CFS paper typically has a higher price than other types of graphics papers. The price of coated groundwood is traditionally less than that for CFS paper.80 Competition with coated groundwood is limited because CFS paper is not available in basis weights below 45 pounds; a producer active in gift wrap and converting segments noted that CFS paper rarely competed against coated groundwood.81 For products with similar characteristics (e.g., 45 pound, 86 brightness), CFS paper prices were reported to be approximately 10 percent higher than those for coated groundwood.82 The price for CFS paper is traditionally higher than that for uncoated free sheet83 by as much as 20 to 40 percent according to U.S. CFS paper producers.84 The higher prices were attributed to the more complex manufacturing process for CFS paper which leads to higher production costs and less efficiency.85 U.S. CFS paper producers reported that the price of C2S is generally similar to or at a slight premium above C1S,86 with the estimated price differential being 10 to 15 percent.87 In was noted that price trends generally run parallel for both C1S and C2S.88
DATA ON PRODUCT TYPES
Respondents have raised the issue as to whether competition between U.S.-produced CFS paper and imports of subject merchandise is attenuated. See, for example, Chinese manufacturers and Unisource’s postconference brief where they assert that web rolls constitute a “distinct market segment” and Korean manufacturers’ postconference brief where they argue that the domestic industry does not face what they label as “significant competition” from subject imports within the web roll “segment” of the U.S. market.89 Petitioner emphasizes that CFS paper is a commodity product and that respondents “offer no evidence” that “they are actually blocked from competing for sales of web rolls.”90
As shown in table I-3, the “domestic industry” (which as shown in the notes include data for a relatively small volume of Canadian production) consists primarily of rolls (*** percent in 2003, *** percent in 2004, and *** percent in 2005). *** web rolls were imported from the subject countries91 and only a relatively small portion of total subject imports were in the form of sheeter rolls (*** percent in 2003, *** percent in 2004, and *** percent in 2005). Most subject merchandise was imported in sheet-
*** producers’ questionnaire response, p. 11. *** producers’ questionnaire response, p. 8. *** producers’ questionnaire response, p. 8. *** producers’ questionnaire response, p. 9. *** producers’ questionnaire response, p. 7, and *** response, p. 7. *** producers’ questionnaire response, p. 7, and *** response, p. 7. *** producers’ questionnaire response, p. 13; *** response, p. 11; and *** response, p. 10. *** producers’ questionnaire response, p. 10. *** producers’ questionnaire response, p. 11.
89 Chinese manufacturers and Unisource’s postconference brief, pp. 4-10; and Korean manufacturers’ postconference brief, pp. 8-11 and app. A (pp. 2-5). Chinese manufacturers and Unisource further assert that there are additional factors that differentiate subject imports from domestically produced CFS paper. Chinese manufacturers and Unisource's postconference brief, pp. 10-13.
Petitioners’ postconference brief, pp. 7, 37-41, and exh. 1 (pp. 21-37). Petitioner’s postconference brief includes a declaration (exh. 14) from ***