[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 206 (Thursday, October 25, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60630-60632]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-21035]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-580-856]


Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Coated Free Sheet Paper from the Republic of Korea

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: We determine that imports of coated free sheet paper (``CFS 
paper'') are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at 
less than fair value (``LTFV''), as provided in section 735 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). The estimated margins of 
sales at LTFV are shown in the ``Final Determination'' section of this 
notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 25, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Moore (Moorim Paper Co., 
Ltd. Moorim SP Co., Ltd. and Moorim USA Inc. (collectively, 
``Moorim''); Dennis McClure (EN Paper Mfg. Co., Ltd. and Shinoho USA, 
Inc. (collectively ``EN Paper''); and (Kyesung Paper Co., Ltd. and 
Namhan Paper Co. Ltd. (collectively ``Kyesung'')); or Joy Zhang (Hankuk 
Paper Mfg. Co., Ltd.) (``Hankuk''), and Hansol Paper Co., Ltd.) 
(``Hansol'')), AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration-Room 
B-099, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 
14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 
telephone: (202) 482-3692, (202) 482-5973, or (202) 482-1168, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 4, 2007, the Department published in the Federal Register 
the preliminary determination of sales at LTFV in the antidumping duty 
investigation of CFS paper from the Republic of Korea. See Coated Free 
Sheet Paper from the Republic of Korea: Notice of Preliminary 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of 
Final Determination, 72 FR 30766 (June 4, 2007) (``Preliminary 
Determination''). Since the Preliminary Determination, the following 
events have occurred. From July 9, 2007, through August 15, 2007, we 
verified the sales and cost questionnaire responses of Moorim, EN 
Paper, Hansol, Hankuk, and Kyesung (hereafter collectively referred to 
as ``the Korean respondents''). On August 15, 27, 28, 30, and 31, and 
September 4, 2007, the Department issued its verification reports. We 
provided the interested parties an opportunity to comment on the 
Preliminary Determination and the Department's verification findings.
    On June 29, 2007, the petitioner\1\ requested a hearing, and from 
July 2 through 9, 2007, the Korean respondents also requested a hearing 
to discuss issues addressed in their case and rebuttal briefs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The petitioner in this investigation is NewPage Corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 28, 2007, the petitioner requested that the Department 
clarify the scope of the investigation of CFS paper from Korea and 
placed on the record of this review information to support its request.
    On September 10, 2007, the Department responded to the petitioner's 
targeting allegations that were filed on April 26, 2007. The petitioner 
alleged that Hansol targeted sales into a region and Moorim and Hankuk 
targeted specific customers. In the Preliminary Determination, the 
Department stated that although petitioner's allegations were timely, 
the Department did not have sufficient time to fully analyze them for 
purposes of the preliminary determination. The Department also stated 
that it would fully consider this issue for purposes of the final 
determination. See Preliminary Determination 72 FR 30766, 30767. 
Therefore, these allegations were addressed after the preliminary 
determination. See Memorandum to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary 
for Import Administration, from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Import Administration, regarding Antidumping Duty 
Investigation of Coated Free Sheet Paper from South Korea - Post-
Preliminary Analysis on Targeting (``Post-Preliminary Determination''), 
dated September 10, 2007, which is on file in the Central Records Unit 
(``CRU''), room B-099 of the main Department building. We provided the 
interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Department's Post-
Preliminary Determination. See also ``Targeted Dumping'' discussion 
infra.
    On September 12, 2007, the petitioner filed its case brief on the 
scope clarification issue. On September 14, 2007, the Korean 
respondents filed a rebuttal brief on this issue. A scope hearing was 
held on September 26, 2007. The hearing comprised a public session, a 
closed session for the antidumping investigation from Korea, and a 
closed session for the countervailing duty investigation from the 
People's Republic of China.
    On September 17, 2007, the petitioner and the Korean respondents 
submitted case briefs. On September 24, 2007, both the petitioner and 
the Korean respondents submitted rebuttal briefs. On September 25, 
2007, a closed hearing was held at the Department.

Targeted Dumping

    We find that there is a pattern of export prices for comparable 
merchandise that differs significantly among purchasers and regions; 
moreover, such differences cannot be taken into account using the 
average-to-average comparison methodology. See section 777A(d)(1)(B) of 
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Accordingly, we used the 
transaction-to-average methodology for these sales.
    In the Post-Preliminary Determination, the Department employed the 
average-to-average comparison methodology used in the Preliminary 
Determination for non-targeted sales. See Post-Preliminary 
Determination; see also, Preliminary Determination, 72 FR 30766, 30768. 
As required by section 777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act, we determined that the 
pattern of price differences could not be taken into account using the 
average-to-average comparison methodology for targeted sales because 
that methodology, by averaging the high prices with the low prices, has 
the effect of masking the extent of sales at LTFV. Thus, consistent 
with 19 CFR 351.414(f)(2), we limited our application of the average-
to-transaction methodology to the targeted sales under 19 CFR 
351.414(f)(1).
    When calculating a respondent's specific weighted-average margin, 
we combined the margin calculated for the targeted sales using the 
average-to-transaction methodology with the margin calculated for the 
non-targeted sales using the average-to-average methodology. In 
combining the margins

[[Page 60631]]

for the targeted and non-targeted U.S. sales databases, we have not 
offset any margins found among the targeted U.S. sales. We have adopted 
the methodology established in the Post-Preliminary Determination for 
purposes of our final determination.

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (``POI'') is October 1, 2005, through 
September 30, 2006. This period corresponds to the four most recent 
fiscal quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs submitted by the 
parties to this investigation 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 October 
17, 2007, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues 
that 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. 
Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this 
investigation, and the corresponding recommendations in this public 
memorandum, on file in the CRU. In addition, a complete version of the 
Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the 
Decision Memo are identical in content.

Scope of Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation includes coated free 
sheet paper and paperboard of a kind used for writing, printing or 
other graphic purposes. Coated free sheet paper is produced from not-
more-than 10 percent by weight mechanical or combined chemical/
mechanical fibers. Coated free sheet paper is coated with kaolin (China 
clay) or other inorganic substances, with or without a binder, and with 
no other coating. Coated free sheet paper may be surface-colored, 
surface-decorated, printed (except as described below), embossed, or 
perforated. The subject merchandise includes single- and double-side-
coated free sheet paper; coated free sheet paper in both sheet or roll 
form; and is inclusive of all weights, brightness levels, and finishes. 
The terms ``wood free'' or ``art'' paper may also be used to describe 
the imported product.
    Excluded from the scope are: (1) coated free sheet paper that is 
imported printed with final content printed text or graphics; (2) base 
paper to be sensitized for use in photography; and (3) paper containing 
by weight 25 percent or more cotton fiber.
    Coated free sheet paper is classifiable under subheadings 
4810.13.1900, 4810.13.2010, 4810.13.2090, 4810.13.5000, 4810.13.7040, 
4810.14.1900, 4810.14.2010, 4810.14.2090, 4810.14.5000, 4810.14.7040, 
4810.19.1900, 4810.19.2010, and 4810.19.2090 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). While HTSUS subheadings are 
provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description 
of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

Scope Comments

    On August 20, August 28, and September 10, 2007, the petitioner 
requested that the Department clarify the scope of the antidumping and 
countervailing duty investigations of CFS paper from Indonesia, Korea 
and the People's Republic of China. Specifically, the petitioner asked 
the Department to ``clarify that the scope of the investigation 
includes coated free sheet paper containing hardwood BCTMP.''
    Because this was a general issue pertaining to all six 
investigations, the Department set up a general issues file to handle 
this scope request. After considering the comments submitted by the 
parties to these investigations, we have determined not to adopt the 
scope clarification sought by the petitioner. See Memorandum to Stephen 
J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, 
entitled ``Scope Clarification Request: NewPage Corporation'' dated 
concurrently with this notice, which is appended to ``Issues and 
Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination in the Countervailing 
Duty Investigation of Coated Free Sheet Paper from the People's 
Republic of China.''

Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at 
verification, we have made certain changes to the margin calculations 
for the Korean Respondents. For a discussion of these changes, see the 
``Margin Calculations'' section of the Decision Memo.

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we verified the sales and 
cost information submitted by the Korean respondents for use in our 
final determination. We used standard verification procedures including 
an examination of relevant accounting and production records, and 
original source documents provided by the Korean respondents. Our sales 
and cost verification results are outlined in separate verification 
reports. See August 27, 28, and 31, 2007, and September 4, 2007, cost 
verification reports, and August 15, 30, and 31, 2007, sales 
verification reports for the Korean respondents.

Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we are 
directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to continue to 
suspend liquidation of all imports of subject merchandise with the 
exception of those exported by Hansol, Moorim, and Hankuk, that are 
entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after June 
4, 2007, the date of publication of the preliminary determination in 
the Federal Register. We will instruct CBP to continue to require a 
cash deposit or the posting of a bond for all companies for which we 
have calculated an above de minimis margin based on the estimated 
weighted-average dumping margins shown below. The suspension of 
liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

Final Determination Margins

    We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins 
exist for the period October 1, 2005, thorough September 30, 2006:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted Average
                Manufacturer/Exporter                  Margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hansol..............................................   0.97 (de minimis)
Hankuk..............................................   0.47 (de minimis)
Moorim..............................................   1.05 (de minimis)
EN Paper............................................               12.31
Kyesung.............................................               31.55
All Others..........................................               18.70
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated ``All 
Others'' rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the 
estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters 
and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de 
minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 
of the Act.

Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the 
date of publication of this notice to parties in

[[Page 60632]]

this proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

International Trade Commission (ITC) Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the 
ITC of our final determination. As our final determination is 
affirmative, the ITC will determine within 45 days whether imports of 
the subject merchandise are causing material injury, or threat of 
material injury, to the industry in the United States. If the ITC 
determines that material injury or threat of injury does not exist, the 
proceeding will be terminated and all securities posted will be 
refunded or canceled. If the ITC determines that such injury does 
exist, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing 
CBP to assess antidumping duties on all imports of the subject 
merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or 
after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation.

Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

    This notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility 
concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written 
notification of return/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 this determination and notice in accordance 
with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: October 17, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix--Issues in Decision Memo

Comments

A. General Comments

Targeting

Comment 1: Standard and Appropriate Statistical Techniques
Comment 2: Validity of Certain Pasta from Italy
Comment 3: Statistical Significance Requirement
Comment 4: Whether the Average-to-Average Method Can Account for 
Targeted Dumping
Comment 5: Statutory Application of Transaction-to-Transaction 
Methodology
Comment 6: Discretionary Application of Transaction-to-Transaction 
Methodology
Comment 7: Margin Calculation of Targeted and Non-Targeted Sales
Comment 8: Proposed Transaction-to-Transaction Margin Program

Cost of Production

Comment 9: Application of Partial Facts Available to Hansol, Moorim, 
and Hankuk's Total Cost of Manufacture
Comment 10: Differences in Merchandise Were Not Verified

B. Company-Specific Comments

Hansol

Comment 1: Treatment of Constructed Export Price (CEP) Offset
Comment 2: Treatment of Indirect Selling Expenses Incurred in Korea 
(DINDIRSU)
Comment 3: Treatment of Missing U.S. Payment Dates
Comment 4: Treatment of U.S. Repacking
Comment 5: Adjustment of Hansol's Reported U.S. Rebates
Comment 6: Production Quantities Were Not Verified
Comment 7: General and Administrative Expense Rate
Comment 8: Financial Expense Rate

Kyesung

Comment 9: Price Adjustment Related to the U.S. Price
Comment 10: Request to Apply Partial Adverse Facts Available

Moorim

Comment 11: Moorim's Pulp Costs Remain Unexplained

Hankuk

Comment 12: Timeliness of Targeted Dumping Allegation concerning Hankuk 
Paper
Comment 13: Standard Costs for Hankuk

EN Paper

Comment 14: Credit Balance for Bad Debt Allowance
[FR Doc. E7-21035 Filed 10-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S