sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register /
Vol. 71, No. 227 / Monday, November 27, 2006 / Notices
petitioner stated that, to the best of its knowledge, Chinese producers manufacturing CFS use the same processes and machinery as U.S. producers, and many Chinese mills use Western technology and mills built by Western companies. According to the petitioner, many of the CFS mills in the PRC are fully integrated. See Volume II of the PRC petition at page 5.
The petitioner provided a dumping margin calculation using the Department’s NME methodology as required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C). See Volume II of the PRC petition at Exhibits II–5 and 14, as revised in Exhibits 3 and 4, respectively, of the November 9, 2006, supplement to the petition. According to the petitioner, the cost model provided in Exhibit II–5 of the PRC petition, as revised in Exhibit 2 of the November 17, 2006 supplement to the petition, reflects the cost of producing the type of paper (i.e., 70 lb. (104g/m3) basis weight, grade 2, double- sided CFS) that can be imported under either of the tariff categories used to derive U.S. price, categories which comprise the majority of subject merchandise imports from the PRC during the POI. See PRC Initiation Checklist.
To determine the quantities of inputs for each raw material used by the PRC producers to produce CFS, the petitioner relied on its own production experience because it claimed that it is not aware of any publicly available information regarding the factor inputs and factor consumption rates pertaining to Chinese producers of CFS. In accordance with section 773(c)(4) of the Act, the petitioner valued factors of production, where possible, using reasonably available, public surrogate country data. To value certain factors of production, the petitioner used Monthly Statistics of the Foreign Trade of India, as published by the Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India, and compiled by World Trade Data Atlas (WTA). Since there were no Indian imports of one minor input, the petitioner used import data for Indonesia from the WTA to value this input. See PRC Initiation Checklist.
Since Indian and Indonesian import values are expressed in a foreign currency, the petitioner converted these values into U.S. dollars using the exchange rates on Import Administration’s Web site, ia.ita.doc.gov/exchange/india.txt, for the period during which the imports were made. The petitioner then inflated the resulting amounts to a POI value using the Indian and, where applicable,
Indonesian, Wholesale Price Index (WPI) for ‘‘All Commodities.’’ 4
See PRC Initiation Checklist
The Department calculates and publishes the surrogate values for labor to be used in NME cases on its Web site. Therefore, to value labor, the petitioner used a labor rate of $0.97 per hour, published on the Department Web site, in accordance with the Department’s regulations. See 19 CFR 351.408(c)(3) and the PRC Initiation Checklist.
The petitioner valued the various forms of energy used in the production of CFS based on the following sources: (1) the Indian electricity rate as reported by the U.S. Department of Energy for the year 2000, inflated to a POI value using the WPI for power, fuel, and lubrications published by the Reserve Bank of India (see Volume II of the PRC petition at page 9 and Exhibit II–9); (2) Indian natural gas prices charged to industrial users during a period overlapping the POI, as reported by CRISIL Research India (see Volume II of the PRC petition at page 9 and Exhibit II–10); (3) prices for hydrocarbon products (to value fuel oil) quoted by Bharat Petroleum Corporation, Ltd., which is, according to the petitioner, a major supplier of oil and other fuel products throughout India (see Volume II of the PRC petition at pages 9–10 and Exhibit II–11); and (4) the price of coal from the TERI Energy Data Directory & Yearbook 2003/04, inflated using the Indian WPI for power, fuel and lubricants, and converted from Rupees per metric ton to U.S. dollars per million British thermal units (see Volume II of the PRC petition at page 10 and Exhibit II–12). The Department revised the petitioner’s value for natural gas to reflect the price in effect during the POI only. See PRC Initiation Checklist for further details.
The petitioner calculated surrogate financial ratios (overhead, SG&A, and profit) from the annual reports of two Indian producers of CFS: The 2004– 2005 Annual Reports of Ballapur Industries, Ltd. (Ballapur) and the 2005– 2006 Annual Report of Seshasayee Paper and Boards, Ltd. (Seshasayee). See Volume II of the PRC petition at page 10 and Exhibit I–13. The Department revised the petitioner’s financial ratio calculations by including in the calculations certain financial statement line items that were omitted from the calculations and by reclassifying certain expenses used in the calculations. See PRC Initiation Checklist.
Source: International Financial Statistics, IMF, October 2006. 4
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to believe that imports of CFS from Indonesia, Korea, and the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Based on comparisons of EP to CV, calculated in accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the Act, the weighted-average dumping margin for CFS is 99.14 percent for Indonesia, and 71.81 percent for Korea. Based on comparisons of EP to NV, calculated in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act and adjusted as noted above, the weighted-average dumping margin for CFS from the PRC is 99.65 percent.
Initiation of Antidumping Investigations
Based upon the examination of the petitions on CFS from Indonesia, Korea, and the PRC, the Department finds that the petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating antidumping duty investigations to determine whether imports of CFS from Indonesia, Korea, and the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act, unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation.
Separate Rates and Quantity and Value Questionnaire
The Department recently modified the process by which exporters and producers may obtain separate-rate status in NME investigations. See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations involving Non-Market Economy Countries (Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin), (Apr. 5, 2005), available on the Department’s Web site at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/ bull05–1.pdf. The process requires the submission of a separate-rate status application. Based on our experience in processing the separate-rate applications in the following antidumping duty investigations, we have modified the application for this investigation to make it more administrable and easier for applicants to complete: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Certain Lined Paper Products from India, Indonesia, and the People’s Republic of China, 70 FR 58374, 58379 (Oct. 6, 2005), Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Certain Artist Canvas From the People’s Republic of China,70 FR 21996, 21999 (Apr. 28,
16:58 Nov 24, 2006