Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From the Netherlands: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77829-77831 [2010-31369]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 14, 2010 / Notices
to the publication of the Preliminary
Results, the Department extended the
deadlines for submission of surrogate
values, rebuttal comments and case
briefs.2 The period of review (‘‘POR’’) is
January 23, 2008, through July 31, 2009.
The final results are currently due no
later than January 13, 2011.
Extension of Time Limit For the Final
Results
Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (‘‘Act’’), requires
that the Department issue the final
results of an administrative review
within 120 days after the date on which
the preliminary results are published. If
it is not practicable to complete the
review within that time period, section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the
Department to extend the deadline for
the final results to a maximum of 180
days after the date on which the
preliminary results are published.
The Department finds that it is not
practicable to complete the final results
within this time limit because the
Department is in the process of
conducting the verification of a
mandatory respondent and needs
additional time to complete this
verification and issue its final
determination. In addition, the
extension of the briefing schedule for
surrogate values and company-specific
issues in this proceeding necessitates
additional time for the Department to
make its final determination. As a
result, the Department finds that it is
not practicable to complete verification,
to review the surrogate value data, and
to analyze the case brief comments
within the scheduled time limit.
Therefore, in accordance with section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Department
is fully extending the time for the
completion of the final results of this
review to March 14, 2011.
We are issuing and publishing this
notice in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 8, 2010.
Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2010–31366 Filed 12–13–10; 8:45 am]
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR
56070 (September 15, 2010) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’).
2 See Letter from Emeka Chukwudebe, Case
Analyst, Office 9, to Interested Parties: Extension
Briefing Schedule for 1st AR Antidumping
Administrative Reviews of Certain Steel Nails from
the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) (October 5,
2010). See also Memorandum For: All Interested
Parties, from Emeka Chukwudebe, Case Analyst,
Import Administration, dated October 6, 2010. See
also Memorandum For: All Interested Parties, from
Matthew Renkey, Case Analyst, Import
Administration, dated October 21, 2010.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Dec 13, 2010
Jkt 223001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–421–811]
Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From
the Netherlands: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 10, 2010, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published its preliminary
results in the antidumping duty
administrative review of purified
carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) from the
Netherlands. See Purified
Carboxymethylcellulose From the
Netherlands; Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 75 FR 48310 (August 10, 2010)
(Preliminary Results). The merchandise
covered by the order is purified CMC, as
described in the ‘‘Scope of the Order’’
section of this notice. The period of
review (POR) is July 1, 2008, through
June 30, 2009. We afforded interested
parties an opportunity to comment on
the Preliminary Results. We received
comments from interested parties on
October 22, 2010, and, in light of these
comments, have made changes to our
margin calculations. Thus, the final
results differ from those published in
the Department’s Preliminary Results.
The final weighted-average dumping
margins for the reviewed firms are listed
below in the section entitled ‘‘Final
Results of the Review.’’
DATES: Effective Date: December 14,
2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Edythe Artman, Olga Carter, or Angelica
Mendoza, AD/CVD Operations, Office 7,
Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3931,
(202) 482–8221, or (202) 482–3019,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On August 10, 2010, the Department
published the preliminary results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on purified
CMC from the Netherlands. See
Preliminary Results at 48310. The
respondents under review are Akzo
Nobel Functional Chemicals B.V.
(ANFC) and CP Kelco B.V. (CP Kelco).
The petitioner in this proceeding is
Aqualon Company, a unit of Hercules
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
77829
Inc. We invited interested parties to
comment on the Preliminary Results
following the release of all verification
reports. See Preliminary Results at
48318.
On September 29, 2010, the
Department released the home-market
sales verification report for ANFC and,
on October 13, 2010, we released the
U.S. sales verification report for this
company. We did not verify the
responses of CP Kelco in the current
review.
On October 22, 2010, ANFC
submitted a case brief and CP Kelco
submitted a letter in lieu of a case brief.
The petitioner did not file any
comments on the preliminary results of
review and no party requested a hearing
concerning the review.
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the order
is all purified CMC, sometimes also
referred to as purified sodium CMC,
polyanionic cellulose, or cellulose gum,
which is a white to off-white, non-toxic,
odorless, biodegradable powder,
comprising sodium CMC that has been
refined and purified to a minimum
assay of 90 percent. Purified CMC does
not include unpurified or crude CMC,
CMC Fluidized Polymer Suspensions,
and CMC that is cross-linked through
heat treatment. Purified CMC is CMC
that has undergone one or more
purification operations which, at a
minimum, reduce the remaining salt
and other by-product portion of the
product to less than ten percent. The
merchandise subject to the order is
classified in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States at
subheading 3912.31.00. This tariff
classification is provided for
convenience and customs purposes;
however, the written description of the
scope of the order is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in ANFC’s case brief
and CP Kelco’s letter in lieu of a case
brief are addressed in the ‘‘Issues and
Decision Memorandum for the Final
Results of the 2008/2009 Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review of Purified
Carboxymethylcellulose from the
Netherlands,’’ from Gary Taverman,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, to Paul Piquado, Acting
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, dated December 8, 2010
(Issues and Decision Memorandum),
and hereby adopted by this notice. A list
of the issues raised, all of which are in
the Issues and Decision Memorandum,
is attached to this notice as Appendix I.
A copy of the Issues and Decision
E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM
14DEN1
77830
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 14, 2010 / Notices
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Memorandum will be placed on the
official file of this review, which is
located in the Central Records Unit
(CRU), room 7046 of the main
Department of Commerce building. In
addition, a complete version of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum can
be accessed directly on the Internet at
https://www.trade.gov/ia/. The paper
copy and electronic version of the Issues
and Decision Memorandum are
identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of the
comments received from ANFC, we
have made changes to its margin
calculations for the final results. The
Department changed the assignment of
product characteristics to the variable
‘‘CMCHAR’’ from U.S. product
characteristics to home-market product
characteristics. This change is
consistent with our model-matching
methodology and will ensure that sales
in the U.S. market are compared to
home-market sales of the identical or
similar models. We also have changed
the calculation of movement expenses
so that warehousing expenses are only
included in domestic movement
expenses (i.e., they have been removed
from the calculation of international
movement expenses). Finally, we have
reviewed ANFC’s comments with
respect to the inventory carrying costs
incurred in the United States and agree
that no such costs were incurred on
‘‘Channel-1’’ sales—those sales in which
the product was shipped directly from
the production facility or warehouse in
the Netherlands to the U.S. customer.
Thus, we have modified our
recalculation of inventory carrying costs
incurred in the United States in the
margin calculation program to exclude
Channel-1 sales. For a more detailed
discussion of the changes made to
ANFC’s calculations, see ‘‘Memorandum
to the File: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review of Purified
Carboxymethylcellulose from the
Netherlands: Analysis of the Sales
Responses Submitted by Akzo Nobel
Functional Chemicals B.V.,’’ from Olga
Carter, International Trade Compliance
Analyst, to the File, dated December 8,
2010. A public version of this
memorandum is on file in the CRU.
In addition, we made changes to the
programs used to calculate ANFC’s
margin based on our own review of the
record following the issuance of the
Preliminary Results. First, in light of a
finding discovered at ANFC’s homemarket sales verification, we have
corrected the entry date of one U.S. sale.
Specifically, in our margin-calculation
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Dec 13, 2010
Jkt 223001
program, we have entered the verified
date of entry for this sale (and, as
described below, are recalculating the
inventory carrying costs for this sale, as
we are for all sales). Second, subsequent
to the issuance of the Preliminary
Results, we noticed that a minor
correction relating to one sale was not
reflected in ANFC’s most-recently
submitted U.S. sales database.1
Consequently, for this sale, we entered
the verified date of entry and amount of
U.S. duties incurred on the sale in the
margin-calculation program. Lastly, we
noticed an oversight in our preliminary
margin calculations in that, having
made an adjustment to the
manufacturing costs of all products, we
failed to recalculate the inventory
carrying costs incurred in the
Netherlands on both home-market and
U.S. sales.2 See the memorandum on
‘‘Cost of Production and Constructed
Value Calculation Adjustments for the
Preliminary Results—Akzo Nobel
Functional Chemicals B.V.,’’ from
Frederick W. Mines, Accountant, to
Peter S. Scholl, Lead Accountant, dated
August 2, 2010. Thus, we have corrected
this oversight for the final results by
modifying the comparison-market and
margin-calculation programs to
recalculate the inventory carrying costs
that ANFC incurred in the Netherlands.
With respect to CP Kelco, we
reviewed the company’s comment that
language in our margin-calculation
program, used to recalculate U.S.
indirect selling expenses incurred in the
home market, resulted in an inadvertent
mathematical error. As suggested by the
respondent, we have modified the
programming language so that the gross
unit price of a sale is now added to any
billing adjustments of the sale before the
selling-expense factor is applied to the
sum of these two amounts. This change
is detailed in the ‘‘CP Kelco B.V.—
Analysis Memorandum for the Final
1 This database and the most-recently submitted
home-market sales database reflected all other
minor corrections and revisions requested by the
Department at verification and were used to
calculate CP Kelco’s preliminary dumping margin.
2 The adjustment to manufacturing costs, upon
which inventory carrying costs are based, would
also make it necessary to recalculate the inventory
carrying costs incurred in the United States except
that we already inserted the programming language
for this recalculation in ANFC’s margin-calculation
program for the preliminary results. We made this
earlier change based on our finding that these costs
should be calculated by using the U.S. interest rate.
See ‘‘Analysis of Data Submitted by Akzo Nobel
Functional Chemicals B.V. (ANFC) and Akzo Nobel
Functional Chemicals LLC (AN–US) in the
Preliminary Results of the 2008–2009
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty
Order on Purified Carboxymethylcellulose (CMC)
from the Netherlands,’’ from Olga Carter and Edythe
Artman, International Trade Compliance Analysts,
to the File, dated August 2, 2010, at 10.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Results of the 2008/2009 Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review of Purified
Carboxymethylcellulose from the
Netherlands,’’ from Edythe Artman,
International Trade Compliance
Analyst, to the File, dated December 8,
2010. A public version of this
memorandum is on file in the CRU.
Final Results of the Review
We determine the following
percentage weighted-average margins to
exist for the period July 1, 2008, through
June 30, 2009:
Manufacturer/Exporter
ANFC ............................
CP Kelco B.V. ...............
Weighted-average
margin
(percentage)
9.06
2.64
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties
on all appropriate entries. In accordance
with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), the
Department normally calculates an
assessment rate for each importer of the
subject merchandise covered by the
review. In this review, we have
calculated, whenever possible, an
exporter/importer (or customer)-specific
assessment rate or value for
merchandise subject to this review as
described below.
With respect to export-price sales (i.e.,
sales directly to the unaffiliated
purchaser in the United States) for these
final results, we divided the total
dumping margins (calculated as the
difference between normal value and
export price) for each exporter’s
importer or customer by the total
number of units the exporter sold to that
importer or customer. We will direct
CBP to assess the resulting per-unit
dollar amount against each unit of
merchandise in each of that importer’s/
customer’s POR entries.
For constructed-export-price sales
(e.g., sales through ANFC’s U.S. affiliate
to the unaffiliated purchaser in the
United States), we divided the total
dumping margins for the reviewed sales
by the total entered value of those
reviewed sales for each importer. We
will direct CBP to assess the resulting
percentage margin against the entered
customs values for the subject
merchandise on each of that importer’s
POR entries. See 19 CFR 351.212(b).
The calculated per-unit values or ad
valorem rates, as appropriate, will be
assessed uniformly on all entries made
by the respective importers during the
POR. Where the assessment rate is
above de minimis, we will instruct CBP
E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM
14DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 14, 2010 / Notices
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
to assess duties on all entries of subject
merchandise by that importer.
The Department clarified its
‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on
May 6, 2003. This clarification will
apply to entries of subject merchandise
during the POR produced by reviewed
companies for which these companies
did not know their merchandise was
destined for the United States. In such
instances, we will instruct CBP to
liquidate unreviewed entries at the allothers rate if there is no rate for the
intermediate company(ies) involved in
the transaction. For a full discussion of
this clarification, see Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
The Department intends to issue
assessment instructions directly to CBP
15 days after publication of these final
results of review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash-deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of this notice of final results
of administrative review for all
shipments of purified CMC from the
Netherlands entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after
the date of publication, as provided by
section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act): (1) The
cash-deposit rates for ANFC and CP
Kelco will be the rates established in the
final results of this review; (2) for
previously reviewed or investigated
companies not covered in this review,
the cash deposit rate will continue to be
the company-specific rate published for
the most recent period; (3) if the
exporter is not a firm covered in this or
any previous review or in the less-thanfair-value (LTFV) investigation but the
manufacturer is, the cash-deposit rate
will be the rate established for the most
recent period for the manufacturer of
the merchandise; and (4) if neither the
exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm
covered in this or any previous review
or the investigation, the cash-deposit
rate will continue to be the all-others
rate of 14.57 percent, which is the allothers rate established by the
Department in the LTFV investigation.
See Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders:
Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from
Finland, Mexico, the Netherlands and
Sweden, 70 FR 39734 (July 11, 2005).
These cash-deposit requirements, when
imposed, shall remain in effect until
further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Dec 13, 2010
Jkt 223001
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
Department’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of doubled antidumping duties.
Notification Regarding Administrative
Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective orders (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the return or
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely,
written notification of the return or
destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a violation that is subject to
sanction.
We are issuing and publishing this
notice in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 8, 2010.
Paul Piquado,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I—Comments in the Issues
and Decision Memorandum
Clerical Errors
Comment 1: Physical Characteristic Codes of
Comparison-Market Sales.
Comment 2: Double-counting of Warehousing
Expenses Incurred in the Country of
Manufacture.
Comment 3: Inventory Carrying Costs
Incurred in the United States on Certain
Sales.
Comment 4: Calculation of U.S. Indirect
Selling Expenses Incurred in the Country
of Manufacture.
[FR Doc. 2010–31369 Filed 12–13–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–428–840]
Lightweight Thermal Paper From
Germany: Notice of Preliminary
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(‘‘the Department’’) is conducting an
administrative review of the
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
77831
antidumping duty order on lightweight
thermal paper from Germany. For the
period November 20, 2008, through
October 31, 2009, we have preliminarily
determined that Papierfabrik August
Koehler AG and Koehler America, Inc.
(collectively, ‘‘Koehler’’) did not make
sales of subject merchandise at less than
normal value (‘‘NV’’) (i.e., sales were
made at de minimis dumping margins).
If these preliminary results are adopted
in the final results of this administrative
review, we will instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to
liquidate appropriate entries without
regard to antidumping duties. See
‘‘Preliminary Results of Review’’ section
of this notice. Interested parties are
invited to comment on these
preliminary results.
DATES: Effective Date: December 14,
2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephanie Moore or George McMahon,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone (202) 482–3692 or (202) 482–
1167, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On November 2, 2009, the Department
issued a notice of opportunity to request
an administrative review of this order
for the period of review (‘‘POR’’)
November 20, 2008, through October 31,
2009. See Antidumping or
Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or
Suspended Investigation; Opportunity
to Request Administrative Review, 74
FR 56573 (November 2, 2009).
On November 30, 2009, we received
a timely request from Appleton Papers,
Inc. (‘‘petitioner’’) for the Department to
conduct an administrative review of
Mitsubishi HiTec Paper Flensburg
GmbH, Mitsubishi HiTec Paper
Bielefeld GmbH and Mitsubishi
International Corporation (collectively,
‘‘Mitsubishi’’), and Papierfabrik August
Koehler AG and Koehler America, Inc.
(collectively, ‘‘Koehler’’). We also
received a request from Koehler for the
Department to conduct an
administrative review of Koehler.
On December 23, 2009, the
Department published the notice of
initiation of this antidumping duty
administrative review covering the
period November 20, 2008, through
October 31, 2009, naming Mitsubishi
and Koehler as respondents. See
Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews and Request for Revocation in
E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM
14DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 14, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77829-77831]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31369]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-421-811]
Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From the Netherlands: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 10, 2010, the Department of Commerce (the
Department) published its preliminary results in the antidumping duty
administrative review of purified carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) from the
Netherlands. See Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From the Netherlands;
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR
48310 (August 10, 2010) (Preliminary Results). The merchandise covered
by the order is purified CMC, as described in the ``Scope of the
Order'' section of this notice. The period of review (POR) is July 1,
2008, through June 30, 2009. We afforded interested parties an
opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results. We received comments
from interested parties on October 22, 2010, and, in light of these
comments, have made changes to our margin calculations. Thus, the final
results differ from those published in the Department's Preliminary
Results. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed
firms are listed below in the section entitled ``Final Results of the
Review.''
DATES: Effective Date: December 14, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edythe Artman, Olga Carter, or
Angelica Mendoza, AD/CVD Operations, Office 7, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482-3931, (202) 482-8221, or (202) 482-3019, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 10, 2010, the Department published the preliminary
results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on
purified CMC from the Netherlands. See Preliminary Results at 48310.
The respondents under review are Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals B.V.
(ANFC) and CP Kelco B.V. (CP Kelco). The petitioner in this proceeding
is Aqualon Company, a unit of Hercules Inc. We invited interested
parties to comment on the Preliminary Results following the release of
all verification reports. See Preliminary Results at 48318.
On September 29, 2010, the Department released the home-market
sales verification report for ANFC and, on October 13, 2010, we
released the U.S. sales verification report for this company. We did
not verify the responses of CP Kelco in the current review.
On October 22, 2010, ANFC submitted a case brief and CP Kelco
submitted a letter in lieu of a case brief. The petitioner did not file
any comments on the preliminary results of review and no party
requested a hearing concerning the review.
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the order is all purified CMC, sometimes
also referred to as purified sodium CMC, polyanionic cellulose, or
cellulose gum, which is a white to off-white, non-toxic, odorless,
biodegradable powder, comprising sodium CMC that has been refined and
purified to a minimum assay of 90 percent. Purified CMC does not
include unpurified or crude CMC, CMC Fluidized Polymer Suspensions, and
CMC that is cross-linked through heat treatment. Purified CMC is CMC
that has undergone one or more purification operations which, at a
minimum, reduce the remaining salt and other by-product portion of the
product to less than ten percent. The merchandise subject to the order
is classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States at
subheading 3912.31.00. This tariff classification is provided for
convenience and customs purposes; however, the written description of
the scope of the order is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in ANFC's case brief and CP Kelco's letter in
lieu of a case brief are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2008/2009 Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review of Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from the
Netherlands,'' from Gary Taverman, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated
December 8, 2010 (Issues and Decision Memorandum), and hereby adopted
by this notice. A list of the issues raised, all of which are in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as Appendix
I. A copy of the Issues and Decision
[[Page 77830]]
Memorandum will be placed on the official file of this review, which is
located in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room 7046 of the main
Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet
at https://www.trade.gov/ia/. The paper copy and electronic version of
the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of the comments received from ANFC, we have
made changes to its margin calculations for the final results. The
Department changed the assignment of product characteristics to the
variable ``CMCHAR'' from U.S. product characteristics to home-market
product characteristics. This change is consistent with our model-
matching methodology and will ensure that sales in the U.S. market are
compared to home-market sales of the identical or similar models. We
also have changed the calculation of movement expenses so that
warehousing expenses are only included in domestic movement expenses
(i.e., they have been removed from the calculation of international
movement expenses). Finally, we have reviewed ANFC's comments with
respect to the inventory carrying costs incurred in the United States
and agree that no such costs were incurred on ``Channel-1'' sales--
those sales in which the product was shipped directly from the
production facility or warehouse in the Netherlands to the U.S.
customer. Thus, we have modified our recalculation of inventory
carrying costs incurred in the United States in the margin calculation
program to exclude Channel-1 sales. For a more detailed discussion of
the changes made to ANFC's calculations, see ``Memorandum to the File:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Purified
Carboxymethylcellulose from the Netherlands: Analysis of the Sales
Responses Submitted by Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals B.V.,'' from
Olga Carter, International Trade Compliance Analyst, to the File, dated
December 8, 2010. A public version of this memorandum is on file in the
CRU.
In addition, we made changes to the programs used to calculate
ANFC's margin based on our own review of the record following the
issuance of the Preliminary Results. First, in light of a finding
discovered at ANFC's home-market sales verification, we have corrected
the entry date of one U.S. sale. Specifically, in our margin-
calculation program, we have entered the verified date of entry for
this sale (and, as described below, are recalculating the inventory
carrying costs for this sale, as we are for all sales). Second,
subsequent to the issuance of the Preliminary Results, we noticed that
a minor correction relating to one sale was not reflected in ANFC's
most-recently submitted U.S. sales database.\1\ Consequently, for this
sale, we entered the verified date of entry and amount of U.S. duties
incurred on the sale in the margin-calculation program. Lastly, we
noticed an oversight in our preliminary margin calculations in that,
having made an adjustment to the manufacturing costs of all products,
we failed to recalculate the inventory carrying costs incurred in the
Netherlands on both home-market and U.S. sales.\2\ See the memorandum
on ``Cost of Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments
for the Preliminary Results--Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals B.V.,''
from Frederick W. Mines, Accountant, to Peter S. Scholl, Lead
Accountant, dated August 2, 2010. Thus, we have corrected this
oversight for the final results by modifying the comparison-market and
margin-calculation programs to recalculate the inventory carrying costs
that ANFC incurred in the Netherlands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This database and the most-recently submitted home-market
sales database reflected all other minor corrections and revisions
requested by the Department at verification and were used to
calculate CP Kelco's preliminary dumping margin.
\2\ The adjustment to manufacturing costs, upon which inventory
carrying costs are based, would also make it necessary to
recalculate the inventory carrying costs incurred in the United
States except that we already inserted the programming language for
this recalculation in ANFC's margin-calculation program for the
preliminary results. We made this earlier change based on our
finding that these costs should be calculated by using the U.S.
interest rate. See ``Analysis of Data Submitted by Akzo Nobel
Functional Chemicals B.V. (ANFC) and Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals
LLC (AN-US) in the Preliminary Results of the 2008-2009
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Purified
Carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) from the Netherlands,'' from Olga
Carter and Edythe Artman, International Trade Compliance Analysts,
to the File, dated August 2, 2010, at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to CP Kelco, we reviewed the company's comment that
language in our margin-calculation program, used to recalculate U.S.
indirect selling expenses incurred in the home market, resulted in an
inadvertent mathematical error. As suggested by the respondent, we have
modified the programming language so that the gross unit price of a
sale is now added to any billing adjustments of the sale before the
selling-expense factor is applied to the sum of these two amounts. This
change is detailed in the ``CP Kelco B.V.--Analysis Memorandum for the
Final Results of the 2008/2009 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
of Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from the Netherlands,'' from Edythe
Artman, International Trade Compliance Analyst, to the File, dated
December 8, 2010. A public version of this memorandum is on file in the
CRU.
Final Results of the Review
We determine the following percentage weighted-average margins to
exist for the period July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-average
Manufacturer/Exporter margin
(percentage)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANFC................................................ 9.06
CP Kelco B.V........................................ 2.64
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), the Department
normally calculates an assessment rate for each importer of the subject
merchandise covered by the review. In this review, we have calculated,
whenever possible, an exporter/importer (or customer)-specific
assessment rate or value for merchandise subject to this review as
described below.
With respect to export-price sales (i.e., sales directly to the
unaffiliated purchaser in the United States) for these final results,
we divided the total dumping margins (calculated as the difference
between normal value and export price) for each exporter's importer or
customer by the total number of units the exporter sold to that
importer or customer. We will direct CBP to assess the resulting per-
unit dollar amount against each unit of merchandise in each of that
importer's/customer's POR entries.
For constructed-export-price sales (e.g., sales through ANFC's U.S.
affiliate to the unaffiliated purchaser in the United States), we
divided the total dumping margins for the reviewed sales by the total
entered value of those reviewed sales for each importer. We will direct
CBP to assess the resulting percentage margin against the entered
customs values for the subject merchandise on each of that importer's
POR entries. See 19 CFR 351.212(b).
The calculated per-unit values or ad valorem rates, as appropriate,
will be assessed uniformly on all entries made by the respective
importers during the POR. Where the assessment rate is above de
minimis, we will instruct CBP
[[Page 77831]]
to assess duties on all entries of subject merchandise by that
importer.
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on
May 6, 2003. This clarification will apply to entries of subject
merchandise during the POR produced by reviewed companies for which
these companies did not know their merchandise was destined for the
United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate
unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the
intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full
discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6,
2003).
The Department intends to issue assessment instructions directly to
CBP 15 days after publication of these final results of review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash-deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of this notice of final results of administrative review
for all shipments of purified CMC from the Netherlands entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of
publication, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act): (1) The cash-deposit rates for ANFC and CP
Kelco will be the rates established in the final results of this
review; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not
covered in this review, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the
company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the
exporter is not a firm covered in this or any previous review or in the
less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation but the manufacturer is, the
cash-deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent
period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) if neither the
exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or any previous
review or the investigation, the cash-deposit rate will continue to be
the all-others rate of 14.57 percent, which is the all-others rate
established by the Department in the LTFV investigation. See Notice of
Antidumping Duty Orders: Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland,
Mexico, the Netherlands and Sweden, 70 FR 39734 (July 11, 2005). These
cash-deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until
further notice.
Notification to Importers
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 Department's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely,
written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to
comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation that is
subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 8, 2010.
Paul Piquado,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I--Comments in the Issues and Decision Memorandum
Clerical Errors
Comment 1: Physical Characteristic Codes of Comparison-Market Sales.
Comment 2: Double-counting of Warehousing Expenses Incurred in the
Country of Manufacture.
Comment 3: Inventory Carrying Costs Incurred in the United States on
Certain Sales.
Comment 4: Calculation of U.S. Indirect Selling Expenses Incurred in
the Country of Manufacture.
[FR Doc. 2010-31369 Filed 12-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P