[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 199 (Wednesday, October 15, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59366-59368]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-26078]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-580-839]
Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from Korea: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Final Results of 2001-2002 Administrative Review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On June 9, 2003, the Department of Commerce published the
preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping
duty order on certain polyester staple fiber from Korea. The period of
review is May 1, 2001, through April 30, 2002. We gave interested
parties an opportunity to comment on the preliminary results. Based on
our analysis of the comments received and an examination of our
calculations, we have made certain changes for the final results. The
final weighted-average dumping margins for the two manufacturer/
exporters are listed below in the ``Final Results of the Review''
section of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 15, 2003.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew McAllister or Judith Rudman,
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1174, or (202) 482-0192,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Since the publication of the preliminary results in this review
(see Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from Korea; Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Partial Rescission of
Review, 68 FR 34378 (June 9, 2003) (``Preliminary Results'')), the
following events have occurred:
The Department reported its findings from Huvis Corporation's
(``Huvis'') cost verification on July 2, 2003. See Memorandum from
Robert Greger and Mark Todd to Neal Halper, Director, Office of
Accounting, ``Verification Report on the Cost of Production and
Constructed Value Data Submitted by Huvis Corporation,'' dated July 2,
2003 (``Huvis Cost Verification Report''), which is on file in the
Department's Central Records Unit (``CRU'') in room B-099 of the main
Department building.
We invited parties to comment on the preliminary results of the
review. On July 22, 2003, E.I. DuPont de Nemours, Inc., Arteva
Specialties S.a.r.l., d/b/a KoSa, Wellman, Inc., and Intercontinental
Polymers, Inc. (collectively ``the petitioners''), and the respondents
East Young Co., Ltd. (``East Young'')/Stein Fibers, Ltd. (``Stein
Fibers'') and Huvis filed case briefs. On July 28, 2003, the above-
mentioned parties, with the exception of East Young/Stein Fibers, filed
rebuttal briefs.
Scope of the Order
For the purposes of this order, the product covered is certain
polyester staple fiber (``PSF''). PSF is defined as synthetic staple
fibers, not carded, combed or otherwise processed for spinning, of
polyesters measuring 3.3 decitex (3 denier, inclusive) or more in
diameter. This merchandise is cut to lengths varying from one inch (25
mm) to five inches (127 mm). The merchandise subject to this order may
be coated, usually with a silicon or other finish, or not coated. PSF
is generally used as stuffing in sleeping bags, mattresses, ski
jackets, comforters, cushions, pillows, and furniture. Merchandise of
less than 3.3 decitex (less than 3 denier) currently classifiable under
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') at
subheading 5503.20.00.20 is specifically excluded from this order. Also
specifically excluded from this order are polyester staple fibers of 10
to 18 denier that are cut to lengths of 6 to 8 inches (fibers used in
the manufacture of carpeting). In addition, low-melt PSF is excluded
from this order. Low-melt PSF is defined as a bi-component fiber with
an outer sheath that melts at a significantly lower temperature than
its inner core.
The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable in
the HTSUS at subheadings 5503.20.00.45 and 5503.20.00.65. Although the
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes,
the written description of the merchandise under order is dispositive.
Period of Review
The period of review (``POR'') is May 1, 2001, through April 30,
2002.
Verification
As stated in the Preliminary Results and provided in section 782(i)
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''), we verified
information provided by East Young and Huvis using standard
verification procedures, including on-site inspection of the
manufacturers' facilities, examination of relevant sales, cost and
financial records, and selection
[[Page 59367]]
of original documentation containing relevant information.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to
this review are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision Memorandum''
from Jeffrey May, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import Administration to
James J. Jochum, Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, dated
October 6, 2003 (``Decision Memorandum''), which is hereby adopted by
this notice. Attached to this notice as an appendix is a list of the
issues which parties have raised and to which we have responded in the
Decision Memorandum. Parties can find a complete discussion of all
issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in
this public memorandum which is on file in the Department's CRU. In
addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/frnhome.htm. The paper
copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
Fair Value Comparisons
To determine whether sales of PSF from Korea to the United States
were made at less than normal value, we compared export price (``EP'')
to normal value (``NV''). Our calculations followed the methodologies
described in the Preliminary Results, except as noted below and in the
final results calculation memoranda cited below, which are on file in
the CRU.
Export Price
We used EP as defined in section 772(a) of the Act. We calculated
EP based on the same methodologies described in the Preliminary
Results.
Normal Value
We used the same methodology as that described in the Preliminary
Results to determine the cost of production (COP''), whether
comparison market sales were at prices below the COP, and the NV.
Changes from the Preliminary Results
For East Young, in our calculation of NV based on constructed
value, we have adjusted the general and administrative expense ratio.
See Memorandum from Team to File, ``Final Results Calculation
Memorandum for East Young Co., Ltd.,'' dated October 6, 2003 (``East
Young Final Calcs''); see also Decision Memorandum, at Comment 10.
With respect to Huvis, we have adjusted its cost of manufacturing
to account for purchases of certain materials from affiliated parties
at non-arm's length prices. Also, we have used the revised selling,
general and administrative expense ratio submitted by Huvis during the
cost verification for its affiliated supplier. We have further adjusted
the submitted ratio for the final results. See Memorandum from Robert
Greger to Neal Halper, ``Cost of Production and Constructed Value
Calculation Adjustments for the Final Results,'' dated October 6, 2003.
Final Results of the Review
We determine that the following percentage margins exist for the
period May 1, 2001, through April 30, 2002:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exporter/manufacturer Weighted-average margin percentage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
East Young Co., Ltd.............................................. 4.07
Huvis Corporation................................................ 0.21 (de minimis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
The Department shall determine, and the United States Bureau of
Customs and Border Protection (``BCBP'') shall assess, antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1), we have calculated exporter/importer (or customer)-
specific assessment rates for merchandise subject to this review. To
determine whether the duty assessment rates were de minimis, in
accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we
calculated importer (or customer)-specific ad valorem rates by
aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S. sales to that
importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by the total value of
the sales to that importer (or customer). Where an importer (or
customer)-specific ad valorem rate was greater than de minimis, we
calculated a per-unit assessment rate by aggregating the dumping
margins calculated for all U.S. sales to that importer (or customer)
and dividing this amount by the total quantity sold to that importer
(or customer).
The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions
directly to the BCBP within 15 days of publication of these final
results of review.
Cash Deposit Rates
The following antidumping duty deposits will be required on all
shipments of PSF from Korea entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption, effective on or after the publication date of the final
results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(1)
of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rates for the reviewed companies will
be the rates listed above (except no cash deposit will be required if a
company's weighted-average margin is de minimis, i.e., less than 0.5
percent); (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not
listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-
specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter
is not a firm covered in this review, the previous review, or the
original investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate
will be the rate established for the most recent period for the
manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) if neither the exporter nor
the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or any previous reviews, the
cash deposit rate will be 11.35 percent, the ``all others'' rate
established in Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the Republic of
Korea, and Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from
the Republic of Korea and Taiwan, 65 FR 33807 (May 25, 2000).
These cash deposit requirements shall remain in effect until
publication of the final results of the next administrative review.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
Notification Regarding APOs
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (``APOs'') of their responsibility
concerning the return or
[[Page 59368]]
destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business
proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely
written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to
comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is
subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing these results and this notice in
accordance with sections section 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: October 6, 2003.
James J. Jochum,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I
List of Comments in the Issues and Decision Memorandum
Comment 1: Exclusion of Certain Home Market Sales Made By Huvis
Comment 2: Huvis' Fiber Composition Characteristic
Comment 3: Huvis' Duty Drawback
Comment 4: Huvis' Brokerage Expenses
Comment 5: Huvis' Major Inputs
Comment 6: Huvis' Affiliated Supplier's SG&A
Comment 7: Huvis' Parent Company G&A
Comment 8: Huvis' Per-Unit G&A Calculation
Comment 9: East Young's Comparison Market
Comment 10: East Young's G&A Ratio
[FR Doc. 03-26078 Filed 10-14-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S