Synthetic Indigo from the People's Republic of China; Notice of Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order, 53165-53166 [E5-4865]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
53165
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 7, 2005 / Notices
China.1 On May 12, 2005, the
Department received a Notice of Intent
to Participate from Nation Ford
Chemical Company (‘‘NFC’’), the
domestic interested party, within the
deadline specified in section
315.218(d)(1)(i) of the Department’s
regulations. NFC claimed interested
party status under section 771(9)(C) of
the Act, as a producer of the domestic–
like product in the United States. On
May 31, 2005, the Department received
a complete substantive response from
NFC within the deadline specified in
section 351.218(d)(3)(i) of the
Department’s regulations. We did not
receive responses from any respondent
interested parties to this proceeding. As
a result, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B)
of the Act and section
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2) of the
Department’s regulations, the
Department determined to conduct
expedited reviews of these orders.
Scope of the Orders:
Imports covered by this antidumping
duty order are all grades of sulfanilic
acid, which include technical (or crude)
sulfanilic acid, refined (or purified)
sulfanilic acid and sodium salt of
sulfanilic acid.
Sulfanilic acid is a synthetic organic
chemical produced from the direct
sulfonation of aniline with sulfuric acid.
Sulfanilic acid is used as a raw material
in the production of optical brighteners,
food colors, specialty dyes, and concrete
additives. The principal differences
between the grades are the undesirable
quantities of residual aniline and alkali
insoluble materials present in the
sulfanilic acid. All grades are available
as dry, free flowing powders.
Technical sulfanilic acid, classifiable
under the subheading 2921.42.22 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS),
contains 96 percent minimum sulfanilic
acid, 1.0 percent maximum aniline, and
1.0 percent maximum alkali insoluble
materials. Refined sulfanilic acid, also
classifiable under the subheading
2921.42.22 of the HTS, contains 98
percent minimum sulfanilic acid, 0.5
percent maximum aniline and 0.25
percent maximum alkali insoluble
materials.
Sodium salt (sodium sulfanilate),
classifiable under the HTS subheading
2921.42.90, is a powder, granular or
crystalline material which contains 75
percent minimum equivalent sulfanilic
acid, 0.5 percent maximum aniline
based on the equivalent sulfanilic acid
content, and 0.25 percent maximum
alkali insoluble materials based on the
equivalent sulfanilic acid content.
The Department conducted a scope
ruling regarding 3V Corporation and
determined that sodium sulfanilate
processed in Italy from sulfanilic acid
from India was within the scope of this
order. See Notice of Scope Rulings and
Anticircumvention Inquiries, 65 FR
41957 (July 7, 2000).
Although the HTS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, our written description of the
scope of this proceeding is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received:
All issues raised in these reviews are
addressed in the ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum’’ (‘‘Decision
Memorandum’’) from Barbara E.
Tillman, Acting Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, to
Joseph A. Spetrini, Acting Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration,
dated August 30, 2005, which is hereby
adopted by this notice. The issues
discussed in the Decision Memorandum
include the likelihood of continuation
or recurrence of dumping and the
magnitude of the margins likely to
prevail if the orders were revoked.
Parties can find a complete discussion
of all issues raised in these reviews and
the corresponding recommendations in
this public memorandum which is on
file in room B–099 of the main
Commerce Building.
In addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the Web at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/, under the
heading ‘‘September 2005.’’ The paper
copy and electronic version of the
Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
We determine that revocation of the
antidumping duty orders on sulfanilic
acid from India and China would likely
lead to continuation or recurrence of
dumping at the following weighted–
average percentage margins:
Weighted Average
Margin (percent)
India.
All Indian Manufacturers
and Exporters ............
China.
China National Chemicals I&E Corporation,
Hebei Branch ............
114.802
19.14
1 See
Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews,
70 FR 22632 (May 2, 2005) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’).
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:05 Sep 06, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Weighted Average
Margin (percent)
China–wide rate ............
85.20
2 The
Department published its final affirmative determination of sales at less than fair
value (‘‘LTFV’’) with respect to imports of sulfanilic acid from India on January 8, 1993 (58
FR 3251). In this determination, the Department published a weighted-average dumping
margin for all manufacturers/producers/exporters of 114.8 percent.
This notice also serves as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders
(‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of
proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR
351.305 of the Department’s regulations.
Timely notification of the return or
destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a violation which is subject to
sanction.
We are issuing and publishing the
results and notice in accordance with
sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the
Act.
Dated: August 30, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E5–4866 Filed 9–6–05; 8:45 am]
Billing Code: 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A–570–856
Synthetic Indigo from the People’s
Republic of China; Notice of Final
Results of Expedited Sunset Review of
Antidumping Duty Order
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On May 2, 2005, the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) initiated the sunset
review of the antidumping duty order
on synthetic indigo from the People’s
Republic of China (‘‘China’’) pursuant to
section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
AGENCY:
Final Results of Reviews:
Manufacturers/Exporters/Producers
Manufacturers/Exporters/Producers
However, consistent with section 772(d)(1)(D) of
the Act, which prohibits assessing antidumping
duties on the portion of the margin attributable to
an export subsidy, we established an estimated
antidumping duty deposit rate of 71.09 percent for
duty deposit purposes. The Department issued its
antidumping duty order on sulfanilic acid from
India on March 2, 1993. See Notice of Antidumping
Duty Order; Sulfanilic Acid from India, 58 FR
12025 (March 2, 1993). The Department has not
conducted an administrative review of this order
since its imposition.
E:\FR\FM\07SEN1.SGM
07SEN1
53166
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 7, 2005 / Notices
as amended (‘‘the Act’’). On the basis of
a Notice of Intent to Participate,
adequate substantive response filed on
behalf of a domestic interested party,
and lack of response from respondent
interested parties, the Department
conducted an expedited (120-day)
sunset review. As a result of this sunset
review, the Department finds that
revocation of the antidumping duty
order would be likely to lead to
continuation or recurrence of dumping.
The dumping margins likely to prevail
if the order were revoked are identified
in the Final Results of Review section of
this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 7, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Hilary E.
Sadler, Esq., AD/CVD Operations, Office
8, International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street & Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–4340.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On May 2, 2005, the Department
published the notice of initiation of the
sunset review of the antidumping duty
order on synthetic indigo from China.
See Initiation of Five-year (‘‘Sunset’’)
Reviews, 70 FR 22632 (May 2, 2005)
(‘‘Initiation Notice’’). On May 17, 2005,
the Department received a Notice of
Intent to Participate from Buffalo Color
Corporation (‘‘Buffalo Color’’), a
domestic interested party, within the
deadline specified in section
315.218(d)(1)(i) of the Department’s
regulations. Buffalo Color claimed
interested party status under section
771(9)(C) of the Act, as a manufacturer,
producer, or wholesaler in the United
States of a domestic like product. On
June 1, 2005, the Department received a
complete substantive response from
Buffalo Color within the deadline
specified in section 351.218(d)(3)(i) of
the Department’s regulations. We did
not receive a response from any
respondent interested party to this
proceeding. As a result, pursuant to
section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and
section 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2) of the
Department’s regulations, the
Department determined to conduct an
expedited review of this order.
Scope of the Order
The products subject to this order are
the deep blue synthetic vat dye known
as synthetic indigo and those of its
derivatives designated commercially as
‘‘Vat Blue 1.’’ Included are Vat Blue 1
(synthetic indigo), Color Index No.
73000, and its derivatives, pre–reduced
indigo or indigo white (Color Index No.
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:05 Sep 06, 2005
Jkt 205001
73001) and solubilized indigo (Color
Index No. 73002). The subject
merchandise may be sold in any form
(e.g., powder, granular, paste, liquid, or
solution) and in any strength. Synthetic
indigo and its derivatives subject to this
order are currently classifiable under
subheadings 3204.15.10.00,
3204.15.40.00 or 3204.15.80.00 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 merchandise
under the order is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in this review are
addressed in the ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum’’ (‘‘Decision Memo’’)
from Barbara E. Tillman, Acting Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, to Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, dated August 30, 2005,
which is hereby adopted by this notice.
The issues discussed in the Decision
Memo include the likelihood of
continuation or recurrence of dumping
and the magnitude of the margins likely
to prevail if the order were revoked.
Parties can find a complete discussion
of all issues raised in this review and
the corresponding recommendations in
this public memorandum which is on
file in room B–099 of the main
Commerce Building.
In addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memo can be accessed directly
on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/
index.html, under the heading
‘‘September 2005.’’ The paper copy and
electronic version of the Decision Memo
are identical in content.
Final Results of Review
We determine that revocation of the
antidumping duty order on synthetic
indigo from China would likely lead to
continuation or recurrence of dumping
at the following weighted–average
percentage margins:
Manufacturers/Exporters/Producers
Wonderful Chemical Industrial
Ltd./Jiangsu Taifeng Chemical
Industry Company, Ltd. ...........
China National Chemical Construction Jiangsu Company ....
China Jiangsu International Economic Technical Cooperation
Corp ........................................
Shanghai Yongchen International Trading Company Ltd.
Hebei Jinzhou Import & Export
Corporation .............................
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Manufacturers/Exporters/Producers
Weighted
Average
Margin
(percent)
Sinochem Hebei Import & Export
Corporation .............................
Chongqing Dyestuff Import & Export United Corporation ..........
Wuhan Tianjin Chemicals Imports & Exports Corp., Ltd. .....
China–wide Rate ........................
79.70
79.70
79.70
129.60
This notice also serves as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’)
of their responsibility concerning the
return or destruction of proprietary
information disclosed under APO in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 of the
Department’s regulations. Timely
notification of the return or destruction
of APO materials or conversion to
judicial protective order is hereby
requested. Failure to comply with the
regulations and terms of an APO is a
violation which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing the
results and notice in accordance with
sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the
Act.
Dated: August 30, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E5–4865 Filed 9–6–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(C–533–821)
Notice of Extension of Time Limit for
Preliminary Results of Countervailing
Duty Administrative Review: Certain
Hot–Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products
from India
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 7, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Weighted
Average
Preeti Tolani or Tipten Troidl, AD/CVD
Margin
Operations, Office 3, Import
(percent)
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
129.60 Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–0395 and (202)
79.70 482–1767, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
129.60
79.70
79.70
AGENCY:
Background Information
On January 31, 2005, the U.S.
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) published a notice of
E:\FR\FM\07SEN1.SGM
07SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 172 (Wednesday, September 7, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53165-53166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-4865]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A-570-856
Synthetic Indigo from the People's Republic of China; Notice of
Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On May 2, 2005, the Department of Commerce (``the
Department'') initiated the sunset review of the antidumping duty order
on synthetic indigo from the People's Republic of China (``China'')
pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
[[Page 53166]]
as amended (``the Act''). On the basis of a Notice of Intent to
Participate, adequate substantive response filed on behalf of a
domestic interested party, and lack of response from respondent
interested parties, the Department conducted an expedited (120-day)
sunset review. As a result of this sunset review, the Department finds
that revocation of the antidumping duty order would be likely to lead
to continuation or recurrence of dumping. The dumping margins likely to
prevail if the order were revoked are identified in the Final Results
of Review section of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 7, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Hilary E. Sadler, Esq., AD/CVD Operations,
Office 8, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482-4340.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On May 2, 2005, the Department published the notice of initiation
of the sunset review of the antidumping duty order on synthetic indigo
from China. See Initiation of Five-year (``Sunset'') Reviews, 70 FR
22632 (May 2, 2005) (``Initiation Notice''). On May 17, 2005, the
Department received a Notice of Intent to Participate from Buffalo
Color Corporation (``Buffalo Color''), a domestic interested party,
within the deadline specified in section 315.218(d)(1)(i) of the
Department's regulations. Buffalo Color claimed interested party status
under section 771(9)(C) of the Act, as a manufacturer, producer, or
wholesaler in the United States of a domestic like product. On June 1,
2005, the Department received a complete substantive response from
Buffalo Color within the deadline specified in section 351.218(d)(3)(i)
of the Department's regulations. We did not receive a response from any
respondent interested party to this proceeding. As a result, pursuant
to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and section 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2)
of the Department's regulations, the Department determined to conduct
an expedited review of this order.
Scope of the Order
The products subject to this order are the deep blue synthetic vat
dye known as synthetic indigo and those of its derivatives designated
commercially as ``Vat Blue 1.'' Included are Vat Blue 1 (synthetic
indigo), Color Index No. 73000, and its derivatives, pre-reduced indigo
or indigo white (Color Index No. 73001) and solubilized indigo (Color
Index No. 73002). The subject merchandise may be sold in any form
(e.g., powder, granular, paste, liquid, or solution) and in any
strength. Synthetic indigo and its derivatives subject to this order
are currently classifiable under subheadings 3204.15.10.00,
3204.15.40.00 or 3204.15.80.00 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
merchandise under the order is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in this review are addressed in the ``Issues and
Decision Memorandum'' (``Decision Memo'') from Barbara E. Tillman,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to Joseph
A. Spetrini, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration,
dated August 30, 2005, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The
issues discussed in the Decision Memo include the likelihood of
continuation or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margins
likely to prevail if the order were revoked. Parties can find a
complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the
corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which is on
file in room B-099 of the main Commerce Building.
In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be
accessed directly on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/,
under the heading ``September 2005.'' The paper copy and electronic
version of the Decision Memo are identical in content.
Final Results of Review
We determine that revocation of the antidumping duty order on
synthetic indigo from China would likely lead to continuation or
recurrence of dumping at the following weighted-average percentage
margins:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted
Average
Manufacturers/Exporters/Producers Margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wonderful Chemical Industrial Ltd./Jiangsu Taifeng Chemical 129.60
Industry Company, Ltd......................................
China National Chemical Construction Jiangsu Company........ 79.70
China Jiangsu International Economic Technical Cooperation 129.60
Corp.......................................................
Shanghai Yongchen International Trading Company Ltd......... 79.70
Hebei Jinzhou Import & Export Corporation................... 79.70
Sinochem Hebei Import & Export Corporation.................. 79.70
Chongqing Dyestuff Import & Export United Corporation....... 79.70
Wuhan Tianjin Chemicals Imports & Exports Corp., Ltd........ 79.70
China-wide Rate............................................. 129.60
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 of the
Department's regulations. Timely notification of the return or
destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order
is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms
of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing the results and notice in accordance
with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: August 30, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E5-4865 Filed 9-6-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
