[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 54 (Monday, March 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13495-13497]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-6295]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

A-570-878


Saccharin from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary 
Results of the 2008-2009 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: In response to requests from interested parties, the 
Department of Commerce (``the Department'') is conducting an 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on saccharin from 
the People's Republic of China (``PRC'') covering the period July 1, 
2008, through June 30, 2009. This administrative review covers one 
exporter of the subject merchandise, i.e., Kaifeng Xinhua Fine Chemical 
Factory (``Kaifeng'').
    We preliminarily determine that Kaifeng does not qualify for a 
separate rate and is instead part of the PRC entity. If these 
preliminary results are adopted in our final results of this review, we 
will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to assess 
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise 
exported by Kaifeng during the period of review (``POR''). We invite 
interested parties to comment on these preliminary results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 22, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brandon Petelin or Charles Riggle, 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-
8173 or (202) 482-0650, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On July 9, 2003, the Department published in the Federal Register 
the antidumping duty order on saccharin from the PRC.\1\ On June 8, 
2009, the Department published in the Federal Register the continuation 
of antidumping duty order on saccharin from the PRC.\2\ On July 1, 
2009, the Department published a notice of opportunity to request an 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on Saccharin from 
the PRC.\3\ In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b)(1), the following 
requests were made regarding the POR July 1, 2008, through June 30, 
2009: (1) on July 31, 2009, Shanghai Fortune Chemical Co., Ltd. 
(``Shanghai Fortune''), a Chinese producer and exporter of subject 
merchandise, requested that the Department conduct an administrative 
review of its exports; (2) on July 31, 2009, Kinetic Industries, Inc. 
(``Kinetic''), a domestic producer of saccharin, requested that the 
Department conduct an administrative review of Kaifeng's exports to the 
United States. Pursuant to this request, the Department published a 
notice of initiation with respect to Shanghai Fortune and Kaifeng.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Saccharin from the 
People's Republic of China, 68 FR 40906 (July 9, 2003) (``Saccharin 
Order'').
    \2\ See Continuation of Antidumping Duty Order on Saccharin from 
the People's Republic of China, 74 FR 27089 (June 8, 2009).
    \3\ See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or 
Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative 
Review, 74 FR 31406 (July 1, 2009).
    \4\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 74 FR 
42873 (August 25, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), on August 28, 2009, 
Shanghai Fortune timely withdrew its request for an administrative 
review of its own exports (i.e., within 90 days of the publication of 
the notice of initiation of this review). No other party requested an 
administrative review of Shanghai Fortune's exports to the United 
States. Therefore, on November 3, 2009, the Department rescinded the 
administrative review of saccharin with respect to Shanghai Fortune.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Saccharin from the People's Republic of China: Notice of 
Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR 
56792 (November 3, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding Kaifeng, the Department issued an antidumping duty 
questionnaire on October 2, 2009. On October 14, 2009, we confirmed 
that Kaifeng signed for and received our mailing of the antidumping 
duty questionnaire. On January 6, 2009, the Department placed the FedEx 
International Air Waybill receipt and delivery confirmation for the 
questionnaire issued to Kaifeng on the record of this administrative 
review to confirm that we mailed, and Kaifeng signed for and received, 
the questionnaire.

Scope of the Order

    The product covered by this antidumping duty order is saccharin. 
Saccharin is defined as a non-nutritive sweetener used in beverages and 
foods, personal care products such as toothpaste, table top sweeteners, 
and animal feeds. It is also used in metalworking fluids. There are 
four primary chemical compositions of saccharin: (1) Sodium saccharin 
(American Chemical Society Chemical Abstract Service (``CAS'') Registry 
128-44-44); (2) calcium saccharin (CAS Registry 6485-34-34); (3) acid 
(or insoluble) saccharin (CAS Registry 81-07-07); and (4) research 
grade saccharin. Most of the U.S.-produced and imported grades of 
saccharin from the PRC are sodium and calcium saccharin, which are 
available in granular, powder, spray-dried powder, and liquid forms. 
The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable under 
subheading 2925.11.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States (``HTSUS'') and includes all types of saccharin imported under 
this HTSUS subheading, including research and specialized grades. 
Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs 
purposes, the Department's written description of the scope of this 
order remains dispositive.

Non-Market Economy Country Status

    In every case conducted by the Department involving the PRC, the 
PRC has been treated as a non-market economy (``NME'') country. In

[[Page 13496]]

accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (``Act''), any determination that a foreign country is an NME 
country shall remain in effect until revoked by the administering 
authority. Because no interested party in this case has contested such 
treatment, the Department continues to treat the PRC as an NME country.

PRC-Wide Rate and Use of Facts Available

    In proceedings involving NME countries, the Department begins with 
a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are 
subject to government control and, thus, should be assigned a single 
antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the Department's policy to assign 
all exporters of subject merchandise, subject to review in an NME 
country, a single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is 
sufficiently independent of government control to be entitled to a 
separate rate.\6\ We have determined that Kaifeng does not qualify for 
a separate rate and is instead subject to the PRC-wide rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See, e.g., Honey from the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 70 FR 74764, 74765 (December 16, 2005); 
unchanged in Honey from the People's Republic of China: Final 
Results and Final Rescission, In Part, of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review 71 FR 34893 (June 16, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In relevant part, section 776(a) of the Act provides that the 
Department shall apply ``facts otherwise available'' (``FA'') if ``(1) 
necessary information is not on the record, or (2) an interested party 
or any other person (A) withholds information that has been 
requested,'' or ``(B) fails to provide information within the deadlines 
established, or in the form and manner requested by the Department, 
subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782 of the Act.'' 
Further, section 776(b) of the Act provides that the Department may 
make an adverse inference in applying the facts otherwise available 
when a party ``has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its 
ability to comply with a request for information.'' Adverse inferences 
are appropriate ``to ensure that the party does not obtain a more 
favorable result by failing to cooperate than if it had cooperated 
fully.''\7\ Finally, according to section 776(b) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.308(c)(1), such an adverse inference may include reliance on 
information derived from the petition, the final determination, a 
previous administrative review, or other information placed on the 
record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Statement of Administrative Action 
(SAA) accompanying the Uruguay Round 
Agreements Act, H. Doc. No. 103-316, Vol. 1, at 870 (1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 2, 2009, the Department issued an antidumping duty 
questionnaire to Kaifeng. We confirmed that the questionnaire was 
delivered and signed for on October 14, 2009.\8\ Because Kaifeng did 
not respond to the Department's questionnaire, we are unable to 
determine if Kaifeng is eligible for a separate rate. Kaifeng has not 
rebutted the presumption of government control and is, therefore, 
presumed to be part of the PRC-wide entity. Further, in accordance with 
sections 776(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act, because the PRC-entity 
(including Kaifeng) failed to cooperate to the best of its ability by 
not responding to our questionnaire, we find it appropriate to use 
adverse facts available. As a result, in accordance with the 
Department's practice, we have preliminarily assigned to the PRC-entity 
(including Kaifeng) a rate of 329.94 percent, the highest rate 
determined in the current, or any previous, segment of this 
proceeding.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Memorandum Regarding: 2008-2009 Antidumping 
Administrative Review of Saccharin from the PRC: Kaifeng 
Questionnaire Delivery Confirmation on the Record, dated January 6, 
2010 (``Delivery Confirmation Memo'').
    \9\ See, e.g., Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Flat-Rolled Carbon Quality Steel Products 
from the People's Republic of China, 65 FR 34660 (May 31, 2000), and 
accompanying Issues and Decisions Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Corroboration of Secondary Information

    Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies 
on secondary information rather than information obtained in the course 
of a review, it must, to the extent practicable, corroborate that 
information from independent sources reasonably at its disposal. 
According to the Statement of Administrative Action, secondary 
information is defined as ``information derived from the petition that 
gave rise to the investigation or review, the final determination 
concerning subject merchandise, or any previous review under section 
751 concerning the subject merchandise.''\10\ To ``corroborate'' means 
that the Department will satisfy itself that the secondary information 
has probative value. The Department will, to the extent practicable, 
examine the reliability and relevance of the secondary information 
used.\11\ Further, independent sources used to corroborate may include, 
for example, published price lists, official import statistics and 
customs data, and information obtained from interested parties during 
the particular investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See SAA at 870.
    \11\ See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and 
Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches or 
Less in Outside Diameter, and Components Thereof, From Japan; 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and 
Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 57391, 57392 
(November 6, 1996), unchanged in Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts 
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered Roller 
Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, and Components 
Thereof, From Japan; Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Reviews and Termination in Part, 62 FR 11825 (March 
13, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the instant review, we are applying to the PRC-wide entity 
(which includes Kaifeng) the PRC-wide rate that was corroborated in the 
underlying investigation of sales at less than fair value.\12\ We find 
that this rate remains contemporaneous with the POR of this review, and 
no evidence has been presented in the current review that calls into 
question the reliability of this information.\13\ Thus, the Department 
finds that the rate information is reliable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 
Fair Value: Saccharin From the People's Republic of China, 68 FR 
27530 (May 30, 2003) (``LTFV Final Determination''); as amended by 
Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value, 68 FR 35383 (June 13, 2003) (``The PRC-wide rate of 329.94 
percent . . . is the correct PRC-wide rate, rather than the rate of 
329.33 percent published in the [LTFV Final Determination].''); see 
also Saccharin Order (establishing 329.94 percent as the PRC-wide 
rate).
    \13\ See, e.g., Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of the New 
Shipper Review and Final Results and Partial Rescission of the Third 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 68 FR 41304, 41308 (July 11, 
2003) (where the Department relied on the corroboration memorandum 
from the LTFV Investigation to assess the reliability of the 
petition rate as the basis for an adverse facts available rate in 
the administrative review).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, regarding relevance, the Department will consider 
information reasonably at its disposal to determine whether a margin 
continues to have relevance. Where circumstances indicate that the 
selected margin is not appropriate, the Department will disregard the 
margin and establish an appropriate margin. Similarly, the Department 
does not apply a margin that has been discredited.\14\ No unusual 
circumstances are present here. Since the LTFV investigation, no new 
information has indicated that this rate is invalid or uncharacteristic 
of the saccharin industry. Further, this rate has been used as the PRC-
wide rate in other segments of this proceeding. Therefore, we find that 
this rate has probative value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See D&L Supply Co. v. United States, 113 F. 3d 1220, 1221 
(Fed. Cir. 1997) (the Department will not use a margin that has been 
judicially invalidated).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the PRC-wide entity rate from the LTFV investigation is both 
reliable and relevant, we determine that this rate, the

[[Page 13497]]

highest rate from any segment of this administrative proceeding (i.e., 
the rate of 329.94 percent), is in accord with section 776(c) of the 
Act, which requires that secondary information be corroborated. Thus, 
the Department finds that the LTFV investigation rate is corroborated 
for the purposes of this administrative review and may reasonably be 
applied to the PRC-wide entity based on Kaifeng's failure to cooperate 
to the best of its ability in this administrative review.

Preliminary Results of the Review

    We preliminarily find that the following weighted-average dumping 
margin exists for the period July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Manufacturer/Exporter                  Margin (Percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-Wide Entity*....................................              329.94
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 *The PRC-entity includes Kaifeng Xinhua Fine Chemical Factory

Public Comment

    Interested parties are invited to comment on the preliminary 
results and may submit case briefs and/or written comments within ten 
days of the date of publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 351.309(c). 
Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals to written comments, limited to issues 
raised in such briefs or comments, may be filed no later than five days 
after the time limit for filing the case briefs. See 19 CFR 351.309(d). 
The Department requests that parties submitting written comments 
provide an executive summary and a table of authorities as well as an 
additional copy of those comments electronically.
    Any interested party may request a hearing within ten days of 
publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Hearing requests 
should contain the following information: (1) the party's name, 
address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) 
a list of the issues to be discussed. Oral presentations will be 
limited to issues raised in the briefs. If a request for a hearing is 
made, parties will be notified of the time and date for the hearing to 
be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230. See 19 CFR 351.310(d).
    The Department will issue the final results of this administrative 
review, which will include its analysis of any written comments, no 
later than 120 days after the publication date of these preliminary 
results. See 19 CFR 351.213(h).

Assessment Rates

    Upon issuance of the final results, the Department will determine, 
and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries 
covered by this review. The Department intends to issue assessment 
instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of the final 
results of this review. If these preliminary results are adopted in our 
final results, the Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, 
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the 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 the PRC-wide 
entity (which includes Kaifeng), the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-
wide rate established in the final results of review; (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 have not 
been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate 
will be the PRC-wide rate of 329.94 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 Importers

    This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of 
their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) 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 the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.
    These preliminary results of review are issued and published in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 
351.221(b)(4).

    Dated: March 16, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010-6295 Filed 3-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S