[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 82 (Thursday, April 27, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24678-24680]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-10531]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-583-833]


Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From Taiwan

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On March 30, 2000, the Department of Commerce published its 
final determination of sales at less than fair value of certain 
polyester staple fiber from Taiwan (see 65 FR 16877). The petitioners 
and Nan Ya Plastics Corporation filed allegations of ministerial errors 
with respect to the calculations for Nan Ya Plastics Corporation.
    Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made 
changes in the margin calculations for Nan Ya Plastics Corporation and 
the all others rate. The final weighted-average dumping margin for Nan 
Ya Plastics Corporation is now 5.77 percent and the all others rate is 
7.53 percent.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 27, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia Thirumalai or Gregory 
Campbell, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 
482-4087 or 482-2239, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Applicable Statute and Regulations

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are 
references to provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930 (``the Act'') as 
amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''). In addition, 
unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department of 
Commerce's (``the Department's'') regulations refer to 19 CFR Part 351 
(April 1999).

Case History

    Since the final determination of this investigation (see 65 FR 
16877 (March 30, 2000) (``Final Determination'')), the following events 
have occurred:
    On April 3, 2000, the petitioners \1\ filed an allegation that the 
Department committed ministerial errors, as defined in 19 CFR 351.224, 
in its final calculations for Nan Ya Plastics Corporation (``Nan Ya''). 
Nan Ya responded to the petitioners' allegation and also filed its own 
allegation of ministerial errors on April 10, 2000. On April 14, 2000, 
the petitioners commented on Nan Ya's allegation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Arteva Specialties S.a.r.l.,d/b/a KoSa; Wellman, Inc; and 
Intercontinental Polymers, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of Investigation

    For the purposes of this investigation, the product covered is 
certain polyester staple fiber (``PSF''). Certain polyester staple 
fiber 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 investigation 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) classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 
the United States (``HTSUS'') at subheading 5503.20.00.20 is 
specifically excluded from this investigation. Also specifically 
excluded from this investigation are polyester staple fibers of 10 to 
18 denier that are cut to lengths

[[Page 24679]]

of 6 to 8 inches (fibers used in the manufacture of carpeting).
    The merchandise subject to this investigation is classified in the 
HTSUS at subheadings 5503.20.00.40 and 5503.20.00.60. Although the 
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, 
the written description of the merchandise under investigation is 
dispositive.

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (``POI'') is April 1, 1998 through 
March 31, 1999. This period corresponds to each respondent's four most 
recent fiscal quarters prior to the filing of the petition.

Analysis of Comments Received

Comment 1: Error in the Exchange Rate

    The petitioners allege that the Department multiplied the exchange 
rate by itself prior to converting NTD-denominated adjustments on U.S. 
sales to U.S. dollar amounts.

The Department's Position:

    We agree with the petitioners and have corrected this error. (See 
Memorandum to R. Moreland, Ministerial Error Allegations Regarding the 
Final Calculations for Nan Ya Plastics Corporation (``Calculation 
Memorandum''), April 19, 2000.)

Comment 2: Exclusion of Packing Labor Costs

    In using Nan Ya's revised packing material costs as submitted at 
the beginning of verification, according to the petitioners, the 
Department failed to add packing labor before calculating total packing 
costs.

The Department's Position:

    We agree with the petitioners that packing labor was not included 
in total packing expenses. For this amended final determination, we 
have corrected this error. (See the Calculation Memorandum.)

Comment 3: Error in Calculating U.S. Packing Costs

    According to the petitioners, an error in the computer program had 
the effect of setting Nan Ya's U.S. packing costs to zero prior to 
their addition to normal value.

The Department's Position:

    We agree with the petitioners that there was an error in the 
computer program which had the effect of setting U.S. packing costs to 
zero prior to their addition to normal value. We have corrected this 
error. (See the Calculation Memorandum.)

Comment 4: Bank Charges

    The petitioners allege that the Department used a per-kilogram 
amount for bank charges on one U.S. sale when the reported quantity was 
in metric tons. While the narrative of the verification report stated 
that the amount used in the final calculations was a per-metric ton 
amount, the petitioners state that the supporting documentation for 
this sale indicates that the amount is actually on a per-kilogram 
basis.

The Department's Position:

    After examining the supporting documentation for this sale, we 
agree with the petitioners that the amount in the narrative of the 
verification report that was used in the final calculations was a per-
kilogram amount. Since Nan Ya's sales are reported on a metric-ton 
basis, we have recalculated the bank charges on this one sale on a 
metric-ton basis. (See the Calculation Memorandum.)

Comment 5: Fiber Scrap Adjustment

    The petitioners allege that the Department relied on an incorrect 
fiber scrap adjustment factor in its margin calculation for the final 
determination. Specifically, the petitioners argue that the adjustment 
factor used by the Department to adjust Nan Ya's overstated scrap 
credit incorrectly used the inflated scrap credit amount as the 
denominator rather than the actual scrap amount produced.
    Nan Ya maintains that the Department calculated the fiber scrap 
adjustment correctly. As evidence, Nan Ya points out that the 
multiplication of the reported scrap amount found in the database by 
``(1--adjustment factor)'' yields as its result the actual scrap amount 
found at verification.

The Department's Position:

    We agree with Nan Ya that the fiber scrap adjustment factor used in 
the final determination was correct. This adjustment factor was 
calculated by taking the difference between Nan Ya's reported scrap and 
its actual scrap produced, and then dividing this difference by its 
reported scrap. This adjustment factor was applied to the reported 
scrap amount to adjust it to reflect the actual scrap produced. Since 
we applied the adjustment factor to the reported amount, it was 
appropriate to use the reported amount as the basis (i.e., denominator) 
for the calculation of the adjustment factor. The petitioners' 
suggestion would amount to calculating an adjustment factor on a 
different basis than the item which is to be adjusted. Therefore, we 
have not adjusted our calculation. (See the Calculation Memorandum.)

Comment 6: Constructed Date of Sale

    In calculating a constructed date of sale for certain of Nan Ya's 
U.S. sales with incorrect sale dates, the Department subtracted from 
the date of shipment the average number of days between shipment date 
and sale date for correctly reported sales. However, state the 
petitioners, the function the Department used to converted the average 
number of days between sale and shipment to an integer truncated the 
average value instead of rounding it. As a result, the average number 
of days was understated by one day.

The Department's Position:

    We agree with the petitioners that the function used in the 
computer program to convert the average number of days between sale and 
shipment to an integer truncated the result. Since a more accurate 
result would be obtained by rounding, we have rounded the average days 
between sale and shipment to the nearest whole number for this amended 
final determination. (See the Calculation Memorandum.)

Comment 7: Indirect Selling Expenses on U.S. Sales

    Nan Ya states that the Department failed to include in the final 
calculations its revised indirect selling expenses on U.S. sales as 
presented at verification and instead used the information in its 
September 3, 1999, sales listing submitted prior to verification.
    Based mainly upon imprecise statements in the narrative of the 
verification report and Nan Ya's rebuttal brief, and the omission of 
detail in the final calculation memorandum for Nan Ya, the petitioners 
argue that the Department intended to use the information in the sales 
listing of September 3, 1999.

The Department's Position:

    We agree with Nan Ya that we should have used its revised indirect 
selling expenses as presented at verification in the final 
determination and have corrected our error in this amended final 
determination. (See the Calculation Memorandum.)

Comment 8: Revision of Control Numbers

    While the Department corrected the control numbers used for product 
matching purposes based on information found at verification with 
respect to fiber type, Nan Ya alleges that it neglected to correct the 
separate

[[Page 24680]]

control numbers for home market sales as used in the sales-below-cost 
test.

The Department's Position:

    We agree with Nan Ya that the control numbers assigned to home 
market sales in preparation for the sales-below-cost test should have 
been revised based on information found at verification with respect to 
fiber type. To correct this error, we have constructed new control 
numbers on home market sales for purposes of matching these sales to 
their respective costs of production. (See the Calculation Memorandum.)

Other Comments on the Calculation of Constructed Value

    We received other comments pertaining to the calculation of 
constructed value. We note that there were no comparisons to 
constructed value in either the final determination or this amended 
final determination. In addition, we find that our calculations 
contained one additional ministerial error which was not identified by 
any party to this proceeding. Specifically, we erroneously included 
inventory carrying costs when calculating constructed value. The 
comments from interested parties and a discussion of the additional 
error we found are addressed in the Calculation Memorandum. Changes to 
the computer program, where appropriate, have been made in the event 
this proceeding results in an antidumping duty order and the computer 
program from this amended final determination gets used again in a 
future segment of this proceeding.

Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we are 
directing the Customs Service (``Customs'') to suspend liquidation of 
all imports of the subject merchandise from Taiwan, produced and 
exported by Nan Ya that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the 
Federal Register. Customs will continue to suspend liquidation on all 
imports of the subject merchandise from Taiwan produced and exported by 
Far Eastern Textile, Ltd. and all other producers/exporters. Customs 
shall require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond equal to the 
weighted-average amount by which normal value exceeds the export price 
as indicated in the chart below. These suspension of liquidation 
instructions will remain in effect until further notice.
    The weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Weighted-average
           Exporter/manufacturer              margin percentage               Critical circumstances
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FETL......................................                  9.51  No.
Nan Ya....................................                  5.77  No.
All Others................................                  7.53  No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rate for all other producers and exporters applies to all 
entries of the subject merchandise except for entries from exporters 
that are identified individually above.

ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the 
International Trade Commission (``ITC'') of our amended final 
determination.
    This determination is issued and published in accordance with 
sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: April 20, 2000.
Troy H. Cribb,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-10531 Filed 4-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P