[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 16, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58642-58646]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-20349]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

A-570-894


Certain Tissue Paper Products from the People's Republic of 
China: Final Results and Final Rescission, In Part, of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On April 9, 2007, the U.S. Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published the preliminary results of the first 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain tissue 
paper products (tissue paper) from the People's Republic of China 
(PRC). See Certain Tissue Paper Products from the People's Republic of 
China: Preliminary Results and Preliminary Rescission, In Part, of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR 17477, (April 9, 2007) 
(Preliminary Results). This review covers the following exporters and/
or producer/exporters: (1) Max Fortune Industrial Limited and Max 
Fortune (FETDE) Paper Products Co., Ltd. (collectively, Max Fortune); 
(2) Samsam Productions Ltd. and Guangzhou Baxi Printing Products Co., 
Ltd. (Guangzhou Baxi) (collectively, Samsam); (3) Foshan Sansico Co., 
Ltd., PT Grafitecindo Ciptaprima, PT Printec Perkasa, PT Printec 
Perkasa II, PT Sansico Utama, Sansico Asia Pacific Limited 
(collectively, the Sansico Group); (4) Vietnam Quijiang Paper Co., Ltd. 
(Quijiang); (5) China National Aero-Technology Import & Export Xiamen 
Corp. (China National); (6) Putian City Hong Ye Paper Products Co., 
Ltd. (Hong

[[Page 58643]]

Ye); (7) Putian City Chengxiang Qu Li Feng (Chengxiang); (8) Kepsco, 
Inc. (Kepsco); and (9) Giftworld Enterprise Co., Ltd. (Giftworld). The 
period of review (POR) is September 21, 2004, through February 28, 
2006. Based on our analysis of the comments received and verification 
findings, we have made changes to certain surrogate values and to Max 
Fortune's margin. In addition, we have determined to rescind this 
review with respect to Samsam. Therefore, the final results differ from 
the Preliminary Results. We are also rescinding this review with 
respect to the Sansico Group and Quijiang.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 16, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristina Horgan or Bobby Wong, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
8173 or (202) 482-0409, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    We published the preliminary results of the first administrative 
review on April 9, 2007, in the Federal Register. See Preliminary 
Results. Since the Preliminary Results, the following events have 
occurred:
    On April 11, 2007, Seaman Paper Company of Massachusetts 
(petitioner) submitted comments on the Department's April 2, 2007, 
memorandum concerning telephone conversations with U.S. representatives 
of two producers of papermaking machines. On April 19, 2007, we issued 
a memorandum stating that the Department would postpone the briefing 
schedule for the final results until verification reports were issued 
for Max Fortune and Samsam. On April 23, 2007, the Sansico Group filed 
comments responding to petitioner's April 11, 2007, submission. On May 
2, 2007, the Department issued a second supplemental questionnaire to 
the Sansico Group. On May 3, 2007, petitioner submitted comments on the 
Sansico Group's April 23, 2007, submission. On May 9, 2007, both 
petitioner and the Sansico Group requested a hearing.
    From May 7 through May 9, 2007, the Department conducted a 
verification of Max Fortune's factors of production information at its 
facilities in Fujian, Fuzhou, PRC, while on May 11 and May 14, 2007, 
the Department conducted a verification of Max Fortune's sales 
information at its facilities in Hong Kong. See Memorandum to the File, 
regarding Verification of the Factors Responses of Max Fortune (FETDE) 
Paper Products Co., Ltd. (MFPP) in the Antidumping Duty Review of 
Certain Tissue Paper from the People's Republic of China, dated July 
12, 2007. See also Memorandum to the File, regarding Verification of 
the Sales Responses of Max Fortune Industrial Limited in the 
Antidumping Duty Review of Certain Tissue Paper from the People's 
Republic of China, dated July 12, 2007 (Max Fortune Sales Verification 
Report).
    On May 15, 2007, the Department verified the sales responses of 
Samsam at its facilities in Hong Kong. From May 16 to May 18, 2007, the 
Department verified the factors of production responses of Guangzhou 
Baxi at its facilities in Guangzhou, PRC, and on May 19, 2007, the 
Department verified the factors of production responses of Guilin 
Samsam Paper Products Ltd. (Guilin Samsam) at its facilities in Guilin, 
PRC. On May 21, 2007, the Department verified the sales responses of 
Samsam Premiums Ltd. (St. Clair Pakwell) at its facilities in Orange, 
CA. See Memorandum to the File, regarding Verification of the Sales & 
Factors Responses of Samsam Productions Limited in the Antidumping Duty 
Review of Certain Tissue Paper Products from the People's Republic of 
China, dated July 12, 2007. See also Memorandum to the File, regarding 
Verification of the Factors Responses of Guangzhou Baxi Productions 
Limited and Guilin Samsam Paper Products Ltd. in the Antidumping Duty 
Review of Certain Tissue Paper Products from the People's Republic of 
China, dated July 12, 2007. See also Memorandum to the File, regarding 
Verification of the Sales Responses of Samsam Premiums Ltd. (d.b.a. St. 
Clair Pakwell) in the Antidumping Duty Review of Certain Tissue Paper 
Products from the People's Republic of China, dated July 12, 2007.
    On May 18, 2007, the Sansico Group responded to the comments 
submitted by petitioner on May 3, 2007, while on May 22, 2007, we 
received the supplemental questionnaire response from the Sansico 
Group. On June 22, 2007, the Department spoke via telephone with 
counsel for the Sansico Group about the verification of its 
unaffiliated supplier, scheduled for June 27, 2007. In this 
conversation, counsel for the Sansico Group informed the Department 
that the Sansico Group's unaffiliated supplier would not permit 
verification of all the information and sources of information listed 
in the Department's June 15, 2007, verification outline. The Sansico 
Group also placed a letter on the record, dated June 22, 2007, 
outlining the limited procedures to which its unaffiliated supplier 
would agree, if the Department's verifiers wished to visit the 
supplier's facilities. On June 22, 2007, the Department informed the 
Sansico Group that it would proceed with verification of the Sansico 
Group but would not visit the facilities of its unaffiliated supplier 
if the Department would not be allowed to verify the supplier's books 
and records for the POR.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Memorandum to the File, regarding Telephone Call 
Regarding Verification of Sansico Group's Indonesian Supplier, dated 
June 25, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 25, 2007, the Department verified the ``no shipment'' 
responses of the Sansico Group in Jakarta, Indonesia, at the production 
facilities of PT Printec Perkasa. See Memorandum to James C. Doyle, 
Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, regarding Verification of Sales 
Response of The Sansico Group in the Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review of Certain Tissue Paper From the People's Republic of China, 
dated July 13, 2007.
    On July 13, 2007, we invited parties to comment on our Preliminary 
Results. On July 20, 2007, the Sansico Group requested a seven-day 
extension of the deadline to submit rebuttal briefs, and on July 25, 
2007, the Department granted that request. On July 31, 2007, the 
Department requested that the Sansico Group place on the record the 
Indonesian law stating that special permission is needed to audit the 
financial records of state-owned companies, as described in the Sansico 
Group's letter to the Department dated July 30, 2007.\2\ On August 1, 
2007, the Sansico Group placed this information on the record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Letter to the Secretary from the Sansico Group, 
regarding Response to Department's Request During the Verification 
of Sansico Group in Certain Tissue Paper Products from the People's 
Republic of China (July 30, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 3, 2007, we received case briefs from Max Fortune, the 
Sansico Group, and Target Corporation, an interested party to this 
proceeding. On August 6, 2007, we received case briefs from petitioner 
and Samsam. On August 16, 2007, Max Fortune requested a one-day 
extension of the deadline to submit rebuttal briefs, and on August 16, 
2007, the Department granted that request. We received rebuttal briefs 
from petitioner, Max Fortune, and Samsam on August 20, 2007. On August 
21, 2007, we received one additional rebuttal brief from petitioner and 
a rebuttal brief from the Sansico Group. On August 22, 2007, both 
petitioner and the Sansico Group submitted letters withdrawing their 
separate requests for a hearing.

[[Page 58644]]

Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order

    The tissue paper products subject to this order are cut-to-length 
sheets of tissue paper having a basis weight not exceeding 29 grams per 
square meter. Tissue paper products subject to this order may or may 
not be bleached, dye-colored, surface-colored, glazed, surface 
decorated or printed, sequined, crinkled, embossed, and/or die cut. The 
tissue paper subject to this order is in the form of cut-to-length 
sheets of tissue paper with a width equal to or greater than one-half 
(0.5) inch. Subject tissue paper may be flat or folded, and may be 
packaged by banding or wrapping with paper or film, by placing in 
plastic or film bags, and/or by placing in boxes for distribution and 
use by the ultimate consumer. Packages of tissue paper subject to this 
order may consist solely of tissue paper of one color and/or style, or 
may contain multiple colors and/or styles.
    The merchandise subject to this order does not have specific 
classification numbers assigned to them under the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Subject merchandise may be under 
one or more of several different subheadings, including: 4802.30; 
4802.54; 4802.61; 4802.62; 4802.69; 4804.31.1000; 4804.31.2000; 
4804.31.4020; 4804.31.4040; 4804.31.6000; 4804.39; 4805.91.1090; 
4805.91.5000; 4805.91.7000; 4806.40; 4808.30; 4808.90; 4811.90; 
4823.90; 4820.50.00; 4802.90.00; 4805.91.90; 9505.90.40. The tariff 
classifications are provided for convenience and customs purposes; 
however, the written description of the scope of this order is 
dispositive.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ On January 30, 2007, at the direction of U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection (CBP), the Department added the following HTSUS 
classifications to the AD/CVD module for tissue paper: 4802.54.3100, 
4802.54.6100, and 4823.90.6700. However, we note that the six-digit 
classifications for these numbers were already listed in the scope.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Excluded from the scope of this order are the following tissue 
paper products: (1) Tissue paper products that are coated in wax, 
paraffin, or polymers, of a kind used in floral and food service 
applications; (2) tissue paper products that have been perforated, 
embossed, or die-cut to the shape of a toilet seat, i.e., disposable 
sanitary covers for toilet seats; (3) toilet or facial tissue stock, 
towel or napkin stock, paper of a kind used for household or sanitary 
purposes, cellulose wadding, and webs of cellulose fibers (HTSUS 
4803.00.20.00 and 4803.00.40.00).

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the briefs are addressed in the Memorandum to 
David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, 
regarding Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results in the 
First Administrative Review of Certain Tissue Paper Products from the 
People's Republic of China, dated October 9, 2007 (Issues and Decision 
Memorandum), which is 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. Parties can find a complete 
discussion of all issues raised in the briefs and the corresponding 
recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the 
Central Records Unit (CRU), room B-099 of the Department of Commerce. 
In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum 
can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/. The 
paper copy and electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum 
are identical in content.

Partial Rescission of Administrative Review

    In the Preliminary Results, the Department issued a notice of 
intent to rescind this administrative review with respect to the 
Sansico Group and Quijiang. We stated in the Preliminary Results that 
we would solicit additional information prior to the final results of 
this review from the Sansico Group to confirm the veracity of its no 
shipment claims. See Preliminary Results, 72 FR at 17480. Based on our 
analysis of information and comments received from interested parties 
on this issue, including a verification of the Sansico Group, the 
Department has determined to rescind this review with regard to the 
Sansico Group. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 3 for 
further discussion on this issue.
    The Department did not receive comments on the preliminary decision 
to rescind this review with regard to Quijiang. See Preliminary 
Results, 72 FR at 17480. As the Department has no evidence to challenge 
this finding, the Department is rescinding this administrative review 
with respect to Quijiang.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Department notes that Quijiang is currently subject to 
an anti-circumvention inquiry in tissue paper from the PRC. See 
Certain Tissue Paper Products from the People's Republic of China: 
Initiation of Anti-circumvention Inquiry, 71 FR 53662 (September 12, 
2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, due to information discovered at verification and our 
analysis of information and comments received from interested parties 
on this issue, the Department has made a final determination to rescind 
this review with regard to Samsam. The Department has concluded that 
the single sale made by Samsam during the POR was not a bona fide 
commercial transaction. Specifically, the price, quantity, and timing 
of the sale, taken into consideration with the unique circumstances of 
the transaction, have led the Department to conclude that this was not 
a legitimate commercial transaction. Accordingly, the Department is 
rescinding the review with respect to Samsam. For an in-depth 
discussion on this issue, see Comment 4 of the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum; see also Memorandum to James C. Doyle, Director, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 9, regarding The Bona Fides Analysis of Samsam 
Productions, Ltd.; Guangzhou Baxi Printing Products, Ltd.; Guilin 
Samsam Paper Products, Ltd.; and St. Clair Pakwell (collectively 
``Samsam'') in the First Administrative of Certain Tissue Paper 
Products from the People's Republic of China, dated October 9, 2007.

Separate Rates

    Max Fortune requested a separate, company-specific antidumping duty 
rate. In the Preliminary Results, we found that Max Fortune met the 
criteria for the application of a separate antidumping duty rate. See 
Preliminary Results, 72 FR at 17480. The Department did not receive 
comments on this issue prior to these final results. Moreover, we have 
not received any information since the Preliminary Results with respect 
to Max Fortune that would warrant reconsideration of our separate-rates 
determination with respect to this company. Therefore, we have assigned 
an individual dumping margin to Max Fortune for this review period.

Use of Facts Otherwise Available and the PRC-Wide Rate

    In the Preliminary Results, we found that China National, Hong Ye, 
Chengxiang, Kepsco, and Giftworld did not respond in a complete and 
timely manner to the Department's requests for information, and hence 
do not qualify for separate rates. Rather, we found that China 
National, Hong Ye, Chengxiang, Kepsco, and Giftworld are appropriately 
considered to be part of the PRC-wide entity, subject to the PRC-wide 
rate. See Preliminary Results, 72 FR at 17480-17481. The Department did 
not receive comments on this issue prior to these final results.

[[Page 58645]]

    The Department also did not receive comments on its preliminary 
determination to apply adverse facts available (AFA) to the PRC-wide 
entity (including China National, Hong Ye, Chengxiang, Kepsco, and 
Giftworld) and has no evidence to challenge this finding. Therefore, we 
have not altered our decision to apply total AFA to the PRC-wide entity 
(including China National, Hong Ye, Chengxiang, Kepsco, and Giftworld) 
for these final results, in accordance with sections 776(a)(2)(A) and 
(B) and section 776(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 
See id. for a complete discussion of the Department's decision to apply 
total AFA to the PRC-wide entity (including China National, Hong Ye, 
Chengxiang, Kepsco, and Giftworld).

Changes since the Preliminary Results

    Based on comments received from the interested parties and findings 
at verification, we have made the following company-specific changes to 
Max Fortune's margin calculation. 1) The Department revised certain of 
Max Fortune's freight and insurance expenses. See Max Fortune Sales 
Verification Report at 2 and 20. 2) The Department did not deduct 
domestic insurance expenses from Max Fortune's sales. See Max Fortune 
Sales Verification Report at 2 and 20. 3) The Department subtracted 
certain billing adjustments from Max Fortune's U.S. sales. See Issues 
and Decision Memorandum, at Comment 7, and Max Fortune Sales 
Verification Report at 2 and 16-17.
    Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides that if an interested party: 
(A) Withholds information that has been requested by the Department; 
(B) fails to provide such information in a timely manner or in the form 
or manner requested, subject to subsections 782(c)(1) and 782(e) of the 
Act; (C) significantly impedes a determination under the antidumping 
statute; or (D) provides such information but the information cannot be 
verified, the Department shall, subject to subsection 782(d) of the 
Act, use facts otherwise available in reaching the applicable 
determination.
    Section 776(b) of the Act states that if the administering 
authority finds that an interested party has not acted to the best of 
its ability to comply with a request for information, the administering 
authority may, in reaching its determination, use an inference that is 
adverse to that party. The adverse inference may be based upon: (1) The 
petition, (2) a final determination in the investigation under this 
title, (3) any previous review under section 751 or determination under 
section 753, or (4) any other information placed on the record.
    For the final results, in accordance with sections 776(a)(2) and 
776(b) of the Act, the Department has determined that Max Fortune did 
not act to the best of its ability in providing necessary information 
involving missing sale(s) and certain sale(s) discounts, as found at 
verification, with respect to Max Fortune's U.S. sales database. See 
Issues and Decision Memorandum, at Comment 7, and Max Fortune Sales 
Verification Report at 2 and 14 and 18-19. Thus, as partial AFA the 
Department has applied the PRC-wide rate of 112.64 percent to the 
missing sale and incorporated the sale into Max Fortune's margin 
calculation. See Memorandum to the File, regarding Certain Tissue Paper 
from the People's Republic of China (PRC): Max Fortune Industrial 
Limited and Max Fortune (FETDE) Paper Products Co., Ltd. (collectively, 
Max Fortune) Analysis Memorandum for the Final Results of Review, dated 
October 9, 2007 (Max Fortune Analysis Memo). Because the Department 
used secondary information in this partial AFA determination, the 
Department corroborated the secondary information in accordance with 
section 776(c) of the Act and determined the PRC wide rate to be both 
reliable and relevant. See Issues and Decision Memorandum, at Comment 
7.
    Also, as facts available, the Department has used information on 
the record to apply one sales discount to all of Max Fortune's sales of 
subject merchandise to a certain U.S. customer. As partial AFA, the 
Department has calculated a second discount using an adverse value and 
also applied the discount to all of Max Fortune's sales of subject 
merchandise to a certain U.S. customer, regardless of whether each sale 
was subject to the discount. See Max Fortune Analysis Memo. Because the 
Department used information gathered in the course of the instant 
review for the facts available and the partial AFA discount 
determinations, there was no need for the Department to corroborate the 
information used, pursuant to section 776(c) of the Act. See Issues and 
Decision Memorandum, at Comment 7.
    For the final results, we also revised our calculation of surrogate 
financial ratios for factory overhead, and used the revised ratio in 
our margin calculation. See Issues and Decision Memorandum, at Comment 
2. See also Memorandum to the File, regarding Factors of Production 
Valuation Memorandum for the Final Results of Antidumping 
Administrative Review of Certain Tissue Paper Products from the 
People's Republic of China, dated October 9, 2007.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following antidumping duty margins exist:

                    Certain Tissue Paper from the PRC
                     Individually Reviewed Exporters
Max Fortune Industrial Ltd..........................               0.07%
  PRC-Wide Rate.....................................
PRC-Wide Rate (including China National, Hong Ye,                112.64%
 Chengxiang, Kepsco, and Giftworld).................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For details on the calculation of the antidumping duty weighted-
average margin for Max Fortune, see Max Fortune Analysis Memo. A public 
version of this memorandum is on file in the CRU.

Assessment Rates

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), 
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. For assessment purposes, where possible, we 
calculated importer-specific assessment rates for tissue paper from the 
PRC via ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the 
total amount of the dumping margins calculated for the examined sales 
to the total entered value of those same sales. We will instruct CBP to 
assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this 
review.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of these final results of this administrative review for 
all shipments of the subject merchandise 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 Max Fortune, 
the Department has calculated a de minimus margin for these final 
results, and therefore no cash deposit will be required for this 
company; (2) 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; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise 
that

[[Page 58646]]

have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, including those 
companies for which this review has been rescinded, the cash deposit 
rate will be the PRC-wide rate of 112.64 percent; and (4) 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 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/destruction or conversion to judicial protective 
order of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 
19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Failure to comply is a violation of the APO.
    This administrative review and this notice are published in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: October 9, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.

APPENDIX I

General Issues

Comment 1: Zeroing
Comment 2: Classification of Expenses in Financial Ratios

Company-Specific Issues

Sansico Group-Related Issues

Comment 3: Rescission of The Sansico Group

Samsam-Related Issues

Comment 4a: Application of Adverse Facts Available based on 
Verification Findings
Comment 4b: Verification Findings
Comment 5: Other Verification Findings
Comment 6: Clerical Errors in Preliminary Results

Max Fortune-Related Issues

Comment 7: Application of Adverse Facts Available based on Verification 
Findings
[FR Doc. E7-20349 Filed 10-15-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S