Lightweight Thermal Paper From the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 57329-57333 [E8-23284]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 192 / Thursday, October 2, 2008 / Notices
and the terms of an APO is a
sanctionable violation.
This determination is issued and
published pursuant to sections 735(d)
and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Frances Veith or Demitrios
Kalogeropoulos, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 8, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–4295 or (202) 482–2623,
respectively.
Dated: Septembe 25, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix -- Issues in Decision
Memorandum
I. GENERAL ISSUES
Comment 1: Ministerial Error Correction
II. TARGETED DUMPING ISSUES
Comment 2: Whether the Department’s
Targeted Dumping Test is Flawed and
Should be Replaced with the
‘‘preponderance at two percent test’’ (P/
2 Test)
Comment 3: Whether the Department
Should Apply any Margins Calculated
for Koehler Pursuant to its Targeted
Dumping Test to Mitsubishi HiTec
Paper and the Non–Selected
Respondents
Comment 4: Whether Margins Should
be Calculated Without Applying Offsets
for Non–Dumped Sales
[FR Doc. E8–23270 Filed 10–1–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–920]
Lightweight Thermal Paper From the
People’s Republic of China: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 2, 2008.
SUMMARY: On May 13, 2008, the
Department of Commerce (the
‘‘Department’’) published its
preliminary determination of sales at
less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’) in the
antidumping investigation of
lightweight thermal paper (‘‘LWTP’’)
from the People’s Republic of China
(‘‘PRC’’). The period of investigation
(‘‘POI’’) is January 1, 2007, to June 30,
2007. We invited interested parties to
comment on our preliminary
determination of sales at LTFV. Based
on our analysis of the comments we
received, we have made changes to our
calculations for the mandatory
respondents. The final dumping
margins for this investigation are listed
in the ‘‘Final Determination Margins’’
section below.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:52 Oct 01, 2008
Jkt 217001
Final Determination
We determine that LWTP from the
PRC is being, or is likely to be, sold in
the United States at LTFV as provided
in section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (‘‘the Act’’). The estimated
margins of sales at LTFV are shown in
the ‘‘Final Determination Margins’’
section of this notice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Case History
The Department published its
preliminary determination of sales at
LTFV on May 13, 2008. See Lightweight
Thermal Paper From the People’s
Republic of China: Preliminary
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Postponement of Final
Determination, 73 FR 27504 (May 13,
2008) (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’).
Additionally, the Department postponed
the deadline for the final determination
by 60 days to September 25, 2008. See
Preliminary Determination, at 27504.
On May 28, 2008, Appleton Papers, Inc.
(‘‘petitioner’’) submitted comments
regarding Guanhao’s eligibility for a
separate rate. From June 2 through 13,
2008, the Department conducted
verifications of Hanhong International
Limited, Shanghai Hanhong Paper Co.,
Ltd., and Hong Kong Hanhong Ltd.
(collectively (‘‘Hanhong’’)) and
Guangdong Guanhao High-Tech Co.,
Ltd. (‘‘Guanhao’’) and released its
verification reports for both companies
on July 16, 2008. See the ‘‘Verification’’
section below for additional
information. On June 12, 2008,
petitioner filed a timely request for a
public hearing. On June 23, 2008,
petitioner and Guanhao submitted
surrogate value information for the
record. On July 2, 2008, the Department
placed its updated wage rate
calculations on the record. On July 24,
2008, case briefs were filed by both
petitioner and Hanhong. On July 29,
2008, Hanhong and Guanhao each filed
rebuttal briefs. On August 14, 2008,
petitioner withdrew its request for a
hearing.
Targeted Dumping
On May 5, 2008, petitioner filed an
allegation of targeted dumping with
respect to patterns of Hanhong’s
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57329
constructed export prices (‘‘CEPs’’) for
comparable merchandise that differ
significantly among purchases and
periods of time. Petitioner limited its
targeted dumping allegation to patterns
of prices found in Hanhong’s CEP sales.
In our Preliminary Determination, we
found that Hanhong was not affiliated
with its U.S. customer, and based our
margin analysis on Hanhong’s export
price (‘‘EP’’) sales. As a result,
petitioner’s targeted dumping allegation
was inapplicable to our margin
calculations. Since the Preliminary
Determination, no interested party has
provided any argument or information
on the record concerning petitioner’s
targeted dumping allegation. In our final
determination, we have continued to
find Hanhong unaffiliated with its U.S.
customer, and consequently, based our
margin calculations on Hanhong’s EP
sales. As a result, petitioner’s allegation
of targeted dumping is not applicable to
our margin analysis. Therefore, we did
not address it in this final
determination.
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is
January 1, 2007, through June 30, 2007.
This period corresponds to the two most
recent fiscal quarters prior to the month
of the filing of the petition, which was
September 2007. See 19 CFR
351.204(b)(1).
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the
Act, we verified the information
submitted by Hanhong and Guanhao for
use in our final determination. See the
Department’s verification reports on the
record of this investigation in the
Central Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’), Room
1117 of the main Department building,
with respect to these entities. For all
verified companies, we used standard
verification procedures, including
examination of relevant accounting and
production records, as well as original
source documents provided by
respondents.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties to this
investigation are addressed in the
‘‘Investigation of Lightweight Thermal
Paper from the People’s Republic of
China: Issues and Decision
Memorandum,’’ dated concurrently
with this notice and hereby adopted by
this notice (‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum’’). A list of the issues
which parties raised and to which we
respond in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum is attached to this notice
as Appendix I. The Issues and Decision
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
57330
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 192 / Thursday, October 2, 2008 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Memorandum is a public document on
file in the CRU and accessible on the
Web at ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper
copy and electronic version of the
memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary
Determination
• Financial statements—In the
Preliminary Determination, we
calculated financial ratios based on two
Indian producers’ financial statements
(i.e. , Parag Copigraph Pvt. Ltd.
(‘‘Parag’’) and Alpha Carbonless Paper
Ltd. for the fiscal year ending March 31,
2006. For the final determination, we
have determined to use only Parag’s
financial statement for the fiscal year
ending March 31, 2007. See Comment 2.
• Financial ratios—For the final
determination, we made certain changes
to the financial ratio calculations from
the Preliminary Determination. We
excluded the line items for freight and
cartage-outward, and freight and
cartage-export from the Selling, General,
and Administrative expenses (‘‘SG&A’’)
ratio calculation obtained from Parag’s
financial statement. Additionally, we
included Parag’s line items for
miscellaneous income, other income,
and interest revenue (because all of
Parag’s interest revenue was on current
assets) as an offset to the SG&A ratio
calculation and we have continued to
include export expense in our
calculation of the surrogate financial
ratio for SG&A. See Comment 3.
• Base paper surrogate value—For
the Preliminary Determination, we
calculated Guanhao’s surrogate value for
base paper using WTA import statistics.
For the final determination, we have
continued to calculate Guanhao’s
surrogate value using WTA import
statistics; however, we have excluded
imports into India from the United
States. See Comment 9.
• Guanhao minor corrections—We
made the following minor corrections to
Guanhao’s sales data: (1) We changed
the reported gross weight for two
observations; and (2) we changed the
reported payment date for six
observations. See Memorandum
entitled, ‘‘Verification of the Sales and
Factors Responses of Guangdong
Guanhao High Tech Co., Ltd. in the
Antidumping Investigation of
Lightweight Thermal Paper from the
People’s Republic of China,’’ dated July
16, 2008.
• Hanhong minor corrections—We
made the following minor corrections to
Hanhong’s sales and factors-ofproduction (‘‘FOP’’) data: (1) We
changed the reported destination for one
observation; (2) we changed the
reported per-unit gross weight for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:52 Oct 01, 2008
Jkt 217001
certain observations; and (3) we
changed the reported capped distance
for certain FOPs. See Memorandum
entitled, ‘‘Verification of the Sales and
Factors Responses of Hanhong
International Limited, Shanghai
Hanhong Paper Co., Ltd., Hong Kong
Hanhong Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping
Investigation of Lightweight Thermal
Paper from the People’s Republic of
China,’’ dated July 16, 2008.
Scope of Investigation
The merchandise covered by this
investigation includes certain
lightweight thermal paper, which is
thermal paper with a basis weight of 70
grams per square meter (g/m2) (with a
tolerance of ±4.0 g/m2) or less;
irrespective of dimensions; 1 with or
without a base coat 2 on one or both
sides; with thermal active coating(s) 3 on
one or both sides that is a mixture of the
dye and the developer that react and
form an image when heat is applied;
with or without a top coat; 4 and
without an adhesive backing. Certain
lightweight thermal paper is typically
(but not exclusively) used in point-ofsale applications such as ATM receipts,
credit card receipts, gas pump receipts,
and retail store receipts. The
merchandise subject to this
investigation may be classified in the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) under
subheadings 4811.90.8040,
4811.90.9090, 3703.10.60, 4811.59.20,
4820.10.20, and 4823.40.00.5 Although
HTSUS subheadings are provided for
1 LWTP is typically produced in jumbo rolls that
are slit to the specifications of the converting
equipment and then converted into finished slit
rolls. Both jumbo and converted rolls (as well as
LWTP in any other form, presentation, or
dimension) are covered by the scope of these
investigations.
2 A base coat, when applied, is typically made of
clay and/or latex and like materials and is intended
to cover the rough surface of the paper substrate
and to provide insulating value.
3 A thermal active coating is typically made of
sensitizer, dye, and co-reactant.
4 A top coat, when applied, is typically made of
polyvinyl acetone, polyvinyl alcohol, and/or like
materials and is intended to provide environmental
protection, an improved surface for press printing,
and/or wear protection for the thermal print head.
5 HTSUS subheading 4811.90.8000 was a
classification used for LWTP until January 1, 2007.
Effective that date, subheading 4811.90.8000 was
replaced with 4811.90.8020 (for gift wrap, a
nonsubject product) and 4811.90.8040 (for ‘‘other’’
including LWTP). HTSUS subheading 4811.90.9000
was a classification for LWTP until July 1, 2005.
Effective that date, subheading 4811.90.9000 was
replaced with 4811.90.9010 (for tissue paper, a
nonsubject product) and 4811.90.9090 (for ‘‘other,’’
including LWTP). Petitioner indicated that, from
time to time, LWTP also may have been entered
under HTSUS subheading 3703.90, HTSUS heading
4805, and perhaps other subheadings of the HTSUS,
including HTSUS subheadings: 3703.10.60,
4811.59.20, 4820.10.20, and 4823.40.00.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the scope of this
investigation is dispositive.
Surrogate Country
In the Preliminary Determination, we
stated that we had selected India as the
appropriate surrogate country to use in
this investigation for the following
reasons: (1) It is a significant producer
of comparable merchandise; (2) it is at
a level of economic development
comparable to that of the PRC; and (3)
we have reliable data from India that we
can use to value the FOPs. See
Preliminary Determination. For the final
determination, we received and
reviewed comments from interested
parties; however, we made no changes
to our findings with respect to the
selection of India as a surrogate country.
Separate Rates
In proceedings involving non-marketeconomy (‘‘NME’’) countries, the
Department begins with a rebuttable
presumption that all companies within
the country are subject to government
control and, thus, should be assigned a
single antidumping duty deposit rate. It
is the Department’s policy to assign all
exporters of merchandise subject to an
investigation in an NME country this
single rate unless an exporter can
demonstrate that it is sufficiently
independent so as to be entitled to a
separate rate. See Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers
from the People’s Republic of China, 56
FR 20588 (May 6, 1991) (‘‘Sparklers’’),
as amplified by Notice of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the
People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 22585
(May 2, 1994) (‘‘Silicon Carbide’’), and
19 CFR 351.107(d).
In the Preliminary Determination, we
found that Hanhong and Guanhao
demonstrated their eligibility for
separate-rate status. For the final
determination, we continue to find that
the evidence placed on the record of
this investigation by Hanhong and
Guanhao demonstrate both a de jure and
de facto absence of government control,
with respect to their respective exports
of the merchandise under investigation,
and, thus are eligible for separate-rate
status. See Comment 7.
Facts Available and the PRC-wide
Entity
Sections 776(a)(1) and (2) of the Act
provide that the Department shall apply
‘‘facts otherwise available’’ if, inter alia,
necessary information is not on the
record or an interested party: (A)
Withholds information requested by the
Department, (B) fails to provide such
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 192 / Thursday, October 2, 2008 / Notices
information by the deadline, or in the
form or manner requested, (C)
significantly impedes a proceeding, or
(D) provides information that cannot be
verified, as provided by section 782(i) of
the Act.
Where the Department determines
that a response to a request for
information does not comply with the
request, section 782(d) of the Act
provides that the Department will so
inform the party submitting the
response and will, to the extent
practicable, provide that party the
opportunity to remedy or explain the
deficiency. If the party fails to remedy
the deficiency within the applicable
time limits, subject to section 782(e) of
the Act, the Department may disregard
all or part of the original and subsequent
responses, as appropriate. Pursuant to
section 782(e) of the Act, the
Department shall not decline to
consider submitted information if all of
the following requirements are met: (1)
The information is submitted by the
established deadline; (2) the information
can be verified; (3) the information is
not so incomplete that it cannot serve as
a reliable basis for reaching the
applicable determination; (4) the
interested party has demonstrated that it
acted to the best of its ability; and (5)
the information can be used without
undue difficulties.
In the Preliminary Determination, we
determined that two companies, Xiamen
Anne Paper Co., Ltd. (‘‘Anne Paper’’)
and Yalong Paper Product (Kunshan)
Co., Ltd. (‘‘Yalong’’), which did not
respond to any of the Department’s
requests for information, did not
cooperate to the best of their ability.6 As
a result, we determined that they failed
to demonstrate that they operate free of
government control and that they are
entitled to a separate rate.7 Thus, we
considered Anne Paper and Yalong to
be part of the PRC-wide entity. Because
the PRC-wide entity, including Anne
Paper and Yalong, did not provide any
information, we determined that
sections 782(d) and (e) of the Act are not
relevant to our analysis. Therefore, in
the Preliminary Determination, we
determined that there were exports of
the merchandise subject to this
investigation from PRC exporters/
producers that did not respond to the
Department’s shipment questionnaire.
Because the PRC-wide entity did not
cooperate to the best of its ability in
responding to our requests for
information, we determined that use of
facts available pursuant to section
776(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act was
6 See
7 See
Preliminary Determination at 73 FR 27508.
Preliminary Determination at 73 FR 27508.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:52 Oct 01, 2008
Jkt 217001
warranted for the PRC-wide entity,
which includes Anne Paper and
Yalong.8
Section 776(b) of the Act provides
that if an interested party fails to
cooperate by not acting to the best of its
ability to comply with requests for
information, the Department may
employ adverse inferences.9 We found
that, because the PRC-wide entity did
not respond to our request for
information, it failed to cooperate to the
best of its ability. Therefore, in the
Preliminary Determination, the
Department determined that, in
selecting from among the facts available,
an adverse inference is appropriate.
There have been no changes to the
information on the record concerning
the PRC-wide entity which includes
Anne Paper and Yalong. Therefore, we
have made no changes in our analysis
for the final determination.
Consequently, we determine that the
use of adverse facts available (‘‘AFA’’)
for the PRC-wide entity, which includes
Anne Paper and Yalong, is warranted
for the final determination.
Selection of the Adverse Facts
Available Rate
In deciding which facts to use as
AFA, section 776(b) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.308(c)(1) provide that the
Department may rely on information
derived from (1) the petition, (2) a final
determination in the investigation, (3)
any previous review or determination,
or (4) any information placed on the
record. In selecting a rate for AFA, the
Department selects a rate that is
sufficiently adverse ‘‘as to effectuate the
purpose of the facts available rule to
induce respondents to provide the
Department with complete and accurate
information in a timely manner.’’ 10 It is
also the Department’s practice to select
a rate that ensures ‘‘that the party does
not obtain a more favorable result by
failing to cooperate than if it had
cooperated fully.’’ 11
Generally, the Department finds
selecting the highest rate in any segment
of the proceeding as AFA to be
8 See, e.g., Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Certain Artist Canvas from the
People’s Republic of China, 71 FR 16116 (March 30,
2006) (‘‘Artist Canvas’’).
9 See, e.g., Artist Canvas, 71 FR 16116, 16118
(March 30, 2006). See also, Statement of
Administrative Action accompanying the URAA,
H.R. Rep No. 103–316 (‘‘SAA’’) at 870.
10 See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at
Less than Fair Value: Static Random Access
Memory Semiconductors From Taiwan, 63 FR 8909,
8932 (February 23, 1998).
11 See Brake Rotors From the People’s Republic of
China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of the
Seventh Administrative Review; Final Results of the
Eleventh New Shipper Review, 70 FR 69937, 69939
(November 18, 2005); see also, SAA at 870.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57331
appropriate.12 It is the Department’s
practice to select, as AFA, the higher of
the (a) highest margin alleged in the
petition, or (b) the highest calculated
rate of any respondent in the
investigation.13 In the instant
investigation, as AFA, we have assigned
to the PRC-wide entity, including Anne
Paper and Yalong, the highest rate on
the record of this proceeding, which in
this case is the calculated margin for
Hanhong. The Department determines
that this information is the most
appropriate from the available sources
to effectuate the purposes of AFA.
Corroboration
Section 776(c) of the Act provides
that, when the Department relies on
secondary information rather than on
information obtained in the course of an
investigation as facts available, it must,
to the extent practicable, corroborate
that information from independent
sources reasonably at its disposal.
Secondary information is described as
‘‘information derived from the petition
that gave rise to the investigation or
review, the final determination
concerning merchandise subject to this
investigation, or any previous review
under section 751 concerning the
merchandise subject to this
investigation.’’ 14 To ‘‘corroborate’’
means simply that the Department will
satisfy itself that the secondary
information to be used has probative
value.15 Independent sources used to
corroborate may include, for example,
published price lists, official import
statistics and customs data, and
information obtained from interested
parties during the particular
investigation.16 To corroborate
secondary information, the Department
will, to the extent practicable, examine
12 See, e.g., Certain Cased Pencils from the
People’s Republic of China; Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and
Intent to Rescind in Part, 70 FR 76755, 76761
(December 28, 2005) Unchanged in Certain Cased
Pencils from the People’s Republic of China; Final
Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 71 FR 38366, (July 6, 2006),
and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 10.
13 See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Quality
Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China,
65 FR 34660 (May 21, 2000), and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum at ‘‘Facts
Available.’’
14 See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Sodium Hexametaphosphate From the
People’s Republic of China, 73 FR 6479, 6481
(February 4, 2008); see also, SAA at 870.
15 See id.
16 See id.
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
57332
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 192 / Thursday, October 2, 2008 / Notices
the reliability and relevance of the
information used.17
As we did not rely upon secondary
information, no corroboration was
required under section 776(c) of the Act;
rather we used a rate calculated for a
respondent in this investigation as the
AFA rate for this investigation. 18 See the
‘‘Final Determination’’ section of this
notice below.
The PRC-wide rate applies to all
entries of the merchandise under
investigation except for entries from
respondents, Hanhong and Guanhao as
they have demonstrated eligibility for a
separate rate. These companies and
their corresponding antidumping duty
cash deposit rates are listed below in the
‘‘Final Determination’’ section of this
to require a cash deposit or posting of
a bond equal to the amount by which
the normal value exceeds the EP, less
the amount of the countervailing duty
determined to constitute an export
Combination Rates
subsidy. Accordingly, for cash deposit
In the Initiation Notice, the
purposes for Guanhao, we will subtract
Department stated that it would
from the antidumping applicable cash
calculate combination rates for certain
deposit rate that portion of the rate
respondents that are eligible for a
attributable to the export subsidies
19 This
separate rate in this investigation.
found in the affirmative countervailing
practice is described in the Separate
duty determination (i.e., 0.13 percent).
20
Rate Policy Bulletin.
After the adjustment for the export
subsidies, the resulting cash deposit rate
Adjustment for Export Subsidies
will be 19.64 for Guanhao.
Consistent with our practice, where
the product under investigation is also
Final Determination
subject to a concurrent countervailing
The weighted-average dumping
duty investigation, we instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) margin percentages are as follows:
notice. Accordingly, we find that the
rate of xx.xx percent is corroborated
within the meaning of section 776(c) of
the Act.
Percent
margin
Exporter/producer combination
Exporter: Shanghai Hanhong Paper Co., Ltd, also known as, Hanhong International Limited .................................................................
Producer: Shanghai Hanhong Paper Co., Ltd..
Exporter: Guangdong Guanhao High-Tech Co., Ltd ...................................................................................................................................
Producer: Guangdong Guanhao High-Tech Co., Ltd.
PRC-Wide Entity* ........................................................................................................................................................................................
115.29
19.77
115.29
* Includes Anne Paper and Yalong.
instructions will remain in effect until
further notice.
for consumption on or after the effective
date of the suspension of liquidation.
ITC Notification
Notification Regarding APO
In accordance with section
735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we are directing
CBP to continue to suspend liquidation
of all imports of subject merchandise
entered or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the
following dates: (1) For Guanhao and
Hanhong, on or after May 13, 2008, the
date of publication of the Preliminary
Determination in the Federal Register,
(2) for the PRC-wide entity, on or after
May 13, 2008, the date of publication of
the Preliminary Determination in the
Federal Register. We will instruct CBP
to continue to require a cash deposit or
the posting of a bond for all companies
based on the estimated weightedaverage dumping margins shown above.
The suspension of liquidation
In accordance with section 735(d) of
the Act, we have notified the
International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’)
of our final determination of sales at
LTFV. As our final determination is
affirmative, in accordance with section
735(b)(2) of the Act, within 45 days the
ITC will determine whether the
domestic industry in the United States
is materially injured, or threatened with
material injury, by reason of imports or
sales (or the likelihood of sales) for
importation of the subject merchandise.
If the ITC determines that material
injury or threat of material injury does
not exist, the proceeding will be
terminated and all securities posted will
be refunded or canceled. If the ITC
determines that such injury does exist,
the Department will issue an
antidumping duty order directing CBP
to assess antidumping duties on all
imports of the subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
This notice also serves as a reminder
to the parties subject to administrative
protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their
responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely
notification of return or destruction of
APO materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested.
Failure to comply with the regulations
and the terms of an APO is a
sanctionable violation.
This determination and notice are
issued and published in accordance
with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the
Act.
17 See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof,
Finished and Unfinished, from Japan, and Tapered
Roller Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside
Diameter, and Components Thereof, from Japan;
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews and Partial Termination of
Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 57391, 57392
(November 6, 1996), unchanged in Tapered Roller
Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and
Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered Roller
Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter,
and Components Thereof, From Japan; Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Reviews and Termination in Part, 62 FR 11825
(March 13, 1997).
18 See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Sodium Hexametaphosphate From the
People’s Republic of China, 73 FR 6479 (February
4, 2008).
19 See Initiation Notice, 72 FR at 62435.
20 See Memorandum entitled ‘‘Separate-Rates
Practice and Application of Combination Rates in
Antidumping Investigations involving Non-Market
Economy Countries’’ dated April 5, 2005, available
at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/.
Disclosure
We will disclose the calculations
performed within five days of the date
of publication of this notice to parties in
this proceeding in accordance with 19
CFR 351.224(b).
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Continuation of Suspension of
Liquidation
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:52 Oct 01, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: September 25, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I—List of Issues
I. GENERAL ISSUES
Comment 1: Surrogate Country
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 192 / Thursday, October 2, 2008 / Notices
Comment 2: Financial Statements
Comment 3: Financial Ratios
Comment 4: New NME Wage Rate
Comment 5: Zeroing
Comment 6: Exchange Rates
II. ISSUES SPECIFIC TO GUANHAO
Comment 7: Separate Rate Eligibility
Comment 8: Vertical Integration
Comment 9: Base Paper Surrogate Value
III. ISSUES SPECIFIC TO HANHONG
Comment 10: Coated Jumbo Rolls
Surrogate Value
Comment 11: Invoice Date
[FR Doc. E8–23284 Filed 10–1–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–851]
Certain Preserved Mushrooms From
the People’s Republic of China: Notice
of Initiation of Antidumping Duty New
Shipper Reviews
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) has received two
requests for new shipper reviews of the
antidumping duty order on certain
preserved mushrooms from the People’s
Republic of China (PRC). See Notice of
Antidumping Duty order: Certain
Preserved Mushrooms from the People’s
Republic of China, 64 FR 8310
(February 19, 1999). In accordance with
section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Tariff Act), and
19 CFR 351.214(d) (2008), we are
initiating antidumping duty new
shipper reviews of Zhejiang Iceman
Group Co., Ltd. (Zhejiang Iceman) and
Zhangzhou Gangchang Foods Co., Ltd.
(Zhangzhou Gangchang). The period of
review (POR) of these new shipper
reviews is February 1, 2008, through
July 31, 2008.
DATES: Effective Date: October 2, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tyler Weinhold 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) 482–1121 or (202) 482–
0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
Background
On February 19, 1999, the Department
published the antidumping duty order
on certain preserved mushrooms from
the PRC. See Notice of Amendment of
Final Determination of Sales at Less
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:52 Oct 01, 2008
Jkt 217001
Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty
Order: Certain Preserved Mushrooms
From the People’s Republic of China, 64
FR 8308 (February 19, 1999). Thus, the
antidumping duty order on certain
preserved mushrooms has a February
anniversary month and a semiannual
anniversary month of August. The
Department received a request for new
shipper reviews from Zhangzhou
Gangchang and Zhejiang Iceman on
August 29, 2008. See August 29, 2008,
letter from Zhangzhou Gangchang to the
Secretary of Commerce requesting a new
shipper review; and August 29, 2008,
letter from Zhejiang Iceman to the
Secretary of Commerce requesting a new
shipper review. Therefore, pursuant to
19 CFR 351.214(d), Zhangzhou
Gangchang and Zhejiang Iceman both
made their requests during the
semiannual anniversary month.
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i) of
the Tariff Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b),
Zhangzhou Gangchang certified that it is
both an exporter and producer of the
subject merchandise, and that it did not
export subject merchandise to the
United States during the period of the
investigation (POI) (July 1, 1997,
through December 31, 1997). See section
751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) of the Tariff Act and 19
CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i). Likewise, Zhejiang
Iceman certified that it is both an
exporter and producer of the subject
merchandise, and that it did not export
subject merchandise to the United
States during the POI. Id. Pursuant to
section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Tariff
Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A),
Zhangzhou Gangchang and Zhejiang
Iceman both certified that since the
investigation was initiated, they have
not been affiliated with any producer or
exporter who exported the subject
merchandise to the United States during
the POI. Because these new shipper
reviews involve imports from a nonmarket economy country, in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(B),
Zhangzhou Gangchang and Zhejiang
Iceman also certified that their export
activities are not controlled by the
central government. Pursuant to 19 CFR
351.214(b)(2)(iv), Zhangzhou Gangchang
and Zhejiang Iceman also submitted
documentation establishing the date on
which they first shipped the subject
merchandise to the United States, the
volume of that shipment, and the date
of their first sale to an unaffiliated
customer in the United States.
Zhangzhou Gangchang and Zhejiang
Iceman also certified they had no
shipments to the United States during
the period subsequent to their first
shipments.
The Department conducted a Customs
database query in an attempt to confirm
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57333
that Zhangzhou Gangchang’s and
Zhejiang Iceman’s shipments of subject
merchandise entered the United States
for consumption and that liquidation of
such entries had been suspended for
antidumping duties. See September 26,
2008, Zhangzhou Gangchang New
Shipper Review Initiation Checklist,
question 18; and Zhejiang Iceman New
Shipper Review Initiation Checklist,
question 18. The Department also
examined whether U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) confirmed that
such entries were made during the new
shipper review POR.
Initiation of Review
Based on information on the record
and in accordance with section
751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and section
351.214(d) of the Department’s
regulations, we find that the requests
Zhangzhou Gangchang and Zhejiang
Iceman submitted meet the statutory
and regulatory requirements for
initiation of a new shipper review.
Accordingly, we are initiating new
shipper reviews of the antidumping
duty order on certain preserved
mushrooms from the People’s Republic
of China manufactured and exported by
Zhangzhou Gangchang and Zhejiang
Iceman. These reviews cover the period
February 1, 2008 through July 31, 2008.
We intend to issue the preliminary
results of these reviews no later than
180 days after the date on which this
review is initiated, and the final results
within 90 days after the date on which
we issue the preliminary results. See
section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.214(h)(i).
In cases involving non-market
economies, the Department requires that
a company seeking to establish
eligibility for an antidumping duty rate
separate from the country-wide rate
provide evidence of de jure and de facto
absence of government control over the
company’s export activities. See Notice
of Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Bicycles From the
People’s Republic of China, 61 FR
19026, 19027 (April 30, 1996).
Accordingly, we will issue
questionnaires to Zhangzhou Gangchang
and Zhejiang Iceman, each of which
will include a separate rates section.
These reviews will proceed if the
responses provide sufficient indication
that Zhangzhou Gangchang and
Zhejiang Iceman are not subject to either
de jure or de facto government control
with respect to its exports of preserved
mushrooms. However, if either
Zhangzhou Gangchang or Zhejiang
Iceman do not demonstrate eligibility
for a separate rates, then the respective
company will be deemed not separate
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 192 (Thursday, October 2, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57329-57333]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-23284]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-920]
Lightweight Thermal Paper From the People's Republic of China:
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 2, 2008.
SUMMARY: On May 13, 2008, the Department of Commerce (the
``Department'') published its preliminary determination of sales at
less than fair value (``LTFV'') in the antidumping investigation of
lightweight thermal paper (``LWTP'') from the People's Republic of
China (``PRC''). The period of investigation (``POI'') is January 1,
2007, to June 30, 2007. We invited interested parties to comment on our
preliminary determination of sales at LTFV. Based on our analysis of
the comments we received, we have made changes to our calculations for
the mandatory respondents. The final dumping margins for this
investigation are listed in the ``Final Determination Margins'' section
below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frances Veith or Demitrios
Kalogeropoulos, AD/CVD Operations, Office 8, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482-4295 or (202) 482-2623, respectively.
Final Determination
We determine that LWTP from the PRC is being, or is likely to be,
sold in the United States at LTFV as provided in section 735 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). The estimated margins of
sales at LTFV are shown in the ``Final Determination Margins'' section
of this notice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Case History
The Department published its preliminary determination of sales at
LTFV on May 13, 2008. See Lightweight Thermal Paper From the People's
Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 73 FR 27504 (May 13,
2008) (``Preliminary Determination''). Additionally, the Department
postponed the deadline for the final determination by 60 days to
September 25, 2008. See Preliminary Determination, at 27504. On May 28,
2008, Appleton Papers, Inc. (``petitioner'') submitted comments
regarding Guanhao's eligibility for a separate rate. From June 2
through 13, 2008, the Department conducted verifications of Hanhong
International Limited, Shanghai Hanhong Paper Co., Ltd., and Hong Kong
Hanhong Ltd. (collectively (``Hanhong'')) and Guangdong Guanhao High-
Tech Co., Ltd. (``Guanhao'') and released its verification reports for
both companies on July 16, 2008. See the ``Verification'' section below
for additional information. On June 12, 2008, petitioner filed a timely
request for a public hearing. On June 23, 2008, petitioner and Guanhao
submitted surrogate value information for the record. On July 2, 2008,
the Department placed its updated wage rate calculations on the record.
On July 24, 2008, case briefs were filed by both petitioner and
Hanhong. On July 29, 2008, Hanhong and Guanhao each filed rebuttal
briefs. On August 14, 2008, petitioner withdrew its request for a
hearing.
Targeted Dumping
On May 5, 2008, petitioner filed an allegation of targeted dumping
with respect to patterns of Hanhong's constructed export prices
(``CEPs'') for comparable merchandise that differ significantly among
purchases and periods of time. Petitioner limited its targeted dumping
allegation to patterns of prices found in Hanhong's CEP sales. In our
Preliminary Determination, we found that Hanhong was not affiliated
with its U.S. customer, and based our margin analysis on Hanhong's
export price (``EP'') sales. As a result, petitioner's targeted dumping
allegation was inapplicable to our margin calculations. Since the
Preliminary Determination, no interested party has provided any
argument or information on the record concerning petitioner's targeted
dumping allegation. In our final determination, we have continued to
find Hanhong unaffiliated with its U.S. customer, and consequently,
based our margin calculations on Hanhong's EP sales. As a result,
petitioner's allegation of targeted dumping is not applicable to our
margin analysis. Therefore, we did not address it in this final
determination.
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (``POI'') is January 1, 2007, through
June 30, 2007. This period corresponds to the two most recent fiscal
quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition, which was
September 2007. See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we verified the
information submitted by Hanhong and Guanhao for use in our final
determination. See the Department's verification reports on the record
of this investigation in the Central Records Unit (``CRU''), Room 1117
of the main Department building, with respect to these entities. For
all verified companies, we used standard verification procedures,
including examination of relevant accounting and production records, as
well as original source documents provided by respondents.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to
this investigation are addressed in the ``Investigation of Lightweight
Thermal Paper from the People's Republic of China: Issues and Decision
Memorandum,'' dated concurrently with this notice and hereby adopted by
this notice (``Issues and Decision Memorandum''). A list of the issues
which parties raised and to which we respond in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum is attached to this notice as Appendix I. The Issues and
Decision
[[Page 57330]]
Memorandum is a public document on file in the CRU and accessible on
the Web at ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of
the memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Determination
Financial statements--In the Preliminary Determination, we
calculated financial ratios based on two Indian producers' financial
statements (i.e. , Parag Copigraph Pvt. Ltd. (``Parag'') and Alpha
Carbonless Paper Ltd. for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2006. For
the final determination, we have determined to use only Parag's
financial statement for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2007. See
Comment 2.
Financial ratios--For the final determination, we made
certain changes to the financial ratio calculations from the
Preliminary Determination. We excluded the line items for freight and
cartage-outward, and freight and cartage-export from the Selling,
General, and Administrative expenses (``SG&A'') ratio calculation
obtained from Parag's financial statement. Additionally, we included
Parag's line items for miscellaneous income, other income, and interest
revenue (because all of Parag's interest revenue was on current assets)
as an offset to the SG&A ratio calculation and we have continued to
include export expense in our calculation of the surrogate financial
ratio for SG&A. See Comment 3.
Base paper surrogate value--For the Preliminary
Determination, we calculated Guanhao's surrogate value for base paper
using WTA import statistics. For the final determination, we have
continued to calculate Guanhao's surrogate value using WTA import
statistics; however, we have excluded imports into India from the
United States. See Comment 9.
Guanhao minor corrections--We made the following minor
corrections to Guanhao's sales data: (1) We changed the reported gross
weight for two observations; and (2) we changed the reported payment
date for six observations. See Memorandum entitled, ``Verification of
the Sales and Factors Responses of Guangdong Guanhao High Tech Co.,
Ltd. in the Antidumping Investigation of Lightweight Thermal Paper from
the People's Republic of China,'' dated July 16, 2008.
Hanhong minor corrections--We made the following minor
corrections to Hanhong's sales and factors-of-production (``FOP'')
data: (1) We changed the reported destination for one observation; (2)
we changed the reported per-unit gross weight for certain observations;
and (3) we changed the reported capped distance for certain FOPs. See
Memorandum entitled, ``Verification of the Sales and Factors Responses
of Hanhong International Limited, Shanghai Hanhong Paper Co., Ltd.,
Hong Kong Hanhong Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Investigation of
Lightweight Thermal Paper from the People's Republic of China,'' dated
July 16, 2008.
Scope of Investigation
The merchandise covered by this investigation includes certain
lightweight thermal paper, which is thermal paper with a basis weight
of 70 grams per square meter (g/m\2\) (with a tolerance of 4.0 g/m\2\) or less; irrespective of dimensions; \1\ with or
without a base coat \2\ on one or both sides; with thermal active
coating(s) \3\ on one or both sides that is a mixture of the dye and
the developer that react and form an image when heat is applied; with
or without a top coat; \4\ and without an adhesive backing. Certain
lightweight thermal paper is typically (but not exclusively) used in
point-of-sale applications such as ATM receipts, credit card receipts,
gas pump receipts, and retail store receipts. The merchandise subject
to this investigation may be classified in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') under subheadings
4811.90.8040, 4811.90.9090, 3703.10.60, 4811.59.20, 4820.10.20, and
4823.40.00.\5\ Although HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience
and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this
investigation is dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ LWTP is typically produced in jumbo rolls that are slit to
the specifications of the converting equipment and then converted
into finished slit rolls. Both jumbo and converted rolls (as well as
LWTP in any other form, presentation, or dimension) are covered by
the scope of these investigations.
\2\ A base coat, when applied, is typically made of clay and/or
latex and like materials and is intended to cover the rough surface
of the paper substrate and to provide insulating value.
\3\ A thermal active coating is typically made of sensitizer,
dye, and co-reactant.
\4\ A top coat, when applied, is typically made of polyvinyl
acetone, polyvinyl alcohol, and/or like materials and is intended to
provide environmental protection, an improved surface for press
printing, and/or wear protection for the thermal print head.
\5\ HTSUS subheading 4811.90.8000 was a classification used for
LWTP until January 1, 2007. Effective that date, subheading
4811.90.8000 was replaced with 4811.90.8020 (for gift wrap, a
nonsubject product) and 4811.90.8040 (for ``other'' including LWTP).
HTSUS subheading 4811.90.9000 was a classification for LWTP until
July 1, 2005. Effective that date, subheading 4811.90.9000 was
replaced with 4811.90.9010 (for tissue paper, a nonsubject product)
and 4811.90.9090 (for ``other,'' including LWTP). Petitioner
indicated that, from time to time, LWTP also may have been entered
under HTSUS subheading 3703.90, HTSUS heading 4805, and perhaps
other subheadings of the HTSUS, including HTSUS subheadings:
3703.10.60, 4811.59.20, 4820.10.20, and 4823.40.00.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surrogate Country
In the Preliminary Determination, we stated that we had selected
India as the appropriate surrogate country to use in this investigation
for the following reasons: (1) It is a significant producer of
comparable merchandise; (2) it is at a level of economic development
comparable to that of the PRC; and (3) we have reliable data from India
that we can use to value the FOPs. See Preliminary Determination. For
the final determination, we received and reviewed comments from
interested parties; however, we made no changes to our findings with
respect to the selection of India as a surrogate country.
Separate Rates
In proceedings involving non-market-economy (``NME'') countries,
the Department begins with a rebuttable presumption that all companies
within the country are subject to government control and, thus, should
be assigned a single antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the
Department's policy to assign all exporters of merchandise subject to
an investigation in an NME country this single rate unless an exporter
can demonstrate that it is sufficiently independent so as to be
entitled to a separate rate. See Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Sparklers from the People's Republic of China, 56 FR
20588 (May 6, 1991) (``Sparklers''), as amplified by Notice of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from
the People's Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994) (``Silicon
Carbide''), and 19 CFR 351.107(d).
In the Preliminary Determination, we found that Hanhong and Guanhao
demonstrated their eligibility for separate-rate status. For the final
determination, we continue to find that the evidence placed on the
record of this investigation by Hanhong and Guanhao demonstrate both a
de jure and de facto absence of government control, with respect to
their respective exports of the merchandise under investigation, and,
thus are eligible for separate-rate status. See Comment 7.
Facts Available and the PRC-wide Entity
Sections 776(a)(1) and (2) of the Act provide that the Department
shall apply ``facts otherwise available'' if, inter alia, necessary
information is not on the record or an interested party: (A) Withholds
information requested by the Department, (B) fails to provide such
[[Page 57331]]
information by the deadline, or in the form or manner requested, (C)
significantly impedes a proceeding, or (D) provides information that
cannot be verified, as provided by section 782(i) of the Act.
Where the Department determines that a response to a request for
information does not comply with the request, section 782(d) of the Act
provides that the Department will so inform the party submitting the
response and will, to the extent practicable, provide that party the
opportunity to remedy or explain the deficiency. If the party fails to
remedy the deficiency within the applicable time limits, subject to
section 782(e) of the Act, the Department may disregard all or part of
the original and subsequent responses, as appropriate. Pursuant to
section 782(e) of the Act, the Department shall not decline to consider
submitted information if all of the following requirements are met: (1)
The information is submitted by the established deadline; (2) the
information can be verified; (3) the information is not so incomplete
that it cannot serve as a reliable basis for reaching the applicable
determination; (4) the interested party has demonstrated that it acted
to the best of its ability; and (5) the information can be used without
undue difficulties.
In the Preliminary Determination, we determined that two companies,
Xiamen Anne Paper Co., Ltd. (``Anne Paper'') and Yalong Paper Product
(Kunshan) Co., Ltd. (``Yalong''), which did not respond to any of the
Department's requests for information, did not cooperate to the best of
their ability.\6\ As a result, we determined that they failed to
demonstrate that they operate free of government control and that they
are entitled to a separate rate.\7\ Thus, we considered Anne Paper and
Yalong to be part of the PRC-wide entity. Because the PRC-wide entity,
including Anne Paper and Yalong, did not provide any information, we
determined that sections 782(d) and (e) of the Act are not relevant to
our analysis. Therefore, in the Preliminary Determination, we
determined that there were exports of the merchandise subject to this
investigation from PRC exporters/producers that did not respond to the
Department's shipment questionnaire. Because the PRC-wide entity did
not cooperate to the best of its ability in responding to our requests
for information, we determined that use of facts available pursuant to
section 776(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act was warranted for the PRC-wide
entity, which includes Anne Paper and Yalong.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Preliminary Determination at 73 FR 27508.
\7\ See Preliminary Determination at 73 FR 27508.
\8\ See, e.g., Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value: Certain Artist Canvas from the People's Republic of China, 71
FR 16116 (March 30, 2006) (``Artist Canvas'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 776(b) of the Act provides that if an interested party
fails to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply
with requests for information, the Department may employ adverse
inferences.\9\ We found that, because the PRC-wide entity did not
respond to our request for information, it failed to cooperate to the
best of its ability. Therefore, in the Preliminary Determination, the
Department determined that, in selecting from among the facts
available, an adverse inference is appropriate. There have been no
changes to the information on the record concerning the PRC-wide entity
which includes Anne Paper and Yalong. Therefore, we have made no
changes in our analysis for the final determination. Consequently, we
determine that the use of adverse facts available (``AFA'') for the
PRC-wide entity, which includes Anne Paper and Yalong, is warranted for
the final determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See, e.g., Artist Canvas, 71 FR 16116, 16118 (March 30,
2006). See also, Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the
URAA, H.R. Rep No. 103-316 (``SAA'') at 870.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Selection of the Adverse Facts Available Rate
In deciding which facts to use as AFA, section 776(b) of the Act
and 19 CFR 351.308(c)(1) provide that the Department may rely on
information derived from (1) the petition, (2) a final determination in
the investigation, (3) any previous review or determination, or (4) any
information placed on the record. In selecting a rate for AFA, the
Department selects a rate that is sufficiently adverse ``as to
effectuate the purpose of the facts available rule to induce
respondents to provide the Department with complete and accurate
information in a timely manner.'' \10\ It is also the Department's
practice to select a rate that ensures ``that the party does not obtain
a more favorable result by failing to cooperate than if it had
cooperated fully.'' \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less than
Fair Value: Static Random Access Memory Semiconductors From Taiwan,
63 FR 8909, 8932 (February 23, 1998).
\11\ See Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Final
Results and Partial Rescission of the Seventh Administrative Review;
Final Results of the Eleventh New Shipper Review, 70 FR 69937, 69939
(November 18, 2005); see also, SAA at 870.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generally, the Department finds selecting the highest rate in any
segment of the proceeding as AFA to be appropriate.\12\ It is the
Department's practice to select, as AFA, the higher of the (a) highest
margin alleged in the petition, or (b) the highest calculated rate of
any respondent in the investigation.\13\ In the instant investigation,
as AFA, we have assigned to the PRC-wide entity, including Anne Paper
and Yalong, the highest rate on the record of this proceeding, which in
this case is the calculated margin for Hanhong. The Department
determines that this information is the most appropriate from the
available sources to effectuate the purposes of AFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See, e.g., Certain Cased Pencils from the People's Republic
of China; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review and Intent to Rescind in Part, 70 FR 76755, 76761 (December
28, 2005) Unchanged in Certain Cased Pencils from the People's
Republic of China; Final Results and Partial Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 38366, (July 6, 2006),
and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 10.
\13\ See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Quality Steel Products from the People's
Republic of China, 65 FR 34660 (May 21, 2000), and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum at ``Facts Available.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corroboration
Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies
on secondary information rather than on information obtained in the
course of an investigation as facts available, it must, to the extent
practicable, corroborate that information from independent sources
reasonably at its disposal. Secondary information is described as
``information derived from the petition that gave rise to the
investigation or review, the final determination concerning merchandise
subject to this investigation, or any previous review under section 751
concerning the merchandise subject to this investigation.'' \14\ To
``corroborate'' means simply that the Department will satisfy itself
that the secondary information to be used has probative value.\15\
Independent sources used to corroborate may include, for example,
published price lists, official import statistics and customs data, and
information obtained from interested parties during the particular
investigation.\16\ To corroborate secondary information, the Department
will, to the extent practicable, examine
[[Page 57332]]
the reliability and relevance of the information used.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Sodium Hexametaphosphate From the People's Republic of China, 73 FR
6479, 6481 (February 4, 2008); see also, SAA at 870.
\15\ See id.
\16\ See id.
\17\ See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and
Unfinished, from Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches or
Less in Outside Diameter, and Components Thereof, from Japan;
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and
Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 57391, 57392
(November 6, 1996), unchanged in Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered Roller
Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, and Components
Thereof, From Japan; Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews and Termination in Part, 62 FR 11825 (March
13, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As we did not rely upon secondary information, no corroboration was
required under section 776(c) of the Act; rather we used a rate
calculated for a respondent in this investigation as the AFA rate for
this investigation. \18\ See the ``Final Determination'' section of
this notice below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Sodium Hexametaphosphate From the People's Republic of China, 73 FR
6479 (February 4, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The PRC-wide rate applies to all entries of the merchandise under
investigation except for entries from respondents, Hanhong and Guanhao
as they have demonstrated eligibility for a separate rate. These
companies and their corresponding antidumping duty cash deposit rates
are listed below in the ``Final Determination'' section of this notice.
Accordingly, we find that the rate of xx.xx percent is corroborated
within the meaning of section 776(c) of the Act.
Combination Rates
In the Initiation Notice, the Department stated that it would
calculate combination rates for certain respondents that are eligible
for a separate rate in this investigation.\19\ This practice is
described in the Separate Rate Policy Bulletin.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Initiation Notice, 72 FR at 62435.
\20\ See Memorandum entitled ``Separate-Rates Practice and
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations
involving Non-Market Economy Countries'' dated April 5, 2005,
available at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustment for Export Subsidies
Consistent with our practice, where the product under investigation
is also subject to a concurrent countervailing duty investigation, we
instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to require a cash
deposit or posting of a bond equal to the amount by which the normal
value exceeds the EP, less the amount of the countervailing duty
determined to constitute an export subsidy. Accordingly, for cash
deposit purposes for Guanhao, we will subtract from the antidumping
applicable cash deposit rate that portion of the rate attributable to
the export subsidies found in the affirmative countervailing duty
determination (i.e., 0.13 percent). After the adjustment for the export
subsidies, the resulting cash deposit rate will be 19.64 for Guanhao.
Final Determination
The weighted-average dumping margin percentages are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent
Exporter/producer combination margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exporter: Shanghai Hanhong Paper Co., Ltd, also known as, 115.29
Hanhong International Limited...............................
Producer: Shanghai Hanhong Paper Co., Ltd...................
Exporter: Guangdong Guanhao High-Tech Co., Ltd.............. 19.77
Producer: Guangdong Guanhao High-Tech Co., Ltd..............
PRC-Wide Entity*............................................ 115.29
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes Anne Paper and Yalong.
Disclosure
We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the
date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we are
directing CBP to continue to suspend liquidation of all imports of
subject merchandise entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the following dates: (1) For Guanhao and
Hanhong, on or after May 13, 2008, the date of publication of the
Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register, (2) for the PRC-wide
entity, on or after May 13, 2008, the date of publication of the
Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register. We will instruct CBP
to continue to require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond for all
companies based on the estimated weighted-average dumping margins shown
above. The suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect
until further notice.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the
International Trade Commission (``ITC'') of our final determination of
sales at LTFV. As our final determination is affirmative, in accordance
with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, within 45 days the ITC will
determine whether the domestic industry in the United States is
materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of
imports or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation of the
subject merchandise. If the ITC determines that material injury or
threat of material injury does not exist, the proceeding will be
terminated and all securities posted will be refunded or canceled. If
the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the Department will
issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess antidumping
duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the
suspension of liquidation.
Notification Regarding APO
This notice also serves as a reminder to the parties subject to
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of return or
destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order
is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the
terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
This determination and notice are issued and published in
accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: September 25, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I--List of Issues
I. GENERAL ISSUES
Comment 1: Surrogate Country
[[Page 57333]]
Comment 2: Financial Statements
Comment 3: Financial Ratios
Comment 4: New NME Wage Rate
Comment 5: Zeroing
Comment 6: Exchange Rates
II. ISSUES SPECIFIC TO GUANHAO
Comment 7: Separate Rate Eligibility
Comment 8: Vertical Integration
Comment 9: Base Paper Surrogate Value
III. ISSUES SPECIFIC TO HANHONG
Comment 10: Coated Jumbo Rolls Surrogate Value
Comment 11: Invoice Date
[FR Doc. E8-23284 Filed 10-1-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
