[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29665-29669]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14721]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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

[[Page 29666]]

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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 4, and Exhibit General-1.
    \5\ See Volume I of the Petition, at Exhibit General-1, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act, and Initiation 
Checklist at Attachment 2.
    \7\ See Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
    \8\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Initiation Checklist at Attachment 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

[[Page 29667]]

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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Initiation Checklist for further discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See 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.
    \13\ See Initiation Checklist for further discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 47.
    \15\ See 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/prc-nme-status-memo.pdf.
    \16\ See 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 47-49.
    \18\ See id.
    \19\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 51-54.
    \21\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 49-50, and Exhibit AD-
6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners state that they valued hot-rolled, 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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 52, and Supplement to 
the AD Petition, at 5.
    \23\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 53, and Exhibit AD-7.
    \24\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 52, and Exhibits AD-6 
and AD-7.
    \25\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 53, and Exhibit AD-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 51, and Exhibit AD-7.
    \27\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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

[[Page 29668]]

PC strand.\28\ The ratios were obtained from each respective company's 
2007/2008 unconsolidated financial reports and then averaged 
together.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Volume II-A of the Petition, at 48-49; see also 
Supplement to the AD Petition, dated June 4, 2009, at 2-5.
    \29\ See 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Supplement to the AD Petition, at Exhibit Supp. AD-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 targeted-dumping 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{time} 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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Withdrawal of the Regulatory Provisions Governing 
Targeted Dumping in Antidumping Duty Investigations, 73 FR 74930 
(December 10, 2008).
    \32\ Id. at 74931.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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/ia-highlights-and-news.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-and-news.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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See 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 '').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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{time} 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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Where the deadline falls on a weekend/holiday, the 
appropriate date is the next business day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of 
the Act.


[[Page 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./ft\2\; 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.

 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Total quantity                      Total value in
                          Market                              in kilograms      Terms of sale     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:
    <bullet> Please report quantity on a kilograms basis. If any 
conversions were used, please provide the conversion formula and 
source.

Terms of Sales:
    <bullet> Please report all sales on the same terms (e.g., free 
on board at port of export).

Total Value:
    <bullet> 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:
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> Please include any sales exported by your company 
directly to the United States.
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> Please do not include any sales of subject merchandise 
manufactured in Hong Kong in your figures.

Constructed Export Price Sales:
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> Please include any sales exported by your company 
directly to the United States.
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> Please do not include any sales of subject merchandise 
manufactured in Hong Kong in your figures.

Further Manufactured:
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> 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