Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Large Residential Washers from Mexico, 76288-76291 [2012-31077]
Download as PDF
76288
Notices
Federal Register
Vol. 77, No. 248
Thursday, December 27, 2012
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains documents other than rules or
proposed rules that are applicable to the
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,
committee meetings, agency decisions and
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of
petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are
examples of documents appearing in this
section.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–201–842]
Notice of Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value: Large
Residential Washers from Mexico
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: We determine that imports of
large residential washers (washers) from
Mexico 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.’’
DATES: Effective Date: December 27,
2012.
AGENCY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Smith or Brandon Custard, 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) 482–1766 or (202) 482–
1823, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
Background
On August 3, 2012, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
preliminary determination of sales at
LTFV in the antidumping duty
investigation of washers from Mexico.1
1 See
Notice of Preliminary Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:53 Dec 26, 2012
Jkt 229001
Since the preliminary determination,
the following events have occurred.
On August 24, 2012, Whirlpool
Corporation (hereafter, the petitioner)
requested a hearing. On September 4,
2012, the respondent, Electrolux Home
Products, Corp. NV/Electrolux Home
Products De Mexico, S.A. de C.V.
(hereafter, Electrolux), also requested a
hearing.
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.
In August and September 2012, we
verified the questionnaire responses of
Electrolux, in accordance with section
782(i) of the Act.
In response to the Department’s
October 15, 2012, request, Electrolux
submitted revised sales databases
incorporating the Department’s sales
verification report findings on October
22 and 24, 2012.
On October 17, 2012, Electrolux
submitted its case brief, and on October
24, 2012, the petitioner submitted its
rebuttal brief. Also, on October 24, 2012,
the petitioner withdrew its request for a
hearing in this case. Similarly, on
October 26, 2012, Electrolux withdrew
its request for a hearing.
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (POI) is
October 1, 2010, through September 30,
2011.
Scope of Investigation
The products covered by this
investigation are all large residential
washers and certain subassemblies
thereof from Mexico.
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
of Final Determination: Large Residential Washers
from the Republic of Korea, 77 FR 46401 (August
3, 2012) (Preliminary Determination).
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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:
(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
installed at the time of importation) such
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.
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\27DEN1.SGM
27DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2012 / Notices
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.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
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 and the concurrent
antidumping (AD) and countervailing
duty (CVD) investigations of washers
from Korea. Subsequently, we received
comments from Samsung Electronics
Co., Ltd and LG Electronics Inc. (LG),
respondents in the AD and CVD
investigations of washers from Korea,
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
from the Team to Gary Taverman,
Senior Advisor for Antidumping and
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).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:53 Dec 26, 2012
Jkt 229001
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
for the Antidumping Duty Investigation
of Large Residential Washers from
Mexico’’ 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.
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 Samsung and
Whirlpool’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 both Samsung and
Whirlpool. See Preliminary
Determination, 77 FR at 46403. 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, neither Samsung nor
Whirlpool responded to the
Department’s questionnaire by the
established deadline nor did either
company request an extension of time to
submit its response. By failing to
participate in this investigation,
Samsung and Whirlpool 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 Samsung and Whirlpool
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
76289
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 Samsung and
Whirlpool was warranted pursuant to
section 776(b) of the Act. See
Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at
46403. 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
Samsung and Whirlpool did not act to
the best of their ability in this
proceeding, within the meaning of
section 776(b) of the Act, because each
failed to participate in this
investigation. Therefore, an adverse
inference is warranted in selecting from
the facts otherwise available with
respect to Samsung and Whirlpool.
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
Samsung and Whirlpool a rate of 72.41
percent, which is the highest rate
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).
E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM
27DEN1
76290
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2012 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
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.
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.
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).
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 4010–4011.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:53 Dec 26, 2012
Jkt 229001
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
the Initiation Checklist, Initiation
Notice, and Preliminary Determination,
we consider the petitioner’s calculation
of the U.S. price and normal value
underlying the 72.41 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 72.41 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 72.41 percent rate in the
petition reflects the commercial
practices of the large residential washer
industry and, as such, is relevant to
Samsung and Whirlpool. In making this
determination, we compared the modelspecific margins we calculated for
Electrolux for the POI to the petition
rate of 72.41 percent. We found that the
highest model-specific margins we
calculated for Electrolux in this
investigation were higher than or within
the range of the 72.41 percent margin
alleged in the petition.
Specifically, after calculating the
margin for Electrolux 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 72.41 percent is
probative. We found a number of model
comparisons with dumping margins
above the rate of 72.41 percent, and a
number of model comparisons with
dumping margins within the range of
72.41 percent. Accordingly, we
determine that the AFA rate is relevant
as applied to Samsung and Whirlpool
for this investigation because it falls
within the range of model-specific
margins we calculated for Electrolux in
this investigation.16
15 Id.
16 This corroboration methodology is consistent
with our past practice. (See Narrow Woven Ribbons
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Based on the foregoing analysis, we
have determined that the AFA rate of
72.41 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
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 http://
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 http://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 Electrolux’s margin
calculation. 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, we verified the sales and cost
information submitted by Electrolux 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
Electrolux.18
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 has 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 46405.
18 See Memorandum to the File entitled
‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of Electrolux
Home Products, Corp. N.V. and Electrolux Home
Products, Inc. (collectively ‘‘Electrolux’’) in the
Antidumping Investigation of Large Residential
Washers from Mexico,’’ dated September 10, 2012;
and Memorandum to the File entitled ‘‘Verification
of the Sales Response of Electrolux Home Products,
E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM
27DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2012 / Notices
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 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 Electrolux’s 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
average-to-average method to all of
Electrolux’s U.S. sales in the final
determination. See the Memorandum to
the File entitled ‘‘Final Determination
Margin Calculation for Electrolux Home
Products Corp., N.V./Electrolux Home
Products De Mexico, S.A. de C.V.
(collectively ‘‘Electrolux’’),’’ 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 Mexico, 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.
These instructions suspending
liquidation will remain in effect until
further notice.
Final Determination Margins
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
The weighted-average dumping
margins are as follows:
Corp. N.V. and Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
(collectively ‘‘Electrolux’’) in the Antidumping
Duty Investigation of Large Residential Washers
from Mexico, dated October 9, 2012 (sales
verification report).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:53 Dec 26, 2012
Jkt 229001
Exporter/Manufacturer
Electrolux Home Products
Corp. NV/Electrolux Home
Products De Mexico, S.A.
de C.V. ..............................
Samsung Electronics Mexico
S.A. de C.V. ......................
Whirlpool International S. de
R.L. de C.V. ......................
All Others ..............................
Weightedaverage
margin
percentage
36.52
72.41
72.41
36.52
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 adverse facts
available. Specifically, this rate is based
on the margin calculated for Electrolux
in this case.
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).
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.
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
We are issuing and publishing this
determination and notice in accordance
with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.210(c).
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
Company-Specific Issue
3. Electrolux’s Affiliated Party Transactions
[FR Doc. 2012–31077 Filed 12–26–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL
PROTECTION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request
Bureau of Consumer Financial
Protection.
ACTION: Notice and request for comment.
AGENCY:
ITC Notification
PO 00000
76291
Sfmt 4703
The Bureau of Consumer
Financial Protection (Bureau), as part of
its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent burden,
invites the general public and other
Federal agencies to take this
opportunity to comment on a proposed
information collection, as required by
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
The Bureau is soliciting comments
concerning its proposed information
collection titled, ‘‘Clearance for
Consumer Attitudes, Understanding,
and Behaviors with Respect to Financial
Services and Products.’’ The proposed
collection has been submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. A copy
of the submission, including copies of
the proposed collection and supporting
documentation, may be obtained by
contacting the agency contact listed
below.
DATES: Written comments are
encouraged and must be received on or
before January 28, 2013 to be assured of
consideration.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by agency name and
‘‘Clearance for Consumer Attitudes,
Understanding, and Behaviors with
Respect to Financial Services and
Products’’ to:
• Agency: Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau (Attention: PRA
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM
27DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 248 (Thursday, December 27, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76288-76291]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31077]
========================================================================
Notices
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings,
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents
appearing in this section.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2012 /
Notices
[[Page 76288]]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-201-842]
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Large Residential Washers from Mexico
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: We determine that imports of large residential washers
(washers) from Mexico 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 27, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Smith or Brandon Custard, 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-
1766 or (202) 482-1823, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 3, 2012, the Department published in the Federal Register
the preliminary determination of sales at LTFV in the antidumping duty
investigation of washers from Mexico.\1\ Since the preliminary
determination, the following events have occurred.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 46401 (August
3, 2012) (Preliminary Determination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 24, 2012, Whirlpool Corporation (hereafter, the
petitioner) requested a hearing. On September 4, 2012, the respondent,
Electrolux Home Products, Corp. NV/Electrolux Home Products De Mexico,
S.A. de C.V. (hereafter, Electrolux), also requested a hearing.
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.
In August and September 2012, we verified the questionnaire
responses of Electrolux, in accordance with section 782(i) of the Act.
In response to the Department's October 15, 2012, request,
Electrolux submitted revised sales databases incorporating the
Department's sales verification report findings on October 22 and 24,
2012.
On October 17, 2012, Electrolux submitted its case brief, and on
October 24, 2012, the petitioner submitted its rebuttal brief. Also, on
October 24, 2012, the petitioner withdrew its request for a hearing in
this case. Similarly, on October 26, 2012, Electrolux withdrew its
request for a hearing.
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (POI) is October 1, 2010, through
September 30, 2011.
Scope of Investigation
The products covered by this investigation are all large
residential washers and certain subassemblies thereof from Mexico.
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
[[Page 76289]]
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 and the concurrent
antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) investigations of
washers from Korea. Subsequently, we received comments from Samsung
Electronics Co., Ltd and LG Electronics Inc. (LG), respondents in the
AD and CVD investigations of washers from Korea, 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 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 for the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Large Residential
Washers from Mexico'' 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.
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 Samsung
and Whirlpool'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 both
Samsung and Whirlpool. See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at 46403.
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, neither Samsung nor Whirlpool responded to the
Department's questionnaire by the established deadline nor did either
company request an extension of time to submit its response. By failing
to participate in this investigation, Samsung and Whirlpool 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 Samsung and
Whirlpool 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 Samsung and Whirlpool was
warranted pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act. See Preliminary
Determination, 77 FR at 46403. 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 Samsung and Whirlpool did not act to the best of
their ability in this proceeding, within the meaning of section 776(b)
of the Act, because each failed to participate in this investigation.
Therefore, an adverse inference is warranted in selecting from the
facts otherwise available with respect to Samsung and Whirlpool.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 Samsung and Whirlpool a rate of
72.41 percent, which is the highest rate
[[Page 76290]]
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 4010-4011.
\15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our examination of the information, as discussed in detail
in the Initiation Checklist, Initiation Notice, and Preliminary
Determination, we consider the petitioner's calculation of the U.S.
price and normal value underlying the 72.41 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 72.41 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 72.41 percent rate in the petition reflects the
commercial practices of the large residential washer industry and, as
such, is relevant to Samsung and Whirlpool. In making this
determination, we compared the model-specific margins we calculated for
Electrolux for the POI to the petition rate of 72.41 percent. We found
that the highest model-specific margins we calculated for Electrolux in
this investigation were higher than or within the range of the 72.41
percent margin alleged in the petition.
Specifically, after calculating the margin for Electrolux 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 72.41 percent is probative. We found a
number of model comparisons with dumping margins above the rate of
72.41 percent, and a number of model comparisons with dumping margins
within the range of 72.41 percent. Accordingly, we determine that the
AFA rate is relevant as applied to Samsung and Whirlpool for this
investigation because it falls within the range of model-specific
margins we calculated for Electrolux 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 has 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 72.41 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 46405.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 http://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 http://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 Electrolux's margin
calculation. 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, we verified the sales and
cost information submitted by Electrolux 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 Electrolux.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Memorandum to the File entitled ``Verification of the
Cost Response of Electrolux Home Products, Corp. N.V. and Electrolux
Home Products, Inc. (collectively ``Electrolux'') in the Antidumping
Investigation of Large Residential Washers from Mexico,'' dated
September 10, 2012; and Memorandum to the File entitled
``Verification of the Sales Response of Electrolux Home Products,
Corp. N.V. and Electrolux Home Products, Inc. (collectively
``Electrolux'') in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Large
Residential Washers from Mexico, dated October 9, 2012 (sales
verification report).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 76291]]
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 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 Electrolux's 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
average-to-average method to all of Electrolux's U.S. sales in the
final determination. See the Memorandum to the File entitled ``Final
Determination Margin Calculation for Electrolux Home Products Corp.,
N.V./Electrolux Home Products De Mexico, S.A. de C.V. (collectively
``Electrolux''),'' 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 Mexico, 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. These instructions suspending liquidation
will remain in effect until further notice.
Final Determination Margins
The weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter/Manufacturer margin
percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electrolux Home Products Corp. NV/Electrolux Home 36.52
Products De Mexico, S.A. de C.V........................
Samsung Electronics Mexico S.A. de C.V.................. 72.41
Whirlpool International S. de R.L. de C.V............... 72.41
All Others.............................................. 36.52
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 adverse facts available. Specifically,
this rate is based on the margin calculated for Electrolux in this
case.
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 and 19 CFR
351.210(c).
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
Company-Specific Issue
3. Electrolux's Affiliated Party Transactions
[FR Doc. 2012-31077 Filed 12-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P