Chlorinated Isocyanurates from Spain: Preliminary Results and Rescission, in Part, of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 25215-25220 [E9-12293]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 27, 2009 / Notices
accordance with the Rural
Electrification Act (RE Act) of 1936, 7
U.S.C. 901 et seq., as amended, and as
prescribed by OMB Circular A–129,
Policies for Federal Credit Programs and
Non-Tax Receivables.
In addition, the Farm Security and
Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Pub. L.
101–171) amended the RE Act to add
Title VI, Rural Broadband Access, to
provide loans and loan guarantees to
fund the cost of construction,
improvement, or acquisition of facilities
and equipment for the provision of
broadband service in eligible rural
communities. RUS therefore requires
Telecommunications and Broadband
borrowers to submit Form 481,
Financial Requirement Statement. This
form implements certain provisions of
the standard Rural Utilities Service loan
documents by setting forth requirements
and procedures to be followed by
borrowers in obtaining advances and
making disbursements of loan funds.
Estimate of Burden: Public reporting
for this collection of information is
estimated to average 1 hour per
response.
Respondents: Business or other for
profit, Not-for-profit institutions.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
177.
Estimated Number of Responses per
Respondent: 6.3.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on
Respondents: 1,223 hours.
Copies of this information collection
can be obtained from Joyce McNeil,
Program Development and Regulatory
Analysis at (202) 720–0812. Fax: (202)
720–8435.
All responses to this notice will be
summarized and included in the request
for OMB approval. All comments will
also become a matter of public record.
The meeting agenda includes the
following:
(1) Introductions/Orientation/
Welcome.
(2) Environmental education updates.
(3) LBL Updates.
(4) Updating the LBL Web site.
(5) Board discussion of comments
received.
The meeting is open to the public.
Written comments are invited and may
be mailed to: William P. Lisowsky, Area
Supervisor, Land Between The Lakes,
100 Van Morgan Drive, Golden Pond,
Kentucky 42211. Written comments
must be received at Land Between The
Lakes by June 4, 2009, in order for
copies to be provided to the members at
the meeting. Board members will review
written comments received, and at their
request, oral clarification may be
requested at a future meeting.
DATES: The meeting will be held on June
11, 2009, 9 a.m. to 12 p.m., CDT.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Paris Landing State Park, Buchanan,
TN, and will be open to the public.
For further information contact:
Sharon Byers, Advisory Board Liaison,
Land Between The Lakes, 100 Van
Morgan Drive, Golden Pond, Kentucky
42211, 270–924–2002.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: None.
Dated: May 20, 2009.
David J. Villano,
Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
[FR Doc. E9–12183 Filed 5–26–09; 8:45 am]
Chlorinated Isocyanurates from Spain:
Preliminary Results and Rescission, in
Part, of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Meeting of the Land Between The
Lakes Advisory Board
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of Meeting.
AGENCY:
erowe on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Land Between The Lakes
Advisory Board will hold a meeting on
Thursday, June 11, 2009. Notice of this
meeting is given under the Federal
Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App.
2.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 May 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
William P. Lisowsky,
Area Supervisor, Land Between The Lakes.
[FR Doc. E9–12323 Filed 5–26–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–469–814]
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: In response to timely requests
by Clearon Corporation and Occidental
Chemical Corporation (collectively,
‘‘petitioners’’), and Aragonesas
´
Industrias y Energıa S.A.
(‘‘Aragonesas’’), the Department of
Commerce (‘‘Department’’) is
conducting an administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on
chlorinated isocyanurates (‘‘chlorinated
isos’’) from Spain with respect to
Aragonesas. The period of review
(‘‘POR’’) is June 1, 2007 through May 31,
2008. In accordance with 19 CFR
351.213(d)(1), the Department is also
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
25215
rescinding this review with respect to
Inquide Flix, S.A. (‘‘Inquide’’).
The Department preliminarily
determines that Aragonesas made U.S.
sales of chlorinated isos at prices less
than normal value (‘‘NV’’). See
Preliminary Results of Review section,
below. If these preliminary results are
adopted in our final results of
administrative review, the Department
will instruct U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to assess
antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries. Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results.
See Disclosure and Public Hearing
section, below. Unless extended, we
will issue the final results of review no
later than 120 days from the date of
publication of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 27, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Myrna Lobo, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 6, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202)
482–2371.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June
24, 2005, the Department published in
the Federal Register an antidumping
duty order on chlorinated isos from
Spain. See Chlorinated Isocyanurates
from Spain: Notice of Antidumping
Duty Order, 70 FR 36562 (June 24,
2005). On June 9, 2008, the Department
published a notice of ‘‘Opportunity to
Request an Administrative Review’’ of
the antidumping duty order. See
Antidumping or Countervailing Duty
Order, Finding, or Suspended
Investigation; Opportunity to Request
Administrative Review, 73 FR 32557
(June 9, 2008). Timely requests for
reviews were received from petitioners
with respect to Aragonesas and Inquide.
The Department also received timely
requests from Aragonesas and Inquide
with respect to each of their companies.
In response to these requests, the
Department published a notice of
initiation of administrative reviews with
respect to Aragonesas and Inquide. See
Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews, Request for Revocation in Part,
and Deferral of Administrative Review,
73 FR 44220 (July 30, 2008). The POR
for this administrative review is June 1,
2007 through May 31, 2008.
On July 22, 2008, Inquide withdrew
its request for administrative review. On
September 18, 2008, petitioners
withdrew their request for review with
regard to Inquide. The applicable
regulation, 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), states
that if a party that requested an
E:\FR\FM\27MYN1.SGM
27MYN1
25216
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 27, 2009 / Notices
erowe on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
administrative review withdraws the
request within 90 days of the date of
publication of the notice of initiation of
the requested review, the Secretary will
rescind the review. In this case both
requesting parties withdrew their
requests within the time limit.
Therefore, we are rescinding this
review, in part, with respect to Inquide.
On August 21, 2008, the Department
issued an antidumping duty
questionnaire to Aragonesas. On
September 25, 2008, the Department
received Aragonesas’ response to
section A of the antidumping
questionnaire. On October 15, 2008, the
Department received Aragonesas’
response to sections B and C of the
antidumping questionnaire. On October
27, 2008, the Department received
Aragonesas’ response to section D of the
antidumping questionnaire. We issued
supplemental questionnaires to
Aragonesas on November 26, 2008,
December 9, 2008, January 29, 2009, and
February 6, 2009. Aragonesas filed a
timely response to each supplemental
questionnaire.
On February 25, 2009, the Department
extended the time limit for the
preliminary results by 78 days. See
Chlorinated Isocyanurates from Spain:
Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 74 FR 9218
(March 3, 2009).
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the order are
chlorinated isocyanurates. Chlorinated
isocyanurates are derivatives of
cyanuric acid, described as chlorinated
s–triazine triones. There are three
primary chemical compositions of
chlorinated isocyanurates: (1)
trichloroisocyanuric acid (Cl3(NCO)3),
(2) sodium dichloroisocyanurate
(dihydrate) (NaCl2(NCO)3 2H2O), and
(3) sodium dichloroisocyanurate
(anhydrous) (NaCl2(NCO)3).
Chlorinated isocyanurates are available
in powder, granular, and tableted forms.
The order covers all chlorinated
isocyanurates.
Chlorinated isocyanurates are
currently classifiable under subheadings
2933.69.6015, 2933.69.6021, and
2933.69.6050 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’). The tariff classification
2933.69.6015 covers sodium
dichloroisocyanurates (anhydrous and
dihydrate forms) and
trichloroisocyanuric acid. The tariff
classifications 2933.69.6021 and
2933.69.6050 represent basket categories
that include chlorinated isocyanurates
and other compounds including an
unfused triazine ring. Although the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 May 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
HTSUS subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the scope of the
order is dispositive.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), from March 23, 2009 through
April 3, 2009, the Department verified
the cost and sales information submitted
by Aragonesas in its questionnaire
responses provided during the course of
this review. We used standard
verification procedures including
examination of relevant accounting and
production records, and original source
documents provided by the respondent.
See Memorandum from Robert Greger,
Senior Accountant, to The File,
‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of
Aragonesas Industrias y Energia, S.A. in
the Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review of Chlorinated Isocyanurates
from Spain,’’ dated May 18, 2009 (‘‘Cost
Verification Report’’); see also
Memorandum from Myrna Lobo,
International Trade Compliance
Analyst, to The File, ‘‘Verification of the
Sales Response of Aragonesas Industrias
y Energia, S.A. in the Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review of
Chlorinated Isocyanurates from Spain,’’
dated May 18, 2009 (‘‘Sales Verification
Report’’). Both verification reports are
on file in the Central Records Unit
(CRU), Room 1117 of the main
Commerce Building.
Selection of Comparison Market for
Normal Value
In order to determine whether there
was a sufficient volume of sales in the
home market to serve as a viable basis
for calculating NV, the Department
compared Aragonesas’ volume of home
market sales of the foreign like product
to the volume of U.S. sales of the subject
merchandise, in accordance with
section 773(a)(1)(C) of the Act. We
excluded sales of merchandise that was
not foreign like product for reasons that
are of a business proprietary nature. See
Memorandum from Myrna Lobo,
International Trade Compliance
Analyst, to The File, ‘‘Calculation
Memorandum for the Preliminary
Results,’’ dated May 19, 2009
(‘‘Preliminary Calculation
Memorandum’’). Because Aragonesas’
aggregate volume of home market sales
of the foreign like product was greater
than five percent of its aggregate volume
of U.S. sales of subject merchandise, the
Department determines that the home
market is viable and sales in the home
market can serve as the basis for
calculating NV.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Date of Sale
Aragonesas reported invoice date as
the date of sale for U.S. and home
market sales. The Department’s
regulations state that ‘‘{i}n identifying
the date of sale of the subject
merchandise or foreign like product, the
Secretary normally will use the date of
invoice, as recorded in the exporter or
producer’s records kept in the ordinary
course of business. However, the
Secretary may use a date other than the
date of invoice if the Secretary is
satisfied that a different date better
reflects the date on which the exporter
or producer establishes the material
terms of sale.’’ See 19 CFR 351.401(i).
We examined the questionnaire
responses and relevant sales
documentation at verification, and
determine that invoice date is the
appropriate date of sale in both the U.S.
and home markets.
However, in accordance with the
Department’s practice, whenever
shipment date precedes invoice date, we
used shipment date as the date of sale.
See, e.g., Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip
in Coils from the Republic of Korea;
Preliminary Results and Partial
Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 71 FR 18074,
18079–80 (April 10, 2006), remaining
unchanged in Stainless Steel Sheet and
Strip in Coils From the Republic of
Korea; Final Results and Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review in Part, 72 FR 4486 (January 31,
2007); and Certain Steel Concrete
Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and New
Shipper Review and Determination To
Revoke in Part, 72 FR 62630 (November
6, 2007) and accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum at Issue 2,
where the Department found ‘‘that it is
appropriate to use the earlier of
shipment or invoice date as Colakoglu’s
and Habas’ U.S. date of sale in the
instant review, consistent with the date–
of-sale methodology established in the
previous review.’’
Comparisons to Normal Value
To determine whether Aragonesas
sold chlorinated isos in the United
States at prices less than NV, the
Department compared the export price
(‘‘EP’’) of individual U.S. sales to the
weighted–average NV of sales of the
foreign like product made in the
ordinary course of trade in a month
contemporaneous with the month in
which the U.S. sale was made. See
sections 777A(d)(2) and 773(a)(1)(B)(i)
of the Act.
E:\FR\FM\27MYN1.SGM
27MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 27, 2009 / Notices
Section 771(16) of the Act defines
foreign like product as merchandise that
is identical or similar to subject
merchandise and produced by the same
person and in the same country as the
subject merchandise. Thus, we
considered all products covered by the
scope of the order that were produced
by the same person and in the same
country as the subject merchandise, and
sold by Aragonesas in the home market
during the POR, to be foreign like
products for the purpose of determining
appropriate product comparisons to
chlorinated isos sold in the United
States.
erowe on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Product Comparisons
In accordance with section 771(16) of
the Act, the Department considered all
products produced by the respondent,
covered by the description in the
‘‘Scope of the Order’’ section above, to
be foreign like products for purposes of
determining appropriate product
comparisons to U.S. sales. Pursuant to
19 CFR 351.414(e)(2), the Department
compared U.S. sales made by
Aragonesas to sales made in the home
market within the contemporaneous
window period, which extends from
three months prior to the U.S. sale until
two months after the sale. Where there
were no sales of identical merchandise
in the comparison market made in the
ordinary course of trade to compare to
U.S. sales, the Department compared
U.S. sales to sales of the most similar
foreign like product made in the
ordinary course of trade. In making the
product comparisons, the Department
used the physical characteristics
determined by the Department, and
reported by Aragonesas, to match
foreign like products to U.S. sales:
chemical structure, free available
chlorine content, physical form, and
packaging.
Export Price
The Department based the price of
Aragonesas’ U.S. sales on EP
methodology, in accordance with
section 772(a) of the Act, because the
subject merchandise was sold directly
by Aragonesas to the first unaffiliated
purchaser in the United States prior to
importation and the constructed export
price (‘‘CEP’’) methodology was not
otherwise indicated. We based EP on
packed prices to unaffiliated purchasers
in the United States. Aragonesas
reported its U.S. sales on a delivered,
duty paid basis. We made deductions
from the starting price, where
appropriate, for billing adjustments,
foreign inland freight, international
freight, foreign inland and marine
insurance, foreign and U.S. brokerage
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 May 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
and handling, U.S. inland freight,
commissions and U.S. duty, in
accordance with section 772(c)(2) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.402. We also made
some corrections and adjustments to
international freight, brokerage and
handling, inventory carrying costs and
indirect selling expenses based on our
findings at verification. See Preliminary
Calculation Memorandum.
Normal Value
After testing home market viability,
whether home market sales to affiliates
were at arm’s–length prices, and
whether home market sales were at
below–cost prices, we calculated NV for
Aragonesas as noted in the ‘‘Calculation
of Normal Value Based on Comparison
Market Prices’’ section of this notice,
below.
A. Arm’s Length Test
The Department may calculate NV
based on a sale to an affiliated party
only if it is satisfied that the price to the
affiliated party is comparable to the
prices at which sales are made to parties
not affiliated with the exporter or
producer, i.e., sales at arm’s–length. See
19 CFR 351.403(c). Sales to affiliated
customers for consumption in the home
market that are determined not to be at
arm’s–length are excluded from our
analysis. In this proceeding, Aragonesas
reported sales of the foreign like product
to one affiliated customer. To test
whether these sales were made at arm’s–
length prices, the Department compared
the prices of sales of comparable
merchandise to affiliated and
unaffiliated customers, net of all
movement charges, direct selling
expenses, and packing. Pursuant to 19
CFR 351.403(c), and in accordance with
the Department’s practice, when the
prices charged to an affiliated party are,
on average, between 98 and 102 percent
of the prices charged to unaffiliated
parties for merchandise comparable to
that sold to the affiliated party, we
determine that the sales to the affiliated
party are at arm’s–length. See
Antidumping Proceedings: Affiliated
Party Sales in the Ordinary Course of
Trade, 67 FR 69186, 69187 (November
15, 2002). In this instance, Aragonesas’
sales to the affiliated home market
customer did not pass the arm’s–length
test, and we therefore excluded those
sales from our analysis. See section
773(b)(1) of the Act. See also
Preliminary Calculation Memorandum.
B. Cost of Production Analysis
In the most recently completed
review, the Department disregarded
sales made at prices that were below
cost of production (‘‘COP’’). See
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
25217
Chlorinated Isocyanurates from Spain:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 73 FR 79789
(December 30, 2008). As a result, in
accordance with section 773(b)(2)(A)(ii)
of the Act, in this review the
Department determined that there are
reasonable grounds to believe or suspect
that Aragonesas sold the foreign like
product at prices below the cost of
producing the product during the
instant POR. Accordingly, the
Department required that Aragonesas
provide a response to Section D of the
questionnaire.
1. Calculation of Cost of Production
In accordance with section 773(b)(3)
of the Act, for each product, sorted by
control number, sold by Aragonesas
during the POR, the Department
calculated Aragonesas’ weighted–
average COP based on the sum of its
materials and fabrication costs, plus
amounts for general and administrative
expenses and interest expenses. See
‘‘Test of Comparison Market Sales
Prices’’ section below for treatment of
home market selling expenses. We
relied on the COP information provided
by Aragonesas in its questionnaire
responses. We made some adjustments
to the COP information based on our
findings at the cost verification. These
adjustments are detailed in the
Memorandum to Neal Halper, ‘‘Cost of
Production and Constructed Value
Calculation Adjustments for the
Preliminary Results for Aragonesas
Industrias y Energia S.A.’’ dated May
19, 2009 (Preliminary Cost
Memorandum). See also Cost
Verification Report.
2. Test of Comparison Market Sales
Prices
In order to determine whether sales
were made at prices below the COP, on
a product–specific basis, the
Department compared Aragonesas
adjusted weighted–average COP to the
home market sales of the foreign like
product, as required under section
773(b) of the Act. In accordance with
sections 773(b)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act,
in determining whether to disregard
home market sales made at prices less
than the COP, we examined whether
such sales were made: (1) in substantial
quantities within an extended period of
time; and (2) at prices which permitted
the recovery of all costs within a
reasonable period of time in the normal
course of trade. The prices were
inclusive of billing adjustments and
exclusive of any applicable movement
charges, discounts and rebates, direct
and indirect selling expenses, and
E:\FR\FM\27MYN1.SGM
27MYN1
25218
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 27, 2009 / Notices
packing expenses, revised where
appropriate.
erowe on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
3. Results of the COP Test
Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(C) of the
Act, where less than 20 percent of a
respondent’s home market sales of a
given product are at prices less than the
COP, the Department does not disregard
any below cost sales of that product,
because the Department determines that
in such instances the below cost sales
were not made within an extended
period of time and in ‘‘substantial
quantities.’’ Where 20 percent or more
of a respondent’s sales of a given
product are at prices less than the COP,
the Department disregards the below
cost sales because they: (1) were made
within an extended period of time in
‘‘substantial quantities,’’ in accordance
with section 773(b)(2)(B) and (C) of the
Act; and (2) based on our comparison of
prices to the weighted–average COPs for
the POR, were at prices which would
not permit the recovery of all costs
within a reasonable period of time, in
accordance with section 773(b)(2)(D) of
the Act. Based on the results of our test,
we found that, for certain products,
more than 20 percent of Aragonesas’
home market sales were at prices less
than the COP and, in addition, such
sales did not provide for the recovery of
costs within a reasonable period of time.
We therefore excluded these sales and
used the remaining sales as the basis for
determining NV, in accordance with
section 773(b)(1) of the Act.
C. Calculation of Normal Value Based
on Comparison Market Prices
We based NV on the prices at which
the foreign like product was first sold by
Aragonesas for consumption in the
home market, in the usual commercial
quantities, in the ordinary course of
trade, and, to the extent possible, at the
same level of trade (‘‘LOT’’) as the
comparison U.S. sale. We excluded
sales of merchandise that was not
foreign like product, for reasons that are
of a business proprietary nature. See
Preliminary Calculation Memorandum.
We calculated NV for Aragonesas using
the reported gross unit prices to
unaffiliated purchasers. Aragonesas
reported that it offers its home market
customers the following terms of
delivery: cost and freight, carriage
insurance paid, carriage paid, delivered
duty paid, delivered duty unpaid, ex–
works/free carrier, and free on truck.
Where appropriate, the Department
made adjustments to the starting price
for billing adjustments. We deducted
home market movement expenses
pursuant to section 773(a)(6)(B) of the
Act. At the sales verification,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 May 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
Aragonesas could not locate an inland
freight invoice pertaining to a few home
market observations. For these few
observations, as facts available under
section 776(a)(2)(A) of the Act, we are
using the average freight expense
Aragonesas incurred to that customer.
We deducted, where appropriate,
discounts and rebates, pursuant to
section 773(a)(6)(B)(ii) of the Act. We
also made adjustments for differences in
costs attributable to differences in the
physical characteristics of the
merchandise, in accordance with
section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.411. In addition, the
Department made adjustments under
section 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act and
19 CFR 351.410 for differences in
circumstances of sale for imputed credit
and warranty expenses. We also
deducted home market packing costs
and added U.S. packing costs, in
accordance with section 773(a)(6)(A)
and (B) of the Act. Further, based on our
findings at verification, we made
corrections to inland freight and we
recalculated indirect selling expenses,
inventory carrying costs and rebates.
See Sales Verification Report. See also
Preliminary Calculation Memorandum.
We also made the appropriate
adjustment where necessary for
commissions paid in the home market
pursuant to 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act
and19 CFR 351.410(c). We made
adjustments, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.410(e), for indirect selling expenses
incurred on comparison market or U.S.
sales where commissions were granted
on sales in one market but not in the
other (i.e., commission offset).
Specifically, where commissions are
incurred in one market, but not in the
other, we limited the amount of such
allowance to the amount of either the
indirect selling expenses incurred in the
one market or the commissions allowed
in the other market, whichever is less.
Level of Trade
In accordance with section
773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to the extent
practicable, the Department determines
NV based on sales in the comparison
market at the same LOT as the EP or
CEP sales in the U.S. market
(Aragonesas had only EP sales in the
U.S. market). The NV LOT is based on
the starting price of the sales in the
comparison market. Where NV is based
on CV, the Department determines the
NV LOT based on the LOT of the sales
from which the Department derives
selling expenses, general and
administrative expenses, and profit for
CV, where possible. For EP sales, the
U.S. LOT is based on the starting price
of the sales to the U.S. market.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
To determine whether NV sales are at
a different LOT than EP sales, the
Department examines stages in the
marketing process and level of selling
functions along the chain of distribution
between the producer and the customer.
See 19 CFR 351.412(c)(2). Substantial
differences in selling activities are a
necessary, but not sufficient, condition
for determining that there is a difference
in the stages of marketing. Id.; see also
Notice of Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cut–toLength Carbon Steel Plate From South
Africa, 62 FR 61731, 61732 (November
19, 1997). When the Department is
unable to match U.S. sales to foreign
like product sales in the comparison
market at the same LOT as the EP sale,
the Department may compare the U.S.
sales to sales at a different LOT in the
comparison market. In comparing EP
sales at a different LOT in the
comparison market, where the
difference affects price comparability, as
manifested by a pattern of consistent
price differences between comparison–
market sales at the NV LOT and
comparison–market sales at the LOT of
the export transaction, the Department
makes an LOT adjustment under section
773(a)(7)(A) of the Act.
In this administrative review,
Aragonesas had only EP sales in the
U.S. market, thus the CEP methodology
was not employed in this review. The
Department obtained information from
Aragonesas regarding the marketing
stages involved in making the reported
home market and U.S. sales, including
a description of the selling activities
performed for each channel of
distribution. Aragonesas reported that it
made EP sales in the U.S. market
through a single distribution channel
(i.e., sales to industrial users). Because
all sales in the United States are made
through a single distribution channel,
we preliminarily determine that there is
one LOT in the U.S. market.
For the home market, Aragonesas
reported that it made sales through three
channels of distribution (i.e., industrial
customers, retail customers, and
distributors), noting that the selling
functions are more or less identical for
retail and distributor sales. We
compared the selling functions
performed by Aragonesas for these
distribution channels and found that
Aragonesas performed similar selling
activities in the home market for the
retail and distributor channels of
distribution, and fewer selling activities
for industrial home market customers.
Thus, we preliminarily find that the
retail and distributor channels of
distribution constitute one NV LOT,
while the channel of distribution for
E:\FR\FM\27MYN1.SGM
27MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 27, 2009 / Notices
industrial customers constitutes a
second NV LOT. Pursuant to section
773(a)(7)(ii) of the Act, where sales in
the U.S. market are matched with sales
in the home market at a more advanced
LOT (i.e., retail and distributor channels
of distribution), the Department will
grant an LOT adjustment to NV if there
is a consistent pattern of price
differences. Therefore, we compared
prices at the two LOTs in the home
market and found that a consistent
pattern of price differences does not
exist between the LOTs. Therefore, an
LOT adjustment is not warranted. See
Preliminary Calculation Memorandum.
Currency Conversion
Pursuant to section 773A(a) of the
Act, we converted amounts expressed in
foreign currencies into U.S. dollar
amounts based on the exchange rates in
effect on the dates of the U.S. sales, as
reported by the Federal Reserve Bank of
the United States.
Preliminary Results of Review
As a result of this review, the
Department preliminarily determines
that the weighted–average dumping
margin for the period June 1, 2007
through May 31, 2008 is as follows:
Manufacturer/Exporter
erowe on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Aragonesas Industrias y
´
Energıa S.A. ..........................
WeightedAverage
Margin
(percentage)
45.50
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective for all
shipments of the subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the
publication date of the final results of
this administrative review, as provided
by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the
cash deposit rate for the company listed
above will be that established in the
final results of this review, except if the
rate is less than 0.50 percent, and
therefore, de minimis within the
meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in
which case the cash deposit rate will be
zero; (2) for previously reviewed or
investigated companies not
participating in this review, 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 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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 May 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit
rate for all other manufacturers or
exporters will continue to be 24.83
percent, the ‘‘All Others’’ rate made
effective by the LTFV investigation. See
Chlorinated Isocyanurates From Spain:
Notice of Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value, 70 FR 24506
(May 10, 2005). These requirements,
when imposed, shall remain in effect
until further notice.
Assessment Instructions
Upon publication of the final results
of this review, the Department shall
determine, and CBP shall assess,
antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries exported by Aragonesas.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), the
Department calculates an assessment
rate for each importer of the subject
merchandise for each respondent. In
accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1),
we will calculate importer–specific
assessment rates on the basis of the ratio
of the total amount of antidumping
duties calculated for the examined sales
and the total quantity of the examined
sales. These rates will be assessed
uniformly on all entries of the
respective importers made during the
POR if these preliminary results are
adopted in the final results of review.
The Department intends to issue
appropriate assessment instructions
directly to CBP 15 days after the date of
publication of the final results of this
review.
This notice constitutes rescission of
the administrative review of Inquide.
The Department will issue appropriate
assessment instructions directly to CBP
15 days after the date of publication of
this notice.
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
applies to entries of subject
merchandise during the POR produced
by any company included in the final
results of review for which the reviewed
company did not know that the
merchandise it sold to the intermediary
(e.g., a reseller, trading company, or
exporter) was destined for the United
States. In such instances, the
Department 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
25219
Disclosure and Public Hearing
We will disclose the calculations used
in our analysis to parties to this segment
of the proceeding within five days of the
public announcement of this notice. See
19 CFR 351.224(b). Interested parties
who wish to request a hearing, or to
participate if one is requested, must
submit a written request to the Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration,
Room 1870, within 30 days of the date
of publication of this notice. Requests
should contain: (1) the party’s name,
address and telephone number; (2) the
number of participants; and (3) a list of
issues to be discussed. See 19 CFR
351.310(c).
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309,
interested parties may submit written
comments in response to these
preliminary results. Unless the time
period is extended by the Department,
case briefs are to be submitted within 30
days after the date of publication of this
notice in the Federal Register. See 19
CFR 351.309(c). Rebuttal briefs, which
must be limited to arguments raised in
case briefs, are to be submitted no later
than five days after the time limit for
filing case briefs. See 19 CFR
351.309(d). Parties who submit
arguments in this proceeding are
requested to submit with the argument:
(1) a statement of the issues; (2) a brief
summary of the argument; and (3) a
table of authorities cited. Further, we
request that parties submitting written
comments provide the Department with
an electronic copy of the public version
of such comments. Case and rebuttal
briefs must be served on interested
parties, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.303(f).
Unless extended, the Department will
issue the final results of this
administrative review, including the
results of its analysis of issues raised in
any written briefs, not later than 120
days after the date of publication of this
notice, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A)
of the Act.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a
preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f)(2) 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
Secretary’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of double antidumping duties.
This administrative review and notice
are published in accordance with
E:\FR\FM\27MYN1.SGM
27MYN1
25220
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 27, 2009 / Notices
Judges Panel of the Malcolm Baldrige
National Quality Award
Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app. 2, as
amended by Section 5(c) of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public
Law 94–409. The meeting, which
involves examination of Award
applicant data from U.S. companies and
other organizations and a discussion of
these data as compared to the Award
criteria in order to recommend Award
recipients, may be closed to the public
in accordance with Section 552b(c)(4) of
Title 5, United States Code, because the
meeting is likely to disclose trade
secrets and commercial or financial
information obtained from a person and
privileged or confidential.
National Institute of Standards
and Technology, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of closed meeting.
Dated: May 20, 2009.
Patrick Gallagher,
Deputy Director.
[FR Doc. E9–12284 Filed 5–26–09; 8:45 am]
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.221.
Dated: May 19, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–12293 Filed 5–26–04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Institute of Standards and
Technology
AGENCY:
Pursuant to the Federal
Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app.
2, notice is hereby given that the Judges
Panel of the Malcolm Baldrige National
Quality Award will meet Tuesday, June
16, 2009. The Judges Panel is composed
of twelve members prominent in the
fields of quality, innovation, and
performance excellence and appointed
by the Secretary of Commerce. The
purpose of this meeting is to discuss the
Judging process and Judging process
changes for 2009; the role of the Judges
Panel in the award process; an overview
of scoring data; the 2009 Baldrige
Award cycle; the Judges Panel survey of
applicants; and the Judges Panel
mentoring process. Under each of these
categories applicant information may be
disclosed. The applications under
review by the Judges Panel contain trade
secrets and proprietary commercial
information submitted to the
Government in confidence.
DATES: The meeting will convene June
16, 2009 at 9 a.m. and adjourn at 4:30
p.m. on June 16, 2009. The entire
meeting will be closed.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, Administration Building,
Lecture Room B, Gaithersburg,
Maryland 20899.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Harry Hertz, Director, Baldrige National
Quality Program, National Institute of
Standards and Technology,
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899,
telephone number (301) 975–2361.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Assistant Secretary for Administration,
with the concurrence of the General
Counsel, formally determined on
January 08, 2009, that the meeting of the
Judges Panel will be closed pursuant to
BILLING CODE 3510–13–P
erowe on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 May 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
Agency Emergency Processing Under
Office of Management and Budget
Review; Chronic Hazard Advisory
Panel Questionnaire
AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The Consumer Product Safety
Commission (Commission or CPSC) is
announcing that a collection of
information has been submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for emergency processing under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
The proposed collection of information
concerns a questionnaire to panel
candidates for selection to a Chronic
Hazard Advisory Panel (CHAP) to study
the effects of phthalates and phthalate
alternatives on children’s health.
DATES: Comments on this request for
approval of information collection
requirements should be submitted by
June 26, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments on this request
for approval of information collection
requirements should be captioned
‘‘Emergency Request—Chronic Hazard
Advisory Panel’’ and submitted to (1)
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for
CPSC, Office of Management and
Budget, Washington, DC 20503;
telephone: (202) 395–7340, or by e-mail
to Brenda_Aguilar@omb.eop.gov and (2)
to the Office of the Secretary by e-mail
at cpsc-os@cpsc.gov, or mailed to the
Office of the Secretary, Consumer
Product Safety Commission, 4330 East
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814.
Comments may also be sent via
facsimile at (301) 504–0127.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Linda Glatz, Division of Policy and
Planning, Office of Information
Technology and Technology Services,
Consumer Product Safety Commission,
4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD
20814; telephone: (301) 504–7671, or by
e-mail to lglatz@cpsc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Proposed Collection of Information
Section 108(b)(2)(A) of the Consumer
Product Safety Improvement Act of
2008 (CPSIA) (Pub. L. 110–314) requires
the Commission to begin the process of
appointing a CHAP pursuant to 15
U.S.C. 2077 to study the effects on
children’s health of all phthalates and
phthalate alternatives as used in
children’s toys and child care articles.
Section 108(b)(2)(B) of the CPSIA
specifies what the panel is to examine
and requires the panel to complete its
examination within 18 months after its
appointment. The panel must report to
the CPSC no later than 180 days after
completing its examination, and, no
later than 180 days after receiving the
panel’s report, the CPSC must
promulgate a final rule to determine
whether an interim prohibition on three
specific phthalates should remain in
effect and evaluate the panel’s findings
and recommendation.
In order to establish the CHAP and
execute the mandatory rulemaking
within the statutory deadlines imposed
under the CPSIA, the CPSC requests
emergency processing of the collection
of information under section 3507(j) of
the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3507(j) and 5 CFR
1320.13). The CPSC will provide a
questionnaire to 27 panel candidates to
identify potential conflicts of interest.
With respect to this collection of
information, the CPSC estimates the
burden of this collection will be
approximately 1 hour. The total
estimated burden to all candidates is 27
hours. The annual reporting cost is
estimated to be $1,481.76. This estimate
is based on the estimated total burden
hours for responding to the
questionnaire (27 hours) multiplied by
an estimated wage (Bureau of Labor
Statistics: All workers, good-producing
industries, management, professional
and related, September 2008) of $54.88
per hour (27 hours × $54.88 per hour =
$1,481.76).
B. Request for Comments
The Commission solicits written
comments from all interested persons
about the proposed collection of
E:\FR\FM\27MYN1.SGM
27MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 27, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25215-25220]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-12293]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-469-814]
Chlorinated Isocyanurates from Spain: Preliminary Results and
Rescission, in Part, of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: In response to timely requests by Clearon Corporation and
Occidental Chemical Corporation (collectively, ``petitioners''), and
Aragonesas Industrias y Energ[iacute]a S.A. (``Aragonesas''), the
Department of Commerce (``Department'') is conducting an administrative
review of the antidumping duty order on chlorinated isocyanurates
(``chlorinated isos'') from Spain with respect to Aragonesas. The
period of review (``POR'') is June 1, 2007 through May 31, 2008. In
accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department is also rescinding
this review with respect to Inquide Flix, S.A. (``Inquide'').
The Department preliminarily determines that Aragonesas made U.S.
sales of chlorinated isos at prices less than normal value (``NV'').
See Preliminary Results of Review section, below. If these preliminary
results are adopted in our final results of administrative review, the
Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'')
to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Interested
parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results. See
Disclosure and Public Hearing section, below. Unless extended, we will
issue the final results of review no later than 120 days from the date
of publication of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 27, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myrna Lobo, AD/CVD Operations, Office
6, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-2371.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 24, 2005, the Department published
in the Federal Register an antidumping duty order on chlorinated isos
from Spain. See Chlorinated Isocyanurates from Spain: Notice of
Antidumping Duty Order, 70 FR 36562 (June 24, 2005). On June 9, 2008,
the Department published a notice of ``Opportunity to Request an
Administrative Review'' of the antidumping duty order. See Antidumping
or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation;
Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 73 FR 32557 (June 9,
2008). Timely requests for reviews were received from petitioners with
respect to Aragonesas and Inquide. The Department also received timely
requests from Aragonesas and Inquide with respect to each of their
companies. In response to these requests, the Department published a
notice of initiation of administrative reviews with respect to
Aragonesas and Inquide. See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, Request for Revocation in
Part, and Deferral of Administrative Review, 73 FR 44220 (July 30,
2008). The POR for this administrative review is June 1, 2007 through
May 31, 2008.
On July 22, 2008, Inquide withdrew its request for administrative
review. On September 18, 2008, petitioners withdrew their request for
review with regard to Inquide. The applicable regulation, 19 CFR
351.213(d)(1), states that if a party that requested an
[[Page 25216]]
administrative review withdraws the request within 90 days of the date
of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review, the
Secretary will rescind the review. In this case both requesting parties
withdrew their requests within the time limit. Therefore, we are
rescinding this review, in part, with respect to Inquide.
On August 21, 2008, the Department issued an antidumping duty
questionnaire to Aragonesas. On September 25, 2008, the Department
received Aragonesas' response to section A of the antidumping
questionnaire. On October 15, 2008, the Department received Aragonesas'
response to sections B and C of the antidumping questionnaire. On
October 27, 2008, the Department received Aragonesas' response to
section D of the antidumping questionnaire. We issued supplemental
questionnaires to Aragonesas on November 26, 2008, December 9, 2008,
January 29, 2009, and February 6, 2009. Aragonesas filed a timely
response to each supplemental questionnaire.
On February 25, 2009, the Department extended the time limit for
the preliminary results by 78 days. See Chlorinated Isocyanurates from
Spain: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR 9218 (March 3, 2009).
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the order are chlorinated isocyanurates.
Chlorinated isocyanurates are derivatives of cyanuric acid, described
as chlorinated s-triazine triones. There are three primary chemical
compositions of chlorinated isocyanurates: (1) trichloroisocyanuric
acid (Cl3(NCO)3), (2) sodium dichloroisocyanurate (dihydrate)
(NaCl2(NCO)3 2H2O), and (3) sodium dichloroisocyanurate (anhydrous)
(NaCl2(NCO)3). Chlorinated isocyanurates are available in powder,
granular, and tableted forms. The order covers all chlorinated
isocyanurates.
Chlorinated isocyanurates are currently classifiable under
subheadings 2933.69.6015, 2933.69.6021, and 2933.69.6050 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). The tariff
classification 2933.69.6015 covers sodium dichloroisocyanurates
(anhydrous and dihydrate forms) and trichloroisocyanuric acid. The
tariff classifications 2933.69.6021 and 2933.69.6050 represent basket
categories that include chlorinated isocyanurates and other compounds
including an unfused triazine ring. Although the HTSUS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description
of the scope of the order is dispositive.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(``the Act''), from March 23, 2009 through April 3, 2009, the
Department verified the cost and sales information submitted by
Aragonesas in its questionnaire responses provided during the course of
this review. We used standard verification procedures including
examination of relevant accounting and production records, and original
source documents provided by the respondent. See Memorandum from Robert
Greger, Senior Accountant, to The File, ``Verification of the Cost
Response of Aragonesas Industrias y Energia, S.A. in the Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review of Chlorinated Isocyanurates from Spain,''
dated May 18, 2009 (``Cost Verification Report''); see also Memorandum
from Myrna Lobo, International Trade Compliance Analyst, to The File,
``Verification of the Sales Response of Aragonesas Industrias y
Energia, S.A. in the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of
Chlorinated Isocyanurates from Spain,'' dated May 18, 2009 (``Sales
Verification Report''). Both verification reports are on file in the
Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 1117 of the main Commerce Building.
Selection of Comparison Market for Normal Value
In order to determine whether there was a sufficient volume of
sales in the home market to serve as a viable basis for calculating NV,
the Department compared Aragonesas' volume of home market sales of the
foreign like product to the volume of U.S. sales of the subject
merchandise, in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(C) of the Act. We
excluded sales of merchandise that was not foreign like product for
reasons that are of a business proprietary nature. See Memorandum from
Myrna Lobo, International Trade Compliance Analyst, to The File,
``Calculation Memorandum for the Preliminary Results,'' dated May 19,
2009 (``Preliminary Calculation Memorandum''). Because Aragonesas'
aggregate volume of home market sales of the foreign like product was
greater than five percent of its aggregate volume of U.S. sales of
subject merchandise, the Department determines that the home market is
viable and sales in the home market can serve as the basis for
calculating NV.
Date of Sale
Aragonesas reported invoice date as the date of sale for U.S. and
home market sales. The Department's regulations state that ``{i{time} n
identifying the date of sale of the subject merchandise or foreign like
product, the Secretary normally will use the date of invoice, as
recorded in the exporter or producer's records kept in the ordinary
course of business. However, the Secretary may use a date other than
the date of invoice if the Secretary is satisfied that a different date
better reflects the date on which the exporter or producer establishes
the material terms of sale.'' See 19 CFR 351.401(i). We examined the
questionnaire responses and relevant sales documentation at
verification, and determine that invoice date is the appropriate date
of sale in both the U.S. and home markets.
However, in accordance with the Department's practice, whenever
shipment date precedes invoice date, we used shipment date as the date
of sale. See, e.g., Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the
Republic of Korea; Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 18074, 18079-80 (April
10, 2006), remaining unchanged in Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in
Coils From the Republic of Korea; Final Results and Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part, 72 FR 4486 (January 31,
2007); and Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper
Review and Determination To Revoke in Part, 72 FR 62630 (November 6,
2007) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Issue 2, where
the Department found ``that it is appropriate to use the earlier of
shipment or invoice date as Colakoglu's and Habas' U.S. date of sale in
the instant review, consistent with the date-of-sale methodology
established in the previous review.''
Comparisons to Normal Value
To determine whether Aragonesas sold chlorinated isos in the United
States at prices less than NV, the Department compared the export price
(``EP'') of individual U.S. sales to the weighted-average NV of sales
of the foreign like product made in the ordinary course of trade in a
month contemporaneous with the month in which the U.S. sale was made.
See sections 777A(d)(2) and 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act.
[[Page 25217]]
Section 771(16) of the Act defines foreign like product as
merchandise that is identical or similar to subject merchandise and
produced by the same person and in the same country as the subject
merchandise. Thus, we considered all products covered by the scope of
the order that were produced by the same person and in the same country
as the subject merchandise, and sold by Aragonesas in the home market
during the POR, to be foreign like products for the purpose of
determining appropriate product comparisons to chlorinated isos sold in
the United States.
Product Comparisons
In accordance with section 771(16) of the Act, the Department
considered all products produced by the respondent, covered by the
description in the ``Scope of the Order'' section above, to be foreign
like products for purposes of determining appropriate product
comparisons to U.S. sales. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.414(e)(2), the
Department compared U.S. sales made by Aragonesas to sales made in the
home market within the contemporaneous window period, which extends
from three months prior to the U.S. sale until two months after the
sale. Where there were no sales of identical merchandise in the
comparison market made in the ordinary course of trade to compare to
U.S. sales, the Department compared U.S. sales to sales of the most
similar foreign like product made in the ordinary course of trade. In
making the product comparisons, the Department used the physical
characteristics determined by the Department, and reported by
Aragonesas, to match foreign like products to U.S. sales: chemical
structure, free available chlorine content, physical form, and
packaging.
Export Price
The Department based the price of Aragonesas' U.S. sales on EP
methodology, in accordance with section 772(a) of the Act, because the
subject merchandise was sold directly by Aragonesas to the first
unaffiliated purchaser in the United States prior to importation and
the constructed export price (``CEP'') methodology was not otherwise
indicated. We based EP on packed prices to unaffiliated purchasers in
the United States. Aragonesas reported its U.S. sales on a delivered,
duty paid basis. We made deductions from the starting price, where
appropriate, for billing adjustments, foreign inland freight,
international freight, foreign inland and marine insurance, foreign and
U.S. brokerage and handling, U.S. inland freight, commissions and U.S.
duty, in accordance with section 772(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.402. We also made some corrections and adjustments to international
freight, brokerage and handling, inventory carrying costs and indirect
selling expenses based on our findings at verification. See Preliminary
Calculation Memorandum.
Normal Value
After testing home market viability, whether home market sales to
affiliates were at arm's-length prices, and whether home market sales
were at below-cost prices, we calculated NV for Aragonesas as noted in
the ``Calculation of Normal Value Based on Comparison Market Prices''
section of this notice, below.
A. Arm's Length Test
The Department may calculate NV based on a sale to an affiliated
party only if it is satisfied that the price to the affiliated party is
comparable to the prices at which sales are made to parties not
affiliated with the exporter or producer, i.e., sales at arm's-length.
See 19 CFR 351.403(c). Sales to affiliated customers for consumption in
the home market that are determined not to be at arm's-length are
excluded from our analysis. In this proceeding, Aragonesas reported
sales of the foreign like product to one affiliated customer. To test
whether these sales were made at arm's-length prices, the Department
compared the prices of sales of comparable merchandise to affiliated
and unaffiliated customers, net of all movement charges, direct selling
expenses, and packing. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.403(c), and in accordance
with the Department's practice, when the prices charged to an
affiliated party are, on average, between 98 and 102 percent of the
prices charged to unaffiliated parties for merchandise comparable to
that sold to the affiliated party, we determine that the sales to the
affiliated party are at arm's-length. See Antidumping Proceedings:
Affiliated Party Sales in the Ordinary Course of Trade, 67 FR 69186,
69187 (November 15, 2002). In this instance, Aragonesas' sales to the
affiliated home market customer did not pass the arm's-length test, and
we therefore excluded those sales from our analysis. See section
773(b)(1) of the Act. See also Preliminary Calculation Memorandum.
B. Cost of Production Analysis
In the most recently completed review, the Department disregarded
sales made at prices that were below cost of production (``COP''). See
Chlorinated Isocyanurates from Spain: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 73 FR 79789 (December 30, 2008). As a result, in
accordance with section 773(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, in this review the
Department determined that there are reasonable grounds to believe or
suspect that Aragonesas sold the foreign like product at prices below
the cost of producing the product during the instant POR. Accordingly,
the Department required that Aragonesas provide a response to Section D
of the questionnaire.
1. Calculation of Cost of Production
In accordance with section 773(b)(3) of the Act, for each product,
sorted by control number, sold by Aragonesas during the POR, the
Department calculated Aragonesas' weighted-average COP based on the sum
of its materials and fabrication costs, plus amounts for general and
administrative expenses and interest expenses. See ``Test of Comparison
Market Sales Prices'' section below for treatment of home market
selling expenses. We relied on the COP information provided by
Aragonesas in its questionnaire responses. We made some adjustments to
the COP information based on our findings at the cost verification.
These adjustments are detailed in the Memorandum to Neal Halper, ``Cost
of Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the
Preliminary Results for Aragonesas Industrias y Energia S.A.'' dated
May 19, 2009 (Preliminary Cost Memorandum). See also Cost Verification
Report.
2. Test of Comparison Market Sales Prices
In order to determine whether sales were made at prices below the
COP, on a product-specific basis, the Department compared Aragonesas
adjusted weighted-average COP to the home market sales of the foreign
like product, as required under section 773(b) of the Act. In
accordance with sections 773(b)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act, in
determining whether to disregard home market sales made at prices less
than the COP, we examined whether such sales were made: (1) in
substantial quantities within an extended period of time; and (2) at
prices which permitted the recovery of all costs within a reasonable
period of time in the normal course of trade. The prices were inclusive
of billing adjustments and exclusive of any applicable movement
charges, discounts and rebates, direct and indirect selling expenses,
and
[[Page 25218]]
packing expenses, revised where appropriate.
3. Results of the COP Test
Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(C) of the Act, where less than 20
percent of a respondent's home market sales of a given product are at
prices less than the COP, the Department does not disregard any below
cost sales of that product, because the Department determines that in
such instances the below cost sales were not made within an extended
period of time and in ``substantial quantities.'' Where 20 percent or
more of a respondent's sales of a given product are at prices less than
the COP, the Department disregards the below cost sales because they:
(1) were made within an extended period of time in ``substantial
quantities,'' in accordance with section 773(b)(2)(B) and (C) of the
Act; and (2) based on our comparison of prices to the weighted-average
COPs for the POR, were at prices which would not permit the recovery of
all costs within a reasonable period of time, in accordance with
section 773(b)(2)(D) of the Act. Based on the results of our test, we
found that, for certain products, more than 20 percent of Aragonesas'
home market sales were at prices less than the COP and, in addition,
such sales did not provide for the recovery of costs within a
reasonable period of time. We therefore excluded these sales and used
the remaining sales as the basis for determining NV, in accordance with
section 773(b)(1) of the Act.
C. Calculation of Normal Value Based on Comparison Market Prices
We based NV on the prices at which the foreign like product was
first sold by Aragonesas for consumption in the home market, in the
usual commercial quantities, in the ordinary course of trade, and, to
the extent possible, at the same level of trade (``LOT'') as the
comparison U.S. sale. We excluded sales of merchandise that was not
foreign like product, for reasons that are of a business proprietary
nature. See Preliminary Calculation Memorandum. We calculated NV for
Aragonesas using the reported gross unit prices to unaffiliated
purchasers. Aragonesas reported that it offers its home market
customers the following terms of delivery: cost and freight, carriage
insurance paid, carriage paid, delivered duty paid, delivered duty
unpaid, ex-works/free carrier, and free on truck. Where appropriate,
the Department made adjustments to the starting price for billing
adjustments. We deducted home market movement expenses pursuant to
section 773(a)(6)(B) of the Act. At the sales verification, Aragonesas
could not locate an inland freight invoice pertaining to a few home
market observations. For these few observations, as facts available
under section 776(a)(2)(A) of the Act, we are using the average freight
expense Aragonesas incurred to that customer. We deducted, where
appropriate, discounts and rebates, pursuant to section
773(a)(6)(B)(ii) of the Act. We also made adjustments for differences
in costs attributable to differences in the physical characteristics of
the merchandise, in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act
and 19 CFR 351.411. In addition, the Department made adjustments under
section 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.410 for differences
in circumstances of sale for imputed credit and warranty expenses. We
also deducted home market packing costs and added U.S. packing costs,
in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(A) and (B) of the Act. Further,
based on our findings at verification, we made corrections to inland
freight and we recalculated indirect selling expenses, inventory
carrying costs and rebates. See Sales Verification Report. See also
Preliminary Calculation Memorandum.
We also made the appropriate adjustment where necessary for
commissions paid in the home market pursuant to 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of
the Act and19 CFR 351.410(c). We made adjustments, in accordance with
19 CFR 351.410(e), for indirect selling expenses incurred on comparison
market or U.S. sales where commissions were granted on sales in one
market but not in the other (i.e., commission offset). Specifically,
where commissions are incurred in one market, but not in the other, we
limited the amount of such allowance to the amount of either the
indirect selling expenses incurred in the one market or the commissions
allowed in the other market, whichever is less.
Level of Trade
In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to the extent
practicable, the Department determines NV based on sales in the
comparison market at the same LOT as the EP or CEP sales in the U.S.
market (Aragonesas had only EP sales in the U.S. market). The NV LOT is
based on the starting price of the sales in the comparison market.
Where NV is based on CV, the Department determines the NV LOT based on
the LOT of the sales from which the Department derives selling
expenses, general and administrative expenses, and profit for CV, where
possible. For EP sales, the U.S. LOT is based on the starting price of
the sales to the U.S. market.
To determine whether NV sales are at a different LOT than EP sales,
the Department examines stages in the marketing process and level of
selling functions along the chain of distribution between the producer
and the customer. See 19 CFR 351.412(c)(2). Substantial differences in
selling activities are a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for
determining that there is a difference in the stages of marketing. Id.;
see also Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate From South Africa, 62
FR 61731, 61732 (November 19, 1997). When the Department is unable to
match U.S. sales to foreign like product sales in the comparison market
at the same LOT as the EP sale, the Department may compare the U.S.
sales to sales at a different LOT in the comparison market. In
comparing EP sales at a different LOT in the comparison market, where
the difference affects price comparability, as manifested by a pattern
of consistent price differences between comparison-market sales at the
NV LOT and comparison-market sales at the LOT of the export
transaction, the Department makes an LOT adjustment under section
773(a)(7)(A) of the Act.
In this administrative review, Aragonesas had only EP sales in the
U.S. market, thus the CEP methodology was not employed in this review.
The Department obtained information from Aragonesas regarding the
marketing stages involved in making the reported home market and U.S.
sales, including a description of the selling activities performed for
each channel of distribution. Aragonesas reported that it made EP sales
in the U.S. market through a single distribution channel (i.e., sales
to industrial users). Because all sales in the United States are made
through a single distribution channel, we preliminarily determine that
there is one LOT in the U.S. market.
For the home market, Aragonesas reported that it made sales through
three channels of distribution (i.e., industrial customers, retail
customers, and distributors), noting that the selling functions are
more or less identical for retail and distributor sales. We compared
the selling functions performed by Aragonesas for these distribution
channels and found that Aragonesas performed similar selling activities
in the home market for the retail and distributor channels of
distribution, and fewer selling activities for industrial home market
customers. Thus, we preliminarily find that the retail and distributor
channels of distribution constitute one NV LOT, while the channel of
distribution for
[[Page 25219]]
industrial customers constitutes a second NV LOT. Pursuant to section
773(a)(7)(ii) of the Act, where sales in the U.S. market are matched
with sales in the home market at a more advanced LOT (i.e., retail and
distributor channels of distribution), the Department will grant an LOT
adjustment to NV if there is a consistent pattern of price differences.
Therefore, we compared prices at the two LOTs in the home market and
found that a consistent pattern of price differences does not exist
between the LOTs. Therefore, an LOT adjustment is not warranted. See
Preliminary Calculation Memorandum.
Currency Conversion
Pursuant to section 773A(a) of the Act, we converted amounts
expressed in foreign currencies into U.S. dollar amounts based on the
exchange rates in effect on the dates of the U.S. sales, as reported by
the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States.
Preliminary Results of Review
As a result of this review, the Department preliminarily determines
that the weighted-average dumping margin for the period June 1, 2007
through May 31, 2008 is as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
Average
Manufacturer/Exporter Margin
(percentage)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aragonesas Industrias y Energ[iacute]a S.A................ 45.50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all
shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the
final results of this administrative review, as provided by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for the company
listed above will be that established in the final results of this
review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent, and therefore, de
minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in which case the
cash deposit rate will be zero; (2) for previously reviewed or
investigated companies not participating in this review, 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 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; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other
manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 24.83 percent, the ``All
Others'' rate made effective by the LTFV investigation. See Chlorinated
Isocyanurates From Spain: Notice of Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value, 70 FR 24506 (May 10, 2005). These requirements,
when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.
Assessment Instructions
Upon publication of the final results of this review, the
Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on
all appropriate entries exported by Aragonesas. Pursuant to 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1), the Department calculates an assessment rate for each
importer of the subject merchandise for each respondent. In accordance
with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we will calculate importer-specific
assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of
antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales and the total
quantity of the examined sales. These rates will be assessed uniformly
on all entries of the respective importers made during the POR if these
preliminary results are adopted in the final results of review. The
Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions
directly to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of the final
results of this review.
This notice constitutes rescission of the administrative review of
Inquide. The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions
directly to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of this notice.
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 applies to entries
of subject merchandise during the POR produced by any company included
in the final results of review for which the reviewed company did not
know that the merchandise it sold to the intermediary (e.g., a
reseller, trading company, or exporter) was destined for the United
States. In such instances, the Department 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.
Disclosure and Public Hearing
We will disclose the calculations used in our analysis to parties
to this segment of the proceeding within five days of the public
announcement of this notice. See 19 CFR 351.224(b). Interested parties
who wish to request a hearing, or to participate if one is requested,
must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, Room 1870, within 30 days of the date of publication of
this notice. Requests should contain: (1) the party's name, address and
telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of
issues to be discussed. See 19 CFR 351.310(c).
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309, interested parties may submit written
comments in response to these preliminary results. Unless the time
period is extended by the Department, case briefs are to be submitted
within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register. See 19 CFR 351.309(c). Rebuttal briefs, which must be
limited to arguments raised in case briefs, are to be submitted no
later than five days after the time limit for filing case briefs. See
19 CFR 351.309(d). Parties who submit arguments in this proceeding are
requested to submit with the argument: (1) a statement of the issues;
(2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities
cited. Further, we request that parties submitting written comments
provide the Department with an electronic copy of the public version of
such comments. Case and rebuttal briefs must be served on interested
parties, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f).
Unless extended, the Department will issue the final results of
this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of
issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the
date of publication of this notice, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of
the Act.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) 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 Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
This administrative review and notice are published in accordance
with
[[Page 25220]]
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221.
Dated: May 19, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-12293 Filed 5-26-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S