Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Reviews, 41374-41382 [E9-19666]

Download as PDF 41374 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES to determine sex ratios, proportion of wild versus hatchery origin, gather scales for age determination and life history strategy, and to obtain fin clips for genetic analysis. Ultimately, these data are being used to guide the placement of hatchery reared CCC coho salmon smolts intended to improve weak or lost year classes in these systems. Requested unintentional mortality for juveniles and smolts of both species is two percent and there is no unintentional mortality requested for adults. Project 2 involves seasonal sampling of CCC steelhead and CCC coho salmon in Pescadero and San Gregorio creek lagoons to determine their abundance (using mark and recapture techniques), growth rates, and to determine smolt and adult life history information from scales. Sampling in late summer and fall will provide information on relative abundance and growth rates while sampling in spring will provide information on smolt abundance and growth during their rearing phase the previous year as well as the spring of their outmigration. Scales collected from a sub-sample of smolt and adult steelhead will be used to provide an index of where they reared as juveniles and to determine age and growth rates. This project also includes creel surveys at Pescadero Lagoon in order to collect scales and length measurements of adult CCC steelhead captured by fisherman during the catch and release fishing season. Data gathered from this project will contribute to the overall understanding and importance of lagoon habitats for these species. In particular, data gathered from Pescadero Lagoon may provide federal and state agencies with important information on the yearto-year impact of re-occurring fish kills during sand bar breach events on the overall production of salmonids in this system. Requested unintentional mortality for juveniles and smolts of both species is two percent and there is no unintentional mortality requested for adults. Dated: August 11, 2009. Therese Conant, Acting Division Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E9–19719 Filed 8–14–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board Foreign–Trade Zones Board Order No. 1637 [Order No. 1641] Expansion of Foreign-Trade Zone 57, Charlotte, North Carolina, Area Pursuant to its authority under the ForeignTrade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the ForeignTrade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order: Whereas, the North Carolina Department of Commerce, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 57, submitted an application to the Board for authority to expand its zone to include an additional site (Site 16) in the Charlotte, North Carolina area, adjacent to the Charlotte Customs and Border Protection port of entry (FTZ Docket 62-2008, filed 10/28/ 08); Whereas, notice inviting public comment was given in the Federal Register (73 FR 65583, 11/4/08), and the application has been processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations; Whereas, on April 24, 2009, the grant of authority was reissued to the Charlotte Regional Partnership, Inc. (Board Order 1613, 74 FR 21622, 05/8/ 09); and, Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner’s report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and Board’s regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the public interest; Now, therefore, the Board hereby orders: The application to expand FTZ 57 is approved, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations, including Section 400.28, and subject to a sunset provision that would terminate authority for Site 16 on August 31, 2014, if no activity has occurred under FTZ procedures before that date. Signed at Washington, DC, this 5th day of August 2009. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board. Attest: Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E9–19676 Filed 8–14–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:55 Aug 14, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Expansion of Foreign–Trade Zone 8, Toledo, Ohio Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign–Trade Zones (FTZ) Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), the Foreign–Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order: Whereas, the Toledo–Lucas County Port Authority, grantee of Foreign– Trade Zone No. 8, submitted an application to the Board for authority to expand Site 1 at the Port of Toledo Complex, within the Toledo/Sandusky Customs and Border Protection port of entry (FTZ Docket 64–2008, filed 12/2/ 2008); Whereas, notice inviting public comment was given in the Federal Register (73 FR 78289, 12/22/2008) and the application has been processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations; and, Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner’s report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the public interest; Now, therefore, the Board hereby orders: The application to expand FTZ 8 Site 1 is approved, subject to the Act and the Board’s regulations, including Section 400.28. Signed at Washington, DC, this 5th day of August 2009. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign–Trade Zones Board. Attest: Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E9–19673 Filed 8–14–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A–570–890 Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM 17AUN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices SUMMARY: On February 9, 2009, the Department of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) published its preliminary results and partial rescission in the antidumping duty administrative review and new shipper reviews (‘‘NSRs’’) of wooden bedroom furniture from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). The period of review (‘‘POR’’) for the administrative review and the new shipper reviews is January 1, 2007, through December 31, 2007. In the administrative review, we have determined that the participating mandatory respondent, Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry Co., Ltd. (‘‘Yihua Timber’’), made sales in the United States at prices below normal value. With respect to the remaining respondents in the administrative review, we have determined that these entities have provided sufficient evidence demonstrating that they are separate from the PRC–entity and, with the exception of Orient International Holding Shanghai Foreign Trading Co. Ltd. (‘‘Orient International’’), we have assigned a margin based on the rate calculated for Yihua Timber. For the NSRs, the Department also reviewed two exporter/producers, Golden Well International (HK), Ltd./Zhangzhou XYM Furniture Product Co., Ltd. (‘‘Golden Well’’) and Dongguan Sunshine Furniture Co., Ltd./Dongguan Sunshine Furniture Co., Ltd. (‘‘Sunshine’’). We invited interested parties to comment on our preliminary results in these reviews. Based on our analysis of the comments we received in these reviews, we made certain changes to our calculations for Yihua Timber and for the new shippers. The final dumping margins for these reviews are listed in the ‘‘Final Results Margins’’ section below. EFFECTIVE DATE: August 17, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Stolz or Sergio Balbontin, AD/CVD Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4474 and (202) 482–6478, respectively. mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Background The Department published its preliminary results on February 9, 2009. See Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative and New Shipper Reviews and Partial Rescission of Administrative Review, 74 FR 6372 (February 9, 2009) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’). We invited parties to VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:55 Aug 14, 2009 Jkt 217001 comment on the Preliminary Results. On February 24, 2009, and March 4, 2009, the Department sent Yihua Timber the Fourth Supplemental Questionnaire and addendum, respectively. On March 17, 2009, Yihua Timber provided its response to the Fourth Supplemental Questionnaire. On February 24, 2009, March 10, 2009, March 20, 2009, and March 25, 2009, Yihua Timber provided information on the weights of it products. On March 6, 2009, we received publicly available surrogate value information from Yihua Timber and American Furniture Manufacturers Committee for Legal Trade and Vaughan–Bassett Furniture Company (‘‘Petitioners’’). On March 16, 2009, we received rebuttal comments on the publicly available surrogate value information from Yihua Timber and the Petitioners. On April 20, 2009, the Department extended the deadline for the final results of the administrative and new shipper reviews to August 10, 2009. See Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Reviews, 74 FR 17951 (April 20, 2009). The Department conducted verification of Yihua Timber, Yihua Timber’s U.S. subsidiary New Classic Home Furnishings, Inc.’s (‘‘New Classic’’), and Sunshine’s data from April 6, 2009, to April 16, 2009, and April 22, 2009, to April 24, 2009. See ‘‘Verification’’ section, below, for additional information. On May 18, 2009, we requested that Yihua Timber submit revised U.S. sales and factors of production (‘‘FOP’’) databases pursuant to the minor corrections presented at Yihua Timber’s and New Classic’s verification. On May 22, 2009, Yihua Timber provided the revised U.S. sales and FOP databases. On May 21, 2009 Yihua Timber submitted unsolicited, untimely new factual information, which the Department rejected on May 26, 2009. See Letter from the Department, regarding ‘‘Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China: Rejection of New Factual Information,’’ dated May 26, 2009. Interested parties submitted case and rebuttal briefs on May 27, 2009, and June 4, 2009, respectively. On May 28, 2009, we rejected Yihua Timber’s case brief due to untimely new information included in Yihua Timber’s case brief. See Letter from the Department, regarding, ‘‘Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China: Rejection of Case Brief,’’ dated May 28, 2009. On June 6, 2009, Yihua Timber PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 41375 resubmitted its case brief with the new information redacted. On June 10, 2009, we rejected the rebuttal brief of Lifestyle Enterprise, Inc., Trade Masters of Texas, Inc., and Emerald Home Furnishings, LLC (collectively ‘‘Importers’ Coalition’’) and the rebuttal brief of COE, Ltd. due to untimely new arguments included in their rebuttal briefs. See Letters from the Department, regarding ‘‘Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China: Rejection of New Argument,’’ dated June 10, 2009. On June 11, 2009, the Importers’ Coalition and COE, Ltd. resubmitted their respective rebuttal briefs with the new arguments redacted. On June 12, 2009, we rejected Yihua Timber’s rebuttal brief due to an untimely new argument included its rebuttal brief. See Letter from the Department, regarding ‘‘Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China: Rejection of Argument,’’ dated June 12, 2009. On June 15, 2009, Yihua Timber resubmitted its rebuttal brief with the new argument redacted. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in these reviews 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, ‘‘Antidumping Duty Administrative and New Shipper Reviews of Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2007 Antidumping Duty Administrative and New Shipper Reviews,’’ dated August 10, 2009, which is hereby adopted by this notice (‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’). A list of the issues which parties raised and to which we respond in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as an Appendix. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file in the Central Records Unit, Main Commerce Building, Room 1117, and is accessible on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the memorandum are identical in content. Period of Review The POR is January 1, 2007, through December 31, 2007. Scope of the Order The product covered by the order is wooden bedroom furniture. Wooden bedroom furniture is generally, but not E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM 17AUN1 41376 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES exclusively, designed, manufactured, and offered for sale in coordinated groups, or bedrooms, in which all of the individual pieces are of approximately the same style and approximately the same material and/or finish. The subject merchandise is made substantially of wood products, including both solid wood and also engineered wood products made from wood particles, fibers, or other wooden materials such as plywood, strand board, particle board, and fiberboard, with or without wood veneers, wood overlays, or laminates, with or without non–wood components or trim such as metal, marble, leather, glass, plastic, or other resins, and whether or not assembled, completed, or finished. The subject merchandise includes the following items: (1) wooden beds such as loft beds, bunk beds, and other beds; (2) wooden headboards for beds (whether stand–alone or attached to side rails), wooden footboards for beds, wooden side rails for beds, and wooden canopies for beds; (3) night tables, night stands, dressers, commodes, bureaus, mule chests, gentlemen’s chests, bachelor’s chests, lingerie chests, wardrobes, vanities, chessers, chifforobes, and wardrobe–type cabinets; (4) dressers with framed glass mirrors that are attached to, incorporated in, sit on, or hang over the dresser; (5) chests–on-chests,1 highboys,2 lowboys,3 chests of drawers,4 chests,5 door chests,6 chiffoniers,7 hutches,8 and armoires;9 (6) desks, 1 A chest-on-chest is typically a tall chest-ofdrawers in two or more sections (or appearing to be in two or more sections), with one or two sections mounted (or appearing to be mounted) on a slightly larger chest; also known as a tallboy. 2 A highboy is typically a tall chest of drawers usually composed of a base and a top section with drawers, and supported on four legs or a small chest (often 15 inches or more in height). 3 A lowboy is typically a short chest of drawers, not more than four feet high, normally set on short legs. 4 A chest of drawers is typically a case containing drawers for storing clothing. 5 A chest is typically a case piece taller than it is wide featuring a series of drawers and with or without one or more doors for storing clothing. The piece can either include drawers or be designed as a large box incorporating a lid. 6 A door chest is typically a chest with hinged doors to store clothing, whether or not containing drawers. The piece may also include shelves for televisions and other entertainment electronics. 7 A chiffonier is typically a tall and narrow chest of drawers normally used for storing undergarments and lingerie, often with mirror(s) attached. 8 A hutch is typically an open case of furniture with shelves that typically sits on another piece of furniture and provides storage for clothes. 9 An armoire is typically a tall cabinet or wardrobe (typically 50 inches or taller), with doors, and with one or more drawers (either exterior below or above the doors or interior behind the doors), shelves, and/or garment rods or other apparatus for storing clothes. Bedroom armoires may also be used VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:55 Aug 14, 2009 Jkt 217001 computer stands, filing cabinets, book cases, or writing tables that are attached to or incorporated in the subject merchandise; and (7) other bedroom furniture consistent with the above list. The scope of the order excludes the following items: (1) seats, chairs, benches, couches, sofas, sofa beds, stools, and other seating furniture; (2) mattresses, mattress supports (including box springs), infant cribs, water beds, and futon frames; (3) office furniture, such as desks, stand–up desks, computer cabinets, filing cabinets, credenzas, and bookcases; (4) dining room or kitchen furniture such as dining tables, chairs, servers, sideboards, buffets, corner cabinets, china cabinets, and china hutches; (5) other non– bedroom furniture, such as television cabinets, cocktail tables, end tables, occasional tables, wall systems, book cases, and entertainment systems; (6) bedroom furniture made primarily of wicker, cane, osier, bamboo or rattan; (7) side rails for beds made of metal if sold separately from the headboard and footboard; (8) bedroom furniture in which bentwood parts predominate;10 (9) jewelry armories;11 (10) cheval mirrors;12 (11) certain metal to hold television receivers and/or other audiovisual entertainment systems. 10 As used herein, bentwood means solid wood made pliable. Bentwood is wood that is brought to a curved shape by bending it while made pliable with moist heat or other agency and then set by cooling or drying. See Customs’ Headquarters’ Ruling Letter 043859, dated May 17, 1976. 11 Any armoire, cabinet or other accent item for the purpose of storing jewelry, not to exceed 24″ in width, 18″ in depth, and 49″ in height, including a minimum of 5 lined drawers lined with felt or felt-like material, at least one side door (whether or not the door is lined with felt or felt-like material), with necklace hangers, and a flip-top lid with inset mirror. See Issues and Decision Memorandum from Laurel LaCivita to Laurie Parkhill, Office Director, Concerning Jewelry Armoires and Cheval Mirrors in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China, dated August 31, 2004. See also Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review and Revocation in Part, 71 FR 38621 (July 7, 2006). 12 Cheval mirrors are any framed, tiltable mirror with a height in excess of 50″ that is mounted on a floor-standing, hinged base. Additionally, the scope of the order excludes combination cheval mirror/jewelry cabinets. The excluded merchandise is an integrated piece consisting of a cheval mirror, i.e., a framed tiltable mirror with a height in excess of 50 inches, mounted on a floor-standing, hinged base, the cheval mirror serving as a door to a cabinet back that is integral to the structure of the mirror and which constitutes a jewelry cabinet lined with fabric, having necklace and bracelet hooks, mountings for rings and shelves, with or without a working lock and key to secure the contents of the jewelry cabinet back to the cheval mirror, and no drawers anywhere on the integrated piece. The fully assembled piece must be at least 50 inches in height, 14.5 inches in width, and 3 inches in depth. See Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 parts;13 (12) mirrors that do not attach to, incorporate in, sit on, or hang over a dresser if they are not designed and marketed to be sold in conjunction with a dresser as part of a dresser–mirror set; and (13) upholstered beds.14 Imports of subject merchandise are classified under subheading 9403.50.9040 of the HTSUS as ‘‘wooden . . . beds’’ and under subheading 9403.50.9080 of the HTSUS as ‘‘other . . . wooden furniture of a kind used in the bedroom.’’ In addition, wooden headboards for beds, wooden footboards for beds, wooden side rails for beds, and wooden canopies for beds may also be entered under subheading 9403.50.9040 of the HTSUS as ‘‘parts of wood’’ and framed glass mirrors may also be entered under subheading 7009.92.5000 of the HTSUS as ‘‘glass mirrors . . . framed.’’ This order covers all wooden bedroom furniture meeting the above description, regardless of tariff classification. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive. Verification As provided in section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘Act’’), we verified the information submitted by Yihua Timber, New Classic, and Sunshine. See Memorandum from Erin Begnal, Program Manager, Office 8 and Sergio Balbontin, International Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 8 to Wendy J. Frankel, Director, Office 8, ‘‘Verification of the Sales and Factors of Production Response of Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China,’’ of Changed Circumstances Review and Determination To Revoke Order in Part, 72 FR 948 (January 9, 2007). 13 Metal furniture parts and unfinished furniture parts made of wood products (as defined above) that are not otherwise specifically named in this scope (i.e., wooden headboards for beds, wooden footboards for beds, wooden side rails for beds, and wooden canopies for beds) and that do not possess the essential character of wooden bedroom furniture in an unassembled, incomplete, or unfinished form. Such parts are usually classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) subheading 9403.90.7000. 14 Upholstered beds that are completely upholstered, i.e., containing filling material and completely covered in sewn genuine leather, synthetic leather, or natural or synthetic decorative fabric. To be excluded, the entire bed (headboards, footboards, and side rails) must be upholstered except for bed feet, which may be of wood, metal, or any other material and which are no more than nine inches in height from the floor. See Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review and Determination to Revoke Order in Part, 72 FR 7013 (February 14, 2007). E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM 17AUN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices (May 18, 2009) (‘‘Yihua Timber Verification Report’’); see also Memorandum from Robert Bolling, Program Manager, Office 4 and Gene Degnan, Acting Program Manager, Office 8 to Wendy J. Frankel, Director, Office 8, ‘‘Verification of the U.S. Sales Questionnaire Responses of Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry Co., Ltd. and their U.S. Subsidiary New Classic Home Furnishing, Inc. in the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China’’ (May 18, 2009) (‘‘New Classic Verification Report’’), and Memorandum from Erin Begnal, Program Manager, Office 8 and Sergio Balbontin, International Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 8 to Wendy J. Frankel, Director, Office 8, ‘‘Verification Report of the Sales and Factors Response of Dongguan Sunshine Furniture Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China’’ (May 7, 2009) (‘‘Sunshine Verification Report’’) on file in the CRU. For the verified companies, we used standard verification procedures, including examination of relevant accounting and production records, as well as original source documents provided by respondents. For further details on the verifications, see the Yihua Timber Verification Report, New Classic Verification Report, and Sunshine Verification Report. New Shipper Status For these final results, no party has contested the bona fides of either Golden Well’s or Sunshine’s sales and we continue to find, as in the Preliminary Results, that both Golden Well and Sunshine have met the requirements to qualify as a new shipper during the POR and that their sales of wooden bedroom furniture to the United States are appropriate transactions for a new shipper. mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on an analysis of the comments received, the Department has made certain changes in the margin calculations. For the final results, the Department has made the following changes: Surrogate Value Issues • The Department revised the surrogate value for Yihua Timber’s poplar, ash, and pine, veneers, and plywood using World Trade Atlas (‘‘WTA’’) data rather than Philippine National Statistics Office (‘‘NSO’’) data as used in the Preliminary Results. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:55 Aug 14, 2009 Jkt 217001 3. See also ‘‘Final Results of the 2007 Administrative and New Shipper Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Order on Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China: Surrogate Value Memorandum,’’ dated August 10, 2009 (‘‘SV Memo’’). • The Department revised the surrogate value for Yihua Timber’s plywood using WTA data rather than NSO data as used in the Preliminary Results. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 4. See also SV Memo. • The Department revised the surrogate value for Yihua Timber’s medium density fiberboard (‘‘MDF’’). See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 5. • The Department revised the surrogate value for Yihua Timber’s particle board. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 8. See also SV Memo. • The Department will continue using the Camarines Sur data used in the Preliminary Results, to calculate electricity and truck freight; however, we will not inflate this data for the final results. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 10 and 11, respectively. See also SV Memo. • The Department revised the selection of surrogate financial statements. We continued to use the financial statements for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2007, from the following producers: Maitland–Smith Cebu, Inc. (‘‘Maitland–Smith’’); Casa Cebuana Incorporated (‘‘Casa Cebuana’’); Diretso Design Furniture Inc., (‘‘Diresto’’); Global Classic Designs, Inc., (‘‘Global’’); and Las Palmas Furniture, Inc., (‘‘Las Palmas’’), all of which are Philippine producers of comparable merchandise. In addition, we used the financial statements for the same period from Arkane International Corporation; Giardini Sole Manufacturing and Trading Corporation (‘‘Giardini’’); and SCT Furnishing Corporation, also Phillippine producers of comparable merchandise. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comments 14–16 for discussion of financial ratios. See also SV Memo. • The Department made changes from the Preliminary Results in calculating the surrogate financial ratios for the following surrogate companies: Maitland–Smith, Casa PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 41377 Cebuana, Diretso, and Las Palmas. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comments 14–16 for a discussion of financial ratios. See also SV Memo. Yihua Timber–Specific Issues • The Department corrected the surrogate value for Yihua Timber’s brokerage and handling charge. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 13. • The Department adjusted Yihua Timber’s warehousing expense paid to its affiliated party to reflect market value. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 19. • The Department corrected its preliminary finding of facts available as to Yihua Timber’s FOP weights. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 20. • The Department is granting Yihua Timber a by–product offset. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 21. • The Department corrected its preliminary finding of partial adverse facts available as to Yihua Timber’s affiliate (Company A) sales. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 22. • The Department corrected its preliminary finding of facts available as to Yihua Timber’s inventory carrying costs. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 23. • The Department corrected Yihua Timber’s transportation expenses with respect to its Channel 1 sales. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 24. • The Department corrected programming errors as to Yihua Timber’s gross weight, material conversion rates, damaged sales, a miscoded CONNUMU, and recalculation of USDUTYU, CREDITU, and WARRU. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 24. Separate Rates In proceedings involving non–market economy (‘‘NME’’) countries, the Department begins with a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are subject to government control and, thus, should be assigned a single antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the Department’s policy to assign all exporters of merchandise subject to an investigation in an NME country this single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is sufficiently independent so as to be entitled to a separate rate. See Final Determination of E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM 17AUN1 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 41378 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers From the People’s Republic of China, 56 FR 20588 (May 6, 1991), as amplified by Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide From the People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994). In the Preliminary Results, we stated that the following companies demonstrated their eligibility for separate–rate status: 1) Yihua Timber; 2) Brother Furniture Manufacture Co., Ltd.; 3) Dongguan Mingsheng Furniture Co., Ltd.; 4) Fujian Lianfu Forestry Co., Ltd. aka Fujian Wonder Pacific, Inc. (Dare Group); 5) Fuzhou Huan Mei Furniture Co., Ltd. (Dare Group); 6) Jiangsu Dare Furniture Co., Ltd. (Dare Group); 7) Shenzhen Shen Long Hang Industry Co., Ltd.; 8) Xingli Arts & Crafts Factory of Yangchun; and 9) Zhongshan Gainwell Furniture Co., Ltd. Also, in the Preliminary Results, we stated that the new shipper, Sunshine, demonstrated its eligibility for separate–rate status. For these final results, we continue to find that evidence placed on the record of these reviews demonstrates that these companies provided information that shows both a de jure and de facto absence of government control with respect to their respective exports of the merchandise under review, and, thus are eligible for separate–rate status. With respect to the following companies not selected for individual examination in this review: 1) COE, Ltd.; 2) Decca Furniture Limited; 3) Dongguan Landmark Furniture Products, Ltd.; 4) Dongguan Yihaiwei Furniture Limited; 5) Hwang Ho International Holdings Limited; 6) Meikangchi (Nantong) Furniture Company, Ltd.; 7) Qingdao Shengchang Wooden Co., Ltd.; 8) Transworld (Zhangzhou) Furniture Co., Ltd.; and 9) Winny Universal, Ltd., Zhongshan Winny Furniture Ltd., Winny Overseas, Ltd., we continue to grant a separate rate to these companies because they are wholly owned by individuals or companies located in a market economy. With respect to the new shipper, Golden Well, we continue to grant it a separate rate because it is wholly owned by individuals or companies located in a market economy. As wholly foreign–owned companies, we have no evidence indicating that these companies are under the control of the PRC. Therefore, a separate–rate analysis is not necessary to determine whether these companies are independent from government control. See Preliminary Results. See also Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Creatine Monohydrate from the People’s Republic of China, 64 FR 71104, 71104– VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:55 Aug 14, 2009 Jkt 217001 05 (December 20, 1999) (where the respondent was wholly foreign–owned and, thus, qualified for a separate rate). The following five exporters did not provide, as appropriate, either a separate rate application or certification: 1) Dongguan Bon Ten Furniture Co., Ltd. (‘‘Bon Ten’’) (see Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 29); 2) Dongguan Qingxi Xinyi Craft Furniture Factory (Joyce Art Factory) (‘‘Joyce Art’’); 3) Tianjin Sande Fairwood Furniture Co. Ltd. (‘‘Sande’’); 4) Yida Co. Ltd., Yitai Worldwide Ltd., Yili Co., Ltd., and Yetbuild Co., Ltd. (collectively ‘‘Yida’’); and 5) Hamilton & Spill, Ltd. (‘‘Hamilton’’), and therefore have not demonstrated their eligibility for separate rate status in this administrative review. In the Preliminary Results, we found that Dream Rooms Furniture (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.’s (‘‘Dream Rooms’’) separate–rate certification was deficient, and thus, Dream Rooms did not demonstrate its eligibility for separate–rate status in this administrative review. See section 776(a)(2)(D) of the Act. Consequently, for the final results, the Department is continuing to treat Dream Rooms as part of the PRC–wide entity. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 30. In addition, while we found Orient International Holding Shanghai Foreign Trading Co., Ltd. (‘‘Orient International’’) to be part of the PRC– wide entity in the Preliminary Results, we are granting Orient International a separate rate for purposes of the final results. However, we continue to find that Orient International did not act to the best of its ability in this administrative review, and thus we have assigned Orient International a rate based on adverse facts available (‘‘AFA’’) for the final results. See ‘‘Adverse Facts Available’’ section below. See also Issues and Decision Memorandum Comment 32. Adverse Facts Available Sections 776(a)(1) and (2) of the Act provide that the Department shall apply ‘‘facts otherwise available’’ if necessary information is not on the record or an interested party or any other person (A) withholds information that has been requested, (B) fails to provide information within the deadlines established, or in the form and manner requested by the Department, subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782, (C) significantly impedes a proceeding, or (D) provides information that cannot be verified as provided by section 782(i) of the Act. Where the Department determines that a response to a request for information does not comply with the PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 request, section 782(d) of the Act provides that the Department will so inform the party submitting the response and will, to the extent practicable, provide that party the opportunity to remedy or explain the deficiency. If the party fails to remedy the deficiency within the applicable time limits and subject to section 782(e) of the Act, the Department may disregard all or part of the original and subsequent responses, as appropriate. Section 782(e) of the Act provides that the Department ‘‘shall not decline to consider information that is submitted by an interested party and is necessary to the determination but does not meet all applicable requirements established by the administering authority’’ if the information is timely, can be verified, is not so incomplete that it cannot be used, and if the interested party acted to the best of its ability in providing the information. Where all of these conditions are met, the statute requires the Department to use the information if it can do so without undue difficulties. Section 776(b) of the Act further provides that the Department may use an adverse inference in applying the facts otherwise available when a party has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with a request for information. Section 776(b) of the Act also authorizes the Department to use as AFA information derived from the petition, the final determination, a previous administrative review, or other information placed on the record. Orient International In the Preliminary Results, we determined that because Orient International ceased participating in this administrative review, Orient International’s information could not be verified. As a result, we found that Orient International did not demonstrate its entitlement to a separate rate and was, therefore, subject to the PRC–wide rate. See Preliminary Results. As stated above, for the final results, we no longer find Orient International to be part of the PRC–entity. Orient International’s separate rate certification demonstrates that Orient International provided information that shows both a de jure and de facto absence of government control with respect to its exports of the merchandise under review, and, thus is eligible for separate–rate status. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 32. However, we find that the application of facts available is warranted. In accordance with sections 776(a)(2)(A) through (D), by not responding to the Department’s questionnaire and E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM 17AUN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES informing the Department that it would no longer participate in the administrative review as a mandatory respondent, we find that Orient International withheld information requested, failed to produce the requested information in a timely manner, significantly impeded the proceeding, and did not allow for verification, as it had ceased cooperating with the Department. Moreover, pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act, the Department finds that Orient International failed to cooperate to the best of its ability by not providing a questionnaire response that was essential to the calculation of the antidumping duty margin. Orient International was provided an ample amount of time to submit a response to the Department’s antidumping duty questionnaire. At no point did Orient International seek clarification from the Department on the specific requests for information, but rather submitted a letter to the Department indicating that it would no longer respond to the Department’s requests for information and that it would no longer participate in the proceeding as a mandatory respondent. Because Orient International failed to cooperate with the Department in this matter, we find it appropriate to use an inference that is adverse to the interests of Orient International in selecting from among the facts otherwise available. See section 776(b) of the Act. By doing so, we will ensure that Orient International will not obtain a more favorable result by failing to cooperate had it cooperated fully in this investigation. See Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, H.R. Doc. 103–316, vol. 1 (1994) at 870 (‘‘SAA’’). See also Issues and Decision Memorandum Comment 32. The PRC–Wide Entity Because we begin with the presumption that all companies within an NME country are subject to government control and because only the companies listed under the ‘‘Final Results Margins’’ section, below, have overcome that presumption, we are applying a single antidumping rate (i.e., the PRC–wide rate) to all other exporters of subject merchandise from the PRC. These other companies did not demonstrate entitlement to a separate rate. See, e.g., Synthetic Indigo From the People’s Republic of China; Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 65 FR 25706, 25707 (May 3, 2000). The PRC–wide rate applies to all entries of subject merchandise except for entries from the VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:55 Aug 14, 2009 Jkt 217001 respondents that are listed in the ‘‘Final Results Margins’’ section, below. The Department based the margin for the PRC–wide entity on AFA. See Preliminary Results. Pursuant to section 776(a) of the Act, the Department found that because the PRC–wide entity failed to respond to the Department’s questionnaires, withheld or failed to provide information in a timely manner or in the form or manner requested by the Department, submitted information that could not be verified, or otherwise impeded the process, it was appropriate to apply a dumping margin for the PRC– wide entity using facts otherwise available on the record. The Department further determined that an adverse inference was appropriate because the PRC–wide entity failed to respond to requests for information and therefore failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability. See ‘‘Selection of AFA Rate,’’ below. Selection of AFA Rate In deciding which facts to use as AFA, section 776(b) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.308(c) authorize the Department to rely on information derived from (1) the petition, (2) a final determination in the investigation, (3) any previous review or determination, or (4) any information placed on the record. In reviews, the Department normally selects, as AFA, the highest rate on the record of any segment of the proceeding. See, e.g., Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 68 FR 19504, 19506 (April 21, 2003). The Court of International Trade (‘‘CIT’’) and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit have consistently upheld the Department’s practice in this regard. See Rhone Poulenc, Inc. v. United States, 899 F.2d 1185, 1190 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (‘‘Rhone Poulenc’’); NSK Ltd. v. United States, 346 F. Supp. 2d 1312, 1335 (CIT 2004) (upholding a 73.55 percent total AFA rate, the highest available dumping margin from a different respondent in a less than fair value investigation); see also Kompass Food Trading Int’l v. United States, 24 CIT 678, 680 (2000) (upholding a 51.16 percent total AFA rate, the highest available dumping margin from a different, fully cooperative respondent); and Shanghai Taoen Int’l Trading Co., Ltd. v. United States, 360 F. Supp 2d 1339, 1348 (CIT 2005) (upholding a 223.01 percent total AFA rate, the highest available dumping margin from a different respondent in a previous administrative review). The Department’s practice when selecting an adverse rate from among PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 41379 the possible sources of information is to ensure that the margin is sufficiently adverse ‘‘so as to effectuate the statutory purposes of the adverse facts available rule to induce respondents to provide the Department with complete and accurate information in a timely manner.’’ See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value: Static Random Access Memory Semiconductors from Taiwan, 63 FR 8909, 8932 (February 23, 1998). The Department’s practice also ensures ‘‘that the party does not obtain a more favorable result by failing to cooperate than if it had cooperated fully.’’ See, SAA at 870; see also Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value: Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp from Brazil, 69 FR 76910, 76912 (December 23, 2004); D&L Supply Co. v. United States, 113 F.3d 1220, 1223 (Fed. Cir. 1997). In choosing the appropriate balance between providing respondents with an incentive to respond accurately and imposing a rate that is reasonably related to the respondent’s prior commercial activity, selecting the highest prior margin ‘‘reflects a common sense inference that the highest prior margin is the most probative evidence of current margins because, if it were not so, the importer, knowing of the rule, would have produced current information showing the margin to be less.’’ Rhone Poulenc, 899 F.2d at 1190. Consistent with the statute, court precedent, and its normal practice, the Department has assigned the rate of 216.01 percent, the highest rate on the record of any segment of the proceeding, a calculated company–specific rate in a new shipper review of wooden bedroom furniture from the PRC, to Orient International and to the PRC–wide entity,15 as AFA. See Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of the 2004–2005 Semi–Annual New Shipper Reviews, 71 FR 70739 (December 6, 2006) (‘‘Final 04–05 New Shipper Reviews’’). Corroboration of Secondary Information Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies on secondary information rather than on information obtained in the course of an investigation or review, it shall, to the extent practicable, corroborate that information from independent sources that are reasonably at its disposal. Secondary information is defined as information derived from the petition that gave rise to the investigation or 15 Bon Ten, Dream Rooms, Hamilton, Joyce Art, Sande, and Yida are all part of the PRC-wide entity. E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM 17AUN1 41380 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices review, the final determination concerning the subject merchandise, or any previous review under section 751 concerning the subject merchandise. See SAA at 870. Corroborate means that the Department will satisfy itself that the secondary information to be used has probative value. Id. To corroborate secondary information, the Department will, to the extent practicable, examine the reliability and relevance of the information to be used. See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished from Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, and Components Thereof, from Japan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 57391, 57392 (November 6, 1996) (unchanged in the final determination, Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Termination in Part: Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished from Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, and Components Thereof, from Japan, 62 FR 11825 (March 13, 1997)). Independent sources used to corroborate such evidence may include, for example, published price lists, official import statistics and customs data, and information obtained from interested parties during the particular investigation. See Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: High and Ultra–High Voltage Ceramic Station Post Insulators from Japan, 68 FR 35627 (June 16, 2003) (unchanged in final determination, Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: High and Ultra High Voltage Ceramic Station Post Insulators from Japan, 68 FR 62560 (November 5, 2003)); and Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Live Swine From Canada, 70 FR 12181, 12183–84 (March 11, 2005). The AFA rate that the Department is now using was determined in the published final results of a previous new shipper review. See Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of the 2004–2005 Semi–Annual New Shipper Reviews, 71 FR 70739, 70741 (December 6, 2006). In that new shipper review, the Department calculated a company– specific rate, which was above the PRC– wide rate established in the investigation. Because this rate is a company–specific calculated rate, we have determined this rate to be reliable. With respect to the relevance aspect of corroboration, the Department will consider information reasonably at its disposal to determine whether a margin continues to have relevance. Where circumstances indicate that the selected margin is not appropriate as AFA, the Department will disregard the margin and determine an appropriate margin. See Fresh Cut Flowers from Mexico: Final Results of Antidumping Administrative Review, 61 FR 6812, 6814 (February 22, 1996) (where the Department disregarded the highest margin in that case as adverse best information available (the predecessor to facts available) because the margin was based on another company’s uncharacteristic business expense resulting in an unusually high margin). Similarly, the Department does not apply a margin that has been discredited. See D&L Supply Co. v. United States, 113 F. 3d 1220, 1221 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (ruling that the Department will not use a margin that has been judicially invalidated). To assess the relevancy of the rate used, the Department compared the margin calculations of the mandatory respondent in the instant administrative review with the 216.01 percent calculated rate from the 2004–2005 new shipper review. The Department found that the margin of 216.01 percent was within the range of the margins calculated on the record of the instant administrative review. Because the record of this administrative review contains margins within the range of 216.01 percent, we determine that the rate from the 2004–2005 review continues to be relevant for use in this administrative review. As the adverse margin is both reliable and relevant, we determine that it has probative value. Accordingly, we determine that this rate meets the corroboration criterion established in section 776(c) of the Act that secondary information have probative value. As a result, the Department determines that the margin is corroborated for the purposes of this administrative review and may reasonably be applied to the PRC–wide entity as AFA. Final Results Margins We determine that the following weighted–average percentage margins exist for the POR: Administrative Review mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Exporter Antidumping Duty Percent Margin Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry co., Ltd. (a.k.a. Yihua Timber Industry Co., Ltd.) ................................. Brother Furniture Manufacture Co., Ltd. ....................................................................................................... COE, Ltd. ....................................................................................................................................................... Decca Furniture Limited ................................................................................................................................ Dongguan Landmark Furniture Products Ltd. ............................................................................................... Dongguan Mingsheng Furniture Co., Ltd. ..................................................................................................... Dongguan Yihaiwei Furniture Limited ........................................................................................................... Fujian Lianfu Forestry Co., Ltd. aka Fujian Wonder Pacific , Inc. (Dare Group) ......................................... Fuzhou Huan Mei Furniture Co., Ltd. (Dare Group) ..................................................................................... Jiangsu Dare Furniture Co., Ltd. (Dare Group) ............................................................................................ Hwang Ho International Holdings Limited ..................................................................................................... Meikangchi (Nantong) Furniture Company Ltd. ............................................................................................ Orient International Holding Shanghai Foreign Trading Co., Ltd. ................................................................. Qingdao Shengchang Wooden Co., Ltd. ...................................................................................................... Shenzhen Shen Long Hang Industry Co., Ltd. ............................................................................................. Transworld (Zhangzhou) Furniture Co., Ltd. ................................................................................................. Winny Universal, Ltd., Zhongshan Winny Furniture Ltd., Winny Overseas, Ltd. ......................................... Xingli Arts & Crafts Factory of Yangchun ..................................................................................................... Zhongshan Gainwell Furniture Co., Ltd. ....................................................................................................... PRC–Wide Entity16 ........................................................................................................................................ 16 Bon 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 216.01% 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 29.98% 216.01% Ten, Dream Rooms, Hamilton, Joyce Art, Sande, and Yida are all part of the PRC-wide entity. VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:55 Aug 14, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM 17AUN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices 41381 New Shipper Review Exporter / Producer Combination Antidumping Duty Percent Margin Golden Well International (HK), Ltd. / Producer: Zhangzhou XYM Furniture Product Co., Ltd. .................. Dongguan Sunshine Furniture Co., Ltd. /Dongguan Sunshine Furniture Co., Ltd. ...................................... Assessment Rates The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review. For assessment purposes, we calculated exporter/importer- (or customer) -specific assessment rates for merchandise subject to this review. Where appropriate, we calculated an ad valorem rate for each importer (or customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for reviewed sales to that party by the total entered values associated with those transactions. For duty– assessment rates calculated on this basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting ad valorem rate against the entered customs values for the subject merchandise. Where appropriate, we calculated a per–unit rate for each importer (or customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for reviewed sales to that party by the total sales quantity associated with those transactions. For duty–assessment rates calculated on this basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting per–unit rate against the entered quantity of the subject merchandise. Where an importer- (or customer) -specific assessment rate is de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent), the Department will instruct CBP to assess that importer (or customer’s) entries of subject merchandise without regard to antidumping duties. We intend to instruct CBP to liquidate entries containing subject merchandise exported by the PRC–wide entity at the PRC–wide rate we determine in the final results of this review. The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review. mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Cash–Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review and new shipper reviews for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: 1) for the exporters listed above, the cash VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:55 Aug 14, 2009 Jkt 217001 deposit rate will be the rates shown for those companies; 2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non– PRC exporters not listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter–specific rate published for the most recent period; 3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC– wide rate of 216.01 percent; and 4) for all non–PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporters that supplied that non–PRC exporter. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further notice. Notification of Interested Parties This notice also serves as a final 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 the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (‘‘APOs’’) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under the APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction. Disclosure We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). We are issuing and publishing these final results and notice in accordance PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 0% 0% with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: August 10, 2009. Carole Showers, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations. Appendix Comment 1: Use of the Philippines as Surrogate Country Comment 2: Net Import Quantity Philippines Comment 3: Surrogate Value for Poplar, Ash and Pine, Veneers and Plywood Comment 4: Surrogate Value for Plywood Comment 5: Surrogate Value for Medium Density Fiberboard (MDF) Comment 6: HS Code for Calculation of the Surrogate Value for Pine Comment 7: Surrogate Value for Sealer Comment 8: Surrogate Value for Particle Board Comment 9: Surrogate Value for Labor Comment 10: Surrogate Value for Energy Comment 11: Surrogate Value for Truck Freight Comment 12: Treatment of Ocean Freight Expense Comment 13: Treatment of and Surrogate Value for Brokerage & Handling Comment 14: Selection of Financial Statements Comment 15: Treatment of Works–inProgress and Changes in Finished Goods Inventory in Surrogate Financial Ratios Comment 16: Treatment of Indirect Materials, Indirect Labor & Subcontractor Expenses Comment 17: Constructed Export Price Offset Comment 18: Yield Ratio Calculation Comment 19: Treatment of Warehousing Expense Comment 20: Treatment of Yihua Timber’s FOP and Gross Weights Comment 21: By–Product Offset Comment 22: Yihua Timber Affiliate’s (Company A’s) Sales Comment 23: Inventory Carrying Costs Comment 24: Inland Freight for Yihua Timber’s Channel 1 Sales Comment 25: SAS Programming Changes and Error Comment 26: Use of Combination Rates Comment 27: Absorption of Antidumping Duties Comment 28: Cash Deposit Instruction for Companies that Lost Their Separate Rate E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM 17AUN1 41382 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices Comment 29: Whether to Rescind the Review with Respect to Dongguan Bon Ten Furniture Co., Ltd. Comment 30: Whether to Grant Dream Rooms Furniture (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. a Separate Rate Comment 31: Whether the Department Failed to Timely Initiate the Administrative Review Thereby Erroneously Choosing Orient International as a Mandatory Respondent Comment 32: Separate Rate Status of Orient International [FR Doc. E9–19666 Filed 8–14–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [Docket 34–2009] mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Foreign-Trade Zone 49—Newark, New Jersey Area, Application for Subzone Status, The Swatch Group (U.S.) Inc. (Watches, Jewelry Products and Leather Goods), Secaucus, New Jersey An application has been submitted to the Foreign–Trade Zones Board (the Board) by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, grantee of FTZ 49, requesting special–purpose subzone status for the distribution facility of the Swatch Group (U.S.) Inc. (Swatch), located in Secaucus, New Jersey. The application was submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Foreign–Trade Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a– 81u), and the regulations of the Foreign– Trade Zones Board (15 CFR part 400). It was formally filed on August 7, 2009. The Swatch facility (56,110 sq. ft., 1 acre, 160 employees) is located at 55 Metro Way, Secaucus, New Jersey. It is used for the receipt, handling, packaging, and distribution of watches, jewelry products, and leather watch cases. All of the products are sourced from abroad and some 10–15% will be exported. FTZ procedures could exempt Swatch from customs duty payments on the foreign goods exported from the proposed subzone. On domestic sales, the company would be able to defer duty payments until merchandise is shipped from the facility and entered for consumption. Certain logistical/supply chain management efficiencies would also be realized through the use of CBP weekly entry procedures. The application indicates that the savings from FTZ procedures would help improve the facility’s international competitiveness. In accordance with the Board’s regulations, Claudia Hausler of the FTZ VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:55 Aug 14, 2009 Jkt 217001 Staff is designated examiner to evaluate and analyze the facts and information presented in the application and case record and report findings and recommendations to the Board. Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions (original and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the Board’s Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is October 16, 2009. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period to November 2, 2009. A copy of the application will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign–Trade Zones Board, Room 2111, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230–0002 and in the ‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the Board’s Web site, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz. For further information, contact Claudia Hausler at ClaudialHausler@ita.doc.gov, or (202) 482–1379. Dated: August 7, 2009. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E9–19677 Filed 8–14–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [Order No. 1640] Grant of Authority for Subzone Status, Hoku Materials, Inc. (Polysilicon), Pocatello, Idaho Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign–Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), the Foreign– Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order: Whereas, the Foreign–Trade Zones Act provides for ‘‘ . . . the establishment . . . of foreign–trade zones in ports of entry of the United States, to expedite and encourage foreign commerce, and for other purposes,’’ and authorizes the Foreign–Trade Zones Board to grant to qualified corporations the privilege of establishing foreign–trade zones in or adjacent to U.S. Customs and Border Protection ports of entry; Whereas, the Board’s regulations (15 CFR Part 400) provide for the establishment of special–purpose subzones when existing zone facilities cannot serve the specific use involved, and when the activity results in a significant public benefit and is in the public interest; PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Whereas, Boundary County, Idaho, grantee of FTZ 242, has made application to the Board for authority to establish special–purpose subzone status at the polysilicon manufacturing plant of Hoku Materials, Inc., located in Pocatello, Idaho (FTZ Docket 53–2008, filed 10/03/2008, and amended 12/31/ 2008); Whereas, notice inviting public comment has been given in the Federal Register (73 FR 59597–59598, 10/09/ 2008); and, Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner’s report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations would be satisfied, and that approval of the application, as amended, would be in the public interest, if approval were subject to the condition listed below; Now, therefore, the Board hereby grants authority for subzone status for activity related to the manufacture of polysilicon at the Hoku Materials, Inc., facility, located in Pocatello, Idaho (Subzone 242A), as described in the application and Federal Register notice, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations, including Section 400.28, and also subject to a restriction prohibiting any admission of silicon metal subject to an antidumping or countervailing duty order. Signed at Washington, DC, this 5th day of August 2009. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign–Trade Zones Board. Attest: Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E9–19675 Filed 8–14–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648–XO99 Incidental Takes of Marine Mammals During Specified Activities; LowEnergy Marine Seismic Survey in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean, August 2009 AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental take authorization. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM 17AUN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 157 (Monday, August 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41374-41382]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19666]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

A-570-890


Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of China: 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper 
Reviews

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

[[Page 41375]]

SUMMARY: On February 9, 2009, the Department of Commerce 
(``Department'') published its preliminary results and partial 
rescission in the antidumping duty administrative review and new 
shipper reviews (``NSRs'') of wooden bedroom furniture from the 
People's Republic of China (``PRC''). The period of review (``POR'') 
for the administrative review and the new shipper reviews is January 1, 
2007, through December 31, 2007. In the administrative review, we have 
determined that the participating mandatory respondent, Guangdong Yihua 
Timber Industry Co., Ltd. (``Yihua Timber''), made sales in the United 
States at prices below normal value. With respect to the remaining 
respondents in the administrative review, we have determined that these 
entities have provided sufficient evidence demonstrating that they are 
separate from the PRC-entity and, with the exception of Orient 
International Holding Shanghai Foreign Trading Co. Ltd. (``Orient 
International''), we have assigned a margin based on the rate 
calculated for Yihua Timber. For the NSRs, the Department also reviewed 
two exporter/producers, Golden Well International (HK), Ltd./Zhangzhou 
XYM Furniture Product Co., Ltd. (``Golden Well'') and Dongguan Sunshine 
Furniture Co., Ltd./Dongguan Sunshine Furniture Co., Ltd. 
(``Sunshine''). We invited interested parties to comment on our 
preliminary results in these reviews. Based on our analysis of the 
comments we received in these reviews, we made certain changes to our 
calculations for Yihua Timber and for the new shippers. The final 
dumping margins for these reviews are listed in the ``Final Results 
Margins'' section below.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 17, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Stolz or Sergio Balbontin, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
4474 and (202) 482-6478, respectively.

Background

    The Department published its preliminary results on February 9, 
2009. See Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative and New Shipper 
Reviews and Partial Rescission of Administrative Review, 74 FR 6372 
(February 9, 2009) (``Preliminary Results''). We invited parties to 
comment on the Preliminary Results. On February 24, 2009, and March 4, 
2009, the Department sent Yihua Timber the Fourth Supplemental 
Questionnaire and addendum, respectively. On March 17, 2009, Yihua 
Timber provided its response to the Fourth Supplemental Questionnaire. 
On February 24, 2009, March 10, 2009, March 20, 2009, and March 25, 
2009, Yihua Timber provided information on the weights of it products. 
On March 6, 2009, we received publicly available surrogate value 
information from Yihua Timber and American Furniture Manufacturers 
Committee for Legal Trade and Vaughan-Bassett Furniture Company 
(``Petitioners''). On March 16, 2009, we received rebuttal comments on 
the publicly available surrogate value information from Yihua Timber 
and the Petitioners.
    On April 20, 2009, the Department extended the deadline for the 
final results of the administrative and new shipper reviews to August 
10, 2009. See Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of 
China: Extension of Time Limit for the Final Results of the Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Reviews, 74 FR 17951 (April 
20, 2009).
    The Department conducted verification of Yihua Timber, Yihua 
Timber's U.S. subsidiary New Classic Home Furnishings, Inc.'s (``New 
Classic''), and Sunshine's data from April 6, 2009, to April 16, 2009, 
and April 22, 2009, to April 24, 2009. See ``Verification'' section, 
below, for additional information. On May 18, 2009, we requested that 
Yihua Timber submit revised U.S. sales and factors of production 
(``FOP'') databases pursuant to the minor corrections presented at 
Yihua Timber's and New Classic's verification. On May 22, 2009, Yihua 
Timber provided the revised U.S. sales and FOP databases.
    On May 21, 2009 Yihua Timber submitted unsolicited, untimely new 
factual information, which the Department rejected on May 26, 2009. See 
Letter from the Department, regarding ``Wooden Bedroom Furniture from 
the People's Republic of China: Rejection of New Factual Information,'' 
dated May 26, 2009.
    Interested parties submitted case and rebuttal briefs on May 27, 
2009, and June 4, 2009, respectively. On May 28, 2009, we rejected 
Yihua Timber's case brief due to untimely new information included in 
Yihua Timber's case brief. See Letter from the Department, regarding, 
``Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of China: 
Rejection of Case Brief,'' dated May 28, 2009. On June 6, 2009, Yihua 
Timber resubmitted its case brief with the new information redacted. On 
June 10, 2009, we rejected the rebuttal brief of Lifestyle Enterprise, 
Inc., Trade Masters of Texas, Inc., and Emerald Home Furnishings, LLC 
(collectively ``Importers' Coalition'') and the rebuttal brief of COE, 
Ltd. due to untimely new arguments included in their rebuttal briefs. 
See Letters from the Department, regarding ``Wooden Bedroom Furniture 
from the People's Republic of China: Rejection of New Argument,'' dated 
June 10, 2009. On June 11, 2009, the Importers' Coalition and COE, Ltd. 
resubmitted their respective rebuttal briefs with the new arguments 
redacted. On June 12, 2009, we rejected Yihua Timber's rebuttal brief 
due to an untimely new argument included its rebuttal brief. See Letter 
from the Department, regarding ``Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the 
People's Republic of China: Rejection of Argument,'' dated June 12, 
2009. On June 15, 2009, Yihua Timber resubmitted its rebuttal brief 
with the new argument redacted.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in 
these reviews 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, ``Antidumping Duty Administrative and New 
Shipper Reviews of Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic 
of China: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the 
2007 Antidumping Duty Administrative and New Shipper Reviews,'' dated 
August 10, 2009, which is hereby adopted by this notice (``Issues and 
Decision Memorandum''). A list of the issues which parties raised and 
to which we respond in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached 
to this notice as an Appendix. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a 
public document and is on file in the Central Records Unit, Main 
Commerce Building, Room 1117, and is accessible on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the 
memorandum are identical in content.

Period of Review

    The POR is January 1, 2007, through December 31, 2007.

Scope of the Order

    The product covered by the order is wooden bedroom furniture. 
Wooden bedroom furniture is generally, but not

[[Page 41376]]

exclusively, designed, manufactured, and offered for sale in 
coordinated groups, or bedrooms, in which all of the individual pieces 
are of approximately the same style and approximately the same material 
and/or finish. The subject merchandise is made substantially of wood 
products, including both solid wood and also engineered wood products 
made from wood particles, fibers, or other wooden materials such as 
plywood, strand board, particle board, and fiberboard, with or without 
wood veneers, wood overlays, or laminates, with or without non-wood 
components or trim such as metal, marble, leather, glass, plastic, or 
other resins, and whether or not assembled, completed, or finished.
    The subject merchandise includes the following items: (1) wooden 
beds such as loft beds, bunk beds, and other beds; (2) wooden 
headboards for beds (whether stand-alone or attached to side rails), 
wooden footboards for beds, wooden side rails for beds, and wooden 
canopies for beds; (3) night tables, night stands, dressers, commodes, 
bureaus, mule chests, gentlemen's chests, bachelor's chests, lingerie 
chests, wardrobes, vanities, chessers, chifforobes, and wardrobe-type 
cabinets; (4) dressers with framed glass mirrors that are attached to, 
incorporated in, sit on, or hang over the dresser; (5) chests-on-
chests,\1\ highboys,\2\ lowboys,\3\ chests of drawers,\4\ chests,\5\ 
door chests,\6\ chiffoniers,\7\ hutches,\8\ and armoires;\9\ (6) desks, 
computer stands, filing cabinets, book cases, or writing tables that 
are attached to or incorporated in the subject merchandise; and (7) 
other bedroom furniture consistent with the above list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A chest-on-chest is typically a tall chest-of-drawers in two 
or more sections (or appearing to be in two or more sections), with 
one or two sections mounted (or appearing to be mounted) on a 
slightly larger chest; also known as a tallboy.
    \2\ A highboy is typically a tall chest of drawers usually 
composed of a base and a top section with drawers, and supported on 
four legs or a small chest (often 15 inches or more in height).
    \3\ A lowboy is typically a short chest of drawers, not more 
than four feet high, normally set on short legs.
    \4\ A chest of drawers is typically a case containing drawers 
for storing clothing.
    \5\ A chest is typically a case piece taller than it is wide 
featuring a series of drawers and with or without one or more doors 
for storing clothing. The piece can either include drawers or be 
designed as a large box incorporating a lid.
    \6\ A door chest is typically a chest with hinged doors to store 
clothing, whether or not containing drawers. The piece may also 
include shelves for televisions and other entertainment electronics.
    \7\ A chiffonier is typically a tall and narrow chest of drawers 
normally used for storing undergarments and lingerie, often with 
mirror(s) attached.
    \8\ A hutch is typically an open case of furniture with shelves 
that typically sits on another piece of furniture and provides 
storage for clothes.
    \9\ An armoire is typically a tall cabinet or wardrobe 
(typically 50 inches or taller), with doors, and with one or more 
drawers (either exterior below or above the doors or interior behind 
the doors), shelves, and/or garment rods or other apparatus for 
storing clothes. Bedroom armoires may also be used to hold 
television receivers and/or other audio-visual entertainment 
systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The scope of the order excludes the following items: (1) seats, 
chairs, benches, couches, sofas, sofa beds, stools, and other seating 
furniture; (2) mattresses, mattress supports (including box springs), 
infant cribs, water beds, and futon frames; (3) office furniture, such 
as desks, stand-up desks, computer cabinets, filing cabinets, 
credenzas, and bookcases; (4) dining room or kitchen furniture such as 
dining tables, chairs, servers, sideboards, buffets, corner cabinets, 
china cabinets, and china hutches; (5) other non-bedroom furniture, 
such as television cabinets, cocktail tables, end tables, occasional 
tables, wall systems, book cases, and entertainment systems; (6) 
bedroom furniture made primarily of wicker, cane, osier, bamboo or 
rattan; (7) side rails for beds made of metal if sold separately from 
the headboard and footboard; (8) bedroom furniture in which bentwood 
parts predominate;\10\ (9) jewelry armories;\11\ (10) cheval 
mirrors;\12\ (11) certain metal parts;\13\ (12) mirrors that do not 
attach to, incorporate in, sit on, or hang over a dresser if they are 
not designed and marketed to be sold in conjunction with a dresser as 
part of a dresser-mirror set; and (13) upholstered beds.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ As used herein, bentwood means solid wood made pliable. 
Bentwood is wood that is brought to a curved shape by bending it 
while made pliable with moist heat or other agency and then set by 
cooling or drying. See Customs' Headquarters' Ruling Letter 043859, 
dated May 17, 1976.
    \11\ Any armoire, cabinet or other accent item for the purpose 
of storing jewelry, not to exceed 24 in width, 
18 in depth, and 49 in height, including a 
minimum of 5 lined drawers lined with felt or felt-like material, at 
least one side door (whether or not the door is lined with felt or 
felt-like material), with necklace hangers, and a flip-top lid with 
inset mirror. See Issues and Decision Memorandum from Laurel 
LaCivita to Laurie Parkhill, Office Director, Concerning Jewelry 
Armoires and Cheval Mirrors in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of 
Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of China, dated 
August 31, 2004. See also Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's 
Republic of China: Notice of Final Results of Changed Circumstances 
Review and Revocation in Part, 71 FR 38621 (July 7, 2006).
    \12\ Cheval mirrors are any framed, tiltable mirror with a 
height in excess of 50 that is mounted on a floor-
standing, hinged base. Additionally, the scope of the order excludes 
combination cheval mirror/jewelry cabinets. The excluded merchandise 
is an integrated piece consisting of a cheval mirror, i.e., a framed 
tiltable mirror with a height in excess of 50 inches, mounted on a 
floor-standing, hinged base, the cheval mirror serving as a door to 
a cabinet back that is integral to the structure of the mirror and 
which constitutes a jewelry cabinet lined with fabric, having 
necklace and bracelet hooks, mountings for rings and shelves, with 
or without a working lock and key to secure the contents of the 
jewelry cabinet back to the cheval mirror, and no drawers anywhere 
on the integrated piece. The fully assembled piece must be at least 
50 inches in height, 14.5 inches in width, and 3 inches in depth. 
See Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the People's Republic of China: 
Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review and Determination To 
Revoke Order in Part, 72 FR 948 (January 9, 2007).
    \13\ Metal furniture parts and unfinished furniture parts made 
of wood products (as defined above) that are not otherwise 
specifically named in this scope (i.e., wooden headboards for beds, 
wooden footboards for beds, wooden side rails for beds, and wooden 
canopies for beds) and that do not possess the essential character 
of wooden bedroom furniture in an unassembled, incomplete, or 
unfinished form. Such parts are usually classified under the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') 
subheading 9403.90.7000.
    \14\ Upholstered beds that are completely upholstered, i.e., 
containing filling material and completely covered in sewn genuine 
leather, synthetic leather, or natural or synthetic decorative 
fabric. To be excluded, the entire bed (headboards, footboards, and 
side rails) must be upholstered except for bed feet, which may be of 
wood, metal, or any other material and which are no more than nine 
inches in height from the floor. See Wooden Bedroom Furniture from 
the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Changed 
Circumstances Review and Determination to Revoke Order in Part, 72 
FR 7013 (February 14, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Imports of subject merchandise are classified under subheading 
9403.50.9040 of the HTSUS as ``wooden . . . beds'' and under subheading 
9403.50.9080 of the HTSUS as ``other . . . wooden furniture of a kind 
used in the bedroom.'' In addition, wooden headboards for beds, wooden 
footboards for beds, wooden side rails for beds, and wooden canopies 
for beds may also be entered under subheading 9403.50.9040 of the HTSUS 
as ``parts of wood'' and framed glass mirrors may also be entered under 
subheading 7009.92.5000 of the HTSUS as ``glass mirrors . . . framed.'' 
This order covers all wooden bedroom furniture meeting the above 
description, regardless of tariff classification. Although the HTSUS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our 
written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive.

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
(``Act''), we verified the information submitted by Yihua Timber, New 
Classic, and Sunshine. See Memorandum from Erin Begnal, Program 
Manager, Office 8 and Sergio Balbontin, International Trade Compliance 
Analyst, Office 8 to Wendy J. Frankel, Director, Office 8, 
``Verification of the Sales and Factors of Production Response of 
Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review of Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's 
Republic of China,''

[[Page 41377]]

(May 18, 2009) (``Yihua Timber Verification Report''); see also 
Memorandum from Robert Bolling, Program Manager, Office 4 and Gene 
Degnan, Acting Program Manager, Office 8 to Wendy J. Frankel, Director, 
Office 8, ``Verification of the U.S. Sales Questionnaire Responses of 
Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry Co., Ltd. and their U.S. Subsidiary New 
Classic Home Furnishing, Inc. in the Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review of Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of 
China'' (May 18, 2009) (``New Classic Verification Report''), and 
Memorandum from Erin Begnal, Program Manager, Office 8 and Sergio 
Balbontin, International Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 8 to Wendy J. 
Frankel, Director, Office 8, ``Verification Report of the Sales and 
Factors Response of Dongguan Sunshine Furniture Co., Ltd. in the 
Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Wooden Bedroom Furniture from 
the People's Republic of China'' (May 7, 2009) (``Sunshine Verification 
Report'') on file in the CRU. For the verified companies, we used 
standard verification procedures, including examination of relevant 
accounting and production records, as well as original source documents 
provided by respondents. For further details on the verifications, see 
the Yihua Timber Verification Report, New Classic Verification Report, 
and Sunshine Verification Report.

New Shipper Status

    For these final results, no party has contested the bona fides of 
either Golden Well's or Sunshine's sales and we continue to find, as in 
the Preliminary Results, that both Golden Well and Sunshine have met 
the requirements to qualify as a new shipper during the POR and that 
their sales of wooden bedroom furniture to the United States are 
appropriate transactions for a new shipper.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on an analysis of the comments received, the Department has 
made certain changes in the margin calculations. For the final results, 
the Department has made the following changes:

Surrogate Value Issues

     The Department revised the surrogate value for Yihua 
Timber's poplar, ash, and pine, veneers, and plywood using World Trade 
Atlas (``WTA'') data rather than Philippine National Statistics Office 
(``NSO'') data as used in the Preliminary Results. See Issues and 
Decision Memorandum at Comment 3. See also ``Final Results of the 2007 
Administrative and New Shipper Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Order on 
Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of China: Surrogate 
Value Memorandum,'' dated August 10, 2009 (``SV Memo'').
     The Department revised the surrogate value for Yihua 
Timber's plywood using WTA data rather than NSO data as used in the 
Preliminary Results. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 4. 
See also SV Memo.
     The Department revised the surrogate value for Yihua 
Timber's medium density fiberboard (``MDF''). See Issues and Decision 
Memorandum at Comment 5.
     The Department revised the surrogate value for Yihua 
Timber's particle board. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 
8. See also SV Memo.
     The Department will continue using the Camarines Sur data 
used in the Preliminary Results, to calculate electricity and truck 
freight; however, we will not inflate this data for the final results. 
See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 10 and 11, respectively. 
See also SV Memo.
     The Department revised the selection of surrogate 
financial statements. We continued to use the financial statements for 
the fiscal year ending December 31, 2007, from the following producers: 
Maitland-Smith Cebu, Inc. (``Maitland-Smith''); Casa Cebuana 
Incorporated (``Casa Cebuana''); Diretso Design Furniture Inc., 
(``Diresto''); Global Classic Designs, Inc., (``Global''); and Las 
Palmas Furniture, Inc., (``Las Palmas''), all of which are Philippine 
producers of comparable merchandise. In addition, we used the financial 
statements for the same period from Arkane International Corporation; 
Giardini Sole Manufacturing and Trading Corporation (``Giardini''); and 
SCT Furnishing Corporation, also Phillippine producers of comparable 
merchandise. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comments 14-16 for 
discussion of financial ratios. See also SV Memo.
     The Department made changes from the Preliminary Results 
in calculating the surrogate financial ratios for the following 
surrogate companies: Maitland-Smith, Casa Cebuana, Diretso, and Las 
Palmas. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comments 14-16 for a 
discussion of financial ratios. See also SV Memo.

Yihua Timber-Specific Issues

     The Department corrected the surrogate value for Yihua 
Timber's brokerage and handling charge. See Issues and Decision 
Memorandum at Comment 13.
     The Department adjusted Yihua Timber's warehousing expense 
paid to its affiliated party to reflect market value. See Issues and 
Decision Memorandum at Comment 19.
     The Department corrected its preliminary finding of facts 
available as to Yihua Timber's FOP weights. See Issues and Decision 
Memorandum at Comment 20.
     The Department is granting Yihua Timber a by-product 
offset. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 21.
     The Department corrected its preliminary finding of 
partial adverse facts available as to Yihua Timber's affiliate (Company 
A) sales. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 22.
     The Department corrected its preliminary finding of facts 
available as to Yihua Timber's inventory carrying costs. See Issues and 
Decision Memorandum at Comment 23.
     The Department corrected Yihua Timber's transportation 
expenses with respect to its Channel 1 sales. See Issues and Decision 
Memorandum at Comment 24.
     The Department corrected programming errors as to Yihua 
Timber's gross weight, material conversion rates, damaged sales, a 
miscoded CONNUMU, and recalculation of USDUTYU, CREDITU, and WARRU. See 
Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 24.

Separate Rates

    In proceedings involving non-market economy (``NME'') countries, 
the Department begins with a rebuttable presumption that all companies 
within the country are subject to government control and, thus, should 
be assigned a single antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the 
Department's policy to assign all exporters of merchandise subject to 
an investigation in an NME country this single rate unless an exporter 
can demonstrate that it is sufficiently independent so as to be 
entitled to a separate rate. See Final Determination of

[[Page 41378]]

Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers From the People's Republic of 
China, 56 FR 20588 (May 6, 1991), as amplified by Notice of Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide From 
the People's Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994).
    In the Preliminary Results, we stated that the following companies 
demonstrated their eligibility for separate-rate status: 1) Yihua 
Timber; 2) Brother Furniture Manufacture Co., Ltd.; 3) Dongguan 
Mingsheng Furniture Co., Ltd.; 4) Fujian Lianfu Forestry Co., Ltd. aka 
Fujian Wonder Pacific, Inc. (Dare Group); 5) Fuzhou Huan Mei Furniture 
Co., Ltd. (Dare Group); 6) Jiangsu Dare Furniture Co., Ltd. (Dare 
Group); 7) Shenzhen Shen Long Hang Industry Co., Ltd.; 8) Xingli Arts & 
Crafts Factory of Yangchun; and 9) Zhongshan Gainwell Furniture Co., 
Ltd. Also, in the Preliminary Results, we stated that the new shipper, 
Sunshine, demonstrated its eligibility for separate-rate status. For 
these final results, we continue to find that evidence placed on the 
record of these reviews demonstrates that these companies provided 
information that shows both a de jure and de facto absence of 
government control with respect to their respective exports of the 
merchandise under review, and, thus are eligible for separate-rate 
status.
    With respect to the following companies not selected for individual 
examination in this review: 1) COE, Ltd.; 2) Decca Furniture Limited; 
3) Dongguan Landmark Furniture Products, Ltd.; 4) Dongguan Yihaiwei 
Furniture Limited; 5) Hwang Ho International Holdings Limited; 6) 
Meikangchi (Nantong) Furniture Company, Ltd.; 7) Qingdao Shengchang 
Wooden Co., Ltd.; 8) Transworld (Zhangzhou) Furniture Co., Ltd.; and 9) 
Winny Universal, Ltd., Zhongshan Winny Furniture Ltd., Winny Overseas, 
Ltd., we continue to grant a separate rate to these companies because 
they are wholly owned by individuals or companies located in a market 
economy. With respect to the new shipper, Golden Well, we continue to 
grant it a separate rate because it is wholly owned by individuals or 
companies located in a market economy. As wholly foreign-owned 
companies, we have no evidence indicating that these companies are 
under the control of the PRC. Therefore, a separate-rate analysis is 
not necessary to determine whether these companies are independent from 
government control. See Preliminary Results. See also Notice of Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Creatine Monohydrate 
from the People's Republic of China, 64 FR 71104, 71104-05 (December 
20, 1999) (where the respondent was wholly foreign-owned and, thus, 
qualified for a separate rate).
    The following five exporters did not provide, as appropriate, 
either a separate rate application or certification: 1) Dongguan Bon 
Ten Furniture Co., Ltd. (``Bon Ten'') (see Issues and Decision 
Memorandum at Comment 29); 2) Dongguan Qingxi Xinyi Craft Furniture 
Factory (Joyce Art Factory) (``Joyce Art''); 3) Tianjin Sande Fairwood 
Furniture Co. Ltd. (``Sande''); 4) Yida Co. Ltd., Yitai Worldwide Ltd., 
Yili Co., Ltd., and Yetbuild Co., Ltd. (collectively ``Yida''); and 5) 
Hamilton & Spill, Ltd. (``Hamilton''), and therefore have not 
demonstrated their eligibility for separate rate status in this 
administrative review. In the Preliminary Results, we found that Dream 
Rooms Furniture (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.'s (``Dream Rooms'') separate-rate 
certification was deficient, and thus, Dream Rooms did not demonstrate 
its eligibility for separate-rate status in this administrative review. 
See section 776(a)(2)(D) of the Act. Consequently, for the final 
results, the Department is continuing to treat Dream Rooms as part of 
the PRC-wide entity. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 30.
    In addition, while we found Orient International Holding Shanghai 
Foreign Trading Co., Ltd. (``Orient International'') to be part of the 
PRC-wide entity in the Preliminary Results, we are granting Orient 
International a separate rate for purposes of the final results. 
However, we continue to find that Orient International did not act to 
the best of its ability in this administrative review, and thus we have 
assigned Orient International a rate based on adverse facts available 
(``AFA'') for the final results. See ``Adverse Facts Available'' 
section below. See also Issues and Decision Memorandum Comment 32.

Adverse Facts Available

    Sections 776(a)(1) and (2) of the Act provide that the Department 
shall apply ``facts otherwise available'' if necessary information is 
not on the record or an interested party or any other person (A) 
withholds information that has been requested, (B) fails to provide 
information within the deadlines established, or in the form and manner 
requested by the Department, subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of 
section 782, (C) significantly impedes a proceeding, or (D) provides 
information that cannot be verified as provided by section 782(i) of 
the Act.
    Where the Department determines that a response to a request for 
information does not comply with the request, section 782(d) of the Act 
provides that the Department will so inform the party submitting the 
response and will, to the extent practicable, provide that party the 
opportunity to remedy or explain the deficiency. If the party fails to 
remedy the deficiency within the applicable time limits and subject to 
section 782(e) of the Act, the Department may disregard all or part of 
the original and subsequent responses, as appropriate. Section 782(e) 
of the Act provides that the Department ``shall not decline to consider 
information that is submitted by an interested party and is necessary 
to the determination but does not meet all applicable requirements 
established by the administering authority'' if the information is 
timely, can be verified, is not so incomplete that it cannot be used, 
and if the interested party acted to the best of its ability in 
providing the information. Where all of these conditions are met, the 
statute requires the Department to use the information if it can do so 
without undue difficulties.
    Section 776(b) of the Act further provides that the Department may 
use an adverse inference in applying the facts otherwise available when 
a party has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its 
ability to comply with a request for information. Section 776(b) of the 
Act also authorizes the Department to use as AFA information derived 
from the petition, the final determination, a previous administrative 
review, or other information placed on the record.

Orient International

    In the Preliminary Results, we determined that because Orient 
International ceased participating in this administrative review, 
Orient International's information could not be verified. As a result, 
we found that Orient International did not demonstrate its entitlement 
to a separate rate and was, therefore, subject to the PRC-wide rate. 
See Preliminary Results. As stated above, for the final results, we no 
longer find Orient International to be part of the PRC-entity. Orient 
International's separate rate certification demonstrates that Orient 
International provided information that shows both a de jure and de 
facto absence of government control with respect to its exports of the 
merchandise under review, and, thus is eligible for separate-rate 
status. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 32. However, we 
find that the application of facts available is warranted. In 
accordance with sections 776(a)(2)(A) through (D), by not responding to 
the Department's questionnaire and

[[Page 41379]]

informing the Department that it would no longer participate in the 
administrative review as a mandatory respondent, we find that Orient 
International withheld information requested, failed to produce the 
requested information in a timely manner, significantly impeded the 
proceeding, and did not allow for verification, as it had ceased 
cooperating with the Department.
    Moreover, pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act, the Department 
finds that Orient International failed to cooperate to the best of its 
ability by not providing a questionnaire response that was essential to 
the calculation of the antidumping duty margin. Orient International 
was provided an ample amount of time to submit a response to the 
Department's antidumping duty questionnaire. At no point did Orient 
International seek clarification from the Department on the specific 
requests for information, but rather submitted a letter to the 
Department indicating that it would no longer respond to the 
Department's requests for information and that it would no longer 
participate in the proceeding as a mandatory respondent. Because Orient 
International failed to cooperate with the Department in this matter, 
we find it appropriate to use an inference that is adverse to the 
interests of Orient International in selecting from among the facts 
otherwise available. See section 776(b) of the Act. By doing so, we 
will ensure that Orient International will not obtain a more favorable 
result by failing to cooperate had it cooperated fully in this 
investigation. See Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the 
Uruguay Round Agreements Act, H.R. Doc. 103-316, vol. 1 (1994) at 870 
(``SAA''). See also Issues and Decision Memorandum Comment 32.

The PRC-Wide Entity

    Because we begin with the presumption that all companies within an 
NME country are subject to government control and because only the 
companies listed under the ``Final Results Margins'' section, below, 
have overcome that presumption, we are applying a single antidumping 
rate (i.e., the PRC-wide rate) to all other exporters of subject 
merchandise from the PRC. These other companies did not demonstrate 
entitlement to a separate rate. See, e.g., Synthetic Indigo From the 
People's Republic of China; Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value, 65 FR 25706, 25707 (May 3, 2000). The PRC-wide 
rate applies to all entries of subject merchandise except for entries 
from the respondents that are listed in the ``Final Results Margins'' 
section, below.
    The Department based the margin for the PRC-wide entity on AFA. See 
Preliminary Results. Pursuant to section 776(a) of the Act, the 
Department found that because the PRC-wide entity failed to respond to 
the Department's questionnaires, withheld or failed to provide 
information in a timely manner or in the form or manner requested by 
the Department, submitted information that could not be verified, or 
otherwise impeded the process, it was appropriate to apply a dumping 
margin for the PRC-wide entity using facts otherwise available on the 
record. The Department further determined that an adverse inference was 
appropriate because the PRC-wide entity failed to respond to requests 
for information and therefore failed to cooperate by not acting to the 
best of its ability. See ``Selection of AFA Rate,'' below.

Selection of AFA Rate

    In deciding which facts to use as AFA, section 776(b) of the Act 
and 19 CFR 351.308(c) authorize the Department to rely on information 
derived from (1) the petition, (2) a final determination in the 
investigation, (3) any previous review or determination, or (4) any 
information placed on the record. In reviews, the Department normally 
selects, as AFA, the highest rate on the record of any segment of the 
proceeding. See, e.g., Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's 
Republic of China: Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 68 FR 19504, 19506 (April 21, 2003). The Court 
of International Trade (``CIT'') and the Court of Appeals for the 
Federal Circuit have consistently upheld the Department's practice in 
this regard. See Rhone Poulenc, Inc. v. United States, 899 F.2d 1185, 
1190 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (``Rhone Poulenc''); NSK Ltd. v. United States, 
346 F. Supp. 2d 1312, 1335 (CIT 2004) (upholding a 73.55 percent total 
AFA rate, the highest available dumping margin from a different 
respondent in a less than fair value investigation); see also Kompass 
Food Trading Int'l v. United States, 24 CIT 678, 680 (2000) (upholding 
a 51.16 percent total AFA rate, the highest available dumping margin 
from a different, fully cooperative respondent); and Shanghai Taoen 
Int'l Trading Co., Ltd. v. United States, 360 F. Supp 2d 1339, 1348 
(CIT 2005) (upholding a 223.01 percent total AFA rate, the highest 
available dumping margin from a different respondent in a previous 
administrative review).
    The Department's practice when selecting an adverse rate from among 
the possible sources of information is to ensure that the margin is 
sufficiently adverse ``so as to effectuate the statutory purposes of 
the adverse facts available rule to induce respondents to provide the 
Department with complete and accurate information in a timely manner.'' 
See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value: 
Static Random Access Memory Semiconductors from Taiwan, 63 FR 8909, 
8932 (February 23, 1998). The Department's practice also ensures ``that 
the party does not obtain a more favorable result by failing to 
cooperate than if it had cooperated fully.'' See, SAA at 870; see also 
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value: Certain 
Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp from Brazil, 69 FR 76910, 76912 
(December 23, 2004); D&L Supply Co. v. United States, 113 F.3d 1220, 
1223 (Fed. Cir. 1997). In choosing the appropriate balance between 
providing respondents with an incentive to respond accurately and 
imposing a rate that is reasonably related to the respondent's prior 
commercial activity, selecting the highest prior margin ``reflects a 
common sense inference that the highest prior margin is the most 
probative evidence of current margins because, if it were not so, the 
importer, knowing of the rule, would have produced current information 
showing the margin to be less.'' Rhone Poulenc, 899 F.2d at 1190. 
Consistent with the statute, court precedent, and its normal practice, 
the Department has assigned the rate of 216.01 percent, the highest 
rate on the record of any segment of the proceeding, a calculated 
company-specific rate in a new shipper review of wooden bedroom 
furniture from the PRC, to Orient International and to the PRC-wide 
entity,\15\ as AFA. See Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results of the 2004-2005 Semi-Annual New 
Shipper Reviews, 71 FR 70739 (December 6, 2006) (``Final 04-05 New 
Shipper Reviews'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Bon Ten, Dream Rooms, Hamilton, Joyce Art, Sande, and Yida 
are all part of the PRC-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Corroboration of Secondary Information

    Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies 
on secondary information rather than on information obtained in the 
course of an investigation or review, it shall, to the extent 
practicable, corroborate that information from independent sources that 
are reasonably at its disposal. Secondary information is defined as 
information derived from the petition that gave rise to the 
investigation or

[[Page 41380]]

review, the final determination concerning the subject merchandise, or 
any previous review under section 751 concerning the subject 
merchandise. See SAA at 870. Corroborate means that the Department will 
satisfy itself that the secondary information to be used has probative 
value. Id. To corroborate secondary information, the Department will, 
to the extent practicable, examine the reliability and relevance of the 
information to be used. See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, 
Finished and Unfinished from Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings Four 
Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, and Components Thereof, from Japan: 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and 
Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 57391, 57392 
(November 6, 1996) (unchanged in the final determination, Final Results 
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Termination in Part: 
Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished from 
Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings Four Inches or Less in Outside 
Diameter, and Components Thereof, from Japan, 62 FR 11825 (March 13, 
1997)). Independent sources used to corroborate such evidence may 
include, for example, published price lists, official import statistics 
and customs data, and information obtained from interested parties 
during the particular investigation. See Notice of Preliminary 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: High and Ultra-High 
Voltage Ceramic Station Post Insulators from Japan, 68 FR 35627 (June 
16, 2003) (unchanged in final determination, Notice of Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: High and Ultra High 
Voltage Ceramic Station Post Insulators from Japan, 68 FR 62560 
(November 5, 2003)); and Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less 
Than Fair Value: Live Swine From Canada, 70 FR 12181, 12183-84 (March 
11, 2005).
    The AFA rate that the Department is now using was determined in the 
published final results of a previous new shipper review. See Wooden 
Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 
the 2004-2005 Semi-Annual New Shipper Reviews, 71 FR 70739, 70741 
(December 6, 2006). In that new shipper review, the Department 
calculated a company-specific rate, which was above the PRC-wide rate 
established in the investigation. Because this rate is a company-
specific calculated rate, we have determined this rate to be reliable.
    With respect to the relevance aspect of corroboration, the 
Department will consider information reasonably at its disposal to 
determine whether a margin continues to have relevance. Where 
circumstances indicate that the selected margin is not appropriate as 
AFA, the Department will disregard the margin and determine an 
appropriate margin. See Fresh Cut Flowers from Mexico: Final Results of 
Antidumping Administrative Review, 61 FR 6812, 6814 (February 22, 1996) 
(where the Department disregarded the highest margin in that case as 
adverse best information available (the predecessor to facts available) 
because the margin was based on another company's uncharacteristic 
business expense resulting in an unusually high margin). Similarly, the 
Department does not apply a margin that has been discredited. See D&L 
Supply Co. v. United States, 113 F. 3d 1220, 1221 (Fed. Cir. 1997) 
(ruling that the Department will not use a margin that has been 
judicially invalidated). To assess the relevancy of the rate used, the 
Department compared the margin calculations of the mandatory respondent 
in the instant administrative review with the 216.01 percent calculated 
rate from the 2004-2005 new shipper review. The Department found that 
the margin of 216.01 percent was within the range of the margins 
calculated on the record of the instant administrative review. Because 
the record of this administrative review contains margins within the 
range of 216.01 percent, we determine that the rate from the 2004-2005 
review continues to be relevant for use in this administrative review.
    As the adverse margin is both reliable and relevant, we determine 
that it has probative value. Accordingly, we determine that this rate 
meets the corroboration criterion established in section 776(c) of the 
Act that secondary information have probative value. As a result, the 
Department determines that the margin is corroborated for the purposes 
of this administrative review and may reasonably be applied to the PRC-
wide entity as AFA.

Final Results Margins

    We determine that the following weighted-average percentage margins 
exist for the POR:

Administrative Review

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Exporter                 Antidumping Duty Percent Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry                            29.98[percnt]
 co., Ltd. (a.k.a. Yihua Timber
 Industry Co., Ltd.)...............
Brother Furniture Manufacture Co.,                         29.98[percnt]
 Ltd...............................
COE, Ltd...........................                        29.98[percnt]
Decca Furniture Limited............                        29.98[percnt]
Dongguan Landmark Furniture                                29.98[percnt]
 Products Ltd......................
Dongguan Mingsheng Furniture Co.,                          29.98[percnt]
 Ltd...............................
Dongguan Yihaiwei Furniture Limited                        29.98[percnt]
Fujian Lianfu Forestry Co., Ltd.                           29.98[percnt]
 aka Fujian Wonder Pacific , Inc.
 (Dare Group)......................
Fuzhou Huan Mei Furniture Co., Ltd.                        29.98[percnt]
 (Dare Group)......................
Jiangsu Dare Furniture Co., Ltd.                           29.98[percnt]
 (Dare Group)......................
Hwang Ho International Holdings                            29.98[percnt]
 Limited...........................
Meikangchi (Nantong) Furniture                             29.98[percnt]
 Company Ltd.......................
Orient International Holding                              216.01[percnt]
 Shanghai Foreign Trading Co., Ltd.
Qingdao Shengchang Wooden Co., Ltd.                        29.98[percnt]
Shenzhen Shen Long Hang Industry                           29.98[percnt]
 Co., Ltd..........................
Transworld (Zhangzhou) Furniture                           29.98[percnt]
 Co., Ltd..........................
Winny Universal, Ltd., Zhongshan                           29.98[percnt]
 Winny Furniture Ltd., Winny
 Overseas, Ltd.....................
Xingli Arts & Crafts Factory of                            29.98[percnt]
 Yangchun..........................
Zhongshan Gainwell Furniture Co.,                          29.98[percnt]
 Ltd...............................
PRC-Wide Entity\16\................                       216.01[percnt]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Bon Ten, Dream Rooms, Hamilton, Joyce Art, Sande, and Yida are all
  part of the PRC-wide entity.


[[Page 41381]]

New Shipper Review

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Exporter / Producer Combination      Antidumping Duty Percent Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Golden Well International (HK),                                0[percnt]
 Ltd. / Producer: Zhangzhou XYM
 Furniture Product Co., Ltd........
Dongguan Sunshine Furniture Co.,                               0[percnt]
 Ltd. /Dongguan Sunshine Furniture
 Co., Ltd..........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (``CBP'') shall assess, antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final 
results of this review. For assessment purposes, we calculated 
exporter/importer- (or customer) -specific assessment rates for 
merchandise subject to this review. Where appropriate, we calculated an 
ad valorem rate for each importer (or customer) by dividing the total 
dumping margins for reviewed sales to that party by the total entered 
values associated with those transactions. For duty-assessment rates 
calculated on this basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting ad 
valorem rate against the entered customs values for the subject 
merchandise. Where appropriate, we calculated a per-unit rate for each 
importer (or customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for 
reviewed sales to that party by the total sales quantity associated 
with those transactions. For duty-assessment rates calculated on this 
basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting per-unit rate against 
the entered quantity of the subject merchandise. Where an importer- (or 
customer) -specific assessment rate is de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 
percent), the Department will instruct CBP to assess that importer (or 
customer's) entries of subject merchandise without regard to 
antidumping duties. We intend to instruct CBP to liquidate entries 
containing subject merchandise exported by the PRC-wide entity at the 
PRC-wide rate we determine in the final results of this review. The 
Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions 
directly to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this 
review.

Cash-Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of this administrative review and new 
shipper reviews for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, 
or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the 
publication date, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: 
1) for the exporters listed above, the cash deposit rate will be the 
rates shown for those companies; 2) for previously investigated or 
reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters not listed above that have separate 
rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific 
rate published for the most recent period; 3) for all PRC exporters of 
subject merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a 
separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate of 
216.01 percent; and 4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise 
which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be 
the rate applicable to the PRC exporters that supplied that non-PRC 
exporter. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until 
further notice.

Notification of Interested Parties

    This notice also serves as a final 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 the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.
    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (``APOs'') of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under the APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which 
continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of 
the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction 
of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby 
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO 
is a violation which is subject to sanction.

Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the 
date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
    We are issuing and publishing these final results and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: August 10, 2009.
Carole Showers,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations.

Appendix

Comment 1: Use of the Philippines as Surrogate Country
Comment 2: Net Import Quantity - Philippines
Comment 3: Surrogate Value for Poplar, Ash and Pine, Veneers and 
Plywood
Comment 4: Surrogate Value for Plywood
Comment 5: Surrogate Value for Medium Density Fiberboard (MDF)
Comment 6: HS Code for Calculation of the Surrogate Value for Pine
Comment 7: Surrogate Value for Sealer
Comment 8: Surrogate Value for Particle Board
Comment 9: Surrogate Value for Labor
Comment 10: Surrogate Value for Energy
Comment 11: Surrogate Value for Truck Freight
Comment 12: Treatment of Ocean Freight Expense
Comment 13: Treatment of and Surrogate Value for Brokerage & Handling
Comment 14: Selection of Financial Statements
Comment 15: Treatment of Works-in-Progress and Changes in Finished 
Goods Inventory in Surrogate Financial Ratios
Comment 16: Treatment of Indirect Materials, Indirect Labor & 
Subcontractor Expenses
Comment 17: Constructed Export Price Offset
Comment 18: Yield Ratio Calculation
Comment 19: Treatment of Warehousing Expense
    Comment 20: Treatment of Yihua Timber's FOP and Gross Weights
Comment 21: By-Product Offset
Comment 22: Yihua Timber Affiliate's (Company A's) Sales
Comment 23: Inventory Carrying Costs
Comment 24: Inland Freight for Yihua Timber's Channel 1 Sales
Comment 25: SAS Programming Changes and Error
Comment 26: Use of Combination Rates
Comment 27: Absorption of Antidumping Duties
Comment 28: Cash Deposit Instruction for Companies that Lost Their 
Separate Rate

[[Page 41382]]

Comment 29: Whether to Rescind the Review with Respect to Dongguan Bon 
Ten Furniture Co., Ltd.
Comment 30: Whether to Grant Dream Rooms Furniture (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. 
a Separate Rate
Comment 31: Whether the Department Failed to Timely Initiate the 
Administrative Review Thereby Erroneously Choosing Orient International 
as a Mandatory Respondent
Comment 32: Separate Rate Status of Orient International
[FR Doc. E9-19666 Filed 8-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S