[Federal Register: January 15, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 10)]
[Notices]
[Page 2511-2512]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15ja09-71]
[[Page 2511]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-549-821]
Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from Thailand: Final Results and
Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 9, 2008, the Department of Commerce published the
preliminary results of the 2006/2007 administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on polyethylene retail carrier bags from
Thailand. 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
respondents are listed below in the ``Final Results of the Review''
section of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 15, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristin Case or Richard Rimlinger, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-3174
or (202) 482-4477, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On September 9, 2008, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
published Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from Thailand: Preliminary
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Intent to Rescind
in Part, 73 FR 52288 (September 9, 2008) (Preliminary Results), in the
Federal Register. The administrative review covers the following
producers/exporters: King Pac Industrial Co., Ltd. (King Pac), Naraipak
Co., Ltd., and Narai Packaging (Thailand) Ltd. (collectively NPG), Poly
Plast (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (Poly Plast), and Master Packaging Co., Ltd.
(Master Packaging).\1\ The period of review is August 1, 2006, through
July 31, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As discussed in the Preliminary Results, we considered both
King Pac and King Pak Ind. Co., Ltd. (King Pak), to be alternative
spellings of the name of one company. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR
at 52288, n. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. On
October 15, 2008, we received case briefs from the Polyethylene Retail
Carrier Bag Committee and its individual members, Hilex Poly Co., LLC,
and Superbag Corporation (collectively, the petitioners), and KYD Ltd.
(KYD), an importer of subject merchandise. On October 23, 2008, we
received rebuttal briefs from the petitioners and KYD. At the request
of KYD, we held a public hearing on October 29, 2008.
We have conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the antidumping duty order is
polyethylene retail carrier bags (PRCBs) which may be referred to as t-
shirt sacks, merchandise bags, grocery bags, or checkout bags. The
subject merchandise is defined as non-sealable sacks and bags with
handles (including drawstrings), without zippers or integral extruded
closures, with or without gussets, with or without printing, of
polyethylene film having a thickness no greater than 0.035 inch (0.889
mm) and no less than 0.00035 inch (0.00889 mm), and with no length or
width shorter than 6 inches (15.24 cm) or longer than 40 inches (101.6
cm). The depth of the bag may be shorter than 6 inches but not longer
than 40 inches (101.6 cm).
PRCBs are typically provided without any consumer packaging and
free of charge by retail establishments, e.g., grocery, drug,
convenience, department, specialty retail, discount stores, and
restaurants, to their customers to package and carry their purchased
products. The scope of the order excludes (1) polyethylene bags that
are not printed with logos or store names and that are closeable with
drawstrings made of polyethylene film and (2) polyethylene bags that
are packed in consumer packaging with printing that refers to specific
end-uses other than packaging and carrying merchandise from retail
establishments, e.g., garbage bags, lawn bags, trash-can liners.
As a result of recent changes to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States (HTSUS), imports of the subject merchandise are
currently classifiable under statistical category 3923.21.0085 of the
HTSUS. Furthermore, although the HTSUS subheading is provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope
of the order is dispositive.
Rescission
In the Preliminary Results, we explained that Kor Ratthanakit Co.,
Ltd. (Kor Ratthanakit), reported that it had no shipments of subject
merchandise covered by this review. Additionally, we stated that,
because our review of information from U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) supported Kor Ratthanakit's claim, we would rescind
the review with respect to Kor Ratthanakit if we continued to find that
Kor Ratthanakit did not have any shipments of subject merchandise to
the United States during the period of review. See Preliminary Results,
73 FR at 52289. Because we have not received information indicating
that Kor Ratthanakit had any shipments of subject merchandise during
the period of review we are rescinding the administrative review with
respect to Kor Ratthanakit.
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 for the
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Polyethylene Retail Carrier
Bags from Thailand for the Period of Review August 31, 2006, through
July 31, 2007 (Decision Memorandum), which is dated January 7, 2009,
and 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 Central Records Unit, Room 1117 of the main
Commerce building (CRU). In addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at http://
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
In our preliminary results for NPG, we used the most recently
submitted cost-of-production data, received on August 25, 2008, but we
did not use the updated constructed-value data contained in the same
submission. Because this submission contained both revised cost and
constructed-value data, we have used all of this data in the
calculation of NPG's final dumping margin.
For Poly Plast, we found it appropriate to assign partial adverse
facts available to certain unreported U.S. sales. During the course of
verification of the information Poly Plast submitted in this review, we
found that Poly Plast did not report certain U.S. sales of subject
merchandise. Because the administrative record lacks
[[Page 2512]]
all of the information necessary to calculate dumping margins for these
sales, we find it appropriate to rely on partial facts available
pursuant to section 776(a) of the Act. Furthermore, because Poly Plast
possessed the necessary records to provide a complete U.S. sales list
but did not do so, we find that it did not act to the best of its
ability to comply with our request for information.
Accordingly, because Poly Plast failed to cooperate in reporting
all of its U.S. sales of subject merchandise, we find that use of
information adverse to the interests of Poly Plast, as facts otherwise
available, is appropriate pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act. As
adverse facts available we have applied the highest transaction-
specific margin we determined for sales Poly Plast reported to the
value of unreported U.S. sales. For a complete discussion on this
issue, see Decision Memorandum at Comment 2.
Sales Below Cost in the Home Market
For these final results of review, the Department disregarded home-
market sales by NPG and Poly Plast that failed the cost-of-production
test.
Final Results of the Review
As a result of our review, we determine that the following
percentage weighted-average dumping margins exist on PCRBs from
Thailand for the period August 1, 2006, through July 31, 2007:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Producer/Exporter Margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
King Pac (aka King Pak)............................. 122.88
Master Packaging.................................... 122.88
NPG................................................. 32.67
Poly Plast.......................................... 8.94
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
Upon issuance of these 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 these final results of review.
We calculated importer/customer-specific duty-assessment amounts
with respect to export-price sales by NPG and Poly Plast in the
following manner. We divided the total dumping margins (calculated as
the difference between normal value and the 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 on each of that importer's or customer's entries during the
review period. See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Where the assessment amount is
above de minimis, we will instruct CBP to assess duties on all entries
of subject merchandise by that importer or customer.
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003)
(Assessment-Policy Notice). This clarification will apply to entries of
subject merchandise during the period of review produced by companies
included in these final results of review for which the reviewed
companies did not know that the merchandise they sold to an
intermediary (e.g., a reseller, trading company, or exporter) 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 intermediary involved in the transaction. See Assessment-
Policy Notice for a full discussion of this clarification.
Because we are relying on total adverse facts available to
establish the dumping margins for King Pac and Master Packaging, we
will instruct CBP to apply a dumping margin of 122.88 percent to all
entries of subject merchandise produced and/or exported by these
companies.
Cash-Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of this notice of final results of administrative review
for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication,
consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash-deposit
rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates shown above; (2) for
previously investigated or reviewed 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 or a previous review or the original 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; (4) the cash-deposit rate for all
other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 2.80 percent, the
all-others rate from the amended final determination of the LTFV
investigation published on July 15, 2004. See Notice of Amended Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Polyethylene Retail
Carrier Bags From Thailand, 69 FR 42419 (July 15, 2004).
These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further
notice.
Notification Requirements
This notice serves as a 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 Department's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping duties. See id.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 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 the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.We are
issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: January 7, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix
1. Adverse Facts Available
2. Unreported Sales by Poly Plast
[FR Doc. E9-634 Filed 1-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S