Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From Taiwan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 5964-5967 [2010-2593]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
5964
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 24 / Friday, February 5, 2010 / Notices
instructions directly to CBP 15 days
after publication of the final results of
this review.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Cash Deposit Requirements
[A–583–833]
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of these
reviews for shipments of subject
merchandise from the PRC entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date, as provided by sections 751(a)(1)
and (a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For all
respondents receiving a separate rate,
the cash deposit rate will be that
established in the final results of these
reviews; (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 that
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 nonPRC exporter. These deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From
Taiwan: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
International Trade Administration
Notification to Importers
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
This notice also serves as a
preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding
the reimbursement of antidumping
duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this review
period. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the
Secretary’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of double antidumping duties.
The Department is issuing and
publishing these preliminary results of
administrative review in accordance
with section 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19
CFR 351.221(b)(4).
Dated: February 1, 2010.
Carole Showers,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy
and Negotiations.
[FR Doc. 2010–2590 Filed 2–4–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain
polyester staple fiber (PSF) from
Taiwan. The period of review is May 1,
2008, through April 30, 2009. This
review covers imports of certain
polyester staple fiber from one
producer/exporter. We have
preliminarily found that sales of the
subject merchandise have been made
below normal value. If these
preliminary results are adopted in our
final results, we will instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
assess antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries. Interested parties
are invited to comment on these
preliminary results. We will issue the
final results not later than 120 days after
the date of publication of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 5, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael A. Romani or Richard
Rimlinger, AD/CVD Operations, Office
5, Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington
DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–0198 or
(202) 482–4477, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On June 24, 2009, the Department
published a notice initiating an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain PSF
from Taiwan covering the respondents
Far Eastern Textiles Ltd. (FET) and Nan
Ya Plastics Corporation (Nan Ya). See
Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews and Requests for Revocation in
Part, 74 FR 30052 (June 24, 2009). We
have rescinded the review with respect
to Nan Ya. See Polyester Staple Fiber
from Taiwan: Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review in Part, 74 FR 41684 (August 18,
2009).
Scope of the Order
The product covered by the order is
PSF. PSF is defined as synthetic staple
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:26 Feb 04, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
fibers, not carded, combed or otherwise
processed for spinning, of polyesters
measuring 3.3 decitex (3 denier,
inclusive) or more in diameter. This
merchandise is cut to lengths varying
from one inch (25 mm) to five inches
(127 mm). The merchandise subject to
the order may be coated, usually with a
silicon or other finish, or not coated.
PSF is generally used as stuffing in
sleeping bags, mattresses, ski jackets,
comforters, cushions, pillows, and
furniture. Merchandise of less than 3.3
decitex (less than 3 denier) currently
classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)
at subheading 5503.20.00.20 is
specifically excluded from the order.
Also specifically excluded from the
order are polyester staple fibers of 10 to
18 denier that are cut to lengths of 6 to
8 inches (fibers used in the manufacture
of carpeting). In addition, low–melt PSF
is excluded from this order. Low–melt
PSF is defined as a bi–component fiber
with an outer sheath that melts at a
significantly lower temperature than its
inner core.
The merchandise subject to this order
is currently classifiable in the HTSUS at
subheadings 5503.20.00.45 and
5503.20.00.65. Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the merchandise
subject to the order is dispositive.
Fair–Value Comparisons
To determine whether FET’s sales of
PSF to the United States were made at
less than normal value, we compared
export price to normal value as
described in the ‘‘Export Price’’ and
‘‘Normal Value’’ sections of this notice.
Pursuant to section 777A(d)(2) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
we compared the export price of
individual U.S. transactions to the
monthly weighted–average normal
value of the foreign like product where
there were sales made in the ordinary
course of trade, as discussed in the ‘‘Cost
of Production’’ section below.
Product Comparisons
We compared U.S. sales to monthly
weighted–average prices of
contemporaneous sales made in the
home market. We found
contemporaneous sales of identical
merchandise in the home market for all
U.S. sales in accordance with section
771(16) of the Act.
Date of Sale
Section 351.401(i) of the Department’s
regulations states that the Department
normally will use the date of invoice, as
recorded in the producer’s or exporter’s
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 24 / Friday, February 5, 2010 / Notices
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
records kept in the ordinary course of
business, as the date of sale. The
regulation provides further that the
Department may use a date other than
the date of the invoice if the Secretary
is satisfied that a different date better
reflects the date on which the material
terms of sale are established. The
Department has a long–standing
practice of finding that, where shipment
date precedes invoice date, shipment
date better reflects the date on which
the material terms of sale are
established. See Notice of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Negative Final
Determination of Critical
Circumstances: Certain Frozen and
Canned Warmwater Shrimp From
Thailand, 69 FR 76918 (December 23,
2004), and accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum at Comment 10;
see also Notice of Final Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Structural Steel Beams From Germany,
67 FR 35497 (May 20, 2002), and
accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 2.
With respect to FET’s U.S. market
sales, shipment date occurs on or before
the date of invoice. The date of invoice
is the date on which the Government
Uniform Invoice is issued. Further,
based on record evidence, all material
terms of sale are established at the time
of shipment and do not change in the
subsequent time prior to the issuance of
the invoice. Therefore, we used the date
of shipment as the date of sale in
accordance with our practice.
With respect to most of FET’s home–
market sales, shipment date occurs on
or before the invoice date. Further,
based on record evidence, all material
terms of sale are established at the time
of shipment and do not change in the
subsequent time prior to the issuance of
the invoice. We note that FET had some
home–market sales in which invoice
dates preceded shipment dates; for these
home–market sales, we used the invoice
date as the date of sale in accordance
with our practice. For all other home–
market sales, we used shipment date as
date of sale.
Export Price
For sales to the United States, we
calculated export price in accordance
with section 772(a) of the Act because
the merchandise was sold prior to
importation by the exporter or producer
outside the United States to the first
unaffiliated purchaser in the United
States and because constructed export–
price methodology was not otherwise
warranted. We calculated export price
based on the free–on-board price to
unaffiliated purchasers in the United
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:26 Feb 04, 2010
Jkt 220001
States. Where appropriate, we made
deductions, consistent with section
772(c)(2)(A) of the Act, for the following
movement expenses: inland freight from
the plant to the port of exportation,
inland insurance in Taiwan, brokerage
and handling, harbor service fees, trade
promotion fees, and containerization
expenses. No other adjustments were
claimed or allowed.
Normal Value
Selection of Comparison Market
To determine whether there was a
sufficient volume of sales of PSF in the
home market to serve as a viable basis
for calculating normal value, we
compared the volume of the
respondent’s home–market sales of the
foreign like product to its volume of
U.S. sales of the subject merchandise in
accordance with section 773(a) of the
Act. Pursuant to section 773(a)(1)(B) of
the Act, because the respondent’s
aggregate volume of home–market sales
of the foreign like product was greater
than five percent of its aggregate volume
of U.S. sales of the subject merchandise,
we determined that the home market
was viable for comparison purposes.
Cost of Production
We disregarded below–cost sales by
FET in the last administrative review of
the order completed prior to the
initiation of this review. See Certain
Polyester Staple Fiber From Taiwan:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 74 FR 18348
(April 22, 2009); see also Certain
Polyester Staple Fiber From Taiwan:
Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR
6136, 6137–38 (February 5, 2009).
Therefore, pursuant to section
773(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, there were
reasonable grounds to believe or suspect
that the respondent made sales of the
foreign like product in its comparison
market at prices below the cost of
production within the meaning of
section 773(b) of the Act.
We calculated the cost of production
on a product–specific basis, based on
the sum of the respondent’s costs of
materials and fabrication for the foreign
like product plus amounts for general
and administrative expenses, interest
expenses, and the costs of all expenses
incidental to preparing the foreign like
product for shipment in accordance
with section 773(b)(3) of the Act.
We relied on cost–of-production
information FET submitted in its
response to our cost questionnaire
except we adjusted FET’s reported cost
of manufacturing to account for
purchases of purified terephthalic acid
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5965
and monoethylene glycol from affiliated
parties at non–arm’s–length prices in
accordance with the major–input rule of
section 773(f)(3) of the Act.
On a product–specific basis, we
compared the adjusted weighted–
average cost–of-production figures for
the period of review to the home–
market sales of the foreign like product,
as required under section 773(b) of the
Act, to determine whether these sales
were made at prices below the cost of
production. The prices were exclusive
of any applicable movement charges,
packing expenses, warranties, and
indirect selling expenses. In
determining whether to disregard
home–market sales made at prices
below their cost of production and in
accordance with sections 773(b)(2)(B),
(C), and (D) of the Act, we examined
whether such sales were made within
an extended period of time in
substantial quantities and at prices
which permitted the recovery of all
costs within a reasonable period of time.
We found that, for certain products,
more than 20 percent of the
respondent’s home–market sales were at
prices below the cost of production and,
in addition, the below–cost sales were
made within an extended period of time
in substantial quantities. In addition,
these sales were made at prices that did
not permit the recovery of costs within
a reasonable period of time. Therefore,
we disregarded these sales and used the
remaining sales of the same product as
the basis for determining normal value
in accordance with section 773(b)(1) of
the Act.
Calculation of Normal Value
We calculated normal value based on
the price FET reported for home–market
sales to unaffiliated customers which
we determined were within the ordinary
course of trade. We made adjustments
for differences in domestic and export
packing expenses in accordance with
sections 773(a)(6)(A) and 773(a)(6)(B)(i)
of the Act. We also made adjustments,
consistent with section 773(a)(6)(B)(ii)
of the Act, for inland–freight expenses
from the plant to the customer and
expenses associated with loading the
merchandise onto the truck to be
shipped. In addition, we made
adjustments for differences in
circumstances of sale in accordance
with section 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act
and 19 CFR 351.410. We made these
adjustments, where appropriate, by
deducting direct selling expenses
incurred on home–market sales (i.e.,
imputed credit expenses and
warranties) and adding U.S. direct
selling expenses (i.e., imputed credit
expenses and bank charges).
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
5966
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 24 / Friday, February 5, 2010 / Notices
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
In addition, FET reported one
transaction in its home–market sales
database for which it acknowledged it
had reason to know would be exported
to the People’s Republic of China. See
FET’s December 23, 2009, response to
our supplemental questionnaire.
Because FET knew or had reason to
know at the time of sale that this
transaction was destined for export, we
removed it from our calculation of
normal value in accordance with section
773(a)(1)(C) of the Act.
Level of Trade
In accordance with section
773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to the extent
practicable, we determine normal value
based on sales in the comparison market
at the same level of trade as the export
price. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.412(c)(1),
the normal–value level of trade is based
on the starting price of the sales in the
comparison market or, when normal
value is based on constructed value, the
starting price of the sales from which we
derive selling, general, and
administrative expenses and profit. For
export–price sales, the U.S. level of
trade is based on the starting price of the
sales in the U.S. market, which is
usually from the exporter to the
importer.
To determine whether comparison–
market sales are at a different level of
trade than export–price sales, we
examine stages in the marketing process
and selling functions along the chain of
distribution between the producer and
the unaffiliated customer. See 19 CFR
351.412(c)(2). If the comparison–market
sales are at a different level of trade and
the difference affects price
comparability, as manifested in a
pattern of consistent price differences
between the sales on which normal
value is based and the comparison–
market sales at the level of trade of the
export transaction, we make a level–oftrade adjustment under section
773(a)(7)(A) of the Act.
In this review, we obtained
information from FET regarding the
marketing stages involved in making its
reported home–market and U.S. sales
for each channel of distribution. FET
reported one channel of distribution
(i.e., direct sales to distributers) and a
single level of trade in the U.S. market.
For purposes of these preliminary
results, we have organized the common
selling functions into four major
categories: sales process and marketing
support, freight and delivery, inventory
and warehousing, and quality
assurance/warranty services. Because
the sales process and selling functions
FET performed for selling to the U.S.
market did not vary by individual
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:26 Feb 04, 2010
Jkt 220001
customers, the necessary condition for
finding they constitute different levels
of trade was not met. Accordingly, we
determined that all of FET’s U.S. sales
constituted a single level of trade.
FET reported a single channel of
distribution (i.e., direct sales to end–
users) and a single level of trade in the
home market. Because the sales process
and selling functions FET performed for
selling to home–market customers did
not vary by individual customers, we
determined that all of FET’s home–
market sales constituted a single level of
trade.
We found that the export–price level
of trade was similar to the home–market
level of trade in terms of selling
activities. Specifically, the levels of
expense were similar for the selling
functions FET provided in both markets.
Accordingly, we considered the export–
price level of trade to be similar to the
home–market level of trade and not at
a different stage of distribution than the
home–market level of trade. Therefore,
we matched export–price sales to sales
at the same level of trade in the home
market and no level–of-trade adjustment
under section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act is
necessary.
Preliminary Results of the Review
As a result of this review, we
preliminarily determine that a dumping
margin of 2.11 percent exists for FET for
the period May 1, 2008, through April
30, 2009.
Public Comment
We will disclose the documents
resulting from our analysis to parties in
this review within five days of the date
of publication of this notice. See 19 CFR
351.224(b). Any interested party may
request a hearing within 30 days of the
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). If a
hearing is requested, the Department
will notify interested parties of the
hearing schedule.
Interested parties are invited to
comment on the preliminary results of
this review. Interested parties may
submit case briefs within 30 days of the
date of publication of this notice.
Rebuttal briefs, which must be limited
to issues raised in the case briefs, may
be filed not later than 35 days after the
date of publication of this notice. Parties
who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs
in this review are requested to submit
with each argument (1) a statement of
the issue and (2) a brief summary of the
argument with an electronic version
included.
We intend to issue the final results of
this review, including the results of our
analysis of issues raised in any
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
submitted written comments, within
120 days after publication of this notice.
Assessment Rates
The Department shall determine, and
CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on
all appropriate entries. Although FET
indicated that it was not the importer of
record for any of its sales to the United
States during the period of review, it
reported the name of the importer of
record for all of its U.S. sales. Because
FET reported the entered value for all of
its U.S. sales and in accordance with 19
CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated
an importer–specific assessment rate for
the merchandise in question by
aggregating the dumping margins we
calculated for all U.S. sales to the
importer and dividing this amount by
the total entered value of those sales.
We intend to issue instructions to CBP
15 days after publication of the final
results of this review.
The Department clarified its
‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment
Clarification). This clarification will
apply to entries of subject merchandise
during the period of review produced by
FET for which it did not know its
merchandise was destined for the
United States. In such instances, we will
instruct CBP to liquidate un–reviewed
entries at the all–others rate if there is
no rate for the intermediate
company(ies) involved in the
transaction. For a full discussion of this
clarification, see Assessment
Clarification.
Cash–Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements
will be effective upon publication of the
notice of final results of administrative
review for all shipments of PSF from
Taiwan entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after
the date of publication as provided by
section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) the
cash–deposit rate for FET will be the
rate established in the final results of
this administrative review; (2) for
merchandise exported by manufacturers
or exporters not covered in this review
but covered in a prior segment of the
proceeding, the cash–deposit rate will
continue to be the company–specific
rate published for the most recent
period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm
covered in this review, a prior review,
or the original investigation but the
manufacturer is, the cash–deposit rate
will be the rate established for the most
recent period for the manufacturer of
the merchandise; (4) if neither the
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 24 / Friday, February 5, 2010 / Notices
exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm
covered in this review, the cash–deposit
rate will be 7.31 percent, the all–others
rate established in Notice of Amended
Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Certain Polyester
Staple Fiber From the Republic of Korea
and Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain
Polyester Staple Fiber From the
Republic of Korea and Taiwan, 65 FR
33807 (May 25, 2000).
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a
preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of
antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this
review period. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in the
Secretary’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of double antidumping duties.
We are issuing and publishing these
results in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: February 1, 2010.
Carole A. Showers,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy
and Negotiations.
[FR Doc. 2010–2593 Filed 2–4–04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM
PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR
SEVERELY DISABLED
Procurement List; Additions and
Deletions
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From
People Who Are Blind or Severely
Disabled.
ACTION: Additions to and Deletions from
Procurement List.
SUMMARY: This action adds to the
Procurement List products and services
to be furnished by nonprofit agencies
employing persons who are blind or
have other severe disabilities, and
deletes from the Procurement List
products and services previously
furnished by such agencies.
DATES: Effective Date: March 8, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase
From People Who Are Blind or Severely
Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800,
1421 Jefferson Davis Highway,
Arlington, Virginia, 22202–3259.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Barry S. Lineback, Telephone: (703)
603–7740, Fax: (703) 603–0655, or email
CMTEFedReg@AbilityOne.gov.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:26 Feb 04, 2010
Jkt 220001
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Additions
On 12/4/2009 (74 FR 63732) and 12/
11/2009 (74 FR 65758–65760), the
Committee for Purchase From People
Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled
published notices of proposed additions
to the Procurement List.
After consideration of the material
presented to it concerning capability of
qualified nonprofit agencies to provide
the products and services and impact of
the additions on the current or most
recent contractors, the Committee has
determined that the products and
services listed below are suitable for
procurement by the Federal Government
under 41 U.S.C. 46–48c and 41 CFR 51–
2.4.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
I certify that the following action will
not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The major factors considered for this
certification were:
1. The action will not result in any
additional reporting, recordkeeping or
other compliance requirements for small
entities other than the small
organizations that will furnish the
products and services to the
Government.
2. The action will result in
authorizing small entities to furnish the
products and services to the
Government.
3. There are no known regulatory
alternatives which would accomplish
the objectives of the Javits-WagnerO’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in
connection with the products and
services proposed for addition to the
Procurement List.
End of Certification
Accordingly, the following products
and services are added to the
Procurement List:
Products
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0382—36″x72″ Fingertip Mat, Heavy-duty, Black
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0372—4x6′ Vinyl Loop
Scraper Mat, Gray
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0377—3x5′ Loop-twist
Outdoor Scraper Mat, Gray
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0383—3x5′ Wiper/
Scraper Mat, Medium Duty, Recycled
PET, Gray
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0391—3x5′ Indoor
Wiper Mat, Recycled PET, Gray
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0397—2x3′ Ribbed Vinyl
Anti-fatigue mat, Gray
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0399—2x3′ Industrial
deck-plate, Anti-fatigue Mat, Black
Coverage: A–List for the total government
requirement as aggregated by the General
Services Administration
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0398—3x5′ Ribbed Vinyl
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5967
Anti-fatigue mat, Gray
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0400—3x5′ Industrial
deck-plate, Anti-fatigue Mat, Black
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0402—2x3′ Industrial
deck-plate, Anti-fatigue Mat, Black
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0403—3x5′ Industrial
deck-plate, Anti-fatigue Mat, Black
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0411—2x3′ Anti-fatigue
Mat, Recycled content, Gray
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0412—3x5′ Anti-fatigue
Mat, Recycled content, Gray
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0384—4x6′ Wiper/
Scraper Mat, Medium Duty, Recycled
PET, Gray
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0378—4x6′ Loop-twist
Outdoor Scraper Mat, Gray
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0392—4x6′ Indoor
Wiper Mat, Recycled PET, Gray
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0369—3x5′ Vinyl Loop
Scraper Mat, Black
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0370—4x6′ Vinyl Loop
Scraper Mat, Black
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0375—24″x32″ Fingertip Mat, Medium-duty, Black
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0376—36″x72″ Fingertip Mat, Medium-duty, Black
NSN: 7220–00–NIB–0381—23″x32″ Fingertip Mat, Heavy-duty, Black
Coverage: B–List for the broad government
requirement as aggregated by the General
Services Administration
NPA: Wiscraft Inc.—Wisconsin Enterprises
for the Blind, Milwaukee, WI
Contracting Activity: Federal Acquisition
Service, GSA/FAS Southwest Supply
Center (QSDAC), Fort Worth, TX
Services
Service Type/Locations: Document
Destruction Service
NPA: NISH (Prime Contractor)
Contracting Activity: Dept Of The Treasury/
Internal Revenue Service, Washington,
DC
I.R.S. Offices at the following locations:
2385 CHAMBLEE TUCKER ROAD,
CHAMBLEE, GA
J GORDON LOW BLDG: 120 BARNARD ST,
SAVANNAH, GA
401 W PEACHTREE ST, ATLANTA, GA
600 EAST FIRST ST, ROME, GA
RICHARD B. RUSSELL FB: 75 SPRING ST,
ATLANTA, GA
R. G. STEPHENS JR FB: 355 HANCOCK
AVENUE, ATHENS, GA
4800 BUFORD HIGHWAY, CHAMBLEE, GA
NE KOGER: 2888 WOODCOCK BLVD,
ATLANTA, GA
SNAPFINGER TECH: 5240 SNAPFINGER
PARK DR, DECATUR, GA
2970 BRANDYWINE RD, ATLANTA, GA
2980 BRANDYWINE RD, ATLANTA, GA
ATSC TRAINING: 2965 FLOWERS RD,
CHAMBLEE, GA
2400 HERODIAN WAY, SMYRNA, GA
FIRST FEDERAL PLAZA: 777 GLOUCESTER
ST, BRUNSWICK, GA
2743 PERIMETER PKWY, AUGUSTA, GA
233 PEACHTREE ST, ATLANTA, GA
6655 PEACHTREE DUNWOODY RD NE,
ATLANTA, GA
329 OAK STREET, GAINESVILLE, GA
1008 PROFESSIONAL BLVD., DALTON, GA
6600 BAY CIRCLE, NORCROSS, GA
640 NORTH AVENUE, MACON, GA
33 E. TWOHIG AVE, SAN ANGELO, TX
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 24 (Friday, February 5, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5964-5967]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-2593]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-583-833]
Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From Taiwan: Preliminary Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain
polyester staple fiber (PSF) from Taiwan. The period of review is May
1, 2008, through April 30, 2009. This review covers imports of certain
polyester staple fiber from one producer/exporter. We have
preliminarily found that sales of the subject merchandise have been
made below normal value. If these preliminary results are adopted in
our final results, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results.
We will issue the final results not later than 120 days after the date
of publication of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 5, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael A. Romani or Richard
Rimlinger, AD/CVD Operations, Office 5, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington DC 20230; telephone
(202) 482-0198 or (202) 482-4477, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On June 24, 2009, the Department published a notice initiating an
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain PSF from
Taiwan covering the respondents Far Eastern Textiles Ltd. (FET) and Nan
Ya Plastics Corporation (Nan Ya). See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Requests for Revocation
in Part, 74 FR 30052 (June 24, 2009). We have rescinded the review with
respect to Nan Ya. See Polyester Staple Fiber from Taiwan: Rescission
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part, 74 FR 41684 (August
18, 2009).
Scope of the Order
The product covered by the order is PSF. PSF is defined as
synthetic staple fibers, not carded, combed or otherwise processed for
spinning, of polyesters measuring 3.3 decitex (3 denier, inclusive) or
more in diameter. This merchandise is cut to lengths varying from one
inch (25 mm) to five inches (127 mm). The merchandise subject to the
order may be coated, usually with a silicon or other finish, or not
coated. PSF is generally used as stuffing in sleeping bags, mattresses,
ski jackets, comforters, cushions, pillows, and furniture. Merchandise
of less than 3.3 decitex (less than 3 denier) currently classifiable in
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) at
subheading 5503.20.00.20 is specifically excluded from the order. Also
specifically excluded from the order are polyester staple fibers of 10
to 18 denier that are cut to lengths of 6 to 8 inches (fibers used in
the manufacture of carpeting). In addition, low-melt PSF is excluded
from this order. Low-melt PSF is defined as a bi-component fiber with
an outer sheath that melts at a significantly lower temperature than
its inner core.
The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable in
the HTSUS at subheadings 5503.20.00.45 and 5503.20.00.65. Although the
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes,
the written description of the merchandise subject to the order is
dispositive.
Fair-Value Comparisons
To determine whether FET's sales of PSF to the United States were
made at less than normal value, we compared export price to normal
value as described in the ``Export Price'' and ``Normal Value''
sections of this notice.
Pursuant to section 777A(d)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), we compared the export price of individual U.S.
transactions to the monthly weighted-average normal value of the
foreign like product where there were sales made in the ordinary course
of trade, as discussed in the ``Cost of Production'' section below.
Product Comparisons
We compared U.S. sales to monthly weighted-average prices of
contemporaneous sales made in the home market. We found contemporaneous
sales of identical merchandise in the home market for all U.S. sales in
accordance with section 771(16) of the Act.
Date of Sale
Section 351.401(i) of the Department's regulations states that the
Department normally will use the date of invoice, as recorded in the
producer's or exporter's
[[Page 5965]]
records kept in the ordinary course of business, as the date of sale.
The regulation provides further that the Department may use a date
other than the date of the invoice if the Secretary is satisfied that a
different date better reflects the date on which the material terms of
sale are established. The Department has a long-standing practice of
finding that, where shipment date precedes invoice date, shipment date
better reflects the date on which the material terms of sale are
established. See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Negative Final Determination of Critical Circumstances:
Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp From Thailand, 69 FR 76918
(December 23, 2004), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 10; see also Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Structural Steel Beams From Germany, 67 FR 35497 (May
20, 2002), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment
2.
With respect to FET's U.S. market sales, shipment date occurs on or
before the date of invoice. The date of invoice is the date on which
the Government Uniform Invoice is issued. Further, based on record
evidence, all material terms of sale are established at the time of
shipment and do not change in the subsequent time prior to the issuance
of the invoice. Therefore, we used the date of shipment as the date of
sale in accordance with our practice.
With respect to most of FET's home-market sales, shipment date
occurs on or before the invoice date. Further, based on record
evidence, all material terms of sale are established at the time of
shipment and do not change in the subsequent time prior to the issuance
of the invoice. We note that FET had some home-market sales in which
invoice dates preceded shipment dates; for these home-market sales, we
used the invoice date as the date of sale in accordance with our
practice. For all other home-market sales, we used shipment date as
date of sale.
Export Price
For sales to the United States, we calculated export price in
accordance with section 772(a) of the Act because the merchandise was
sold prior to importation by the exporter or producer outside the
United States to the first unaffiliated purchaser in the United States
and because constructed export-price methodology was not otherwise
warranted. We calculated export price based on the free-on-board price
to unaffiliated purchasers in the United States. Where appropriate, we
made deductions, consistent with section 772(c)(2)(A) of the Act, for
the following movement expenses: inland freight from the plant to the
port of exportation, inland insurance in Taiwan, brokerage and
handling, harbor service fees, trade promotion fees, and
containerization expenses. No other adjustments were claimed or
allowed.
Normal Value
Selection of Comparison Market
To determine whether there was a sufficient volume of sales of PSF
in the home market to serve as a viable basis for calculating normal
value, we compared the volume of the respondent's home-market sales of
the foreign like product to its volume of U.S. sales of the subject
merchandise in accordance with section 773(a) of the Act. Pursuant to
section 773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, because the respondent's aggregate
volume of home-market sales of the foreign like product was greater
than five percent of its aggregate volume of U.S. sales of the subject
merchandise, we determined that the home market was viable for
comparison purposes.
Cost of Production
We disregarded below-cost sales by FET in the last administrative
review of the order completed prior to the initiation of this review.
See Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From Taiwan: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR 18348 (April 22, 2009);
see also Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From Taiwan: Preliminary
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR 6136, 6137-38
(February 5, 2009). Therefore, pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(A)(ii) of
the Act, there were reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that the
respondent made sales of the foreign like product in its comparison
market at prices below the cost of production within the meaning of
section 773(b) of the Act.
We calculated the cost of production on a product-specific basis,
based on the sum of the respondent's costs of materials and fabrication
for the foreign like product plus amounts for general and
administrative expenses, interest expenses, and the costs of all
expenses incidental to preparing the foreign like product for shipment
in accordance with section 773(b)(3) of the Act.
We relied on cost-of-production information FET submitted in its
response to our cost questionnaire except we adjusted FET's reported
cost of manufacturing to account for purchases of purified terephthalic
acid and monoethylene glycol from affiliated parties at non-arm's-
length prices in accordance with the major-input rule of section
773(f)(3) of the Act.
On a product-specific basis, we compared the adjusted weighted-
average cost-of-production figures for the period of review to the
home-market sales of the foreign like product, as required under
section 773(b) of the Act, to determine whether these sales were made
at prices below the cost of production. The prices were exclusive of
any applicable movement charges, packing expenses, warranties, and
indirect selling expenses. In determining whether to disregard home-
market sales made at prices below their cost of production and in
accordance with sections 773(b)(2)(B), (C), and (D) of the Act, we
examined whether such sales were made within an extended period of time
in substantial quantities and at prices which permitted the recovery of
all costs within a reasonable period of time.
We found that, for certain products, more than 20 percent of the
respondent's home-market sales were at prices below the cost of
production and, in addition, the below-cost sales were made within an
extended period of time in substantial quantities. In addition, these
sales were made at prices that did not permit the recovery of costs
within a reasonable period of time. Therefore, we disregarded these
sales and used the remaining sales of the same product as the basis for
determining normal value in accordance with section 773(b)(1) of the
Act.
Calculation of Normal Value
We calculated normal value based on the price FET reported for
home-market sales to unaffiliated customers which we determined were
within the ordinary course of trade. We made adjustments for
differences in domestic and export packing expenses in accordance with
sections 773(a)(6)(A) and 773(a)(6)(B)(i) of the Act. We also made
adjustments, consistent with section 773(a)(6)(B)(ii) of the Act, for
inland-freight expenses from the plant to the customer and expenses
associated with loading the merchandise onto the truck to be shipped.
In addition, we made adjustments for differences in circumstances of
sale in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.410. We made these adjustments, where appropriate, by deducting
direct selling expenses incurred on home-market sales (i.e., imputed
credit expenses and warranties) and adding U.S. direct selling expenses
(i.e., imputed credit expenses and bank charges).
[[Page 5966]]
In addition, FET reported one transaction in its home-market sales
database for which it acknowledged it had reason to know would be
exported to the People's Republic of China. See FET's December 23,
2009, response to our supplemental questionnaire. Because FET knew or
had reason to know at the time of sale that this transaction was
destined for export, we removed it from our calculation of normal value
in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(C) of the Act.
Level of Trade
In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to the extent
practicable, we determine normal value based on sales in the comparison
market at the same level of trade as the export price. Pursuant to 19
CFR 351.412(c)(1), the normal-value level of trade is based on the
starting price of the sales in the comparison market or, when normal
value is based on constructed value, the starting price of the sales
from which we derive selling, general, and administrative expenses and
profit. For export-price sales, the U.S. level of trade is based on the
starting price of the sales in the U.S. market, which is usually from
the exporter to the importer.
To determine whether comparison-market sales are at a different
level of trade than export-price sales, we examine stages in the
marketing process and selling functions along the chain of distribution
between the producer and the unaffiliated customer. See 19 CFR
351.412(c)(2). If the comparison-market sales are at a different level
of trade and the difference affects price comparability, as manifested
in a pattern of consistent price differences between the sales on which
normal value is based and the comparison-market sales at the level of
trade of the export transaction, we make a level-of-trade adjustment
under section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act.
In this review, we obtained information from FET regarding the
marketing stages involved in making its reported home-market and U.S.
sales for each channel of distribution. FET reported one channel of
distribution (i.e., direct sales to distributers) and a single level of
trade in the U.S. market. For purposes of these preliminary results, we
have organized the common selling functions into four major categories:
sales process and marketing support, freight and delivery, inventory
and warehousing, and quality assurance/warranty services. Because the
sales process and selling functions FET performed for selling to the
U.S. market did not vary by individual customers, the necessary
condition for finding they constitute different levels of trade was not
met. Accordingly, we determined that all of FET's U.S. sales
constituted a single level of trade.
FET reported a single channel of distribution (i.e., direct sales
to end-users) and a single level of trade in the home market. Because
the sales process and selling functions FET performed for selling to
home-market customers did not vary by individual customers, we
determined that all of FET's home-market sales constituted a single
level of trade.
We found that the export-price level of trade was similar to the
home-market level of trade in terms of selling activities.
Specifically, the levels of expense were similar for the selling
functions FET provided in both markets. Accordingly, we considered the
export-price level of trade to be similar to the home-market level of
trade and not at a different stage of distribution than the home-market
level of trade. Therefore, we matched export-price sales to sales at
the same level of trade in the home market and no level-of-trade
adjustment under section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act is necessary.
Preliminary Results of the Review
As a result of this review, we preliminarily determine that a
dumping margin of 2.11 percent exists for FET for the period May 1,
2008, through April 30, 2009.
Public Comment
We will disclose the documents resulting from our analysis to
parties in this review within five days of the date of publication of
this notice. See 19 CFR 351.224(b). Any interested party may request a
hearing within 30 days of the publication of this notice in the Federal
Register. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). If a hearing is requested, the
Department will notify interested parties of the hearing schedule.
Interested parties are invited to comment on the preliminary
results of this review. Interested parties may submit case briefs
within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal
briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may
be filed not later than 35 days after the date of publication of this
notice. Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this
review are requested to submit with each argument (1) a statement of
the issue and (2) a brief summary of the argument with an electronic
version included.
We intend to issue the final results of this review, including the
results of our analysis of issues raised in any submitted written
comments, within 120 days after publication of this notice.
Assessment Rates
The Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries. Although FET indicated that it was
not the importer of record for any of its sales to the United States
during the period of review, it reported the name of the importer of
record for all of its U.S. sales. Because FET reported the entered
value for all of its U.S. sales and in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1), we have calculated an importer-specific assessment rate
for the merchandise in question by aggregating the dumping margins we
calculated for all U.S. sales to the importer and dividing this amount
by the total entered value of those sales. We intend to issue
instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of
this review.
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment
Clarification). This clarification will apply to entries of subject
merchandise during the period of review produced by FET for which it
did not know its merchandise was destined for the United States. In
such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate un-reviewed entries
at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate
company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full discussion of this
clarification, see Assessment Clarification.
Cash-Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for
all shipments of PSF from Taiwan entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the date of publication as provided by
section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) the cash-deposit rate for FET will be
the rate established in the final results of this administrative
review; (2) for merchandise exported by manufacturers or exporters not
covered in this review but covered in a prior segment of the
proceeding, the cash-deposit rate will continue to be the company-
specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter
is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original
investigation but the manufacturer is, the cash-deposit rate will be
the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of
the merchandise; (4) if neither the
[[Page 5967]]
exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this review, the
cash-deposit rate will be 7.31 percent, the all-others rate established
in Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value: Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From the Republic of Korea and
Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From the
Republic of Korea and Taiwan, 65 FR 33807 (May 25, 2000).
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: February 1, 2010.
Carole A. Showers,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations.
[FR Doc. 2010-2593 Filed 2-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
