Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 19811-19812 [E8-7794]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 71 / Friday, April 11, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES been or will be exported from the United States and which is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Persons, or service any item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Persons if such service involves the use of any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States. For purposes of this paragraph, servicing means installation, maintenance, repair, modification or testing. Third, that, after notice and opportunity for comment as provided in section 766.23 of the EAR, any other person, firm, corporation, or business organization related to any of the Denied Persons by affiliation, ownership, control, or position of responsibility in the conduct of trade or related services may also be made subject to the provisions of this Order. Fourth, that this Order does not prohibit any export, reexport, or other transaction subject to the EAR where the only items involved that are subject to the EAR are the foreign-produced direct product of U.S.-origin technology. In accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(e) of the EAR, the Respondents may, at any time, appeal this Order by filing a full written statement in support of the appeal with the Office of the Administrative Law Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing Center, 40 South Gay Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202–4022. In accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(d) of the EAR, BIS may seek renewal of this Order by filing a written request with the Assistant Secretary not later than 20 days before the expiration date and serving the request on the Respondents. The Respondents may oppose a request to renew this Order by filing a written submission with the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement, which must be received not later than seven days before the expiration date of the Order. A copy of this Order shall be served on the Respondents and shall be published in the Federal Register. This Order is effective as of the date that it is signed and shall remain in effect for 180 days. Entered this 4th day of April 2008. Darryl W. Jackson, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement. [FR Doc. E8–7683 Filed 4–10–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DT–P VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:21 Apr 10, 2008 Jkt 214001 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A–533–838 Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce SUMMARY: On December 7, 2007, the Department of Commerce published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on carbazole violet pigment 23 from India. The review covers exports of this merchandise to the United States by Alpanil Industries for the period of review December 1, 2005, through November 30, 2006. We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the preliminary results. Based on our analysis of the comments we received from interested parties and the information we obtained after the preliminary results, 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: April 11, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yang Jin Chun at (202) 482–5760 or Richard Rimlinger at (202) 482–4477, AD/CVD Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background On December 7, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of review on carbazole violet pigment 23 (CVP 23) from India and invited interested parties to comment. See Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from India: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR 69184 (December 7, 2007) (Preliminary Results). On January 10, 2008, Alpanil Industries (Alpanil) filed a case brief in which the company raised two substantive issues. On January 15, 2008, the petitioners1 and a domestic interested party2 filed rebuttal briefs. Scope of the Order The merchandise subject to this antidumping duty order is CVP 23 1 Nation Ford Chemical Company and Sun Chemical Corporation. 2 Clariant Corporation. PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 19811 identified as Color Index No. 51319 and Chemical Abstract No. 6358–30–1, with the chemical name of diindolo [3,2 b:3 ,2 -m]3 triphenodioxazine, 8,18– dichloro–5, 15–diethyl–5, 15–dihydro-, and molecular formula of C34H22Cl2N4O2. The subject merchandise includes the crude pigment in any form (e.g., dry powder, paste, wet cake) and finished pigment in the form of presscake and dry color. Pigment dispersions in any form (e.g., pigment dispersed in oleoresins, flammable solvents, water) are not included within the scope of the investigation. The merchandise subject to this antidumping duty order is classifiable under subheading 3204.17.90.40 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of this order is dispositive. Analysis of the Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by interested parties to this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum (Decision Memo) from Deputy Assistant Secretary Stephen J. Claeys to Assistant Secretary David M. Spooner dated April 7, 2008, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have responded in the Decision Memo is attached to this notice as an Appendix. The Decision Memo, which is a public document, is on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), main Department of Commerce building, Room 1117, and is accessible on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/ index.html. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of comments received and based on our own analysis of the preliminary results, we have made changes to the margin calculation with respect to three issues. Sales Analyzed Data we obtained from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) after we received the case and rebuttal briefs indicated that additional sales of subject merchandise Alpanil reported in its U.S. sales database entered the United States 3 The bracketed section of the product description, [3,2-b:3 ,2 -m], is not businessproprietary information. In this case, the brackets are simply part of the chemical nomenclature. See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 From India, 69 FR 77988 (December 29, 2004) (Antidumping Duty Order). E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM 11APN1 19812 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 71 / Friday, April 11, 2008 / Notices but liquidation of these sales was not suspended. Therefore, pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), we have calculated the weighted–average margin using the sales of CVP 23 that are related to these entries during the period of review. Where possible, for those entries of subject merchandise for which there was no suspension of liquidation and which have been liquidated, we adjusted the importer– specific assessment rates to take into account the antidumping duty liability for subject merchandise that entered and was liquidated without regard to antidumping duties. See the Decision Memo for more details. Inland Freight from the Plant to the Port of Exportation For a certain number of sales, Alpanil reported in its U.S. sales database erroneous amounts of inland–freight expenses it incurred to transport subject merchandise from its plant to the port of exportation. We revised these expenses based on the freight–expense documents Alpanil provided. See Alpanil Final Analysis Memorandum dated April 7, 2008 (Final Analysis Memo), for more details that rely on Alpanil’s business–proprietary information. mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Constructed Value and Associated Expenses For certain reported U.S. sales that did not have matching home–market sales, we used constructed value as the basis for normal value. Because Alpanil did not report general and administrative (G&A) expenses in its constructed–value database, we calculated Alpanil’s G&A expenses using Alpanil’s profit–and-loss statement and reported total cost of manufacturing and packing expenses. In order to calculate correct amounts of indirect selling expenses for constructed value, we revised Alpanil’s home– market indirect selling expense by excluding transportation expenses from the recalculation of its home–market indirect–selling-expense rate. See Alpanil Final Analysis Memo for more details that rely on Alpanil’s business– proprietary information. Final Results of Review As a result of our review, we determine that the weighted–average margin for Alpanil for the period of review December 1, 2005, through November 30, 2006, is 11.25 percent. Assessment Rates The Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:21 Apr 10, 2008 Jkt 214001 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 Alpanil for which it did not know its merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate any 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 CVP 23 entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results, as provided by section 751(a)(1) and (a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the cash–deposit rate for Alpanil will be 11.25 percent; (2) for a previously investigated company, the cash–deposit rate will continue to be the company–specific rate published in Antidumping Duty Order, 69 FR at 77989; (3) 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; (4) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer has its own rate, the cash– deposit rate will be 27.48 percent, the all–others rate published in Antidumping Duty Order, 69 FR at 77989. 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 period of review. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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 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 Act. Dated: April 7, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix 1. Reported U.S. Sales and Sales That Entered the United States 2. Countervailing Duty Offset [FR Doc. E8–7794 Filed 4–10–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Expected Non-Market Economy Wages: Request for Comments on 2007 Calculation Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Request for comment. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) has a longstanding practice of calculating expected nonmarket economy (‘‘NME’’) wages for use as the surrogate value for direct labor in antidumping proceedings involving NME countries. These expected NME wages are calculated annually in accordance with the Department’s regulations, See 19 CFR 351.408 (c)(3). This notice constitutes the Department’s 2007 expected NME wages, which were calculated from 2005 data made available in 2007 according to the Department’s revised methodology described in the Federal Register notice entitled Antidumping Methodologies: Market Economy Inputs, Expected NonMarket Economy Wages, Duty Drawback; and Request for Comments, 71 FR 61716, Oct. 19, 2006 (hereafter, E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM 11APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 71 (Friday, April 11, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19811-19812]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-7794]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

A-533-838


Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from India: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce
SUMMARY: On December 7, 2007, the Department of Commerce published the 
preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping 
duty order on carbazole violet pigment 23 from India. The review covers 
exports of this merchandise to the United States by Alpanil Industries 
for the period of review December 1, 2005, through November 30, 2006. 
We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the preliminary 
results. Based on our analysis of the comments we received from 
interested parties and the information we obtained after the 
preliminary results, 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: April 11, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yang Jin Chun at (202) 482-5760 or 
Richard Rimlinger at (202) 482-4477, AD/CVD Operations, Office 5, 
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, 
Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On December 7, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published the preliminary results of review on carbazole violet pigment 
23 (CVP 23) from India and invited interested parties to comment. See 
Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from India: Preliminary Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR 69184 (December 7, 2007) 
(Preliminary Results). On January 10, 2008, Alpanil Industries 
(Alpanil) filed a case brief in which the company raised two 
substantive issues. On January 15, 2008, the petitioners\1\ and a 
domestic interested party\2\ filed rebuttal briefs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Nation Ford Chemical Company and Sun Chemical Corporation.
    \2\ Clariant Corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The merchandise subject to this antidumping duty order is CVP 23 
identified as Color Index No. 51319 and Chemical Abstract No. 6358-30-
1, with the chemical name of diindolo [3,2 b:3 ,2 -m]\3\ 
triphenodioxazine, 8,18-dichloro-5, 15-diethyl-5, 15-dihydro-, and 
molecular formula of C[bdi3][bdi4]H[bdi2][bdi2]Cl[bdi2]N[bdi4]O[bdi2]. 
The subject merchandise includes the crude pigment in any form (e.g., 
dry powder, paste, wet cake) and finished pigment in the form of 
presscake and dry color. Pigment dispersions in any form (e.g., pigment 
dispersed in oleoresins, flammable solvents, water) are not included 
within the scope of the investigation. The merchandise subject to this 
antidumping duty order is classifiable under subheading 3204.17.90.40 
of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). 
Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes, our written description of the scope of this order is 
dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The bracketed section of the product description, [3,2-b:3 
,2 -m], is not business-proprietary information. In this case, the 
brackets are simply part of the chemical nomenclature. See Notice of 
Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Antidumping Duty Order: Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 From India, 69 
FR 77988 (December 29, 2004) (Antidumping Duty Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of the Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by interested 
parties to this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum (Decision Memo) from Deputy Assistant Secretary Stephen J. 
Claeys to Assistant Secretary David M. Spooner dated April 7, 2008, 
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which 
parties have raised and to which we have responded in the Decision Memo 
is attached to this notice as an Appendix. The Decision Memo, which is 
a public document, is on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), main 
Department of Commerce building, Room 1117, and is accessible on the 
Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The paper copy and 
electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of comments received and based on our own 
analysis of the preliminary results, we have made changes to the margin 
calculation with respect to three issues.

Sales Analyzed

    Data we obtained from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 
after we received the case and rebuttal briefs indicated that 
additional sales of subject merchandise Alpanil reported in its U.S. 
sales database entered the United States

[[Page 19812]]

but liquidation of these sales was not suspended. Therefore, pursuant 
to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 
Act), we have calculated the weighted-average margin using the sales of 
CVP 23 that are related to these entries during the period of review. 
Where possible, for those entries of subject merchandise for which 
there was no suspension of liquidation and which have been liquidated, 
we adjusted the importer-specific assessment rates to take into account 
the antidumping duty liability for subject merchandise that entered and 
was liquidated without regard to antidumping duties. See the Decision 
Memo for more details.

Inland Freight from the Plant to the Port of Exportation

    For a certain number of sales, Alpanil reported in its U.S. sales 
database erroneous amounts of inland-freight expenses it incurred to 
transport subject merchandise from its plant to the port of 
exportation. We revised these expenses based on the freight-expense 
documents Alpanil provided. See Alpanil Final Analysis Memorandum dated 
April 7, 2008 (Final Analysis Memo), for more details that rely on 
Alpanil's business-proprietary information.

Constructed Value and Associated Expenses

    For certain reported U.S. sales that did not have matching home-
market sales, we used constructed value as the basis for normal value. 
Because Alpanil did not report general and administrative (G&A) 
expenses in its constructed-value database, we calculated Alpanil's G&A 
expenses using Alpanil's profit-and-loss statement and reported total 
cost of manufacturing and packing expenses. In order to calculate 
correct amounts of indirect selling expenses for constructed value, we 
revised Alpanil's home-market indirect selling expense by excluding 
transportation expenses from the recalculation of its home-market 
indirect-selling-expense rate. See Alpanil Final Analysis Memo for more 
details that rely on Alpanil's business-proprietary information.

Final Results of Review

    As a result of our review, we determine that the weighted-average 
margin for Alpanil for the period of review December 1, 2005, through 
November 30, 2006, is 11.25 percent.

Assessment Rates

    The Department shall determine, and 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 Alpanil for 
which it did not know its merchandise was destined for the United 
States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate any 
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 CVP 23 entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after the publication date of the final results, as 
provided by section 751(a)(1) and (a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the cash-
deposit rate for Alpanil will be 11.25 percent; (2) for a previously 
investigated company, the cash-deposit rate will continue to be the 
company-specific rate published in Antidumping Duty Order, 69 FR at 
77989; (3) 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; (4) if neither the exporter 
nor the manufacturer has its own rate, the cash-deposit rate will be 
27.48 percent, the all-others rate published in Antidumping Duty Order, 
69 FR at 77989. 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 period of review. 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 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 Act.

    Dated: April 7, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix

1. Reported U.S. Sales and Sales That Entered the United States
2. Countervailing Duty Offset
[FR Doc. E8-7794 Filed 4-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S