[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19325-19329]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8347]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-934]
1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid From the People's
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Intent To Rescind Review in Part
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: In response to a timely request from Compass Chemical
International LLC (``Petitioner''), the Department of Commerce
(``Department'') is conducting an administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on 1-hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-diphosphonic acid
(``HEDP'') from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''). The period of
review (``POR'') is April 23, 2009, through March 31, 2010. This
administrative review covers two exporters of the subject merchandise
that are being individually examined as mandatory respondents.
The Department has preliminarily determined that one mandatory
respondent, Jiangsu Jianghai Chemical Group Co., Ltd. (``Jiangsu
Jianghai''), did not demonstrate that it is entitled to a separate
rate. Therefore, the Department has treated Jiangsu Jianghai as part of
the PRC-wide entity. The other mandatory respondent, Changzhou Wujin
Fine Chemical Factory Co., Ltd. (``Wujin Fine''), reported that it did
not ship subject merchandise to the United States during the POR.
Because record evidence does not contradict Wujin Fine's no-shipment
claim, the Department intends to rescind the administrative review with
respect to this company. If these preliminary results are adopted in
the final results of review, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (``CBP'') to assess antidumping duties on entries
of subject merchandise during the POR for which the importer-specific
assessment rates are above de minimis.
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary
results. Parties that submit comments are requested to submit with each
argument a statement of the issue and a brief summary of the argument.
The Department intends to issue the final results of this review no
later than 120 days from the date of publication of this notice.
DATES: Effective Date: April 7, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shawn Higgins, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0679.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On April 28, 2009, the Department published the antidumping duty
order on HEDP from the PRC in the Federal Register.\1\ On April 1,
2010, the Department notified interested parties of their opportunity
to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on
HEDP from the PRC.\2\ On April 30, 2010, Petitioner requested that the
Department conduct an administrative review of Jiangsu Jianghai and
Wujin Fine.\3\ On May 28, 2010, the Department published a notice
initiating an antidumping duty administrative review of the Order
covering Jiangsu Jianghai and Wujin Fine during the period April 23,
2009, through March 31, 2010.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from India
and the People's Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Orders, 74 FR
19197 (April 28, 2009) (``Order'').
\2\ See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or
Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative
Review, 75 FR 16426 (April 1, 2010).
\3\ See Letter from Petitioner to the Secretary of Commerce,
``1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid (HEDP) from The
People's Republic of China (PRC): Request for Administrative
Review'' (April 30, 2010).
\4\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews, 75 FR 29976 (May 28, 2010) (``Initiation
Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Initiation Notice notified parties that they must submit timely
separate rate applications or separate rate certifications in order to
qualify for a separate rate.\5\ The Department did not receive any
separate rate applications or separate rate certifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Id., 75 FR at 29976-77.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 7, 2010, the Department issued antidumping questionnaires
to Jiangsu Jianghai and Wujin Fine.\6\ In June and July 2010, Jiangsu
Jianghai and Wujin Fine submitted letters certifying that they did not
ship subject merchandise to the United States during the POR.\7\ From
July through September 2010, the Department requested and received
import data and entry documentation from CBP. The Department placed
this information on the record of this review and solicited comments
from interested parties.\8\ Petitioner, Jiangsu Jianghai, and Wujin
Fine submitted comments on this import data and entry documentation in
August and October 2010.\9\ On October 25, 2010, the Department
informed Jiangsu Jianghai that record CBP data
[[Page 19326]]
and entry documentation indicated that Jiangsu Jianghai had a shipment
of subject merchandise that entered the United States during the
POR.\10\ Further, the Department explained that it is necessary for
Jiangsu Jianghai to provide the information requested by the Department
in the antidumping questionnaire because the entry date of Jiangsu
Jianghai's shipment was within the POR and there is no record evidence
in this review of circumstances that compel the Department to employ an
atypical methodology to determine the universe of sales to be examined
during this review.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See, e.g., Letter from Robert Bolling, Program Manager, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 4, to Jiangsu Jianghai, ``1-
Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the People's Republic
of China: Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Jiangsu Jianghai
Chemical Group Co., Ltd.'' (June 7, 2010) (``antidumping
questionnaire'').
\7\ See Letter from Jiangsu Jianghai to the Secretary of
Commerce, ``1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the
Republic of India and the People's Republic of China; A-570-934;
Copy of Certification of No Shipments by Jiangsu Jianghai Chemical
Group Co., Ltd.'' (July 13, 2010); Letter from Wujin Fine to the
Secretary of Commerce, ``1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid
from the Republic of India and the People's Republic of China; A-
570-934; Notification by Changzhou Wujin Fine Chemical Factory Co.,
Ltd.'' (June 28, 2010).
\8\ See Memorandum from Shawn Higgins, International Trade
Compliance Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, to Interested
Parties, ``2009-2010 Administrative Review of 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1,
1-Diphosphonic Acid from the People's Republic of China; Placing CBP
Data and Entry Documents on the Record'' (August 13, 2010);
Memorandum from Shawn Higgins, International Trade Compliance
Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, to Interested Parties, ``2009-
2010 Administrative Review of 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic
Acid from the People's Republic of China; Placing CBP Data and Entry
Documents on the Record'' (September 24, 2010) (``CBP Data and Entry
Documents'').
\9\ See Letter from Jiangsu Jianghai to the Secretary of
Commerce, ``1-Hydroxyethyidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the
Republic of India and the People's Republic of China; A-570-934;
Comments on Customs and Border Protection Data by Jiangsu Jianghai
Chemical Group Co., Ltd.'' (August 19, 2010); Letter from Wujin Fine
to the Secretary of Commerce, ``1-Hydroxyethyidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic
Acid from the Republic of India and the People's Republic of China;
A-570-934; Comments on Customs and Border Protection Data by
Changzhou Wujin Fine Chemical Factory Co., Ltd.'' (August 19, 2010);
Letter from Jiangsu Jianghai to the Secretary of Commerce, ``1-
Hydroxyethyidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the Republic of India
and the People's Republic of China; A-570-934; Comments on Customs
and Border Protection Data by Jiangsu Jianghai Chemical Group Co.,
Ltd.'' (October 4, 2010); Letter from Petitioner to the Secretary of
Commerce, ``1-Hydroxyethidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the
People's Republic of China'' (October 4, 2010).
\10\ See Letter from Robert Bolling, Program Manager, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 4, to Jiangsu Jianghai, ``1-Hydroxyethylidene-1,
1-Diphosphonic Acid from the People's Republic of China: Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review of Jiangsu Jianghai Chemical Group Co.,
Ltd.'' (October 25, 2010) (``Shipment Letter'') at 2.
\11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In November and December 2010, Jiangsu Jianghai submitted timely
responses to Sections A, C, and D of the antidumping questionnaire.\12\
The Department issued a supplementary Sections A and C questionnaire
and a supplementary Section D questionnaire to Jiangsu Jianghai on
December 9, 2010, and December 17, 2010, respectively.\13\ Jiangsu
Jianghai neither responded to these supplementary questionnaires nor
asked for extensions of time to respond.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Memorandum from Jiangsu Jianghai to the Secretary of
Commerce, ``1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the
Republic of India and the People's Republic of China; A-570-934;
Section A Response'' (November 19, 2010) (``Section A Response'');
Memorandum from Jiangsu Jianghai to the Secretary of Commerce, ``1-
Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the Republic of India
and the People's Republic of China; A-570-934; Section C Response''
(December 1, 2010); Memorandum from Jiangsu Jianghai to the
Secretary of Commerce, ``1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid
from the Republic of India and the People's Republic of China; A-
570-934; Section D Response of Jiangsu Jianghai Chemical Group Co.,
Ltd.'' (December 9, 2010).
\13\ See Letter from Robert Bolling, Program Manager, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 4, to Jiangsu Jianghai, ``Sections A & C
Supplemental Questionnaire'' (December 9, 2010) (``Sections A & C
Supplemental''); Letter from Robert Bolling, Program Manager, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 4, to Jiangsu Jianghai, ``Section D Supplemental
Questionnaire'' (December 17, 2010).
\14\ See Memorandum from Shawn Higgins, International Trade
Compliance Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, to the File,
``Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on 1-
Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the People's Republic
of China: Telephone Conversation With Counsel for Jiangsu Jianghai
Chemical Group Co., Ltd.'' (January 3, 2011) (``Telephone
Conversation Memo'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the Department's November 12, 2010, letter providing
all interested parties with an opportunity to submit comments regarding
surrogate country and surrogate value selection,\15\ Petitioner filed
surrogate country and surrogate value comments in November and December
2010.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Letter from Robert Bolling, Program Manager, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 4, to All Interested Parties, ``Administrative
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-
Diphosphonic Acid from the People's Republic of China: Request for
Comments on Selection of Surrogate Country and Surrogate Values''
(November 12, 2010).
\16\ See Letter from Petitioner to the Secretary of Commerce,
``1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the People's
Republic of China'' (November 30, 2010); Letter from Petitioner to
the Secretary of Commerce, ``1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic
Acid from the People's Republic of China'' (December 16, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 1, 2010, the Department extended the time period for
completing the preliminary results of this administrative review until
March 31, 2011.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid From the
People's Republic of China: Extension of the Time Limit for the
Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,
75 FR 74684 (December 1, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the order includes all grades of
aqueous, acidic (non-neutralized) concentrations of 1-
hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-diphosphonic acid,\18\ also referred to as
hydroxethlylidenediphosphonic acid, hydroxyethanediphosphonic acid,
acetodiphosphonic acid, and etidronic acid. The CAS (Chemical Abstract
Service) registry number for HEDP is 2809-21-4. The merchandise subject
to the order is currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule
of the United States (``HTSUS'') at subheading 2931.00.9043. It may
also enter under HTSUS subheading 2811.19.6090. While HTSUS subheadings
are provided for convenience and customs purposes only, the written
description of the scope of the order is dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ C2H8O7P2 or
C(CH3)(OH)(PO3H2)2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intent To Partially Rescind the Administrative Review
As stated above, Jiangsu Jianghai and Wujin Fine submitted letters
certifying that they did not ship subject merchandise to the United
States during the POR. To test these claims, the Department ran a CBP
data query, issued no-shipment inquiries to CBP requesting that it
provide any information that contradicted these no-shipment claims, and
obtained entry documentation from CBP. After examining this
information, the Department has preliminarily determined that Jiangsu
Jianghai had a shipment of subject merchandise that entered the United
States during the POR.\19\ However, because the evidence on the record
does not contradict Wujin Fine's no-shipment claim, the Department
intends to rescind this administrative review with respect to Wujin
Fine, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Shipment Letter at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Market Economy Country Status
In every case conducted by the Department involving the PRC, the
PRC has been treated as a non-market economy (``NME'') country. In
accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the ``Act''), any determination that a foreign country is an
NME country shall remain in effect until revoked by the administering
authority. None of the parties to this proceeding have contested NME
treatment.
Separate Rates
In proceedings involving NME countries, the Department maintains a
rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are
subject to government control.\20\ In accordance with this presumption,
all exporters of subject merchandise in an NME country are assigned a
single rate unless an exporter can affirmatively demonstrate its
entitlement to a separate, company-specific margin by showing an
absence of government control, both in law and in fact, with respect to
export activities.\21\ To determine whether de jure government control
exists, the Department examines evidence of: (1) An absence of
restrictive stipulations associated with an individual exporter's
business and export license; (2) any legislative enactments
decentralizing control of companies; or (3) any other formal measures
by the government decentralizing control of companies.\22\ Evidence
supporting de facto absence of government control includes: (1) Whether
each exporter sets its own export prices independently of the
government; (2) whether each exporter has the authority to negotiate
and sign contracts and other agreements; (3) whether each exporter has
autonomy from the government in making decisions regarding the
selection of
[[Page 19327]]
management; and (4) whether each exporter can retain the proceeds from
its export sales and make independent decisions regarding disposition
of profits or financing of losses.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Sigma Corp. v. United States, 117 F.3d 1401, 1405-06
(Fed. Cir. 1997).
\21\ Id., 117 F.3d at 1405.
\22\ See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Sparklers From the People's Republic of China, 56 FR 20588, 20589
(May 6, 1991) (``Sparklers''); Qingdao Taifa Group Co., Ltd. v.
United States, 710 F. Supp. 2d 1352, 1355-56 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2010)
(``Qingdao Taifa'') (citing Coal. for the Pres. of Am. Brake Drum
and Rotor Aftermarket Mfrs. v. United States, 44 F. Supp. 2d 229,
242 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1999) (``Brake Drum'')).
\23\ See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Silicon Carbide From the People's Republic of China, 59
FR 22585, 22586-87 (May 2, 1994) (``Silicon Carbide,''); Qingdao
Taifa, 710 F. Supp. 2d at 1356 (citing Brake Drum, 44 F. Supp. 2d at
243).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 19, 2010, Jiangsu Jianghai submitted its response to
Section A of the antidumping questionnaire.\24\ Jiangsu Jianghai's
submission was incomplete and contained information insufficient to
overcome the presumption that Jiangsu Jianghai's export activities are
controlled, in law and in fact, by the PRC government. On December 9,
2010, the Department issued Jiangsu Jianghai a supplementary
questionnaire that requested Jiangsu Jianghai to correct these
deficiencies and provide additional information necessary to determine
whether it qualified for a separate rate.\25\ On January 3, 2011, the
Department received confirmation that Jiangsu Jianghai would not
provide the Department with the information requested in the December
9, 2010 supplementary questionnaire.\26\ Therefore, by submitting
incomplete and unverifiable responses to questions regarding government
control of its export activities and not responding to the Department's
supplementary questionnaire, Jiangsu Jianghai has prevented the
Department from further investigating the facts related to the question
of government control and failed to demonstrate an absence of de jure
and de facto government control under the criteria identified in
Sparklers and Silicon Carbide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Section A Response.
\25\ See Sections A & C Supplemental at Enclosure 1-3.
\26\ See Telephone Conversation Memo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, by submitting incomplete and unverifiable responses to
the antidumping questionnaire and not responding to either the
Department's December 9, 2010, supplementary Sections A and C
questionnaire or its December 17, 2010, supplementary Section D
questionnaire, Jiangsu Jianghai did not meet its requirement to fully
participate in this administrative review by responding to all
information that has been requested by the Department.\27\ The
Department does not permit respondents to selectively choose which
requests to respond to or which information to submit.\28\ Jiangsu
Jianghai cannot qualify for separate rate status by participating in
only limited aspects of this review while simultaneously failing to
provide complete and verifiable data with respect to other required
elements.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See antidumping questionnaire at G-1 (``[A]s a respondent,
your company must wholly and fully participate in this
administrative review. * * * a respondent must respond to all
information that has been requested by the Department''); Wooden
Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of China: Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Reviews,
74 FR 41374 (August 17, 2009) (``Furniture'') and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 32.
\28\ See antidumping questionnaire at G-1.
\29\ See Furniture, and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 32; see also antidumping questionnaire at G-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, the Department has preliminarily determined that Jiangsu
Jianghai does not qualify for a separate rate because it has failed to
demonstrate an absence of de jure and de facto government control under
the criteria identified in Sparklers and Silicon Carbide and did not
fully participate in this administrative review. Accordingly, the
Department is treating Jiangsu Jianghai as part of the PRC-wide entity.
Moreover, because Jiangsu Jianghai's responses to the antidumping
questionnaire cannot be verified and Jiangsu Jianghai did not remedy
the deficiencies noted in the Department's supplementary
questionnaires, the Department has, in accordance with sections 782(d)
and (e) of the Act, preliminarily determined to disregard all of
Jiangsu Jianghai's responses to the antidumping questionnaire.
Use of Facts Available and Adverse Facts Available (``AFA'')
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 by section
782(i) of the Act.
Further, 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.
Application of Total AFA to the PRC-Wide Entity
In the Initiation Notice, the Department stated that if one of the
companies for which this review was initiated ``does not qualify for a
separate rate, all other exporters of {HEDP from the PRC{time} that
have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this
review as part of the single PRC entity. * * * '' As noted above,
Jiangsu Jianghai, one of the companies for which this review was
initiated, has not qualified for a separate rate. Therefore, the PRC-
wide entity is now under review.
As explained above, Jiangsu Jianghai, as part of the PRC-wide
entity, submitted incomplete and unverifiable responses to the
antidumping questionnaire and did not respond to either the
Department's December 9, 2010, supplementary Sections A and C
questionnaire or its December 17, 2010 supplementary Section D
questionnaire. For these reasons, the Department has preliminarily
determined that the PRC-wide entity (1) withheld information that was
requested, (2) failed to provide information within the deadlines
established and in the form and manner requested by the Department, (3)
significantly impeded this proceeding, and (4) provided information
that cannot be verified. Therefore, in accordance with subsections
776(a)(2)(A) through (D) of the Act, the Department has preliminarily
based the dumping margin of the PRC-wide entity on the facts otherwise
available. Further, because the PRC-wide entity failed to cooperate by
not acting to the best of its ability to comply with the Department's
requests for information, the Department has preliminarily determined,
pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act, to use an inference that is
adverse to the interests of the PRC-wide entity in selecting from among
the facts otherwise available.
Selection of the AFA Rate
Section 776(b) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.308(c)(1) provide that the
Department's adverse inference ``may include reliance on information
derived from (1) the petition, (2) a final determination in the
investigation, (3) any previous review or determination, or (4) any
other information placed on the record.'' In selecting a rate for use
as AFA, the Department selects a rate that is sufficiently adverse ``as
to effectuate the purpose of the facts available rule to induce
respondents to provide the Department with complete and accurate
[[Page 19328]]
information in a timely manner.'' \30\ Furthermore, it is the
Department's practice to ensure ``that the party does not obtain a more
favorable result by failing to cooperate than if it had cooperated
fully'' \31\ and to select ``the highest rate on the record of the
proceeding'' \32\ that can be corroborated, to the extent
practicable.\33\ Therefore, as AFA, the Department has preliminarily
assigned the PRC-wide entity a dumping margin of 72.42 percent, which
was the margin calculated in the petition, as adjusted by the
Department for initiation, and is the highest dumping margin on the
record of this proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Static Random Access Memory Semiconductors From Taiwan,
63 FR 8909, 8932 (February 23, 1998).
\31\ See Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act, H. Doc. No. 316, 103d Cong., 2d
Session at 870 (1994) (``SAA''); Brake Rotors From the People's
Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of the
Seventh Administrative Review; Final Results of the Eleventh New
Shipper Review, 70 FR 69937, 69939 (November 18, 2005).
\32\ See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Brazil: Final
Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 73 FR 39940, 39942 (July 11, 2008).
\33\ See Fujian Lianfu Forestry Co., Ltd. v. United States, 638
F. Supp. 2d 1325, 1336 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corroboration of Secondary Information
Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies
on secondary information rather than on information obtained in the
course of an investigation or review, it shall, to the extent
practicable, corroborate that information from independent sources that
are reasonably at its disposal. Secondary information is defined as
information derived from the petition that gave rise to the
investigation or review, the final determination concerning the subject
merchandise, or any previous review under section 751 of the Act
concerning the subject merchandise.\34\ ``Corroborate'' means that the
Department will satisfy itself that the secondary information to be
used has probative value.\35\ To corroborate secondary information, the
Department will, to the extent practicable, examine the reliability and
relevance of the information to be used.\36\ Independent sources used
to corroborate such information may include, for example, published
price lists, official import statistics and customs data, and
information obtained from interested parties during the particular
investigation or review.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See SAA at 870.
\35\ Id.
\36\ 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, 61 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 Duty
Administrative Reviews and Termination in Part, 62 FR 11825 (March
13, 1997).
\37\ See Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: High and Ultra-High Voltage Ceramic Station Post
Insulators from Japan, 68 FR 35627, 35629 (June 16, 2003), unchanged
in Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
High and Ultra-High Voltage Ceramic Station Post Insulators from
Japan, 68 FR 62560 (November 5, 2003); Notice of Final Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Live Swine From Canada, 70 FR
12181, 12183-84 (March 11, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To corroborate the 72.42 percent petition rate, the Department
first revisited its pre-initiation analysis of the information in the
petition. During the initiation of the antidumping investigation of
HEDP from the PRC, the Department examined evidence supporting the
calculations in the petition and the supplemental information provided
by Petitioner to determine the probative value of the margins alleged
in the petition.\38\ During the Department's pre-initiation analysis,
it examined the information used as the basis of export price (``EP'')
and normal value (``NV'') in the petition, and the calculations used to
derive the alleged margins.\39\ Also during its pre-initiation
analysis, the Department examined information from various independent
sources provided either in the petition or in supplements to the
petition, which corroborated key elements of the EP and NV
calculations.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ See 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the
Republic of India and the People's Republic of China: Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Investigations, 73 FR 20023, 20025-26 (April 14,
2008) (``Investigation Initiation''); 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-
Diphosphonic Acid from the People's Republic of China: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 74 FR 10545, 10547
(March 11, 2009) (``Final Determination'').
\39\ See Investigation Initiation, 73 FR at 20025-26; Final
Determination, 74 FR at 10547.
\40\ See Final Determination, 74 FR at 10547.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To further corroborate the 72.42 percent petition rate, the
Department examined the information on the record of this
administrative review. Because the Department has, in accordance with
section 782(d) of the Act, disregarded all of Jiangsu Jianghai's
responses to the antidumping questionnaire, the Department
preliminarily determined that the only information on the record of
this administrative review that can be used for purposes of
corroboration are the entry documents provided by CBP.\41\ These entry
documents--particularly the commercial invoice for Jiangsu Jianghai's
single entry of subject merchandise during the POR--establish that
Jiangsu Jianghai's U.S. price approximates the U.S. price in the
petition.\42\ Therefore, the Department has preliminarily determined
that the U.S. price in the petition reflects commercial reality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ See CBP Data and Entry Documents at Attachment 1.
\42\ See Memorandum from Shawn Higgins, International Trade
Compliance Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, to the File, ``1-
Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the People's Republic
of China: Corroboration Memorandum for Preliminary Results of
Administrative Review'' (March 31, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For these reasons, the Department has preliminarily determined that
the 72.42 percent petition rate has probative value and, therefore, is
corroborated to the extent practicable, in accordance with section
776(c) of the Act. Moreover, because the information on the record of
this administrative review that can be used for purposes of
corroboration approximate the information used as a basis for the
petition rate, the Department is satisfied that the 72.42 percent
petition rate reflects commercial reality.
Preliminary Results of Review
The Department has preliminarily determined that the following
weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period April 23, 2009,
through March 31, 2010:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Antidumping duty
Exporter percent margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-Wide Entity \43\................................ 72.42
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments
Interested parties may submit written comments no later than 30
days after the date of publication of these preliminary results of
review.\44\ Rebuttal comments must be limited to the issues raised in
the written comments and may be filed no later than 35 days after the
date of publication.\45\ Parties submitting written comments or
rebuttal comments are requested to provide the Department with an
additional copy of those comments on CD-ROM. Any interested party may
request a hearing within 30 days of publication of these preliminary
results.\46\ Any hearing, if requested, ordinarily will be held two
days after the scheduled date for submission of rebuttal briefs.\47\
Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and
[[Page 19329]]
location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ Jiangsu Jianghai is part of the PRC-wide entity.
\44\ See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii).
\45\ See 19 CFR 351.309(d).
\46\ See 19 CFR 351.310(c).
\47\ See 19 CFR 351.310(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department will issue the final results of this administrative
review, which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised
in the briefs, within 120 days of publication of these preliminary
results, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1), unless the time limit
is extended.
Assessment Rates
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212, the Department will determine, and CBP
shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject
merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review. The
Department intends to instruct CBP to liquidate entries containing
subject merchandise exported by the PRC-wide entity at the PRC-wide
rate the Department determines in the final results of this review. The
Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions
directly to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this
review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all
shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC 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 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; (2) for
all PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not been found to
be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-
wide rate established in the final results of this review; and (3) 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 further
notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 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 presuming that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and, subsequently, the
assessment of double antidumping duties.
The Department is issuing and publishing these preliminary results
of administrative review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).
Dated: March 31, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011-8347 Filed 4-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P