[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 194 (Monday, October 6, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58113-58115]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-23588]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-894]
Certain Tissue Paper Products from the People's Republic of
China: Final Results and Final Rescission, in Part, of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On April 4, 2008, the Department of Commerce (``the
Department'') published the preliminary results of the second
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain tissue
paper products (``tissue paper'') from the People's Republic of China
(``PRC''). See Certain Tissue Paper Products from the People's Republic
of China: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR 18497 (April 4, 2008) (``Preliminary
Results''). We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the
Preliminary Results. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we
have made changes to the surrogate value for labor for the final
results. We find that Max Fortune Industrial Limited and Max Fortune
(FETDE) Paper Products Co., Ltd. (collectively, Max Fortune), has not
sold subject merchandise at less than normal value during the period of
review (``POR''), March 1, 2006, through February 28, 2007.
DATES: Effective Date: October 6, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Gorelik, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6905.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
We published the preliminary results of the second administrative
review on April 4, 2008, in the Federal Register. See Preliminary
Results. On May 5, 2008, Seaman Paper Company of Massachusetts
(``Petitioner'') and Max Fortune filed their case briefs. On May 12,
2008, Petitioner and Max Fortune filed rebuttal briefs. On June 30,
2008, the Department placed import entry packages obtained from U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') on the record of this
administrative review. The Department did not receive any comments
regarding the CBP entry
[[Page 58114]]
packages. On July 14, 2008, the Department extended the final results
of this administrative review. See Certain Tissue Paper Products from
the People's Republic of China: Notice of Extension of Time Limit for
Final Results of Second Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR
40295 (July 14, 2008). No parties requested a hearing.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the briefs are addressed in the Memorandum to
David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration,
regarding Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results in the
Second Administrative Review of Certain Tissue Paper Products from the
People's Republic of China, dated October 1, 2008 (``Issues and
Decision Memorandum''), which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list
of the issues raised, all of which are in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum, is attached to this notice as Appendix I. Parties can find
a complete discussion of all issues raised in the briefs and the
corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on
file in the Central Records Unit, room 1117 of the Department of
Commerce. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/release/release.html. The paper copy and electronic
version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order
The tissue paper products subject to this order are cut-to-length
sheets of tissue paper having a basis weight not exceeding 29 grams per
square meter. Tissue paper products subject to this order may or may
not be bleached, dye-colored, surface-colored, glazed, surface
decorated or printed, sequined, crinkled, embossed, and/or die cut. The
tissue paper subject to this order is in the form of cut-to-length
sheets of tissue paper with a width equal to or greater than one-half
(0.5) inch. Subject tissue paper may be flat or folded, and may be
packaged by banding or wrapping with paper or film, by placing in
plastic or film bags, and/or by placing in boxes for distribution and
use by the ultimate consumer. Packages of tissue paper subject to this
order may consist solely of tissue paper of one color and/or style, or
may contain multiple colors and/or styles.
The merchandise subject to this order does not have specific
classification numbers assigned to them under the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). Subject merchandise may be
under one or more of several different subheadings, including: 4802.30;
4802.54; 4802.61; 4802.62; 4802.69; 4804.31.1000; 4804.31.2000;
4804.31.4020; 4804.31.4040; 4804.31.6000; 4804.39; 4805.91.1090;
4805.91.5000; 4805.91.7000; 4806.40; 4808.30; 4808.90; 4811.90;
4823.90; 4820.50.00; 4802.90.00; 4805.91.90; 9505.90.40. The tariff
classifications are provided for convenience and customs purposes;
however, the written description of the scope of this order is
dispositive.
Excluded from the scope of this order are the following tissue
paper products: (1) Tissue paper products that are coated in wax,
paraffin, or polymers, of a kind used in floral and food service
applications; (2) tissue paper products that have been perforated,
embossed, or die-cut to the shape of a toilet seat, i.e., disposable
sanitary covers for toilet seats; (3) toilet or facial tissue stock,
towel or napkin stock, paper of a kind used for household or sanitary
purposes, cellulose wadding, and webs of cellulose fibers (HTSUS
4803.00.20.00 and 4803.00.40.00).
Partial Rescission of Administrative Review
In the Preliminary Results, the Department issued a notice of
intent to rescind this administrative review with respect to: (1)
Samsam Production Limited, (2) Guangzhou Baxi Printing Products
Limited, (3) Guilin Samsam Paper Products Ltd., (4) Vietnam Quijiang
Paper Co., Ltd., (5) PT Grafitecindo Ciptaprima, (6) PT Printec
Perkasa, (7) PT Printec Perkasa II, (8) PT Sansico Utama, (9) Foshan
Sansico Co., Ltd., and (10) Sansico Asia Pacific Limited. Each of these
companies certified that they did not export subject tissue paper from
the PRC to the United States during the POR, which the Department
corroborated by reviewing PRC tissue paper import data maintained by
CBP, and found no discrepancies with the statements made by these
companies. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 18499. Additionally,
consistent with the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act'') and
Department practice, we also preliminarily rescinded the review with
respect to Guilin Qifeng Paper Co., Ltd. (``Guilin Qifeng'') because
the record showed no suspended entries of merchandise exported by
Guilin Qifeng during the POR. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 18500.
Subsequent to the Preliminary Results, no information was submitted
on the record indicating that the above companies made shipments to the
United States of subject merchandise during the POR. Thus, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) and consistent with our practice,
we are rescinding this review with respect to Samsam Production
Limited, Guangzhou Baxi Printing Products Limited, Guilin Samsam Paper
Products Ltd., Vietnam Quijiang Paper Co., Ltd., PT Grafitecindo
Ciptaprima, PT Printec Perkasa, PT Printec Perkasa II, PT Sansico
Utama, Foshan Sansico Co., Ltd., and Sansico Asia Pacific Limited.
Additionally, the Department is rescinding the review with respect to
Guilin Qifeng as no information was submitted on the record challenging
our preliminary intent to rescind the review for this company.
Separate Rates
Max Fortune requested a separate, company-specific antidumping duty
rate. In the Preliminary Results, we found that Max Fortune met the
criteria for the application of a separate antidumping duty rate. See
Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 18500. The Department did not receive
comments on this issue prior to these final results. Moreover, we have
not received any information since the Preliminary Results with respect
to Max Fortune that would warrant reconsideration of our separate-rates
determination. Therefore, we continue to assign an individual dumping
margin to Max Fortune for this review period.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on comments received from the interested parties, we have
revised the labor surrogate value used in Max Fortune's margin
calculation. For the final results, we will continue to use regression-
based wage data, but will use U.S. $1.04 as the revised wage for the
PRC in the final results, which continues to be based on the reported
experience of several countries, but applies the more recent 2007
calculations, based on 2005 wage rate data, as published by the
Department in May 2008. See Issues and Decision Memorandum, at Comment
4.
Use of Facts Available
Sections 776(a)(1) and 776(a)(2)(B) of the Act direct the
Department to use facts available if necessary information is not
available on the record of an antidumping proceeding. We determined in
the Preliminary Results that, pursuant to sections 776(a) and 782(d) of
the Act, Max Fortune did not provide certain information relevant to
the Department's analysis because it failed to report ink and dye
[[Page 58115]]
consumption on a color-specific basis. Max Fortune stated it does not
maintain records for dye and ink consumption in the papermaking and
paper printing stages of production on a color specific basis. Thus,
Max Fortune could not report ink and dye consumption data in a manner
requested by the Department. As a result, we determined that it was
necessary to apply facts otherwise available to Max Fortune. Petitioner
argues that we should apply an adverse inference, pursuant to section
776(b) of the Act, to Max Fortune's calculation. However, we have
concluded that Max Fortune acted to the best of its ability in
providing responses to the Department's questionnaires. Thus,
consistent with the Department's application in the previous segment of
the instant review and in the Preliminary Results, we will not apply an
adverse inference, but will continue to apply the average Indian import
values for three dye types, which are commonly used in the production
of tissue paper, to value the aggregate amount of dye consumed in the
production of the subject tissue paper. See Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 1 for a detailed analysis.
Additionally, in the Preliminary Results, the Department invited
comments from interested parties regarding whether or not it should
alter its requirements for reporting ink and dye consumption in future
segments. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 18501. Upon analyzing the
comments received from interested parties with respect to the reporting
requirement for ink and dye consumption on a CONNUM-specific basis, we
have determined that the record does not contain sufficient evidence
necessary to revise the model-match criteria. Therefore, we will not
make any changes, at this time, to the model-match criteria and
continue to require that companies in future segments report ink and
dye consumption on a CONNUM-specific basis. See Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 2, for a detailed analysis.
Final Results of Review
We determine that the following antidumping duty margin exists:
Certain Tissue Paper From the PRC Individually Reviewed Exporters
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Max Fortune Industrial Ltd................................... 0.00%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department will disclose calculations performed for these final
results to the parties within five days of the date of publication of
this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Assessment Rates
Upon issuance of the final results, the Department will determine,
and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.
The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days
after the date of publication of the final results of review. Pursuant
to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we will calculate importer-specific (or
customer) ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the
total amount of the dumping margins calculated for the examined sales
to the total entered value of those same sales. We will instruct CBP to
assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this
review if any importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final
results of this review is above de minimis.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of these final results of this administrative review for
all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as
provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For Max Fortune,
the Department has calculated a zero margin for these final results,
and therefore no cash deposit will be required for this company; (2)
for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters not
listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recent
period; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise that have not
been found to be entitled to a separate rate, including those companies
for which this review has been rescinded, the cash deposit rate will be
the PRC-wide rate of 112.64 percent; and (4) for all non-PRC exporters
of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash
deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporters that
supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when
imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results
of the next administrative review.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice also serves as the final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding
the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and in the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the return/destruction or conversion to judicial protective
order of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with
19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Failure to comply is a violation of the APO.
This administrative review and this notice are published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.221(b)(5).
Dated: September 29, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
APPENDIX I
General Issues
Comment 1: Reporting of Ink and Dye Consumption
Comment 2: Reporting Requirements for Ink and Dye
Comment 3: Steam Coal Surrogate Value
Comment 4: Labor Surrogate Value
Comment 5: Treatment of Negative Dumping Margins (``Zeroing'')
[FR Doc. E8-23588 Filed 10-3-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P