[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 14, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7725-7727]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-2088]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-847]


Persulfates From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 10, 2005, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') published the preliminary results of the antidumping duty 
administrative review of persulfates from the People's Republic of 
China (``the PRC''). This review covers one exporter of the subject 
merchandise, Shanghai AJ Import and Export Corporation (``Shanghai 
AJ''). The period of review (``POR'') is July 1, 2003, through June 30, 
2004. We invited interested parties to comment on our preliminary 
results. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made 
certain changes to our calculations. The final weighted-average dumping 
margin for this review is listed in the ``Final Results of Review'' 
section below.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 14, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tisha Loeper-Viti or Frances Veith, 
AD/CVD Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
7425 and (202) 482-4295, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On July 7, 1997, the Department published in the Federal Register 
the antidumping duty order on persulfates from the PRC. See Notice of 
Antidumping Duty Order and Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less 
Than Fair Value: Persulfates From the People's Republic of China, 62 FR 
36259 (July 7, 1997). On July 1, 2004, the Department published a 
notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on persulfates from the PRC for the period July 
1, 2003, through June 30, 2004. See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty 
Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request 
Administrative Review, 69 FR 39903 (July 1, 2004). On July 30, 2004, 
FMC Corporation (FMC), a domestic producer, requested an administrative 
review of Shanghai AJ. No other interested party submitted a request 
for a review. On September 22, 2004, the Department published in the 
Federal Register a notice of the initiation of the administrative 
review of the order on persulfates from the PRC for the period July 1, 
2003, through June 30, 2004. See Initiation of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation 
in Part, 69 FR 56745 (September 22, 2004).
    On March 25, 2005, the Department published a notice in the Federal 
Register extending the time limit for the preliminary results of this 
review to August 1, 2005. See Notice of Extension of Time Limit for the 
Preliminary Results of the 2003-2004 Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review: Persulfates From the People's Republic of China, 70 FR 15293 
(March 25, 2005). The Department published the preliminary results on 
August 10, 2005. See Persulfates From the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 70 FR 
46476 (August 10, 2005) (``Preliminary Results'').
    We invited parties to comment on the preliminary results of review. 
See Preliminary Results, 70 FR at 46480. On September 23, 2005, the 
Department received case briefs from FMC and Shanghai AJ. On September 
30, 2005, the Department received rebuttal briefs from FMC and Shanghai 
AJ. The Department conducted a public hearing on October 7, 2005, at 
the main Commerce building. On January 12, 2006, we issued a memorandum 
to all interested parties requesting comments regarding a change in the 
Department's calculated regression-based wage rate. See January 12, 
2006, Memorandum from Tisha Loeper-Viti to the File Re:

[[Page 7726]]

2003-2004 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on 
Persulfates from the People's Republic of China (PRC): Expected PRC 
Wage Rate 2003 Income Data. No parties provided comments. On February 
2, 2006, we issued a letter to all interested parties requesting 
comments regarding changes to the Department's calculation of surrogate 
financial ratios. See February 2, 2006, letter from Wendy J. Frankel to 
All Interested Parties Re: 2003-2004 Administrative Review of the 
Antidumping Duty Order on Persulfates from the People's Republic of 
China Calculation of Surrogate Financial Ratios. We received comments 
from FMC on February 3, 2006. Shanghai AJ did not comment on this 
issue. The Department has conducted this administrative review in 
accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
(``the Act'').

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this order are persulfates, including 
ammonium, potassium, and sodium persulfates. The chemical formula for 
these persulfates are, respectively, 
(NH4)2S2O8, 
K2S2O8, and 
Na2S2O8. Potassium persulfates are 
currently classifiable under subheading 2833.40.10 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). Sodium persulfates 
are classifiable under HTSUS subheading 2833.40.20. Ammonium and other 
persulfates are classifiable under HTSUS subheadings 2833.40.50 and 
2833.40.60. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience 
and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this 
order is dispositive.

Separate Rates

    Shanghai AJ has requested a separate, company-specific antidumping 
duty rate. In our preliminary results, we found that Shanghai AJ had 
met the criteria for the application of a separate antidumping duty 
rate. See Preliminary Results, 70 FR at 46478. We have not received any 
other information since the preliminary results which would warrant 
reconsideration of our separate-rates determination with respect to 
this company. Therefore, we have assigned an individual dumping margin 
to Shanghai AJ for this administrative review.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case briefs by parties to this 
administrative review are addressed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum (``Decision Memo'') from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Import Administration, to David M. Spooner, Assistant 
Secretary for Import Administration, dated February 6, 2006, which is 
hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which parties have 
raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in the Decision 
Memo, is attached to this notice as an Appendix. The Decision Memo is a 
public document which is on file in the Central Records Unit in Room B-
099 of the main Commerce Building. In addition, a complete version of 
the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision 
Memo are identical in content.

Changes From the Preliminary Results

    For purposes of the final results, we have made certain changes in 
the margin calculation for Shanghai AJ. For a discussion of these 
changes, see the ``Margin Calculations'' section of the Decision Memo.

Final Results of Review

    As a result of our review, we determine that the following 
weighted-average percentage margin exists for persulfates from the PRC 
for the period July 1, 2003, through June 30, 2004:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Manufacturer/exporter                  Margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shanghai AJ Import and Export Corporation...........               36.53
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    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), we have 
calculated importer (or customer)-specific ad valorem rates by 
aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S. sales to that 
importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by the total value of 
the sales to that importer (or customer). Where an importer (or 
customer)-specific ad valorem rate is greater than de minimis and the 
respondent has reported reliable entered values, we applied the 
assessment rate to the entered value of the importer's/customer's 
entries during the review period. Where an importer (or customer)-
specific ad valorem rate is greater than de minimis and we do not have 
entered values, we calculated a per-unit assessment rate by aggregating 
the dumping duties due for all U.S. sales to each importer (or 
customer) and dividing this amount by the total quantity sold to that 
importer (or customer). The Department will issue appropriate 
assessment instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of publication 
of these final results of review.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective for all 
shipments of persulfates from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of these 
final results of administrative review, as provided by section 751(a) 
of the Act: (1) for Shanghai AJ, the cash-deposit rate will be 36.53 
percent; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not 
listed above that have separate rates, the cash-deposit rate will 
continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent 
period; (3) the cash-deposit rate for all other PRC exporters will be 
119.02 percent, the PRC-wide rate established in the less-than-fair-
value investigation; and (4) the cash-deposit rate for non-PRC 
exporters of subject merchandise from the PRC will be the rate 
applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that 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 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'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 or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues 
to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the 
proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/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 which is subject to sanction.
    This determination is issued and published in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.


[[Page 7727]]


    Dated: February 6, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix

Comments and Responses

Comment 1: Whether to Use Financial Data from Indian Peroxide Producers 
to Derive Surrogate Financial Ratios
Comment 2: Whether to Include Financial Data from Gujarat Alkalies and 
Chemicals Co., Ltd. to Derive Surrogate Financial Ratios
Comment 3: Whether to Include Employee Benefits in Overhead Calculation
Comment 4: Surrogate Labor Rate
Comment 5: Surrogate Value for Water
Comment 6: Surrogate Value for Electricity
Comment 7: Surrogate Value for Caustic Soda
Comment 8: Whether the Department Should Apply Total Adverse Facts 
Available
Comment 9: Whether the Department Should Disregard as Untimely Certain 
Record Information
Comment 10: Whether the Department Should Reopen the Record to New 
Factual Information
Comment 11: Application of Adverse Facts Available in Preliminary 
Results Margin Program

[FR Doc. E6-2088 Filed 2-13-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S