Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review: Greige Polyester Cotton Printcloth From the People's Republic of China

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-101]

Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review: Greige Polyester Cotton

Printcloth From the People's Republic of China

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of expedited sunset review: Greige

polyester cotton printcloth from the People's Republic of China.

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

SUMMARY: On November 2, 1998, the Department of Commerce (``the

Department'') initiated a sunset review of the antidumping order on

greige polyester cotton printcloth from The People's Republic of China

(63 FR 58709) pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as

amended (``the Act''). On the basis of a notice of intent to

participate and substantive comments filed on behalf of the domestic

industry and inadequate response (in this case, no response) from

respondent interested parties, the Department determined to conduct an

expedited review. As a result of this review, the Department finds that

revocation of the antidumping order would be likely to lead to

continuation or recurrence of dumping at the levels indicated in the

Final Results of Review section of this notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott E. Smith or Melissa G. Skinner,

Office of Policy for Import Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and

Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482-

6397 or (202) 482-1560, respectively.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 18, 1999.

Statute and Regulations

This review was conducted pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752 of

the Act. The Department's procedures for the conduct of sunset reviews

are set forth in Procedures for Conducting Five-year (``Sunset'')

Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 63 FR 13516

(March 20, 1998) (``Sunset Regulations''). Guidance on methodological

or analytical issues relevant to the Department's conduct of sunset

reviews is set forth in the Department's Policy Bulletin 98:3--Policies

Regarding the Conduct of Five-year (``Sunset'') Reviews of Antidumping

and Countervailing Duty Orders; Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16,

1998) (``Sunset Policy Bulletin'').

Scope

The merchandise subject to this antidumping order is greige

polyester cotton printcloth, other than 80 x 80 type. Greige polyester

cotton printcloth is of chief weight cotton,1 unbleached and

uncolored printcloth. The term ``printcloth'' refers to plain woven

fabric, not napped, not fancy or figured,

[[Page 13400]]

of singles yarn, not combed, of average yarn number 43 to

68,2 weighing not more than 6 ounces per square yard, of a

total count of more than 85 yarns per square inch, of which the total

count of the warp yarns per inch and the total count of the filling

yarns per inch are each less than 62 percent of the total count of the

warp and filling yarns per square inch. This merchandise is currently

classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTSUS) item

5210.11.6060. The HTSUS item numbers are provided for convenience and

U.S. Customs purposes. The written description remains dispositive.

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

\1\ In the scope from the original investigation, the Department

defined the subject merchandise by chief value (i.e., the subject

merchandise was of chief value cotton). For the purposes of this

review, we have incorporated Custom's conversion to chief weight

(i.e., the subject merchandise is of chief weight cotton). See

Memorandum, RE: Greige Polyester Cotton Printcloth--Scope, February

25, 1999.

\2\ Under the English system, this average yarn number count

translates to 26 to 40. The average yarn number counts reported in

previous scope descriptions by the Department are based on the

English system of yarn number counts. Per phone conversations with

U.S. Customs officials, the Customs Service now relies on the metric

system to establish average yarn number counts. Thus, the 26 to 40

average yarn number count under the English system translates to a

43 to 68 average yarn number count under the metric system. See

Memorandum, RE: Greige Polyester Cotton Printcloth--Scope, February

19, 1999.

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

This review covers imports from all manufacturers and exporters of

Chinese printcloth.

Background

On November 2, 1998, the Department initiated a sunset review of

the antidumping order on greige polyester cotton printcloth from The

People's Republic of China (63 FR 58709), pursuant to section 751(c) of

the Act. The Department received a Notice of Intent to Participate on

behalf of the American Textile Manufacturers Institute (``ATMI'') and

its member companies on November 16, 1998,3 within the

deadline specified in section 351.218(d)(1)(i) of the Sunset

Regulations. The member companies of ATMI claimed interested party

status under 19 U.S.C. 1677(9)(C) as U.S. producers of greige polyester

cotton printcloth. In addition, ATMI indicated that the following

member companies were the original petitioners in this case: CMI

Industries, Inc., Alice Manufacturing Co., Mayfair Mills, Inc.,

Greenwood Mills, Inc., and Mount Vernon Mills, Inc. We received a

complete substantive response from ATMI on December 2, 1998, within the

30-day deadline specified in the Sunset Regulations under section

351.218(d)(3)(i). We did not receive a substantive response from any

respondent interested party to this proceeding. As a result, pursuant

to 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C), the Department determined to conduct an

expedited, 120-day review of this order.

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

\3\ CMI Industries, Inc. (formerly Clinton Mills, Inc.), Alice

Manufacturing Co., Mayfair Mills, Inc., Greenwood Mills, Inc., Inman

Mills, Inc., Spartan Mills, Inc., and Mount Vernon Mills, Inc.

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

Determination

In accordance with section 751(c)(1) of the Act, the Department

conducted this review to determine whether revocation of the

antidumping order would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence

of dumping. Section 752(c) of the Act provides that, in making this

determination, the Department shall consider the weighted-average

dumping margins determined in the investigation and subsequent reviews

and the volume of imports of the subject merchandise for the period

before and the period after the issuance of the antidumping order, and

shall provide to the International Trade Commission (``the

Commission'') the magnitude of the margin of dumping likely to prevail

if the order is revoked.

The Department's determinations concerning continuation or

recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margin are discussed

below. In addition, parties' comments with respect to continuation or

recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margin are addressed

within the respective sections below.

Continuation or Recurrence of Dumping

Drawing on the guidance provided in the legislative history

accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''), specifically

the Statement of Administrative Action (``the SAA''), H.R. Doc. No.

103-316, vol. 1 (1994), the House Report, H.R. Rep. No. 103-826, pt. 1

(1994), and the Senate Report, S. Rep. No. 103-412 (1994), the

Department issued its Sunset Policy Bulletin providing guidance on

methodological and analytical issues, including the bases for

likelihood determinations. In its Sunset Policy Bulletin, the

Department indicated that determinations of likelihood will be made on

an order-wide basis (see section II.A.3). In addition, the Department

indicated that normally it will determine that revocation of an

antidumping order is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of

dumping where (a) dumping continued at any level above de minimis after

the issuance of the order, (b) imports of the subject merchandise

ceased after the issuance of the order, or (c) dumping was eliminated

after the issuance of the order and import volumes for the subject

merchandise declined significantly (see section II.A.3).

In addition to guidance on likelihood provided in the Sunset Policy

Bulletin and legislative history, section 751(c)(4)(B) of the Act

provides that the Department shall determine that revocation of an

order is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping where

a respondent interested party waives its participation in the sunset

review. In the instant review, the Department did not receive a

response from any interested party. Pursuant to section

351.218(d)(2)(iii) of the Sunset Regulations, this constitutes a waiver

of participation.

The antidumping duty order on greige polyester cotton printcloth

from the People's Republic of China was published in the Federal

Register on September 16, 1983 (48 FR 41614). Since this time, the

Department has conducted three administrative reviews.4 The

order remains in effect for all manufacturers and exporters of the

subject merchandise.

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

\4\ See Greige Polyester cotton Printcloth From the People's

Republic of China; Final Results of Administrative Review of

Antidumping Order; 50 FR 5805, February 12, 1985; Greige Polyester

cotton Printcloth From the People's Republic of China; Final Results

of Administrative Review of Antidumping Order; 57 FR 1254, January

13, 1992; and Greige Polyester cotton Printcloth From the People's

Republic of China; Final Results of Administrative Review of

Antidumping Order; 57 FR 31353, July 15, 1992.

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

In its substantive response, ATMI argues that the Department should

determine that there is a likelihood that dumping would recur if the

order were revoked because a dumping margin above a de minimis level

has been in place since the imposition of the order, and dumping of

subject merchandise has continued since the issuance of the order.

ATMI notes that a dumping margin of 22.4 percent has existed

throughout the life of the order (see December 2, 1998 Substantive

Response of ATMI at 5-7). Furthermore, ATMI argues that, although the

Department has not conducted a review since the 1988/89 administrative

review (57 FR 31353, July 15, 1992), the existence of imports since

that time, and the fact that a 22.4 percent deposit rate has been

continuously in effect for all imports of the subject merchandise,

suggests that imports of greige polyester cotton printcloth must have

been exported to the United States at prices below cost since 1990.

In making its decision, the Department considered the existence of

dumping margins and the volume of imports before and after the issuance

of the order. As discussed in section II.A.3 of the Sunset Policy

Bulletin, the SAA at 890, and the House Report at 63-64, if companies

continue dumping with the discipline of an order in place, the

Department may reasonably infer that dumping would continue if the

[[Page 13401]]

discipline were removed. In the instant proceeding, a dumping margin

above a de minimis level continues to exist for shipments of the

subject merchandise from all Chinese producers/exporters.5

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

\5\ See Greige Polyester cotton Printcloth From the People's

Republic of China; Final Results of Administrative Review of

Antidumping Order; 57 FR 31353, July 15, 1992.

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

The Department also considered the volume of imports before and

after issuance of the order, consistent with section 752(c) of the Act.

The Department examined U.S. Census Bureau IM146 reports and data from

our original investigation and subsequent administrative reviews and

finds that imports of the subject merchandise have existed throughout

most of the life of the order.6

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

\6\ From the Department's original investigation and its

subsequent administrative reviews, the Department can confirm that

shipments of the subject merchandise occurred in 1982, the year

prior to the imposition of the order, and 1983, the year of the

issuance of the antidumping duty order.

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

For the period from 1984 through 1987, the Department can, as noted

in Griege Polyester Cotton Printcloth: Final Results of Antidumping

Duty Administrative Review and Determination Not to Revoke, 57 FR 1254

(January 13, 1992), confirm two shipments of subject merchandise to the

United States. From 1988 through 1989, the Department knows of no

shipments of the subject merchandise to the United States. Lastly, U.S.

Census Bureau IM146 reports show annual imports of merchandise within

the covered HTSUS item number have existed almost continuously from

1990 through 1998.

Upon consideration of the argument and evidence on the record, the

Department determines that the existence of dumping margins after the

issuance of the order is highly probative of the likelihood of

continuation or recurrence of dumping. Specifically, a deposit rate

above a de minimis level continues in effect for exports of the subject

merchandise by all known Chinese manufacturers/exporters. Given that

dumping has continued over the life of the order, respondent interested

parties waived participation in the sunset review, and absent argument

and evidence to the contrary, the Department determines that dumping is

likely to continue if the order were revoked.

Magnitude of the Margin

In the Sunset Policy Bulletin, the Department stated that it will

normally provide to the Commission the margin that was determined in

the final determination in the original investigation. Further, for

companies not specifically investigated or for companies that did not

begin shipping until after the order was issued, the Department

normally will provide a margin based on the ``all others'' rate from

the investigation. (See section II.B.1 of the Sunset Policy Bulletin.)

Exceptions to this policy include the use of a more recently calculated

margin, where appropriate, and consideration of duty absorption

determinations. (See sections II.B.2 and 3 of the Sunset Policy

Bulletin.)

The Department, in its final determination of sales at less than

fair value, published a weighted-average dumping margin for all imports

of greige polyester cotton printcloth from the People's Republic of

China (48 FR 34312, July 28, 1983). We note that, to date, the

Department has not issued any duty absorption findings in this case.

In its substantive response, ATMI, citing the Sunset Policy

Bulletin, argues that the Department should report to the Commission

the weighted-averaged dumping margin from the original investigation

for China National Textiles Import and Export Corporation

(``Chinatex''). Chinatex was the only producer/exporter of the subject

merchandise identified in the original investigation. Quoting the

Sunset Policy Bulletin, ATMI argues that the Department should report

this margin to the Commission as it is ``* * * the only calculated rate

that reflects the behavior of exporters * * * without the discipline of

an order or suspension agreement in place''.

The Department agrees with ATMI's argument concerning the choice of

the margin rate to report to the Commission. In the original

investigation, the Department calculated a country-wide weighted-

averaged margin for all companies, including Chinatex. Therefore, the

Department finds that the country-wide weighted-averaged margin

calculated in the original investigation is probative of how Chinese

producers and exporters of greige polyester cotton printcloth would act

if the order were revoked. As such, the Department will report to the

Commission as the dumping margin for all companies, the country-wide

rate from the original investigation as contained in the Final Results

of Review section of this notice.

Final Results of Review

As a result of this review, the Department finds that revocation of

the antidumping duty order would likely lead to continuation or

recurrence of dumping at the margin listed below:

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

Margin

Manufacturer/exporter (percent)

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

All Chinese Manufacturers/Exporters.......................... 22.4

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

This notice serves as the only 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 of the Department's regulations.

Timely 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.

This five-year (``sunset'') review and notice are in accordance

with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

Dated: March 11, 1999.

Robert S. LaRussa,

Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 99-6536 Filed 3-17-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P