 

domestic producers (or workers) have 

met the statutory criteria for industry 

support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of 

the Act because the domestic producers 

(or workers) who support the Petition 

account for more than 50 percent of the 

production of the domestic like product 

produced by that portion of the industry 

expressing support for, or opposition to, 

the Petition. Accordingly, the 

Department determines that the Petition 

was filed on behalf of the domestic 

industry within the meaning of section 

732(b)(1) of the Act.8

The Department finds that Petitioners 

filed the Petition on behalf of the 

domestic industry because they are 

interested parties as defined in section 

771(9)(C) of the Act and they have 

demonstrated sufficient industry 

support with respect to the antidumping 

investigation that they are requesting 

the Department initiate.9

Allegations and Evidence of Material 

Injury and Causation 

Petitioners allege that the U.S. 

industry producing the domestic like 

product is being materially injured, or is 

threatened with material injury, by 

reason of the imports of the subject 

merchandise sold at less than normal 

value (‘‘NV’’). In addition, Petitioners 

allege that subject imports exceed the 

negligibility threshold provided for 

under section 771(24)(A) of the Act. 

Petitioners contend that the industry’s 

injured condition is illustrated by 

reduced market share, increased import 

penetration, underselling and price 

depressing and suppressing effects, lost 

sales and revenue, reduced production, 

capacity, and capacity utilization, 

reduced employment, and an overall 

decline in financial performance. We 

have assessed the allegations and 

supporting evidence regarding material 

injury, threat of material injury, and 

causation, and we have determined that 

these allegations are properly supported 

by adequate evidence and meet the 

statutory requirements for initiation.10

Period of Investigation 

In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.204(b)(1), because this Petition was 

filed on May 27, 2009, the anticipated 

period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is 

October 1, 2008, through March 31, 

2009. 

Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair 

Value 

The following is a description of the 

allegations of sales at less than fair value 

upon which the Department has based 

its decision to initiate an investigation 

with respect to the PRC. The sources of 

data for the deductions and adjustments 

relating to U.S. price and normal value 

(‘‘NV’’) are discussed in the Initiation 

Checklist. Should the need arise to use 

any of this information as facts available 

under section 776 of the Act, we may 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29667 

11See Initiation Checklist for further discussion. 

12See Memorandum from Katie Marksberry to 

The File, regarding Investigation of Certain Kitchen 

Appliance Shelving and Racks from the People’s 

Republic of China: Surrogate Value Determination, 

dated February 26, 2009, at 17. 

13See Initiation Checklist for further discussion. 

14See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 47. 

15See Memorandum from the Office of Policy to 

David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, regarding The People’s Republic of 

China Status as a Non-Market Economy, dated May 

15, 2006. This document is available online at 

http://ia.ita.doc.gov/download/prc-nme-status/prcnme-status-memo.pdf. 

16See Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality 

Steel Line Pipe from the People’s Republic of China: 

Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 

Value, 74 FR 14514 (March 31, 2009); Frontseating 

Service Valves from the People’s Republic of China: 

Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 

Value and Final Negative Determination of Critical 

Circumstances, 74 FR 10886 (March 13, 2009); 1– 

Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1–Diphosphonic Acid From 

the People’s Republic of China: Final Determination 

of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 74 FR 10545 

(March 11, 2009). 

17See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 47–49. 

18See id. 

19See id. 

20See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 51–54. 

21See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 49–50, and 

Exhibit AD–6. 

22See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 52, and 

Supplement to the AD Petition, at 5. 

23See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 53, and 

Exhibit AD–7. 

24See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 52, and 

Exhibits AD–6 and AD–7. 

25See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 53, and 

Exhibit AD–7. 

26See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 51, and 

Exhibit AD–7. 

27See id. 

reexamine the information and revise 

the margin calculations, if appropriate. 

Export Price 

Petitioners calculated export prices 

(‘‘EPs’’) for PC strand of various 

diameters: 3⁄8 ′′ diameter, 1⁄2 ′′ diameter 

and 0.6 ′′ diameter. These were based on 

price quotes obtained through offers of 

sale. Petitioner presented affidavits for 

the offers for sale attesting that the offers 

were made during the POI.11

To calculate the net U.S. EP, 

Petitioners deducted from the starting 

U.S. prices ocean freight and insurance 

charges, U.S. port fees, foreign brokerage 

and, as appropriate, a re-seller mark-up. 

U.S. inland freight costs were also 

deducted when such information was 

available. We have not made any 

additional deductions. 

Petitioners calculated per-unit ocean 

freight and insurance using import 

statistics reported by the U.S. 

International Trade Commission 

Dataweb. As for U.S. port fees, 

Petitioners included the 0.21 percent ad 

valorem harbor maintenance fee as well 

as the 0.125 percent merchandise 

processing fee. Foreign brokerage was 

calculated using the Department’s 

methodology in Certain Kitchen 

Appliance Shelving and Racks from the 

People’s Republic of China and then 

converted to the appropriate unit.12

Petitioners calculated re-seller mark-ups 

based on industry knowledge, choosing 

a lower value in order to produce a 

conservative estimate. Lastly, U.S. 

inland freight was calculated based on 

Petitioners’ experience delivering PC 

strand inside the United States and the 

number of miles from the closest U.S. 

port to the location of the U.S. 

customer.13

Normal Value 

Petitioners state that in every previous 

less-than-fair value investigation 

involving merchandise from the PRC, 

the Department has concluded that the 

PRC is a non-market economy country 

(‘‘NME’’) and, as the Department has not 

revoked this determination, its NME 

status remains in effect today.14 The 

Department has previously examined 

the PRC’s market status and determined 

that NME status should continue for the 

PRC.15 In addition, in recent 

antidumping duty investigations, the 

Department has continued to determine 

that the PRC is an NME country.16

In accordance with section 

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

presumption of NME status remains in 

effect until revoked by the Department. 

The presumption of NME status for the 

PRC has not been revoked by the 

Department and, therefore, remains in 

effect for purposes of the initiation of 

this investigation. Accordingly, the NV 

of the product is appropriately based on 

factors of production valued in a 

surrogate market economy country, in 

accordance with section 773(c) of the 

Act. In the course of this investigation, 

all parties will have the opportunity to 

provide relevant information related to 

the issues of the PRC’s NME status and 

the granting of separate rates to 

individual exporters. 

Petitioners argue that India is the 

appropriate surrogate country for the 

PRC because it is at a comparable level 

of economic development and it has two 

major producers of PC strand.17

Petitioners state that the Department has 

determined in previous antidumping 

duty investigations and administrative 

reviews that India is at a level of 

development comparable to the PRC.18

Petitioners also assert that there are two 

major producers of the subject 

merchandise in India, the Tata Steel 

Group and the Usha Martin Group.19

Based on the information provided by 

Petitioners, the Department believes that 

the use of India as a surrogate country 

is appropriate for purposes of initiation. 

However, after initiation of the 

investigation, interested parties will 

have the opportunity to submit 

comments regarding surrogate country 

selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an 

opportunity to submit publicly available 

information to value factors of 

production within 40 days after the date 

of publication of the preliminary 

determination. 

Petitioners provided dumping margin 

calculations using the Department’s 

NME methodology as required by 19 

CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C) and 19 CFR 

351.408. Petitioners calculated three 

NVs for PC strand, including diameters 

of 3⁄8 ′′, 1⁄2 ′′, and 0.6 ′′. 

Petitioners valued the factors of 

production using reasonably available, 

public surrogate country data, including 

India import data from the Monthly 

Statistics of the Foreign Trade of India 

(‘‘MSFTI’’) as compiled by the World 

Trade Atlas (WTA) from the period May 

2008 through October 2008, the most 

current data available, information 

regarding labor costs on the 

Department’s Web site, the International 

Energy Agency Statistics, and 

information from the 2007/2008 

unconsolidated financial reports of the 

Tata Steel Group and the Usha Martin 

Group.20 To calculate the consumption 

rates, the Petitioners used the 

consumption rates for U.S. producers 

during the POI.21

Petitioners state that they valued hotrolled, high-carbon steel wire rod using 

the WTA data, which was then 

converted to the appropriate unit.22

Petitioners valued electricity using 

Indian electricity rates disseminated by 

the International Energy Agency.23

Petitioners valued labor using the wage 

rate data published on the Department’s 

Web site, at http://ia.ita.doc.gov.24

Petitioners valued natural gas according 

to Indian import data compiled by the 

WTA.25

Where Petitioners were unable to find 

input prices contemporaneous with the 

POI, Petitioners adjusted for inflation 

using the wholesale price index for 

India, as published by the International 

Monetary Fund.26 Petitioners used 

exchange rates, as reported by the 

Federal Reserve, to convert Indian 

Rupees to U.S. Dollars.27

Petitioners based factory overhead, 

selling, general and administrative 

expenses (‘‘SG&A’’), and profit, on the 

financial ratios of the Tata Steel Group 

and the Usha Martin Group as both 

companies are significant producers of 

29668 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

28See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 48–49; see 

also Supplement to the AD Petition, dated June 4, 

2009, at 2–5. 

29See Volume II–A of the Petition, at 53–54, and 

Exhibit AD–8; see also Supplement to the AD 

Petition, dated June 4, 2009, at 6. 

30See Supplement to the AD Petition, at Exhibit 

Supp. AD–1. 

31See Withdrawal of the Regulatory Provisions 

Governing Targeted Dumping in Antidumping Duty 

Investigations, 73 FR 74930 (December 10, 2008). 

32 Id. at 74931. 

33See Circular Welded Austenitic Stainless 

Pressure Pipe from the People’s Republic of China: 

Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 73 FR 

10221, 10225 (February 26, 2008); and Initiation of 

Antidumping Duty Investigation: Certain Artist 

Canvas From the People’s Republic of China, 70 FR 

21996, 21999 (April 28, 2005). 

34See Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality 

Steel Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea and the 

People’s Republic of China: Initiation of 

Antidumping Duty Investigations, 73 FR 23188, 

23193 (April 29, 2008). (‘‘Certain Circular Welded 

Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the PRC’’). 

35See Import Administration Policy Bulletin, 

Number: 05.1, ‘‘Separate-Rates Practice and 

Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping 

Investigations involving Non-Market Economy 

Countries,’’ dated April 5, 2005, available on the 

Department’s Web site at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ 

policy/bull05-1.pdf; See also Certain Circular 

Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the 

PRC, 73 FR 23188, 23193. 

36Where the deadline falls on a weekend/ 

holiday, the appropriate date is the next business 

day. 

PC strand.28 The ratios were obtained 

from each respective company’s 2007/ 

2008 unconsolidated financial reports 

and then averaged together.29

Fair-Value Comparisons 

Based on the data provided by 

Petitioners, there is reason to believe 

that imports of PC strand from the PRC 

are being, or are likely to be, sold in the 

United States at less than fair value. 

Based on comparisons of EP to NV as 

revised above, the estimated dumping 

margins for the PRC range from 140.16 

percent to 314.59 percent.30

Initiation of Antidumping Investigation 

Based upon the examination of the 

Petition concerning PC strand from the 

PRC and other information reasonably 

available to the Department, the 

Department finds that the Petition meets 

the requirements of section 732 of the 

Act. Therefore, we are initiating an 

antidumping duty investigation to 

determine whether imports of PC strand 

from the PRC are being, or are likely to 

be, sold in the United States at less than 

fair value. In accordance with section 

733(b)(1)(A) of the Act, unless 

postponed, we will make our 

preliminary determinations no later 

than 140 days after the date of this 

initiation. 

Targeted-Dumping Allegations 

On December 10, 2008, the 

Department issued an interim final rule 

for the purpose of withdrawing 19 CFR 

351.414(f) and (g), the regulatory 

provisions governing the targeteddumping analysis in antidumping duty 

investigations, and the corresponding 

regulation governing the deadline for 

targeted-dumping allegations, 19 CFR 

351.301(d)(5).31 The Department stated 

that ‘‘{w}ithdrawal will allow the 

Department to exercise the discretion 

intended by the statute and, thereby, 

develop a practice that will allow 

interested parties to pursue all statutory 

avenues of relief in this area.’’ 32

In order to accomplish this objective, 

if any interested party wishes to make 

a targeted-dumping allegation in this 

investigation pursuant to section 

777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act, such allegation 

is due no later than 45 days before the 

scheduled date of the preliminary 

determination. 

Respondent Selection 

The Department will request quantity 

and value information from the 

exporters and producers identified in 

the Petition with complete contact 

information. The quantity and value 

data received from NME exporters/ 

producers will be used as the basis to 

select the mandatory respondents. 

The Department requires that the 

respondents submit a response to both 

the quantity and value questionnaire 

and the separate-rate application by the 

respective deadlines in order to receive 

consideration for separate-rate status.33

Appendix II of this notice contains the 

quantity and value questionnaire that 

must be submitted by all NME 

exporters/producers no later than July 7, 

2009. In addition, the Department will 

post the quantity and value 

questionnaire along with the filing 

instructions on the Department’s Web 

site, at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/iahighlights-and-news.html. 

Separate Rates 

In order to obtain separate-rate status 

in an NME investigation, exporters and 

producers must submit a separate-rate 

status application.34 The specific 

requirements for submitting the 

separate-rate application in this 

investigation are outlined in detail in 

the application itself, available on the 

Department’s Web site at http:// 

ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-highlights-andnews.html on the date of publication of 

this initiation notice in the Federal 

Register. The separate-rate application 

will be due sixty (60) days from the date 

of publication of this initiation notice in 

the Federal Register. 

Use of Combination Rates in an NME 

Investigation 

The Department will calculate 

combination rates for certain 

respondents that are eligible for a 

separate rate in this investigation. The 

Separate Rates/Combination Rates 

Bulletin states: 

{w}hile continuing the practice of 

assigning separate rates only to exporters, all 

separate rates that the Department will now 

assign in its NME investigations will be 

specific to those producers that supplied the 

exporter during the period of investigation. 

Note, however, that one rate is calculated for 

the exporter and all of the producers which 

supplied subject merchandise to it during the 

period of investigation. This practice applies 

both to mandatory respondents receiving an 

individually calculated separate rate as well 

as the pool of non-investigated firms 

receiving the weighted-average of the 

individually calculated rates. This practice is 

referred to as the application of combination 

rates because such rates apply to specific 

combinations of exporters and one or more 

producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to 

an exporter will apply only to merchandise 

both exported by the firm in question and 

produced by a firm that supplied the exporter 

during the period of investigation.35

Distribution of Copies of the Petition 

In accordance with section 

732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.202(f), a copy of the public version 

of the Petition has been provided to the 

representatives of the Government of the 

PRC. Because of the particularly large 

number of producers/exporters 

identified in the Petition, the 

Department considers the service of the 

public version of the Petition to the 

foreign producers/exporters satisfied by 

the delivery of the public version to the 

Government of the PRC, consistent with 

19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). 

ITC Notification 

We have notified the ITC of our 

initiation, as required by section 732(d) 

of the Act. 

Preliminary Determination by the 

International Trade Commission 

The ITC will preliminarily determine, 

no later than July 13, 2009,36 whether 

there is a reasonable indication that 

imports of PC strand from the PRC 

materially injure, or threaten material 

injury to, a U.S. industry. A negative 

ITC determination covering all classes 

or kinds of merchandise covered by the 

Petition would result in the 

investigation being terminated. 

Otherwise, this investigation will 

proceed according to statutory and 

regulatory time limits. 

This notice is issued and published 

pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act. 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29669 

Dated: June 16, 2009. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I 

Scope of the Investigation 

For purposes of this investigation, 

prestressed concrete steel wire strand (PC 

strand) is steel wire strand, other than of 

stainless steel, which is suitable for use in, 

but not limited to, prestressed concrete (both 

pretensioned and post-tensioned) 

applications. The scope of this investigation 

encompasses all types and diameters of PC 

strand whether uncoated (uncovered) or 

coated (covered) by any substance, including 

but not limited to, grease, plastic sheath, or 

epoxy. This merchandise includes, but is not 

limited to, PC strand produced to the 

American Society for Testing and Materials 

(ASTM) A–416 specification, or comparable 

domestic or foreign specifications. PC strand 

made from galvanized wire is excluded from 

the scope if the zinc and/or zinc oxide 

coating meets or exceeds the 0.40 oz./ft2; 

standard set forth in ASTM–A–475. 

The PC strand subject to this investigation 

is currently classifiable under subheadings 

7312.10.3010 and 7312.10.3012 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 

States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for convenience 

and customs purposes, the written 

description of the scope of this investigation 

is dispositive. 

Appendix II 

Where it is not practicable to examine all 

known exporters/producers of subject 

merchandise, section 777A(c)(2) of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended, permits us to 

investigate (1) a sample of exporters, 

producers, or types of products that is 

statistically valid based on the information 

available at the time of selection, or (2) 

exporters and producers accounting for the 

largest volume of the subject merchandise 

that can reasonably be examined. 

In the chart below, please provide the total 

quantity and total value of all your sales of 

merchandise covered by the scope of this 

investigation (see ‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ 

section of this notice), produced in the PRC, 

and exported/shipped to the United States 

during the period October 1, 2008, through 

March 31, 2009. 

Market Total quantity 

in kilograms Terms of sale Total value in U.S. dollars 

United States: 

1. Export Price Sales ................................................................................................

2. a. Exporter Name .................................................................................................

b. Address ............................................................................................................

c. Contact .............................................................................................................

d. Phone No. ........................................................................................................

e. Fax No. .............................................................................................................

3. Constructed Export Price Sales ...........................................................................

4. Further Manufactured ...........................................................................................

Total Sales ........................................................................................................

Total Quantity: 

• Please report quantity on a kilograms 

basis. If any conversions were used, please 

provide the conversion formula and source. 

Terms of Sales: 

• Please report all sales on the same terms 

(e.g., free on board at port of export). 

Total Value: 

• All sales values should be reported in 

U.S. dollars. Please indicate any exchange 

rates used and their respective dates and 

sources. 

Export Price Sales: 

• Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as an 

export price sale when the first sale to an 

unaffiliated customer occurs before 

importation into the United States. 

• Please include any sales exported by 

your company directly to the United States. 

• Please include any sales exported by 

your company to a third-country market 

economy reseller where you had knowledge 

that the merchandise was destined to be 

resold to the United States. 

• If you are a producer of subject 

merchandise, please include any sales 

manufactured by your company that were 

subsequently exported by an affiliated 

exporter to the United States. 

• Please do not include any sales of subject 

merchandise manufactured in Hong Kong in 

your figures. 

Constructed Export Price Sales: 

• Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as a 

constructed export price sale when the first 

sale to an unaffiliated customer occurs after 

importation. However, if the first sale to the 

unaffiliated customer is made by a person in 

the United States affiliated with the foreign 

exporter, constructed export price applies 

even if the sale occurs prior to importation. 

• Please include any sales exported by 

your company directly to the United States. 

• Please include any sales exported by 

your company to a third-country market 

economy reseller where you had knowledge 

that the merchandise was destined to be 

resold to the United States. 

• If you are a producer of subject 

merchandise, please include any sales 

manufactured by your company that were 

subsequently exported by an affiliated 

exporter to the United States. 

• Please do not include any sales of subject 

merchandise manufactured in Hong Kong in 

your figures. 

Further Manufactured: 

• Sales of further manufactured or 

assembled (including re-packaged) 

merchandise is merchandise that undergoes 

further manufacture or assembly in the 

United States before being sold to the first 

unaffiliated customer. 

• Further manufacture or assembly costs 

include amounts incurred for direct 

materials, labor and overhead, plus amounts 

for general and administrative expense, 

interest expense, and additional packing 

expense incurred in the country of further 

manufacture, as well as all costs involved in 

moving the product from the U.S. port of 

entry to the further manufacturer. 

[FR Doc. E9–14721 Filed 6–22–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–822] 

Certain Helical Spring Lock Washers 

from the People’s Republic of China: 

Extension of Time Limit for the 

Preliminary Results of the 2007–2008 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce 

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 23, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shelly Atkinson or Brandon Farlander, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington DC 20230; 

telephone (202) 482–0116 or (202)482– 

0182, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: