Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People's Republic of China, 20920-20922 [E9-10508]
Download as PDF
20920
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 6, 2009 / Notices
Tuberias Procasa S.A. de C.V./Tuberias
Procarsa S.A. de C.V., and PYTCO S.A
de C.V.
The Department will issue
appropriate assessment instructions
directly to U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) 41 days after the
publication of this notice. The
Department will direct CBP to assess
antidumping duties for these companies
at the cash deposit rate in effect on the
date of entry for entries during the
period November 1, 2007, to October 31,
2008.
Notification to Parties
This notice serves as a reminder to
importers of their responsibility under
section 351.402(f) of the Department’s
regulations to file a certificate regarding
the reimbursement of antidumping
duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this period of
time. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the
Secretary’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and subsequent assessment of
double antidumping duties.
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 section 351.305(a)(3) of the
Department’s regulations. Timely
written notification of the return or
destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a sanctionable violation.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with section 351.213(d)(4) of
the Department’s regulations and
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.
Dated: April 28, 2009.
John M. Andersen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations.
[FR Doc. E9–10493 Filed 5–5–09; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A–570–868
Affirmative Final Determination of
Circumvention of the Antidumping
Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables
and Chairs from the People’s Republic
of China
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Final Determination of
Circumvention of Antidumping Duty
Order
SUMMARY: We determine that imports
from the People’s Republic of China
(‘‘PRC’’) of folding metal tables with legs
connected by cross–bars, so that the legs
fold in sets, and otherwise meeting the
description of in–scope merchandise,
are within the class or kind of
merchandise subject to the order on
folding metal tables and chairs
(‘‘FMTCs’’) from the PRC.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lilit
Astvatsatrian or Charles Riggle, 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) 482–6412 or (202) 482–
0650, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 27, 2008, the Department
of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) published
its preliminary affirmative
determination that folding metal tables
with cross–bars are circumventing the
antidumping duty order on FMTCs from
the PRC.1 We invited interested parties
to comment on our preliminary results.
On November 26, 2008, Meco
Corporation (‘‘Meco’’), the petitioner in
the underlying investigation, Cosco
Home and Office Products (‘‘Cosco’’),2
an importer of subject merchandise, and
Lifetime Products, Inc. and Lifetime
(Xiamen) Plastic Products Ltd.
(collectively, ‘‘Lifetime’’), a PRC
producer/exporter of folding metal
tables, submitted case briefs.
1 See Affirmative Preliminary Determination of
Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order on
Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People’s
Republic of China, 73 FR 63684 (October 27, 2008)
(‘‘Preliminary Determination’’).
2 Cosco submitted a revised case brief on January
7, 2009, with all untimely submitted new factual
information, as well as all references and arguments
based thereupon, redacted.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:36 May 05, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
On January 12, 2009, Feili Furniture
Development Limited Quanzhou City,
Feili Furniture Development Co., Ltd.,
Feili Group (Fujian) Co., Ltd., and Feili
(Fujian) Co., Ltd. (collectively ‘‘Feili’’),
a PRC producer/exporter of folding
metal tables, submitted rebuttal
comments. On January 16, 2009, Meco,
Cosco, Lifetime, and New–Tec
Integration (Xiamen) Co., Ltd. and New–
Tec Integration Co., Ltd. (collectively
‘‘New–Tec’’), a PRC producer/exporter
of folding metal tables, submitted
rebuttal comments.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by this order
consist of assembled and unassembled
folding tables and folding chairs made
primarily or exclusively from steel or
other metal, as described below:
1) Assembled and unassembled
folding tables made primarily or
exclusively from steel or other metal
(folding metal tables). Folding metal
tables include square, round,
rectangular, and any other shapes with
legs affixed with rivets, welds, or any
other type of fastener, and which are
made most commonly, but not
exclusively, with a hardboard top
covered with vinyl or fabric. Folding
metal tables have legs that mechanically
fold independently of one another, and
not as a set. The subject merchandise is
commonly, but not exclusively, packed
singly, in multiple packs of the same
item, or in five piece sets consisting of
four chairs and one table. Specifically
excluded from the scope of the order
regarding folding metal tables are the
following:
Lawn furniture;
Trays commonly referred to as ‘‘TV
trays;’’
Side tables;
Child–sized tables;
Portable counter sets consisting of
rectangular tables 36’’ high and
matching stools; and, Banquet
tables. A banquet table is a
rectangular table with a plastic or
laminated wood table top
approximately 28’’ to 36’’ wide by
48’’ to 96’’ long and with a set of
folding legs at each end of the table.
One set of legs is composed of two
individual legs that are affixed
together by one or more cross–
braces using welds or fastening
hardware. In contrast, folding metal
tables have legs that mechanically
fold independently of one another,
and not as a set.
2) Assembled and unassembled
folding chairs made primarily or
exclusively from steel or other metal
(folding metal chairs). Folding metal
chairs include chairs with one or more
E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM
06MYN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 6, 2009 / Notices
cross–braces, regardless of shape or size,
affixed to the front and/or rear legs with
rivets, welds or any other type of
fastener. Folding metal chairs include:
those that are made solely of steel or
other metal; those that have a back pad,
a seat pad, or both a back pad and a seat
pad; and those that have seats or backs
made of plastic or other materials. The
subject merchandise is commonly, but
not exclusively, packed singly, in
multiple packs of the same item, or in
five piece sets consisting of four chairs
and one table. Specifically excluded
from the scope of the order regarding
folding metal chairs are the following:
Folding metal chairs with a wooden
back or seat, or both;
Lawn furniture;
Stools;
Chairs with arms; and
Child–sized chairs.
The subject merchandise is currently
classifiable under subheadings
9401.71.0010, 9401.71.0030,
9401.79.0045, 9401.79.0050,
9403.20.015, 9403.20.0030,
9403.70.8010, 9403.70.8020, and
9403.70.8030 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
Department’s written description of the
merchandise is dispositive.
Based on a request by RPA
International Pty., Ltd. and RPS, LLC
(collectively, ‘‘RPA’’), the Department
ruled on January 13, 2003, that RPA’s
poly–fold metal folding chairs are
within the scope of the order because
they are identical in all material
respects to the merchandise described
in the petition, the initial investigation,
and the determinations of the Secretary.
On May 5, 2003, in response to a
request by Staples, the Office Superstore
Inc. (‘‘Staples’’), the Department issued
a scope ruling that the chair component
of Staples’ ‘‘Complete Office–To-Go,’’ a
folding chair with a tubular steel frame
and a seat and back of plastic, with
measurements of: height: 32.5 inches;
width: 18.5 inches; and depth: 21.5
inches, is covered by the scope of the
order because it is identical in all
material respects to the scope
description in the order, but that the
table component, with measurements of:
width (table top): 43 inches; depth (table
top): 27.375 inches; and height: 34.875
inches, has legs that fold as a unit and
meets the requirements for an
exemption from the scope of the order.
On September 7, 2004, the
Department found that table styles 4600
and 4606 produced by Lifetime Plastic
Products Ltd. are within the scope of the
order because these products have all of
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:36 May 05, 2009
Jkt 217001
the components that constitute a folding
metal table as described in the scope.
On July 13, 2005, the Department
issued a scope ruling determining that
‘‘butterfly’’ chairs are not within the
scope of the antidumping duty order
because they do not meet the physical
description of merchandise covered by
the scope of the order because they do
not have cross braces affixed to the front
and/or rear legs, and the seat and back
is one piece of cloth that is not affixed
to the frame with screws, rivets, welds,
or any other type of fastener.
On July 13, 2005, the Department
issued a scope ruling determining that
folding metal chairs imported by
Korhani of America Inc. are within the
scope of the antidumping duty order
because the wooden seat is padded with
foam and covered with fabric or
polyvinyl chloride, attached to the
tubular steel seat frame with screws,
and has cross braces affixed to its legs.
On May 1, 2006, the Department
issued a scope ruling determining that
‘‘moon chairs’’ are not included within
the scope of the antidumping duty order
because moon chairs have different
physical characteristics, different uses,
and are advertised differently that chairs
covered by the scope of the order.
On October 4, 2007, the Department
issued a scope ruling determining that
International E–Z Up Inc.’s (‘‘E–Z Up’’)
Instant Work Bench is not included
within the scope of the antidumping
duty order because its legs and weight
do not match the description of the
folding metal tables in the scope of the
order.
On April 18, 2008, the Department
issued a scope ruling determining that
the VIKA Twofold 2–in–1 Workbench/
Scaffold (‘‘Twofold Workbench/
Scaffold’’) imported by Ignite USA, LLC
from the PRC is not included within the
scope of the antidumping duty order
because its rotating leg mechanism
differs from the folding metal tables
subject to the order, i.e., the folding
mechanisms of the Twofold
Workbench/Scaffold are mechanisms
that rotate either upward or downward
at the sides of the top among three
modes with locking devices. In storage
mode, the legs can be folded in under
either the fiberboard surface or under
the scaffold surface. In addition, its
weight is twice as much as the expected
maximum weight for folding metal
tables within the scope of the order.
As a result of this affirmative final
determination of circumvention, the
Department has determined that folding
metal tables with legs affixed with
cross–bars enabling the legs to fold in
sets are covered by the scope of the
antidumping duty order on folding
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20921
metal tables and chairs from the PRC.
Such tables are distinguishable from
banquet tables, which are not subject to
the antidumping duty order because,
but for the cross–bars located near the
table top that connects the legs, enabling
the legs to fold in sets, these tables
otherwise meet the description of
merchandise subject to the order.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the post–
preliminary comments by parties in this
review are addressed in the
memorandum from John M. Andersen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, ‘‘Final Analysis
Memorandum for the Minor Alterations
Anti–Circumvention Inquiry of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Folding
Metal Tables and Chairs from the
People’s Republic of China’’ (February
19, 2009) (‘‘Final Analysis
Memorandum’’), which is hereby
adopted by this notice. A list of the
issues that parties raised and to which
we responded in the Final Analysis
Memorandum is attached to this notice
as an appendix. The Final Analysis
Memorandum is a public document and
is on file in the Central Records Unit
(‘‘CRU’’) in room 1117 in the main
Department building, and is also
accessible on the Web at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and
electronic version of the memorandum
are identical in content.
Final Ruling
In the case of an allegation of a
‘‘minor alteration’’ claim under section
781(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (‘‘the Act’’), it is the
Department’s practice to look at the five
factors listed in the Senate Finance
Committee report to determine if
circumvention exists in a particular
case.3 Because each anti–circumvention
inquiry is highly dependent on the facts
on the record, and must be analyzed in
light of those specific facts, the
Department has historically analyzed
several additional criteria to determine
3 See Omnibus Trade Act of 1987, Report of the
Senate Finance Committee, S. Rep. No. 71, 100th
Cong., 1st Sess., at 100 (1987) (‘‘Senate Finance
Committee Report’’), which explained that in
circumvention inquiries regarding minor
alterations, the Department ≥should consider such
criteria as the overall physical characteristics of the
merchandise, the expectations of the ultimate users,
the use of the merchandise, the channels of
marketing and the cost of any modification relative
to the total value of the imported products.
E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM
06MYN1
20922
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 6, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
if circumvention of the order is taking
place.4
For this final determination, we
continue to rely on the criteria that we
considered in making our preliminary
determination.5 Based on our review of
the record evidence and our analysis of
the comments received, the Department
continues to find that imports from the
PRC of folding metal tables with legs
connected by cross–bars, so that the legs
fold in sets, and otherwise meet the
description of in–scope merchandise,
are circumventing the order and are
properly considered to be within the
class or kind of merchandise subject to
the order on FMTCs from the PRC. For
a complete discussion of the
Department’s analysis, see the Final
Analysis Memorandum, dated
concurrently with this notice.
As explained in the Final Analysis
Memorandum in Comment 2, we
determine that the folding metal tables
with cross–bars at issue in this case are
not expressly excluded from the order.
The order expressly excluded banquet
tables. No party has argued that these
folding metal tables with cross–bars are
banquet tables. As a result of our
analysis of the overall physical
characteristics of the products subject to
this inquiry, we find that the PRC
producers and exporters produce and
export to the United States folding metal
tables that match the physical
description of folding metal tables in the
scope of the FMTCs order except for the
presence of cross–bars connecting the
legs placed near the table top.6 But for
the addition of these cross–bars, these
tables would be within the scope of the
order.
There are no significant differences in
the expectations of the ultimate users,7
uses of the merchandise,8 and channels
of marketing between folding metal
tables with and without cross–bars.9
None of the companies, either producers
or customers, provided evidence of
customer involvement in the design of
the tables with cross–bars.10 As
explained in the Final Analysis
Memorandum, there are also no
4 See, e.g., Preliminary Determination of
Circumvention of Antidumping Order; Cut-toLength Carbon Steel Plate from Canada, 65 FR
64926, 64929–31 (October 31, 2000).
5 See Preliminary Determination, 73 FR 63684.
6 See Final Analysis Memorandum; see also
Preliminary Analysis Memorandum for the Minor
Alterations Circumvention Inquiry of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables
and Chairs from the People’s Republic of China, at
12 (October 20, 2008) (‘‘Preliminary Analysis
Memo’’).
7 See id., at 13.
8 See id., at 15.
9 See id., at 16.
10 See id., at 21.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:36 May 05, 2009
Jkt 217001
differences in the manner in which the
folding metal tables with cross–bars are
advertised or displayed compared with
folding metal tables without cross–
bars.11 Furthermore, producers of such
tables in the PRC acknowledged that the
cost of adding cross–bars to tables in the
course of production is negligible.12
Moreover, we find that test results -purported to demonstrate improvements
to the tables as a result of the addition
of cross–bars -- do not demonstrate that
the addition of cross–bars improved the
strength or stability of folding metal
tables. Furthermore, although parties
alluded to other supposed advantages
attributable to the addition of cross–
bars, i.e., elimination of pinch points
and quicker folding time, the record
demonstrates that companies’
advertisements for folding metal tables
do not indicate that a cross–bar exists,
much less that it represents an
advantage over tables without cross–
bars.13 Therefore, we do not find that
the cross–bars that are located near the
table top provide a significant
advantage.
As a result of our inquiry, we
determine that imports from the PRC of
folding metal tables with legs connected
by cross–bars, so that the legs fold in
sets, and otherwise meeting the
description of in–scope merchandise,
are circumventing the order and are
properly considered to be within the
class or kind of merchandise subject to
the order on FMTCs from the PRC. See
Section 781(c) of the Act.
Continuation of Suspension of
Liquidation
11 See Final Analysis Memorandum, at 18–20; see
also Preliminary Analysis Memorandum, at 18–19.
12 See Preliminary Analysis Memorandum, at 17.
13 See Final Analysis Memo at 13–18; see also
Preliminary Analysis Memorandum, at 24.
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: April 28, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
APPENDIX
List of Comments and Final Analysis
Memorandum
Comment 1:Whether the Department
Should Terminate the Anti–
Circumvention Inquiry
Comment 2:Whether Folding Metal
Tables with Cross–Bars Are Expressly
Excluded from the Scope
Comment 3:Whether Folding Metal
Tables with Cross–Bars Are
Significantly Different from the In–
Scope Merchandise
Comment 4:Whether Folding Metal
Tables with Cross–Bars Represent a
Significant Improvement over Folding
Metal Tables with Independently
Folding Legs
Comment 5:Whether to Deny Feili’s
Partial Revocation Request
[FR Doc. E9–10508 Filed 5–5–09; 8:45 am]
In accordance with section 351.225(i)
of the Department’s regulations, for
folding metal tables meeting the
description of the folding metal tables
described in the scope of the FMTCs
order except that they have cross–bars
connecting the legs, so that the legs fold
in sets, we are directing U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to
continue to suspend liquidation and to
require a cash deposit of estimated
duties at the applicable rates for each
unliquidated entry of the product
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after June 1,
2007. With a final affirmative
determination of circumvention, the
Department normally instructs CBP to
continue the suspension of liquidation
that was directed in the affirmative
preliminary determination of
PO 00000
circumvention, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.225(l)(3). However, because doing
so in the instant inquiry would include
merchandise that entered during a
completed review period, we will
instruct CBP to continue to suspend
liquidation for entries made on or after
July 1, 2007, the first day of the only
pending administrative review period of
this order.
This final determination of
circumvention is in accordance with
section 781(c) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.225.
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration
Call for Applications for Commerce
Spectrum Management Advisory
Committee
AGENCY: National Telecommunications
and Information Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice and Call for
Applications.
SUMMARY: The National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) is seeking
applications from persons interested in
serving on the Department of
Commerce’s Spectrum Management
Advisory Committee (CSMAC) for new
two-year terms. The CSMAC provides
advice to the Assistant Secretary for
Communications and Information and
E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM
06MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 6, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20920-20922]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-10508]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A-570-868
Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the
People's Republic of China
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Final Determination of Circumvention of Antidumping
Duty Order
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We determine that imports from the People's Republic of China
(``PRC'') of folding metal tables with legs connected by cross-bars, so
that the legs fold in sets, and otherwise meeting the description of
in-scope merchandise, are within the class or kind of merchandise
subject to the order on folding metal tables and chairs (``FMTCs'')
from the PRC.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lilit Astvatsatrian or Charles Riggle,
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-
6412 or (202) 482-0650, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 27, 2008, the Department of Commerce (``Department'')
published its preliminary affirmative determination that folding metal
tables with cross-bars are circumventing the antidumping duty order on
FMTCs from the PRC.\1\ We invited interested parties to comment on our
preliminary results. On November 26, 2008, Meco Corporation (``Meco''),
the petitioner in the underlying investigation, Cosco Home and Office
Products (``Cosco''),\2\ an importer of subject merchandise, and
Lifetime Products, Inc. and Lifetime (Xiamen) Plastic Products Ltd.
(collectively, ``Lifetime''), a PRC producer/exporter of folding metal
tables, submitted case briefs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Circumvention
of the Antidumping Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs
from the People's Republic of China, 73 FR 63684 (October 27, 2008)
(``Preliminary Determination'').
\2\ Cosco submitted a revised case brief on January 7, 2009,
with all untimely submitted new factual information, as well as all
references and arguments based thereupon, redacted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 12, 2009, Feili Furniture Development Limited Quanzhou
City, Feili Furniture Development Co., Ltd., Feili Group (Fujian) Co.,
Ltd., and Feili (Fujian) Co., Ltd. (collectively ``Feili''), a PRC
producer/exporter of folding metal tables, submitted rebuttal comments.
On January 16, 2009, Meco, Cosco, Lifetime, and New-Tec Integration
(Xiamen) Co., Ltd. and New-Tec Integration Co., Ltd. (collectively
``New-Tec''), a PRC producer/exporter of folding metal tables,
submitted rebuttal comments.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by this order consist of assembled and
unassembled folding tables and folding chairs made primarily or
exclusively from steel or other metal, as described below:
1) Assembled and unassembled folding tables made primarily or
exclusively from steel or other metal (folding metal tables). Folding
metal tables include square, round, rectangular, and any other shapes
with legs affixed with rivets, welds, or any other type of fastener,
and which are made most commonly, but not exclusively, with a hardboard
top covered with vinyl or fabric. Folding metal tables have legs that
mechanically fold independently of one another, and not as a set. The
subject merchandise is commonly, but not exclusively, packed singly, in
multiple packs of the same item, or in five piece sets consisting of
four chairs and one table. Specifically excluded from the scope of the
order regarding folding metal tables are the following:
Lawn furniture;
Trays commonly referred to as ``TV trays;''
Side tables;
Child-sized tables;
Portable counter sets consisting of rectangular tables 36'' high
and matching stools; and, Banquet tables. A banquet table is a
rectangular table with a plastic or laminated wood table top
approximately 28'' to 36'' wide by 48'' to 96'' long and with a set of
folding legs at each end of the table. One set of legs is composed of
two individual legs that are affixed together by one or more cross-
braces using welds or fastening hardware. In contrast, folding metal
tables have legs that mechanically fold independently of one another,
and not as a set.
2) Assembled and unassembled folding chairs made primarily or
exclusively from steel or other metal (folding metal chairs). Folding
metal chairs include chairs with one or more
[[Page 20921]]
cross-braces, regardless of shape or size, affixed to the front and/or
rear legs with rivets, welds or any other type of fastener. Folding
metal chairs include: those that are made solely of steel or other
metal; those that have a back pad, a seat pad, or both a back pad and a
seat pad; and those that have seats or backs made of plastic or other
materials. The subject merchandise is commonly, but not exclusively,
packed singly, in multiple packs of the same item, or in five piece
sets consisting of four chairs and one table. Specifically excluded
from the scope of the order regarding folding metal chairs are the
following:
Folding metal chairs with a wooden back or seat, or both;
Lawn furniture;
Stools;
Chairs with arms; and
Child-sized chairs.
The subject merchandise is currently classifiable under subheadings
9401.71.0010, 9401.71.0030, 9401.79.0045, 9401.79.0050, 9403.20.015,
9403.20.0030, 9403.70.8010, 9403.70.8020, and 9403.70.8030 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). Although
the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the Department's written description of the merchandise is
dispositive.
Based on a request by RPA International Pty., Ltd. and RPS, LLC
(collectively, ``RPA''), the Department ruled on January 13, 2003, that
RPA's poly-fold metal folding chairs are within the scope of the order
because they are identical in all material respects to the merchandise
described in the petition, the initial investigation, and the
determinations of the Secretary.
On May 5, 2003, in response to a request by Staples, the Office
Superstore Inc. (``Staples''), the Department issued a scope ruling
that the chair component of Staples' ``Complete Office-To-Go,'' a
folding chair with a tubular steel frame and a seat and back of
plastic, with measurements of: height: 32.5 inches; width: 18.5 inches;
and depth: 21.5 inches, is covered by the scope of the order because it
is identical in all material respects to the scope description in the
order, but that the table component, with measurements of: width (table
top): 43 inches; depth (table top): 27.375 inches; and height: 34.875
inches, has legs that fold as a unit and meets the requirements for an
exemption from the scope of the order.
On September 7, 2004, the Department found that table styles 4600
and 4606 produced by Lifetime Plastic Products Ltd. are within the
scope of the order because these products have all of the components
that constitute a folding metal table as described in the scope.
On July 13, 2005, the Department issued a scope ruling determining
that ``butterfly'' chairs are not within the scope of the antidumping
duty order because they do not meet the physical description of
merchandise covered by the scope of the order because they do not have
cross braces affixed to the front and/or rear legs, and the seat and
back is one piece of cloth that is not affixed to the frame with
screws, rivets, welds, or any other type of fastener.
On July 13, 2005, the Department issued a scope ruling determining
that folding metal chairs imported by Korhani of America Inc. are
within the scope of the antidumping duty order because the wooden seat
is padded with foam and covered with fabric or polyvinyl chloride,
attached to the tubular steel seat frame with screws, and has cross
braces affixed to its legs.
On May 1, 2006, the Department issued a scope ruling determining
that ``moon chairs'' are not included within the scope of the
antidumping duty order because moon chairs have different physical
characteristics, different uses, and are advertised differently that
chairs covered by the scope of the order.
On October 4, 2007, the Department issued a scope ruling
determining that International E-Z Up Inc.'s (``E-Z Up'') Instant Work
Bench is not included within the scope of the antidumping duty order
because its legs and weight do not match the description of the folding
metal tables in the scope of the order.
On April 18, 2008, the Department issued a scope ruling determining
that the VIKA Twofold 2-in-1 Workbench/Scaffold (``Twofold Workbench/
Scaffold'') imported by Ignite USA, LLC from the PRC is not included
within the scope of the antidumping duty order because its rotating leg
mechanism differs from the folding metal tables subject to the order,
i.e., the folding mechanisms of the Twofold Workbench/Scaffold are
mechanisms that rotate either upward or downward at the sides of the
top among three modes with locking devices. In storage mode, the legs
can be folded in under either the fiberboard surface or under the
scaffold surface. In addition, its weight is twice as much as the
expected maximum weight for folding metal tables within the scope of
the order.
As a result of this affirmative final determination of
circumvention, the Department has determined that folding metal tables
with legs affixed with cross-bars enabling the legs to fold in sets are
covered by the scope of the antidumping duty order on folding metal
tables and chairs from the PRC. Such tables are distinguishable from
banquet tables, which are not subject to the antidumping duty order
because, but for the cross-bars located near the table top that
connects the legs, enabling the legs to fold in sets, these tables
otherwise meet the description of merchandise subject to the order.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the post-preliminary comments by parties in
this review are addressed in the memorandum from John M. Andersen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration, ``Final Analysis Memorandum for the Minor
Alterations Anti-Circumvention Inquiry of the Antidumping Duty Order on
Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People's Republic of China''
(February 19, 2009) (``Final Analysis Memorandum''), which is hereby
adopted by this notice. A list of the issues that parties raised and to
which we responded in the Final Analysis Memorandum is attached to this
notice as an appendix. The Final Analysis Memorandum is a public
document and is on file in the Central Records Unit (``CRU'') in room
1117 in the main Department building, and is also accessible on the Web
at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of
the memorandum are identical in content.
Final Ruling
In the case of an allegation of a ``minor alteration'' claim under
section 781(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''), it
is the Department's practice to look at the five factors listed in the
Senate Finance Committee report to determine if circumvention exists in
a particular case.\3\ Because each anti-circumvention inquiry is highly
dependent on the facts on the record, and must be analyzed in light of
those specific facts, the Department has historically analyzed several
additional criteria to determine
[[Page 20922]]
if circumvention of the order is taking place.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Omnibus Trade Act of 1987, Report of the Senate Finance
Committee, S. Rep. No. 71, 100th Cong., 1st Sess., at 100 (1987)
(``Senate Finance Committee Report''), which explained that in
circumvention inquiries regarding minor alterations, the Department
should consider such criteria as the overall physical
characteristics of the merchandise, the expectations of the ultimate
users, the use of the merchandise, the channels of marketing and the
cost of any modification relative to the total value of the imported
products.
\4\ See, e.g., Preliminary Determination of Circumvention of
Antidumping Order; Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from Canada, 65
FR 64926, 64929-31 (October 31, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For this final determination, we continue to rely on the criteria
that we considered in making our preliminary determination.\5\ Based on
our review of the record evidence and our analysis of the comments
received, the Department continues to find that imports from the PRC of
folding metal tables with legs connected by cross-bars, so that the
legs fold in sets, and otherwise meet the description of in-scope
merchandise, are circumventing the order and are properly considered to
be within the class or kind of merchandise subject to the order on
FMTCs from the PRC. For a complete discussion of the Department's
analysis, see the Final Analysis Memorandum, dated concurrently with
this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Preliminary Determination, 73 FR 63684.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As explained in the Final Analysis Memorandum in Comment 2, we
determine that the folding metal tables with cross-bars at issue in
this case are not expressly excluded from the order. The order
expressly excluded banquet tables. No party has argued that these
folding metal tables with cross-bars are banquet tables. As a result of
our analysis of the overall physical characteristics of the products
subject to this inquiry, we find that the PRC producers and exporters
produce and export to the United States folding metal tables that match
the physical description of folding metal tables in the scope of the
FMTCs order except for the presence of cross-bars connecting the legs
placed near the table top.\6\ But for the addition of these cross-bars,
these tables would be within the scope of the order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Final Analysis Memorandum; see also Preliminary Analysis
Memorandum for the Minor Alterations Circumvention Inquiry of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the
People's Republic of China, at 12 (October 20, 2008) (``Preliminary
Analysis Memo'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are no significant differences in the expectations of the
ultimate users,\7\ uses of the merchandise,\8\ and channels of
marketing between folding metal tables with and without cross-bars.\9\
None of the companies, either producers or customers, provided evidence
of customer involvement in the design of the tables with cross-
bars.\10\ As explained in the Final Analysis Memorandum, there are also
no differences in the manner in which the folding metal tables with
cross-bars are advertised or displayed compared with folding metal
tables without cross-bars.\11\ Furthermore, producers of such tables in
the PRC acknowledged that the cost of adding cross-bars to tables in
the course of production is negligible.\12\ Moreover, we find that test
results -- purported to demonstrate improvements to the tables as a
result of the addition of cross-bars -- do not demonstrate that the
addition of cross-bars improved the strength or stability of folding
metal tables. Furthermore, although parties alluded to other supposed
advantages attributable to the addition of cross-bars, i.e.,
elimination of pinch points and quicker folding time, the record
demonstrates that companies' advertisements for folding metal tables do
not indicate that a cross-bar exists, much less that it represents an
advantage over tables without cross-bars.\13\ Therefore, we do not find
that the cross-bars that are located near the table top provide a
significant advantage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See id., at 13.
\8\ See id., at 15.
\9\ See id., at 16.
\10\ See id., at 21.
\11\ See Final Analysis Memorandum, at 18-20; see also
Preliminary Analysis Memorandum, at 18-19.
\12\ See Preliminary Analysis Memorandum, at 17.
\13\ See Final Analysis Memo at 13-18; see also Preliminary
Analysis Memorandum, at 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result of our inquiry, we determine that imports from the PRC
of folding metal tables with legs connected by cross-bars, so that the
legs fold in sets, and otherwise meeting the description of in-scope
merchandise, are circumventing the order and are properly considered to
be within the class or kind of merchandise subject to the order on
FMTCs from the PRC. See Section 781(c) of the Act.
Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 351.225(i) of the Department's
regulations, for folding metal tables meeting the description of the
folding metal tables described in the scope of the FMTCs order except
that they have cross-bars connecting the legs, so that the legs fold in
sets, we are directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to
continue to suspend liquidation and to require a cash deposit of
estimated duties at the applicable rates for each unliquidated entry of
the product entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or
after June 1, 2007. With a final affirmative determination of
circumvention, the Department normally instructs CBP to continue the
suspension of liquidation that was directed in the affirmative
preliminary determination of circumvention, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.225(l)(3). However, because doing so in the instant inquiry would
include merchandise that entered during a completed review period, we
will instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation for entries made
on or after July 1, 2007, the first day of the only pending
administrative review period of this order.
This final determination of circumvention is in accordance with
section 781(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225.
Dated: April 28, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
APPENDIX
List of Comments and Final Analysis Memorandum
Comment 1:Whether the Department Should Terminate the Anti-
Circumvention Inquiry
Comment 2:Whether Folding Metal Tables with Cross-Bars Are Expressly
Excluded from the Scope
Comment 3:Whether Folding Metal Tables with Cross-Bars Are
Significantly Different from the In-Scope Merchandise
Comment 4:Whether Folding Metal Tables with Cross-Bars Represent a
Significant Improvement over Folding Metal Tables with Independently
Folding Legs
Comment 5:Whether to Deny Feili's Partial Revocation Request
[FR Doc. E9-10508 Filed 5-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S