Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Large Residential Washers From the Republic of Korea, 75988-75992 [2012-31104]
Download as PDF
75988
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2012 / Notices
weighted-average amount by which NV
exceeds U.S. price, as follows: (1) The
rate for the exporter/producer
combinations listed in the table above
will be the rate the Department has
determined in this investigation; (2) for
all Vietnamese exporters of merchandise
under consideration which have not
Combination Rates
received their own rate, the rate will be
In the Initiation Notice, the
the rate for the Vietnam-wide entity;
Department stated that it would
and (3) for all non-Vietnamese exporters
calculate combination rates for
of merchandise under consideration
respondents that are eligible for a
separate rate in this investigation.34 This which have not received their own rate,
the rate will be the rate applicable to the
practice is described in Policy Bulletin
Vietnamese exporter/producer
05.1, available at https://www.trade.gov/
combination that supplied that nonia/.
Vietnamese exporter.
Final Determination
ITC Notification
The Department determines that the
following weighted-average dumping
In accordance with section 735(d) of
margins exist for the period April 1,
the Act, we have notified the
2011, through September 30, 2011.
International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’)
of the final affirmative determination of
Weightedaverage
sales at LTFV. As the Department’s final
Exporter
Producer
dumping
determination is affirmative, in
margin
accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the
(percent)
Act, the ITC will determine, within 45
The CS Wind
The CS Wind
51.50 days, whether the domestic industry in
Group *.
Group.
the United States is materially injured,
Vietnam-Wide
.......................
58.49 or threatened with material injury, by
Entity **..
reason of imports of subject
merchandise, or sales (or the likelihood
* The CS Wind Group consists of CS
of sales) for importation, of the subject
Wind Vietnam Co., Ltd. and CS Wind
merchandise. If the ITC determines that
Corporation.
** The Vietnam-Wide Entity includes such injury does exist, the Department
will issue an antidumping duty order
Vina-Halla Heavy Industries Ltd.
directing CBP to assess, upon further
Disclosure
instruction by the Department,
We intend to disclose to parties the
antidumping duties on all imports of the
calculations performed in this
subject merchandise entered or
proceeding within five days of the date
withdrawn from warehouse, for
of publication of this notice in
consumption, on or after the effective
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
date of the suspension of liquidation.
Continuation of Suspension of
Notification Regarding APO
Liquidation
This notice also serves as a reminder
In accordance with section
735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department
to the parties subject to administrative
will instruct U.S. Customs and Border
protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their
Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to continue to
responsibility concerning the
suspend liquidation of all appropriate
disposition of proprietary information
entries of utility scale wind towers from disclosed under APO in accordance
Vietnam as described in the ‘‘Scope of
with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely
Investigation’’ section, entered or
notification of return or destruction of
withdrawn from warehouse, for
APO materials or conversion to judicial
consumption, on or after August 2,
protective order is hereby requested.
2012, the date of publication of the
Failure to comply with the regulations
Preliminary Determination in the
and terms of an APO is a sanctionable
Federal Register.
violation.
The Department will instruct CBP to
This determination is issued and
require a cash deposit equal to the
published in accordance with sections
735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
Vietnam-wide entity applies to all
entries of the merchandise under
investigation except for entries of
merchandise under investigation from
the exporter/manufacturer combinations
listed in the chart in the ‘‘Final
Determination’’ section below.
Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube from the
People’s Republic of China, 73 FR 35652, 35653
(June 24, 2008), and accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum at Comment 1.
34 See Initiation Notice, 77 FR at 3446.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
06:31 Dec 22, 2012
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Dated: December 17, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I
Issues for Final Determination
1. Steel Plate
2. Surrogate Financial Statements
3. Financial Ratio Adjustments
4. Packed Weight and the Sum of FOPs
5. Scrap Offset
6. Market Economy Purchases
7. Idle Labor
8. Oxygen
9. Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
10. Base Rings
11. Brokerage & Handling
12. Date of Sale
13. Free-of-Charge Inputs
[FR Doc. 2012–30944 Filed 12–21–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–580–868]
Notice of Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value: Large
Residential Washers From the
Republic of Korea
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: We determine that imports of
large residential washers (washers) from
the Republic of Korea (Korea) are being,
or are likely to be, sold in the United
States at less than fair value (LTFV), as
provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act).
Based on our analysis of the
comments received, we have made
changes in the margin calculations.
Therefore, the final determination
differs from the preliminary
determination. The final weightedaverage dumping margins for the
investigated companies are listed below
in the section entitled ‘‘Final
Determination Margins.’’
AGENCY:
DATES:
Effective Date: December 26,
2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Goldberger or Henry Almond,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–4136 or (202) 482–
0049, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\26DEN1.SGM
26DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2012 / Notices
Background
The following events have occurred
since the preliminary determination 1
was issued.
On August 1, 2012, we issued a
supplemental questionnaire to Samsung
Electronics Co., Ltd. (Samsung),
addressing Whirlpool Corporation’s
(hereafter, the petitioner’s) July 25,
2012, fraud allegation against Samsung,
and we received a response to this
supplemental questionnaire in this same
month. Samsung responded to the
petitioner’s fraud allegation in August
and September, 2012.
In August and October, 2012, LG
Electronics Inc. (LG) submitted
supplemental questionnaire responses.
In addition, in October, Samsung
submitted revised sales and cost
databases pursuant to the Department’s
requests.
On August 31, 2012, the petitioner
formally filed a request to amend the
petition to exclude smaller top-load
washers from the scope of this
investigation. See General Issue 1 in the
‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for
the Antidumping Duty Investigation of
Large Residential Washers from the
Republic of Korea’’ from Gary
Taverman, Senior Advisor for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration
(Issues and Decision Memorandum),
dated concurrently with this notice and
incorporated herein by reference.
On September 19, 2012, the petitioner
revised its targeted dumping allegation
for LG with respect to region. See
General Issue 3 in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum.
On October 31, 2012, and November
7, 2012, the petitioner, LG, and
Samsung submitted case and rebuttal
briefs, respectively. On November 14,
2012, the Department held a hearing at
the request of the petitioner, LG, and
Samsung.
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (POI) is
October 1, 2010, through September 30,
2011.
Scope of the Investigation
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
The products covered by this
investigation are all large residential
washers and certain subassemblies
thereof from Korea.
For purposes of this investigation, the
term ‘‘large residential washers’’
1 See
Notice of Preliminary Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement
of Final Determination: Large Residential Washers
from the Republic of Korea, 77 FR 46391 (August
3, 2012) (Preliminary Determination).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
06:31 Dec 22, 2012
Jkt 229001
75989
denotes all automatic clothes washing
machines, regardless of the orientation
of the rotational axis, except as noted
below, with a cabinet width (measured
from its widest point) of at least 24.5
inches (62.23 cm) and no more than
32.0 inches (81.28 cm).
Also covered are certain
subassemblies used in large residential
washers, namely: (1) All assembled
cabinets designed for use in large
residential washers which incorporate,
at a minimum: (a) At least three of the
six cabinet surfaces; and (b) a bracket;
(2) all assembled tubs 2 designed for use
in large residential washers which
incorporate, at a minimum: (a) A tub;
and (b) a seal; (3) all assembled baskets 3
designed for use in large residential
washers which incorporate, at a
minimum: (a) A side wrapper;4 (b) a
base; and (c) a drive hub;5 and (4) any
combination of the foregoing
subassemblies.
Excluded from the scope are stacked
washer-dryers and commercial washers.
The term ‘‘stacked washer-dryers’’
denotes distinct washing and drying
machines that are built on a unitary
frame and share a common console that
controls both the washer and the dryer.
The term ‘‘commercial washer’’ denotes
an automatic clothes washing machine
designed for the ‘‘pay per use’’ market
meeting either of the following two
definitions:
installed at the time of importation) such
that, in normal operation,8 the unit cannot
begin a wash cycle without first receiving a
signal from a bona fide payment acceptance
device such as an electronic credit card
reader; (c) it contains a push button user
interface with a maximum of six manually
selectable wash cycle settings, with no ability
of the end user to otherwise modify water
temperature, water level, or spin speed for a
selected wash cycle setting; and (d) the
console containing the user interface is made
of steel and is assembled with security
fasteners.
(1) (a) it contains payment system
electronics;6 (b) it is configured with an
externally mounted steel frame at least six
inches high that is designed to house a coin/
token operated payment system (whether or
not the actual coin/token operated payment
system is installed at the time of
importation); (c) it contains a push button
user interface with a maximum of six
manually selectable wash cycle settings, with
no ability of the end user to otherwise modify
water temperature, water level, or spin speed
for a selected wash cycle setting; and (d) the
console containing the user interface is made
of steel and is assembled with security
fasteners;7 or
(2) (a) it contains payment system
electronics; (b) the payment system
electronics are enabled (whether or not the
payment acceptance device has been
Scope Comments
On May 17, 2012, the petitioner
requested that the Department exclude
smaller top-load washers (i.e., automatic
washing machines with a vertical
rotational axis and a rated capacity of
less than 3.70 cubic feet) from the scope
of this investigation, the concurrent
antidumping investigation of washers
from Mexico, and the concurrent
countervailing duty investigation of
washers from Korea. Subsequently, we
received comments from Samsung and
LG objecting to the petitioner’s scope
exclusion request, and comments from
other interested parties supporting the
request.
Based on our evaluation of these
comments, the briefs which were
subsequently filed by LG and the
petitioner, and the information provided
by U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP), we have amended the scope to
exclude smaller top-load washers. For a
complete discussion of the Department’s
scope determination, see Memorandum
2 A ‘‘tub’’ is the part of the washer designed to
hold water.
3 A ‘‘basket’’ (sometimes referred to as a ‘‘drum’’)
is the part of the washer designed to hold clothing
or other fabrics.
4 A ‘‘side wrapper’’ is the cylindrical part of the
basket that actually holds the clothing or other
fabrics.
5 A ‘‘drive hub’’ is the hub at the center of the
base that bears the load from the motor.
6 ‘‘Payment system electronics’’ denotes a circuit
board designed to receive signals from a payment
acceptance device and to display payment amount,
selected settings, and cycle status. Such electronics
also capture cycles and payment history and
provide for transmission to a reader.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Also excluded from the scope are
automatic clothes washing machines
with a vertical
rotational axis and a rated capacity of
less than 3.70 cubic feet, as certified to
the U.S. Department of Energy pursuant
to 10 CFR 429.12 and 10 CFR 429.20,
and in accordance with the test
procedures established in 10 CFR Part
430.
The products subject to this
investigation are currently classifiable
under subheading 8450.20.0090 of the
Harmonized Tariff System of the United
States (HTSUS). Products subject to this
investigation may also enter under
HTSUS subheadings 8450.11.0040,
8450.11.0080, 8450.90.2000, and
8450.90.6000. Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the merchandise
subject to this scope is dispositive.
7 A ‘‘security fastener’’ is a screw with a nonstandard head that requires a non-standard driver.
Examples include those with a pin in the center of
the head as a ‘‘center pin reject’’ feature to prevent
standard Allen wrenches or Torx drivers from
working.
E:\FR\FM\26DEN1.SGM
26DEN1
75990
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2012 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
from the Team to Gary Taverman,
Senior Advisor for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations,
‘‘Exclusion of Top-Load Washing
Machines with a Rated Capacity Less
than 3.70 Cubic Feet from the Scope of
the Investigations,’’ dated July 27, 2012,
and Issues and Decision Memorandum.
LG requested on July 27, 2012, that
larger-width washers (i.e., washers with
widths of 29 inches or greater) be
excluded from the scope of the
investigations. The petitioner objected
to this request on August 27, 2012.
Based on our evaluation of the parties’
comments, as discussed in their briefs,
we find that larger-width washers
should not be excluded from the scope.
See Issues and Decision Memorandum)
for further discussion.
Application of Facts Available
In the Preliminary Determination, we
determined that due to Daewoo
Electronic Corporation’s (Daewoo’s)
complete lack of cooperation in this
investigation, in accordance with
section 776(a)(2) of the Act, the use of
facts available was appropriate as the
basis for the dumping margin for
Daewoo. See Preliminary
Determination, 77 FR at 46393. Section
776(a) of the Act provides that the
Department shall apply ‘‘facts otherwise
available’’ if (1) necessary information is
not on the record; or (2) 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 of the Act, (C)
significantly impedes a proceeding, or
(D) provides information that cannot be
verified as provided in section 782(i) of
the Act.
In this case, Daewoo did not respond
to the Department’s questionnaire by the
established deadline nor did it request
an extension of time to submit its
response. By failing to participate in this
investigation, Daewoo withheld
requested information, failed to provide
information with the deadlines
established, and significantly impeded
the proceeding. Thus, pursuant to
sections 776(a)(2)(A), (B) and (C) of the
Act, because Daewoo did not participate
in this investigation, the Department
continues to find that the use of total
facts available is warranted.
In the Preliminary Determination, we
also determined that the application of
an adverse inference to Daewoo was
warranted pursuant to section 776(b) of
the Act. See Preliminary Determination,
77 FR at 46393. Section 776(b) of the
Act provides that the Department may
VerDate Mar<15>2010
06:31 Dec 22, 2012
Jkt 229001
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. Such an adverse
inference may include reliance on
information derived from the petition,
the final determination, a previous
administrative review, or other
information placed on the record.
Adverse inferences are appropriate ‘‘to
ensure that the party does not obtain a
more favorable result by failing to
cooperate than if it had cooperated
fully.’’ 9 Furthermore, ‘‘affirmative
evidence of bad faith on the part of a
respondent is not required before the
Department may make an adverse
inference.’’ 10 For purposes of this final
determination, we continue to find that
Daewoo did not act to the best of its
ability in this proceeding, within the
meaning of section 776(b) of the Act,
because it failed to participate in this
investigation. Therefore, an adverse
inference is warranted in selecting from
the facts otherwise available with
respect to Daewoo.
The Department’s practice, when
selecting an adverse facts available
(AFA) rate from among the possible
sources of information, has been to
select the highest rate on the record of
the proceeding and to ensure that the
margin is sufficiently adverse ‘‘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.’’ 11
In order to ensure that the margin is
sufficiently adverse so as to induce
cooperation, we have assigned to
Daewoo a rate of 82.41 percent, which
is the highest rate alleged in the petition
(as adjusted at initiation).12 The
Department believes that this rate is
sufficiently high as to effectuate the
purpose of the facts available rule (i.e.,
we find that this rate is high enough to
encourage participation in future
segments of this proceeding in
accordance with section 776(b) of the
Act). As discussed below, we have also
9 See Statement of Administrative Action
accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act,
H.R. Rep. No. 103–316, Vol. 1, at 870 (1994) (SAA),
reprinted in 1994 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4040, 4198–99.
10 See Antidumping Duties: Countervailing
Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27340 (May 19,
1997); see also Nippon Steel Corp. v. United States,
337 F.3d 1373, 1382–83 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
11 See, e.g., Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing
Bars from Turkey; Final Results and Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part,
71 FR 65082, 65084 (November 7, 2006).
12 See Large Residential Washers From the
Republic of Korea and Mexico: Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Investigations, 77 FR 4007
(January 26, 2012) (Initiation Notice).
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
corroborated this rate, and determined
that it is both reliable and relevant.
When using facts otherwise available,
section 776(c) of the Act provides that,
where the Department relies on
secondary information (such as the
petition) rather than information
obtained in the course of an
investigation, it must corroborate, to the
extent practicable, information from
independent sources that are reasonably
at its disposal. To corroborate secondary
information, the Department will
examine, to the extent practicable, the
reliability and relevance of the
information used.13 The Department’s
regulations state that independent
sources used to corroborate such
evidence may include, for example,
published prices lists, official import
statistics and customs data, and
information obtained from interested
parties during the particular
investigation. See 19 CFR 351.308(d)
and the SAA at 870.
For the purposes of this investigation
and to the extent appropriate
information was available, we reviewed
the adequacy and accuracy of the
information in the petition during our
pre-initiation analysis and for purposes
of this final determination.14 We
examined evidence supporting the
calculations in the petition to determine
the probative value of the margins
alleged in the petition for use as AFA
for purposes of this final determination.
During our pre-initiation analysis we
examined the key elements of the U.S.
price and normal value calculations
used in the petition to derive margins.
During our pre-initiation analysis we
also examined information from various
independent sources provided either in
the petition or in supplements to the
petition that corroborates key elements
of the U.S. price and normal value
calculations used in the petition to
derive estimated margins.15
Based on our examination of the
information, as discussed in detail in
13 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, 62 FR 57391, 57392
(November 6, 1996) (unchanged in 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: Final
Results of Antidumping Administrative Reviews
and Termination in Part, 62 FR 11825 (March 13,
1997)).
14 See Antidumping Investigation Initiation
Checklist dated January 19, 2012 (Initiation
Checklist), at 6 through 11. See also Initiation
Notice, 77 FR at 4009—4011.
15 Id.
E:\FR\FM\26DEN1.SGM
26DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2012 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
the Initiation Checklist, Initiation
Notice, and Preliminary Determination,
we consider the petitioner’s calculation
of the U.S. price and normal value
underlying the 82.41 percent rate to be
reliable. Therefore, because we
confirmed the accuracy and validity of
the information underlying the
calculation of margins in the petition by
examining source documents as well as
publicly available information, we
determine that the 82.41 percent margin
in the petition is reliable for purposes of
this investigation.
With respect to the relevance aspect
of corroboration, as in the Preliminary
Determination, we also considered
information reasonably at our disposal
to determine whether a margin
continues to have relevance. We found
that the 82.41 percent rate in the
petition reflects the commercial
practices of the large residential washer
industry and, as such, is relevant to
Daewoo. In making this determination,
we compared the model-specific
margins we calculated for LG and
Samsung for the POI to the petition rate
of 82.41 percent. We found that the
highest model-specific margins we
calculated for both LG and Samsung in
this investigation were higher than or
within the range of the 82.41 percent
margin alleged in the petition.
Specifically, after calculating the
margins for LG and Samsung as
discussed below, we examined
individual model comparisons and the
margins we calculated based on those
model comparisons in order to
determine whether the rate of 82.41
percent is probative. We found a
number of model comparisons with
dumping margins above the rate of
82.41 percent, and a number of model
comparisons with dumping margins
within the range of 82.41 percent.
Accordingly, we determine that the
AFA rate is relevant as applied to
Daewoo for this investigation because it
falls within the range of model-specific
margins we calculated for LG and
Samsung in this investigation.16
Based on the foregoing analysis, we
have determined that the AFA rate of
82.41 percent has probative value and is
corroborated ‘‘to the extent practicable’’
as provided in section 776(c) of the Act.
See also 19 CFR 351.308(d).17
16 This corroboration methodology is consistent
with our past practice. (See Narrow Woven Ribbons
With Woven Selvedge from the People’s Republic of
China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value, 75 FR 41808, 41811 (July 19, 2010)). A
similar corroboration methodology as been upheld
by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. (See
PAM S.p.A. v. United States, 582 F.3d 1336, 1340
(Fed. Cir. 2009)).
17 See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at 46394.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
06:31 Dec 22, 2012
Jkt 229001
75991
Analysis of Comments Received
Targeted Dumping
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties in this
investigation are addressed in the Issues
and Decision Memorandum which is
hereby adopted by this notice. A list of
the issues raised is attached to this
notice as Appendix I. The Issues and
Decision Memorandum is a public
document and is on file electronically
via Import Administration’s
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System
(IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is available to
registered users at https://
iaaccess.trade.gov and 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 signed Issues and Decision
Memorandum and the electronic
version of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
The Act allows the Department to
employ the average-to-transaction
comparison methodology under the
following circumstances: (1) there is a
pattern of export prices (EPs) or
constructed export prices (CEPs) for
comparable merchandise that differ
significantly among purchasers, regions,
or periods of time; and (2) the
Department explains why such
differences cannot be taken into account
using the average-to-average or
transaction-to-transaction methodology.
See section 777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act.
For purposes of the final
determination, we performed our
targeted dumping analysis following the
methodology employed in the
Preliminary Determination, after making
certain revisions to the respondents’
reported U.S. sales data based on
verification findings, as enumerated in
the ‘‘Margin Calculations’’ section of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum. In so
doing, we found that the results of our
final targeted dumping analysis were
generally consistent with those of our
preliminary targeted dumping analysis.
Therefore, we continued to apply the
alternative average-to-transaction
method for LG’s and Samsung’s margin
calculations in the final determination.
See the memoranda entitled ‘‘Final
Determination Margin Calculation for
LG Electronics Inc., and LG Electronics
USA, Inc.’’ (collectively, ‘‘LG’’), and
‘‘Final Determination Margin
Calculation for Samsung Electronics
Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics
America, Inc.’’ (collectively,
‘‘Samsung’’) dated concurrently with
this notice for further discussion.
Changes Since the Preliminary
Determination
Based on our analysis of the
comments received and our findings at
verification, we have made certain
changes to the margin calculations. For
a discussion of these changes, see the
‘‘Margin Calculations’’ section of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the
Act, in August and September 2012, we
verified the sales and cost information
submitted by the respondents for use in
our final determination. We used
standard verification procedures
including an examination of relevant
accounting and production records, and
original source documents provided by
the respondents.18
18 See the following memoranda entitled:
‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of LG
Electronics, Inc. in the Antidumping Duty
Investigation of Large Residential Washers from the
Republic of Korea,’’ dated October 11, 2012;
‘‘Verification of the Home Market and Export Price
Sales Responses of LG Electronics, Inc.,’’ dated
October 11, 2012; ‘‘Verification of the CEP Sales
Responses of LG Electronics, Inc. and LG
Electronics USA Inc.,’’ dated October 15, 2012;
‘‘Verification of Samsung Electronics America Inc.
in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Large
Residential Washers from Korea,’’ dated October 16,
2012; ‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. in the Less-ThanFair-Value Investigation of Large Residential
Washers from the Republic of Korea,’’ dated
October 17, 2012; and ‘‘Verification of the Sales
Response of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. in the
Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Large
Residential Washers form Korea,’’ dated October 17,
2012.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Continuation of Suspension of
Liquidation
Pursuant to 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we
will instruct CBP to continue to suspend
liquidation of all entries of subject
merchandise from Korea, entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after August 3, 2012,
the date of publication of the
preliminary determination in the
Federal Register. CBP shall require a
cash deposit equal to the estimated
amount by which the normal value
exceeds the U.S. price as shown below
adjusted, where appropriate, for export
subsidies. These instructions
suspending liquidation will remain in
effect until further notice.
Final Determination Margins
The weighted-average dumping
margins are as follows:
E:\FR\FM\26DEN1.SGM
26DEN1
75992
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2012 / Notices
Exporter/manufacturer
Weighted-average margin
percentage
Return or Destruction of Proprietary
Information
This notice will serve as the only
reminder to parties subject to
Daewoo Electronics Corporation ....................................
82.41 administrative protective order (APO) of
LG Electronics, Inc. ..............
13.02 their responsibility concerning the
Samsung Electronics Co.,
destruction of proprietary information
Ltd. ....................................
9.29 disclosed under APO in accordance
All Others ..............................
11.86
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of return/
In accordance with section
destruction of APO materials or
735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the ‘‘All Others’’ conversion to judicial protective order is
rate is derived exclusive of all de
hereby requested. Failure to comply
minimis or zero margins and margins
with the regulations and the terms of an
based entirely on AFA. We have based
APO is a sanctionable violation.
our calculation of the ‘‘All Others’’ rate
We are issuing and publishing this
on the weighted-average of the margins
determination and notice in accordance
calculated for LG and Samsung using
with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the
publicly-ranged data. Because we
Act.
cannot apply our normal methodology
Dated: December 18, 2012.
of calculating a weighted-average
Paul Piquado,
margin due to requests to protect
Assistant Secretary for Import
business-proprietary information, we
Administration.
find this rate to be the best proxy of the
actual weighted-average margin
Appendix—Issues in Decision
determined for these respondents.19 For Memorandum
further discussion of this calculation,
General Issues
see memorandum entitled ‘‘Calculation
1. Scope Exclusion of Smaller Top-Load
of the All Others Rate for the Final
Washers
Determination of the Antidumping Duty
2. Request to Exclude Larger-Width Washers
Investigation of Large Residential
from the Scope
Washers from Korea,’’ dated
3. Targeted Dumping
concurrently with this notice.
4. Zeroing in the Average-to-Transaction
Method
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).
ITC Notification
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
In accordance with section 735(d) of
the Act, we have notified the ITC of our
final determination. As our final
determination is affirmative, the ITC
will determine within 45 days whether
imports of the subject merchandise are
causing material injury, or threat of
material injury, to an industry in the
United States. If the ITC determines that
material injury or threat of injury does
not exist, the proceeding will be
terminated and all securities posted will
be refunded or canceled. If the ITC
determines that such injury does exist,
the Department will issue an
antidumping duty order directing CBP
to assess antidumping duties on all
imports of the subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the effective
date of the suspension of liquidation.
19 See, e.g., Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp
From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, Partial Rescission, and
Final No Shipment Determination, 76 FR 41203,
41205 (July 13, 2011).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
07:31 Dec 22, 2012
Jkt 229001
Company-Specific Issues
LG
5. Rebates
6. Conducting the Sales-Below-Cost Test
Based on Level of Trade
7. General and Administrative Expenses
8. Alleged Affiliation of LG and its Input
Suppliers
9. Request to Exclude a Certain Home Market
Model
10. Unreported Early Payment Discounts
11. Calculation of Profit Rate for Affiliated
Logistics Services Provider
12. Treatment of Certain Selling Expenses
and Rebates
13. Treatment of Affiliated Retailer’s
Operating Expenses
14. Adjustment of Marine Insurance
Premium Ratio
Samsung
15. Fraud Allegation Against Samsung
16. Request to Apply Adverse Facts Available
to Samsung for Its Affiliate’s Conduct
17. Alleged Unforeseen Event
18. U.S. Sales Transactions Affected by the
Alleged Unforeseen Event
19. Date of Sale for Samsung’s Direct
Shipment Sales
20. Duty Drawback
21. Adjustment to the Selling, General &
Administrative Expenses of Affiliated
Suppliers
22. Product Characteristic Coding
[FR Doc. 2012–31104 Filed 12–21–12; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–981]
Utility Scale Wind Towers From the
People’s Republic of China: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: December 24,
2012.
SUMMARY: On August 2, 2012, the
Department of Commerce (the
‘‘Department’’) published its
preliminary determination of sales at
less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’) and
postponement of final determination in
the antidumping investigation of utility
scale wind towers (‘‘wind towers’’) from
the People’s Republic of China
(‘‘PRC’’).1 Based on an analysis of the
comments received, the Department has
made changes from the Preliminary
Determination. The Department has
determined that wind towers from the
PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold
in the United States at LTFV, as
provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the ‘‘Act’’). The
final weighted-average dumping
margins for this investigation are listed
in the ‘‘Final Determination’’ section
below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lilit
Astvatsatrian, Shawn Higgins, Thomas
Martin, or Trisha Tran, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 4, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–6412, (202) 482–
0679, (202) 482–3936, or (202) 482–
4852, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
The Department published its
Preliminary Determination on August 2,
2012.2 Between August 13, 2012, and
August 24, 2012, the Department
conducted verifications of the
mandatory respondents (i.e., Chengxi
Shipyard Co., Ltd. (‘‘CXS’’) and Titan
Wind Energy (Suzhou) Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Titan’’)).3 Between September 14,
2012, and September 24, 2012, CXS,
1 See Utility Scale Wind Towers From the People’s
Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement
of Final Determination, 77 FR 46034 (August 2,
2012) (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’).
2 Id.
3 See the ‘‘Verification’’ section below.
E:\FR\FM\26DEN1.SGM
26DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75988-75992]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31104]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-580-868]
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Large Residential Washers From the Republic of Korea
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: We determine that imports of large residential washers
(washers) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) are being, or are likely
to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV), as
provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act).
Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made
changes in the margin calculations. Therefore, the final determination
differs from the preliminary determination. The final weighted-average
dumping margins for the investigated companies are listed below in the
section entitled ``Final Determination Margins.''
DATES: Effective Date: December 26, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Goldberger or Henry Almond, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4136
or (202) 482-0049, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 75989]]
Background
The following events have occurred since the preliminary
determination \1\ was issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination: Large
Residential Washers from the Republic of Korea, 77 FR 46391 (August
3, 2012) (Preliminary Determination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 1, 2012, we issued a supplemental questionnaire to
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Samsung), addressing Whirlpool
Corporation's (hereafter, the petitioner's) July 25, 2012, fraud
allegation against Samsung, and we received a response to this
supplemental questionnaire in this same month. Samsung responded to the
petitioner's fraud allegation in August and September, 2012.
In August and October, 2012, LG Electronics Inc. (LG) submitted
supplemental questionnaire responses. In addition, in October, Samsung
submitted revised sales and cost databases pursuant to the Department's
requests.
On August 31, 2012, the petitioner formally filed a request to
amend the petition to exclude smaller top-load washers from the scope
of this investigation. See General Issue 1 in the ``Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Large Residential
Washers from the Republic of Korea'' from Gary Taverman, Senior Advisor
for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration (Issues and Decision
Memorandum), dated concurrently with this notice and incorporated
herein by reference.
On September 19, 2012, the petitioner revised its targeted dumping
allegation for LG with respect to region. See General Issue 3 in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum.
On October 31, 2012, and November 7, 2012, the petitioner, LG, and
Samsung submitted case and rebuttal briefs, respectively. On November
14, 2012, the Department held a hearing at the request of the
petitioner, LG, and Samsung.
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (POI) is October 1, 2010, through
September 30, 2011.
Scope of the Investigation
The products covered by this investigation are all large
residential washers and certain subassemblies thereof from Korea.
For purposes of this investigation, the term ``large residential
washers'' denotes all automatic clothes washing machines, regardless of
the orientation of the rotational axis, except as noted below, with a
cabinet width (measured from its widest point) of at least 24.5 inches
(62.23 cm) and no more than 32.0 inches (81.28 cm).
Also covered are certain subassemblies used in large residential
washers, namely: (1) All assembled cabinets designed for use in large
residential washers which incorporate, at a minimum: (a) At least three
of the six cabinet surfaces; and (b) a bracket; (2) all assembled tubs
\2\ designed for use in large residential washers which incorporate, at
a minimum: (a) A tub; and (b) a seal; (3) all assembled baskets \3\
designed for use in large residential washers which incorporate, at a
minimum: (a) A side wrapper;\4\ (b) a base; and (c) a drive hub;\5\ and
(4) any combination of the foregoing subassemblies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ A ``tub'' is the part of the washer designed to hold water.
\3\ A ``basket'' (sometimes referred to as a ``drum'') is the
part of the washer designed to hold clothing or other fabrics.
\4\ A ``side wrapper'' is the cylindrical part of the basket
that actually holds the clothing or other fabrics.
\5\ A ``drive hub'' is the hub at the center of the base that
bears the load from the motor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excluded from the scope are stacked washer-dryers and commercial
washers. The term ``stacked washer-dryers'' denotes distinct washing
and drying machines that are built on a unitary frame and share a
common console that controls both the washer and the dryer. The term
``commercial washer'' denotes an automatic clothes washing machine
designed for the ``pay per use'' market meeting either of the following
two definitions:
(1) (a) it contains payment system electronics;\6\ (b) it is
configured with an externally mounted steel frame at least six
inches high that is designed to house a coin/token operated payment
system (whether or not the actual coin/token operated payment system
is installed at the time of importation); (c) it contains a push
button user interface with a maximum of six manually selectable wash
cycle settings, with no ability of the end user to otherwise modify
water temperature, water level, or spin speed for a selected wash
cycle setting; and (d) the console containing the user interface is
made of steel and is assembled with security fasteners;\7\ or
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ ``Payment system electronics'' denotes a circuit board
designed to receive signals from a payment acceptance device and to
display payment amount, selected settings, and cycle status. Such
electronics also capture cycles and payment history and provide for
transmission to a reader.
\7\ A ``security fastener'' is a screw with a non-standard head
that requires a non-standard driver. Examples include those with a
pin in the center of the head as a ``center pin reject'' feature to
prevent standard Allen wrenches or Torx drivers from working.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) (a) it contains payment system electronics; (b) the payment
system electronics are enabled (whether or not the payment
acceptance device has been installed at the time of importation)
such that, in normal operation,\8\ the unit cannot begin a wash
cycle without first receiving a signal from a bona fide payment
acceptance device such as an electronic credit card reader; (c) it
contains a push button user interface with a maximum of six manually
selectable wash cycle settings, with no ability of the end user to
otherwise modify water temperature, water level, or spin speed for a
selected wash cycle setting; and (d) the console containing the user
interface is made of steel and is assembled with security fasteners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ ``Normal operation'' refers to the operating mode(s)
available to end users (i.e., not a mode designed for testing or
repair by a technician).
Also excluded from the scope are automatic clothes washing machines
with a vertical
rotational axis and a rated capacity of less than 3.70 cubic feet,
as certified to the U.S. Department of Energy pursuant to 10 CFR 429.12
and 10 CFR 429.20, and in accordance with the test procedures
established in 10 CFR Part 430.
The products subject to this investigation are currently
classifiable under subheading 8450.20.0090 of the Harmonized Tariff
System of the United States (HTSUS). Products subject to this
investigation may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 8450.11.0040,
8450.11.0080, 8450.90.2000, and 8450.90.6000. Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the merchandise subject to this scope is
dispositive.
Scope Comments
On May 17, 2012, the petitioner requested that the Department
exclude smaller top-load washers (i.e., automatic washing machines with
a vertical rotational axis and a rated capacity of less than 3.70 cubic
feet) from the scope of this investigation, the concurrent antidumping
investigation of washers from Mexico, and the concurrent countervailing
duty investigation of washers from Korea. Subsequently, we received
comments from Samsung and LG objecting to the petitioner's scope
exclusion request, and comments from other interested parties
supporting the request.
Based on our evaluation of these comments, the briefs which were
subsequently filed by LG and the petitioner, and the information
provided by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), we have amended
the scope to exclude smaller top-load washers. For a complete
discussion of the Department's scope determination, see Memorandum
[[Page 75990]]
from the Team to Gary Taverman, Senior Advisor for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations, ``Exclusion of Top-Load Washing
Machines with a Rated Capacity Less than 3.70 Cubic Feet from the Scope
of the Investigations,'' dated July 27, 2012, and Issues and Decision
Memorandum.
LG requested on July 27, 2012, that larger-width washers (i.e.,
washers with widths of 29 inches or greater) be excluded from the scope
of the investigations. The petitioner objected to this request on
August 27, 2012. Based on our evaluation of the parties' comments, as
discussed in their briefs, we find that larger-width washers should not
be excluded from the scope. See Issues and Decision Memorandum) for
further discussion.
Application of Facts Available
In the Preliminary Determination, we determined that due to Daewoo
Electronic Corporation's (Daewoo's) complete lack of cooperation in
this investigation, in accordance with section 776(a)(2) of the Act,
the use of facts available was appropriate as the basis for the dumping
margin for Daewoo. See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at 46393.
Section 776(a) of the Act provides that the Department shall apply
``facts otherwise available'' if (1) necessary information is not on
the record; or (2) 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 of the Act, (C) significantly impedes a proceeding, or (D)
provides information that cannot be verified as provided in section
782(i) of the Act.
In this case, Daewoo did not respond to the Department's
questionnaire by the established deadline nor did it request an
extension of time to submit its response. By failing to participate in
this investigation, Daewoo withheld requested information, failed to
provide information with the deadlines established, and significantly
impeded the proceeding. Thus, pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A), (B)
and (C) of the Act, because Daewoo did not participate in this
investigation, the Department continues to find that the use of total
facts available is warranted.
In the Preliminary Determination, we also determined that the
application of an adverse inference to Daewoo was warranted pursuant to
section 776(b) of the Act. See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at
46393. Section 776(b) of the Act 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. Such an adverse inference may
include reliance on information derived from the petition, the final
determination, a previous administrative review, or other information
placed on the record. Adverse inferences are appropriate ``to ensure
that the party does not obtain a more favorable result by failing to
cooperate than if it had cooperated fully.'' \9\ Furthermore,
``affirmative evidence of bad faith on the part of a respondent is not
required before the Department may make an adverse inference.'' \10\
For purposes of this final determination, we continue to find that
Daewoo did not act to the best of its ability in this proceeding,
within the meaning of section 776(b) of the Act, because it failed to
participate in this investigation. Therefore, an adverse inference is
warranted in selecting from the facts otherwise available with respect
to Daewoo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act, H.R. Rep. No. 103-316, Vol. 1, at 870
(1994) (SAA), reprinted in 1994 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4040, 4198-99.
\10\ See Antidumping Duties: Countervailing Duties; Final Rule,
62 FR 27296, 27340 (May 19, 1997); see also Nippon Steel Corp. v.
United States, 337 F.3d 1373, 1382-83 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department's practice, when selecting an adverse facts
available (AFA) rate from among the possible sources of information,
has been to select the highest rate on the record of the proceeding and
to ensure that the margin is sufficiently adverse ``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.'' \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See, e.g., Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from
Turkey; Final Results and Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review in Part, 71 FR 65082, 65084 (November 7,
2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to ensure that the margin is sufficiently adverse so as to
induce cooperation, we have assigned to Daewoo a rate of 82.41 percent,
which is the highest rate alleged in the petition (as adjusted at
initiation).\12\ The Department believes that this rate is sufficiently
high as to effectuate the purpose of the facts available rule (i.e., we
find that this rate is high enough to encourage participation in future
segments of this proceeding in accordance with section 776(b) of the
Act). As discussed below, we have also corroborated this rate, and
determined that it is both reliable and relevant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Large Residential Washers From the Republic of Korea
and Mexico: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 77 FR
4007 (January 26, 2012) (Initiation Notice).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When using facts otherwise available, section 776(c) of the Act
provides that, where the Department relies on secondary information
(such as the petition) rather than information obtained in the course
of an investigation, it must corroborate, to the extent practicable,
information from independent sources that are reasonably at its
disposal. To corroborate secondary information, the Department will
examine, to the extent practicable, the reliability and relevance of
the information used.\13\ The Department's regulations state that
independent sources used to corroborate such evidence may include, for
example, published prices lists, official import statistics and customs
data, and information obtained from interested parties during the
particular investigation. See 19 CFR 351.308(d) and the SAA at 870.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 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, 62 FR 57391, 57392
(November 6, 1996) (unchanged in 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: Final Results of Antidumping Administrative
Reviews and Termination in Part, 62 FR 11825 (March 13, 1997)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the purposes of this investigation and to the extent
appropriate information was available, we reviewed the adequacy and
accuracy of the information in the petition during our pre-initiation
analysis and for purposes of this final determination.\14\ We examined
evidence supporting the calculations in the petition to determine the
probative value of the margins alleged in the petition for use as AFA
for purposes of this final determination. During our pre-initiation
analysis we examined the key elements of the U.S. price and normal
value calculations used in the petition to derive margins. During our
pre-initiation analysis we also examined information from various
independent sources provided either in the petition or in supplements
to the petition that corroborates key elements of the U.S. price and
normal value calculations used in the petition to derive estimated
margins.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Antidumping Investigation Initiation Checklist dated
January 19, 2012 (Initiation Checklist), at 6 through 11. See also
Initiation Notice, 77 FR at 4009--4011.
\15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our examination of the information, as discussed in detail
in
[[Page 75991]]
the Initiation Checklist, Initiation Notice, and Preliminary
Determination, we consider the petitioner's calculation of the U.S.
price and normal value underlying the 82.41 percent rate to be
reliable. Therefore, because we confirmed the accuracy and validity of
the information underlying the calculation of margins in the petition
by examining source documents as well as publicly available
information, we determine that the 82.41 percent margin in the petition
is reliable for purposes of this investigation.
With respect to the relevance aspect of corroboration, as in the
Preliminary Determination, we also considered information reasonably at
our disposal to determine whether a margin continues to have relevance.
We found that the 82.41 percent rate in the petition reflects the
commercial practices of the large residential washer industry and, as
such, is relevant to Daewoo. In making this determination, we compared
the model-specific margins we calculated for LG and Samsung for the POI
to the petition rate of 82.41 percent. We found that the highest model-
specific margins we calculated for both LG and Samsung in this
investigation were higher than or within the range of the 82.41 percent
margin alleged in the petition.
Specifically, after calculating the margins for LG and Samsung as
discussed below, we examined individual model comparisons and the
margins we calculated based on those model comparisons in order to
determine whether the rate of 82.41 percent is probative. We found a
number of model comparisons with dumping margins above the rate of
82.41 percent, and a number of model comparisons with dumping margins
within the range of 82.41 percent. Accordingly, we determine that the
AFA rate is relevant as applied to Daewoo for this investigation
because it falls within the range of model-specific margins we
calculated for LG and Samsung in this investigation.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ This corroboration methodology is consistent with our past
practice. (See Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge from the
People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value, 75 FR 41808, 41811 (July 19, 2010)). A similar
corroboration methodology as been upheld by the Court of Appeals for
the Federal Circuit. (See PAM S.p.A. v. United States, 582 F.3d
1336, 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2009)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the foregoing analysis, we have determined that the AFA
rate of 82.41 percent has probative value and is corroborated ``to the
extent practicable'' as provided in section 776(c) of the Act. See also
19 CFR 351.308(d).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at 46394.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in
this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues raised is
attached to this notice as Appendix I. The Issues and Decision
Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via
Import Administration's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is available to
registered users at https://iaaccess.trade.gov and 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 signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the
electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical
in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Determination
Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at
verification, we have made certain changes to the margin calculations.
For a discussion of these changes, see the ``Margin Calculations''
section of the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, in August and September
2012, we verified the sales and cost information submitted by the
respondents for use in our final determination. We used standard
verification procedures including an examination of relevant accounting
and production records, and original source documents provided by the
respondents.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See the following memoranda entitled: ``Verification of the
Cost Response of LG Electronics, Inc. in the Antidumping Duty
Investigation of Large Residential Washers from the Republic of
Korea,'' dated October 11, 2012; ``Verification of the Home Market
and Export Price Sales Responses of LG Electronics, Inc.,'' dated
October 11, 2012; ``Verification of the CEP Sales Responses of LG
Electronics, Inc. and LG Electronics USA Inc.,'' dated October 15,
2012; ``Verification of Samsung Electronics America Inc. in the
Antidumping Duty Investigation of Large Residential Washers from
Korea,'' dated October 16, 2012; ``Verification of the Cost Response
of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. in the Less-Than-Fair-Value
Investigation of Large Residential Washers from the Republic of
Korea,'' dated October 17, 2012; and ``Verification of the Sales
Response of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. in the Less-Than-Fair-
Value Investigation of Large Residential Washers form Korea,'' dated
October 17, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Targeted Dumping
The Act allows the Department to employ the average-to-transaction
comparison methodology under the following circumstances: (1) there is
a pattern of export prices (EPs) or constructed export prices (CEPs)
for comparable merchandise that differ significantly among purchasers,
regions, or periods of time; and (2) the Department explains why such
differences cannot be taken into account using the average-to-average
or transaction-to-transaction methodology. See section 777A(d)(1)(B) of
the Act.
For purposes of the final determination, we performed our targeted
dumping analysis following the methodology employed in the Preliminary
Determination, after making certain revisions to the respondents'
reported U.S. sales data based on verification findings, as enumerated
in the ``Margin Calculations'' section of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum. In so doing, we found that the results of our final
targeted dumping analysis were generally consistent with those of our
preliminary targeted dumping analysis. Therefore, we continued to apply
the alternative average-to-transaction method for LG's and Samsung's
margin calculations in the final determination. See the memoranda
entitled ``Final Determination Margin Calculation for LG Electronics
Inc., and LG Electronics USA, Inc.'' (collectively, ``LG''), and
``Final Determination Margin Calculation for Samsung Electronics Co.,
Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc.'' (collectively,
``Samsung'') dated concurrently with this notice for further
discussion.
Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation
Pursuant to 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will instruct CBP to
continue to suspend liquidation of all entries of subject merchandise
from Korea, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or
after August 3, 2012, the date of publication of the preliminary
determination in the Federal Register. CBP shall require a cash deposit
equal to the estimated amount by which the normal value exceeds the
U.S. price as shown below adjusted, where appropriate, for export
subsidies. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in
effect until further notice.
Final Determination Margins
The weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:
[[Page 75992]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
Exporter/manufacturer average margin
percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Daewoo Electronics Corporation.......................... 82.41
LG Electronics, Inc..................................... 13.02
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd............................ 9.29
All Others.............................................. 11.86
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the ``All
Others'' rate is derived exclusive of all de minimis or zero margins
and margins based entirely on AFA. We have based our calculation of the
``All Others'' rate on the weighted-average of the margins calculated
for LG and Samsung using publicly-ranged data. Because we cannot apply
our normal methodology of calculating a weighted-average margin due to
requests to protect business-proprietary information, we find this rate
to be the best proxy of the actual weighted-average margin determined
for these respondents.\19\ For further discussion of this calculation,
see memorandum entitled ``Calculation of the All Others Rate for the
Final Determination of the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Large
Residential Washers from Korea,'' dated concurrently with this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See, e.g., Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From India:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Partial
Rescission, and Final No Shipment Determination, 76 FR 41203, 41205
(July 13, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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).
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the
ITC of our final determination. As our final determination is
affirmative, the ITC will determine within 45 days whether imports of
the subject merchandise are causing material injury, or threat of
material injury, to an industry in the United States. If the ITC
determines that material injury or threat of injury does not exist, the
proceeding will be terminated and all securities posted will be
refunded or canceled. If the ITC determines that such injury does
exist, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing
CBP to assess antidumping duties on all imports of the subject
merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or
after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation.
Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information
This notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written
notification of return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to
judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with
the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in
accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: December 18, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix--Issues in Decision Memorandum
General Issues
1. Scope Exclusion of Smaller Top-Load Washers
2. Request to Exclude Larger-Width Washers from the Scope
3. Targeted Dumping
4. Zeroing in the Average-to-Transaction Method
Company-Specific Issues
LG
5. Rebates
6. Conducting the Sales-Below-Cost Test Based on Level of Trade
7. General and Administrative Expenses
8. Alleged Affiliation of LG and its Input Suppliers
9. Request to Exclude a Certain Home Market Model
10. Unreported Early Payment Discounts
11. Calculation of Profit Rate for Affiliated Logistics Services
Provider
12. Treatment of Certain Selling Expenses and Rebates
13. Treatment of Affiliated Retailer's Operating Expenses
14. Adjustment of Marine Insurance Premium Ratio
Samsung
15. Fraud Allegation Against Samsung
16. Request to Apply Adverse Facts Available to Samsung for Its
Affiliate's Conduct
17. Alleged Unforeseen Event
18. U.S. Sales Transactions Affected by the Alleged Unforeseen Event
19. Date of Sale for Samsung's Direct Shipment Sales
20. Duty Drawback
21. Adjustment to the Selling, General & Administrative Expenses of
Affiliated Suppliers
22. Product Characteristic Coding
[FR Doc. 2012-31104 Filed 12-21-12; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P