Petroleum Wax Candles From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Anticircumvention Inquiries of Antidumping Duty Order, 10962-10965 [E5-918]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
10962
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 43 / Monday, March 7, 2005 / Notices
section 351.212(b) of the Department’s
regulations, the Department calculates
an assessment rate for each importer of
the subject merchandise for each
respondent. The Department will issue
appropriate assessment instructions
directly to CBP within 15 days of
publication of the final results of
review.
Dated: February 28, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E5–920 Filed 3–4–05; 8:45 am]
Cash Deposit Requirements
International Trade Administration
The following cash deposit rates will
be effective with respect to all
shipments of LEU from France entered,
or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date of the final results, as provided for
by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) For
Eurodif/COGEMA, the cash deposit rate
will be the rate established in the final
results of this review; (2) for previously
reviewed or investigated companies not
listed above, the cash deposit rate will
be the company-specific rate established
for the most recent period; (3) if the
exporter is not a firm covered in this
review, a prior review, or the LTFV
investigation, but the manufacturer is,
the cash deposit rate will be the rate
established for the most recent period
for the manufacturer of the subject
merchandise; and (4) if neither the
exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm
covered by this review, a prior review,
or the LTFV investigation, the cash
deposit rate shall be the all other rate
established in the LTFV investigation,
which is 19.95 percent. See Notice of
Amended Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value and
Antidumping Duty Order: Low Enriched
Uranium fro France, 67 FR 6680
(February 13, 2002). These deposit rates,
when imposed, shall remain in effect
until publication of the final results of
the next administrative review.
[A–580–825]
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a preliminary
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under section 351.402(f)
of the Department’s regulations to file a
certificate regarding the reimbursement
of antidumping duties prior to
liquidation of the relevant entries
during this review period. Failure to
comply with this requirement could
result in the Secretary’s presumption
that reimbursement of antidumping
duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping
duties.
This administrative review and notice
are issued and published in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of
the Act.
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:15 Mar 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Oil Country Tubular Goods From
Korea: Extension of Time Limit for
Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 7, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff
Boord or Nicholas Czajkowski, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 6, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–6345 or (202) 482–
1395, respectively.
AGENCY:
Background
On August 31, 2004, the Department
of Commerce (the Department) received
timely requests to conduct an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on oil country
tubular goods from Korea. On
September 22, 2004, the Department
published a notice of initiation of this
administrative review, covering the
period of August 1, 2003, through July
31, 2004 (69 FR 56745). The preliminary
results are currently due no later than
May 3, 2005.
Extension of Time Limits for
Preliminary Results
Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires
the Department to complete the
preliminary results of an administrative
review within 245 days after the last day
of the anniversary month of an order for
which a review is requested. However,
if it is not practicable to complete the
review within these time periods,
section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows
the Department to extend the time limit
for the preliminary results to a
maximum of 365 days after the last day
of the anniversary month of an order for
which a review is requested.
We are currently analyzing a number
of complex issues with respect to the
basis for normal value which must be
addressed prior to the issuance of the
preliminary results. Specifically, our
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
analysis of input cost issues and
comparison market issues requires
additional time and makes it
impracticable to complete the
preliminary results of this review within
the originally anticipated time limit.
Accordingly, the Department is
extending the time limit for completion
of the preliminary results of this
administrative review until no later than
August 31, 2005, which is 365 days
from the last day of the anniversary
month. We intend to issue the final
results no later than 120 days after
publication of the preliminary results
notice.
Barbara E. Tillman,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E5–923 Filed 3–4–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–504]
Petroleum Wax Candles From the
People’s Republic of China: Initiation
of Anticircumvention Inquiries of
Antidumping Duty Order
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Initiation of
Anticircumvention Inquiries of
Antidumping Duty Order: Petroleum
Wax Candles from the People’s Republic
of China.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In response to a request from
the National Candle Association
(‘‘NCA’’ or ‘‘Petitioners’’), the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) is initiating an
anticircumvention inquiry pursuant to
section 781(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended, (‘‘the Act’’) to determine
whether mixed wax candles composed
of petroleum wax and varying amounts
of either palm or vegetable–based waxes
have been subject to a minor alteration
such that the addition of the non–
petroleum content to these candles
results in products that are ‘‘altered in
form or appearance in minor respects’’
from the subject merchandise that these
mixed wax petroleum candles can be
considered subject to the antidumping
duty order on petroleum wax candles
from the People’s Republic of China
(‘‘PRC’’) under the minor alterations
provision. See Notice of Antidumping
Duty Order: Petroleum Wax Candles
from the People’s Republic of China, 51
FR 30686 (August 28, 1986) (‘‘Order’’).
E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM
07MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 43 / Monday, March 7, 2005 / Notices
In addition, in response to a request
from the NCA, the Department is also
initiating an anticircumvention inquiry
pursuant to section 781(d) of the Act to
determine whether mixed wax candles
composed of petroleum wax and
varying amounts of either palm or
vegetable–based waxes are later–
developed products that can be
considered subject to the antidumping
duty order on petroleum wax candles
from the PRC under the later–developed
merchandise provision.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 7, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex
Villanueva, Julia Hancock, or Nicole
Bankhead, 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) 482–3208,
(202) 482–1394, and (202) 482–9068,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 8, 2004, Petitioners
requested that the Department conduct
an anticircumvention inquiry pursuant
to section 781(d) of the Act to determine
whether candles containing palm or
vegetable–based waxes as the majority
ingredient and exported to the United
States are circumventing the
antidumping duty order on petroleum
wax candles from the PRC.
On October 12, 2004, Petitioners
requested that the Department conduct
an anticircumvention inquiry pursuant
to section 781(c) of the Act to determine
whether candles containing palm or
vegetable–based waxes and exported to
the United States are circumventing the
antidumping duty order on petroleum
wax candles from the PRC.
On November 15, 2004, the Candle
Corporation of America (‘‘CCA’’), a
domestic producer, submitted
comments in opposition to Petitioners’
request that the Department initiate this
anticircumvention inquiry. On
November 15, 2004, the Department
extended the deadline by three weeks
for initiating the later–developed
merchandise anticircumvention inquiry
from November 22, 2004, to December
13, 2004. In addition, on November 15,
2004, the Department extended by three
weeks the deadline for initiating the
minor alterations anticircumvention
inquiry, from November 26, 2004, to
December 17, 2004.
On November 16, 2004, Russ Berrie &
Company, Inc. (‘‘Russ Berrie’’), a
domestic importer, submitted comments
in opposition to Petitioners’ request that
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:15 Mar 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
the Department initiate an
anticircumvention inquiry.
On December 2, 2004, J.C. Penney
Company, Inc., Target Corporation, the
National Retail Federation, the MVP
Group, the Candle Company, and the
World at Large, hereinafter collectively
known as the Coalition for Free Trade
in Candles (‘‘CFTC’’), which represents
these domestic importers, submitted
comments in opposition to Petitioners’
request that the Department initiate an
anticircumvention inquiry.
On December 6, 2004, Fine Arts
Marketing, Inc.; HomeScents, Inc.; Lava
Enterprises Inc.; Makebest Industries,
Ltd.; Silk Road Gifts, Inc.; Tag Trade
Associates Group, Ltd. and Zodax, Inc.,
hereinafter collectively referred to as the
‘‘Tuttle Importers,’’ submitted
comments in these domestic importers’
opposition to Petitioners’ request that
the Department initiate an
anticircumvention inquiry.
On December 9, 2004, Petitioners
submitted rebuttal comments to the
Department in response to comments
made by those parties opposing
Petitioners’ request for the initiation of
an anticircumvention inquiry.
On December 10, 2004, Pier 1 Imports
(U.S.), Inc. (‘‘Pier 1’’), a domestic
importer, submitted comments in
opposition to Petitioners’ request that
the Department initiate an
anticircumvention inquiry.
On December 13, 2004, the
Department extended the later–
developed merchandise
anticircumvention initiation deadline
because additional information was
needed for the Department to make a
decision within the established time
limits to initiate an anticircumvention
inquiry. The deadline for initiating the
later–developed merchandise
anticircumvention inquiry was
extended by sixty days from December
13, 2004, to February 11, 2005. Also on
December 13, 2004, the Department
issued a supplemental questionnaire to
Petitioners regarding several areas in the
later–developed merchandise
anticircumvention request that needed
further clarification.
In addition, on December 13, 2004,
the Department extended the minor
alterations anticircumvention initiation
deadline a second time because
additional information was needed
Department to make a decision within
the established time limits to initiate an
anticircumvention inquiry. The
deadline for initiating the minor
alterations anticircumvention inquiry
was extended by sixty days from
December 17, 2004, to February 15,
2005. Also, on December 13, 2004, the
Department issued a supplemental
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
10963
questionnaire to Petitioners addressing
several areas in the minor alterations
anticircumvention request that needed
further clarification.
On December 17, 2004, Petitioners
requested an extension of three weeks to
respond to the Department’s
supplemental questionnaires. On
December 20, 2004, the Department
granted Petitioners an extension of
fifteen days from December 27, 2004, to
January 14, 2005, to respond to the
Department’s supplemental
questionnaires. On January 14, 2005,
Petitioners submitted a response to the
supplemental questionnaires issued by
the Department.
On January 24, 2005, the CFTC
requested that the Department extend
the deadline for initiating the
anticircumvention inquiry by one
month from February 11, 2005, to March
11, 2005.
On January 25, 2005, Petitioners
submitted samples of candles, which
were referenced in the supplemental
questionnaire response filed on January
14, 2005.
On January 27, 2005, Petitioners
submitted comments in opposition to
the CFTC’s request to extend the
deadline for initiating the
anticircumvention inquiry.
On January 28, 2005, CCA submitted
comments in response to Petitioners’
supplemental questionnaire response.
On January 31, 2005, the Department
extended the later–developed
merchandise anticircumvention
initiation deadline a third time because
domestic interested parties needed
additional time to respond to
Petitioners’ supplemental response. The
deadline for initiating the later–
developed merchandise
anticircumvention inquiry was
extended by ten days from February 11,
2005, to February 22, 2005. Also, on
January 31, 2005, the Department
extended the anticircumvention
initiation deadline for the minor
alterations anticircumvention inquiry by
ten days from February 15, 2005, to
February 25, 2005. In addition, on
January 31, 2005, the Department
granted CFTC and other interested
parties an extension of ten days from
January 28, 2005, to February 7, 2005,
to submit factual information rebutting,
clarifying, or corroborating factual
information submitted by Petitioners to
respondents on January 18, 2005.
Also on January 31, 2005, Russ Berrie
requested that the Department extend
the deadline for initiation. In its
submission, Russ Berrie noted that it
had submitted interim comments
rebutting Petitioners’ supplemental
response in case in which the
E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM
07MRN1
10964
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 43 / Monday, March 7, 2005 / Notices
Department did not extend the deadline
as previously requested by the CFTC.
On February 2, 2005, CFTC submitted
comments in response to Petitioners’
supplemental questionnaire responses.
On February 7, 2005, Petitioners
submitted rebuttal comments in
response to comments made by
interested parties regarding Petitioners’
supplemental response. On February 7,
2005, Silk Road Gifts, Ltd. (‘‘Silk
Road’’), a domestic importer, submitted
comments in response to Petitioners’
supplemental response. Also on
February 7, 2005, CFTC submitted
additional comments and samples of
candles.
On February 11, 2005, the Department
placed a memorandum on the file
regarding the ex parte meeting the
Department had with counsel for
Petitioners on February 10, 2005.
On February 16, 2005, the Department
placed a memorandum on the file
regarding the ex parte meeting Acting
Assistant Secretary Joseph Spetrini had
with members of the Coalition for Free
Trade in Candles on February 15, 2005.
On February 18, 2005, the Department
extended the initiation deadline of the
anticircumvention inquiry by three days
from February 22, 2005, to February 25,
2005. Additionally, on February 18,
2005, Qindao Kingking Applied
Chemistry Co., Ltd.; Shonfeld’s (USA),
Inc.; Alef Judaica, Inc.; and Amscan,
Inc. submitted comments in response to
Petitioners’ supplemental questionnaire
response.
On February 24, 2005, a
memorandum to the file was placed by
the Department regarding the ex parte
meeting that the Acting Assistant
Secretary Joseph Spetrini had with
counsel for Petitioners on February 23,
2005. Additionally, on February 24,
2005, Petitioners filed further rebuttal
comments.
Scope of Order
The products covered by this order
are certain scented or unscented
petroleum wax candles made from
petroleum wax and having fiber or
paper–cored wicks. They are sold in the
following shapes: tapers, spirals, and
straight–sided dinner candles; round,
columns, pillars, votives; and various
wax–filled containers. The products
were classified under the Tariff
Schedules of the United States
(‘‘TSUS’’) 755.25, Candles and Tapers.
The product covered are currently
classified under the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’) item 3406.00.00. Although
the HTSUS subheading is provided for
convenience purposes, our written
description remains dispositive. See
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:15 Mar 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
Order; see also Notice of Final Results
of the Antidumping Duty New Shipper
Review: Petroleum Wax Candles from
the People’s Republic of China, 69 FR
77990 (December 29, 2004).
Initiation of Minor Alterations
Anticircumvention Proceeding
Section 781(c)(1) of the Act provides
that the Department may find
circumvention of an antidumping duty
order when products which are of the
class or kind of merchandise subject to
an antidumping duty order have been
‘‘altered in form or appearance in minor
respects * * * whether or not included
in the same tariff classification.’’
Based on the language contained in
the petition, the antidumping duty
order, and the fact that the domestic
‘‘like product’’ determinations of the
ITC are not dispositive, the Department
finds that there is sufficient basis to
initiate an anticircumvention inquiry
pursuant to section 781(c) of the Act to
determine whether the addition of
vegetable and/or palm–based wax
results in a minor alteration, and thus,
a change so insignificant as to render
the petroleum based, mixed candle
subject to the antidumping duty order
on petroleum wax candles from the
PRC.1
Scope of the Minor Alterations
Anticircumvention Proceeding
Petitioners argue that it is almost
impossible to specify in this application
all or most all PRC producers and
importers of mixed wax petroleum wax
candles containing varying amounts of
palm or other vegetable–based waxes
because of the continuously increasing
quantity of imports of these candles into
the United States. Additionally,
Petitioners argue that an application
requesting an anticircumvention inquiry
and a resulting determination finding
circumvention limited to only a few
companies and specific candles would
have little to no effect in preventing
circumvention of the order.
The Department recognizes that
Petitioners have limited information
available to them at this time regarding
the production, exportation and
importation of mixed wax petroleum
wax candles containing varying
amounts of palm or other vegetable–
based waxes. Specifically, we agree that
obtaining subject and non–subject
import data from the only tariff
classification for all candles and the
unknown number of companies
producing and exporting to the United
1 The various comments submitted by interested
parties will be considered by the Department in its
final determination.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
States mixed wax petroleum wax
candles containing varying amounts of
palm and/or vegetable–based waxes is
difficult. However, we also note that
Petitioners have provided a list of
companies importing and, to a certain
extent, identified those companies
producing/exporting mixed wax
petroleum wax candles varying amounts
of palm and/or vegetable–based waxes
based on that companies’ scope ruling
request submitted to the Department.
See Petitioners’ Minor Alterations
Supplemental Response (January 14,
2005) at Appendix I. In addition,
Petitioners have provided, where
available, specific model/product/SKU
numbers for consideration in this
anticircumvention inquiry using the
data from the companies’ scope ruling
requests previously submitted to the
Department. See Petitioners’ Minor
Alterations Submission (October 12,
2004) at Appendix 1.
We are initiating this
anticircumvention inquiry on particular
PRC exporters, as identified by
Petitioners in Appendix 1 of their
January 14, 2005, submission. However,
within 45 days of the date of initiation
of this inquiry, if the Department
receives sufficient evidence that other
PRC manufacturers are involved in the
production of mixed wax petroleum
wax candles containing varying
amounts of palm and/or vegetable–
based waxes for export to the United
States, we will consider examining such
additional manufacturers.
The Department will not order the
suspension of liquidation of entries of
any additional merchandise at this time.
However, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.225(l)(2), if the Department issues a
preliminary affirmative determination,
we will then instruct U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to suspend
liquidation and require a cash deposit of
estimated duties on the merchandise.
Initiation of Later–Developed
Merchandise Anticircumvention
Proceeding
Section 781(d)(1)(A) of the Act
provides that the Department may find
circumvention of an antidumping duty
order when merchandise is developed
after an investigation is initiated (‘‘later–
developed merchandise’’).
Based on the language contained in
the petition and the antidumping duty
order, and the fact that the domestic like
product determinations of the
International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’)
is not dispositive, the Department finds
that there is sufficient basis to initiate
an anticircumvention inquiry pursuant
to section 781(d) of the Act to determine
whether candles produced through the
E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM
07MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 43 / Monday, March 7, 2005 / Notices
addition of vegetable and/or palm–
based wax to petroleum wax are later–
developed products that can be
considered subject to the antidumping
duty order on petroleum wax candles
from the PRC under the later–developed
merchandise provision.2
The Department recognizes that the
ITC’s final injury determination states
that ‘‘commercial production of candles
generally uses ‘‘natural’’ waxes
(paraffins, microcrystallines, stearic
acid, and beeswax) in various
combinations.’’ See Candles from the
People’s Republic of China,
Investigation No. 731–TA–282 (Final),
USITC Publication 1888 (August 1986)
at 2 (‘‘ITC Final Determination’’). In
addition, we note that the ITC Final
Determination defined petroleum wax
candles ‘‘as those composed of over 50
percent petroleum wax,’’ and noted that
such candles ‘‘may contain other waxes
in varying amounts, depending on the
size and shape of the candle, to enhance
the melt–point, viscosity, and burning
power.’’ Id. However, because the
Department did not address the
proportion of these waxes that would be
indicative of petroleum wax candles,
there is no clear basis for the
Department to make a conclusive
determination that candles with non–
petroleum waxes in a different
proportion are not later–developed
merchandise. Consequently, we are
initiating this inquiry under section
781(d) of the Act.
In addition, parties may submit
comments regarding the appropriateness
of our later–developed analysis as
provided in this notice, no later than
thirty days from the date of publication
of this notice. Rebuttal comments are
due no later than forty days from the
date of publication of this notice.
The Department will not order the
suspension of liquidation of entries of
any additional merchandise at this time.
However, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.225(l)(2), if the Department issues a
preliminary affirmative determination,
we will then instruct CBP to suspend
liquidation and require a cash deposit of
estimated duties on the merchandise.
We intend to notify the ITC in the
event of an affirmative preliminary
determination of circumvention, in
accordance with 781(e)(1) of the Act and
19 CFR 351.225(f)(7)(i)(C).The
Department will, following consultation
with interested parties, establish a
schedule for questionnaires and
comments on the issues. The
2 The
Department recognizes that certain parties
submitted comments addressing certain factors as
required by section 781(d) of the Act, however the
Department will address these comments in the
final determination.
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:15 Mar 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
Department intends to issue its final
determinations within 300 days of the
date of publication of this initiation.
This notice is published in accordance
with sections 781(c) and 781(d) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.225(i).
Dated: February 25, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E5–918 Filed 3–4–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–851]
Certain Preserved Mushrooms From
the People’s Republic of China:
Preliminary Results and Partial
Rescission of Fifth Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(‘‘the Department’’) is conducting the
fifth administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain
preserved mushrooms from the People’s
Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) covering the
period February 1, 2003, through
January 31, 2004. We have preliminarily
determined that sales have been made
below normal value. If these
preliminary results are adopted in our
final results of this review, we will
instruct U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to assess
antidumping duties on entries of subject
merchandise during the period of
review (‘‘POR’’), for which the importerspecific assessment rates are above de
minimis.
Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results.
We will issue the final results no later
than 120 days from the date of
publication of this notice.
DATES: Effective Date: March 7, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amber Musser or Brian C. Smith, 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) 482–1777, or (202)
482–1766, respectively.
AGENCY:
Background
On February 19, 1999, the Department
published in the Federal Register an
amended final determination and
antidumping duty order on certain
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
10965
preserved mushrooms from the PRC.
See Notice of Amendment of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Antidumping Duty
Order: Certain Preserved Mushrooms
from the People’s Republic of China, 64
FR 8308 (February 19, 1999).
On February 3, 2004, the Department
published a notice of opportunity to
request an administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain
preserved mushrooms from the PRC.
See Antidumping or Countervailing
Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended
Investigation; Opportunity To Request
Administrative Review, 69 FR 5125
(February 3, 2004). On February 5 and
27, 2004, the Department received
timely requests from Dingyuan Import &
Export Corporation (‘‘Dingyuan’’),
Gerber Food (Yunnan) Co., Ltd., Gerber
Food (Yunnan) Co., Ltd., (‘‘Gerber’’),
Guangxi Hengxian Pro-Light Foods, Inc.
(‘‘Guangxi Hengxian’’), Primera Harvest
(Xiangfan) Co., Ltd. (‘‘Primera Harvest’’),
Shantou Hongda Industrial General
Corporation, (‘‘Shantou Hongda’’),
Shandong Jiufa Edible Fungus
Corporation, Ltd. (‘‘Jiufa’’), and Xiamen
International Trade & Industrial Co.,
Ltd. (‘‘XITIC’’) for an administrative
review pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(b).
On February 27, 2004, the petitioner 1
requested an administrative review
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(b) of 19
companies,2 which it claimed were
1 The petitioner is the Coalition for Fair Preserved
Mushroom Trae which includes the following
domestic companies: L.K. Bowman, Inc., Monterey
Mushrooms, Inc., Mushrooms Canning Company,
and Sunny Dell Foods, Inc.
2 The petitioner’s request included the following
companies: (1) China Processed Food Import &
Export Company (‘‘COFCO’’) and its affiliates China
National Cereals, Oils, & Foodstuffs Import & Export
Corporation (‘‘China National’’), COFCO
(Zhangzhou) Food Industrial Co., Ltd. (‘‘COFCO
Zhangzhou’’), Fujian Zishan Group Co. (‘‘Fujian
Zishan’’), Xiamen Jiahua Import & Export Trading
Co., Ltd. (‘‘Xiamen Jiahua’’), and Fujian Yu Xing
Fruit & Vegetable Foodstuff Development Co. (‘‘Yu
Xing’’); (2) Gerber; (3) Green Fresh Foods
(Zhangzhou) Co., Ltd. and its affiliate Zhangzhou
Longhai Lubao Food Co., Ltd.; (4) Guangxi
Hengxian; (5) Guangxi Yizhou Dongfang Cannery
(‘‘Guangxi Yizhou’’); (6) Guangxi Yulin Oriental
Food Co.; Ltd. (‘‘Guangxi Yulin’’); (7) Nanning
Runchao Industrial Trade Co., Ltd. (‘‘Nanning
Runchao’’); (8) Primera Harvest; (9) Raoping Xingyu
Foods Co., Ltd. (‘‘Raoping Xingyu’’) and its affiliate
Raoping Yucun Canned Foods Factory (‘‘Raoping
Yucun’’); (10) Shanghai Superlucky Import &
Export Company, Ltd. (‘‘Superlucky’’); (11) Shantou
Hongda; (12) Shenxian Dongxing Foods Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Shenxian Dongxing’’); (13) Shenzhen
Qunxingyuan Trading Co., Ltd. (‘‘Shenzhen
Qunxingyuan’’); (14) Tak Fat Trading Co. (‘‘Tak
Fat’’) and its affiliate Mei Wei Food Industry Co.,
Ltd. (‘‘Mei Wei’’); (15) Xiamen Zhongjia Imp. & Exp.
Co., Ltd. (‘‘Zhongjia’’); (16) XITIC and its affiliate
Inter-Foods D.S. Co., Ltd.; (17) Zhangzhou
Hongning Canned Food Factory; (18) Zhangzhou
Jingxiang Foods Co., Ltd.; and (19) Zhangzhou
Longhai Minhui Industry and Trade Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Minhui’’).
E:\FR\FM\07MRN1.SGM
07MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 43 (Monday, March 7, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10962-10965]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-918]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-504]
Petroleum Wax Candles From the People's Republic of China:
Initiation of Anticircumvention Inquiries of Antidumping Duty Order
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Initiation of Anticircumvention Inquiries of
Antidumping Duty Order: Petroleum Wax Candles from the People's
Republic of China.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In response to a request from the National Candle Association
(``NCA'' or ``Petitioners''), the Department of Commerce (``the
Department'') is initiating an anticircumvention inquiry pursuant to
section 781(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, (``the Act'') to
determine whether mixed wax candles composed of petroleum wax and
varying amounts of either palm or vegetable-based waxes have been
subject to a minor alteration such that the addition of the non-
petroleum content to these candles results in products that are
``altered in form or appearance in minor respects'' from the subject
merchandise that these mixed wax petroleum candles can be considered
subject to the antidumping duty order on petroleum wax candles from the
People's Republic of China (``PRC'') under the minor alterations
provision. See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Petroleum Wax Candles
from the People's Republic of China, 51 FR 30686 (August 28, 1986)
(``Order'').
[[Page 10963]]
In addition, in response to a request from the NCA, the Department
is also initiating an anticircumvention inquiry pursuant to section
781(d) of the Act to determine whether mixed wax candles composed of
petroleum wax and varying amounts of either palm or vegetable-based
waxes are later-developed products that can be considered subject to
the antidumping duty order on petroleum wax candles from the PRC under
the later-developed merchandise provision.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 7, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex Villanueva, Julia Hancock, or
Nicole Bankhead, 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) 482-3208, (202) 482-1394, and (202) 482-9068, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 8, 2004, Petitioners requested that the Department
conduct an anticircumvention inquiry pursuant to section 781(d) of the
Act to determine whether candles containing palm or vegetable-based
waxes as the majority ingredient and exported to the United States are
circumventing the antidumping duty order on petroleum wax candles from
the PRC.
On October 12, 2004, Petitioners requested that the Department
conduct an anticircumvention inquiry pursuant to section 781(c) of the
Act to determine whether candles containing palm or vegetable-based
waxes and exported to the United States are circumventing the
antidumping duty order on petroleum wax candles from the PRC.
On November 15, 2004, the Candle Corporation of America (``CCA''),
a domestic producer, submitted comments in opposition to Petitioners'
request that the Department initiate this anticircumvention inquiry. On
November 15, 2004, the Department extended the deadline by three weeks
for initiating the later-developed merchandise anticircumvention
inquiry from November 22, 2004, to December 13, 2004. In addition, on
November 15, 2004, the Department extended by three weeks the deadline
for initiating the minor alterations anticircumvention inquiry, from
November 26, 2004, to December 17, 2004.
On November 16, 2004, Russ Berrie & Company, Inc. (``Russ
Berrie''), a domestic importer, submitted comments in opposition to
Petitioners' request that the Department initiate an anticircumvention
inquiry.
On December 2, 2004, J.C. Penney Company, Inc., Target Corporation,
the National Retail Federation, the MVP Group, the Candle Company, and
the World at Large, hereinafter collectively known as the Coalition for
Free Trade in Candles (``CFTC''), which represents these domestic
importers, submitted comments in opposition to Petitioners' request
that the Department initiate an anticircumvention inquiry.
On December 6, 2004, Fine Arts Marketing, Inc.; HomeScents, Inc.;
Lava Enterprises Inc.; Makebest Industries, Ltd.; Silk Road Gifts,
Inc.; Tag Trade Associates Group, Ltd. and Zodax, Inc., hereinafter
collectively referred to as the ``Tuttle Importers,'' submitted
comments in these domestic importers' opposition to Petitioners'
request that the Department initiate an anticircumvention inquiry.
On December 9, 2004, Petitioners submitted rebuttal comments to the
Department in response to comments made by those parties opposing
Petitioners' request for the initiation of an anticircumvention
inquiry.
On December 10, 2004, Pier 1 Imports (U.S.), Inc. (``Pier 1''), a
domestic importer, submitted comments in opposition to Petitioners'
request that the Department initiate an anticircumvention inquiry.
On December 13, 2004, the Department extended the later-developed
merchandise anticircumvention initiation deadline because additional
information was needed for the Department to make a decision within the
established time limits to initiate an anticircumvention inquiry. The
deadline for initiating the later-developed merchandise
anticircumvention inquiry was extended by sixty days from December 13,
2004, to February 11, 2005. Also on December 13, 2004, the Department
issued a supplemental questionnaire to Petitioners regarding several
areas in the later-developed merchandise anticircumvention request that
needed further clarification.
In addition, on December 13, 2004, the Department extended the
minor alterations anticircumvention initiation deadline a second time
because additional information was needed Department to make a decision
within the established time limits to initiate an anticircumvention
inquiry. The deadline for initiating the minor alterations
anticircumvention inquiry was extended by sixty days from December 17,
2004, to February 15, 2005. Also, on December 13, 2004, the Department
issued a supplemental questionnaire to Petitioners addressing several
areas in the minor alterations anticircumvention request that needed
further clarification.
On December 17, 2004, Petitioners requested an extension of three
weeks to respond to the Department's supplemental questionnaires. On
December 20, 2004, the Department granted Petitioners an extension of
fifteen days from December 27, 2004, to January 14, 2005, to respond to
the Department's supplemental questionnaires. On January 14, 2005,
Petitioners submitted a response to the supplemental questionnaires
issued by the Department.
On January 24, 2005, the CFTC requested that the Department extend
the deadline for initiating the anticircumvention inquiry by one month
from February 11, 2005, to March 11, 2005.
On January 25, 2005, Petitioners submitted samples of candles,
which were referenced in the supplemental questionnaire response filed
on January 14, 2005.
On January 27, 2005, Petitioners submitted comments in opposition
to the CFTC's request to extend the deadline for initiating the
anticircumvention inquiry.
On January 28, 2005, CCA submitted comments in response to
Petitioners' supplemental questionnaire response.
On January 31, 2005, the Department extended the later-developed
merchandise anticircumvention initiation deadline a third time because
domestic interested parties needed additional time to respond to
Petitioners' supplemental response. The deadline for initiating the
later-developed merchandise anticircumvention inquiry was extended by
ten days from February 11, 2005, to February 22, 2005. Also, on January
31, 2005, the Department extended the anticircumvention initiation
deadline for the minor alterations anticircumvention inquiry by ten
days from February 15, 2005, to February 25, 2005. In addition, on
January 31, 2005, the Department granted CFTC and other interested
parties an extension of ten days from January 28, 2005, to February 7,
2005, to submit factual information rebutting, clarifying, or
corroborating factual information submitted by Petitioners to
respondents on January 18, 2005.
Also on January 31, 2005, Russ Berrie requested that the Department
extend the deadline for initiation. In its submission, Russ Berrie
noted that it had submitted interim comments rebutting Petitioners'
supplemental response in case in which the
[[Page 10964]]
Department did not extend the deadline as previously requested by the
CFTC.
On February 2, 2005, CFTC submitted comments in response to
Petitioners' supplemental questionnaire responses.
On February 7, 2005, Petitioners submitted rebuttal comments in
response to comments made by interested parties regarding Petitioners'
supplemental response. On February 7, 2005, Silk Road Gifts, Ltd.
(``Silk Road''), a domestic importer, submitted comments in response to
Petitioners' supplemental response. Also on February 7, 2005, CFTC
submitted additional comments and samples of candles.
On February 11, 2005, the Department placed a memorandum on the
file regarding the ex parte meeting the Department had with counsel for
Petitioners on February 10, 2005.
On February 16, 2005, the Department placed a memorandum on the
file regarding the ex parte meeting Acting Assistant Secretary Joseph
Spetrini had with members of the Coalition for Free Trade in Candles on
February 15, 2005.
On February 18, 2005, the Department extended the initiation
deadline of the anticircumvention inquiry by three days from February
22, 2005, to February 25, 2005. Additionally, on February 18, 2005,
Qindao Kingking Applied Chemistry Co., Ltd.; Shonfeld's (USA), Inc.;
Alef Judaica, Inc.; and Amscan, Inc. submitted comments in response to
Petitioners' supplemental questionnaire response.
On February 24, 2005, a memorandum to the file was placed by the
Department regarding the ex parte meeting that the Acting Assistant
Secretary Joseph Spetrini had with counsel for Petitioners on February
23, 2005. Additionally, on February 24, 2005, Petitioners filed further
rebuttal comments.
Scope of Order
The products covered by this order are certain scented or unscented
petroleum wax candles made from petroleum wax and having fiber or
paper-cored wicks. They are sold in the following shapes: tapers,
spirals, and straight-sided dinner candles; round, columns, pillars,
votives; and various wax-filled containers. The products were
classified under the Tariff Schedules of the United States (``TSUS'')
755.25, Candles and Tapers. The product covered are currently
classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(``HTSUS'') item 3406.00.00. Although the HTSUS subheading is provided
for convenience purposes, our written description remains dispositive.
See Order; see also Notice of Final Results of the Antidumping Duty New
Shipper Review: Petroleum Wax Candles from the People's Republic of
China, 69 FR 77990 (December 29, 2004).
Initiation of Minor Alterations Anticircumvention Proceeding
Section 781(c)(1) of the Act provides that the Department may find
circumvention of an antidumping duty order when products which are of
the class or kind of merchandise subject to an antidumping duty order
have been ``altered in form or appearance in minor respects * * *
whether or not included in the same tariff classification.''
Based on the language contained in the petition, the antidumping
duty order, and the fact that the domestic ``like product''
determinations of the ITC are not dispositive, the Department finds
that there is sufficient basis to initiate an anticircumvention inquiry
pursuant to section 781(c) of the Act to determine whether the addition
of vegetable and/or palm-based wax results in a minor alteration, and
thus, a change so insignificant as to render the petroleum based, mixed
candle subject to the antidumping duty order on petroleum wax candles
from the PRC.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The various comments submitted by interested parties will be
considered by the Department in its final determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Minor Alterations Anticircumvention Proceeding
Petitioners argue that it is almost impossible to specify in this
application all or most all PRC producers and importers of mixed wax
petroleum wax candles containing varying amounts of palm or other
vegetable-based waxes because of the continuously increasing quantity
of imports of these candles into the United States. Additionally,
Petitioners argue that an application requesting an anticircumvention
inquiry and a resulting determination finding circumvention limited to
only a few companies and specific candles would have little to no
effect in preventing circumvention of the order.
The Department recognizes that Petitioners have limited information
available to them at this time regarding the production, exportation
and importation of mixed wax petroleum wax candles containing varying
amounts of palm or other vegetable-based waxes. Specifically, we agree
that obtaining subject and non-subject import data from the only tariff
classification for all candles and the unknown number of companies
producing and exporting to the United States mixed wax petroleum wax
candles containing varying amounts of palm and/or vegetable-based waxes
is difficult. However, we also note that Petitioners have provided a
list of companies importing and, to a certain extent, identified those
companies producing/exporting mixed wax petroleum wax candles varying
amounts of palm and/or vegetable-based waxes based on that companies'
scope ruling request submitted to the Department. See Petitioners'
Minor Alterations Supplemental Response (January 14, 2005) at Appendix
I. In addition, Petitioners have provided, where available, specific
model/product/SKU numbers for consideration in this anticircumvention
inquiry using the data from the companies' scope ruling requests
previously submitted to the Department. See Petitioners' Minor
Alterations Submission (October 12, 2004) at Appendix 1.
We are initiating this anticircumvention inquiry on particular PRC
exporters, as identified by Petitioners in Appendix 1 of their January
14, 2005, submission. However, within 45 days of the date of initiation
of this inquiry, if the Department receives sufficient evidence that
other PRC manufacturers are involved in the production of mixed wax
petroleum wax candles containing varying amounts of palm and/or
vegetable-based waxes for export to the United States, we will consider
examining such additional manufacturers.
The Department will not order the suspension of liquidation of
entries of any additional merchandise at this time. However, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(l)(2), if the Department issues a
preliminary affirmative determination, we will then instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to suspend liquidation and
require a cash deposit of estimated duties on the merchandise.
Initiation of Later-Developed Merchandise Anticircumvention Proceeding
Section 781(d)(1)(A) of the Act provides that the Department may
find circumvention of an antidumping duty order when merchandise is
developed after an investigation is initiated (``later-developed
merchandise'').
Based on the language contained in the petition and the antidumping
duty order, and the fact that the domestic like product determinations
of the International Trade Commission (``ITC'') is not dispositive, the
Department finds that there is sufficient basis to initiate an
anticircumvention inquiry pursuant to section 781(d) of the Act to
determine whether candles produced through the
[[Page 10965]]
addition of vegetable and/or palm-based wax to petroleum wax are later-
developed products that can be considered subject to the antidumping
duty order on petroleum wax candles from the PRC under the later-
developed merchandise provision.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Department recognizes that certain parties submitted
comments addressing certain factors as required by section 781(d) of
the Act, however the Department will address these comments in the
final determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department recognizes that the ITC's final injury determination
states that ``commercial production of candles generally uses
``natural'' waxes (paraffins, microcrystallines, stearic acid, and
beeswax) in various combinations.'' See Candles from the People's
Republic of China, Investigation No. 731-TA-282 (Final), USITC
Publication 1888 (August 1986) at 2 (``ITC Final Determination''). In
addition, we note that the ITC Final Determination defined petroleum
wax candles ``as those composed of over 50 percent petroleum wax,'' and
noted that such candles ``may contain other waxes in varying amounts,
depending on the size and shape of the candle, to enhance the melt-
point, viscosity, and burning power.'' Id. However, because the
Department did not address the proportion of these waxes that would be
indicative of petroleum wax candles, there is no clear basis for the
Department to make a conclusive determination that candles with non-
petroleum waxes in a different proportion are not later-developed
merchandise. Consequently, we are initiating this inquiry under section
781(d) of the Act.
In addition, parties may submit comments regarding the
appropriateness of our later-developed analysis as provided in this
notice, no later than thirty days from the date of publication of this
notice. Rebuttal comments are due no later than forty days from the
date of publication of this notice.
The Department will not order the suspension of liquidation of
entries of any additional merchandise at this time. However, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(l)(2), if the Department issues a
preliminary affirmative determination, we will then instruct CBP to
suspend liquidation and require a cash deposit of estimated duties on
the merchandise.
We intend to notify the ITC in the event of an affirmative
preliminary determination of circumvention, in accordance with
781(e)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(f)(7)(i)(C).The Department
will, following consultation with interested parties, establish a
schedule for questionnaires and comments on the issues. The Department
intends to issue its final determinations within 300 days of the date
of publication of this initiation. This notice is published in
accordance with sections 781(c) and 781(d) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.225(i).
Dated: February 25, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E5-918 Filed 3-4-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
