[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17027-17029]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7063]



[[Page 17027]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-583-848]


Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents From Taiwan: Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) has determined 
that imports of certain stilbenic optical brightening agents (stilbenic 
OBAs) from Taiwan 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 listed in the ``Continuation of Suspension of 
Liquidation'' section of this notice.

DATES: Effective Date: March 23, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sandra Stewart or Minoo Hatten, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-0768 
or (202) 482-1690, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Case History

    On November 3, 2011, the Department published in the Federal 
Register its preliminary determination in the antidumping duty 
investigation of stilbenic OBAs from Taiwan. See Certain Stilbenic 
Optical Brightening Agents From Taiwan: Preliminary Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 
76 FR 68154 (November 3, 2011) (Preliminary Determination).
    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we conducted sales and 
cost verifications of the questionnaire responses submitted by the 
participating respondent, Teh Fong Min International, Co., Ltd. (TFM) 
and its U.S. affiliate, TFM North America, Inc. We used standard 
verification procedures, including examination of relevant accounting 
and production records, as well as original source documents provided 
by the company.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Memorandum to the File entitled ``Verification of the 
Sales Response of TFM North America, Inc. (TFMNA) in the Antidumping 
Investigation on Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents from 
Taiwan,'' dated December 20, 2011, Memorandum to the File entitled 
``Verification of the Sales Response of Teh Fong Min International 
Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Investigation of Certain Stilbenic 
Optical Brightening Agents from Taiwan,'' dated December 30, 2011, 
and Memorandum to the File entitled ``Verification of the Cost 
Response of Teh Fong Min International Corporation in the 
Antidumping Investigation of Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening 
Agents from Taiwan,'' dated January 6, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We received case briefs submitted by Clariant Corporation 
(hereinafter, the petitioner) and TFM on January 19, 2012. TFM and the 
petitioner submitted rebuttal comments on January 26, 2012, and January 
27, 2012, respectively. At the request of both parties, we held a 
hearing on January 31, 2012, in the main Department of Commerce 
building.
    Subsequent to the Preliminary Determination, the Department revised 
the program to ensure that it accurately reflected the methodological 
choices made in that determination. These revisions to the programming, 
had they been included in the preliminary determination, would not have 
altered the weighted average dumping margins calculated there. See 
``Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Certain Stilbenic Optical 
Brightening Agents from Taiwan: Final Analysis Memorandum for Teh Fong 
Min International Co., Ltd. (1/1/2010--12/31/2010),'' dated 
concurrently with this notice (Final Analysis Memo) (with the revised 
preliminary AD margin program, output and weighted-average dumping 
margins).

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 2010, through 
December 31, 2010. This period corresponds to the four most recent 
fiscal quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition, March 
2011. See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).

Scope of Investigation

    The certain stilbenic OBAs covered by this investigation are all 
forms (whether free acid or salt) of compounds known as 
triazinylaminostilbenes (i.e., all derivatives of 4,4'-bis [1,3,5- 
triazin-2-yl] \2\ amino-2,2'-stilbenedisulfonic acid), except for 
compounds listed in the following paragraph. The stilbenic OBAs covered 
by these investigations include final stilbenic OBA products, as well 
as intermediate products that are themselves triazinylaminostilbenes 
produced during the synthesis of final stilbenic OBA products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The brackets above denote the chemical formula of the 
subject merchandise. This is not business-proprietary information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Excluded from this investigation are all forms of 4,4'-bis[4-
anilino-6-morpholino-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl] \3\ amino-2,2'-
stilbenedisulfonic acid, C40H40N12O8S2 (``Fluorescent Brightener 71''). 
This investigation covers the above-described compounds in any state 
(including but not limited to powder, slurry, or solution), of any 
concentrations of active certain stilbenic OBA ingredient, as well as 
any compositions regardless of additives (i.e., mixtures or blends, 
whether of certain stilbenic OBAs with each other, or of certain 
stilbenic OBAs with additives that are not certain stilbenic OBAs), and 
in any type of packaging.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These stilbenic OBAs are classifiable under subheading 3204.20.8000 
of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), but 
they may also enter under subheadings 2933.69.6050, 2921.59.4000 and 
2921.59.8090. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the 
merchandise is dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this antidumping investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum (I&D Memo) from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary 
for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, which is dated 
concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the 
issues raised is attached to this notice as Appendix I. The I&D Memo is 
a public document and is on file electronically via Import 
Administration's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized 
Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). Access to IA ACCESS is available 
in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room 7046 of the main Department of 
Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the I&D Memo can 
be accessed directly on the Internet at http://www.trade.gov/ia/. The 
signed and electronic versions of the I&D memo are identical in 
content.

Targeted Dumping

    The statute allows the Department to employ the average-to-
transaction margin-calculation methodology under the following 
circumstances: (1) There is a pattern of export prices that differ 
significantly among purchasers, regions, or periods of time; (2) the 
Department explains why such differences cannot be taken into account 
using the average-to-average or transaction-to-transaction methodology. 
See section 777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act.
    In the Preliminary Determination, based on the methodology we 
adopted

[[Page 17028]]

in Nails,\4\ as modified in Bags\5\ and Wood Flooring\6\ to correct 
certain ministerial errors, we found that the overall proportion of 
TFM's U.S. sales during the POI that satisfy the criteria of section 
777A(d)(1)(B)(i) of the Act was insufficient to establish a pattern of 
export prices for comparable merchandise that differ significantly 
among certain customers or regions. Accordingly, the Department 
determined that the criteria established in 777A(d)(1)(B)(i) of the Act 
had not been met and applied the average-to-average methodology to all 
sales.\7\ No party has commented on this determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Certain Steel Nails from the United Arab Emirates: 
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Not Less Than Fair Value, 
73 FR 33985 (June 16, 2008) (Nails).
    \5\ See Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags From Taiwan: 
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Postponement of Final Determination, 74 FR 55183 (October 27, 2009) 
(unchanged in Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from Taiwan: Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 75 FR 14569 (March 
26, 2010)) (Bags).
    \6\ See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of 
China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 76 FR 
64318 (October 18, 2011) (Wood Flooring) and accompanying I&D Memo 
at Comment 4.
    \7\ See also Memorandum to Christian Marsh from Susan H. Kuhbach 
entitled, ``Less-Than-Fair Value Investigation on Certain Stilbenic 
Optical Brightening Agents from Taiwan: Targeted Dumping--Teh Fong 
Min International Co., Ltd.,'' dated October 27, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As in the Preliminary Determination, for TFM we continue to not 
find a pattern of export prices for comparable merchandise that differs 
significantly among customers, regions, or by time period. See Final 
Analysis Memo.

Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at 
verifications, we have made certain changes to TFM's margin 
calculation. For a discussion of these changes, see memorandum to Neal 
M. Halper from Gina K. Lee entitled, ``Constructed Value Calculation 
Adjustments for the Final Determination--Teh Fong Min International 
Co., Ltd. (``TFM'')'' (Final Cost Memo) and Final Analysis Memo, dated 
concurrently with this notice.

Date of Sale

    Section 19 CFR 351.401(i) of the Department's regulations states 
that the Department normally will use the date of invoice, as recorded 
in the producer's or exporter's records kept in the ordinary course of 
business, as the date of sale. The regulation provides further that the 
Department may use a date other than the date of the invoice if the 
Secretary is satisfied that a different date better reflects the date 
on which the material terms of sale are established.
    TFM reported its sales using shipment date as the date of sale, 
because shipment occurred prior to invoicing. The petitioner commented 
that contract date or contract amendment date is the appropriate date 
of sale for TFM's sales made pursuant to long-term contracts. Based on 
information on the record concerning these long-term contracts and 
consistent with the Preliminary Determination and Yieh Phui,\8\ we find 
that the date of shipment is the appropriate date of sale. See I&D Memo 
published concurrently with this notice at Comment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Yieh Phui Enterprise Co. v. United States (Slip Op. 11-
107) (August 24, 2011) (Yieh Phui).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Constructed Value

    As was explained in the Preliminary Determination (76 FR at 68134-
68135), in accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the Act, we used 
constructed value as the basis for normal value because TFM did not 
have a viable comparison market. We calculated constructed value in 
accordance with section 773(e) of the Act. Because TFM does not have a 
viable comparison market, in the Preliminary Determination we 
determined selling expenses and profit under section 773(e)(2)(B)(iii) 
of the Act. In the Preliminary Determination we used the profit rate 
derived from the publicly available financial statements for the fiscal 
year most contemporaneous with the POI for a company in Taiwan, 
Everlight Chemical Industrial Corporation (Everlight). We received new 
factual information concerning the calculation of constructed value 
profit from parties since the Preliminary Determination. After 
considering the new factual information and comments we received 
concerning this issue, we find that, for this final determination, it 
is appropriate to use Everlight's colorants-sector profit to derive the 
constructed value profit. We have also excluded movement expenses and 
direct-selling expenses in our calculation of constructed value 
indirect selling expenses. See the discussion in the accompanying I&D 
Memo at Comments 2 through 6. See also Final Cost Memo and Final 
Analysis Memo.

Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will instruct U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation 
of all entries of stilbenic OBAs from Taiwan which were entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after November 3, 2011, 
the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination. We will 
instruct CBP to require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond equal 
to the weighted-average margin, as indicated below, as follows: (1) The 
rate for TFM will be the rate we have determined in this final 
determination; (2) if the exporter is not a firm identified in this 
investigation but the producer is, the rate will be the rate 
established for the producer of the subject merchandise; (3) the rate 
for all other producers or exporters will be 6.20 percent, as discussed 
in the ``All-Others Rate'' section, below. These suspension-of-
liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Weighted-
                  Manufacturer/exporter                   average margin
                                                             (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Teh Fong Min International Co., Ltd.....................            6.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------

All-Others Rate

    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 or de 
minimis margins and any margins determined entirely under section 776 
of the Act. TFM is the only respondent in this investigation for which 
the Department calculated a company-specific rate. Therefore, for 
purposes of determining the all-others rate and pursuant to section 
735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, we are using the weighted-average dumping 
margin calculated for TFM, 6.20 percent.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less 
Than Fair Value: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils From 
Italy, 64 FR 30750, 30755 (June 8, 1999), and Coated Free Sheet 
Paper from Indonesia: Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales 
at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 72 
FR 30753, 30757 (June 4, 2007) (unchanged in Notice of Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Coated Free Sheet 
Paper from Indonesia, 72 FR 60636 (October 25, 2007)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    We intend to disclose the calculations performed within five days 
of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding 
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

[[Page 17029]]

International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the 
International Trade Commission (ITC) of our final determination. As our 
final determination is affirmative and in accordance with section 
735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will determine, within 45 days, whether 
the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or 
threatened with material injury, by reason of imports or sales (or the 
likelihood of sales) for importation of the subject merchandise. 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.

Notification Regarding APO

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of the 
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.
    This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 
735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: March 19, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I

Issues in I&D Memo

1. Date of Sale for Long-Term Contracts
2. Constructed Value Profit
3. Constructed Value Selling Expenses
4. Constructed Export Price Profit
5. General and Administrative Expenses
6. Cost Reconciliation
[FR Doc. 2012-7063 Filed 3-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P