[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 14, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77829-77831]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31369]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-421-811]
Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From the Netherlands: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 10, 2010, the Department of Commerce (the
Department) published its preliminary results in the antidumping duty
administrative review of purified carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) from the
Netherlands. See Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From the Netherlands;
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR
48310 (August 10, 2010) (Preliminary Results). The merchandise covered
by the order is purified CMC, as described in the ``Scope of the
Order'' section of this notice. The period of review (POR) is July 1,
2008, through June 30, 2009. We afforded interested parties an
opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results. We received comments
from interested parties on October 22, 2010, and, in light of these
comments, have made changes to our margin calculations. Thus, the final
results differ from those published in the Department's Preliminary
Results. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed
firms are listed below in the section entitled ``Final Results of the
Review.''
DATES: Effective Date: December 14, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edythe Artman, Olga Carter, or
Angelica Mendoza, AD/CVD Operations, Office 7, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482-3931, (202) 482-8221, or (202) 482-3019, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 10, 2010, the Department published the preliminary
results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on
purified CMC from the Netherlands. See Preliminary Results at 48310.
The respondents under review are Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals B.V.
(ANFC) and CP Kelco B.V. (CP Kelco). The petitioner in this proceeding
is Aqualon Company, a unit of Hercules Inc. We invited interested
parties to comment on the Preliminary Results following the release of
all verification reports. See Preliminary Results at 48318.
On September 29, 2010, the Department released the home-market
sales verification report for ANFC and, on October 13, 2010, we
released the U.S. sales verification report for this company. We did
not verify the responses of CP Kelco in the current review.
On October 22, 2010, ANFC submitted a case brief and CP Kelco
submitted a letter in lieu of a case brief. The petitioner did not file
any comments on the preliminary results of review and no party
requested a hearing concerning the review.
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the order is all purified CMC, sometimes
also referred to as purified sodium CMC, polyanionic cellulose, or
cellulose gum, which is a white to off-white, non-toxic, odorless,
biodegradable powder, comprising sodium CMC that has been refined and
purified to a minimum assay of 90 percent. Purified CMC does not
include unpurified or crude CMC, CMC Fluidized Polymer Suspensions, and
CMC that is cross-linked through heat treatment. Purified CMC is CMC
that has undergone one or more purification operations which, at a
minimum, reduce the remaining salt and other by-product portion of the
product to less than ten percent. The merchandise subject to the order
is classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States at
subheading 3912.31.00. This tariff classification is provided for
convenience and customs purposes; however, the written description of
the scope of the order is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in ANFC's case brief and CP Kelco's letter in
lieu of a case brief are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2008/2009 Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review of Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from the
Netherlands,'' from Gary Taverman, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated
December 8, 2010 (Issues and Decision Memorandum), and hereby adopted
by this notice. A list of the issues raised, all of which are in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as Appendix
I. A copy of the Issues and Decision
[[Page 77830]]
Memorandum will be placed on the official file of this review, which is
located in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room 7046 of the main
Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet
at http://www.trade.gov/ia/. The paper copy and electronic version of
the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of the comments received from ANFC, we have
made changes to its margin calculations for the final results. The
Department changed the assignment of product characteristics to the
variable ``CMCHAR'' from U.S. product characteristics to home-market
product characteristics. This change is consistent with our model-
matching methodology and will ensure that sales in the U.S. market are
compared to home-market sales of the identical or similar models. We
also have changed the calculation of movement expenses so that
warehousing expenses are only included in domestic movement expenses
(i.e., they have been removed from the calculation of international
movement expenses). Finally, we have reviewed ANFC's comments with
respect to the inventory carrying costs incurred in the United States
and agree that no such costs were incurred on ``Channel-1'' sales--
those sales in which the product was shipped directly from the
production facility or warehouse in the Netherlands to the U.S.
customer. Thus, we have modified our recalculation of inventory
carrying costs incurred in the United States in the margin calculation
program to exclude Channel-1 sales. For a more detailed discussion of
the changes made to ANFC's calculations, see ``Memorandum to the File:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Purified
Carboxymethylcellulose from the Netherlands: Analysis of the Sales
Responses Submitted by Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals B.V.,'' from
Olga Carter, International Trade Compliance Analyst, to the File, dated
December 8, 2010. A public version of this memorandum is on file in the
CRU.
In addition, we made changes to the programs used to calculate
ANFC's margin based on our own review of the record following the
issuance of the Preliminary Results. First, in light of a finding
discovered at ANFC's home-market sales verification, we have corrected
the entry date of one U.S. sale. Specifically, in our margin-
calculation program, we have entered the verified date of entry for
this sale (and, as described below, are recalculating the inventory
carrying costs for this sale, as we are for all sales). Second,
subsequent to the issuance of the Preliminary Results, we noticed that
a minor correction relating to one sale was not reflected in ANFC's
most-recently submitted U.S. sales database.\1\ Consequently, for this
sale, we entered the verified date of entry and amount of U.S. duties
incurred on the sale in the margin-calculation program. Lastly, we
noticed an oversight in our preliminary margin calculations in that,
having made an adjustment to the manufacturing costs of all products,
we failed to recalculate the inventory carrying costs incurred in the
Netherlands on both home-market and U.S. sales.\2\ See the memorandum
on ``Cost of Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments
for the Preliminary Results--Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals B.V.,''
from Frederick W. Mines, Accountant, to Peter S. Scholl, Lead
Accountant, dated August 2, 2010. Thus, we have corrected this
oversight for the final results by modifying the comparison-market and
margin-calculation programs to recalculate the inventory carrying costs
that ANFC incurred in the Netherlands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This database and the most-recently submitted home-market
sales database reflected all other minor corrections and revisions
requested by the Department at verification and were used to
calculate CP Kelco's preliminary dumping margin.
\2\ The adjustment to manufacturing costs, upon which inventory
carrying costs are based, would also make it necessary to
recalculate the inventory carrying costs incurred in the United
States except that we already inserted the programming language for
this recalculation in ANFC's margin-calculation program for the
preliminary results. We made this earlier change based on our
finding that these costs should be calculated by using the U.S.
interest rate. See ``Analysis of Data Submitted by Akzo Nobel
Functional Chemicals B.V. (ANFC) and Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals
LLC (AN-US) in the Preliminary Results of the 2008-2009
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Purified
Carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) from the Netherlands,'' from Olga
Carter and Edythe Artman, International Trade Compliance Analysts,
to the File, dated August 2, 2010, at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to CP Kelco, we reviewed the company's comment that
language in our margin-calculation program, used to recalculate U.S.
indirect selling expenses incurred in the home market, resulted in an
inadvertent mathematical error. As suggested by the respondent, we have
modified the programming language so that the gross unit price of a
sale is now added to any billing adjustments of the sale before the
selling-expense factor is applied to the sum of these two amounts. This
change is detailed in the ``CP Kelco B.V.--Analysis Memorandum for the
Final Results of the 2008/2009 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
of Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from the Netherlands,'' from Edythe
Artman, International Trade Compliance Analyst, to the File, dated
December 8, 2010. A public version of this memorandum is on file in the
CRU.
Final Results of the Review
We determine the following percentage weighted-average margins to
exist for the period July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-average
Manufacturer/Exporter margin
(percentage)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANFC................................................ 9.06
CP Kelco B.V........................................ 2.64
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), the Department
normally calculates an assessment rate for each importer of the subject
merchandise covered by the review. In this review, we have calculated,
whenever possible, an exporter/importer (or customer)-specific
assessment rate or value for merchandise subject to this review as
described below.
With respect to export-price sales (i.e., sales directly to the
unaffiliated purchaser in the United States) for these final results,
we divided the total dumping margins (calculated as the difference
between normal value and export price) for each exporter's importer or
customer by the total number of units the exporter sold to that
importer or customer. We will direct CBP to assess the resulting per-
unit dollar amount against each unit of merchandise in each of that
importer's/customer's POR entries.
For constructed-export-price sales (e.g., sales through ANFC's U.S.
affiliate to the unaffiliated purchaser in the United States), we
divided the total dumping margins for the reviewed sales by the total
entered value of those reviewed sales for each importer. We will direct
CBP to assess the resulting percentage margin against the entered
customs values for the subject merchandise on each of that importer's
POR entries. See 19 CFR 351.212(b).
The calculated per-unit values or ad valorem rates, as appropriate,
will be assessed uniformly on all entries made by the respective
importers during the POR. Where the assessment rate is above de
minimis, we will instruct CBP
[[Page 77831]]
to assess duties on all entries of subject merchandise by that
importer.
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on
May 6, 2003. This clarification will apply to entries of subject
merchandise during the POR produced by reviewed companies for which
these companies did not know their merchandise was destined for the
United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate
unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the
intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full
discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6,
2003).
The Department intends to issue assessment instructions directly to
CBP 15 days after publication of these final results of review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash-deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of this notice of final results of administrative review
for all shipments of purified CMC from the Netherlands entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of
publication, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act): (1) The cash-deposit rates for ANFC and CP
Kelco will be the rates established in the final results of this
review; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not
covered in this review, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the
company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the
exporter is not a firm covered in this or any previous review or in the
less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation but the manufacturer is, the
cash-deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent
period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) if neither the
exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or any previous
review or the investigation, the cash-deposit rate will continue to be
the all-others rate of 14.57 percent, which is the all-others rate
established by the Department in the LTFV investigation. See Notice of
Antidumping Duty Orders: Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland,
Mexico, the Netherlands and Sweden, 70 FR 39734 (July 11, 2005). These
cash-deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until
further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely,
written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to
comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation that is
subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 8, 2010.
Paul Piquado,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I--Comments in the Issues and Decision Memorandum
Clerical Errors
Comment 1: Physical Characteristic Codes of Comparison-Market Sales.
Comment 2: Double-counting of Warehousing Expenses Incurred in the
Country of Manufacture.
Comment 3: Inventory Carrying Costs Incurred in the United States on
Certain Sales.
Comment 4: Calculation of U.S. Indirect Selling Expenses Incurred in
the Country of Manufacture.
[FR Doc. 2010-31369 Filed 12-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P