Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from Thailand: Final Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 2511-2512 [E9-634]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 10 / Thursday, January 15, 2009 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–549–821]
Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from
Thailand: Final Results and Partial
Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 9, 2008, the
Department of Commerce published the
preliminary results of the 2006/2007
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on
polyethylene retail carrier bags from
Thailand. We gave interested parties an
opportunity to comment on the
preliminary results. Based on our
analysis of the comments received and
an examination of our calculations, we
have made certain changes for the final
results. The final weighted–average
dumping margins for the respondents
are listed below in the ‘‘Final Results of
the Review’’ section of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 15, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kristin Case or Richard Rimlinger, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 5, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone (202) 482–3174 or (202) 482–
4477, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Background
On September 9, 2008, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published Polyethylene
Retail Carrier Bags from Thailand:
Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review and Intent
to Rescind in Part, 73 FR 52288
(September 9, 2008) (Preliminary
Results), in the Federal Register. The
administrative review covers the
following producers/exporters: King Pac
Industrial Co., Ltd. (King Pac), Naraipak
Co., Ltd., and Narai Packaging
(Thailand) Ltd. (collectively NPG), Poly
Plast (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (Poly Plast),
and Master Packaging Co., Ltd. (Master
Packaging).1 The period of review is
August 1, 2006, through July 31, 2007.
We invited parties to comment on the
Preliminary Results. On October 15,
2008, we received case briefs from the
1 As
discussed in the Preliminary Results, we
considered both King Pac and King Pak Ind. Co.,
Ltd. (King Pak), to be alternative spellings of the
name of one company. See Preliminary Results, 73
FR at 52288, n. 1.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:58 Jan 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bag
Committee and its individual members,
Hilex Poly Co., LLC, and Superbag
Corporation (collectively, the
petitioners), and KYD Ltd. (KYD), an
importer of subject merchandise. On
October 23, 2008, we received rebuttal
briefs from the petitioners and KYD. At
the request of KYD, we held a public
hearing on October 29, 2008.
We have conducted this review in
accordance with section 751(a) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the
antidumping duty order is polyethylene
retail carrier bags (PRCBs) which may be
referred to as t–shirt sacks, merchandise
bags, grocery bags, or checkout bags.
The subject merchandise is defined as
non–sealable sacks and bags with
handles (including drawstrings),
without zippers or integral extruded
closures, with or without gussets, with
or without printing, of polyethylene
film having a thickness no greater than
0.035 inch (0.889 mm) and no less than
0.00035 inch (0.00889 mm), and with no
length or width shorter than 6 inches
(15.24 cm) or longer than 40 inches
(101.6 cm). The depth of the bag may be
shorter than 6 inches but not longer
than 40 inches (101.6 cm).
PRCBs are typically provided without
any consumer packaging and free of
charge by retail establishments, e.g.,
grocery, drug, convenience, department,
specialty retail, discount stores, and
restaurants, to their customers to
package and carry their purchased
products. The scope of the order
excludes (1) polyethylene bags that are
not printed with logos or store names
and that are closeable with drawstrings
made of polyethylene film and (2)
polyethylene bags that are packed in
consumer packaging with printing that
refers to specific end–uses other than
packaging and carrying merchandise
from retail establishments, e.g., garbage
bags, lawn bags, trash–can liners.
As a result of recent changes to the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS), imports of the
subject merchandise are currently
classifiable under statistical category
3923.21.0085 of the HTSUS.
Furthermore, although the HTSUS
subheading is provided for convenience
and customs purposes, the written
description of the scope of the order is
dispositive.
Rescission
In the Preliminary Results, we
explained that Kor Ratthanakit Co., Ltd.
(Kor Ratthanakit), reported that it had
no shipments of subject merchandise
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2511
covered by this review. Additionally,
we stated that, because our review of
information from U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) supported Kor
Ratthanakit’s claim, we would rescind
the review with respect to Kor
Ratthanakit if we continued to find that
Kor Ratthanakit did not have any
shipments of subject merchandise to the
United States during the period of
review. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR
at 52289. Because we have not received
information indicating that Kor
Ratthanakit had any shipments of
subject merchandise during the period
of review we are rescinding the
administrative review with respect to
Kor Ratthanakit.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties to this review
are addressed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review of
Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from
Thailand for the Period of Review
August 31, 2006, through July 31, 2007
(Decision Memorandum), which is
dated January 7, 2009, and hereby
adopted by this notice. Attached to this
notice as an appendix is a list of the
issues which parties have raised and to
which we have responded in the
Decision Memorandum. Parties can find
a complete discussion of all issues
raised in this review and the
corresponding recommendations in this
public memorandum, which is on file in
the Department’s Central Records Unit,
Room 1117 of the main Commerce
building (CRU). In addition, a complete
version of the Decision Memorandum
can be accessed directly on the Web at
http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy
and electronic version of the Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
In our preliminary results for NPG, we
used the most recently submitted cost–
of-production data, received on August
25, 2008, but we did not use the
updated constructed–value data
contained in the same submission.
Because this submission contained both
revised cost and constructed–value data,
we have used all of this data in the
calculation of NPG’s final dumping
margin.
For Poly Plast, we found it
appropriate to assign partial adverse
facts available to certain unreported
U.S. sales. During the course of
verification of the information Poly
Plast submitted in this review, we found
that Poly Plast did not report certain
U.S. sales of subject merchandise.
Because the administrative record lacks
E:\FR\FM\15JAN1.SGM
15JAN1
2512
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 10 / Thursday, January 15, 2009 / Notices
all of the information necessary to
calculate dumping margins for these
sales, we find it appropriate to rely on
partial facts available pursuant to
section 776(a) of the Act. Furthermore,
because Poly Plast possessed the
necessary records to provide a complete
U.S. sales list but did not do so, we find
that it did not act to the best of its ability
to comply with our request for
information.
Accordingly, because Poly Plast failed
to cooperate in reporting all of its U.S.
sales of subject merchandise, we find
that use of information adverse to the
interests of Poly Plast, as facts otherwise
available, is appropriate pursuant to
section 776(b) of the Act. As adverse
facts available we have applied the
highest transaction–specific margin we
determined for sales Poly Plast reported
to the value of unreported U.S. sales.
For a complete discussion on this issue,
see Decision Memorandum at Comment
2.
Sales Below Cost in the Home Market
For these final results of review, the
Department disregarded home–market
sales by NPG and Poly Plast that failed
the cost–of-production test.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Final Results of the Review
As a result of our review, we
determine that the following percentage
weighted–average dumping margins
exist on PCRBs from Thailand for the
period August 1, 2006, through July 31,
2007:
unit of merchandise on each of that
importer’s or customer’s entries during
the review period. See 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1). Where the assessment
amount is above de minimis, we will
instruct CBP to assess duties on all
entries of subject merchandise by that
importer or customer.
The Department clarified its
‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment–
Policy Notice). This clarification will
apply to entries of subject merchandise
during the period of review produced by
companies included in these final
results of review for which the reviewed
companies did not know that the
merchandise they sold to an
intermediary (e.g., a reseller, trading
company, or exporter) 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 intermediary
involved in the transaction. See
Assessment–Policy Notice for a full
discussion of this clarification.
Because we are relying on total
adverse facts available to establish the
dumping margins for King Pac and
Master Packaging, we will instruct CBP
to apply a dumping margin of 122.88
percent to all entries of subject
merchandise produced and/or exported
by these companies.
Cash–Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements
Producer/Exporter
Margin (percent)
will be effective upon publication of
King Pac (aka King
this notice of final results of
Pak) ...........................
122.88 administrative review for all shipments
Master Packaging .........
122.88 of the subject merchandise entered, or
NPG ..............................
32.67 withdrawn from warehouse, for
Poly Plast ......................
8.94
consumption on or after the date of
publication, consistent with section
Assessment Rates
751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash–deposit
rates for the reviewed companies will be
Upon issuance of these final results,
the Department will determine, and CBP the rates shown above; (2) for previously
investigated or reviewed companies not
shall assess, antidumping duties on all
listed above, the cash–deposit rate will
appropriate entries. The Department
intends to issue assessment instructions continue to be the company–specific
rate published for the most recent
to CBP 15 days after the date of
period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm
publication of these final results of
covered in this or a previous review or
review.
We calculated importer/customer–
the original less–than-fair–value (LTFV)
specific duty–assessment amounts with investigation but the manufacturer is,
respect to export–price sales by NPG
the cash–deposit rate will be the rate
and Poly Plast in the following manner. established for the most recent period
We divided the total dumping margins
for the manufacturer of the
(calculated as the difference between
merchandise; (4) the cash–deposit rate
normal value and the export price) for
for all other manufacturers or exporters
each exporter’s importer or customer by will continue to be 2.80 percent, the all–
the total number of units the exporter
others rate from the amended final
sold to that importer or customer. We
determination of the LTFV investigation
will direct CBP to assess the resulting
published on July 15, 2004. See Notice
per–unit dollar amount against each
of Amended Final Determination of
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:58 Jan 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags From
Thailand, 69 FR 42419 (July 15, 2004).
These deposit requirements shall
remain in effect until further notice.
Notification Requirements
This notice serves as a 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. See id.
This notice also serves as a reminder
to 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(a)(3). Timely
notification of the return or destruction
of APO materials or conversion to
judicial protective order is hereby
requested. Failure to comply with the
regulations and the terms of an APO is
a sanctionable violation.We are issuing
and publishing these results in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i) of the Act.
Dated: January 7, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix
1. Adverse Facts Available
2. Unreported Sales by Poly Plast
[FR Doc. E9–634 Filed 1–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–580–818]
Corrosion–Resistant Carbon Steel Flat
Products from the Republic of Korea:
Final Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 9, 2008, the
U.S. Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) published in the Federal
Register its preliminary results of the
administrative review of the
countervailing duty (‘‘CVD’’) order on
corrosion–resistant carbon steel flat
products (‘‘CORE’’) from the Republic of
Korea (‘‘Korea’’) for the period of review
E:\FR\FM\15JAN1.SGM
15JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 10 (Thursday, January 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2511-2512]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-634]
[[Page 2511]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-549-821]
Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from Thailand: Final Results and
Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 9, 2008, the Department of Commerce published the
preliminary results of the 2006/2007 administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on polyethylene retail carrier bags from
Thailand. We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the
preliminary results. Based on our analysis of the comments received and
an examination of our calculations, we have made certain changes for
the final results. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the
respondents are listed below in the ``Final Results of the Review''
section of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 15, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristin Case or Richard Rimlinger, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-3174
or (202) 482-4477, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On September 9, 2008, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
published Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from Thailand: Preliminary
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Intent to Rescind
in Part, 73 FR 52288 (September 9, 2008) (Preliminary Results), in the
Federal Register. The administrative review covers the following
producers/exporters: King Pac Industrial Co., Ltd. (King Pac), Naraipak
Co., Ltd., and Narai Packaging (Thailand) Ltd. (collectively NPG), Poly
Plast (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (Poly Plast), and Master Packaging Co., Ltd.
(Master Packaging).\1\ The period of review is August 1, 2006, through
July 31, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As discussed in the Preliminary Results, we considered both
King Pac and King Pak Ind. Co., Ltd. (King Pak), to be alternative
spellings of the name of one company. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR
at 52288, n. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. On
October 15, 2008, we received case briefs from the Polyethylene Retail
Carrier Bag Committee and its individual members, Hilex Poly Co., LLC,
and Superbag Corporation (collectively, the petitioners), and KYD Ltd.
(KYD), an importer of subject merchandise. On October 23, 2008, we
received rebuttal briefs from the petitioners and KYD. At the request
of KYD, we held a public hearing on October 29, 2008.
We have conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the antidumping duty order is
polyethylene retail carrier bags (PRCBs) which may be referred to as t-
shirt sacks, merchandise bags, grocery bags, or checkout bags. The
subject merchandise is defined as non-sealable sacks and bags with
handles (including drawstrings), without zippers or integral extruded
closures, with or without gussets, with or without printing, of
polyethylene film having a thickness no greater than 0.035 inch (0.889
mm) and no less than 0.00035 inch (0.00889 mm), and with no length or
width shorter than 6 inches (15.24 cm) or longer than 40 inches (101.6
cm). The depth of the bag may be shorter than 6 inches but not longer
than 40 inches (101.6 cm).
PRCBs are typically provided without any consumer packaging and
free of charge by retail establishments, e.g., grocery, drug,
convenience, department, specialty retail, discount stores, and
restaurants, to their customers to package and carry their purchased
products. The scope of the order excludes (1) polyethylene bags that
are not printed with logos or store names and that are closeable with
drawstrings made of polyethylene film and (2) polyethylene bags that
are packed in consumer packaging with printing that refers to specific
end-uses other than packaging and carrying merchandise from retail
establishments, e.g., garbage bags, lawn bags, trash-can liners.
As a result of recent changes to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States (HTSUS), imports of the subject merchandise are
currently classifiable under statistical category 3923.21.0085 of the
HTSUS. Furthermore, although the HTSUS subheading is provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope
of the order is dispositive.
Rescission
In the Preliminary Results, we explained that Kor Ratthanakit Co.,
Ltd. (Kor Ratthanakit), reported that it had no shipments of subject
merchandise covered by this review. Additionally, we stated that,
because our review of information from U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) supported Kor Ratthanakit's claim, we would rescind
the review with respect to Kor Ratthanakit if we continued to find that
Kor Ratthanakit did not have any shipments of subject merchandise to
the United States during the period of review. See Preliminary Results,
73 FR at 52289. Because we have not received information indicating
that Kor Ratthanakit had any shipments of subject merchandise during
the period of review we are rescinding the administrative review with
respect to Kor Ratthanakit.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to
this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum for the
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Polyethylene Retail Carrier
Bags from Thailand for the Period of Review August 31, 2006, through
July 31, 2007 (Decision Memorandum), which is dated January 7, 2009,
and hereby adopted by this notice. Attached to this notice as an
appendix is a list of the issues which parties have raised and to which
we have responded in the Decision Memorandum. Parties can find a
complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the
corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on
file in the Department's Central Records Unit, Room 1117 of the main
Commerce building (CRU). In addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at http://
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
In our preliminary results for NPG, we used the most recently
submitted cost-of-production data, received on August 25, 2008, but we
did not use the updated constructed-value data contained in the same
submission. Because this submission contained both revised cost and
constructed-value data, we have used all of this data in the
calculation of NPG's final dumping margin.
For Poly Plast, we found it appropriate to assign partial adverse
facts available to certain unreported U.S. sales. During the course of
verification of the information Poly Plast submitted in this review, we
found that Poly Plast did not report certain U.S. sales of subject
merchandise. Because the administrative record lacks
[[Page 2512]]
all of the information necessary to calculate dumping margins for these
sales, we find it appropriate to rely on partial facts available
pursuant to section 776(a) of the Act. Furthermore, because Poly Plast
possessed the necessary records to provide a complete U.S. sales list
but did not do so, we find that it did not act to the best of its
ability to comply with our request for information.
Accordingly, because Poly Plast failed to cooperate in reporting
all of its U.S. sales of subject merchandise, we find that use of
information adverse to the interests of Poly Plast, as facts otherwise
available, is appropriate pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act. As
adverse facts available we have applied the highest transaction-
specific margin we determined for sales Poly Plast reported to the
value of unreported U.S. sales. For a complete discussion on this
issue, see Decision Memorandum at Comment 2.
Sales Below Cost in the Home Market
For these final results of review, the Department disregarded home-
market sales by NPG and Poly Plast that failed the cost-of-production
test.
Final Results of the Review
As a result of our review, we determine that the following
percentage weighted-average dumping margins exist on PCRBs from
Thailand for the period August 1, 2006, through July 31, 2007:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Producer/Exporter Margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
King Pac (aka King Pak)............................. 122.88
Master Packaging.................................... 122.88
NPG................................................. 32.67
Poly Plast.......................................... 8.94
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
Upon issuance of these final results, the Department will
determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP
15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review.
We calculated importer/customer-specific duty-assessment amounts
with respect to export-price sales by NPG and Poly Plast in the
following manner. We divided the total dumping margins (calculated as
the difference between normal value and the export price) for each
exporter's importer or customer by the total number of units the
exporter sold to that importer or customer. We will direct CBP to
assess the resulting per-unit dollar amount against each unit of
merchandise on each of that importer's or customer's entries during the
review period. See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Where the assessment amount is
above de minimis, we will instruct CBP to assess duties on all entries
of subject merchandise by that importer or customer.
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003)
(Assessment-Policy Notice). This clarification will apply to entries of
subject merchandise during the period of review produced by companies
included in these final results of review for which the reviewed
companies did not know that the merchandise they sold to an
intermediary (e.g., a reseller, trading company, or exporter) 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 intermediary involved in the transaction. See Assessment-
Policy Notice for a full discussion of this clarification.
Because we are relying on total adverse facts available to
establish the dumping margins for King Pac and Master Packaging, we
will instruct CBP to apply a dumping margin of 122.88 percent to all
entries of subject merchandise produced and/or exported by these
companies.
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 the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication,
consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash-deposit
rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates shown above; (2) for
previously investigated or reviewed companies not listed above, the
cash-deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate
published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm
covered in this or a previous review or the original less-than-fair-
value (LTFV) investigation but the manufacturer is, the cash-deposit
rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the
manufacturer of the merchandise; (4) the cash-deposit rate for all
other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 2.80 percent, the
all-others rate from the amended final determination of the LTFV
investigation published on July 15, 2004. See Notice of Amended Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Polyethylene Retail
Carrier Bags From Thailand, 69 FR 42419 (July 15, 2004).
These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further
notice.
Notification Requirements
This notice serves as a 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. See id.
This notice also serves as a reminder to 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(a)(3). Timely notification of the
return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the
regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.We are
issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: January 7, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix
1. Adverse Facts Available
2. Unreported Sales by Poly Plast
[FR Doc. E9-634 Filed 1-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S