[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 203 (Thursday, October 21, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61790-61792]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23605]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-867]


Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields From the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results of Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of the first administrative review of 
automotive replacement glass windshields from the People's Republic of 
China.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') published its 
preliminary results of administrative review of the antidumping duty 
order on automotive replacement glass windshields (``ARG'') from the 
People's Republic of China (``PRC'') on May 7, 2004. See Automotive 
Replacement Glass Windshields from the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review 69 FR 
25545 (May 7, 2004) (``Preliminary Results''). The period of review 
(``POR'') is September 19, 2001, through March 31, 2003.
    Based on our analysis of the comments we received, we have made 
changes from the preliminary results of review. Therefore, the final 
results differ from the Preliminary Results with respect to the 
weighted-average dumping margins. The final weighted-average dumping 
margin for the reviewed firms is listed below in the section entitled 
``Final Results of the Review.''

DATES: Effective October 21, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Will Dickerson or Jon Freed, Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 
20230; telephone: (202) 482-1778 and (202) 482-3818, respectively.

Background

    On May 21, 2003, the Department published in the Federal Register a 
notice of the initiation of the antidumping duty administrative review 
of ARG from the PRC for the period September 19, 2001, through March 
31, 2003. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 68 FR 27781 
(May 21, 2003). The respondents included Changchun Pilkington Safety 
Glass Company, Ltd., Shanghai Yaohua Pilkington Autoglass Company, 
Ltd., Wuhan Yaohua Pilkington Safety Glass Company, Ltd., Guilin 
Pilkington Safety Glass Company, Ltd. (collectively ``Pilkington 
JVs''), Dongguan Kongwan Automobile Glass Ltd. and Peaceful City, Ltd., 
(collectively ``Peaceful City''), Fuyao Glass Industry Group company, 
Ltd. (``Fuyao''), Shenzhen CSG Automotive Glass Co., Ltd. (formerly 
Shenzhen Benxun AutoGlass Co., Ltd.) (``Shenzhen CSG''), TCG 
International, Inc. (``TCGI''), and Xinyi Automotive Glass (Shenzhen) 
Co., Ltd. (``Xinyi'').
    On September 8, 2003, the Department published a notice in the 
Federal Register rescinding the administrative reviews of TCGI, Xinyi, 
and Shenzhen CSG. See Certain Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields 
from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Partial Rescission of 
the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 68 FR 52893 (September 8, 
2003) (``Notice of Rescission'').
    In the Department's original investigation, Shenzhen Benxun 
AutoGlass Co., Ltd. (``Benxun'') received a rate separate from the PRC-
wide entity. When Shenzhen CSG requested an administrative review, it 
indicated it was the company known formerly as Benxun, but that it had 
undergone a name change since the Department's orginal investigation. 
On July 8, 2003, Shenzhen CSG withdrew its request for an 
administrative review. Because Shenzhen CSG withdrew its request for 
administrative review, the Department did not have the information 
necessary to make a successor-in-interest determination. Therefore, the 
Department did not determine that Shenzhen CSG was entitled to receive 
the same antidumping rate accorded Benxun within the context of this 
administrative review. In a changed-circumstance review subsequent to 
the September 8, 2003, Notice of Rescission, the Department determined 
that entries of merchandise from Shenzhen CSG are eligible for Benxun's 
cash-deposit rate. See Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Changed Circumstances Review: Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields 
from the People's Republic of China, 69 FR 43388 (July 20, 2004).
    We invited parties to comment on our preliminary results of review. 
See Preliminary Results. On June 7, 2004, the Department received case 
briefs from PNA, Fuyao, and Shenzhen CSG. On June 9, 2004, the 
Department received an untimely filed case brief from Peaceful City, 
which it rejected in accordance with 19 CFR 351.302(d). See Letter to 
Peaceful City Rejecting Case Brief, dated July 9, 2004. We did not 
receive any rebuttal comments. We have now completed the administrative 
review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (``the Act'').

Scope of Order

    The products covered by this order are ARG windshields, and parts 
thereof, whether clear or tinted, whether coated or not, and whether or 
not they include antennas, ceramics, mirror buttons or VIN notches, and 
whether or not they are encapsulated. ARG windshields are laminated 
safety glass (i.e., two layers of (typically float) glass with a sheet 
of clear or tinted plastic in between (usually polyvinyl butyral)), 
which are produced and sold for use by automotive glass installation 
shops to replace windshields in automotive vehicles (e.g., passenger 
cars, light trucks, vans, sport utility vehicles, etc.) that are 
cracked, broken or otherwise damaged.
    ARG windshields subject to this order are currently classifiable 
under subheading 7007.21.10.10 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of 
the United States (HTSUS). Specifically excluded from the scope of the 
order are laminated automotive windshields sold for use in original 
assembly of vehicles. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope 
of the order is dispositive.

Facts Available

    In the instant review, for the preliminary results, the Department 
applied the petition rate as adverse facts available, in accordance 
with section 776(a) of the Act, to Peaceful City because Peaceful City 
withheld certain information that had been requested by the Department, 
it failed to provide certain information by the Department's statutory 
deadlines, it significantly impeded the Department's investigation, and 
it failed to provide certain information that could be verified 
pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)/(A), (B), (C) and (D) of the Act. See 
Preliminary Results, 69 FR at 25550-25555. There is no argument on the 
record to cause us to reconsider our decision in the Preliminary 
Results. Therefore, we have determined that the application of facts 
available continues to be appropriate with respect to Peaceful City.

[[Page 61791]]

Corroboration of Adverse Facts Available

    We corroborated the adverse facts-available rate we have applied to 
Peaceful City in the investigation and in the preliminary results of 
this administrative review. See Preliminary Results, 69 FR at 25555-
25556, citing Memorandum from Jon Freed to Robert Bolling: Preliminary 
Results in the Antidumping Administrative Review of Automotive 
Replacement Glass Windshields from the People's Republic of China: 
First Administrative Review Corroboration Memorandum, dated April 29, 
2004 (``First Review Corroboration Memo''), with attached Memorandum 
from Edward Yang to Joseph Spetrini: Preliminary Determination in the 
Antidumping Investigation of Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields 
from the People's Republic of China: Total Facts Available 
Corroboration Memorandum for All Others Rate, dated September 10, 2001 
(``Corroboration Memo''). In the Preliminary Results, the Department 
found the facts-available rate of 124.5 percent to be both reliable and 
relevant. Id. The Department explained in its Preliminary Results that 
it would reexamine the relevancy of the petition rate to this 
administrative review by considering all margins on the record at the 
time of the final results. See 69 FR at 25556.
    To assess the relevancy of the total adverse facts-available rate 
it has chosen, the Department compared the final margin calculations of 
other respondents in this administrative review with the rate of 124.5 
percent from the original petition. We find the rate is within the 
range of the highest margins we have determined in this administrative 
review. See Memorandum from Jon Freed to Robert Bolling: Final Results 
in the Antidumping Administrative Review of Automotive Replacement 
Glass Windshields from the People's Republic of China: First 
Administrative Review Final Corroboration Memorandum, dated October 14, 
2004 (``First Review Final Corroboration Memo''). Since the record of 
this administrative review contains margins within the range of the 
petition margin, we determine that the rate from the petition continues 
to be relevant for use in this administrative review. Further, the rate 
used is currently applicable to all exporters subject to the PRC-wide 
rate.
    As the petition rate is both reliable and relevant, we determine 
that it has probative value. As a result, the Department determines 
that the petition rate is corroborated for the purposes of this 
administrative review and may reasonably be applied to Peaceful City as 
a total adverse facts-available rate. Accordingly, we determine that 
the highest rate from any segment of this administrative proceeding 
(i.e., the calculated rate of 124.50 percent) is in accord with the 
requirement under section 776(c) of the Act that secondary information 
be corroborated (i.e., have probative value).
    Consequently, we are applying a single antidumping rate, the 
highest rate from any segment of this administrative proceeding, to 
Peaceful City's exports based on Peaceful City's failure to be 
reasonably prepared during the verification and its resulting failure 
to substantiate the majority of its factors of production, which were 
reported in its questionnaire responses. See, e.g., Final Determination 
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Synthetic Indigo from the People's 
Republic of China, 65 FR 25706, 25707 (May 3, 2000).

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this administrative review are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision 
Memorandum'' (``Decision Memorandum'') from Jeffrey A. May, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary, for Import Administration, to James J. Jochum, 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated October 14, 2004, 
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which 
parties have raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in 
the Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as an Appendix. 
Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this 
review and the corresponding recommendations in the Decision 
Memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit, Room B-099 of 
the main Department building. In addition, a complete version of the 
Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/index.html. The paper copy and electronic version of 
the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of comments received, we have made changes in 
the margin calculations for PNA. The specific calculation changes can 
be found in our Final Analysis Memo, dated October 14, 2004. The 
changes to the margin calculations are listed below:
    <bullet> For the calculation of imputed credit, inventory-carrying 
cost, and marine insurance, the Department used the net price (i.e., 
gross price--price-list discount) rather than gross price in order to 
base these adjustments on the amounts actually paid. See Decision 
Memorandum at Comment 7.
    <bullet> In the preliminary results, the Department inadvertently 
overstated the marine insurance value. For the final results, the 
Department reduced the marine insurance value by two decimal places. 
See Decision Memorandum at Comment 8.
    <bullet> In the preliminary results, the Department inadvertently 
valued metal clips with the surrogate value for labels. For the final 
results, the Department valued metal clips with the value listed on 
page 5 of the Factors Valuation Memorandum. See Decision Memorandum at 
Comment 9.
    <bullet> The Department double-counted two elements of the packing 
labor calculation of normal value in the preliminary results of review. 
For the final results, the Department corrected this inadvertent error. 
See Decision Memorandum at Comment 10.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following percentage margins exist on exports 
of ARG windshields from the PRC for the period September 19, 2001, 
through March 31, 2003:

          Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields From the PRC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Weighted-
                                                               average
               Producer/manufacturer/exporter                   margin
                                                              (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fuyao......................................................        *0.13
Peaceful City/Dongguan Kongwan.............................       124.50
Pilkington.................................................        2.88
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*De minimis.

Assessment Rates

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated 
exporter/importer (or customer)-specific assessment rates for 
merchandise subject to this review. The Department will issue 
appraisement instructions directly to U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (``CBP'') within 15 days of publication of these final 
results of administrative review. We will direct CBP to assess the 
resulting assessment rates against the entered customs values for the 
subject merchandise on each of that importer's entries under the 
relevant order during the review period.
    To determine whether the duty assessment rates were de minimis, in 
accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we 
calculated importer (or customer)-specific ad valorem rates by 
aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all

[[Page 61792]]

U.S. sales to that importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by 
the total value of the sales to that importer (or customer). Where an 
importer (or customer)-specific ad valorem rate was greater than de 
minimis (i.e., 0.5%), we calculated a per unit assessment rate by 
aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S. sales to that 
importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by the total quantity 
sold to that importer (or customer). Where an importer (or customer)-
specific ad valorem rate was de minimis, we will order CBP to liquidate 
appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of this notice of final results of administrative review 
for all shipments of ARG windshields from the PRC entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as 
provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates 
for the reviewed companies will be the rates shown above except that 
the Department shall require no deposit of estimated antidumping duties 
for firms whose weighted-average margins are less than 0.5% and 
therefore de minimis; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated 
companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be 
the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if 
the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or 
the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the 
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for 
the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) 
if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in these 
or any previous reviews, the cash deposit rate will be the ``all 
others'' rate, which is 124.5 percent.
    These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication 
of the final results of the next administrative review.

Notification of Interested Parties

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumpting 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 the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.
    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (``APOs'') of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues 
to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the 
proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of 
APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby 
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO 
is a violation which is subject to sanction.
    We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(I)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: October 14, 2004.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix 1--Issues in the Decision Memorandum

Fuyao's Comments

Comment 1: Water as a Separate Component of Normal Value
Comment 2: Certain Inputs as a Separate Component of Normal Value

Shenzhen CSG's Comments

Comment 3: Liquidation Instructions for Shenzhen CSG's Entries

PNA's Comments

Comment 4: Proper Set of Sales as Basis for the Margin for PNA
Comment 5: Rejection of Market Purchases from Indonesia, Thailand, 
and South Korea
Comment 6: Surrogate Profit Ratio
Comment 7: Allocation of Credit Expense, Inventory Carrying Cost, 
and Marine Insurance
Comment 8: Market-Price Value for Marine Insurance 1
Comment 9: Surrogate Value for Metal Clips
Comment 10: Double-Counting of Labor

[FR Doc. 04-23605 Filed 10-20-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P