Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Mexico: Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 70300-70301 [E7-23969]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 11, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70300-70301]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-23969]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-201-834]


Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Mexico: Final Results of the 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 7, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on purified carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) from 
Mexico. See Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From Mexico: Notice of 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR 
44095 (August 7, 2007) (Preliminary Results). The review covers exports 
of the subject merchandise to the United States produced and exported 
by Quimica Amtex S.A. de C.V. (Amtex). We invited interested parties to 
comment on the preliminary results. Based upon our analysis of the 
comments received from parties, we have made changes in the margin 
calculation for the final results of this review. The final weighted-
average margin is listed below in the ``Final Results of Review'' 
section of this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 11, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Flessner or Robert James, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
6312 or (202) 482-0649, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 7, 2007, the Department published the preliminary results 
of the administrative review and invited interested parties to comment. 
See Preliminary Results. On September 6, 2007, respondent Amtex filed a 
case brief in which the company alleges a ministerial error in our 
margin calculation. Also on September 6, 2007, petitioner The Aqualon 
Company, a division of Hercules, Inc. (Aqualon), filed a 
``Demonstration of Programming Errors in Lieu of Case Brief'' in which 
the company alleges two ministerial errors in the calculation.

Period of Review

    The period of review (POR) is December 27, 2004, through June 30, 
2006.

Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by this order is all purified 
carboxymethylcellulose (CMC), sometimes also referred to as purified 
sodium CMC, polyanionic cellulose, or cellulose gum, which is a white 
to off-white, non-toxic, odorless, biodegradable powder, comprising 
sodium CMC that has been refined and purified to a minimum assay of 90 
percent. Purified CMC does not include unpurified or crude CMC, CMC 
Fluidized Polymer Suspensions, and CMC that is cross-linked through 
heat treatment. Purified CMC is CMC that has undergone one or more 
purification operations which, at a minimum, reduce the remaining salt 
and other by-product portion of the product to less than ten percent. 
The merchandise subject to this order is classified in the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States at subheading 3912.31.00. This 
tariff classification is provided for convenience and customs purposes; 
however, the written description of the scope of the order is 
dispositive.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

SG&A and Interest Expense

    In accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the 
Tariff Act), we base normal value (NV) on constructed value (CV) if we 
are unable to find a contemporaneous comparison market match of such or 
similar merchandise for the U.S. sale. Section 773(e) of the Tariff Act 
provides that CV shall be based on the sum of the cost of materials and 
fabrication employed in making the subject merchandise, SG&A expenses, 
profit, and U.S. packing costs. Since there was no cost allegation in 
this administrative review, no section D questionnaire was issued to 
Amtex. Therefore, we relied upon the costs of materials and fabrication 
as reported by Amtex in its sections A, B, and C responses and 
supplemental response to calculate CV (for those sales which were not 
matched to home market sales). However, Amtex's responses did not 
provide all the data necessary for us to compute CV profit. For the 
preliminary results, we calculated a CV profit using Amtex's 2001-2002 
and 2005 audited financial statements, as submitted in the most recent 
segment of these proceedings. See Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: 
Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, Mexico, the Netherlands, 
and Sweden, 70 FR 39734 (July 11, 2005); see also Frozen Concentrated 
Orange Juice from Brazil: Final Results and Partial Rescission of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 66 FR 51008 (October 5, 2001) 
and the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 3.
    On August 24, 2007, Amtex submitted its audited 2006 financial 
statement. Therefore, we have used Amtex's 2006 cost data for SG&A and 
net interest expenses in order to derive CV for these final results. 
See Analysis Memorandum for the Final Results of the Administrative 
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Carboxymethylcellulose from 
Mexico dated December 5, 2007 (Final Results Analysis Memorandum), at 
3-4.; see also Analysis Memorandum for the Preliminary Results of the 
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on 
Carboxymethylcellulose from Mexico dated July 31, 2007 (Preliminary 
Results Analysis Memorandum), at 10-13. Public versions of these 
memoranda are on file in the Department's Central Records Unit (CRU) 
located in Room B-099 of the main Department of Commerce Building, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.

Conversion Error in Calculation of DIFMER

    In accordance with section 19 C.F.R. 351.411, we make a reasonable 
allowance for merchandise sold in the United States that does not have 
the same physical characteristics as the merchandise sold in the 
foreign market if we determine that the difference has an effect on 
prices when computing NV.

[[Page 70301]]

This is reflected in the programming as difference in merchandise 
(DIFMER). In its case brief, Amtex contends that the Department failed 
to convert DIFMER adjustments to a per-pound basis in calculating the 
foreign unit price in dollars (FUPDOL). As all comparisons in this 
review are made on a per-pound basis, we therefore agree with Amtex and 
have made the conversion for the final results. See Final Results 
Analysis Memorandum at 2.

Subtraction Error in Calculating FUPDOL

    In its ``Demonstration of Programming Errors in Lieu of Case 
Brief,'' Aqualon contends that the Department inadvertently added 
rather than subtracted DIFMER in the FUPDOL calculation as would be 
appropriate. We agree with Aqualon, and have, in keeping with the 
Department's standard programming language, subtracted DIFMER in the 
FUPDOL calculation for the final results. See Final Results Analysis 
Memorandum at 2-3. However, we have used programming language that is 
different from that suggested by Aqualon because Aqualon's language 
would add rather than subtract any level of trade adjustment (LOTADJMT) 
from comparison market net price (CMNETPRI).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Tariff Act allows the Department 
to add or subtract any level of trade adjustment (LOTADJ). The 
Department's standard programming language subtracts the LOTADJ from 
home market price. In this administrative review, there is no 
LOTADJ; therefore, it is mathematically irrelevant whether the zero 
value is added or subtracted. We have determined, however, to keep 
the FUPDOL string consistent with the standard programming language.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CEPICCU and CEPINDU Adjustments

    Also in its ``Demonstration of Programming Errors in Lieu of Case 
Brief,'' Aqualon contends that the Department inadvertently set 
constructed export price imputed inventory carrying costs (CEPICCU) and 
indirect selling expenses incurred in the United States (CEPINDU) to 
zero. We agree with Aqualon, and have set CEPICCU to equal inventory 
carrying costs (INVCARU) and set CEPINDU to equal U.S. indirect selling 
expenses (INDIRSU) in keeping with long-standing Department practice. 
See Final Results Analysis Memorandum at 3.

Final Results of Review

    As a result of our review, we determine that the following 
weighted-average dumping margin exists for the period December 27, 2004 
through June 30, 2006:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       Weighted-Average Margin
                      Producer                                     POR                        (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quimica Amtex, S.A. de C.V..........................           12/27/04 - 06/30/06                          2.51
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we will issue 
importer-specific assessment instructions for entries of subject 
merchandise during the period of review. The Department will issue 
appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after 
publication of the final results of review.
    The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on 
May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This clarification will apply to entries of 
subject merchandise during the period of review produced by Amtex for 
which it did not know that the merchandise sold to the intermediary was 
destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP 
to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no 
rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For 
a full discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).

Cash-Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of this notice of final results of administrative review 
for all shipments of CMC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after the publication date of the final results, as 
provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act: (1) the cash-deposit 
rate for Amtex will be 2.51 percent; (2) if the exporter is not a firm 
covered in this review or the less-than-fair-value investigation but 
the manufacturer is, the cash-deposit rate will be the rate established 
for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; (3) 
if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer has its own rate, the 
cash-deposit rate will be 12.61 percent, the all-others rate for this 
proceeding published in the final less-than-fair-value investigation. 
See Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Purified Carboxymethylcellulose 
from Finland, Mexico, the Netherlands, and Sweden, 70 FR 39734 (July 
11, 2005). These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until 
further notice.

Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 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 Department's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

Notification Regarding APOs

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO as explained in the APO itself. See also 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). 
Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials 
or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure 
to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable 
violation.
    We are publishing these final results of administrative review and 
notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the 
Tariff Act.

    Dated: December 3, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-23969 Filed 12-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S