Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven

Selvedge from China and Taiwan

Investigation Nos. 701-TA-467 and 731-TA-1164-1165 (Final)

Publication 4180 August 2010

Washington, DC 20436
U.S. International Trade Commission

COMMISSIONERS

Deanna Tanner Okun, Chairman

Charlotte R. Lane

Daniel R. Pearson

Shara L. Aranoff

Irving A. Williamson

Dean A. Pinkert

Robert B. Koopman

Acting Director of Operations

Staff assigned

Russell Duncan, Investigator

Shannon Gaffney, Industry Analyst

Nancy Bryan, Economist

Mary Klir, Accountant

Elizabeth Duall, Attorney

George Deyman, Supervisory Investigator

Address all communications to

Secretary to the Commission

United States International Trade Commission

Washington, DC 20436
U.S. International Trade Commission

Washington, DC 20436

www.usitc.gov

Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven

Selvedge from China and Taiwan

Investigation Nos. 701-TA-467 and 731-TA-1164-1165 (Final)

Publication 4180 August 2010
 
i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Determinations .............................................................................................................................................. 1 

Views of the Commission ............................................................................................................................. 3 

Dissenting Views of Chairman Deanna Tanner Okun and Commissioner Daniel R. Pearson ................... 37 

Separate and Dissenting Views of Commissioner Dean A. Pinkert ........................................................... 41 

Part I: Introduction ............................................................................................................................. I-1

Background ............................................................................................................................................ I-1

Statutory criteria and organization of the report .................................................................................... I-2

Statutory criteria ................................................................................................................................. I-2

Organization of the report .................................................................................................................. I-2

Market summary .................................................................................................................................... I-3

Summary data ........................................................................................................................................ I-3

Previous investigations .......................................................................................................................... I-3

Nature and extent of subsidies and sales at LTFV ................................................................................. I-3

Subsidies ............................................................................................................................................ I-3

Sales at LTFV .................................................................................................................................... I-4

The subject merchandise ........................................................................................................................ I-6

Commerce’s scope ............................................................................................................................. I-6

Tariff treatment .................................................................................................................................. I-8

The product ............................................................................................................................................ I-9

Description and applications .............................................................................................................. I-9

Manufacturing processes ................................................................................................................. I-10

Domestic like product issues ................................................................................................................ I-12

Part II: Conditions of competition in the U.S. market ...................................................................... II-1

U.S. market characteristics.................................................................................................................... II-1

Channels of distribution ........................................................................................................................ II-2

Supply and demand considerations ....................................................................................................... II-4

Supply ............................................................................................................................................... II-4

Demand ............................................................................................................................................. II-8

Substitutability issues .......................................................................................................................... II-11

Factors affecting purchasing decisions ........................................................................................... II-11

Comparisons of domestic product and subject imports .................................................................. II-14

Other country comparisons ............................................................................................................. II-18

Elasticity estimates .............................................................................................................................. II-19

U.S. supply elasticity ...................................................................................................................... II-19

U.S. demand elasticity .................................................................................................................... II-19

Substitution elasticity ...................................................................................................................... II-20
ii 

TABLE OF CONTENTS--Continued

Part III: U.S. producers’ production, shipments, and employment ................................................ III-1

U.S. producers ...................................................................................................................................... III-1

Historical decline of the industry ..................................................................................................... III-1

U.S. production, capacity, and capacity utilization .............................................................................. III-2

U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments and exports ........................................................................................ III-3

Seasonality of U.S. shipments.......................................................................................................... III-4

U.S. shipments by channel of distribution ....................................................................................... III-4

U.S. producers’ imports and purchases ................................................................................................ III-5

U.S. producers’ inventories .................................................................................................................. III-5

U.S. employment, wages, and productivity ......................................................................................... III-6

Part IV: U.S. imports, apparent U.S. consumption, and market shares ......................................... IV-1

U.S. importers ..................................................................................................................................... IV-1

U.S. importers’ U.S. imports............................................................................................................... IV-2

U.S. imports controlled by U.S. producers ..................................................................................... IV-3

Negligibility ........................................................................................................................................ IV-4

U.S. importers’ shipments of imports ................................................................................................. IV-4

U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments by channel of distribution ............................................................ IV-6

Cumulation considerations .................................................................................................................. IV-6

Fungibility ...................................................................................................................................... IV-6

Geographic overlap ......................................................................................................................... IV-7

Presence in the market and seasonality ........................................................................................... IV-7

Apparent U.S. consumption and U.S. market shares .......................................................................... IV-8

Apparent U.S. consumption and market shares by channel of distribution .................................... IV-9

Ratio of imports to U.S. production .................................................................................................. IV-10

Part V: Pricing and related information ............................................................................................ V-1

Factors affecting prices ......................................................................................................................... V-1

Raw material costs ............................................................................................................................ V-1

U.S. inland transportation costs ........................................................................................................ V-2

Pricing practices .................................................................................................................................... V-2

Pricing methods ................................................................................................................................ V-2

Contracts vs. spot sales ..................................................................................................................... V-3

Sales terms and discounts ................................................................................................................. V-3

Price data ............................................................................................................................................... V-3

Price trends........................................................................................................................................ V-5

Price comparisons ............................................................................................................................. V-8

Lost sales and lost revenues .................................................................................................................. V-8
iii 

TABLE OF CONTENTS--Continued

Part VI: Financial experience of the U.S. producers ........................................................................ VI-1

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ VI-1

Operations on narrow woven ribbons ................................................................................................. VI-1

Variance analysis ................................................................................................................................ VI-2

Capital expenditures ............................................................................................................................ VI-3

Assets and return on investment ......................................................................................................... VI-3

Capital and investment ........................................................................................................................ VI-3

Actual negative effects .................................................................................................................... VI-3

Anticipated negative effects ............................................................................................................ VI-3

Part VII:Threat considerations and information on nonsubject countries ................................... VII-1

Bilateral and multilateral trade restrictions ........................................................................................ VII-2

The industry in China ......................................................................................................................... VII-3

The industry in Taiwan ...................................................................................................................... VII-4

U.S. inventories of imported merchandise ......................................................................................... VII-5

U.S. importers’ outstanding orders .................................................................................................... VII-6

Antidumping or countervailing duty orders in third-country markets ............................................... VII-6

Information on nonsubject sources .................................................................................................... VII-6

Appendixes 

A. Federal Register notices ............................................................................................................. A-1 

B. Hearing witnesses ........................................................................................................................ B-1 

C. Summary table ............................................................................................................................. C-1 

D. Nonsubject pricing data............................................................................................................... D-1 

E. Data on facilitated imports reported by Berwick Offray, by top customers ................................ E-1 

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

Investigation Nos. 701-TA-467 and 731-TA-1164-1165 (Final)

NARROW WOVEN RIBBONS WITH 

WOVEN SELVEDGE FROM CHINA AND TAIWAN

DETERMINATIONS

On the basis of the record1

 developed in the subject investigations, the United States International

Trade Commission (Commission) determines,2

 pursuant to sections 705(b) and 735(b) of the Tariff Act of

1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1671d(b)) and (19 U.S.C. § 1673d(b)) (the Act), that an industry in the United States is

threatened with material injury by reason of imports of narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge from

China, primarily provided for in subheading 5806.32 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United

States, that the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) has determined are subsidized and sold in

the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”). The Commission further determines,2

 pursuant to

section 735(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 1673d(b)), that an industry in the United States is threatened with

material injury by reason of imports of narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge from Taiwan,

primarily provided for in subheading 5806.32 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States,

that Commerce has determined are sold in the United States at LTFV. In addition, the Commission

determines that it would not have found material injury but for the suspension of liquidation.

BACKGROUND

The Commission instituted these investigations effective July 9, 2009, following receipt of a

petition filed with the Commission and Commerce by Berwick Offray LLC and its wholly-owned

subsidiary Lion Ribbon Company, Inc., Berwick, PA. The final phase of the investigations was

scheduled by the Commission following notification of preliminary determinations by Commerce that

imports of narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge from China were subsidized within the meaning

of section 703(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 1671b(b)) and that imports of narrow woven ribbons with

woven selvedge from China and Taiwan were dumped within the meaning of 733(b) of the Act

(19 U.S.C. § 1673b(b)). Notice of the scheduling of the final phase of the Commission’s investigations

and of a public hearing to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the

Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the

notice in the Federal Register on March 12, 2010 (75 FR 11908). The hearing was held in Washington,

DC, on July 15, 2010, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person

or by counsel.

 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR § 207.2(f)).

 2

 Commissioners Charlotte R. Lane, Shara L. Aranoff, and Irving A. Williamson made affirmative

determinations. Chairman Deanna Tanner Okun and Commissioner Daniel R. Pearson made negative

determinations. Commissioner Dean A. Pinkert made an affirmative determination with respect to China and a

negative determination with respect to Taiwan. 

1

VIEWS OF THE COMMISSION

Based on the record in the final phase of these investigations, we find that an industry in the

United States is threatened with material injury by reason of imports of certain narrow woven ribbons

with woven selvedge (“narrow woven ribbons”) from China and Taiwan that are sold in the United States

at less than fair value and imports of narrow woven ribbons from China that are subsidized by the

Government of China.1

I. BACKGROUND

The petitions in these investigations were filed on July 9, 2009, by domestic producer Berwick

Offray LLC and its wholly owned subsidiary Lion Ribbon Company, Inc. (“petitioner” or “Berwick

Offray”). Petitioner appeared at the hearing and filed prehearing and posthearing briefs and final

comments.2

 Useable data on U.S. production operations in response to the Commission’s questionnaires

were provided by four U.S. producers, Berwick Offray, Lawrence Schiff Silk Mills, Inc. (“Lawrence

Schiff”), L.A. Najarian, Inc. (“L.A. Najarian”), and Trimtex Co., Inc. (“Trimtex”).3

 Berwick Offray was

the largest U.S. producer of narrow woven ribbons over the period examined, accounting for *** of U.S.

production. Lawrence Schiff was the second-largest U.S. producer, accounting for a little under *** of

U.S. production.4

 L.A. Najarian and Trimtex had *** production of narrow woven ribbons over the

period examined, and ***.5

 In addition to petitioner, several respondents appeared at the hearing and submitted prehearing

and posthearing briefs and final comments. A group of importers/retailers of subject merchandise, 

Costco Wholesale Corporation (“Costco”), Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (“Hobby Lobby”), Jo-Ann Stores,

Inc. (“Jo-Ann’s”), Michael’s Stores, Inc. (“Michael’s”), and Target Corporation (“Target”) (collectively,

the “Ribbon Retailers”) participated in the hearing through company officials and/or counsel and

submitted prehearing and posthearing briefs and final comments. Representatives from importers

Papillon Ribbons & Bow, Inc. (“Papillon”), MNC Stribbons, Inc. (“MNC Stribbons”), Liberty Ribbon

and Packaging, LLC (“Liberty Ribbon”), May Arts, and Essential Ribbons, Inc. (“Essential Ribbons”)

(collectively, the “Ribbon Importers”) also participated in the hearing through company officials and/or

counsel and submitted prehearing and posthearing briefs and final comments. In addition, the Taiwan

Silk & Filament Weaving Industrial Association and its individual members King Young Enterprise Co.,

 1 Chairman Okun and Commissioner Pearson find that an industry in the United States is neither materially

injured nor threatened with material injury by reason of subject imports from China and Taiwan. Except as

otherwise noted, they join the discussion and analysis in sections I to V and VI.A and VI.B and provide the

remainder of their analysis in dissenting views. See Dissenting Views of Chairman Deanna Tanner Okun and

Commissioner Daniel R. Pearson. Commissioner Pinkert finds that a domestic industry is threatened with material

injury by reason of subject imports from China and is not materially injured or threatened with material injury by

reason of subject imports from Taiwan. Except as otherwise noted, Commissioner Pinkert joins the discussion and

analysis in sections I to V and provides the remainder of his analysis in separate and dissenting views. See Separate

and Dissenting Views of Commissioner Dean A. Pinkert. Commissioner Pinkert also joins the majority’s finding in

section VI.E that the domestic industry is vulnerable for purposes of its threat analysis. 

 2

 The statute and regulations provide that final party comments “containing new factual information shall be

disregarded.” See 19 U.S.C. §1677m(g); 19 C.F.R. § 207.30(b). New factual information is contained in footnote 6

of page 9 of Berwick Offray’s final comments and in exhibit 1 (in its entirety) of the Ribbon Retailers’ final

comments. We disregard this new factual information in making our final determination in these investigations.

 3

 CR at I-3; CR/PR at Table III-1. ***. CR/PR at Table III-1.

 4

 CR at III-1; CR/PR at Table III-1.

 5

 CR at III-1 to III-2.

3
Ltd. (“King Young”), Roung Shu Industry Corporation (“Roung Shu”), and Shienq Huong Enterprise

Co., Ltd. (“Shienq Huong”) (collectively, the “Taiwan Respondents”) participated in the hearing and filed

prehearing and posthearing briefs and final comments. 

Data on the domestic industry are based on questionnaire responses of four domestic producers

that accounted for all known U.S. production during the period examined.6

 U.S. imports are based on

responses to the Commission’s U.S. importer questionnaires by 52 U.S. importers, believed to account for

the vast majority of imports of narrow woven ribbons from subject sources.7

 Information on the

industries in China and Taiwan is based on questionnaire responses from 11 foreign producers and

exporters.8

II. DOMESTIC LIKE PRODUCT

A. In General

In determining whether an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with

material injury by reason of imports of the subject merchandise, the Commission first defines the

“domestic like product” and the “industry.”9

 Section 771(4)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended

(“the Tariff Act”), defines the relevant domestic industry as the “producers as a whole of a domestic like

product, or those producers whose collective output of a domestic like product constitutes a major

proportion of the total domestic production of the product.”10 In turn, the Tariff Act defines “domestic

like product” as “a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses

with, the article subject to an investigation ... .”11

The decision regarding the appropriate domestic like product(s) in an investigation is a factual

determination, and the Commission has applied the statutory standard of “like” or “most similar in

characteristics and uses” on a case-by-case basis.12 No single factor is dispositive, and the Commission

may consider other factors it deems relevant based on the facts of a particular investigation.13 The

 6 CR at I-3; PR at I-3; CR/PR at Table III-1.

 7

 CR at I-3 and IV-1; PR at I-3 and IV-1.

 8

 CR at I-3; PR at I-3. Data from responding producers in China appear to account for between *** percent of

U.S. importers’ U.S. imports from China. CR at VII-4, n.11; PR at VII-3, n.11. Data from responding producers in

Taiwan appear to account for between 47 and 55 percent of U.S. importers’ subject U.S. imports from Taiwan. CR

at VII-5, n.18; PR at VII-4, n.18.

 9

 19 U.S.C. § 1677(4)(A).

 10 19 U.S.C. § 1677(4)(A).

 11 19 U.S.C. § 1677(10).

 12 See, e.g., Cleo, Inc. v. United States, 501 F.3d 1291, 1299 (Fed. Cir. 2007); NEC Corp. v. Department of

Commerce, 36 F. Supp.2d 380, 383 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1998); Nippon Steel Corp. v. United States, 19 CIT 450, 455

(1995); Torrington Co. v. United States, 747 F. Supp. 744, 749 n.3 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1990), aff’d, 938 F.2d 1278 (Fed.

Cir. 1991) (“every like product determination ‘must be made on the particular record at issue’ and the ‘unique facts

of each case’”). The Commission generally considers a number of factors including the following: (1) physical

characteristics and uses; (2) interchangeability; (3) channels of distribution; (4) customer and producer perceptions

of the products; (5) common manufacturing facilities, production processes, and production employees; and, where

appropriate, (6) price. See Nippon, 19 CIT at 455 n.4; Timken Co. v. United States, 913 F. Supp. 580, 584 (Ct. Int’l

Trade 1996).

 13 See, e.g., S. Rep. No. 96-249 at 90-91 (1979).

4
Commission looks for clear dividing lines among possible like products and disregards minor variations.14

Although the Commission must accept the determination of the U.S. Department of Commerce

(“Commerce”) as to the scope of the imported merchandise subsidized or sold at LTFV,15 the Commission

determines what domestic product is like the imported articles Commerce has identified.16

B. Product Description

In its final determinations, the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce’s”) defined the

imported merchandise within the scope of these investigations as follows:

narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge, in any length, but with a width (measured at the

narrowest span of the ribbon) less than or equal to 12 centimeters, composed of, in whole or in

part, man-made fibers (whether artificial or synthetic, including but not limited to nylon,

polyester, rayon, polypropylene, and polyethylene teraphthalate), metal threads and/or metalized

yarns, or any combination thereof.17 Narrow woven ribbons subject to {these investigations}

 14 Nippon, 19 CIT at 455; Torrington, 747 F. Supp. at 748-49; see also S. Rep. No. 96-249 at 90-91 (1979)

(Congress has indicated that the like product standard should not be interpreted in “such a narrow fashion as to

permit minor differences in physical characteristics or uses to lead to the conclusion that the product and article are

not ‘like’ each other, nor should the definition of ‘like product’ be interpreted in such a fashion as to prevent

consideration of an industry adversely affected by the imports under consideration.”).

 15 See, e.g., USEC, Inc. v. United States, 34 Fed. Appx. 725, 730 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (“The ITC may not modify the

class or kind of imported merchandise examined by Commerce.”); Algoma Steel Corp. v. United States, 688 F.

Supp. 639, 644 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1988), aff’d, 865 F.3d 240 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 919 (1989).

 16 Hosiden Corp. v. Advanced Display Mfrs., 85 F.3d 1561, 1568 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (Commission may find a single

like product corresponding to several different classes or kinds defined by Commerce); Cleo, 501 F.3d at 1298 n.1

(“Commerce’s {scope} finding does not control the Commission’s {like product} determination.”); Torrington, 747

F. Supp. at 748-52 (affirming Commission determination of six like products in investigations where Commerce

found five classes or kinds).

 17 Narrow woven ribbons subject to these investigations may:

* also include natural or other non-man-made fibers;

* be of any color, style, pattern, or weave construction, including but not limited to single-faced

satin, double-faced satin, grosgrain, sheer, taffeta, twill, jacquard, or a combination of two or more

colors, styles, patterns and/or weave constructions;

* have been subjected to, or composed of materials that have been subjected to, various treatments,

including but not limited to dyeing, printing, foil stamping, embossing, flocking, coating and/or

sizing;

* have embellishments, including but not limited to appliqué, fringes, embroidery, buttons, glitter,

sequins, laminates, and/or adhesive backing;

* have wire and/or monofilament in, on, or along the longitudinal edges of the ribbon;

* have ends of any shape or dimension, including but not limited to straight ends that are

perpendicular to the longitudinal edges of the ribbon, tapered ends, flared ends or shaped ends, and

the ends of such woven ribbons may or may not be hemmed;

* have longitudinal edges that are straight or of any shape, and the longitudinal edges of such woven

ribbon may or may not be parallel to each other;

* consist of such ribbons adhered to the like ribbon and/or cut-edge woven ribbon, a configuration

also known as an “ornamental trimming;”

* be wound on spools; attached to a card; hanked (i.e., coiled or bundled); packaged in boxes, trays

or bags; or configured as skeins, balls, bateaus or folds; and/or

* be included within a kit or set such as when packaged with other products, including but not

(continued...)

5
include all narrow woven fabrics, tapes, and labels that fall within this written description of the

scope of these investigations.18

Narrow woven ribbons are fabrics with widths equal to or less than 12 centimeters that typically

are used to adorn or embellish apparel, footwear, home furnishings, crafts, or floral arrangements. They

may also be used for functional reasons such as to create hair bows and sashes and to wrap packages.19

Because they are constructed with a durable woven selvedge (or longitudinal edge) and are colorfast by

nature of their fiber content and dyeing process, narrow woven ribbons do not fray easily and are

washable. Consequently, they are often used in apparel and keepsake items such as scrapbooks.20 They

are available in a variety of designs, widths, colors, and patterns.21

 17 (...continued)

limited to gift bags, gift boxes and/or other types of ribbon.

CR at I-6 to I-7; 75 Fed. Reg. 41808 (July 19, 2010) (China antidumping investigation ); 75 Fed. Reg. 41801

(July19, 2010) (China countervailing duty investigation); and 75 Fed. Reg. 41804 (July 19, 2010) (Taiwan

antidumping investigation).

 18 Excluded from the scope of this investigation are the following: (1) formed bows composed of narrow woven

ribbons with woven selvedge; (2) “pull bows” (i.e., an assemblage of ribbons connected to one another, folded flat

and equipped with a means to form such ribbons into the shape of a bow by pulling on a length of material affixed to

such assemblage) composed of woven ribbons; (3) narrow woven ribbons comprised at least 20 percent by weight of

elastomeric yarn (i.e., filament yarn, including monofilament, of synthetic textile material, other than textured yarn,

which does not break on being extended to three times its original length and which returns, after being extended to

twice its original length, within a period of five minutes, to a length not greater than one and a half times its original

length as defined in the HTSUS, Section XI, Note 13) or rubber thread; (4) narrow woven ribbons of a kind used for

the manufacture of typewriter or printer ribbons; (5) narrow woven labels and apparel tapes, cut-to-length or cut-toshape, having a length (when measured across the longest edge-to-edge span) not exceeding 8 centimeters;

(6) narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge attached to and forming the handle of a gift bag; (7) cut-edge narrow

woven ribbons formed by cutting broad woven fabric into strips of ribbon, with or without treatments to prevent the

longitudinal edges of the ribbon from fraying (such as by merrowing, lamination, sono-bonding, fusing, gumming, or

waxing), and with or without wire running lengthwise along the longitudinal edges of the ribbon; (8) narrow woven

ribbons comprised of at least 85 percent by weight of threads having a denier of 225 or higher; (9) narrow woven

ribbons constructed from pile fabrics (i.e., fabrics with a surface effect formed by tufts or loops of yarn that stand up

from the body of the fabric); (10) narrow woven ribbon affixed (including by tying) as a decorative detail to nonsubject merchandise, such as a gift bag, gift box, gift tin, greeting card or plush toy, or affixed (including by tying)

as a decorative detail to packaging containing non-subject merchandise; (11) narrow woven ribbon affixed to nonsubject merchandise as a working component of such non-subject merchandise, such as where narrow woven ribbon

comprises an apparel trimming book marker, bag cinch, or part of an identity card holder; and (12) narrow woven

ribbon(s) comprising a belt attached to and imported with an item of wearing apparel, whether or not such belt is

removable from such item of wearing apparel; (13) narrow woven ribbon(s) included with non-subject merchandise

in kits, such as a holiday ornament craft kit or a scrapbook kit, in which the individual lengths of narrow woven

ribbon(s) included in the kit are each no greater than eight inches, the aggregate amount of narrow woven ribbon(s)

included in the kit does not exceed 48 linear inches, none of the narrow woven ribbon(s) included in the kit is on a

spool, and the narrow woven ribbon(s) is only one of multiple items included in the kit. CR at I-7 to I-8; 75 Fed.

Reg. 41808 (July 19, 2010) (China antidumping investigation ); 75 Fed. Reg. 41801 (July19, 2010) (China

countervailing duty investigation); and 75 Fed. Reg. 41804 (July 19, 2010) (Taiwan antidumping investigation).

 19 See, e.g., CR at I-8; PR at I-7.

 20 See, e.g., CR at I-8; PR at I-7.

 21 See, e.g., CR at I-8; PR at I-7.

6
C. Domestic Like Product

In the preliminary phase of these investigations, the Commission considered expanding the

domestic like product to include cut-edge ribbons. The Commission found, however, that narrow woven

ribbon and cut-edge ribbon have different physical characteristics resulting from distinct manufacturing

processes for each product, limited interchangeability, general differences in channels of distribution, lack

of fungibility in production facilities and employees used in production, and differences in price.22

Accordingly, in the preliminary phase of these investigations, the Commission defined a single domestic

like product coextensive with the scope consisting of narrow woven ribbons other than cut-edge ribbons.23

The record concerning criteria that the Commission examines in defining the domestic like

product has not changed materially since the preliminary determinations.24 Accordingly, based on the

facts on the record in the final phase of these investigations, in the absence of contrary arguments, and for

the same reasons as in the preliminary determinations, we find a single domestic like product, coextensive

with Commerce’s scope. 

III. DOMESTIC INDUSTRY

The domestic industry is defined as the domestic “producers as a whole of a domestic like

product, or those producers whose collective output of a domestic like product constitutes a major

proportion of the total domestic production of the product.”25 In defining the domestic industry, the

Commission’s general practice has been to include in the industry producers of all domestic production of

the like product, whether toll-produced, captively consumed, or sold in the domestic merchant market.

Based on our definition of the domestic like product, we define a single domestic industry consisting of

all domestic producers of narrow woven ribbons.26

 22 See Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge from China and Taiwan, Inv. Nos. 701-TA-467 and 731-

TA-1164-1165 (Prelim.), USITC Pub. 4099, at 10 (August 2009) (“USITC Pub. 4099”).

 23 USITC Pub. 4099 at 10.

 24 See generally CR at I-17; PR at I-12.

 25 19 U.S.C. § 1677(4)(A).

 26 In the preliminary phase of these investigations, the Commission considered whether Berwick Offray engaged

in sufficient production-related activities to qualify as a domestic producer with respect to narrow woven ribbons

that it weaves and dyes in the United States, but transfer prints and/or spools in its facility in Mexico. The

Commission concluded that Berwick Offray’s finishing operations in Mexico are relatively limited, involving mostly

just packaging and, in limited circumstances, transfer printing the narrow woven ribbons, and treated such narrow

woven ribbons that Berwick Offray sells in the U.S. market as U.S. shipments of the domestic like product. In the

final phase of these investigations, no new evidence has come to light and no party disagreed with the determination

in the preliminary phase on this issue. Therefore, based on the record in the final phase of these investigations, we

treat U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbon that Berwick Offray spools and/or transfer prints in Mexico as U.S.

shipments of the domestic like product. 

7
A. Related Parties

We must determine whether any producer of the domestic like product should be excluded from

the domestic industry pursuant to section 19 U.S.C. § 1677(4)(B). Subsection 1677(4)(B) allows the

Commission, if appropriate circumstances exist, to exclude from the domestic industry producers that are

related to an exporter or importer of subject merchandise or which are themselves importers.27 Exclusion

of such a producer is within the Commission’s discretion based upon the facts presented in each

investigation.28

In the preliminary phase of these investigations, we found that two domestic producers, Berwick

Offray and Lawrence Schiff, qualified as related parties, but concluded that appropriate circumstances did

not exist to exclude any related party from the domestic industry.29 In the final phase of these

investigations, we again determine that appropriate circumstances do not exist to exclude any related

party from the domestic industry. 

Berwick Offray qualifies as a related party because it was an importer of subject merchandise

from ***.30 The company is the sole petitioner. Berwick Offray is the largest known producer of narrow

woven ribbons in the United States, accounting for *** percent of reported U.S. production in the period

examined.31 Its imports of the subject merchandise from China were equivalent to *** percent of its

domestic production in 2007, *** percent in 2008, and *** percent in 2009.32 Its imports of the subject

merchandise from Taiwan were equivalent to *** percent of its domestic production in 2007, *** percent

in 2008, and *** percent in 2009.33 According to testimony at the hearing, the bulk of Berwick Offray’s

 27 19 U.S.C. § 1677(4)(B).

 28 The primary factors the Commission has examined in deciding whether appropriate circumstances exist to

exclude a related party are as follows: (1) the percentage of domestic production attributable to the importing

producer; (2) the reason the U.S. producer has decided to import the product subject to investigation, i.e., whether

the firm benefits from the LTFV sales or subsidies or whether the firm must import in order to enable it to continue

production and compete in the U.S. market, and (3) the position of the related producer vis-a-vis the rest of the

industry, i.e., whether inclusion or exclusion of the related party will skew the data for the rest of the industry. See,

e.g., Torrington Co. v. United States, 790 F. Supp. 1161 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1992), aff’d mem., 991 F.2d 809 (Fed. Cir.

1993). The Commission has also considered the ratio of import shipments to U.S. production for related producers

and whether the primary interest of the related producer lies in domestic production or importation. These latter two

considerations were cited as appropriate factors in Allied Mineral Products, Inc. v. United States, 28 CIT 1861, 1864

(2004) (“The most significant factor considered by the Commission in making the ‘appropriate circumstances’

determination is whether the domestic producer accrued a substantial benefit from its importation of the subject

merchandise.”); USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 12 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2001) (“the provision’s purpose

is to exclude from the industry headcount domestic producers substantially benefitting from their relationships with

foreign exporters.”), aff’d, 34 Fed. Appx. 725 (Fed. Cir. April 22, 2002); S. Rep. No. 249, 96th Cong. 1st Sess. at 83

(1979) (“where a U.S. producer is related to a foreign exporter and the foreign exporter directs his exports to the

United States so as not to compete with his related U.S. producer, this should be a case where the ITC would not

consider the related U.S. producer to be a part of the domestic industry”).

 29 USITC Pub. 4099 at 15. The Commission did not consider whether to exclude *** from the domestic industry

in the preliminary phase of these investigations because only *** provided useable data. See USITC Pub. 4099 at

13.

 30 CR/PR at Table III-6.

 31 CR/PR at Table III-1.

 32 CR/PR at Table III-6. The data in Table III-6 do not include Berwick Offray’s facilitated imports. See CR/PR

at Table E-1 for Berwick Offray’s reported facilitated imports from China.

 33 CR/PR at Table III-6. The data in Table III-6 do not include Berwick Offray’s facilitated imports. See CR/PR

at Table E-2 for Berwick Offray’s reported facilitated imports from Taiwan. Berwick Offray’s reported net sales of

(continued...)

8
imported products are from China and Taiwan.34 Berwick Offray also facilitated subject imports during

the period examined, although such imports constitute a small volume.35 Berwick Offray *** and, in

some cases, began to produce domestically (or to again produce domestically) certain narrow woven

ribbon products that they had been importing from China and/or Taiwan.36 Thus, Berwick Offray’s

primary interest appears to lie in the domestic production of narrow woven ribbons rather than

importation.

It appears that Berwick Offray derives some benefit from its importation of the subject

merchandise.37 38 While the ratio of operating income to net sales of the overall industry declined from

*** percent in 2007 and 2008 to *** percent in 2009,39 the ratio of operating income to net sales reported

by Berwick Offray was *** than the other three domestic producers during the period for which data were

collected.40 41 

As in the preliminary phase of these investigations, we again find that appropriate circumstances

do not exist to exclude Berwick Offray from the domestic industry as a related party in our final

 33 (...continued)

subject imports were $*** in fiscal year 2008 and $*** in fiscal year 2009. Petitioner’s Posthearing Br., Responses

To Questions Raised At The Hearing, at Exhibit 1A, question 5. Its reported net sales of facilitated imports were

$*** in fiscal year 2008 and $*** in fiscal year 2009. Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at Exhibit 1A, Responses To

Questions Raised At The Hearing, Exhibit 1A, at question 6.

 34 Hearing Tr. at 107 (Sorenson). Although Berwick Offray’s imports of subject merchandise and its facilitated

imports collectively are ***, it reported engaging in these activities to stay competitive with low-priced subject

imports. See CR at III-12; PR at III-5.

 35 Hearing Tr. at 104-105 (Sorenson, Pajic), 114 (Sorenson). Facilitation is defined as any activity designed to, or

having the effect of, helping to bring about either the import of narrow woven ribbons into the United States or the

export of narrow woven ribbons to the United States. Such activities include, but are not limited to, promoting,

advertising, negotiating contracts, arranging sales, brokering transactions, invoicing, financing, guaranteeing,

collaborating, providing quality control or performing other types of logistical or administrative support or

assistance. CR at IV-7, n.10; PR at IV-3, n.10. Berwick Offray’s reported facilitated imports from subject sources

in China were equivalent to *** percent of U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbons over the period

examined. Berwick Offray’s facilitated imports from subject sources in Taiwan were equivalent to *** percent of

U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbons over the period examined. See CR/PR at Table E-1 and

Table III-6 (calculations from data presented in these tables). ***. CR/PR at E-3.

 36 Petitioner’s Prehearing Br. at 6; Hearing Tr. at 12 (Dorris), 50 (Sorenson). Berwick Offray reported that it has

switched *** narrow woven ribbon products from subject imports to domestic manufacture (*** in calendar year

2009 and *** in calendar year 2010).

 37 Consistent with her practice in past investigations and reviews, Commissioner Aranoff does not rely on

individual-company operating income margins, which reflect a domestic producer’s financial operations related to

production of the domestic like product, in assessing whether a related party has benefitted from importation of

subject merchandise. Rather, she determines whether to exclude a related party based principally on its ratio of

subject imports to domestic production and whether its primary interests lie in domestic production or importation. 

 38 Commissioner Pinkert does not rely upon companies’ financial performance as a factor in determining whether

there are appropriate circumstances to exclude them from the domestic industry. The record is not sufficient to infer

from the companies’ profitability on U.S. operations whether they have derived a specific benefit from importing. 

See Allied Mineral Products v. United States, 28 C.I.T. 1861, 1865-1867 (2004).

 39 CR/PR at Table C-1. 

 40 CR/PR at Table VI-2.

 41 In addition, Berwick Offray reported *** overall operating income. CR/PR at Table VI-2. While Berwick

Offray reported *** per-unit COGS than ***, Berwick Offray’s reported per-unit SG&A expenses were *** than

SG&A expenses as reported by ***, *** reported *** and *** reported *** in 2008 and 2009. CR at VI-4; PR at

VI-2. 

9
determinations. Berwick Offray is the largest U.S. producer and the sole petitioner, its primary interest

appears to be in domestic production rather than importation, no party argued for its exclusion, and

exclusion of its data would skew the data on the domestic industry.

Lawrence Schiff also qualifies as a related party because it was an importer of subject

merchandise from *** and also facilitated imports from subject countries.42 The company ***, although

it is not a petitioner.43 The company accounted for *** percent of reported U.S. production during the

period examined.44 Its imports of the subject merchandise ***.45 The level of Lawrence Schiff’s subject

imports on an absolute basis ***. While it is unclear whether Lawrence Schiff benefitted from its imports

of subject merchandise, its primary interest appears to be in domestic production rather than importation. 

The company ***,46 and any benefit that it derived from importing the subject merchandise is unlikely to

skew the data for the industry overall. For all of these reasons, as in the preliminary phase of these

investigations, we again find that appropriate circumstances do not exist to exclude Lawrence Schiff from

the domestic industry as a related party.

*** qualifies as a related party because it was an importer of subject merchandise from ***

during the period examined.47 The company *** the petitions.48 *** accounts for *** percent of reported

U.S. production during the period examined.49 Its imports of the subject merchandise from *** were

equivalent to *** percent of its domestic production in 2008 and *** percent in 2009; it ***.50 ***.51

*** does not appear to have derived a significant benefit from its importation of the subject

merchandise during the period examined. *** reported *** for the period examined.52 Moreover, it

reported *** in each year of the period examined and reported the largest *** as a ratio to net sales of the

reporting firms.53

The level of *** subject imports ***. Because it represents ***, its data are unlikely to skew the

data for the industry overall. Furthermore, *** did not appear to derive any benefit from importing the

subject merchandise. For all of these reasons, we do not find that appropriate circumstances exist to

exclude *** from the domestic industry as a related party. 

 42 CR/PR at Table III-6.

 43 CR/PR at Table III-1.

 44 CR/PR at Table III-1.

 45 CR/PR at Table III-6. The data in Table III-6 do not include Lawrence Schiff’s facilitated imports. 

 46 Lawrence Schiff’s reported reason for importing subject merchandise is that ***. See CR at III-12; PR at III-5. 

 47 CR/PR at Table III-6. In the preliminary phase of these investigations, the issue of whether to exclude ***

from the domestic industry was moot because the company did not submit useable data in response to the

Commission’s questionnaires. See USITC Pub. 4099 at 13.

 48 CR/PR at Table III-1.

 49 CR/PR at Table III-1.

 50 CR/PR at Table III-6. *** stated reason for importing subject merchandise is ***. See CR at III-12; PR at III5.

 51 CR at III-2. ***. CR at VI-4 to VI-5; PR at VI-2.

 52 CR/PR at Table VI-2.

 53 CR/PR at Table VI-2; CR at VI-4; PR at VI-2. *** also reported *** per-unit COGS *** of the reporting

domestic producers, and its reported per-unit SG&A expenses were ***. CR/PR at Table VI-2.

10
IV. CUMULATION54

A. Legal Framework

For purposes of evaluating the volume and price effects for a determination of material injury by

reason of the subject imports, section 771(7)(G)(i) of the Tariff Act requires the Commission to cumulate

subject imports from all countries as to which petitions were filed and/or investigations self-initiated by

Commerce on the same day, if such imports compete with each other and with domestic like products in

the U.S. market and no statutory exceptions apply.55 The statutory threshold for cumulation is satisfied in

these investigations because the petitions with respect to China and Taiwan were filed on the same day,

July 9, 2009.56

In assessing whether subject imports compete with each other and with the domestic like product,

the Commission has generally considered four factors:

(1) the degree of fungibility between the subject imports from different countries and

between imports and the domestic like product, including consideration of specific

customer requirements and other quality related questions;

(2) the presence of sales or offers to sell in the same geographic markets of subject

imports from different countries and the domestic like product;

(3) the existence of common or similar channels of distribution for subject imports

from different countries and the domestic like product; and

(4) whether the subject imports are simultaneously present in the market.57 58

While no single factor is necessarily determinative, and the list of factors is not exclusive, these factors

are intended to provide the Commission with a framework for determining whether the subject imports

compete with each other and with the domestic like product.59 Only a “reasonable overlap” of

competition is required.60

 54 Negligibility under 19 U.S.C. § 1677(24) is not an issue in these investigations, and no party made any

arguments concerning this issue. Calculated from proprietary Customs data for imports, subject imports from China

accounted for *** percent of total U.S. imports of narrow woven ribbons, by value, for the period July 2008 to June

2009, the most recent 12-month period preceding the filing of the petition for which data are available, whereas

subject imports from Taiwan accounted for 34.0 percent of such imports. Thus, subject imports of narrow woven

ribbons from China and Taiwan as a share of total imports of narrow woven ribbons into the United States clearly

exceeded the statute’s three percent negligibility level. Therefore, we do not find that the volume of subject imports

from either China or Taiwan is negligible. CR at IV-9; PR at IV-4.

 55 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(G)(i).

 56 CR at I-1; PR at I-1. None of the statutory exceptions to cumulation is applicable.

 57 See Certain Cast-Iron Pipe Fittings from Brazil, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan, Inv. Nos. 731-TA-278-280

(Final), USITC Pub. 1845 (May 1986), aff'd, Fundicao Tupy, S.A. v. United States, 678 F. Supp. 898 (Ct. Int'l

Trade), aff'd, 859 F.2d 915 (Fed. Cir. 1988).

 58 Commissioner Lane notes with respect to the first factor that her analysis does not require such similarity of

products that a perfectly symmetrical fungibility is required. See Separate Views of Commissioner Charlotte R.

Lane, Certain Lightweight Thermal Paper from China, Germany, and Korea, Inv. Nos. 701-TA-451 and 731-TA1126-1128 (Preliminary), USITC Pub. 3964 (Nov. 2007).

 59 See, e.g., Wieland Werke, AG v. United States, 718 F. Supp. 50 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1989).

 60 The Uruguay Round Agreements Act, Statement of Administrative Action, H.R. Doc. No. 103-316, Vol. 1 at

848 (1994) (“SAA”) expressly states that “the new section will not affect current Commission practice under which

the statutory requirement is satisfied if there is a reasonable overlap of competition.” SAA at 848 (citing Fundicao

Tupy, S.A. v. United States, 678 F. Supp. 898, 902 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1988)), aff’d, 859 F.2d 915 (Fed. Cir. 1988). See

(continued...)

11
In the preliminary phase of these investigations, the Commission found a reasonable overlap of

competition between subject imports from China and Taiwan, and the domestic like product, and among

the imports themselves.61 The Commission thus analyzed subject imports on a cumulated basis.62

In the final phase of these investigations, petitioner argues that the Commission should again

consider subject imports from China and Taiwan on a cumulated basis because, in their view, there is a

reasonable overlap of competition between subject imports from both countries and the domestic like

product based on the four factors the Commission considers in analyzing the issue.63 No other party

argued against cumulation of subject imports from China and Taiwan for purposes of our present material

injury analysis.

B. Analysis

Based on the four traditional factors which the Commission considers in analyzing cumulation,

we find that there is a reasonable overlap of competition. 

Fungibility. Most narrow woven ribbons are made primarily of polyester fibers regardless of the

source (domestically produced or imported).64 There were domestic shipments and imports from each of

the subject countries in each of the identified categories.65

The questionnaire responses also indicate that market participants perceive narrow woven ribbons

from various sources to be interchangeable. All reporting U.S. producers and a majority of importers that

compared narrow woven ribbons from China and Taiwan with those from the United States reported that

they are always or frequently interchangeable.66 When asked to compare imports of subject merchandise

from China with subject imports from Taiwan, all reporting U.S. producers and 19 of 22 responding

importers reported that they are “always” or “frequently” interchangeable with one another.67

Channels of Distribution. During the period examined, the domestic like product and the imports

from each subject country were sold in overlapping channels of distribution, to wholesalers/distributors,

industrial end users, and retailers.68 The *** of the domestic industry’s sales were to retailers throughout

the period examined, but a *** of U.S. producers’ shipments were also to industrial end users.69 The ***

(...continued)

Goss Graphic Sys., Inc. v. United States, 33 F. Supp. 2d 1082,1087 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1998) (“cumulation does not

require two products to be highly fungible”); Wieland Werke, AG, 718 F. Supp. at 52 (“Completely overlapping

markets are not required.”).

 61 USITC Pub. 4099 at 17-18.

 62 USITC Pub. 4099 at 18.

 63 See Petitioner’s Prehearing Br. at 7-8; Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at 2, n.1.

 64 CR at IV-15; PR at IV-6. Imported narrow woven ribbon from both subject and non-subject sources, however,

have greater shares of predominantly nylon content than do domestically produced narrow woven ribbons. CR at

IV-15; PR at IV-6.

 65 CR/PR at Table IV-8.

 66 CR at II-20; PR at II-14; CR/PR at Table II-4.

 67 CR/PR at Table II-4. Indeed, ***. CR at V-7, n.12; PR at V-4 to V-5, n.12.

 68 The term “industrial end users” includes entities that use narrow woven ribbons in the production or assembly

of any other product, including floral arrangements assembled by the wholesale or retail floral industry, apparel,

packaging of another product (such as a confectionary item), and in-store gift packaging. CR at II-3, n.12; PR at II2, n.12.

 69 CR at II-3; PR at II-2; CR/PR at Table II-1. In 2007, domestic producers’ U.S. shipments to *** were ***

percent, shipments to *** were *** percent, and shipments to *** were *** percent. In 2008, domestic producers’

(continued...)

12
of U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of subject imports from China were also to retailers in 2007, 2008, and

2009, followed by ***.70 While the majority of subject imports from Taiwan were sold to final

consumers,71 nearly half of subject imports from Taiwan were to retailers, ***.72 ***.73

Geographic Overlap. Domestically produced and imported narrow woven ribbons are sold

throughout the United States.74 When asked to list the geographic regions of the United States where they

sell narrow woven ribbons, *** of the producers and *** of the importers reported that they served a

nationwide market.75 Consequently, there was geographic overlap of the domestic like product and the

subject imports.

Simultaneous Presence in Market. Customs data and pricing product data show that imports from

China and Taiwan, like the domestic like product, were sold in the U.S. market throughout the period of

investigation.76

For the reasons explained above, we therefore find that a reasonable overlap of competition exists

among the subject imports and between subject imports and the domestic like product. Consequently, we

cumulate subject imports from China and Taiwan for the purpose of analyzing whether the domestic

industry is materially injured by reason of the subject imports.

 69 (...continued)

U.S. shipments to *** were *** percent, shipments to *** were *** percent, and shipments to *** were *** percent. 

In 2009, domestic producers’ U.S. shipments to *** were *** percent, shipments to *** were *** percent, and

shipments to *** were *** percent. CR/PR at Table II-1.

 70 CR at II-3; PR at II-2; CR/PR at Table II-1. In 2007, U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of subject imports from

China to *** were *** percent, shipments to *** were *** percent, shipments to *** were *** percent, and

shipments to *** were *** percent. In 2008, U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of subject imports from China to ***

were *** percent, shipments to *** were *** percent, shipments to *** were *** percent, and shipments to ***

were *** percent. In 2009, U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of subject imports from China to *** were *** percent,

shipments to *** were *** percent, shipments to *** were *** percent, and shipments to *** were *** percent. 

CR/PR at Table II-1

 71 Final consumers are individuals that purchase narrow woven ribbons at retail entities. “Shipments to final

consumers” are direct imports by retailers *** that they distribute to their retail establishments for sale. See CR at

II-3, n.13; PR at II-2, n.13.

 72 CR at II-3; PR at II-2. In 2007, U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of subject imports from Taiwan to *** were

*** percent, shipments to *** were *** percent, shipments to *** were *** percent, and shipments to *** were ***

percent. In 2008, U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of subject imports from Taiwan to *** were *** percent,

shipments to *** were *** percent, shipments to *** were *** percent, and shipments to *** were *** percent. In

2009, U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of subject imports from Taiwan to *** were *** percent, shipments to ***

were *** percent, shipments to *** were *** percent, and shipments to *** were *** percent. CR/PR at Table II-1. 

“Final consumers” of subject imports from Taiwan are the purchasers of narrow woven ribbons that have been

directly imported by retailers, ***. See CR at II-3, n.13; PR at II-3, n.13. Petitioner notes that the largest such

retailers purchase both domestically produced narrow woven ribbons and subject imports. Petitioner’s Prehearing

Br. at 8.

 73 CR/PR at Table II-1. ***. CR at II-3, n.12; II-3, n.12. Producers and importers reported shipments as

“shipments to retailers” when shipments were sold to retailers such as ***, while retailers reported shipments as

“shipments to final consumers” if they imported the products directly. Accordingly, “shipments to final consumers”

for purposes of this analysis are also shipments to retailers.

 74 CR at II-3 and IV-16; PR at II-2 and IV-16; CR/PR at Table IV-9.

 75 CR at II-3; PR at II-2.

 76 CR at IV-17 to IV-18; PR at IV-7 to IV-8; CR/PR at Tables V-1 through V-6.

13
V. NO MATERIAL INJURY BY REASON OF CUMULATED SUBJECT IMPORTS

A. Legal Standards

In the final phase of antidumping and countervailing duty investigations, the Commission

determines whether an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material

injury by reason of the imports under investigation.77 In making this determination, the Commission must

consider the volume of subject imports, their effect on prices for the domestic like product, and their

impact on domestic producers of the domestic like product, but only in the context of U.S. production

operations.78 The statute defines “material injury” as “harm which is not inconsequential, immaterial, or

unimportant.”79 In assessing whether the domestic industry is materially injured by reason of subject

imports, we consider all relevant economic factors that bear on the state of the industry in the United

States.80 No single factor is dispositive, and all relevant factors are considered “within the context of the

business cycle and conditions of competition that are distinctive to the affected industry.”81

Although the statute requires the Commission to determine whether the domestic industry is

“materially injured by reason of” unfairly traded imports,82 it does not define the phrase “by reason of,”

indicating that this aspect of the injury analysis is left to the Commission’s reasonable exercise of its

discretion.83 In identifying a causal link, if any, between subject imports and material injury to the

domestic industry, the Commission examines the facts of record that relate to the significance of the

volume and price effects of the subject imports and any impact of those imports on the condition of the

domestic industry. This evaluation under the “by reason of” standard must ensure that subject imports are

more than a minimal or tangential cause of injury and that there is a sufficient causal, not merely a

temporal, nexus between subject imports and material injury.84

In many investigations, there are other economic factors at work, some or all of which may also

be having adverse effects on the domestic industry. Such economic factors might include non-subject

imports; changes in technology, demand, or consumer tastes; competition among domestic producers; or

management decisions by domestic producers. The legislative history explains that the Commission must

examine factors other than subject imports to ensure that it is not attributing injury from other factors to

 77 19 U.S.C. §§ 1671d(b), 1673d(b).

 78 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(B)( i). The Commission “may consider such other economic factors as are relevant to the

determination” but shall “identify each {such} factor ... and explain in full its relevance to the determination.” 

19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(B).

 79 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(A).

 80 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(iii).

 81 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(iii).

 82 19 U.S.C. §§ 1671d(a), 1673d(a).

 83 Angus Chemical Co. v. United States, 140 F.3d 1478, 1484-85 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (“{T}he statute does not

‘compel the commissioners’ to employ {a particular methodology}.”), aff’g 944 F. Supp. 943, 951 (Ct. Int’l Trade

1996).

 84 The Federal Circuit, in addressing the causation standard of the statute, observed that “{a}s long as its effects

are not merely incidental, tangential, or trivial, the foreign product sold at less than fair value meets the causation

requirement.” Nippon Steel Corp. v. USITC, 345 F.3d 1379, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2003). This was further ratified in

Mittal Steel Point Lisas Ltd. v. United States, 542 F.3d 867, 873 (Fed. Cir. 2008), where the Federal Circuit, quoting

Gerald Metals, Inc. v. United States, 132 F.3d 716, 722 (Fed. Cir. 1997), stated that “this court requires evidence in

the record ‘to show that the harm occurred “by reason of” the LTFV imports, not by reason of a minimal or

tangential contribution to material harm caused by LTFV goods.’” See also Nippon Steel Corp. v. United States,

458 F.3d 1345, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2006); Taiwan Semiconductor Industry Ass’n v. USITC, 266 F.3d 1339, 1345 (Fed.

Cir. 2001).

14
the subject imports, thereby inflating an otherwise tangential cause of injury into one that satisfies the

statutory material injury threshold.85 In performing its examination, however, the Commission need not

isolate the injury caused by other factors from injury caused by unfairly traded imports.86 Nor does the

“by reason of” standard require that unfairly traded imports be the “principal” cause of injury or

contemplate that injury from unfairly traded imports be weighed against other factors, such as non-subject

imports, which may be contributing to overall injury to an industry.87 It is clear that the existence of

injury caused by other factors does not compel a negative determination.88

Assessment of whether material injury to the domestic industry is “by reason of” subject imports

“does not require the Commission to address the causation issue in any particular way” as long as “the

injury to the domestic industry can reasonably be attributed to the subject imports” and the Commission

“ensure{s} that it is not attributing injury from other sources to the subject imports.”89 90 Indeed, the

 85 Statement of Administrative Action (“SAA”) on Uruguay Round Agreements Act (“URAA”), H.R. Rep. 103-

316, Vol. I at 851-52 (1994) (“{T}he Commission must examine other factors to ensure that it is not attributing

injury from other sources to the subject imports.”); S. Rep. 96-249 at 75 (1979) (the Commission “will consider

information which indicates that harm is caused by factors other than less-than-fair-value imports.”); H.R. Rep. 96-

317 at 47 (1979) (“in examining the overall injury being experienced by a domestic industry, the ITC will take into

account evidence presented to it which demonstrates that the harm attributed by the petitioner to the subsidized or

dumped imports is attributable to such other factors;” those factors include “the volume and prices of nonsubsidized

imports or imports sold at fair value, contraction in demand or changes in patterns of consumption, trade restrictive

practices of and competition between the foreign and domestic producers, developments in technology and the

export performance and productivity of the domestic industry”); accord Mittal Steel, 542 F.3d at 877.

 86 SAA at 851-52 (“{T}he Commission need not isolate the injury caused by other factors from injury caused by

unfair imports.”); Taiwan Semiconductor Industry Ass’n v. USITC, 266 F.3d 1339, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (“{T}he

Commission need not isolate the injury caused by other factors from injury caused by unfair imports ... . Rather, the

Commission must examine other factors to ensure that it is not attributing injury from other sources to the subject

imports.” (emphasis in original)); Asociacion de Productores de Salmon y Trucha de Chile AG v. United States, 180

F. Supp. 2d 1360, 1375 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2002) (“{t}he Commission is not required to isolate the effects of subject

imports from other factors contributing to injury” or make “bright-line distinctions” between the effects of subject

imports and other causes.); see also Softwood Lumber from Canada, Invs. Nos. 701-TA-414 and 731-TA-928

(Remand), USITC Pub. 3658 at 100-01 (Dec. 2003) (Commission recognized that “{i}f an alleged other factor is

found not to have or threaten to have injurious effects to the domestic industry, i.e., it is not an ‘other causal factor,’

then there is nothing to further examine regarding attribution to injury”), citing Gerald Metals, Inc. v. United States,

132 F.3d 716, 722 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (the statute “does not suggest that an importer of LTFV goods can escape

countervailing duties by finding some tangential or minor cause unrelated to the LTFV goods that contributed to the

harmful effects on domestic market prices.”).

 87 S. Rep. 96-249 at 74-75; H.R. Rep. 96-317 at 47.

 88 See Nippon Steel Corp., 345 F.3d at 1381 (“an affirmative material-injury determination under the statute

requires no more than a substantial-factor showing. That is, the ‘dumping’ need not be the sole or principal cause of

injury.”).

 89 Mittal Steel, 542 F.3d at 877-78; see also id. at 873 (“While the Commission may not enter an affirmative

determination unless it finds that a domestic industry is materially injured ‘by reason of’ subject imports, the

Commission is not required to follow a single methodology for making that determination ... {and has} broad

discretion with respect to its choice of methodology.”) citing United States Steel Group v. United States, 96 F.3d

1352, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1996) and S. Rep. 96-249 at 75.

 90 Commissioner Pinkert does not join this paragraph or the following three paragraphs. He points out that the

Federal Circuit, in Bratsk, 444 F.3d 1369, and Mittal, held that the Commission is required, in certain circumstances

when considering present material injury, to undertake a particular kind of analysis of non-subject imports, albeit

without reliance upon presumptions or rigid formulas. Mittal explains as follows:

What Bratsk held is that “where commodity products are at issue and fairly traded, price-competitive, non-

(continued...)

15
Federal Circuit has examined and affirmed various Commission methodologies and has disavowed “rigid

adherence to a specific formula.”91

The Federal Circuit’s decisions in Gerald Metals, Bratsk, and Mittal Steel all involved cases

where the relevant “other factor” was the presence in the market of significant volumes of pricecompetitive non-subject imports. The Commission interpreted the Federal Circuit’s guidance in Bratsk as

requiring it to apply a particular additional methodology following its finding of material injury in cases

involving commodity products and a significant market presence of price-competitive non-subject

imports.92 The additional “replacement/benefit” test looked at whether non-subject imports might have

replaced subject imports without any benefit to the U.S. industry. The Commission applied that specific

additional test in subsequent cases, including the Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad

and Tobago determination that underlies the Mittal Steel litigation.

Mittal Steel clarifies that the Commission’s interpretation of Bratsk was too rigid and makes clear

that the Federal Circuit does not require the Commission to apply an additional test nor any one specific

methodology; instead, the court requires the Commission to have “evidence in the record” to “show that

the harm occurred ‘by reason of’ the LTFV imports,” and requires that the Commission not attribute

injury from non-subject imports or other factors to subject imports.93 Accordingly, we do not consider

ourselves required to apply the replacement/benefit test that was included in Commission opinions

subsequent to Bratsk.

The progression of Gerald Metals, Bratsk, and Mittal Steel clarifies that, in cases involving

commodity products where price-competitive non-subject imports are a significant factor in the U.S.

market, the Court will require the Commission to give full consideration, with adequate explanation, to

non-attribution issues when it performs its causation analysis.94 95

The question of whether the material injury threshold for subject imports is satisfied

notwithstanding any injury from other factors is factual, subject to review under the substantial evidence

 90 (...continued)

subject imports are in the market,” the Commission would not fulfill its obligation to consider an important

aspect of the problem if it failed to consider whether non-subject or non-LTFV imports would have

replaced LTFV subject imports during the period of investigation without a continuing benefit to the

domestic industry. 444 F.3d at 1369. Under those circumstances, Bratsk requires the Commission to

consider whether replacement of the LTFV subject imports might have occurred during the period of

investigation, and it requires the Commission to provide an explanation of its conclusion with respect to

that factor.

542 F.3d at 878.

 91 Nucor Corp. v. United States, 414 F.3d 1331, 1336, 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2005); see also Mittal Steel, 542 F.3d at

879 (“Bratsk did not read into the antidumping statute a Procrustean formula for determining whether a domestic

injury was ‘by reason’ of subject imports.”).

 92 Mittal Steel, 542 F.3d at 875-79.

 93 Mittal Steel, 542 F.3d at 873 (quoting from Gerald Metals, 132 F.3d at 722), 875-79 & n.2 (recognizing the

Commission’s alternative interpretation of Bratsk as a reminder to conduct a non-attribution analysis).

 94 Commissioner Lane also refers to her dissenting views in Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip

from Brazil, China, Thailand, and the United Arab Emirates, Invs. Nos. 731-TA-1131 to 1134 (Final), USITC Pub.

4040 (Oct. 2008), for further discussion of Mittal Steel.

 95 To that end, after the Federal Circuit issued its decision in Bratsk, the Commission began to present published

information or send out information requests in final phase investigations to producers in non-subject countries that

accounted for substantial shares of U.S. imports of subject merchandise (if, in fact, there were large non-subject

import suppliers). In order to provide a more complete record for the Commission’s causation analysis, these

requests typically seek information on capacity, production, and shipments of the product under investigation in the

major source countries that export to the United States. The Commission plans to continue utilizing published or

requested information in final phase investigations in which there are substantial levels of non-subject imports.

16
standard.96 Congress has delegated this factual finding to the Commission because of the agency’s

institutional expertise in resolving injury issues.97

B. Post-Petition Effects

In the final phase of these investigations, the statute requires the Commission to consider whether

changes in volume, price effects, or impact are related to the pendency of these investigations.98 If the

Commission determines that such changes are related to the pendency of the investigations, it has the

discretion under the statute to reduce the weight accorded to such information but is not required to do so. 

The SAA states that “{t}he imposition of provisional duties, in particular, can cause a reduction in import

volumes and an increase in prices of both the subject imports and the domestic like product.”99

Furthermore, in considering whether any improvements in the domestic industry’s condition during the

investigations may be an indication of a change related to the filing of the petitions, the SAA states that

the Commission may presume that such changes are related to the pendency of the investigations, rather

than any other cause, absent evidence to the contrary.100

 96 We provide in our respective discussions of volume, price effects, and impact a full analysis of other factors

alleged to have caused any material injury experienced by the domestic industry.

 97 Mittal Steel, 542 F.3d at 873; Nippon Steel Corp., 458 F.3d at 1350, citing U.S. Steel Group, 96 F.3d at 1357;

S. Rep. 96-249 at 75 (“The determination of the ITC with respect to causation is ... complex and difficult, and is a

matter for the judgment of the ITC.”).

 98 The statutory provision governing the Commission’s treatment of post-petition information, 19 U.S.C.

§ 1677(7)(I), states that:

{T}he Commission shall consider whether any change in the volume, price effects, or impact of

imports of the subject merchandise since the filing of the petition in an investigation ... is related

to the pendency of the investigation and, if so, the Commission may reduce the weight accorded to

the data for the period after the filing of the petition in making its determination of material injury,

threat of material injury, or material retardation of the establishment of an industry in the United

States.

 99 SAA at 854; see also, e.g., Superalloy Degassed Chromium from Japan, Inv. No. 731-TA-1090 (Final), USITC

Pub. 3825 at 15 n.122 (Dec. 2005); Magnesium from China and Russia, Invs. Nos. 731-TA-1071-1072 (Final),

USITC Pub. 3763 at 20 (Apr. 2005) (noting overselling that occurred after the filing of the petition).

 100 SAA at 854. The SAA states:

{w}hen the Commission finds evidence on the record of a significant change in data concerning the imports

or their effects subsequent to the filing of the petition or the imposition of provisional duties, the

Commission may presume that such change is related to the pendency of the investigation. In the absence

of sufficient evidence rebutting that presumption and establishing that such change is related to factors

other than the pendency of the investigation, the Commission may reduce the weight to be accorded to the

affected data.

Id. The Commission has applied the statutory post-petition filing provision (19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(I)) even where

imports dropped to zero after the filing of the petition. See Foundry Coke from China, Inv. No. 731-TA-891 (Final),

USITC Pub. 3449 at 15 & n.78, 17, n.92, 21 & nns. 114 & 117 (Sept. 2001). However, the Commission has also

found the presumption not applicable when a “watershed event,” in that case imposition of section 201 relief, altered

the conditions of competition to warrant a focus on the most recent data available, even though the data were for the

period following the filing of the petition. See Cold-Rolled Steel, USITC Pub. 3536 at 31 & nn.182 & 185 (Sept.

2002). The majority’s finding was affirmed in Nucor Corp. v. United States, 318 F. Supp. 2d 1207 (Ct. Int’l Trade

2004), aff’d Nucor Corp. v. United States, 414 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2005).

17
Berwick Offray contended that the filing of the petition was a significant market event that

changed the buying patterns of importers and purchasers, resulting in the decline in subject imports in

2009 and some benefit to the domestic industry.101 Berwick Offray argued that there was a shift in

market share to the U.S. industry, not just an overall decline in consumption, and that the volume of

narrow woven ribbons ordered changed as a result of the filing of the petition.102 Petitioner cited to

statements made by the *** indicating that its imports from China decreased because of the trade

remedies proceeding.103

In contrast, respondents disputed petitioner’s arguments that subject imports declined because of

these investigations and argued that data show instead that imports increased in the second half of 2009

after the filing of the petition as a result of orders placed for the holiday season in the second quarter and

that importers filled customer orders as always. According to respondents, therefore, any decline in

subject imports was due to the decline in demand as measured by apparent U.S. consumption caused by

the global recession.104 Furthermore, *** later revised its position on the effect of the trade remedy

proceedings.105

Although there is evidence suggesting that the filing of the petition played some role in the

decline in the volume of subject imports in 2009, on balance, we do not find a clear enough link between

the pendency of these investigations and the decline in subject imports to warrant discounting 2009

data.106 107

C. Conditions Of Competition And The Business Cycle

The following conditions of competition inform our analysis of whether there is material injury

by reason of subject imports from China and Taiwan.

 101 Petitioner’s Prehearing Br. at 10; Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at 3-5; Hearing Tr. at 10-11 (Dorris); 56

(Kaplan), 90-91 (Sorenson).

 102 Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at 4-5; Petitioner’s Posthearing Br., Responses to Questions Raised at the Hearing,

at Exhibit 1D, question 3; Hearing Tr. at 116 (Pajic - stating that retailers give a “handshake and a forecast” at

meetings with retailers in the spring) and 256 (Pauley - stating that prices are separate from the determination of

color/assortment and that prices are determined in advance). See also Petitioner’s Posthearing Br., Responses to

Questions Raised at the Hearing, at Exhibit 1D, question 3.

 103 Petitioner’s Prehearing Br. at 10. See also CR at II-2, n.7; PR at II-1, n.7.

 104 See, e.g., Hearing Tr. at 14-15 (Cannon); Ribbon Retailers’ Posthearing Br. at 6-7; Hearing Tr. at 195

(Mitchell), 201-202 (Dembski-Brandl); Taiwan Respondents’ Prehearing Br. at 5; Taiwan Respondents’ Posthearing

Br. at 3-6. The Taiwan Respondents also argued that, if the decline were due to the filing of the petition, then

subject imports should have increased from 2007 through the filing of the petition in July 2009, and the domestic

industry’s condition should have changed only after the petition was filed. Instead, they contend that subject import

volume and market share declines actually began prior to the filing of the petition in 2008 and the first part of 2009. 

See Taiwan Respondents’ Posthearing Br. at 4. 

 105 CR at IV-6 and n.9; PR at IV-3 and n.9; ***.

 106 We note that, although the monthly data for subject imports on the record (CR/PR at Table IV-10) show

relatively little change between 2008 and 2009, the full-year data from Commission questionnaires show that subject

imports decreased by a significantly greater amount than apparent consumption during 2008-2009 (compare CR/PR

at Table IV-2 with CR/PR at Table C-1).

 107 Commissioner Pinkert, as explained in his separate and dissenting views, finds a link between the filing of the

petition and the decline in subject imports from China.

18
1. Demand conditions

The demand for narrow woven ribbons is largely determined by the overall economy and fashion

trends.108 Demand, as measured by apparent U.S. consumption in square yards, increased by *** percent

between 2007 and 2008, but declined by *** percent from 2008 to 2009.109 Overall, apparent U.S.

consumption declined by *** percent from 2007 to 2009.110 

As discussed above, during the period examined, the domestic like product and the imports from

each subject country were sold in overlapping channels of distribution, to wholesalers/distributors,

industrial end users, and retailers.111 The *** of the domestic industry’s sales were to *** throughout the

period examined, but a substantial percentage of U.S. producers’ shipments were also to ***.112 The

majority of U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of subject imports from China were also to retailers in 2007,

2008, and 2009, followed by ***.113 While the majority of U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of subject

imports from Taiwan were sold to final consumers, nearly half of such imports were to retailers, ***.114

***.115

The top ten customers reported by U.S. producers and importers include ***. Among the largest

customers, there is considerable overlap among purchasers from both the domestic industry and importers

of subject narrow woven ribbons, both of which supply ***.116

Questionnaire respondents provided mixed responses regarding changes in demand during the

period examined, with some reporting decreased demand and others reporting increased demand. There

appear to be some differences in demand conditions in the different segments of the narrow woven ribbon

market.117 For example, there is evidence on the record that demand in the craft and scrapbooking

segment of the market is more insulated from recessionary effects because people tend to conduct more

projects in the home during economic downturns.118 Reasons cited by questionnaire respondents for

decreased demand since 2007 include the recession and the decline of the U.S. apparel industry.119 Five

importers that reported an increase in demand cited an increase in arts and crafts projects, improved

 108 CR at II-11; PR at II-8 to II-9.

 109 CR/PR at Table C-1 and Table IV-11.

 110 CR/PR at Table C-1. Apparent U.S. consumption was *** square yards in 2007, *** square yards in 2008,

and *** square yards in 2009. CR/PR at Table C-1.

 111 See CR at I-11 to I-12; PR at I-9 to I-10. The term “industrial end users” includes users that use narrow woven

ribbons in the production or assembly of any other product, including floral arrangements assembled by the

wholesale or retail floral industry, apparel, packaging of another product such as a confectionary item, and in-store

gift packaging. CR at II-3, n.12; PR at II-2, n.12. 

 112 CR at II-3; PR at II-2; CR/PR at Table II-1. 

 113 CR at II-3; PR at II-2; CR/PR at Table II-1. 

 114 CR at II-3; PR at II-2. ***. See CR at II-3, n.13; PR at II-2, n.13. Petitioner notes that the largest such

retailers purchase both domestically produced narrow woven ribbons and subject imports. Petitioner’s Prehearing

Br. at 8.

 115 CR/PR at Table II-1. ***. CR at II-3, n.12; PR at II-2, n.12.

 116 CR at II-3; PR at II-2.

 117 CR at II-12; PR at II-8 to II-9. See also Petitioner’s Posthearing Br., Responses to Questions Raised at the

Hearing, at Exhibit 1C, question 1.

 118 See Hearing Tr. at 77-78 (Pajic), 78-79 (Kaplan), 125 (Pajic).

 119 CR at II-12; PR at II-9. Sixteen of 32 responding importers reported that demand has decreased since 2007,

with most firms citing the recession and two citing the decline of the U.S. apparel industry. CR at II-12; PR at II-9. 

See also Ribbon Importers’ Prehearing Br. at 5.

19
design innovation and product ranges, and lower prices as reasons for the increase.120 Four importers

reported no changes in demand and seven reported that demand has fluctuated following trends in the

overall economy and fashion trends.121 

*** importers that provided projections of changes in future demand and the Ribbon Retailers

reported that they expected demand to increase from 2009 to 2011.122 

Responses to the Commission’s questionnaire regarding whether there is a business cycle for

narrow woven ribbons were mixed.123 Petitioner and respondents also presented conflicting descriptions

regarding the level of seasonality of the narrow woven ribbons industry.124 Respondents contended that

subject imports primarily serve the seasonal holiday market while the domestic like product is a basic,

year-round product.125 While subject imports do appear to be more seasonal than domestically produced

narrow woven ribbons, subject imports entered the U.S. market during each month of 2008 and 2009.126

We find that the factual differences raised by the parties with respect to seasonality are not significant

enough to affect our analysis of material injury either way.

2. Supply conditions

During the POI, the U.S. market was supplied by the domestic industry, subject imports from

Taiwan, subject imports from China, non-subject imports from Taiwan, and imports from non-subject

countries.127 The domestic industry’s share of apparent U.S. consumption by quantity increased from ***

 120 CR at II-12; PR at II-9.

 121 CR at II-12; PR at II-9.

 122 CR at II-12 to II-13; PR at II-9 to II-10; Ribbon Importers’ Posthearing Br. at 26-27; ; Ribbon Retailers’

Posthearing Br, Exhibit A, p.58.

 123 CR at II-13; PR at II-10. Seventeen importers reported that there is no business cycle in the narrow woven

ribbons industry, while fifteen reported that a business cycle does exist, with eight stating that sales peak in the

second half of the year in the build-up for the Christmas season. Nineteen responding purchasers reported that there

is no business cycle, while fifteen purchasers reported that a business cycle exists in the narrow woven ribbons

market, with most citing a sales peak in the second half of the year or fourth quarter of the year for the holiday gift

wrapping and floral and other craft applications. CR at II-13; PR at II-10. 

 124 See, e.g., Petitioner’s Posthearing Br., Responses to Questions Raised at the Hearing, at Exhibit 1D, question

3; Hearing Tr. at 148 (Sorenson); 149 (Pajic); and 256-257 (Freebern); Ribbon Importers’ Prehearing Br. at 7-8;

Ribbon Retailers Posthearing Br., Responses to Questions from the Commissioners and Staff, at Exhibit A, pp. 14-

15, 27-28. See also CR at III-8 to III-9; PR at III-4.

 125 See, e.g., Ribbon Importers’ Prehearing Br. at 7-8; Ribbon Retailers’ Posthearing Br., Responses to Questions

from the Commissioners and Staff, at Exhibit A, pp. 14-15, 27-28.

 126 CR/PR at Table IV-10.

 127 In the preliminary determinations regarding narrow woven ribbons from China, Commerce calculated a

dumping margin of zero percent (75 Fed. Reg. 7244 (Feb. 18, 2010)) and a net subsidy rate of 0.29 (de minimis)

percent (74 Fed. Reg. 66090 (Dec. 14, 2009)) for Yama Ribbons and Bows Co., Ltd. (“Yama”). On July 13,

Commerce issued its final determinations in these investigations. In its final determination regarding narrow woven

ribbons from China, Commerce indicated that it again calculated a zero percent dumping margin for Yama, but

calculated a net subsidy rate of 1.56 percent for the company. Commerce did not find Yama’s margin (or the 1.56

percent margin assigned as the all others rate) to be de minimis. Even though Commerce calculated a zero percent

dumping margin for Yama, because we cross cumulate dumping and subsidized imports, Yama’s imports are no

longer considered to be non-subject imports from China. Thus, all imports of narrow woven ribbons from China are

considered to be subject imports for purposes of the Commission’s analysis.

20
percent in 2007 to *** percent in 2008, and *** percent in 2009.128 Cumulated subject imports’ share of

the U.S. market, by quantity, decreased from *** percent in 2007 to *** percent in 2008, and *** percent

in 2009,129 while non-subject imports’ share increased from *** percent in 2007 to *** percent in 2008,

and *** percent in 2009.130

Berwick Offray, the largest known producer of narrow woven ribbons in the United States,

accounted for *** percent of reported U.S. production during the period examined.131 The second-largest

U.S. producer, Lawrence Schiff, accounted for a little under *** of U.S. production, while the two other

domestic producers, L.A. Najarian and Trimtex, had *** production of narrow woven ribbons.132 As

explained above in the section regarding related parties, Berwick Offray and Lawrence Schiff imported

subject narrow woven ribbons during the period examined and also facilitated imports of narrow woven

ribbons from subject countries. During the period examined, the quantity of U.S. subject imports

controlled by U.S. producers decreased by *** percent.133 Evidence on the record also indicates that a

growing number of retailers are choosing to import narrow woven ribbons directly from subject and nonsubject sources rather than rely on U.S. producers to arrange or facilitate importation. Specifically, while

some retailers, such as *** already had substantial direct importation of narrow woven ribbons,134

retailers such as *** began importing directly during the period examined.135

3. Substitutability

We find that domestically produced narrow woven ribbons and subject imports are moderately

substitutable. We note that narrow woven ribbons are available in a large variety of fabrics, designs,

widths, colors, and patterns, and that within the broad product mix, narrow woven ribbons are generally

substitutable within each of the distinct categories of ribbon (e.g., grosgrain or sheers).

According to questionnaire responses, all reporting domestic producers and a large majority of

importers reported that domestically produced narrow woven ribbons and subject imports are always

interchangeable.136 Moreover, *** of importers and all three of the responding domestic producers

reported that subject imports from China are always or frequently interchangeable with subject imports

from Taiwan.137 Eleven of 16 responding purchasers that compared narrow woven ribbons from China

with those from the United States reported that they are always or frequently interchangeable, and 8 of 14

purchasers that compared subject imports from Taiwan with U.S.-produced narrow woven ribbons

reported that they are always or frequently interchangeable.138 In addition, *** of the three responding

U.S. producers reported that differences other than price between subject imports and the domestic like

 128 CR/PR at Table C-1.

 129 CR/PR at Table C-1.

 130 CR/PR at Table C-1.

 131 CR/PR at Table III-1.

 132 CR/PR at Table III-1. ***. CR at III-2; PR at III-1.

 133 CR at IV-7; PR at IV-3. U.S. subject imports controlled by U.S. producers were *** square yards in 2007,

*** square yards in 2008, and *** square yards in 2009. CR/PR at Table IV-3.

 134 See, e.g., CR/PR at Table IV-1; Importer Questionnaire Response of *** at 9 (showing that *** imported

narrow woven ribbons from Taiwan throughout the period examined); Staff Telephone Notes, *** (July 16, 2010)

(stating that ***).

 135 CR at IV-7; PR at IV-3. See also ***. Petitioner provided evidence that ***. See Petitioner’s Posthearing Br.

at Exhibit 3, Declaration of *** (Exhibit B, Written Presentation of ***).

 136 CR at II-20; PR at II-14; CR/PR at Table II-4.

 137 CR at II-20; PR at II-14; CR/PR at Table II-4.

 138 CR at II-20; PR at II-14; CR/PR at Table II-4.

21
product are sometimes a significant factor.139 Responses from importers were mixed, with slightly more

than half of responding importers reporting that differences other than price between U.S.-produced

narrow woven ribbons and subject imports are always or frequently a significant factor.140 Some

importers reported experiencing product availability, product range, service, and quality differences

between subject imports and the domestic like product.141 Parties asserted that a number of factors,

including lead and delivery times, are critical for seasonal and fashion-driven applications. They also

emphasize the importance of design in purchasing decisions.142

4. Other conditions of competition

Contracts vs. Spot Sales/Sales from Inventory. U.S. producers reported that the majority of their

sales are on a short-term contract or spot sale basis.143 The majority of reporting U.S. importers indicated

that all or nearly all of their sales of narrow woven ribbons are on a spot basis.144 Moreover, *** sales of

domestically produced narrow woven ribbons and subject imports are from inventory, with lead times

from inventory ranging from ***.145

Raw Material Costs. The principal raw materials used in the production of narrow woven

ribbons are polyester, nylon, acetate, and rayon yarns. Other raw materials include dyes, corrugated

packaging, and paper and plastic spools.146 *** reported that polyester yarn accounts for *** percent of

its total raw material costs and the price of polyester yarn increased *** in 2007, remained stable in 2008

and 2009, increased *** in the first quarter of 2010, and is now expected ***.147 *** reported that the

prices of raw materials have increased since 2007 and are expected to continue to increase.148

 139 CR at II-21; PR at II-15; CR/PR at Table II-5.

 140 CR at II-22; PR at II-15; CR/PR at Table II-5.

 141 CR at II-22 to II-23; PR at II-16 to II-17.

 142 Ribbon Importers’ Prehearing Br. at 9-12.

 143 CR at V-4; PR at V-3. *** reported that *** percent of their sales are on a short-term contract basis, with the

remainder being spot sales. *** reported that *** percent of its sales are on a short-term contract basis and ***

percent are spot sales. *** reported that *** of its sales are on a short-term contract basis. CR at V-4; PR at V-3.

 144 CR at V-4; PR at V-3.

 145 CR at II-2; PR at II-1. U.S. producers reported that *** percent of their narrow woven ribbons are sold from

inventory. A majority of importers of subject imports from China reported that most or all of their sales are from

inventory, while *** of the importers of subject imports from Taiwan reported that most or all of their sales are from

inventory. CR at II-2 to II-3; PR at II-1 to II-2.

 146 CR at V-1; PR at V-1.

 147 CR at V-1; PR at V-1.

 148 CR at V-1; PR at V-1.

22
D. Volume Of The Cumulated Subject Imports149

In evaluating the volume of subject imports, section 771(7)(C)(i) of the Tariff Act provides that

the “Commission shall consider whether the volume of imports of the merchandise, or any increase in that

volume, either in absolute terms or relative to production or consumption in the United States, is

significant.”150

 In absolute terms, subject imports from China and Taiwan, by quantity, increased *** from ***

in 2007 to *** in 2008, before declining sharply to *** in 2009.151 The ratio of subject imports to U.S.

production increased from *** percent in 2007 to *** percent in 2008, before decreasing to *** percent

in 2009.152 Subject imports as a share of apparent U.S. consumption by quantity were *** percent in

2007, *** percent in 2008, and *** percent in 2009.153 Apparent U.S. consumption increased *** from

*** square yards in 2007 to *** square yards in 2008, before declining to *** square yards in 2009,

resulting in an overall decline of *** percent from 2007 to 2009.154

We find that the volume of subject imports was significant in absolute terms and relative to

apparent U.S. consumption and production during the period examined, even though the volume and

market share of subject imports declined over the period examined.155

E. Price Effects Of The Cumulated Subject Imports

In evaluating the price effects of the subject imports, section 771(7)(C)(ii) of the Tariff Act

provides that the Commission shall consider whether –

 (I) there has been significant price underselling by the imported merchandise as

compared with the price of domestic like products of the United States, and

 149 In the preliminary phase of these investigations, a significant number of reporting U.S. importers were unable

to provide the Commission with useable quantity data on their narrow woven ribbon operations within the time

requested. See USITC Pub. 4099 at 23-24. In the final phase of these investigations, only two U.S. importers, ***,

were unable to provide the Commission with useable quantity data on their narrow woven ribbon operations within

the time requested. Staff was able to estimate quantities for these two firms using average unit value for all other

responding importers by source. Therefore, consistent with our usual practice, we have relied on quantity

measurements to measure volume in the final phase of these investigations.

 150 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(i).

 151 CR/PR at Table IV-2.

 152 CR/PR at Table IV-14.

 153 CR/PR at Table IV-11.

 154 CR/PR at Table C-1.

 155 Imports of narrow woven ribbons from China and Taiwan into the United States, like various other textile

products, were subject to various quotas until these two countries acceded to the World Trade Organization

(“WTO”) in December 11, 2001 and January 1, 2002, respectively. See Petition, Vol. I at 10. In 2005, the United

States and China concluded a bilateral textile agreement (“China Safeguard Agreement”) that established new quotas

for certain textiles produced or manufactured in China and exported to the United States after January 1, 2006. 

Narrow woven ribbons were one of a variety of products that were included as “Category 229” under the China

Safeguard Agreement. The quotas expired on December 31, 2008. See Memorandum of Understanding Between

the Governments of the United States of America and the People’s Republic of China Concerning Trade in Textile

and Apparel Products (entered into on Nov. 8, 2005), cited in Petition, Vol. I at 10, Exh. 6; CR at VII-5 to VII-6.

23
 (II) the effect of imports of such merchandise otherwise depresses prices to a significant

degree or prevents price increases, which otherwise would have occurred, to a significant

degree.156

As explained above, the domestic like product and subject imports are generally

interchangeable157 and price is an important factor in purchasing decisions.158 There is also evidence in

the record that other factors, such as design, availability, product consistency, quality, and reliability are

also important factors in purchasing decisions.159

The Commission collected quarterly pricing data for six narrow woven ribbon products,160 which

closely match the six product descriptions that were submitted by petitioner in the petition.161 Pricing

data for sales of the requested products were provided by *** U.S. producers of narrow woven ribbons,

16 importers of subject narrow woven ribbons from China, and 15 importers of subject narrow woven

ribbons from Taiwan.162 

Pricing data reported by these firms accounted for approximately *** percent of the value of U.S.

producers’ U.S. commercial shipments of narrow woven ribbons from 2007 to 2009.163 We note that

there are challenges in collecting representative pricing data for narrow woven ribbons given the large

number and variety of products within the scope of these investigations and within each pricing product. 

We recognize that it is difficult to achieve the same level of coverage as we are able to in other cases

involving more homogenous products. Although product categories were narrowly defined, the wide

variety of products made it difficult to avoid aggregating a mix of products within a single product

definition. Nevertheless, the pricing data collected by the Commission are generally useful for the

analysis of price trends and price comparisons.164 We do, however, place greater weight on certain of the

pricing products, such as product 1, where higher volumes are reported.

Taken as a whole, the pricing data show significant underselling by subject imports. Specifically,

subject imports undersold the domestic like product in 118 of 141 (approximately 84 percent) pricing

comparisons for products 1 through 6, with margins ranging from 1.7 to 83.3 percent.165 With respect to

product 1, for which significant volumes were reported for sales of subject imports from China and

Taiwan and of domestically produced narrow woven ribbons, subject imports undersold the domestic like

product in *** price comparisons, with margins ranging from *** percent and an average margin of ***

percent.166 Moreover, U.S. weighted-average sales prices of the pricing products fluctuated, but generally

 156 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(ii).

 157 CR/PR at Table II-4.

 158 CR/PR at Table II-2.

 159 CR/PR at Table II-3.

 160 CR at V-6; PR at V-4.

 161 CR at V-6, n.8 and V-7, n.12; PR at V-4, n.8 and V-4 to V-5, n.12.

 162 CR at V-7; PR at V-4. We note that the pricing data do not include ***. CR at V-7, n.12; V-4 to V-5, n.12.

 163 CR at V-7; PR at V-4.

 164 We also note that the pricing products used in our questionnaires were suggested by petitioner and the

petitioner did not comment on the six pricing product descriptions presented in the draft questionnaires. CR at V-6,

n.8; PR at V-4, n.8.

 165 CR/PR at Table V-8.

 166 CR/PR at Table V-8. Product 1 accounted for the *** of U.S. sales by quantity of domestically produced

narrow woven ribbon (*** percent) and subject imports from China (*** percent), and accounted for the *** volume

of U.S. sales by quantity of subject imports from Taiwan (*** percent). CR at V-8; PR at V-5.

24
increased (with the exception of ***) during the period examined.167 For the ***, the weighted-average

sales prices fluctuated *** and declined *** overall from 2007 to 2009.168 Accordingly, we do not find

that cumulated subject imports from China and Taiwan significantly depressed prices of the domestic like

product in the U.S. market.

We also considered whether subject imports from China and Taiwan suppressed prices of the

domestic like product to a significant degree. The domestic industry’s average unit cost of goods sold

(“COGS”) decreased from $*** per square yard in 2007 to $*** per square yard in 2008, and $*** per

square yard in 2009.169 Along with a decline in raw material costs, the domestic industry reported a

decline in non-raw material operating costs.170 During the period examined, the domestic industry’s

COGS-to-net sales ratio increased *** from *** percent in 2007 to *** percent in 2008, before declining

to *** percent in 2009.171

 Based on the record, we do not find that the domestic industry is currently experiencing a costprice squeeze as a result of significant underselling by subject imports. Therefore, we do not find that

subject imports prevented price increases which otherwise would have occurred during the period

examined to a significant degree.172 In addition, the Commission was unable to confirm most of the lost

sales and lost revenue allegations made by petitioner.173

In sum, we conclude that subject imports are not currently having significant adverse effects on

domestic producers’ prices.

 167 CR at V-21; PR at V-6.

 168 See CR/PR at Table V-3 and Table V-4.

 169 CR/PR at Table VI-1.

 170 See CR at VI-1; PR at VI-1.

 171 CR/PR at Table VI-1.

 172 There is some evidence on the record that as subject import volumes decreased, domestic prices were able to

increase. For example, with respect to pricing product 1, domestic prices reached their *** levels in 2009, as subject

imports from China and Taiwan were generally decreasing overall. See CR/PR at Table V-1. The questionnaires in

these final phase investigations sought data for the period 2007 through 2009, an investigative period consistent with

our normal practice. No party, including petitioner, argued that we should modify our data request to expand the

period covered. Petitioner’s arguments in these final phase investigations that we should, in effect, speculate that

price suppression existed for a period prior to the period investigated is thus without merit. See, e.g., Petitioner’s

Prehearing Br. at 15-16, 19; Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at 6. Moreover, the statute directs us to determine whether

the domestic industry “is” materially injured, not whether it was injured some years in the past. See, e.g., Nucor

Corp. v. United States, 318 F. Supp. 2d 1207, 1223 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2004).

 173 CR at V-25 to V-34; PR at V-8 toV-9. We note, however, that *** indicated in response to the lost sales and

lost revenue allegations that ***. See CR at V-31 and V-32; PR at V-9.

25
F. Impact of the Cumulated Subject Imports on the Domestic Industry174

In examining the impact of subject imports, section 771(7)(C)(iii) of the Tariff Act provides that

the Commission “shall evaluate all relevant economic factors which have a bearing on the state of the

industry.”175 These factors include output, sales, inventories, ability to raise capital, research and

development, and factors affecting domestic prices. No single factor is dispositive and all relevant factors

are considered “within the context of the business cycle and conditions of competition that are distinctive

to the affected industry.”176

We have examined the performance indicia for the domestic industry producing narrow woven

ribbons. Overall, we find that the data on the record do not show a correlation between subject imports

and the domestic industry’s declining performance indicia. In particular, demand as measured by

apparent U.S. consumption declined *** percent from 2007 to 2009 and, while the market share of

domestic producers’ increased steadily by *** percentage points from 2007 to 2009, the market share of

subject imports increased *** from 2007 to 2008, before declining *** in 2009, for an overall decline in

market share of *** percentage points.177 

The domestic industry’s end-of-period inventories of narrow woven ribbons increased *** from

*** square yards in 2007 to *** square yards in 2008, before falling to *** square yards in 2009.178 The

domestic industry’s production declined from *** square yards in 2007 to *** square yards in 2008,

before declining further to *** square yards in 2009.179 U.S. producers’ average production capacity was

*** square yards in 2007 and 2008 and declined *** in 2009.180 As a result of the decline in production

while capacity remained relatively stable, domestic producers’ capacity utilization rate declined from ***

percent in 2007 to *** percent in 2008, and *** percent in 2009. U.S. producers’ U.S. commercial

shipments increased *** from *** square yards in 2007 to *** square yards in 2008, before declining to

*** square yards in 2009.181 Despite the overall declines in production and shipments from 2007 to 2009,

 174 We have considered the magnitude of the antidumping duty margins found by Commerce. Commerce

determined in its final determinations that certain producers in China and Taiwan were selling narrow woven ribbons

in the U.S. market at less than fair value. Commerce calculated a dumping margin of 123.83 for certain Chinese

producers and 247.65 for the PRC-wide entity. CR/PR at Table I-2; Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge

from the People’s Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 75 Fed Reg. 41808,

41812 (July 19, 2010). Commerce found a zero rate of dumping for certain producers and/or exporters in Taiwan

(Dear Year Brothers Mfg. Co., Ltd. and Shienq Huong Enterprise Co., Ltd./Hsien Chan Enterprise Co., Ltd./Novelty

Handicrafts Co., Ltd.) so that any U.S. imports from these producers/exporters are considered to be non-subject

imports from Taiwan for purposes of the our determinations. Commerce calculated a dumping margin of 4.37

percent ad valorem for Roung Shu Industry Corporation and for all other Taiwan producers and/or exporters. 

CR/PR at Table I-3; Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from Taiwan: Final Determination of Sales at

Less Than Fair Value, 75 Fed Reg. 41804, 41807 (July 19, 2010).

 175 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(iii); see also SAA at 851 and 885 (“In material injury determinations, the Commission

considers, in addition to imports, other factors that may be contributing to overall injury. While these factors, in

some cases, may account for the injury to the domestic industry, they also may demonstrate that an industry is facing

difficulties from a variety of sources and is vulnerable to dumped or subsidized imports.”).

 176 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(iii); see also SAA at 851, 885; Live Cattle from Canada and Mexico, Inv. Nos. 701-

TA-386, 731-TA-812-813 (Prelim.), USITC Pub. 3155 at 25 n.148 (Feb. 1999).

 177 CR/PR at Table C-1.

 178 CR/PR at Table C-1.

 179 CR/PR at Table C-1.

 180 CR/PR at Table III-2.

 181 CR/PR at Table III-3.

26
however, as noted above, the domestic industry increased its market share in each year of the period

examined, while the market share and absolute volume of subject imports decreased overall.

The domestic industry’s employment indicators generally declined over the period examined. 

The number of production related workers, hours worked, and wages paid all declined from 2007 to 2009,

with the biggest declines occurring between 2008 and 2009.182 The domestic industry experienced ***

gains in hourly wages and increased productivity such that the unit labor costs per square yard declined

*** from 2007 to 2009.183

The domestic industry also experienced declines in many financial indicators during the period

examined. The quantity of the domestic industry’s net sales was relatively stable, increasing from ***

square yards in 2007 to *** square yards in 2008, before decreasing to *** square yards in 2009.184 The

value of its net sales, however, decreased steadily during the period examined from $*** in 2007 to $***

in 2008 and $*** in 2009.185 The domestic industry experienced positive operating incomes in each year

of the period examined, reporting operating income of $*** million in 2007, $*** in 2008, and $*** in

2009.186 Its operating income as a ratio of net sales was *** percent in 2007, *** percent in 2008, and

*** percent in 2009.187 Capital expenditures decreased during the period examined, starting at $*** in

2007, decreasing to $*** in 2008, and falling *** to $*** in 2009.188

 The deterioration in some of the domestic industry’s performance indicators coincided with the

economic downturn and appear to be demand driven, since subject imports decreased overall during the

period examined both on an absolute basis and in terms of market penetration. As noted above, the

volume of subject imports on an absolute basis increased slightly from 2007 to 2008 as apparent U.S.

consumption also increased *** by quantity, but decreased *** in 2009 as apparent U.S. consumption

also fell.189 Furthermore, the market share of subject imports declined in each year of the period

examined, while the market share of domestic producers’ increased in each year.190 Therefore, the

evidence does not support a conclusion that subject imports took market share at the expense of domestic

producers. As noted above, we also do not find that subject imports had a significant adverse effect on

domestic prices in the form of price depression or price suppression. We note further that the domestic

industry experienced its *** operating incomes both absolutely and as a ratio to net sales in 2007 and

2008, while the volume of subject imports by quantity was increasing.191

Despite the decline in demand, the domestic industry was able generally to increase prices and

was profitable in each year of the period examined. Although aggressively priced subject imports may

have prevented the domestic industry from improving its performance, the record does not establish a

present significant adverse impact during the period examined. 

Petitioner argued that the Commission should consider the effects of an “investment bias” and a

“survivor bias,” which acted to conceal the level of injury to the domestic industry. With respect to the

purported investment bias, Berwick Offray contends that as a result of the domestic industry’s cost-saving

 182 See CR/PR at Table C-1.

 183 See CR/PR at Table C-1.

 184 CR/PR at Table VI-1.

 185 CR/PR at Table VI-1. We note, however, that the decline in the value of net sales may be largely attributable

to ***. See CR at III-7; PR at III-3 to III-4.

 186 CR/PR at Table VI-1.

 187 CR/PR at Table VI-1.

 188 CR/PR at Table VI-4. *** accounted for *** percent of total capital expenditures in each year of the period

examined. CR at VI-5; PR at VI-3.

 189 See CR/PR at Table IV-2 and Table C-1.

 190 CR/PR at Table C-1.

 191 See CR/PR at Table VI-1 and Table IV-2.

27
investments, the domestic industry avoided a severe cost-price squeeze. Petitioner claims that despite the

efficiency measures taken revenue declines outstripped any gains, resulting in operating losses for *** of

four domestic producers.192 It also argued that injury to the domestic industry caused by subject imports

is at least partially concealed by a “survivor bias” caused when the weakest company leaves the industry

so that the performance of the remaining companies as measured by averages appears to be better than it

is.193 The Commission’s analysis, however, “takes the domestic industry as it finds it,” and neither

ignores evidence of an adverse effect nor finds an effect where none exists due to an assessment of the

relative efficiency of the domestic industry.194 For an affirmative determination of present material injury

to be made, the record must show that the material injury is by reason of subject imports. As discussed

above, we find that there is not a sufficient causal nexus between any present injury to the domestic

industry and the subject imports.

For the reasons stated above, we find that an industry in the United States is not materially

injured by reason of imports of narrow woven ribbons from China and Taiwan that have been found by

Commerce to be sold in the United States at less than fair value.195

 192 See Petitioner’s Prehearing Br. at 26-27; Petitioner’s Posthearing Br., Responses to Questions Raised at the

Hearing, at Exhibit 1A, questions 11 and 12, Exhibit 1E, questions 2 and 7, and Exhibit 4; Hearing Tr. at 96

(Kaplan). 

 193 See Hearing Tr. at 57-58 (Kaplan). Moreover, there is evidence on the record that these producers left the

industry for reasons other than subject imports. *** exited the industry prior to the period examined due to ***. CR

at III-3 and n.10/PR at III-2 and n.10. ***, which represented *** of domestic production, reported that it ceased its

U.S. production of narrow woven ribbons due to the loss of the apparel market in the United States. See CR at III3/PR at III-2; Staff Telephone Notes, *** (May 24, 2010) at 1.

 194 Compare, e.g., Certain Frozen or Canned Warmwater Shrimp and Prawns from Brazil, China, Equador, India,

Thailand and Vietnam, Inv. Nos. 731-TA-1063-1068 (Final), USITC Pub. 3748 (January 2005) at 34 & n. 239

(“inefficient operations by a domestic industry do not preclude the Commission from making an affirmative injury

determination”) citing Iwatsu Electric Co. v. United States, 758 F. Supp. 1506, 1512, 1518 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1991). 

 195 Commissioner Lane notes that petitioner argued that the domestic industry would have been better off if

subject imports had been fairly traded during the period examined, and submitted an analysis as support in its

posthearing brief at Exhibit 2. See Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at Exhibit 2. Although she finds that it is likely that

there would have been a reduction in subject imports and price increases if subject imports had been fairly traded,

Commissioner Lane is not satisfied that the record supports a finding of present material injury by reason of subject

imports.

28
VI. THREAT OF MATERIAL INJURY BY REASON OF CUMULATED SUBJECT

IMPORTS FROM CHINA AND TAIWAN196

A. Legal Standards

Section 771(7)(F) of the Tariff Act directs the Commission to determine whether the U.S.

industry is threatened with material injury by reason of the subject imports by analyzing whether “further

dumped or subsidized imports are imminent and whether material injury by reason of imports would

occur unless an order is issued or a suspension agreement is accepted.”197 The Commission may not make

such a determination “on the basis of mere conjecture or supposition,” and considers the threat factors “as

a whole” in making its determination whether dumped or subsidized imports are imminent and whether

material injury by reason of subject imports would occur unless an order is issued.198 In making our

determination, we consider all statutory threat factors that are relevant to this investigation.199

 196 As noted above, Chaiman Okun and Commissioner Pearson do not find that an industry in the United States is

threatened with material injury by reason of cumulated subject imports from China and Taiwan. They join the

discussion and analysis in sections VI.A and VI.B, but provide the remainder of their analysis in dissenting views. 

See Dissenting Views of Chairman Deanna Tanner Okun and Commissioner Daniel R. Pearson. Commissioner

Pinkert finds that a domestic industry is threatened with material injury by reason of subject imports from China and

is not materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of subject imports from Taiwan. Except as

otherwise noted, Commissioner Pinkert joins the discussion and analysis in sections I to V and provides the

remainder of his analysis in separate and dissenting views. See Separate and Dissenting Views of Commissioner

Dean A. Pinkert. Commissioner Pinkert also joins the majority’s finding in section VI.E that the domestic industry

is vulnerable for purposes of its threat analysis

 197 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(ii).

 198 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(ii).

 199 These factors are as follows:

(I) if a countervailable subsidy is involved, such information as may be presented to it by the administering

authority as to the nature of the subsidy (particularly as to whether the countervailable subsidy is a subsidy

described in Article 3 or 6.1 of the Subsidies Agreement) and whether imports of the subject merchandise

are likely to increase,

(II) any existing unused production capacity or imminent, substantial increase in production capacity in the

exporting country indicating the likelihood of substantially increased imports of the subject merchandise

into the United States, taking into account the availability of other export markets to absorb any additional

exports,

(III) a significant rate of increase of the volume or market penetration of imports of the subject merchandise

indicating the likelihood of substantially increased imports,

(IV) whether imports of the subject merchandise are entering at prices that are likely to have a significant

depressing or suppressing effect on domestic prices and are likely to increase demand for further imports,

(V) inventories of the subject merchandise,

(VI) the potential for product-shifting if production facilities in the foreign country, which can be used to

produce the subject merchandise, are currently being used to produce other products.

* * *

(continued...)

29
B. Cumulation

Section 771(7)(H) of the Act provides as follows:

(H) Cumulation for determining threat of material injury – To the extent practicable and subject

to subparagraph (G)(ii), for purposes of clause (i)(III) and (IV) of subparagraph (F), the

Commission may cumulatively assess the volume and price effects of imports of the subject

merchandise from all countries with respect to which – 

(i) petitions were filed under section 1671a(b) or 1673a(b) of this title on the same

day.

(ii) investigations were initiated under section 1671a(a) or 1673a(a) of this title on

the same day, or

(iii) petitions were filed under section 1671a(b) or 1673a(b) of this title and

investigations were initiated under section 1671a(a) or 1673a(a) of this title on

the same day,

if such imports compete with each other and with domestic like products in the United States

market.200

China and Taiwan are not competing under different conditions of competition and we do not

find any evidence indicating that this will change in the future. We also considered whether subject

imports from China and Taiwan exhibited similar volume and price trends during the period of

investigation so as to justify a decision to cumulate these imports. The volume of subject imports from

China increased from 2007 to 2008, while the volume of subject imports from Taiwan declined

somewhat.201 Subject imports from China and Taiwan, however, both declined overall from 2007 to

2009.202 We do not find, therefore, that the difference in volume trends for subject imports from China

and Taiwan was significant in this context. In addition, the price trends of these imports are sufficiently

similar to support cumulation.203 Finally, subject producers in China and Taiwan generally sell the same

types of subject narrow woven ribbons in the same channels of distribution, including to a number of the

same customers, in the United States. Accordingly, based on an evaluation of the relevant criteria as well

 199 (...continued)

(IX) any other demonstrable adverse trends that indicate the probability that there is likely to be material

injury by reason of imports (or sale for importation) of the subject merchandise (whether or not it is actually

being imported at the time).

19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(i). To organize our analysis, we discuss the applicable statutory threat factors using the

same volume/price/impact framework that applies to our material injury analysis. Statutory threat factors (I), (II),

(III), (V), and (VI) are discussed in the analysis of subject import volume. Statutory threat factor (IV) is discussed in

the price effects analysis, and statutory threat factor (IX) is discussed in the impact analysis. Statutory threat factor

(VII) is inapplicable, as no imports of agricultural products are involved in this investigation. No argument was

made that the domestic industry is currently engaging or will imminently engage in any efforts to develop a

derivative or more advanced version of the domestic like product, which would implicate statutory threat factor

(VIII).

 200 19 U.S.C. 1677(7)(H) (emphasis added).

 201 See CR/PR at Table IV-2.

 202 See CR/PR at Table IV-2.

 203 See CR/PR at Tables V-1 to V-6 and Figures V-3 to V-8.

30
as our analysis supporting cumulation in the context of assessing present material injury, we exercise our

discretion to cumulate subject imports from China and Taiwan for purposes of assessing threat of material

injury.204

C. Likely Volume Of The Cumulated Subject Imports

As noted above in our analysis of present material injury, the volume of subject imports was

significant on an absolute basis and relative to apparent U.S. consumption and U.S. production during the

period examined. We find evidence on the record that subject import volumes will increase as retailers

continue to switch to direct importation of narrow woven ribbons from the subject countries and U.S.

economic recovery spurs demand thereby pulling more subject imports into the U.S. market. 

As noted above, *** purchasers of narrow woven ribbons, ***, have stated that they have begun

to purchase more subject imports directly and that they intend to continue this transition in the imminent

future.205 For example, ***.206 The increasing direct importation of narrow woven ribbons by *** is

likely to lead to an increase in subject imports.

In addition, we find that the volume trends in subject imports demonstrate that subject foreign

producers have the ability to respond to changes in the market by pulling out of the market when demand

declines and will reenter the market as demand recovers.207 Although the volume of subject imports did

not increase overall during the period examined, the volume of subject imports increased *** from 2007

to 2008 before declining *** in 2009 consistent with the general trend in apparent U.S. consumption

where demand increased *** and then decreased in 2009.208 Subject imports are likely to continue to

significantly undersell the domestic like product, increasing the attractiveness of those imports to

purchasers. Thus, increased lower-priced subject imports would prevent the domestic industry from

participating fully in supplying the increased demand by purchasers.

Subject producers in China and Taiwan also reported substantial production of narrow woven

ribbons during the period examined.209 In 2009, the responding subject producers’ production was

equivalent to *** percent of U.S. consumption in that year.210 There is also available excess capacity in

China and Taiwan for the production of additional quantities of narrow woven ribbons.211 In 2009,

reported excess capacity in China and Taiwan for the limited number of firms that responded to the

Commission’s questionnaires was 5.5 million square yards which was equivalent to *** percent of

 204 Chairman Okun and Commissioner Pearson do not join the remainder of this opinion. See Dissenting Views

of Chairman Deanna Tanner Okun and Commissioner Daniel R. Pearson.

 205 See Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at Exhibit 3; Ribbon Retailers’ Posthearing Br. at 33-38;CR at IV-7; PR at IV3. See also ***.

 206 Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at Exhibit 3, Exhibit B to Declaration of ***. Petitioner also provided notes to its

meetings with *** indicating that it ***. Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at Exhibit 3, Exhibit M to Declaration of ***.

 207 As noted above, the record provides evidence that post-petition effects have also played some role in the

decline in subject imports in 2009. We would expect that any such post-petition effect would reinforce the effect of

growing domestic demand on subject imports and contribute to their increase. 

 208 See CR/PR at Table IV-2 and Table C-1.

 209 Data from responding producers in China appear to cover between *** percent of U.S. importers’ U.S. imports

from China. CR at VII-4, n.11; PR at 3, n.11. Data from responding producers in Taiwan appear to cover between

47 and 55 percent of U.S. importers’ subject U.S. imports from Taiwan. CR at VII-5, n.18; PR at VII-4, n.18.

 210 Compare CR/PR at Table VII-1 and Table VII-2 with CR/PR at Table C-1.

 211 See CR/PR at Table VII-1 and Table VII-2. Furthermore, at least *** Chinese producers reported that ***. 

CR at VII-4 to VII-5; PR at VII-4.

31
apparent U.S. consumption in that year.212 Moreover, subject producers in China and Taiwan are exportoriented213 and the United States represents an important market for both countries.214 In 2009, when

subject imports were at their lowest levels during the period examined, exports to the United States still

accounted for 26.8 percent of total shipments from China and 53.7 percent of total shipments from

Taiwan.215

We also considered inventories of subject merchandise. As noted above, the business model of

the narrow woven ribbons industry involves the sale of product from inventory.216 U.S. producers

reported that *** percent of their narrow woven ribbons are sold from inventory. A majority of importers

of subject imports from China reported that most or all of their sales are from inventory, while *** of the

importers of subject imports from Taiwan reported that most or all of their sales are from inventory. U.S.

producers reported end of period inventories of *** square yards in 2007, *** square yards in 2008, and

*** square yards in 2009. We note that the *** accounted for *** of the decrease in U.S. inventories by

U.S. producers from 2008 to 2009.217 U.S. importers’ reported inventories of subject narrow woven

ribbons were *** square yards in 2007, *** square yards in 2008, and *** square yards in 2009.218 Endof-period inventories of narrow woven ribbons in China were 4.4 million square yards in 2007, 4.3

million square yards in 2008, and 4.2 million in 2009.219 End-of-period inventories of narrow woven

ribbons in Taiwan were 0.5 million square yards in 2007, 0.3 million square yards in 2008, and 0.4

million square yards in 2009.220 Thus, in 2009, the reported end-of-period inventories of responding

narrow woven ribbon producers in China and Taiwan were equivalent to *** percent of apparent U.S.

consumption.221 222

In light of these factors, we find that a significant increase in the volume of subject imports from

China and Taiwan is likely in the imminent future. Evidence on the record shows that purported nonprice reasons for choosing imported merchandise from subject countries over domestically produced

 212 Compare CR/PR at Table VII-1 and Table VII-2 with CR/PR at Table C-1. Because we do not have complete

coverage of the subject producers in China and Taiwan, the data for excess capacity likely are understated. See CR

at VII-4 and VII-5, n.18, n.11; PR atVII-3, n.11 and VII-4, n.18.

 213 CR/PR at Table VII-1 and Table VII-2. Responding producers in China reported that exports accounted for

85.3 percent of total shipments in 2007, 82.7 percent of total shipments in 2008, and 81.7 percent of total shipment

in 2009. CR/PR at Table VII-1. Responding producers in Taiwan reported that exports accounted for 92.1 percent

of total shipments in 2007, 90.4 percent of total shipments in 2008, and 89.6 percent of total shipments in 2009. 

CR/PR at Table VII-2. 

 214 CR/PR at Table VII-1 and Table VII-2. Responding producers in China reported that exports to the United

States accounted for 46.2 percent of total shipments in 2007, 40.9 percent of total shipments in 2008, and 26.8

percent of total shipments in 2009. CR/PR at Table VII-1. Responding producers in Taiwan reported that exports to

the United States accounted for 52.0 percent of total shipments in 2007, 53.3 percent of total shipments in 2008, and

53.7 percent of total shipments in 2009. CR/PR at Table VII-2.

 215 CR/PR at Table VII-1 and Table VII-2.

 216 CR at II-2 to II-3; PR at II-1 toII-2.

 217 CR at III-12; PR at III-5 to III-6. CR/PR at Table III-7. U.S. producers’ U.S. inventories as a ratio to

production were *** percent in 2007, *** percent in 2008, and *** percent in 2009. CR/PR at Table III-7.

 218 CR/PR at Table VII-3. 

 219 CR/PR at Table VII-1.

 220 CR/PR at Table VII-2.

 221 Compare CR/PR at Table VII-1 and Table VII-2 with CR/PR at Table C-1.

 222 There are no known antidumping or countervailing duty orders on narrow woven ribbons in third-country

markets. CR at VII-8; PR at VII-6.

32
narrow woven ribbons are not determinative and that lower prices have been a driving factor in

purchasers’ sourcing decisions. Domestic producers will be forced to lower prices or lose market share.

D. Likely Price Effects Of The Cumulated Subject Imports

In assessing the likely price effects of the subject imports, we consider whether the significantly

increased volume of subject imports is likely to have significant depressing or suppressing effects on

prices for domestic narrow woven ribbons.

We note that apparent U.S. consumption fell during the period examined, but that demand is

expected to recover in the imminent future.223 As discussed above, there was widespread and significant

underselling by subject imports during the period examined, with margins of underselling by the subject

merchandise ranging from ***.224 We find that such underselling likely would increase as subject imports

use lower prices to gain market share from the domestic industry and will prevent the domestic industry

from participating fully in supplying the increased demand by purchasers. Price is an important factor in

the purchasing decision of purchasers.225 There is considerable evidence on the record that the decision

by purchasers whether to import from subject countries or to continue to purchase narrow woven ribbons

from domestic producers hinges on obtaining the lowest priced narrow woven ribbons.226 For example,

Berwick Offray provided internal call reports explaining that *** requested the company to provide

significant price reductions in order to compete with the retailer’s direct import options.227 Specifically,

Berwick Offray provided bids on its narrow woven ribbons to *** to compete with the pricing structure

offered by ***228 and was told by ***.229 Thus, evidence from these contemporaneous emails and

correspondence indicates that price is the main factor in purchasers’ decision whether to import subject

merchandise or purchase domestically produced narrow woven ribbons. Such competition on the basis of

price will likely negatively affect domestic prices in the imminent future.

Although we concluded that the price effects of subject imports were not significant during the

period examined, they will have increasing and significant depressing and/or suppressing effects on

domestic prices as the volume of unfairly priced subject imports increases significantly, given the

importance of price in the purchase of narrow woven ribbons and the likely continued significant

underselling by subject imports. We find that these price effects will rise to a significant level in the

imminent future.

E. Likely Impact of the Subject Imports on the Domestic Industry

Despite the positive performance in certain indicators, such as market share and operating

income, during the period examined, even in light of an overall decline in apparent U.S. consumption, we

find that the downward trends in a large number of performance indicators during the period examined

 223 CR at II-12 to II-13; Ribbon Importers’ Posthearing Br. at 26-27; Ribbon Retailers’ Posthearing Br. at Exhibit

A, p.58.

 224 CR/PR at Table V-8.

 225 CR/PR at Table II-3. Thirty of 35 responding purchasers identified price as a “very important” factor in their

purchasing decisions. CR/PR at Table II-3.

 226 See Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at Exhibit 3 (Declaration of *** and Exhibits B, D-G, I-W ***). These

contemporaneous records contradict respondents’ arguments that purchasers are choosing imports over domestically

produced narrow woven ribbons based on non-price factors.

 227 Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at Exhibit 3 (Declaration of ***, Exhibit A).

 228 Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at Exhibit 3 (Declaration of ***, Exhibit D).

 229 Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at Exhibit 3 (Declaration of ***, Exhibit M).

33
weighs heavily in our consideration of the impact of subject imports in the imminent future. The

domestic industry’s performance declined in terms of production, net sales, unit COGS, gross profits,

operating income, and operating margins.230 The domestic industry reported decreased capacity from

2007 to 2009 and experienced a drop in capacity utilization in each year of the period examined.231 In

addition, the domestic industry registered declines in employment related factors. The number of

production-related workers declined *** percent and the hours worked decreased *** percent from 2007

to 2009, while the wages paid also experienced a *** decrease.232 Accordingly, we find that the industry

is vulnerable to material injury. 233 234 As a result of the declining trends and given its vulnerable state, the

domestic industry will likely continue to experience even lower employment levels, net sales, operating

income, and profitability as demand recovers and increasing volumes of low-priced subject imports are

lured back to the U.S. market and compete with the domestic like product. Given that the industry is

already in a weakened state, we conclude that these effects are significant and support a conclusion that

the domestic industry is threatened with material injury by reason of subject imports from China and

Taiwan. Accordingly, we find that there is a likely causal relationship between the subject imports and an

imminent adverse impact on the domestic industry

We also have considered whether there are other factors that will likely have an imminent impact

on the domestic industry. Non-subject imports were sold in the U.S. market throughout the period

examined and increased their market share from 2007 to 2009, but their presence was small with the

exception of imports from non-subject producers in Taiwan.235 Although non-subject imports from

Taiwan undersold the domestic product in all quarterly comparisons, non-subject imports from Taiwan

also generally oversold imports from China and oversold subject imports from Taiwan in 16 of 33

quarterly comparisons.236 Furthermore, the share of apparent U.S. consumption of domestic producers

and non-subject imports from Taiwan increased during the period examined. Therefore, the record does

not show that non-subject imports from Taiwan took market share from domestic producers.

We further determine, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1671d(b)(4)(B), that we would not have found

material injury but for the suspension of liquidation of subject imports.

We conclude that, given the vulnerability of the domestic industry, together with the likelihood

that cumulated subject imports will increase significantly in the imminent future at prices that will likely

 230 See CR/PR at Table VI-1 and Table C-1. 

 231 See CR/PR at Table C-1. 

 232 See CR/PR at Table C-1.

 233 In the preliminary phase of these investigations, we did not find the domestic industry to be vulnerable largely

because our finding was based on data covering only the first quarter of 2009. See USITC Pub. 4099 at 35. In the

final phase of these investigations, however, we place greater weight on the full-year data for 2009 than the interim

data that were previously available.

 234 Commissioner Pinkert joins in this analysis and finds that the domestic industry is currently in a weakened

state and thus vulnerable to injury from subject imports.

 235 CR/PR at Table IV-2. We also examined respondents’ contention that Berwick Offray’s scattered design,

production, and distribution facilities (in New Jersey, South Carolina, Maryland, Mexico, and Texas) resulted in cost

inefficiencies. Berwick Offray, however, explained that it determined that the structure of its operations results in

cost savings and that to consolidate its already existing facilities would require a sizeable investment and would not

provide any benefit. See Petitioner’s Posthearing Br. at Exhibit 1A, question 9; Hearing Tr. at 141-142 (Sorenson). 

In any event, we take the domestic industry as we find it and the fact that a domestic industry’s operations may be

“inefficient” would not preclude us from making an affirmative injury determination. See Certain Frozen or Canned

Warmwater Shrimp and Prawns from Brazil, China, Ecquador, India, Thailand and Vietnam, Inv. Nos.

731-TA-1063-1068 (Final), USITC Pub. 3748 (January 2005) at 34 & n. 239, quoting Iwatsu Electric Co. v. United

States, 758 F. Supp. 1506, 1512, 1518 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1991). 

 236 CR/PR at Appendix D-3.

34
undersell the domestic like product and depress and suppress domestic prices to a significant degree,

material injury by reason of subject imports will occur absent issuance of antidumping duty orders against

subject imports. We therefore conclude that the domestic narrow woven ribbons industry is threatened

with material injury by reason of cumulated subject imports from China and Taiwan.

CONCLUSION

For the above-stated reasons, and based on the record in the final phase of these investigations,

we find that a domestic industry producing narrow woven ribbons is threatened with material injury by

reason of subject imports from China and Taiwan that are sold in the United States at less than fair value,

and imports of narrow woven ribbons from China that are subsidized by the Government of China. 

35

DISSENTING VIEWS OF CHAIRMAN DEANNA TANNER OKUN

AND COMMISSIONER DANIEL R. PEARSON

I. INTRODUCTION

Based on the record in these investigations, we determine that an industry in the United States is

not materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of imports of certain narrow woven

ribbons with woven selvedge (“narrow woven ribbons”) from China and Taiwan that are sold in the

United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”) and imports of narrow woven ribbons from China that are

subsidized by the Government of China. We join the Views of the Commission concerning background,

domestic like product, domestic industry, cumulation analysis for both present material injury and threat

of material injury, the appropriate legal standards for material injury and threat of material injury analysis,

post-petition effects, the conditions of competition, and the negative material injury by reason of subject

imports analysis and findings. We write separately, however, with respect to our analysis of threat of

material injury by reason of subject imports from China and Taiwan.

II. NO THREAT OF MATERIAL INJURY BY REASON OF SUBJECT IMPORTS FROM

CHINA AND TAIWAN

Section 771(7)(F) of the Tariff Act directs the Commission to determine whether the U.S.

industry is threatened with material injury by reason of the subject imports by analyzing whether “further

dumped or subsidized imports are imminent and whether material injury by reason of imports would

occur unless an order is issued or a suspension agreement is accepted.”1

 The Commission may not make

such a determination “on the basis of mere conjecture or supposition,” and considers the threat factors “as

a whole” in making its determination whether dumped or subsidized imports are imminent and whether

material injury by reason of subject imports would occur unless an order is issued.2

 In making our

determinations, we consider all statutory threat factors that are relevant to these investigations.3

 1 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(ii).

 2

 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(ii).

 3

 These factors are as follows:

(I) if a countervailable subsidy is involved, such information as may be presented to it by the administering

authority as to the nature of the subsidy (particularly as to whether the countervailable subsidy is a subsidy

described in Article 3 or 6.1 of the Subsidies Agreement) and whether imports of the subject merchandise

are likely to increase,

(II) any existing unused production capacity or imminent, substantial increase in production capacity in the

exporting country indicating the likelihood of substantially increased imports of the subject merchandise

into the United States, taking into account the availability of other export markets to absorb any additional

exports,

(III) a significant rate of increase of the volume or market penetration of imports of the subject merchandise

indicating the likelihood of substantially increased imports,

(IV) whether imports of the subject merchandise are entering at prices that are likely to have a significant

depressing or suppressing effect on domestic prices and are likely to increase demand for further imports,

(V) inventories of the subject merchandise,

37
Based on the indicators of the industry’s performance discussed in the Views of the Commission,

we do not find that the domestic industry is currently in a weakened state nor vulnerable to a threat of

material injury by reason of subject imports from China and Taiwan.4

 We find that the data on the

domestic industry do not show a correlation between subject imports and the domestic industry’s

declining performance indicia during the period of investigation. The domestic industry’s financial

performance remained positive and was at its highest level when subject imports increased from 2007 to

2008, declining as subject imports declined in 2009. Moreover, the deterioration in some of the domestic

industry’s performance indicators coincided with the economic downturn and appear to be demand

driven, occurring while subject imports were decreasing overall during the period examined on an

absolute basis and in terms of market penetration. The record evidence does not indicate that the

conditions of competition prevailing during the period of investigation will change significantly in the

imminent future.

The volume of subject imports from China and Taiwan declined overall in both absolute terms

and as a share of apparent U.S. consumption during the period examined. In absolute terms, cumulated

subject imports fluctuated between years, but declined sharply from *** square yards in 2007 to ***

square yards in 2009, or by ***.5

 The volume of subject imports began declining in 2009 before the

filing of the petitions in these investigations and in response to a rapid decline in demand.6

 Moreover, in

the declining U.S. market, the market share of cumulated subject imports dropped from *** in 2007 to

*** in 2009, as the domestic industry’s share increased.7

 We see no evidence in the record to find that

this pattern will not continue. Consequently, we find that the volume and market share of cumulated

subject imports are not likely to increase substantially in the imminent future.

We acknowledge that Chinese and Taiwan producers are export oriented, and that the United

States was the destination for a large share of their exports during the period examined.8

 Exports to the

(VI) the potential for product-shifting if production facilities in the foreign country, which can be used to

produce the subject merchandise, are currently being used to produce other products;

(VIII) the actual and potential negative effects on the existing development and production efforts of the

domestic industry, including efforts to develop a derivative or more advanced version of the domestic like

product, and ,

. . .

(IX) any other demonstrable adverse trends that indicate the probability that there is likely to be material

injury by reason of imports (or sale for importation) of the subject merchandise (whether or not it is actually

being imported at the time).

19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(I). This investigation does not involve an agricultural product, so statutory threat factor

(VII) is not implicated. As no one has argued that the domestic industry is currently engaging or will imminently

engage in any efforts to develop a derivative or more advanced version of the domestic like product, statutory threat

factor (VIII) is not implicated.

 4

 In its final countervailing duty determination, Commerce found the following programs to be countervailable:

preferential tax policies for enterprises with foreign investment (“two free, three half”) program; local income tax

exemptions and reduction programs for “productive” foreign-invested enterprises; Xiamen Municipal Science and

Technology Grant Program; and International Market Development Fund Grants for SMEs. CR/PR at I-4, n.3.

 5

 CR/PR at Table IV-2.

 6

 See CR/PR at Table IV-10.

 7

 CR/PR at Tables IV-11, C-1. The ratio of subject imports to U.S. production increased from *** in 2007 to ***

in 2008 before declining to *** in 2009. CR/PR at Table IV-14. 

 8

 CR/PR at Tables VII-1 and VII-2. Data for responding producers in China appear to cover between *** of U.S.

importers’ U.S. imports from China. CR at VII-4, n.11/PR at VII-4, n.11. Data from responding producers in

Taiwan appear to cover between 47 and 55 percent of U.S. importers’ subject U.S. imports from Taiwan. CR at VII38
United States as a share of responding Chinese producers’ total exports, however, steadily declined as

Chinese exports of narrow woven ribbons to third country markets accounted for an increasing share of

total Chinese exports, notwithstanding the slowdown of the global economy in 2009.9

 While exports to

the United States as a share of responding Taiwan producers’ total exports increased slightly from 2007 to

2009, in absolute terms the volume of these exports to the United States steadily declined.10

Although the reported capacity to produce narrow woven ribbons in each subject country is at a

similar level to the U.S. industry’s average production capacity, reported capacity in China and Taiwan

declined over the period examined.11 During the period examined, Chinese producers’ capacity

utilization was about 70 percent, although it fluctuated higher between years, and Taiwan producers’

capacity utilization declined from a high of 94.7 percent in 2007 to a low of 75.5 percent in 2009.12 We

recognize that the subject countries have some excess capacity but note that the excess capacity did not

lead to increases in subject imports during the period examined and, in fact, the excess capacity was

highest in 2009 when subject imports declined.

U.S. importers’ inventories of subject imports remained at relatively the same level during the

period examined13 and were lower than U.S. producers’ reported end-of-period inventories in each year,

even with the *** decline as U.S. producer *** in 2009.14 Chinese and Taiwan producers’ end-of-period

inventories remained at relatively stable levels during the period examined.15 Most sales by importers

from China and Taiwan, as well as by U.S. producers, are from inventory.16 Thus, relatively high levels

of inventory are a condition of competition in this market, and are not indicative of likely substantial

increases in subject imports in the imminent future.17

5, n.18/PR at VII-4, n.18.

 9

 Subject Chinese producers’ exports to the United States accounted for 46.2 percent of their total exports in

2007, 40.9 percent in 2008, and 26.8 percent in 2009. CR/PR at Table VII-1.

 10 Subject Taiwan producers’ exports to the United States accounted for 52.0 percent of their total exports in

2007, 53.3 percent in 2008, and 53.7 percent in 2009. CR/PR at Table VII-2.

 11 After increasing from 9.9 million square yards in 2007 to 10.7 million square yards in 2008, responding

Chinese producers’ narrow woven ribbon capacity declined to 9.1 million square yards in 2009, and is projected to

remain at that level in 2010 and 2011. CR/PR at Table VII-1. Responding Taiwan producers’ narrow woven ribbon

capacity declined from 12.1 million square yards in 2007 to 11.4 million square yards in 2008 and 11.2 million

square yards in 2009, and is projected to remain at that level in 2010 and 2011. CR/PR at Table VII-2.

 12 CR/PR at Tables VII-1 and VII-2.

 13 U.S. importers’ inventories of subject narrow woven ribbon were: *** square yards in 2007, and *** square

yards in 2008 and 2009. CR/PR at Table VII-3. As a ratio to U.S. imports from all subject sources, U.S. importers’

inventories were *** in 2007, *** in 2008, and *** in 2009. CR/PR at Table VII-3. 

 14 CR at III-12, n.29/CR at III-6, n.29. U.S. producers’ end-of-period inventories were: *** square yards in

2007, *** square yards in 2008, and *** square yards in 2009. CR/PR at Table III-7. As a ratio to U.S. production,

U.S. producers’ end-of-period inventories were *** in 2007, *** in 2008, and *** in 2009. CR/PR at Table III-7.

 15 Chinese producers’ end of period inventories were 4.4 million square yards in 2007, and 4.3 million square

yards in 2008 and 2009. CR at Table VII-1. Taiwan producers’ end-of-period inventories were 0.5 million square

yards in 2007, 0.3 million square yards in 2008, and 0.4 million square yards in 2009. CR at Table VII-2.

 16 A majority of importers of narrow woven ribbons from subject sources in China reported that most or all of

their sales are from inventory. *** of the importers of narrow woven ribbons from subject sources in Taiwan

reported that most or all of their sales are from inventory. U.S. producers reported that *** of their narrow woven

ribbons are sold from inventory. CR at II-2 and II-3/PR at II-1 and II-2.

 17 There is no indication that subject producers have the ability to shift production from other products to narrow

woven ribbons let alone would rely on product shifting to increase exports to the United States in the imminent

future. Moreover, narrow woven ribbon is not the subject of any import relief investigations or findings in any other

39
Based on the above, we conclude that there is no likelihood of substantially increased imports of

subject merchandise, particularly not as a share of apparent U.S. consumption, in the imminent future.

We have considered Petitioner’s allegations that certain retailers intend to transition business to

direct importation.18 The evidence demonstrates that during the period of investigation some retailers,

such as *** already had substantial volumes of direct imports of narrow woven ribbon.19 Moreover, any

increases in direct imports by the U.S. retailers during the period of investigation occurred at the expense

of the domestic industry’s facilitated imports, as U.S. retailers began cutting out U.S. producers as their

import sources.20 Thus, the evidence during the period of investigation does not provide an indication of

a likelihood of substantial increases in subject imports in the imminent future.

Accordingly, we find it is not likely that subject imports will increase to a level that would be

injurious to the domestic industry in the imminent future.

We have already found that subject imports from China and Taiwan have not had significantly

adverse effects on domestic prices. Subject imports are not entering at prices that are likely to have a

significant depressing or suppressing effect on domestic prices. We observe that underselling by subject

imports did not adversely affect domestic producers’ prices during the period examined. Nothing on the

record indicates that conditions of competition in the U.S. market or importers’ pricing practices will

change significantly from those during the period examined to such an extent that the likely volume of

subject imports would have a significant adverse effect on domestic producers’ prices in the imminent

future.

There is also no evidence that subject imports will have significant negative effects on the

performance of the domestic industry. There is simply no indication that the conditions of competition

prevailing during the period examined will change significantly in the imminent future. Given our

conclusion that subject imports will not imminently increase substantially above the non-injurious market

shares they held during the period examined and will not likely have significant adverse price effects, we

find that subject imports will not likely have a significant adverse impact on the performance of the

domestic industry. Therefore, we find that material injury by reason of subject imports will not occur

absent issuance of an antidumping duty order or countervailing duty order against subject imports. 

Accordingly, we conclude that the domestic narrow woven ribbon industry is not threatened with material

injury by reason of subject imports from China and Taiwan.

III. CONCLUSION

For the reasons stated above, we find that the domestic industry producing narrow woven ribbons

is not materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of subject imports from China and

Taiwan sold in the United States at less than fair value and subject imports subsidized by the Government

of China.

country. CR at VII-8.

 18 See Petitioner’s Posthearing Brief at Exhibit 3.

 19 U.S. Importers’ Questionnaire Responses for ***. Id.

 20 CR at IV-7; PR at IV-3. U.S. imports controlled by U.S. producers (“facilitated imports”) *** in 2009. CR/PR

at Table IV-3.

40
SEPARATE AND DISSENTING VIEWS OF COMMISSIONER 

DEAN A. PINKERT 

Based on the record in the final phase of these investigations, I find that an industry in the

United States is threatened with material injury by reason of imports of narrow woven ribbons

with woven selvedge (“narrow woven ribbons”) from China that are sold in the United States

at less than fair value and/or subsidized by the Government of China. I further find that an industry in the

United States is not threatened with material injury by reason of imports of narrow woven ribbons

from Taiwan that are sold in the United States at less than fair value. 

I join the Commission’s Views with respect to background, domestic like product, domestic

industry, legal standards, conditions of competition, vulnerability, and the analysis of present material

injury by reason of the subject imports, except where otherwise noted. I write separately, however, with

respect to my analysis of threat of material injury by reason of the subject imports.

I. THREAT OF MATERIAL INJURY BY REASON OF SUBJECT IMPORTS FROM

CHINA

Section 771(F) of the Act directs the Commission to determine whether an industry in the United

States is threatened with material injury by reason of the subject imports by analyzing whether “further

dumped or subsidized imports are imminent and whether material injury by reason of imports would

occur unless an order is issued or a suspension agreement is accepted.”1

 The Commission may not make

such a determination “on the basis of mere conjecture or supposition,” and considers the threat factors “as

a whole.”2

 In making my determinations, I have considered all factors that are relevant to these

investigations.3

 

 1 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(ii).

 2

 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(ii). An affirmative threat determination must be based upon “positive evidence tending

to show an intention to increase the levels of importation.” Metallverken Nederland B.V. v. United States, 744 F.

Supp. 281, 287 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1990) (citing American Spring Wire Corp. v. United States, 590 F. Supp. 1273, 1280

(Ct. Int’l Trade 1984); see also Calabrian Corp. v. United States, 794 F. Supp. 377, 387-88 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1992)

citing H.R. Rep. No. 98-1156 at 174 (1984).

 3

 These factors are as follows:

(I) if a countervailable subsidy is involved, such information as may be presented to it by the administering

authority as to the nature of the subsidy (particularly as to whether the countervailable subsidy is a subsidy

described in Article 3 or 6.1 of the Subsidies Agreement) and whether imports of the subject merchandise

are likely to increase,

(II) any existing unused production capacity or imminent, substantial increase in production capacity in the

exporting country indicating the likelihood of substantially increased imports of the subject merchandise

into the United States, taking into account the availability of other export markets to absorb any additional

exports,

(III) a significant rate of increase of the volume or market penetration of imports of the subject merchandise

indicating the likelihood of substantially increased imports,

(IV) whether imports of the subject merchandise are entering at prices that are likely to have a significant

depressing or suppressing effect on domestic prices and are likely to increase demand for further imports,

41
A. Cumulation

Section 771(7)(H) of the Act provides as follows:

(H) Cumulation for determining threat of material injury – To the extent practicable and subject

to subparagraph (G)(ii), for purposes of clause (i)(III) and (IV) of subparagraph (F), the

Commission may cumulatively assess the volume and price effects of imports of the subject

merchandise from all countries with respect to which – 

(i) petitions were filed under section 1671a(b) or 1673a(b) of this title on the same

day.

(ii) investigations were initiated under section 1671a(a) or 1673a(a) of this title on

the same day, or

(iii) petitions were filed under section 1671a(b) or 1673a(b) of this title and

investigations were initiated under section 1671a(a) or 1673a(a) of this title on

the same day,

if such imports compete with each other and with the domestic like product in the United States market.4

I note that, under the statute, both the limitations on eligibility for cumulation and the exceptions

to cumulation that are applicable for purposes of present material injury determinations are applicable as

well for purposes of threat of material injury determinations. Unlike the statutory language regarding

cumulation for purposes of present material injury determinations, however, the language set forth above

indicates that the Commission “may” cumulatively assess imports that satisfy the statutory prerequisites,

which permits the Commission to consider factors other than the prerequisites in determining whether to

cumulate imports for purposes of threat determinations. In the Commission’s practice, the most

prominent of those other factors are volume and price trends. As a consequence of my consideration of

such factors, although I join my colleagues in cumulating the subject imports from China and Taiwan for

purposes of my negative present material injury determination, I do not cumulate the subject imports for

purposes of my threat of material injury determinations.

(V) inventories of the subject merchandise,

(VI) the potential for product-shifting if production facilities in the foreign country, which can be used to

produce the subject merchandise, are currently being used to produce other products.

* * *

(IX) any other demonstrable adverse trends that indicate the probability that there is likely to be material

injury by reason of imports (or sale for importation) of the subject merchandise (whether or not it is actually

being imported at the time).

19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(I). Statutory threat factor (VII) is inapplicable, as no imports of agricultural products are

involved in these investigations. No argument was made under statutory threat factor (VIII) that the domestic

industry is currently engaging or will imminently engage in any efforts to develop a derivative or more advanced

version of the domestic like product.

 4

 19 U.S.C. 1677(7)(H) (emphasis added).

42
The volume trends for subject imports from China and Taiwan are very different.5

 Subject import

volumes from China increased significantly from 2007 to 2008 ***, before decreasing dramatically from

2008 to 2009 ***, while subject imports from Taiwan decreased each year from 2007 to 2009 ***.6

Although subject imports from both countries declined from 2008 to 2009, the decline with respect to

China was far greater both in absolute and percentage terms than the decline with respect to Taiwan.7 8

 

Price trends for subject imports from China and Taiwan are also quite different. Subject imports

from China oversold domestically produced merchandise in only 4 of 69 comparisons (5.80 percent of the

comparisons), while subject imports from Taiwan oversold domestically produced merchandise in 19 of

72 comparisons (26.39 percent of the comparisons).9

 Further, subject imports from China frequently

undersold subject imports from Taiwan, often by substantial amounts.10 Additional evidence of differing

price trends is shown in the average unit value (“AUV”) data. Whereas the AUVs of U.S. shipments of

subject imports from China decreased steadily, decreasing by *** during the period examined, the AUVs

of U.S. shipments from Taiwan increased steadily, increasing by 20.7 percent during the period

examined.11

It is also pertinent to my cumulation determination that Taiwanese producers of narrow woven

ribbons – due to their relatively high capacity utilization and relatively low level of inventories – are

much less able than Chinese producers to respond to increases in demand in the U.S. market.12 13 I find

this factor to be particularly important in considering threat of material injury as demand conditions in the

U.S. market recover after a period during which an extraordinarily sharp contraction in the overall

economy weighed heavily upon them.

Given these differences between China and Taiwan, all of which are highly relevant to the threat

subject imports pose to the domestic industry in the imminent future, I decline to exercise my discretion

to cumulate subject imports from the two countries.

 5 Unless otherwise noted, any reference herein to “Taiwan” or “Taiwanese” refers only to subject imports,

exports, or producers.

 6

 U.S. shipments of imports from China increased from *** square yards in 2007 to *** square yards in 2008. 

U.S. shipments of imports from China then decreased to *** square yards in 2009. U.S. shipments of imports from

Taiwan fell from *** square yards in 2007 to *** square yards in 2009. CR/PR at Table C-1.

 7

 CR/PR at Table IV-2. Although one importer of subject merchandise cited to the filing of the petition as the

reason for the decline in imports in 2009, others cited primarily to the weakened economy or weak demand for

subject merchandise in the U.S. market as the reason for the decrease in imports. CR at IV-6.

 8

 CR at IV-5-IV-6.

 9

 CR/PR at Table V-8.

 10 CR/PR at Tables V-1 to V-6.

 11 CR/PR at Table C-1.

 12 The capacity utilization of responding subject producers of narrow woven ribbons in Taiwan was 94.7 percent

in 2007, 87.6 percent in 2008, and 75.5 percent in 2009. Inventories of narrow woven ribbons for producers in

Taiwan were 4.3 percent of production in 2007, 3.0 percent in 2008, and 4.5 percent in 2009. CR at VII-6.

 13 The capacity utilization of responding producers of narrow woven ribbons in China was 68.7 percent in 2007,

76.3 percent in 2008, and 69.6 percent in 2009. Inventories of narrow woven ribbons for producers in China were

65.0 percent of production in 2007, 52.3 percent in 2008, and 67.0 percent in 2009. CR at VII-4.

43
B. Analysis of Statutory Threat Factors

1. Subject Imports from China

As explained below, I find that increasing volumes of dumped and/or subsidized subject

merchandise from China into the United States are imminent and that material injury by reason of these

imports will occur unless orders are issued. 

The narrow woven ribbons industry in China is large and getting larger.14 In 2009, the 

responding Chinese subject producers’ production was equivalent to *** percent of U.S. consumption.15

The industry in China is also export oriented.16 The responding Chinese producers’ home market

shipments, although showing a slight increase, remained low relative to their total shipments.17

Moreover, the United States is a very important market for exporting Chinese producers. During the

period examined, responding Chinese producers’ export shipments to the United States remained high,

ranging from a low of 26.8 percent to a high of 46.2 percent.18 Exports to the United States exceeded

exports to all other markets in 2007 and were only slightly less than exports to all other markets in 2008. 

Only in 2009, with the decline in apparent U.S. consumption and the filing of the petition, did a sudden

and dramatic shift away from the U.S. market and toward other export markets occur. It is thus only in

that one year of the period examined that exports of subject merchandise to all other markets exceeded, by

any significant measure, exports to the United States.19

Chinese producers retain the ability as a result of their excess capacity20 and inventories,21 as well

as their ability to shift product from alternative markets,22 to quickly and substantially increase their

shipments to the U.S. market.23 Importantly, the record indicates clearly that Chinese producers have an

ability and willingness to significantly increase or decrease their exports to the United States over a

relatively short period of time, creating large shifts in volume from one year to the next. In the imminent

 14 ***. ***. ***. CR at VII-4-5/PR at VII-3-4.

 15 Compare CR/PR at Table VII-1 with CR/PR at Table C-1. Although our data coverage for the Chinese

industry is not complete, exports to the United States by the five responding Chinese producers appear to cover

between *** percent of U.S. importers’ U.S. imports from China. CR/PR at Table IV-2, CR at VII-4, n.11. 

 16 In 2007, reporting Chinese producers exported 85.3 percent of their shipments, declining slightly to 82.7

percent in 2008 and to 81.7 percent in 2009. CR/PR at Table VII-1. 

 17 Reporting Chinese producers’ home market shipments were 7.3 percent of total shipments in 2007, 9.7 percent

of total shipments in 2008, and 11.3 percent of total shipments in 2009. CR/PR at Table VII-1.

 18 CR/PR at Table VII-1.

 19 CR/PR at Table VII-4. 

 20 The responding Chinese producers’ projected capacity of 9.1 million square yards in each of 2010 and 2011

and projected production of 5.3 million square yards in 2010 and 5.6 million square yards in 2011. CR/PR at Table

VII-1. The responding Chinese producers’ projected excess capacity is 3.8 million square yards in 2010 and 3.5

million square yards in 2011.

 21 The responding Chinese producers’ end-of-period inventories were projected to be 3.9 million square yards in

2010 and 3.6 million square yards in 2011. CR/PR at Table VII-1. 

 22 Available data indicate that Chinese producers have some ability to divert shipments to or from alternate

markets in response to changes in the price of narrow woven ribbons. CR at II-7/PR at II-5.

 23 CR at II-6-7/PR at II-5. 

44
future, Chinese producers will likely have an incentive to increase U.S. shipments of the subject product,

as there is evidence on the record that demand is rebounding.24

In analyzing what Chinese producers are likely to do in the imminent future, one need not look

further than the sharp increase, and even sharper subsequent decrease, in Chinese subject import volumes

between 2007 and 2009. Between 2007 and 2008, a period when apparent U.S. consumption was

relatively stable, U.S. shipments of imports from China increased by *** percent, taking a substantial

amount of market share.25 26 Conversely, between 2008 and 2009, a period when apparent U.S.

consumption ***, U.S. shipments of imports from China decreased by *** percent, ***.27 Such sharp

increases and decreases in volume corresponding to changes in demand conditions were not made by any

of the other participants involved in the U.S. narrow woven ribbons market during the period. The rapid

withdrawal from the U.S. market in 2009 by Chinese producers, especially in terms of market share, is

also linked to the filing of the petition in July of that year, given that it showed no signs of reversing itself

as demand conditions improved after the filing.28 I therefore attribute the decline in volume by the

Chinese subject producers in 2009 both to the decline in apparent U.S. consumption and to the filing of

the petition, not to any lessening of the importance of the U.S. market to Chinese subject producers, any

change in the U.S. market’s acceptance of Chinese subject merchandise, or any change in the desire or

capability of Chinese producers of the subject merchandise to sell into the United States. In a period of

recovering U.S. demand, and without trade remedies in place, the Chinese producers would likely return

to the export pattern shown between 2007 and 2008, namely, a dramatic increase effectuated by means of

underselling to take advantage of U.S. demand for narrow woven ribbons. This increase would come at

the expense of domestic producers.29 

In light of these factors, I find that a significant increase in the volume of subject imports from 

China is likely in the imminent future.

I next consider whether the increased volume of subject imports from China is likely to have

significant price depressing and/or suppressing effects on sales of domestic narrow woven ribbons. In

that respect, I note that price is a very important factor in purchasing decisions.30 

The margins of underselling by the subject merchandise from China ranged from 1.7 to 83.3

percent during the period of investigation, with an average margin of 49.2 percent.31 I find that such

underselling would likely increase in the imminent future as subject imports use lower prices to gain

 24 CR at II-12-13/PR at II-9-10. 

 25 U.S. producers’ market share increased only fractionally from 2007 to 2008, while Chinese market share

increased significantly. By contrast, Taiwan producers’ market share declined from 2007 to 2008. CR/PR at Table

C-1.

 26 U.S. importers’ U.S. imports from China were *** square yards in 2007 and rose to *** square yards in 2008,

before declining to *** square yards in 2009. CR/PR at Table IV-2. 

 27 Chinese producers responded more dramatically than any other country’s producers to circumstances in 2009,

losing almost *** percentage points in market share. Taiwanese producers, conversely, had virtually no change in

market share. CR/PR at Table C-1.

 28 CR/PR at Table IV-10.

 29 I note that the responding Chinese producers project that their exports to the U.S. will amount to only 409,000

square yards in 2010 and 237,000 square yards in 2011. CR/PR at Table VII-1. As these projections do not

correspond with the levels of historical exports by the Chinese producers during the period examined, I place less

weight on them.

 30 CR/PR at Tables II-2 and II-3.

 31 CR/PR at Table V-8.

45
market share from the domestic producers as well as from Taiwanese subject and nonsubject producers.32

Although the Commission concludes in the majority opinion on present material injury, which I join, that

the price effects of the cumulated subject imports were not significant during the period of investigation, I

find that increasing underselling by Chinese producers will exert additional pricing pressure on U.S.

producers in the imminent future and will likely lead to depressing and/or suppressing effects on domestic

prices as the volumes of unfairly priced subject imports from China increase significantly. At a

minimum, they will result in significant volume and market share losses for the domestic industry.

I join the Commission majority in finding that the domestic industry is in a weakened state and

therefore vulnerable to material injury from subject imports.33 

Given current projections for demand in the imminent future, the U.S. market will likely

experience significant additional subject volumes from China, competing largely on price and creating

intense competition for market share. As discussed above, I note that the increased volume of subject

imports from China that is likely to occur in the imminent future will likely significantly undersell the

domestic like product, take market share from the domestic industry, and have depressing and/or

suppressing effects on prices for domestically produced narrow woven ribbons. As the U.S. industry

loses volume and market share to Chinese producers, it will be forced to choose between, on the one

hand, further losses of volume and market share and, on the other hand, cutting prices to compete with the

undersold imports. Either course will likely lead to a further decline in many of the industry’s financial

metrics. 

The increased volumes of undersold subject import volumes from China will likely exacerbate

the domestic industry’s already weakened condition, adversely affecting the financial performance of the

U.S. industry and magnifying the negative trends the domestic industry experienced in 2009, including

trends with respect to operating income, capacity utilization, production workers, and hours worked. 

In conclusion, given the vulnerability of the domestic industry and the likelihood that subject

imports from China will increase significantly in the imminent future at prices that will undersell the

domestic like product and depress and/or suppress domestic prices to a significant degree, I find that

material injury by reason of subject imports from China will occur in the imminent future unless orders

are issued. I therefore conclude that the domestic narrow woven ribbons industry is threatened with

material injury by reason of subject imports from China. 34

 32 Chinese subject producers undersold U.S. producers in virtually every quarterly comparison (65 of 69

comparisons) and oversold U.S. producers in only four comparisons. Taiwanese subject producers, by contrast,

oversold U.S. producers in 19 quarterly comparisons. CR at V-24-25/PR at V-7-8. Additionally, the AUVs of U.S.

shipments from China declined each year during the period examined. The AUVs of U.S. shipments from Taiwan,

however, increased each year during the period examined.

 33 CR at VI-7-9, PR at VI-5-6 (discussion of actual and anticipated negative effects on development and

production efforts).

 34 I further determine, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1673d(b)(4)(B), that the record does not indicate that the domestic

industry would have been materially injured “but for” the suspension of liquidation of subject imports.

46
2. Subject Imports from Taiwan35

Subject imports from Taiwan declined during the period under investigation,36 as did the market

share controlled by the subject Taiwanese producers, which fell from *** percent in 2007 to *** percent

in 2009.37 Although the Taiwanese industry is export oriented,38 the percentage of Taiwan’s narrow

woven ribbons shipped to the United States increased only slightly between 2007 and 2009, and projected

shipments to the United States are expected to fall slightly in 2010 and 2011.39 The share of shipments

exported to other markets dropped from 40.1 percent in 2007 to 35.9 percent in 2009, with the share of

shipments to the home market rising correspondingly.40 Overall, the presence of Taiwanese subject

imports in the U.S. market has been notably stable despite declining demand driven in large part by

macroeconomic forces.

The capacity of the industry in Taiwan decreased from 2007 to 2009 and is projected to remain at

current levels in the future.41 The Taiwanese industry is operating at high levels of capacity utilization

that are expected to decrease only slightly in 2010 and 2011.42 In addition, the Taiwanese producers’

inventories of subject merchandise are extremely low and are projected to remain low in 2010 and 2011.

Taiwanese producers’ end-of-period inventories fell from 490,000 square yards in 2007 to 378,000 square

yards in 2009. Taiwan’s end-of-period inventories are projected to be 363,000 square yards in 2010 and

345,000 square yards in 2011, less than *** those of reporting Chinese producers.43 In view of the

foregoing, I do not find that subject imports from Taiwan will enter the U.S. market in significantly

increased volumes in the imminent future.

Prices for narrow woven ribbon from Taiwan generally undersold the U.S. product.44

Notwithstanding this underselling, I have found that the record does not support a finding of price

depression or price suppression. Because I find that there is no reason to believe any change in the

behavior of Taiwanese subject imports in the U.S. market to be imminent, I determine that the record does

 35 The Commission received foreign producer questionnaire responses from seven of 39 potential producers of

narrow woven ribbons in Taiwan. CR at VII-5/PR at VII-4.

 36 Subject imports from Taiwan fell from 12.7 million square yards in 2007 to 8.9 million square yards in 2009. 

CR/PR at Table IV-2.

 37 CR/PR at Table C-1.

 38 The industry in Taiwan shipped between 92.1 percent and 89.6 percent of its shipments to export markets

between 2007 and 2009 and projects that it will export 87.9 percent in 2010 and 87.8 percent in 2011. CR/PR at

Table VII-2. 

 39 Taiwan’s exports to the United States represented 52.0 percent of Taiwan’s total exports of narrow woven

ribbons in 2007, 53.3 percent in 2008, and 53.7 percent in 2009. CR/PR at Table VII-2. Responding producers in

Taiwan projected that 52.7 percent of Taiwan’s export of narrow woven ribbons would be exported to the United

States in 2010 and 52.5 percent would be exported to the United States in 2011. CR/PR at Table VII-2. 

 40 Taiwan’s exports to the home market represented 7.0 percent of the total in 2007 and 9.6 percent in 2009. 

 41 Taiwan’s capacity was 12.1 million square yards in 2007, 11.4 million square yards in 2008, and 11.2 million

square yards in 2009. Taiwan’s capacity is projected to remain at 11.2 million square yards in 2010 and 2011. 

CR/PR at Table VII-2.

 42 Capacity utilization was 94.7 percent in 2007, 87.7 percent in 2008, and 75.5 percent in 2009, and is projected

to be 73.9 percent in 2010 and 73.9 percent in 2011. CR/PR at Table VII-2. 

 43 CR/PR at Tables VII-1, -2.

 44 See CR/PR at Tables V-1 to V-6. Subject imports from Taiwan undersold the domestic product in 53 of 72

quarterly price comparisons, with margins ranging from 2.4 to 81.0 percent; the average margin of underselling was

42.5 percent. CR/PR at Table V-8.

47
not support a finding of likely price depression or price suppression by reason of Taiwanese subject

imports.

As noted above, I find that the domestic industry is vulnerable to material injury. Were there any

credible evidence on the record other than predominant underselling to indicate a likelihood of injury to

the domestic industry in the imminent future by reason of Taiwanese subject imports – such as credible

evidence of a propensity on the part of Taiwanese producers to make an aggressive move into the U.S.

market – I would likely find a threat to the U.S. industry by reason of such imports. Plainly stated,

however, there is no such credible evidence. Notably, Taiwanese producers’ market share in the United

States did not increase in 2008, when Chinese producers’ market share was increasing significantly, and it

did not decrease in 2009, when Chinese producers’ market share was tumbling. 

I consequently determine that the domestic narrow woven ribbons industry is not threatened with

material injury by reason of subject imports from Taiwan.

Conclusion

For the reasons stated above, I determine that an industry in the United States is threatened with

material injury by reason of subject imports of narrow woven ribbon from China that have been found by

Commerce to be sold in the United States at less than fair value and/or subsidized by the Government of

China. I also determine that an industry in the United States is not threatened with material injury by

reason of subject imports of narrow woven ribbon from Taiwan. 

48
I-1 

PART I: INTRODUCTION 

BACKGROUND 

These investigations result from petitions filed with the U.S. Department of Commerce 

(“Commerce”) and the U.S. International Trade Commission (“USITC” or “Commission”) by Berwick 

Offray LLC and its wholly-owned subsidiary Lion Ribbon Company, Inc., Berwick, PA, on July 9, 2009, 

alleging that an industry in the United States is materially injured and threatened with material injury by 

reason of subsidized and less-than-fair-value (“LTFV”) imports of narrow woven ribbons with woven 

selvedge (“narrow woven ribbons”)1

 from China and LTFV imports of narrow woven ribbons from 

Taiwan. Information relating to the background of these investigations is provided below:2

Effective date Action 

July 9, 2009 

Petitions filed with Commerce and the Commission; 

institution of investigations (74 FR 34362, July 15, 2009) 

August 6, 2009 

Commerce’s notice of antidumping duty investigations 

initiation (74 FR 39291); Commerce’s notice of 

countervailing duty investigation initiation (74 FR 39298) 

December 14, 2009 

Commerce’s notice of preliminary affirmative 

countervailing duty determination and alignment of final 

countervailing duty determination with final antidumping 

duty determination with respect to imports of narrow 

woven ribbons from China (74 FR 66090) 

February 12, 2010 

Commerce’s across-the-board one-week extension of all 

its administrative deadlines (“tolling memo”) 

February 18, 2010 

Commerce’s notices of preliminary determination of sales 

at LTFV and postponement of final determination with 

respect to imports of narrow woven ribbons from China 

(75 FR 7244) and Taiwan (75 FR 7236) 

February 18, 2010 

Commission’s notice of scheduling of the final phase 

investigations (75 FR 11908, March 12, 2010) 

July 15, 2010 Commission’s hearing1

July 19, 2010 

Commerce’s final antidumping and countervailing duty 

determinations (75 FR 41801, 41804, and 41808) 

August 12, 2010 Commission’s vote 

August 25, 2010 

Commission’s determinations and views transmitted to 

Commerce 1

 App. B of this report contains a list of witnesses at the hearing. 

 1

 A complete description of the imported products subject to these investigations is presented in the “Subject 

merchandise” section of this part of the report. 2 Federal Register notices since March 12, 2010 cited in this tabulation are presented in app. A of this report. 
I-2 

STATUTORY CRITERIA AND ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT 

Statutory Criteria 

Section 771(7)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the “Act”) (19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(B)) provides that in 

making its determinations of injury to an industry in the United States, the Commission-- 

shall consider (I) the volume of imports of the subject merchandise, (II) 

the effect of imports of that merchandise on prices in the United States 

for domestic like products, and (III) the impact of imports of such 

merchandise on domestic producers of domestic like products, but only 

in the context of production operations within the United States; and. . . 

may consider such other economic factors as are relevant to the 

determination regarding whether there is material injury by reason of 

imports. 

Section 771(7)(C) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)) further provides that-- 

In evaluating the volume of imports of merchandise, the Commission 

shall consider whether the volume of imports of the merchandise, or any 

increase in that volume, either in absolute terms or relative to production 

or consumption in the United States is significant. 

. . . 

In evaluating the effect of imports of such merchandise on prices, the 

Commission shall consider whether. . .(I) there has been significant price 

underselling by the imported merchandise as compared with the price of 

domestic like products of the United States, and (II) the effect of imports 

of such merchandise otherwise depresses prices to a significant degree 

or prevents price increases, which otherwise would have occurred, to a 

significant degree. 

. . . 

In examining the impact required to be considered under subparagraph 

(B)(i)(III), the Commission shall evaluate (within the context of the 

business cycle and conditions of competition that are distinctive to the 

affected industry) all relevant economic factors which have a bearing on 

the state of the industry in the United States, including, but not limited to 

. . . (I) actual and potential decline in output, sales, market share, profits, 

productivity, return on investments, and utilization of capacity, (II) 

factors affecting domestic prices, (III) actual and potential negative 

effects on cash flow, inventories, employment, wages, growth, ability to 

raise capital, and investment, (IV) actual and potential negative effects 

on the existing development and production efforts of the domestic 

industry, including efforts to develop a derivative or more advanced 

version of the domestic like product, and (V) in {an antidumping 

investigation}, the magnitude of the margin of dumping. 

Organization of the Report 

Information on the subject merchandise, margins of dumping and subsidy rates, and domestic like 

product is presented in Part I. Information on conditions of competition and other relevant economic 
I-3 

factors is presented in Part II. Part III presents information on the condition of the U.S. industry, 

including data on capacity, production, shipments, inventories, and employment. The volume and pricing 

of imports of the subject merchandise are presented in Part IV and Part V, respectively. Part VI presents 

information on the financial experience of U.S. producers. The statutory requirements and information 

obtained for use in the Commission’s consideration of the question of threat of material injury and the 

judicial requirements and information obtained for use in the Commission’s consideration of Bratsk

issues are presented in Part VII. 

MARKET SUMMARY 

Narrow woven ribbons are used for decorative packaging, crafts, and other retail applications. 

Trade in the U.S. market for narrow woven ribbons totaled $*** in 2009, of which *** percent was 

accounted for by sales of U.S.-produced narrow woven ribbons. Imports from subject sources accounted 

for *** percent of the U.S. market value in 2009, while imports from nonsubject sources accounted for 

*** percent. By quantity (based on square yards), U.S.-produced narrow woven ribbons accounted for 

*** percent of the market in 2009 compared to *** percent for subject sources and *** percent for 

nonsubject sources. 

SUMMARY DATA 

Table C-1 in appendix C presents a summary of data collected in these investigations. U.S. 

industry data are based on questionnaire responses from four U.S. producers (see Part III of this report). 

U.S. import data are based on questionnaire responses from 52 U.S. importers (see Part IV of this report). 

Information on the industries that produce narrow woven ribbons in China and Taiwan is based on 

questionnaire responses from 10 foreign producers and exporters (see Part VII of this report). Data from 

other sources are referenced and footnoted where appropriate. 

PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS 

Narrow woven ribbons have not been the subject of any prior countervailing or antidumping duty 

investigations in the United States. 

NATURE AND EXTENT OF SUBSIDIES AND SALES AT LTFV 

Subsidies 

On July 19, 2010, Commerce determined that certain producers of narrow woven ribbons benefit 

from countervailable subsidies provided by the Government of China.3

 Table I-1 presents the net subsidy 

rates found by Commerce. In its final determination, Commerce did not find a de minimis net 

 3

 Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from the People’s Republic of China: Final Affirmative 

Countervailing Duty Determination, 75 FR 41801, July 19, 2010. In its final determination, Commerce found 

several programs to be countervailable, including: preferential tax policies for enterprises with foreign investment 

(“two free, three half”) program; local income tax exemptions and reduction programs for “productive” foreigninvested enterprises; Xiamen Municipal Science and Technology Grant Program; and International Market 

Development Fund Grants for SMEs. See Commerce’s public decision memorandum, Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Narrow Woven Ribbons with 

Woven Selvedge from the People’s Republic of China, July 12, 2010.
I-4 

countervailable subsidy rate for Yama Ribbons and Bows Co., Ltd. for which it had done so in its 

preliminary determination.4

 

Table I-1 

Narrow woven ribbons: Net countervailable subsidy rates for producers in China 

Manufacturer/exporter 

Net subsidy rate 

(percent) 

Yama Ribbons and Bows Co., Ltd. 1.56

Changtai Rongshu Textile Co., Ltd. 117.95

All others 1.56

Source: Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from the People’s Republic of China: Final Affirmative 

Countervailing Duty Determination, 75 FR 41801, July 19, 2010. 

Sales at LTFV 

On July 19, 2010, Commerce determined that certain producers in China and Taiwan were selling 

narrow woven ribbons in the U.S. market at LTFV.5 6

 Tables I-2 and I-3 present the weighted-average 

margins of dumping found by Commerce. Since Commerce found a zero rate of dumping for certain 

producers or exporters in Taiwan, any U.S. imports from these producers/exporters are considered as 

nonsubject imports from Taiwan for the purposes of this report, and are presented apart from subject 

imports from Taiwan in all the relevant data tables.7

 

 4

 Therefore, for the purposes of this report, U.S. imports from the Chinese producer Yama Ribbons and Bows 

Co., Ltd. are considered subject imports along with the rest of U.S. imports from other producers in China, despite 

Commerce’s separate finding that Yama Ribbons and Bows Co., Ltd. was not selling narrow woven ribbons in the 

U.S. market at LTFV (see section below). 5

 Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From the People’s Republic of China: Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 75 FR 41808, July 19, 2010. 6

 Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge 

from Taiwan, 75 FR 41804, July 19, 2010. 7

 A similar treatment is not accorded to U.S. imports from the Chinese producer Yama Ribbons and Bows Co., 

Ltd. despite Commerce’s finding of a zero rate of dumping for that firm because Commerce separately found in its 

subsidy investigation on this product that Yama Ribbons and Bows Co., Ltd. was provided a net countervailable 

subsidy by the Government of China that was not de minimis. See section above. 
I-5 

Table I-2 

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average margins of dumping for producers in China 

Exporter Producer 

Weighted-average margin 

of dumping (percent) 

Yama Ribbons and Bows Co., Ltd. Yama Ribbons and Bows Co., Ltd. 0

Beauty Horn Investment Limited Tianjin Sun Ribbon Co., Ltd. 123.83

Fujian Rongshu Industry Co., Ltd. Fujian Rongshu Industry Co., Ltd. 123.83

Guangzhou Complacent Weaving 

Co., Ltd. 

Guangzhou Complacent Weaving Co., 

Ltd. 

123.83

Ningbo MH Industry Co., Ltd. 

Hangzhou City Linghu Jiacheng Silk 

Ribbon Co., Ltd. 

123.83

Ningbo V.K. Industry & Trading Co., 

Ltd. 

Ningbo Yinzhou Jinfeng Knitting 

Factory 

123.83

Stribbons (Guangzhou) Ltd. Stribbons (Guangzhou) Ltd. 123.83

Stribbons (Guangzhou) Ltd. Stribbons (Nanyang) MNC Ltd. 123.83

Sun Rich (Asia) Limited 

Dongguan Yi Sheng Decoration Co., 

Ltd. 

123.83

Tianjin Sun Ribbon Co., Ltd. Tianjin Sun Ribbon Co., Ltd. 123.83

Weifang Dongfang Ribbon Weaving 

Co., Ltd. 

Weifang Dongfang Ribbon Weaving 

Co., Ltd. 

123.83

Weifang Yu Yuan Textile Co., Ltd. Weifang Yu Yuan Textile Co., Ltd. 123.83

Xiamen Yi He Textile Co., Ltd. Xiamen Yi He Textile Co., Ltd. 123.83

Yangzhou Bestpak Gifts & Crafts 

Co., Ltd. 

Yangzhou Bestpak Gifts & Crafts Co., 

Ltd. 

123.83

PRC-wide Entity 247.65

Source: Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From the People’s Republic of China: Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 75 FR 41808, July 19, 2010. 

Table I-3 

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average margins of dumping for producers/exporters in Taiwan 

Manufacturer/exporter 

Weighted-average margin of 

dumping (percent) 

Dear Year Brothers Mfg. Co., Ltd. 0

Roung Shu Industry Corporation 4.37

Shienq Huong Enterprise Co., Ltd./Hsien Chan Enterprise Co., 

Ltd./Novelty Handicrafts Co., Ltd. 0

All others 4.37

Source: Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven 

Selvedge from Taiwan, 75 FR 41804, July 19, 2010.
I-6 

THE SUBJECT MERCHANDISE 

Commerce’s Scope8

The merchandise subject to the investigation{s} is narrow woven ribbons with 

woven selvedge, in any length, but with a width (measured at the narrowest span 

of the ribbon) less than or equal to 12 centimeters, composed of, in whole or in 

part, man–made fibers (whether artificial or synthetic, including but not limited 

to nylon, polyester, rayon, polypropylene, and polyethylene teraphthalate), metal 

threads and/or metalized yarns, or any combination thereof. 

Narrow woven ribbons subject to the investigation{s} may: 

 also include natural or other non–man-made fibers; 

 be of any color, style, pattern, or weave construction, including but 

not limited to single–faced satin, double–faced satin, grosgrain, 

sheer, taffeta, twill, jacquard, or a combination of two or more 

colors, styles, patterns, and/or weave constructions; 

 have been subjected to, or composed of materials that have been 

subjected to, various treatments, including but not limited to dyeing, 

printing, foil stamping, embossing, flocking, coating, and/or sizing; 

 have embellishments, including but not limited to appliqué, fringes, 

embroidery, buttons, glitter, sequins, laminates, and/or adhesive 

backing; 

 have wire and/or monofilament in, on, or along the longitudinal 

edges of the ribbon; 

 have ends of any shape or dimension, including but not limited to 

straight ends that are perpendicular to the longitudinal edges of the 

ribbon, tapered ends, flared ends or shaped ends, and the ends of 

such woven ribbons may or may not be hemmed; 

 have longitudinal edges that are straight or of any shape, and the 

longitudinal edges of such woven ribbon may or may not be parallel 

to each other; 

 consist of such ribbons affixed to like ribbon and/or cut–edge woven 

ribbon, a configuration also known as an ‘‘ornamental trimming;’’ 

 be wound on spools; attached to a card; hanked (i.e., coiled or 

bundled); packaged in boxes, trays or bags; or configured as skeins, 

balls, bateaus or folds; and/or 

 be included within a kit or set such as when packaged with other 

products, including but not limited to gift bags, gift boxes and/or 

other types of ribbon. 

Narrow woven ribbons subject to the investigation{s} include all narrow woven 

fabrics, tapes, and labels that fall within this written description of the scope of 

this investigation. 

Excluded from the scope of the investigation{s} are the following: 

 8 Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From the People’s Republic of China: Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 75 FR 41808, July 19, 2010. 
I-7 

(1) formed bows composed of narrow woven ribbons with woven 

selvedge; 

(2) ‘‘pull–bows’’ (i.e., an assemblage of ribbons connected to one 

another, folded flat and equipped with a means to form such ribbons 

into the shape of a bow by pulling on a length of material affixed to 

such assemblage) composed of narrow woven ribbons; 

(3) narrow woven ribbons comprised at least 20 percent by weight of 

elastomeric yarn (i.e., filament yarn, including monofilament, of 

synthetic textile material, other than textured yarn, which does not 

break on being extended to three times its original length and which 

returns, after being extended to twice its original length, within a 

period of five minutes, to a length not greater than one and a half 

times its original length as defined in the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), Section XI, Note 13) or 

rubber thread; 

(4) narrow woven ribbons of a kind used for the manufacture of 

typewriter or printer ribbons; 

(5) narrow woven labels and apparel tapes, cut–to-length or cut–toshape, having a length (when measured across the longest edge–toedge span) not exceeding 8 centimeters; 

(6) narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge attached to and forming 

the handle of a gift bag; 

(7) cut–edge narrow woven ribbons formed by cutting broad woven 

fabric into strips of ribbon, with or without treatments to prevent the 

longitudinal edges of the ribbon from fraying (such as by merrowing, 

lamination, sono–bonding, fusing, gumming or waxing), and with or 

without wire running lengthwise along the longitudinal edges of the 

ribbon; 

(8) narrow woven ribbons comprised at least 85 percent by weight of 

threads having a denier of 225 or higher; 

(9) narrow woven ribbons constructed from pile fabrics (i.e., fabrics 

with a surface effect formed by tufts or loops of yarn that stand up 

from the body of the fabric); 

(10) narrow woven ribbon affixed (including by tying) as a decorative 

detail to non–subject merchandise, such as a gift bag, gift box, gift 

tin, greeting card or plush toy, or affixed (including by tying) as a 

decorative detail to packaging containing non–subject merchandise; 

(11) narrow woven ribbon that is 

a. affixed to non–subject merchandise as a working component 

of such non–subject merchandise, such as where narrow 

woven ribbon comprises an apparel trimming, book marker, 

bag cinch, or part of an identity card holder, or 

b. affixed (including by tying) to non–subject merchandise as a 

working component that holds or packages such non–subject 

merchandise or attaches packaging or labeling to such non–

subject merchandise, such as a ‘‘belly band’’ around a pair 

of pajamas, a pair of socks or a blanket; and 

(12) narrow woven ribbon(s) comprising a belt attached to and imported 

with an item of wearing apparel, whether or not such belt is 

removable from such item of wearing apparel. 
I-8 

(13) narrow woven ribbon(s) included with non–subject merchandise in 

kits, such as a holiday ornament craft kit or a scrapbook kit, in which 

the individual lengths of narrow woven ribbon(s) included in the kit 

are each no greater than eight inches, the aggregate amount of 

marrow woven ribbon(s) included in the kit does not exceed 48 

linear inches, none of the narrow woven ribbon(s) included in the kit 

is on a spool, and the narrow woven ribbon(s) is only one of multiple 

items included in the kit. 

The merchandise subject to {these} investigation{s} is classifiable under the 

HTSUS statistical categories 5806.32.1020; 5806.32.1030; 5806.32.1050 and 

5806.32.1060. Subject merchandise also may enter under subheadings 

5806.31.00; 5806.32.20; 5806.39.20; 5806.39.30; 5808.90.00; 5810.91.00; 

5810.99.90; 5903.90.10; 5903.90.25; 5907.00.60; and 5907.00.80 and under 

statistical categories 5806.32.1080; 5810.92.9080; 5903.90.3090; and 

6307.90.9889. The HTSUS statistical categories and subheadings are provided 

for convenience and customs purposes; however, the written description of the 

merchandise under investigation is dispositive. 

Tariff Treatment 

Narrow woven ribbons are primarily classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 

States (HTSUS) under subheading 5806.32.10.9

 This subheading, however, is considered a “basket 

category” and therefore both merchandise that is subject to these investigations and that is not subject to 

these investigations are properly classified in it. Prior to January 1, 2008, most narrow woven ribbons in 

subheading 5806.32.10 were reported under statistical reporting number 5806.32.1090, which itself was a 

basket category that represented “ribbons” of man-made fibers (e.g., polyester, nylon, rayon, among 

others) other than those suitable for typewriters.10 Since January 1, 2008, the merchandise subject to 

these investigations has been provided for by a new classification schema involving the use of nine new 

more specific statistical reporting numbers in the HTSUS under subheading 5806.32.10. Under this new 

schema, most of the merchandise subject to these investigations is properly imported under the following 

five statistical reporting numbers: 5806.32.1020, 5806.32.1030, 5806.32.1050, 5806.32.1060, and 

5806.32.1080.11 12 13

While most of the merchandise subject to these investigations is properly classified under 

subheading 5806.32.10 of the HTSUS, some subject merchandise may also be properly classified under 

 9

 Ribbons that are “in part” of man-made fibers are not necessarily classified in the HTSUS subheading 5806.32. 

The only ribbons classified in that subheading are those in which the man-made fibers predominate by weight. 

Ribbons with man-made fibers less than 50 percent by weight are classified in other provisions of the HTSUS. 10 As a basket category, this historical statistical reporting number included merchandise outside the scope of 

these investigations, including ribbons with widths in excess of 12 cm and cut-edge ribbons with widths not 

exceeding 12 cm. 11 The first four statistical reporting numbers are specific to the merchandise subject to these investigations, 

while the fifth number is a “basket category” for narrow (i.e., not greater than 12 cm in width) woven ribbons of 

man-made fibers other than polyester and nylon (which are provided for separately), i.e., the 5806.32.1080 number 

may include both ribbons with woven selvedge and cut-edge ribbons. 12 As an imperfect point of comparison, total value of merchandise imported from all sources under the old 

basket category statistical reporting number in 2007 was $135.5 million while the total value of merchandise 

imported under the five new statistical reporting numbers more closely representing subject merchandise in 2008 

was $55.0 million and in 2009 was $62.2 million. 13 Subject imports under HTS 5806.32.10 from both China and Taiwan are subject to a 6 percent ad valorem

duty rate under column 1 general (normal trade relations). 
I-9 

various other HTSUS subheadings based on physical characteristics of the merchandise (e.g., certain 

narrow woven ribbons made from metallic or partially elastic fabrics, holiday-themed subject 

merchandise, narrow woven ribbons that are impregnated or laminated, and narrow woven ribbons 

included within kits, among others). Commerce’s scope language identifies a wide range of potential 

subheadings and statistical reporting numbers of the HTSUS that could contain subject merchandise; 

however, it is likely that the preponderance of merchandise reported under those additional subheadings 

and statistical reporting numbers is not subject to these investigations. In the preliminary phase of these 

investigations, the Commission sought information from known importers of subject merchandise as to 

“other” HTS numbers under which they imported narrow woven ribbons and received a wide range of 

responses.14 Two statistical reporting numbers stood out as repeatedly being cited among the responding 

importers: 5806.39.3020 which is a basket category for narrow woven fabric made of metalized yarn, and 

5907.00.6000 which is a basket category for textiles fabrics made of man-made fibers that are otherwise 

impregnated, coated, or covered.15

THE PRODUCT 

Description and Applications 

Narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge16 are fabrics partially or wholly composed of 

manmade fibers and measuring up to 12 centimeters in width. They are typically used to adorn or 

embellish apparel, footwear, home furnishings, crafts, or floral arrangements; however, narrow woven 

ribbons also have functional uses and can be used to create articles such as hair bows, sashes, and to wrap 

packages.17 Narrow woven ribbons are constructed with a woven selvedge that provides a durable, 

longitudinal seam, and are thus washable. They are often used in keepsake items such as scrapbooks 

because they do not fray easily and are colorfast by nature of their fiber content and dyeing process 

(discussed below). Industry sources indicate that narrow woven ribbons of manmade fiber are primarily 

composed of polyester or nylon yarn;18 however, narrow woven ribbons of other manmade yarn, such as 

acetate and rayon, are also included in the definition of this product. 

Narrow woven ribbons are available in a variety of designs, widths, colors, and patterns. 

Different varieties are created by changing the weave pattern, color, fiber type, or embellishment. ***.19 

 14 Twenty-one out of 74 responding importers in the preliminary phase of these investigations indicated that they 

imported some narrow woven ribbons under statistical reporting numbers of the HTSUS other than those within the 

5806.32.10 subheading. The volume of these imports, however, accounted for only 6.3 percent of the total imports 

reported. Further, only a handful of “other” statistical reporting numbers were actually cited by more than a single 

firm, and only two numbers were cited by more than two firms. 15 Commission staff analyzed import data in 2009 under these two frequently cited “other” HTSUS statistical 

reporting categories for narrow woven ribbons and discovered that the majority (approximately 54 percent) of 

imports under these numbers were by firms that also imported under subheading 5806.32.10 (the largest of which 

were captured in the preliminary phase mailing list) and of the remaining imports, most of the largest importers 

appeared to be firms operating in industries other than those related to the subject merchandise (solar screens, paper 

mills, medical devices, sailboat supplies, among others). Nonetheless, with this additional information gathered 

from the preliminary phase of these investigations, Commission staff augmented the mailing list in the final phase of 

these investigations with a handful of firms identified under these two frequently cited “other” HTSUS numbers. 16 Selvedge is the narrow edge of woven fabric that runs parallel to the warp. It is made with stronger yarns in a 

tighter construction than the body of the fabric to prevent unraveling. Textile terms, unless otherwise noted, are 

from Hoechst Celanese. Dictionary of Fiber & Textile Technology. Charlotte, NC: Product/Technical 

Communications Services, IZ 503, Hoechst Celanese Corporation, 1990. 17 Staff telephone interview with ***. 

18 ***. 

19 ***. 
I-10 

A ribbon may be woven from yarn-dyed yarn or it may be woven from greige20 yarn and piece-dyed in 

woven form. In yarn-dyed ribbons, it is possible to create woven patterns such as stripes, jacquards, 

plaids, and embroidered designs. Common types of narrow woven ribbon include single- and double-face 

satin, grosgrain, picot, and sheer.21 In some instances, differing forms of narrow woven ribbons have 

specific uses. For example, single-face satin is often used to embroider apparel because the face of the 

ribbon is a smooth satin, while the reverse side is dull, can be sewn down, and will not slip or be visible in 

final use. Double-face satin is preferable in circumstances where both sides of the ribbon will be visible, 

such as for sashes, hair bows, or home decor. Sheer ribbons are often woven with wire in the selvedge to 

impart body to the ribbon and help the ribbon to maintain its shape when fashioned into packaging bows. 

Sheer ribbons are frequently used in floral applications. Finally, grosgrain ribbons are bulkier and have a 

textured hand, desirable for applications such as hair bows or in home decor where a shiny ribbon or 

slippage is undesirable. 

U.S. producers of narrow woven ribbons generally distribute their products through retailers, 

industrial end users (e.g., florists and confectioners), and distributors. Berwick Offray indicated that it 

does not sell narrow woven ribbons directly to consumers.22 According to U.S. producers, domestically 

produced narrow woven ribbons and imported narrow woven ribbons are used interchangeably by 

consumers, put up for retail sale via similar distribution channels, and in some cases marketed and sold in 

the same retail programs.23

Manufacturing Processes 

The manufacture of narrow woven ribbons can be broken down into five processes: warping,24

weaving, dyeing, embellishment,25 and spooling. The production process begins with purchased greige 

yarn (both flat and textured), usually polyester or nylon monofilament. Reportedly, there is *** price 

differential in the U.S. market between nylon and polyester, though *** in other markets.26 Polyester 

typically has a smoother hand27 (as compared with acetate or nylon) and is better suited for use in ***. 

However, nylon is good for ***; it ***. Nylon is sometimes used in the ***28 or ***.29 In some 

instances, a manufacturer ***. 

Yarn-dyed ribbons, which represent approximately ***30 percent of total U.S. production, 

undergo an additional step prior to warping where the monofilament yarn is dyed, as opposed to greige 

ribbons that are dyed after weaving. Monofilaments to be yarn-dyed must first be re-spooled onto a dye 

tube containing holes that allow the dye bath to permeate the entire spool. Several dye tubes are placed 

on a dye rack, which is inserted into a dye vat where the yarn is dyed and washed. After dyeing, the yarn 

is dried and transferred from the dye tubes to spools. During this transfer the yarn is coated with a 

lubricant to reduce friction, and to minimize lint and shedding during the downstream warping and 

weaving processes. 

 20 Greige refers to unfinished yarn or fabric. 

21 Information on different ribbon types and their respective uses is from the conference transcript in the 

preliminary phase of these investigations, pp. 34-47 (Pajic). 22 Conference transcript, p. 38 (Pajic). 

23 Conference transcript, pp. 38-39 (Pajic). 

24 Warping is the operation of winding warp yarns onto a beam in preparation for weaving. 25 Not all narrow woven ribbons are necessarily embellished. 

26 ***. 

27 Hand refers to the tactile qualities of a fabric, e.g., softness, fineness, firmness, and other qualities perceived 

by touch. 28 In a woven fabric, the weft or filling is the yarn running from selvedge to selvedge, perpendicular to the warp. 

29 ***. 

30 ***. 
I-11 

Before weaving, both greige and yarn-dyed yarn are laid out on a warp beam.31 The warp beam 

composition varies in thread count according to ribbon design. The warp forms the longitudinal yarn of 

narrow woven ribbon. After warping, the beams are placed on the looms and are ready for weaving. 

Depending on a ribbon’s design, a loom can use several warp feeds to vary the texture and fiber 

composition of a ribbon (e.g., when forming a ribbon including metalized yarn, the wire feeds into the 

loom on a separate warp beam). Ribbons of varying patterns, designs, and widths are created by alternate 

adjustments in the warp composition. 

Narrow woven ribbons are produced on specialized needle looms ***.32 Narrow woven ribbons 

are woven in *** strips per machine, depending on ribbon width. They must be woven with expected 

shrinkage of roughly *** percent between the loom and finishing. Production speed depends primarily 

on the complexity of the pattern of the ribbon. For example, a more complex pattern would be produced 

at a *** percent lower speed than a plain weave. Petitioner reports that all looms producing narrow 

woven ribbon are ***.33 

During weaving34 one or more warp beams are fed into the loom. There are three basic 

operations of the loom during weaving, namely shedding, filling insertion, and beat-up. During shedding, 

cards on the loom separate the warp beam according to a programmed pattern. Then, a needle hooks 

through the warp beam carrying a filling yarn through to a latch hook to catch the filling yarn. After 

insertion, the filling yarn is “beat” into the fabric to keep the filling yarns parallel. Narrow woven ribbons 

are produced using ***.35 ***. 

Dyeing occurs in a continuous process where greige ribbons are washed, dried, dyed, and then 

washed and dried once more. During dyeing, one to several ends of ribbon are fed through an 

accumulator, which winds ribbon vertically up and down through a series of cams to control the flow of 

ribbon through the machine at a steady pace. This also serves to keep the machine running at the end of 

the ribbon (by providing a steady pull) to reduce waste. ***.36

Greige ribbon is first de-sized in a pre-scour bath soap solution where ribbons are washed to 

remove the lubricant applied to the monofilaments prior to weaving. The ribbon is wound through the 

soap bath and then through a rinse before it is squeezed out and heated on drying cylinders. 

After pre-scouring, the greige ribbon is dipped in a dye bath that covers the ribbons’ surface with 

a dispersed, high energy, fiber specific dye. The dyes used are water-delivery based. After the dye bath, 

the ribbon passes through drying cylinders to remove excess moisture and then a gas-fired oven at *** 

degrees for roughly *** seconds. Polyester melts at 482 degrees, so the temperature ***.37 The pigment 

is absorbed into and inside the ribbon fiber, and the energy transfer that occurs in the oven deepens and 

changes the ribbon’s color. This method of dyeing polyester is highly colorfast. After dyeing, the ribbon 

passes through an after-scour bath which removes excess color to render the ribbon machine washable 

and prevents bleeding. Darker colors, such as black, undergo more after-scour washes than lighter colors. 

The ribbon is then dried in a heated can stack. Finally, the ribbon is spun off the dye machine and ready 

for embellishment or final blocking. 

The petitioner has separate dye lines for polyester and nylon. Dye formulas must be adjusted 

according to the different fiber type used. The process for nylon is slightly different than that described 

above for polyester. ***.38 

***. 

 31 A warp beam is a large cylinder around which the warp yarns, or ends, are wound in a uniform and parallel 

arrangement. 32 ***. 

33 ***. 

34 The standard weaving process is summarized from Collier, Billie J., and Phyllis G. Tortora. Understanding 

Textiles. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1997, pp. 257-269. 35 ***. 

36 ***. 

37 ***. 

38 ***. 
I-12 

The process for yarn-dyed ribbons varies slight from that of greige ribbons. After weaving and 

prior to final spooling, yarn-dyed ribbons are finished, a process that includes washing, de-sizing, drying, 

and ironing of the ribbon. 

Prior to final spooling, narrow woven ribbons can be embellished using several techniques 

including flexoprinting, transfer printing, silkscreen printing, lacquer printing, or hot stamping. In 

flexoprinting, ribbon is continuously stamped with a film of metered-release ink by a flexible plate around 

a cylinder. In transfer printing, a sublistatic ink is flexoprinted on paper, and then the print is heat 

transferred to the ribbon. In this process, an employee feeds ribbon and paper together into a heated 

drum. The dye is vaporized and permeates the ribbon. This process uses similar dyes to those used in the 

dyeing process, resulting in more permanent color. In lacquer printing, solvent-based lacquer paint is 

applied to face of ribbon through an open pattern in a method similar to stenciling. With silkscreen 

printing, paint is applied directly to ribbon through a silkscreen. Squeegees force paint through patterns. 

Silkscreen printing creates more of a texture and is more durable than lacquer print. Finally, hot-stamping 

uses a metal plate to stamp a pattern on to the ribbon face from a roll of foil. 

Dyed, finished, and embellished ribbons are typically spooled (blocked) once an order is 

received. Spooling can be done manually or automatically. The length of ribbon on a spool varies by 

customer and distribution method. Narrow woven ribbons are spun to a specific length on a cardboard 

spool, flanges are glued to both sides of the spool, the package is labeled, and a plastic film is wrapped 

around the exposed ribbon to form the finished product. Berwick Offray moved some spooling 

operations to Mexico three to four years ago.39 Today, roughly *** of its spooling capacity is located 

outside of the United States.40

The petitioner reports that production processes for narrow woven ribbons are essentially 

standard worldwide.41

DOMESTIC LIKE PRODUCT ISSUES 

The Commission’s decision regarding the appropriate domestic product(s) that are “like” the 

subject imported product is based on a number of factors including: (1) physical characteristics and uses; 

(2) common manufacturing facilities and production employees; (3) interchangeability; (4) customer and 

producer perceptions; (5) channels of distribution; and (6) price. In the preliminary phase of the 

investigations, the Commission defined a single domestic like product encompassing all domestically 

produced narrow woven ribbons, coextensive with the scope of the investigations. 

There are reportedly two types of ribbons: narrow woven ribbons and cut-edge ribbons.42 In the 

preliminary phase of these investigations, the petitioner had argued for a domestic like product comprised 

of all narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge coextensive with the scope.43 The respondents did not 

contest with the definition of the domestic like product offered by the petitioner.44 

In the preliminary phase of these investigations, the Commission considered expanding the 

domestic like product to include cut-edge ribbons. However, owing to different physical characteristics 

resulting from distinct manufacturing processes for each product, limited interchangeability, general 

differences in channels of distribution, lack of fungibility in production facilities and employees used in 

production, and price differences between narrow woven ribbons and cut-edge ribbons, the Commission 

 39 Conference transcript, pp. 62-63 (Shea). 

40 ***. 

41 Conference transcript, p. 41 (Kerr). 

42 Conference transcript, p. 31 (Pajic). 

43 Petitioner’s postconference brief, p. 2. 

44 Conference transcript, p. 165 (Jacobs). 
I-13 

determined not to expand the domestic like product to include cut-edge ribbons because “a clear dividing 

line can be drawn separating narrow woven ribbons and cut-edge ribbons.”45

 45 Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from China and Taiwan, Investigation Nos. 701-TA-467 and 

731-TA-1164-1165 (Preliminary), USITC Publication 4099, August 2009, pp. 8-10. 

PART II: CONDITIONS OF COMPETITION IN THE U.S. MARKET

U.S. MARKET CHARACTERISTICS

Narrow woven ribbons may be constructed from various man-made fibers and include a range of

different colors, styles, patterns, and weave constructions, including but not limited to single-faced satin,

double-faced satin, grosgrain, sheer, taffeta, twill, and jacquard, among which single-faced satin is

reportedly the most common weave of narrow woven ribbon in the U.S. market.1

 Narrow woven ribbons

typically are sold on a spool and used for decorative purposes in applications such as floral arrangements,

gift wrapping, packaging, scrapbooking, and craft projects or for embellishment on apparel or handbags.2

They may be sold separately by different types and designs; in random assortments of ribbon in a tray or

assortments based on customers’ specific requests for certain sizes or designs; or as mix of products

sourced domestically with products from subject sources and/or nonsubject sources.3

The Commission received questionnaire responses from 39 purchasers.4

 Purchasers were asked

how many suppliers they generally contact before making a purchase. Among 34 responding purchasers,

11 purchasers reported that they contact one supplier, 3 purchasers reported that they contact one to two

suppliers, 5 purchasers reported that they contact two suppliers, 8 purchasers reported that they contact up

to three suppliers, and 5 reported that they contact up to four to six suppliers.5

 

When purchasers were asked if the relative shares of their total purchases of narrow woven 

ribbons from different sources had changed since 2007, among 21 responding purchasers, seven reported

that their shares from U.S. sources had decreased, four of which also reported an increase in shares from

China, while the remaining three reported that their total purchases had decreased due to the recession.6

Two purchasers reported an increase in their purchase shares from U.S. sources. Eight purchasers

reported that their shares of purchases of imports from China had increased and six reported that their

shares of purchases of imports from China had decreased.7

 Six purchasers reported that their shares of

purchases of imports from Taiwan increased and three reported that their shares of purchases of imports

from Taiwan had decreased. Two purchasers reported that their shares of purchases from Mexico and

Brazil decreased, while one reported that its share from Mexico had increased. Two purchasers indicated

that there had been no change in their relative shares of purchases.

*** sales by U.S. producers and importers from China and Taiwan are from inventory, with lead

times from inventory ranging from *** to ***. U.S. producers reported that *** of their narrow woven

ribbons are sold from inventory, with lead times ranging from ***. The lead times on U.S. producers’

sales of produced-to-order product range from ***. A majority of importers of narrow woven ribbons

 1 Petition, p. 5; conference transcript, pp. 34-37 (Pajic).

 2

 Conference transcript, pp. 34-37 (Pajic).

 3

 ***’s U.S. producers’ questionnaire response, at IV-20.

 4

 Not every purchaser responded to every question on the questionnaire.

 5

 Two purchasers reported that they only contact “traditional suppliers,” but did not indicate an exact number.

 6

 Two of these purchasers (***) reported that they switched their purchases from U.S. sources to imports from

China due to price. Another purchaser, ***, reported that it switched its purchases from U.S. sources to imports

from China and Taiwan because ***.

 7

 One purchaser reported that it had increased its share of purchases of imports from China and Taiwan in

anticipation of the increased duties resulting from these investigations. Two purchasers reported that the decrease in

their shares of purchases of imports from China was due to the recession; one reported that the minimum order

requirements from sources in China were too high; and one reported that it switched from sources in China to

nonsubject sources in Taiwan, partly in order to avoid the duties resulting from these investigations, but also because

its source in China offered inferior design capability compared to other sources.

II-1
from subject sources in China reported that most or all of their sales are from inventory, with most lead

times ranging from one day to two weeks.8

 Lead times on importers’ sales of produced-to-order product

from China range from one to four months.9

 *** of the importers of narrow woven ribbons from subject

sources in Taiwan reported that most or all of their sales are from inventory, with most lead times ranging

from one day to two weeks.10 Lead times on importers’ sales produced to order in Taiwan range mostly

from one to three months.11

When firms were asked to list the geographic regions in the United States where they sell narrow

woven ribbons, *** responding producers and *** of the importers reported that they served a nationwide

market. 

 CHANNELS OF DISTRIBUTION

 As shown in table II-1, *** of U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbons was to

***, followed by shipments to ***.12 The majority of importers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven

ribbons from China went to retailers in 2007 and the largest share went to retailers in 2008 and in 2009. 

Most of importers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbons from Taiwan went to final consumers,

followed by shipments to retailers.13 Additional tables on channels of distribution are presented in Part III

(table III-5) and Part IV (table IV-7) of this report.

The top ten customers reported by U.S. producers and importers include ***. Among the largest

customers, there is considerable overlap in the customers cited by both U.S. producers and importers, ***.

 8 Of 18 responding importers of narrow woven ribbons from subject sources in China, one reported lead times

from inventory of 28 days.

 9

 One responding importer of narrow woven ribbons from China reported lead times from sales produced-to-order

of six-and-a-half months.

 10 Of 19 responding importers of narrow woven ribbons from subject sources in Taiwan, one reported lead times

from inventory of ***.

 11 One responding importer of narrow woven ribbons from Taiwan reported lead times from sales produced to

order of six-and-a-half months.

 12 The term “industrial end users” includes users that use narrow woven ribbons in the production or assembly of

any other product, including floral arrangements assembled by the wholesale or retail floral industry, apparel,

packaging of another product such as a confectionery item, and in-store gift packaging. Hearing transcript, pp. 123-

124 (Pajic, Dorris).

 Staff notes that ***.

 13 The importers that sell to final consumers are retailers that import directly.

II-2
Table II-1

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers’ and importers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbons,

by sources and channels of distribution, 2007-09

Item

Period

 2007 2008 2009

Share of domestic producers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbons to:

 Wholesalers/distributors *** *** ***

 Industrial end users *** *** ***

 Retailers *** *** ***

 Final consumers1 *** *** ***

Share of U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbons from subject sources in China

to:

 Wholesalers/distributors *** *** ***

 Industrial end users *** *** ***

 Retailers *** *** ***

 Final consumers1 *** *** ***

Share of U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbons from subject sources in

Taiwan to:

 Wholesalers/distributors 12.7 14.2 10.5

 Industrial end users 5.0 4.9 5.6

 Retailers 31.8 31.2 29.6

 Final consumers1 50.4 49.7 54.3

Share of U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbons from nonsubject sources in

Taiwan to:

 Wholesalers/distributors *** *** ***

 Industrial end users *** *** ***

 Retailers *** *** ***

 Final consumers1 *** *** ***

Table continued on following page.

II-3
Table II-1--Continued

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers’ and importers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbons,

by sources and channels of distribution, 2007-09 

Item

Period

 2007 2008 2009

Share of U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbons from all other countries to:

 Wholesalers/distributors 22.1 21.4 15.3

 Industrial end users 26.3 27.8 25.0

 Retailers 34.9 35.1 30.2

 Final consumers1 16.8 15.7 29.5

 1 Sales to “final consumers” are sales made by retailers to retail customers.

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires.

SUPPLY AND DEMAND CONSIDERATIONS

Supply

U.S. Supply

The supply response of U.S. producers to changes in price depends on such factors as the level of

excess capacity, the availability of alternate markets for U.S.-produced narrow woven ribbons, inventory

levels, and the ability to shift production to the manufacture of other products. The evidence indicates

that U.S. producers have the ability to increase supply, due primarily to ***. 

Industry capacity

U.S. producers’ annual capacity utilization rates for narrow woven ribbons (using ***14)

decreased *** from *** percent in 2007 to *** percent in 2008, before decreasing to *** percent in 2009. 

Alternatively, U.S. producers’ annual capacity utilization rates for narrow woven ribbons using ***

decreased from *** percent in 2007 to *** percent in 2009. The levels of capacity utilization indicated

by both methods above indicate that the U.S. producers have *** unused capacity with which they could

increase production of narrow woven ribbons in the event of a price change.

Alternative markets

U.S. producers’ exports, as a share of their total shipments, *** over the period for which data

were collected, decreasing *** from *** percent in 2007 to *** percent in 2008 and to *** percent in

2009. These data indicate that the U.S. producers have a *** capability to divert shipments to or from

alternative markets in response to changes in the price of narrow woven ribbons. 

 14 See Part III and table III-2 for more discussion on the U.S. industry’s capacity.

II-4
Inventory levels

U.S. producers’ ratio of end-of-period inventories to total shipments decreased from *** percent

in 2007 to *** percent in 2008 and to *** in 2009. These data indicate that the U.S. producers *** to use

inventories as a means of increasing shipments of narrow woven ribbons to the U.S. market.15

Production alternatives

U.S. producers reported that they *** the same manufacturing equipment and the same workers 

used to make narrow woven ribbons in the production of alternative products.

Subject Imports from China

The responsiveness of supply of imports from China to changes in price in the U.S. market is

affected by such factors as capacity utilization rates and the availability of home markets and other export

markets. Based on available information, producers in China have the capability to respond to changes in

demand with large changes in the quantity of shipments of narrow woven ribbons to the U.S.

market.16 The main contributing factors to the high degree of responsiveness of supply is the existence of

unused capacity, the existence of alternative markets, and the presence of substantial inventories.

Industry capacity

During the period for which data were collected, the capacity utilization rate for reporting

producers in China of narrow woven ribbons increased irregularly from 68.7 percent in 2007 to 69.6

percent in 2009; it is projected to be 57.9 percent in 2010 and 61.8 percent in 2011.

Alternative markets

Available data indicate that producers in China have some ability to divert shipments to or from

alternative markets in response to changes in the price of narrow woven ribbons. As shown in figure II-1,

the share of shipments by producers in China that went to the United States decreased over the period,

with sales shifting more to export markets other than the United States. 

 15 A *** amount of the reported inventory levels is attributable to *** and constitutes ***. ***. The U.S.

industry’s ratio of end-of-period inventories to total shipments excluding *** was *** percent in 2009.

 16 Four Chinese producers provided useable data and based on their export data, they appear to account for *** to

*** percent of U.S. importers’ imports from China.

II-5
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Percent of total shipments

Internal consumption 7.4 7.6 6.9 12.3 15.2

Shipments to home market 7.3 9.7 11.3 17.1 18.7

Exports to markets other

than the United States

39.0 41.9 55.0 63.3 62.0

Exports to the United States 46.2 40.9 26.8 7.3 4.0

2007 2008 2009 2010--

projected

2011--

projected

Figure II-1

Narrow woven ribbons: Shares of total shipments of narrow woven ribbons by producers in

China, by destination, 2007-09 and projected for 2010 and 2011

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. 

Inventory levels

Inventories, as a share of total shipments, of the responding producers in China decreased from

61.2 percent in 2007 to 51.5 percent in 2008 before increasing to 66.5 percent in 2009; they are projected

to be 68.4 percent in 2010 and 61.0 percent in 2011. These data indicate that producers in China have the

ability to use inventories as a means of increasing shipments of narrow woven ribbons to the U.S. market.

Subject Imports from Taiwan

The responsiveness of supply of imports from Taiwan to changes in price in the U.S. market is

affected by such factors as capacity utilization rates and the availability of home markets and other export

markets. Based on available information, producers in Taiwan may have a somewhat limited capability to

respond to changes in demand with changes in the quantity of shipments of narrow woven ribbons to the

U.S. market.17 The main contributing factors to the limited degree of responsiveness of supply are the

unused capacity and limited inventories.

 17 Seven producers in Taiwan provided useable data; based on their reported exports to the United States, they

accounted for between 47 and 55 percent of U.S. importers’ imports from Taiwan.

II-6
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Percent of total shipments

Internal consumption 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.9

Shipments to home market 7.0 8.9 9.6 11.2 11.3

Exports to markets other

than the United States

40.1 37.0 35.9 35.2 35.3

Exports to the United States 52.0 53.3 53.7 52.7 52.5

2007 2008 2009 2010--

projected

2011--

projected

Industry capacity

During the period for which data were collected, the capacity utilization rate for reporting

producers in Taiwan of narrow woven ribbons decreased from 93.1 percent in 2007 to 72.3 percent in

2009; it is projected to be 71.1 percent in 2010 and 71.3 percent in 2011.

Alternative markets

Available data indicate that producers in Taiwan have some ability to divert shipments to or from

alternative markets in response to changes in the price of narrow woven ribbons. As shown in figure II-2,

the share of shipments by producers in Taiwan that went to the United States and the share of shipments

going to the home market increased slightly over the period, while shipments to export markets other than

the United States decreased.

Specifically, the share of shipments by producers in Taiwan that went to the United States

increased slightly from 52.0 percent in 2007 to 53.7 percent in 2009; it is projected to be 52.7 percent in

2010 and 52.5 percent in 2011. The share of shipments by producers in Taiwan to export markets other

than the United States decreased from 40.1 percent in 2007 to 35.9 percent in 2009; it is projected to be

35.2 percent in 2010 and 35.3 percent in 2011. The share of shipments by producers in Taiwan going to

the home market increased from 7.0 percent in 2007 to 9.6 percent in 2009; it is projected to be 11.2

percent in 2010 and 11.3 percent in 2011. The share of internal consumption or company transfers by

producers in Taiwan decreased from 0.9 percent in 2007 to 0.8 percent in 2009; it is projected to be 0.9

percent in 2010 and 2011.

Figure II-2

Narrow woven ribbons: Shares of total shipments of narrow woven ribbons by producers in

Taiwan, by destination, 2007-09 and projected for 2010 and 2011

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires.

II-7
Inventory levels

Responding Taiwan producers’ inventories, as a share of their total shipments, decreased slightly

from 4.2 percent in 2007 to 4.1 percent in 2009; they are projected to be 4.1 percent in 2010 and 3.9

percent in 2011. These data indicate that producers in Taiwan may be limited in their ability to use

inventories as a means of increasing shipments of narrow woven ribbons to the U.S. market.

Nonsubject Imports

Imports from nonsubject sources of narrow woven ribbons, as a share of total U.S. imports of

narrow woven ribbons, increased from *** percent in 2007 to *** percent in 2009.18

Supply constraints

When U.S. producers were asked if they had ever refused, declined, or been unable to supply

narrow woven ribbons since 2007, *** responded “no,” and *** responded “yes,” with ***. When

importers were asked if they had ever refused, declined, or been unable to supply narrow woven ribbons

since 2007, 29 of 33 responding importers responded “no.” Four importers responded “yes,” with ***

citing delays in meeting timely shipment commitments due to switching sources of supply as a result of

these investigations,19 importer *** reporting that its high quality products take a longer time to produce,

and importer *** reporting insufficient cash flow to fund the inventory needed to make timely shipments

of its imported products.

Demand

 The elasticity of demand for this product is likely to be slightly price elastic.20 As discussed

below, the reported existence of substitutes for narrow woven ribbons (which indicates that the demand is

likely to be price elastic) is moderated by the fact that narrow woven ribbons account for a relatively low

cost share of end-use products (which indicates that demand is less elastic). The demand for narrow

woven ribbons is largely determined by the overall economy and fashion trends. Real quarterly U.S.

GDP growth at seasonally adjusted annual rates and the percent change in quarterly real personal

consumption expenditures are shown in figure II-3.21 Both indicators generally declined in 2007 and

2008 and rebounded in 2009, with real personal consumption expenditures increasing in the first quarter

of 2009, one quarter ahead of the rebound in real GDP growth.

 18 The largest source of nonsubject imports is from ***.

 19 ***.

 20 Petitioner contends that the elasticity of demand is inelastic, arguing that “there are not good substitutes for

narrow woven ribbons in most high-volume end uses” and that narrow woven ribbons account for “a small share of

the final value of products into which {they are} incorporated.” Petitioner’s prehearing brief, p. 11. See further

discussion on page II-19.

 21 Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce. Gross Domestic Product: First Quarter 2010

(Preliminary Estimate). Retrieved June 9, 2010. Personal Income and Outlays, April 2010. 

II-8
-8.0

-6.0

-4.0

-2.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

2007 2008 2009

Percent change

Real GDP growth Real personal consumption expenditures

Figure II-3

Percent changes in real GDP growth and real personal consumption expenditures, by quarter,

January 2007-December 2009

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce.

When asked how the overall demand for narrow woven ribbons has changed since January 2007,

*** reported that demand has increased slightly, citing an increase in craft and scrapbooking projects and

lower price points of narrow woven ribbons being partially offset by the decline of the U.S. apparel

industry and the recession. Berwick Offray reported that demand for narrow woven ribbons has

historically not been affected by downturns in the economy, citing consumers’ increased propensity to

engage in at-home activities during economic recessions, among which are craft projects that use narrow

woven ribbons.22 Berwick Offray also reported that it has experienced a larger decline in its sales to

industrial end users relative to its sales to retailers.23 *** reported that demand has decreased since 2007,

citing the decline of the U.S. apparel industry.

Sixteen of 32 responding importers reported that demand has decreased since 2007, with most

firms citing the recession and two citing the decline in the U.S. apparel industry. Five importers reported

that demand has increased due to an increase in arts and craft projects, improved design innovation and

product ranges, and lower prices.24 Four importers reported that there has been no change in demand and

seven reported that demand has fluctuated, following trends in the overall economy and fashion trends.

*** importers provided their projections of changes in future demand. ***.25 Ribbon retailers

reported that they expect demand to modestly increase from 2009 to 2010 and 2011.26

 22 Conference transcript, pp. 67-68 (Shea) and pp. 68-69 (Pajic). Hearing transcript, p. 77 (Pajic). Petitioner also

reported that final consumers may switch from purchasing wedding applications or floral arrangements from a florist

to purchasing the components (including narrow woven ribbons) themselves at craft retailers. Hearing transcript, p.

79 (Pajic).

 23 Hearing transcript, pp. 79-80 (Kaplan).

 24 ***. 

 25 Ribbon importers’ posthearing brief, pp. 26-27.

 26 Ribbon retailers’ posthearing brief, exh. A, p. 58.

II-9
Eight of 17 responding purchasers reported that demand has decreased since 2007, mostly citing

the recession. Eight purchasers reported that demand did not change since 2007 and one purchaser

reported that demand has increased slightly.

Apparent U.S. consumption, based on quantity, decreased by *** percent overall from 2007 to

2009, increasing *** by *** percent from 2007 to 2008 before decreasing by *** percent from 2008 to

2009. 

Business Cycles

When asked if the narrow woven ribbons market was subject to business cycles, U.S. producer

*** reported that the narrow woven ribbons market was not subject to business cycles, while *** reported

that sales peak from August to December due to holiday gift wrapping. Seventeen importers reported that

there is no business cycle in the narrow woven ribbons market.27 Fifteen responding importers reported

that a business cycle does exist in the narrow woven ribbons market, with eight specifically stating that

sales peak in the second half of the year in the build-up for the Christmas season.28 Nineteen responding

purchasers reported that there is no business cycle. Fifteen purchasers reported that a business cycle

exists in the narrow woven ribbons market, with most citing the second half of the year or the fourth

quarter of the year for holiday gift wrapping and floral and other craft applications.29

Substitute Products

U.S. producers *** reported that substitutes for narrow woven ribbons include cut-edge ribbons

(including embossed-edge cut-edge ribbons), plastic extruded ribbons, and elastic ribbon for packaging

and some floral applications.30 *** reported that changes in the prices of these substitutes have affected

the price for narrow woven ribbons, with *** stating that a price change may occur with a three- to sixmonth time lag and that if the price of narrow woven ribbons drops, they are usually preferred over the

substitutes because they are the higher quality product. Petitioner reported that there is limited

substitutability between narrow woven ribbons and cut-edge ribbons for use in craft projects such as

scrapbooking.31

Eighteen importers reported that substitutes exist for narrow woven ribbons, including cut-edge

ribbons, narrow cut fabric, curling ribbon, pre-made bows, extruded ribbons, mesh, tape, merrow edge

ribbons, braids, cords, lace, trims, embroidery, elastic ribbon, raffia or other natural material, and yarn. 

One importer noted that there is no effective substitute for narrow woven ribbons used in apparel

manufacturing. Three of these importers reported that changes in the prices of these substitutes have

affected the price for narrow woven ribbons, with one stating that the prices of the substitutes are lower

and another reporting that sales of extruded ribbons have declined as the price of narrow woven ribbons

has decreased.

Twelve of 38 purchasers reported that substitutes exist for narrow woven ribbons, including cutedge ribbons, wired cut-edge ribbons of 11⁄2-inch width, out-of-scope widths of ribbons, elastic ribbons or

 27 ***. 

 28 ***. *** reported that *** percent of its sales occur in the second and third quarters and *** reported that ***

of its sales are shipped in the third quarter. Petitioner contends that ***. Petitioner’s postconference brief, p. 17. 

 29 *** of these purchasers are retailers.

 30 When asked the degree of interchangeability between narrow woven ribbons and ribbons made of nonmanmade fabrics in the preliminary phase of these investigations, *** reported that non-manmade fabric ribbons

have only recently been available, due to eco-friendly trends, and that they account for *** percent of the market.

 31 Specifically, petitioner stated that cut-edge ribbons with a width of one half inch or below will not have the

same effect as narrow woven ribbons of that width. Hearing transcript, p. 78 (Pajic).

II-10
loops, non-woven ribbons, curling ribbons, extruded ribbons, pre-formed bows, tulle, cords, cut fabric,

trims, raffia, and garland. No purchasers reported that the changes in the prices of these substitutes have

affected the price for narrow woven ribbons.

Cost Share

*** reported that narrow woven ribbons account for approximately *** percent of the total cost

of end uses such as crafts, home decor, and floral arrangements, and can account for *** percent of the

total cost of packaging applications. Importers reported that narrow woven ribbons can account for 2 to

10 percent of the total cost of packaging applications; 1 to 10 percent of the total cost of craft

applications; up to 30 percent of the total cost of floral arrangements; 10 percent of the total cost of

apparel applications; and account for 85 percent of hair accessory applications. Four purchasers that use

narrow woven ribbons in the manufacture of other products reported that narrow woven ribbons account

for 0.1 percent or less of the total cost of apparel; 0.5 percent of the total cost of floral arrangements; and

5 percent of the total cost of products such as stationery and wedding favors.

SUBSTITUTABILITY ISSUES

The degree of substitutability between domestic products and subject and nonsubject imports and

between subject and nonsubject imports is examined in this section. Information is based primarily on

questionnaire responses from producers, importers, and purchasers, and indicates that the U.S.-produced

and imported narrow woven ribbons are moderately substitutable.

Factors Affecting Purchasing Decisions

Available information indicates that a variety of factors are considered important in the

purchasing decision for narrow woven ribbons. Purchasers were asked to list the top three factors that

they consider when choosing a supplier of narrow woven ribbons. Table II-2 summarizes the responses.

Price was named by 11 purchasers as the number one factor generally considered in deciding

from whom to purchase narrow woven ribbons, while 9 purchasers indicated that it was the number two

factor, and 7 purchasers responded that it was the number three factor. As indicated in table II-3, 30 of 

35 responding purchasers indicated that price was a “very important” factor in their purchasing decisions. 

When asked how often they purchase the narrow woven ribbons that are offered at the lowest price, 18 of

35 responding purchasers reported “sometimes,” 11 reported “usually,” 5 reported “never,” and the

remaining purchaser reported “always.”

II-11
Table II-2

Narrow woven ribbons: Ranking of factors used in purchasing decisions, as reported by U.S.

purchasers

Factor

Number of firms reporting

Number one factor Number two factor Number three factor

Price 11 9 7

Quality 7 9 7

Availability 5 4 7

Traditional or approved supplier 4 1 0

Product range 3 3 2

Other1 7 8 12

 1 For the number one factor, other factors cited include three instances of “reliability;” one instance of “client

approval;” one instance of “design;” one instance of “extension of credit;” and one instance of “social and

environmental compliance.” For the number two factor, other factors cited include four instances of “delivery or lead

time;” three instances of “design capability;” and one instance of “low minimum order requirements.” For the

number three factor, other factors cited include three instances of “delivery time;” three instances of “extension of

credit;” two instances of “lead time;” one instance of “producer’s flexibility;” one instance of “customer service;” one

instance of “trustworthiness and professional conduct;” and one instance of “industry experience.” 

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires.

 

When purchasers were asked if they had purchased from one source although comparable narrow

woven ribbons were available from another source at a lower price, 23 of 38 responding purchasers

reported that they had done so, mostly citing lead and delivery times, quality, minimum order

requirements, past relationship with the supplier, design/selection, and customer service. Other factors

cited include availability, purchasing other products from the supplier, packaging, and sampling

capability.

Quality was named by 7 of 35 purchasers as the number one factor generally considered in

deciding from whom to purchase narrow woven ribbons, while 9 purchasers indicated that it was the

number two factor, and 7 reported that it was the number three factor. As indicated in table II-3, a large

majority of responding purchasers indicated that product consistency and quality meeting industry

standards were “very important” factors in their purchasing decisions.

Availability was named by five purchasers as the number one factor generally considered in

deciding from whom to purchase narrow woven ribbons, while four indicated that it was the number two

factor, and seven purchasers reported that it was the number three factor. As indicated in table II-3, 29 of

35 responding purchasers indicated that availability was a “very important” factor in their purchasing

decisions and 34 of 35 responding purchasers indicated that reliability of supply was a “very important”

factor.

When asked if buying narrow woven ribbons that are produced in the United States was an 

important factor in their purchasing decisions, 30 of 34 responding purchasers responded “no.” The four

purchasers that responded “yes” cited the desire to minimize inventories, quick delivery, and customer

service.

II-12
Table II-3

Narrow woven ribbons: Importance of factors used in purchasing decisions, as reported by U.S.

purchasers

Factor1

Number of firms reporting

Very important Somewhat important Not important

Availability 29 6 0

Delivery terms 20 12 3

Delivery time 32 3 0

Discounts offered 12 16 7

Extension of credit 12 10 13

Price 30 5 0

Minimum quantity requirements 20 10 5

Packaging 16 10 9

Product consistency 34 1 0

Quality meets industry standards 29 5 1

Quality exceeds industry standards 13 16 6

Product range 18 14 3

Reliability of supply 34 1 0

Technical support/service 12 13 9

U.S. transportation costs 15 8 11

Availability of fancy ribbons 10 14 10

Design innovation/fashion trends 12 19 3

 1 One purchaser also cited “social and environmental compliance” and “sampling capability” (e.g., when

attempting to meet custom specifications) as very important factors used in purchasing decisions.

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires.

Twenty of 35 responding purchasers reported that they require suppliers to become certified for

all or some of their purchases.32 When purchasers were asked what factors they consider when qualifying

a new supplier, purchasers most often cited product quality and consistency, availability, capacity,

financial stability, design innovation, color options, lead time, and price. Other factors cited included

social and environmental compliance, reliability, flexibility, shipping requirements, labeling and

packaging, warehousing capability, and market position of the supplier. One purchaser reported that the

certification time is two weeks; another reported that it is one month; three reported one to three months;

and one reported nine months. Three purchasers reported that a supplier had failed in its attempt to

qualify product with them.33 Two of the three purchasers cited *** due to factors including poor quality,

 32 Eighteen of these purchasers reported that they require suppliers to be certified for all of their purchases.

 33 Another purchaser reported that a *** had failed in its attempt to qualify its product due to poor service.

II-13
poor customer service, lack of design capability, and poor shipping.34 *** cited *** due to lack of design

capability, poor quality, and insufficient size of company. One purchaser cited *** due to poor customer

service. 

Eighteen of 35 responding purchasers reported that they “always” know whether the narrow

woven ribbons they purchase are imported or produced domestically; 13 reported that they “always”

know the manufacturer; and 16 reported that buyers are “never” aware or interested in the country of

origin of the narrow woven ribbons they purchase. 

Eleven of 25 responding purchasers reported that narrow woven ribbons produced in the United

States “always” meet minimum quality specifications, while 10 reported “usually,” one reported

“sometimes,” and 3 reported “rarely or never.” Six of 23 responding purchasers reported that narrow

woven ribbons produced in China “always” meet minimum quality specifications, while 15 reported

“usually,” one reported “sometimes,” and one reported “rarely or never.” Eight of 19 responding

purchasers reported that narrow woven ribbons produced in Taiwan “always” meet minimum quality

specifications, while 10 reported “usually” and 1 reported “rarely or never.” 

Comparisons of Domestic Product and Subject Imports

In order to determine whether U.S.-produced narrow woven ribbons can generally be used in the

same applications as imports from China, producers, importers, and purchasers were asked whether the

products can “always,” “frequently,” “sometimes,” or “never” be used interchangeably. All reporting

U.S. producers reported that they are always interchangeable, as shown in table II-4. A large majority of

the importers that compared narrow woven ribbons from China and Taiwan with those from the United

States reported that they are always interchangeable. Eleven of 16 responding purchasers that compared

narrow woven ribbons from China with those from the United States reported that they are always or

frequently interchangeable, and 8 of 14 purchasers that compared narrow woven ribbons from Taiwan

with those from the United States reported that they are always or frequently interchangeable.

 34 One of these purchasers reported that it believed that the product supplied by ***.

II-14
Table II-4

Narrow woven ribbons: Perceived degree of interchangeability of product produced in the United

States and in other countries

Country comparison

U.S. producers U.S. importers U.S. purchasers

AFSNAFSNAFSN

U.S. vs. China 3 0 0 0 15 3 3 0 6 5 5 0

U.S. vs. Taiwan 3 0 0 0 12 4 3 1 3 5 5 1

U.S. vs. Mexico 3 0 0 0 6 0 3 0 2 5 1 0

U.S. vs. Other Nonsubject 2 0 0 0 6 0 5 0 1 3 3 0

China vs. Taiwan 3 0 0 0 16 3 3 0 4 5 4 0

China vs. Mexico 3 0 0 0 7 0 3 0 3 3 1 0

China vs. Other Nonsubject 2 0 0 0 6 1 3 1 1 3 2 0

Taiwan vs. Mexico 3 0 0 0 7 0 3 1 3 3 1 0

Taiwan vs. Other Nonsubject 2 0 0 0 6 1 2 1 1 3 2 0

Mexico vs. Other Nonsubject 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

Note.-- “A” = Always, “F” = Frequently, “S” = Sometimes, and “N” = Never.

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires.

 

The sole importer that reported that narrow woven ribbons from U.S. producers are “never” 

interchangeable with imports from Taiwan stated that the quality and color of the product from Taiwan is

superior to that of other suppliers. One importer reported that U.S. producers follow fashion trends more

quickly than import suppliers and that imports from China and Taiwan are of lower quality. One importer

reported that the U.S.-produced narrow woven ribbons are limited to basic types of ribbons, such as single

and double face satin, grosgrain, some sheers, and some prints. This importer also reported that narrow

woven ribbons from China are not always interchangeable with product from Taiwan or from U.S.

producers due to inconsistent quality. An importer of narrow woven ribbons from China *** for apparel

use reported that the quality of its imports (especially that of ***) is higher than that of U.S.-produced

narrow woven ribbons. This importer also noted that its imports of one specific type of ribbon (***) are

not interchangeable with *** ribbons that are currently produced in the United States. One purchaser

reported that imports from China have a long delivery time and a high minimum order requirement. 

Another purchaser reported that the quality of imports from Taiwan is superior to that of U.S.-produced

narrow woven ribbons and that U.S. suppliers’ minimum order requirements are cost prohibitive.

As indicated in table II-5, *** of three responding U.S. producers reported that differences 

other than price are sometimes a significant factor in their sales of narrow woven ribbons. Responses

from importers were mixed, with slightly more than half of responding importers reporting that

differences other than price between U.S.-produced narrow woven ribbons and subject imports are always

or frequently a significant factor. 

II-15
Table II-5

Narrow woven ribbons: Differences other than price between products from different sources1

Country comparison

U.S. producers U.S. importers2

AFSNAFSN

U.S. vs. subject countries:

 U.S. vs. China 0 *** *** 0 5 7 6 4

 U.S. vs. Taiwan 0 *** *** 0 4 7 5 3

U.S. vs. nonsubject countries:

 U.S. vs. Mexico 0 *** *** 0 4 2 3 1

 U.S. vs. Other 0 *** *** 0 4 2 3 1

Subject country comparisons:

 China vs. Taiwan 0 *** *** 0 3 7 8 5

 1

 Producers and importers were asked if differences other than price between narrow woven ribbons produced in

the United States and in other countries are a significant factor in their firms’ sales of narrow woven ribbons. 2

 ***. 

Note.–“A” = Always, “F” = Frequently, “S” = Sometimes, and “N” = Never.

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires.

When petitioner was asked how U.S. producers have maintained some sales when faced with

subject import competition, petitioner reported that it offers “serviceability,” “capability,” and “high fill

rates,” among other factors.35

Two importers reported that suppliers in Taiwan are superior to U.S. producers in terms of 

capacity, quality, availability, and delivery time. Importer *** reported that it imports narrow woven

ribbons ***.

Six importers (***) reported that suppliers in China and Taiwan are superior to U.S.

manufacturers, citing factors including in shorter lead times, especially for large and intricate orders;

greater availability; wider product range; matching dye colors; superior printing technique and quality;

superior testing for new jobs; and greater speed and flexibility in product development. Another importer

reported limited availability of wired and non-wired metallic ribbons and wired sheer, satin, and grosgrain

ribbons from U.S. producers.

Purchaser *** also reported that suppliers in China and Taiwan can provide ***. *** reported

that the products designed by Berwick Offray “***.”36 It also reported that manufacturers in *** offer

greater design innovation.37 *** also reported that ***.38

Berwick Offray reported that it can reproduce any color or design and is unaware of any situation

in which it has had to turn away an order because it was unable to manufacture a specific design.39 It

reported that it has an internal team to follow fashion and design trends in the wedding, floral, and

 35 Hearing transcript, p. 71 (Pajic).

 36 Ribbon retailers’ postconference brief, p. 17 and exh. 6.

 37 Ribbon retailers’ responses to additional questions, p. 5, August 4, 2009.

 38 Ribbon retailers’ postconference brief, p. 17 and exh. 6.

 39 Conference transcript, pp. 46-48 (Shea, Pajic). Petitioner’s postconference brief, exh. 1, p. 1. Hearing

transcript, p. 85 (Pajic, Sorenson).

II-16
confectionery industries and meets with major customers annually.40 It further reported that it will

produce any design requested if it does not already offer it, including proprietary and private licensed

designs.41 Berwick Offray also reports that the quality of narrow woven ribbons from any country source

is comparable.42

Four of 36 responding purchasers reported that there were certain grades, sizes, or types of

narrow woven ribbon that are only available from a single source, mostly stating that custom designs may 

only be available from a particular source. Purchaser *** reported that only one source in Taiwan has the

capability, flexibility, and high-quality printing machines and technology required to produce the level of

quality it desires. It also reported that only one source in China has the design and manufacturing

capability to produce coordinating non-ribbon products. Importer Liberty Ribbon and retailer Michael’s

reported that U.S. producers cannot satisfy U.S. demand for custom and holiday-themed narrow woven

ribbons, especially custom ribbons with short delivery times.43

As indicated in table II-6, for the factors that nearly all purchasers reported were “very important”

factors used in purchasing decisions (see table II-3), most purchasers reported that the U.S. product is

comparable to the product from both China and Taiwan with respect to availability, minimum quantity

requirements, packaging, product consistency, quality meeting or exceeding industry standards, product

range, reliability of supply, and technical support/service. However, 11 of 14 responding purchasers

indicated that the U.S. product is inferior to the product from China with respect to price (i.e., the U.S.

product is generally higher in price), with three reporting that the U.S. product is comparable. Likewise,

8 of 11 purchasers indicated that the U.S. product is inferior to the product from Taiwan with respect to

price (i.e., the U.S. product is generally higher in price), with three reporting that the U.S. product is

comparable. A great majority of purchasers reported that the U.S. product is superior to the product from

China and Taiwan with respect to delivery time.

 40 Hearing transcript, p. 82 (Pajic).

 41 Hearing transcript, pp. 83-84 (Pajic).

 42 Conference transcript, p. 70 (Shea).

 43 Hearing transcript, pp. 175 and 181 (Lodge) and p. 236 (Mitchell).

II-17
Table II-6

Narrow woven ribbons: Comparisons between U.S.-produced and subject imported product, as

reported by U.S. purchasers

Factor1

U.S. vs. China U.S. vs. Taiwan

SC I SC I

Availability 6 7 2 3 6 2

Delivery terms 7 7 1 4 6 1

Delivery time 12 2 1 9 1 1

Discounts offered 1 7 6 0 7 3

Extension of credit 4 10 0 3 7 0

Lower price2 0 3 11 0 3 8

Minimum quantity requirements 6 8 1 3 7 2

Packaging 1 13 1 1 9 1

Product consistency 5 9 1 1 8 2

Quality meets industry standards 3 11 1 1 8 2

Quality exceeds industry standards 4 10 1 1 8 2

Product range 4 9 2 0 6 4

Reliability of supply 5 9 1 2 8 1

Technical support/service 3 11 1 3 8 1

Lower U.S. transportation costs 8 7 0 6 5 0

Availability of fancy ribbons 5 6 4 2 3 6

Design innovation/fashion trends 4 9 2 2 5 3

 1 One purchaser also reported that U.S.-produced product was inferior to product from China and Taiwan with

respect to “responsiveness” and “flexibility.”

 2

 A rating of superior means that the price is generally lower. For example, if a firm reports “U.S. superior,” this

means that it rates the U.S. price generally lower than the subject import price.

Note.--S=U.S. product is superior, C=U.S. product is comparable, I=U.S. product is inferior.

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires.

Other Country Comparisons

In addition to comparisons between the U.S. product and imports from the subject countries, U.S.

producer and importer comparisons between the U.S. product and imports from nonsubject countries and

between subject imports and nonsubject imports are also shown in tables II-4 and II-5. Two importers

reported that suppliers of narrow woven ribbons from Mexico were unreliable, expensive, of poor 

quality, and had shipping errors. Another importer reported that narrow woven ribbons from Europe have

superior product ranges and more custom design offerings than U.S. producers. One importer reported

that narrow woven ribbons produced in India are rarely interchangeable with products from U.S.

producers or imported from China or Taiwan because of their poor quality.

II-18
Three of six responding purchasers reported that narrow woven ribbons from Mexico “always”

meet minimum quality specifications. One purchaser reported that narrow woven ribbons from Europe

“always” meet minimum quality specifications; one reported “usually” for imports from France; one

reported “usually” for imports from the United Kingdom; one reported “usually” for imports from Brazil;

and one reported “usually” for imports from Thailand.

ELASTICITY ESTIMATES44

U.S. Supply Elasticity45

The domestic supply elasticity for narrow woven ribbons measures the sensitivity of the quantity

supplied by U.S. producers to changes in the U.S. market price of narrow woven ribbons. The elasticity

of domestic supply depends on several factors including the level of excess capacity, the ease with which

producers can alter capacity, producers’ ability to shift to production of other products, the existence of

inventories, and the availability of alternate markets for U.S.-produced narrow woven ribbons. Analysis

of these factors above indicates that U.S. producers have the ability to increase or decrease shipments to

the U.S. market; an estimate in the range of 4 to 6 is suggested.46

U.S. Demand Elasticity

The U.S. demand elasticity for narrow woven ribbons measures the sensitivity of the overall

quantity demanded to a change in the U.S. market price of narrow woven ribbons. This estimate depends

on factors discussed above such as the existence, availability, and commercial viability of substitute

products. Based on the available information, the aggregate demand elasticity for narrow woven ribbons

is likely to be in the range of -1.25 to -1.5.47

 44 Petitioner submitted an economic study estimating the effects of subject imports on the U.S. narrow woven

ribbons industry. Petitioner uses elasticity estimates of a range of 3 to 8 for U.S. supply elasticity, -0.5 for demand

elasticity, and a range of 4 to 8 for substitution elasticity and assumes that, “absent dumping and subsidization,”

subject import volumes would have been 25 percent lower than their actual levels, rather than applying the margins

determined by the Commerce Department. Based on these estimates and assumptions, petitioner’s study found that

U.S. industry shipments would have been *** percent higher in 2009 than their actual level. Petitioner’s posthearing

brief, exh. 2. Staff notes that petitioner’s elasticity estimates differ from staff’s estimates (see discussion below). 

 45 A supply function is not defined in the case of a non-competitive market.

 46 Petitioner asserted that U.S. supply elasticity is in the range of 3 to 8, which it states is consistent with staff’s

estimate. Petitioner’s posthearing brief, exh. 2, p. 10.

 47 Petitioner asserted that demand for narrow woven ribbons is inelastic, citing an estimated range of -0.1 to -0.5.

Petitioner’s prehearing brief, p. 12. Staff notes that petitioner’s characterization of demand elasticity primarily

focuses on the low cost share accounted for by narrow woven ribbons in end uses. Staff maintains that demand is

slightly elastic, due primarily to the fact that a wide range of available and practical substitutes were cited by

questionnaire respondents. Moreover, staff considers the purchase of narrow woven ribbons to be discretionary

because they are reportedly a fashion-driven accessory item. Taiwan respondents agree with staff’s estimate of

demand elasticity. Taiwan respondents’ posthearing brief, pp. A-73-74.

II-19
Substitution Elasticity48

The elasticity of substitution depends upon the extent of product differentiation between the

domestic and imported products. Product differentiation, in turn, depends upon such factors as quality

and conditions of sale (availability, sales terms/discounts, etc.). Based on available information, the

elasticity of substitution between U.S.-produced narrow woven ribbons from China and Taiwan is likely

to be in the range of 2 to 4.49

 48 The substitution elasticity measures the responsiveness of the relative U.S. consumption levels of the subject

imports and the domestic like products to changes in their relative prices. This reflects how easily purchasers switch

from the U.S. product to the subject products (or vice versa) when prices change.

 49 Petitioner asserted that the elasticity of substitution is higher than the staff estimate and proposed an estimate of

4 to 8. Hearing transcript, p. 64 (Kaplan). Staff notes that, as shown in table II-5, slightly more than half of

responding importers reported that differences other than price between U.S.-produced narrow woven ribbons and

subject imports are always or frequently a significant factor, which implies a moderate degree of substitution

elasticity, as staff estimated. Taiwan respondents contend that the elasticity of substitution of 4 to 8 proposed by the

petitioner is much too high. Taiwan respondents’ posthearing brief, pp. A-75-76.

II-20
III-1 

PART III: U.S. PRODUCERS’ PRODUCTION, SHIPMENTS, AND 

EMPLOYMENT 

The Commission analyzes a number of factors in making injury determinations (see 19 U.S.C. §§ 

1677(7)(B) and 1677(7)(C)). Information on the margins of dumping and subsidies was presented in Part 

I of this report and information on the volume and pricing of imports of the subject merchandise is 

presented in Part IV and Part V. Information on the other factors specified is presented in this section 

and/or Part VI and (except as noted) is based on the questionnaire responses of four firms that accounted 

for the vast majority of U.S. production of narrow woven ribbon over the period examined. 

U.S. PRODUCERS 

Table III-1 lists U.S. producers of narrow woven ribbons, their production locations, positions on 

the petitions, production, and shares of reported production over the period for which data were collected. 

Table III-1 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers, their positions on the petitions, production locations, 

production, and shares of reported production, January 2007 to December 2009 

Firm 

Position on 

petitions1

Production 

locations 

Total 

production 

(1,000 square 

yards) 

Share of 

production 

(percent) 

Berwick Offray, LLC Support, petitioner 

Hagerstown, MD 

Leesville, SC *** ***

L.A. Najarian, Inc. *** Greene, NY *** ***

Lawrence Schiff Silk Mills, 

Inc. *** Quakertown, PA *** ***

Trimtex Co., Inc. *** Williamsport, PA *** ***

Total *** ***

1

 Position on all three petitions. 

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. 

The petitioner, Berwick Offray, was the largest U.S. producer of narrow woven ribbons over the 

period examined, accounting for more than *** of U.S. production. Lawrence Schiff was the secondlargest producer of narrow woven ribbons, accounting for a little under *** of U.S. production. Two 

other U.S. producers, L.A. Najarian and Trimtex, had *** production of narrow woven ribbons over the 

period examined. One of the U.S. producers, Trimtex, ceased its production of narrow woven ribbons 

***. 

Historical Decline of the Industry 

As the U.S. ribbons industry lost its apparel end-market (reflecting the fact that the vast majority 

of apparel production has left the United States), U.S. producers shifted to focusing on the smaller craft 

and retail markets for ribbons.1

 In the 1990s, Offray (prior to its merger with Berwick) had an 

approximate $*** narrow woven ribbons business; by the time of the merger in 2002 this had declined to 

$***, largely reflecting the loss of downstream apparel manufacturers in the United States according to 

 1

 Staff conversation with ***, April 8, 2010. 
III-2 

***, but also reflecting a shift by some ribbon consumers (mainly retailers) to source narrow woven 

ribbons abroad.2

 *** estimated that by 2004-05, the vast majority of apparel manufacturers that had 

previously been purchasers of narrow woven ribbons no longer had U.S. operations, although U.S. 

producers indicated that this trend continues through the period examined.3

 U.S. producer *** 

summarizes the trend of decreasing demand for narrow woven ribbons as follows, “***.”4

 U.S. producer 

***5 also indicates that a major demand driver related to “***.”6 Finally, U.S. producer *** indicates that 

there has been a “***” over the period examined.7

 

Former U.S. producer *** ceased its U.S. production of ribbons due to the loss of the apparel 

market in the United States and currently supplies its remaining U.S. customers with imported 

merchandise.8

 Likewise, the petitioner and other U.S. producers currently focus production and 

marketing of subject merchandise on the craft, packaging, and retail sectors due to the historical decline 

of the U.S. apparel industry.9

 ***, on the other hand, a producer of narrow woven ribbons ***, exited the 

industry due to ***.10

U.S. PRODUCTION, CAPACITY, AND CAPACITY UTILIZATION 

Table III-2, figure III-1, and figure III-2 present U.S. producers’ production, capacity, and 

capacity utilization. Over the period examined, U.S. producers’ production declined by *** percent, with 

most of the decline occurring between 2008 and 2009. While all four responding U.S. producers reported 

a decrease in production between 2008 and 2009, *** decreased its 2009 production relative to its own 

2008 production level to a *** larger extent than other firms in the industry, reflecting a management 

decision ***.11 *** reported decrease in production between 2008 and 2009, which accounted for *** 

percent of the overall decrease reported by all producers, largely mirrored the *** in that year.12

Reported ribbon capacity relates to loom capacity; however, capacity to produce subject 

merchandise may also be constrained by capacity bottlenecks in other downstream finishing operations 

such as ribbon dyeing or spooling.13 Bottlenecks in dyeing and spooling capacity are addressed by U.S. 

producers on a case-by-case basis based on projected demand, and are not necessarily less capital 

intensive than addressing capacity constraints in weaving operations.14 To the degree that a producer 

supplies the more seasonal retail demand for narrow woven ribbons, additional constraints on capacity 

 2

 Staff telephone conversation with ***, July 16, 2010. 

3

 Ibid. 

4

 *** U.S. importers’ questionnaire response, question III-5. 

5

 As table III-1 indicated ,*** accounted for *** percent of total production of narrow woven ribbons over the 

period examined, but *** is also focused more on supplying the industrial end user market which includes apparel 

manufacturing as well as packaging (i.e., putting a “give away” ribbon on a box as part of its packaging). See staff 

telephone notes with ***, July 16, 2010. Within the industrial end use channel, *** accounted for *** percent of 

U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments. 6

 *** U.S. producers’ questionnaire response, question IV-15. 

7

 *** U.S. producers’ questionnaire response, question IV-15. 

8

 Staff telephone conversation with ***, May 24, 2010. 

9

 Staff conversation with ***, April 8, 2010. 10 The closure of ***. ***. The narrow woven ribbons facility ceased its manufacturing activities ***. Staff 

conference call notes, ***, July 20, 2010. 11 Staff telephone conversation, ***, July 16, 2010. *** accounted for *** percent of the overall decline in 

production reported by U.S. producers between 2008 and 2009, *** percent of production over the period examined. 12 ***. 

13 See table III-2 for a discussion of capacity reported by ***. 14 Staff conversation with ***. 
III-3 

may occur due to seasonal demand “crunches.”15 U.S. producer ***, given the proper demand conditions, 

could increase production of narrow woven ribbons without installing new looms.16

Table III-2 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers’ production, capacity, and capacity utilization, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

Figure III-1 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers’ production, average production capacity, and capacity 

utilization, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

Figure III-2 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers’ production, hypothetical capacity, and capacity 

utilization, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

According to the petitioner, one of the effects of the industry’s re-orientation towards the craft, 

packaging, and retail end markets for ribbons is that U.S. producers now have developed more 

customized products (e.g., unique dyes) and in quantities (e.g., individual spools) marketable at the retail 

level.17 A portion of the U.S. industry’s capital expenditures in the recent past has gone into the 

development of new automated dyeing and spooling processes, and certain spooling processes that have 

not been successfully automated ***.18 In fact, according to the petitioner, constraints on the cost 

effectiveness of U.S. producers’ spooling operations has led some foreign sources to develop niche 

products not offered at competitive prices by U.S. producers (e.g., micro-spools, trays of small 3-yard 

spools, et cetera).19

U.S. PRODUCERS’ U.S. SHIPMENTS AND EXPORTS 

Table III-3 presents U.S. producers’ shipments over the period examined. U.S. producers 

primarily ship domestically-produced narrow woven ribbons to customers within the United States.20 

U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbons were lowest in 2009 in terms of quantity, value, 

and average unit values. *** decision ***21 accounted for most of the decrease in the average unit value 

 15 Hearing transcript, pp. 237-239 (Ms. Dembski-Brandl, Mr. Lodge, Ms. Bucklin). 16 The difference between hypothetical capacity and average production capacity in table III-2 represents 

additional weaving capacity (i.e., idled looms and looms operating at less than full capacity) at *** that could be 

brought online ***. 17 ***. 

18 For example, in the 2006-07 period, ***. 

19 ***. 

20 Canada and Mexico were the primary destination markets for U.S. producers’ exports. 

21 Staff telephone conversation with ***, July 16, 2010. *** accounted for *** percent of the overall decline in 

production reported by U.S. producers between 2008 and 2009, despite accounting for only *** percent of 

production over the period examined. 
III-4 

of overall U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments over the period examined.22 *** reporting U.S. producers 

indicated that they shipped narrow woven ribbons to all regions within the continental United States.23 

The vast majority (*** percent of the value) of U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments in 2009 consisted 

of narrow woven ribbons of fabric made of primarily (>50%) polyester. *** percent of the value of U.S. 

producers’ U.S. shipments was narrow woven ribbons of fabric made of primarily (>50%) nylon, *** 

percent was of fabric made of primarily (>50%) metallic fibers, and the remaining *** percent was 

everything else, i.e., made of fabric in which polyester, nylon, or metallic fibers did not individually 

account for more than 50 percent of the input yarn.24

Table III-3 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments, export shipments, and total shipments, 

2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

Seasonality of U.S. Shipments 

Table III-4 and figure III-3 present U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments by month. U.S. producers 

sold narrow woven ribbons 

***.25 

Table III-4 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments by month, 2008-09 

* * * * * * * 

Figure III-3 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments by month, 2008-09 

* * * * * * * 

U.S. Shipments by Channel of Distribution 

Table III-5 presents the value of U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments by channel of distribution. The 

channels of distribution were defined as follows: 

Wholesaler/Distributor.--Firms that purchase finished product for the purpose of re-selling the 

same finished product to either a retailer or an industrial user. 

 22 The average unit values of *** U.S. shipments decreased from $*** per square yard in 2007 to $*** per 

square yard. *** U.S. producers’ questionnaire response, question II-8. 23 U.S. producers’ questionnaire responses, question IV-12. Additionally, the *** percent of U.S. producers’ 

U.S. shipments over the 2007-09 period, indicated that they shipped to all locations within the United States, i.e., 

including Hawaii and U.S. territories. 24 U.S. producers’ questionnaire responses, question II-17. 

25 In 2008, *** percent of the value of U.S. shipments occurred in the first half of the year and *** percent in the 

second half. In 2009, *** percent of the value of U.S. shipments occurred in the first half of the year and *** 

percent in the second half. 
III-5 

Industrial end user.--Firms that purchase (or imported directly) finished product for the purpose 

of consuming the finished product in the creation of a different finished product; examples 

include retail florists and retail stores that use the finished product to embellish their retail 

boxes.26

Retailer.--Firms that resell the finished product to individual consumers. 

Final consumer.--Customers purchasing from retail stores or internet sites. 

Over the period examined, U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments to retailers increased by *** percent, 

while U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments to distributors and to industrial end users decreased by *** percent 

and by *** percent, respectively. 

Table III-5 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments by channel of distribution, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

U.S. PRODUCERS’ IMPORTS AND PURCHASES 

Table III-6 presents U.S. producers’ imports, production, and ratios of imports to production over 

the period examined. 

Table III-6 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers’ imports, production, and ratios of imports to production, 

2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

Both major U.S. producers also import *** subject merchandise from subject sources.27 

Additionally, ***, which ***, is an importer of subject merchandise from subject sources. U.S. producers 

provided the following reasons for importing:28

 Berwick Offray: ***. 

 Lawrence Schiff: ***. 

 ***. 

U.S. PRODUCERS’ INVENTORIES 

Table III-7 presents U.S. producers’ end-of-period inventories and the ratios of these inventories 

to U.S. producers’ production, U.S. shipments, and total shipments over the period examined. *** 

 26 This “industrial end use” would include sales of narrow woven ribbons to apparel manufacturers, but not 

exclusively. Narrow woven ribbons sold to distributors could also have gone to apparel manufacturers or to other 

end users. Further, some retailers holding narrow woven ribbons serve primarily the home apparel market. 27 A definition and discussion of import facilitation by U.S. producers is included in Part IV of this report. 28 Taken from firms’ responses to question II-6 of the U.S. importers’ questionnaire. 
III-6 

accounted for *** of reported U.S. producers’ inventories.29 According to a company official, these 

inventories represent years of accumulated inventory that ***. *** and this accounted for *** of the 

decrease in U.S. inventories by U.S. producers between 2008 and 2009.30 

Table III-7 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers’ end-of-period inventories, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

U.S. EMPLOYMENT, WAGES, AND PRODUCTIVITY 

Table III-8 shows U.S. producers’ employment-related data during the period examined. 

Table III-8 

Narrow woven ribbons: Average number of production and related workers, hours worked, wages 

paid to such employees, hourly wages, productivity, and unit labor costs, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

While ***, most of the decrease in PRWs caused by ***, and is therefore not reflected in the 

decline in PRWs reported during the period examined.31 The ***-percent reduction in PRWs over the 

period examined far outstripped the ***-percent decline in U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments, but roughly 

paralleled the ***-percent decline in U.S. production.32 33 Aggregate hours worked by PRWs declined 

further than overall employment and U.S. production, i.e., by *** percent, resulting in some increased 

productivity over the period. Gains in hourly wages remained low enough compared to aggregate hours 

worked and production that the unit labor cost per square yard decreased *** over the period examined. 

 29 For example, in 2009, *** indicated that it maintained an inventory level that accounted for *** percent of its 

domestic production, while in that same year, *** reported inventories that accounted for over *** percent of its 

domestic production. According to a company official, ***. 30 Staff telephone conversation with ***, July 16, 2010. 

31 *** response to staff questions, May 12, 2010. 

32 In other words, U.S. producers shipped relatively more product from inventory in 2009 as a share of total U.S. 

shipments than in previous years within the period. 33 Also, *** reduction in PRWs accounted for *** percent of the decline between 2008 and 2009. 
IV-1 

PART IV: U.S. IMPORTS, APPARENT U.S. CONSUMPTION, AND 

MARKET SHARES 

Data on imports of narrow woven ribbons are based on responses to Commission questionnaires 

except where noted.1

 Narrow woven ribbons are imported under a variety of HTS numbers, including but 

not limited to the specific statistical reporting numbers presented in Part I of this report.2

 Further, prior to 

2008, imports under the primary HTS subheading (i.e., 5806.32) were not broken out by statistical 

reporting numbers applicable to the merchandise subject to these investigations.3

 Additionally, official 

Commerce statistics gathered quantity information on imports by weight (i.e., in kilograms) which does 

not provide useful average unit value calculations given that the merchandise subject to these 

investigations is typically priced based on the surface area of ribbon sold (i.e., by square yard). Finally, a 

number of U.S. importers apparently also re-export imported merchandise.4

 

Since Commerce indicated in its final LTFV determinations that several of the firms within the 

subject countries (i.e., China and Taiwan) were not selling narrow woven ribbons at LTFV, this part of 

the report divides import data into imports from “subject sources” (i.e., all imports from China5

 or from 

Taiwan excluding imports from the zero-rate firms in Taiwan that Commerce identified) and from 

“nonsubject sources” (i.e., imports from the zero-rate firms in Taiwan that Commerce identified as well as 

imports from all other countries except China). The Commission received questionnaire responses from 

52 firms believed to account for the vast majority of imports of narrow woven ribbons from subject 

sources.6 7

 As discussed in Part VII of this report, U.S. importer questionnaires also account for the vast 

majority of imports of narrow woven ribbons from nonsubject sources. 

U.S. IMPORTERS 

Table IV-1 presents data on the U.S. importers that cumulatively account for at least 85 percent of 

the imports from a given source (based on quantity). 

 1

 Proprietary Customs data on imports are used in the discussions on negligibility and cumulation where a breakout of monthly statistics was needed. 2

 U.S. importers, in their responses to the Commission’s U.S. importers’ questionnaire, reported on the imports 

and sales of all merchandise matching Commerce’s scope language regardless of the specific HTS number used. 3

 This makes constructing a time-series dataset on imports from official Commerce statistics for the 2007-09 

period impossible. In 2008, when the new statistical reporting numbers were instituted, imports under these 

numbers accounted for only approximately 40 percent of what had been reported under the overly broad statistical 

reporting number in 2007. 4

 U.S. importers’ U.S. shipment data have therefore been used to construct apparent U.S. consumption data. 

5

 While Commerce determined that the Chinese producer Yama Ribbons and Bows Co., Ltd. was not selling its 

narrow woven ribbon at LTFV in the U.S. market, it did find that Yama Ribbons received a non de minimis net 

countervailable subsidy from the Government of China, and therefore for the purposes of this report U.S. imports 

from Yama are considered to be subject imports from China. In other words, all U.S. imports from China are 

subject. 6

 Questionnaire data gathered on imports from subject sources represent 132 percent of the value reported under 

the subject merchandise’s specific statistical reporting numbers within subheading 5806.32 in 2008 for imports from 

subject sources, and 87 percent in 2009. 7

 The Commission received 74 responses to its importers’ questionnaire in the preliminary phase of these 

investigations; however, most of the firms that did not respond in the final phase of these investigations were small 

importers. Data gathered in the final phase of these investigations on imports from China and Taiwan (both subject 

and nonsubject sources) amounted to $64.2 million in 2008, while data reported in the preliminary phase amounted 

to $65.0 million in that same year (i.e., 99 percent of the data from the preliminary phase). 
IV-2 

Table IV-1 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. importers, by source, January 2007 to December 2009 aggregated 

* * * * * * * 

U.S. IMPORTERS’ U.S. IMPORTS 

Table IV-2 and figure IV-1 present information on U.S. imports of narrow woven ribbons over 

the period examined. 

Table IV-2 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. importers’ U.S. imports, by source, 2007-09 

Source 

Calendar year 

2007 2008 2009 

Quantity (1,000 square yards) 

China *** *** ***

Taiwan, subject 12,694 11,264 8,904

Subtotal, subject *** *** ***

Taiwan, nonsubject *** *** ***

All other sources *** *** ***

Subtotal, nonsubject *** *** ***

Total imports 29,848 30,322 23,460

Value (1,000 dollars) 

China *** *** ***

Taiwan, subject 27,389 27,402 21,882

Subtotal, subject *** *** ***

Taiwan, nonsubject *** *** ***

All other sources *** *** ***

Subtotal, nonsubject *** *** ***

Total imports 68,576 68,372 55,009

Unit value (dollars per square yard) 

China *** *** ***

Taiwan, subject 2.16 2.43 2.46

Average, subject *** *** ***

Taiwan, nonsubject *** *** ***

All other sources *** *** ***

Average, nonsubject *** *** ***

Average, all imports 2.30 2.25 2.34

Table continued on next page 
IV-3 

Table IV-2 --Continued

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. importers’ U.S. imports, by source, 2007-09 

Source 

Calendar year 

2007 2008 2009 

Share of quantity (percent) 

China *** *** ***

Taiwan, subject *** *** ***

Subtotal, subject *** *** ***

Taiwan, nonsubject *** *** ***

All other sources *** *** ***

Subtotal, nonsubject *** *** ***

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires.

On a cumulated basis, the quantity of imports from subject sources first rose slightly in 2008 and 

then declined sharply in 2009. The slight rise in subject imports in 2008 reflects the fact that subject 

imports from China increased by more than the amount that subject imports from Taiwan decreased. 

Subject imports from both China and Taiwan decreased in 2009, although the decline of U.S. imports 

from China was greater, both absolutely and in percent, than the decline in U.S. imports from subject 

sources in Taiwan. Part of the decline in subject import volumes in 2009 may be attributed to the filing of 

the petition in these investigations (July 2009). *** indicated the following in relation to its narrow 

woven ribbon imports from China: “The 2009 imports decreased because of this trade remedies 

proceeding.”8

 ***.9 Other firms primarily cited the weak economy, slowing sales, or weak demand for 

subject merchandise in the U.S. market as the reason for decreases in their imports in 2009. 

Figure IV-1 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. importers’ U.S. imports, by source, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

U.S. Imports Controlled by U.S. Producers 

Table IV-3 presents information on U.S. imports of narrow woven ribbons that U.S. producers 

control, either through direct import operations or through import facilitation10 activities.11 Over the 

period examined, U.S. imports under U.S. producers’ control decreased by *** percent for imports from 

subject sources and by *** percent for imports from nonsubject sources. Most of the imports under U.S. 

producers’ control diminished between 2007 and 2008, as certain retailers, namely ***, began cutting out 

U.S. producers from their import sourcing and began importing directly. As a share of imports by each 

source, imports under U.S. producers’ control were ***. 

 8

 *** U.S. importers’ questionnaire response, question II-6. 

9

 ***. *** posthearing brief, ***. 

10 Facilitation is defined as any activity designed to, or having the effect of, helping to bring about either the 

import of narrow woven ribbons into the United States or the export of narrow woven ribbons to the United States. 

Such activities include, but are not limited to, promoting, advertising, negotiating contracts, arranging sales, 

brokering transactions, invoicing, financing, guaranteeing, collaborating, providing quality control, or performing 

other types of logistical or administrative support or assistance. 11 Note that this table underestimates the true amount of U.S. imports controlled by U.S. producers to the degree 

that Berwick Offray was unable to provide complete data on its import facilitation activities. See appendix E for a 

further discussion of missing data from Berwick Offray. 
IV-4 

Table IV-3 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. imports controlled by U.S. producers, by source, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

NEGLIGIBILITY 

The statute requires that an investigation be terminated without an injury determination if imports 

of the subject merchandise are found to be negligible.12 Negligible imports are generally defined in the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, as imports from a country of merchandise corresponding to a domestic 

like product where such imports account for less than 3 percent of the volume of all such merchandise 

imported into the United States in the most recent 12-month period for which data are available that 

precedes the filing of the petition or the initiation of the investigation. However, if there are imports of 

such merchandise from a number of countries subject to investigations initiated on the same day that 

individually account for less than 3 percent of the total volume of the subject merchandise, and if the 

imports from those countries collectively account for more than 7 percent of the volume of all such 

merchandise imported into the United States during the applicable 12-month period (in this case, July 

2008 through June 2009), then imports from such countries are deemed not to be negligible.13 U.S. 

imports from China accounted for *** percent of the value of total imports of narrow woven ribbons in 

the July 2008 to June 2009 period, while subject U.S. imports from Taiwan (Taiwan subject) accounted 

for 34.0 percent, or *** percent on a cumulated basis.14

U.S. IMPORTERS’ SHIPMENTS OF IMPORTS 

Table IV-4 presents data on U.S. importers’ shipments of imports from China over the period 

examined. 

Table IV-4 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. importers’ shipments of imports from China, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

Table IV-5 presents data on U.S. importers’ shipments of subject imports from Taiwan over the 

period examined. 

 12 Sections 703(a)(1), 705(b)(1), 733(a)(1), and 735(b)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. §§ 1671b(a)(1), 1671d(b)(1), 

1673b(a)(1), and 1673d(b)(1)). 13 Section 771(24) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 1677(24)). 

14 Calculated from proprietary Customs data for imports under the new statistical reporting numbers detailed in 

Part I of this report. Value data were used as the quantity data gathered for Customs purposes was in kilograms, 

which does not provide a useful quantity measure for the subject merchandise. 
IV-5 

Table IV-5 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. importers’ shipments of subject imports from Taiwan, 2007-09 

Source 

Calendar year 

2007 2008 2009 

Quantity (1,000 square yards) 

U.S. shipments: 

Commercial U.S. shipments *** *** ***

Internal consumption *** *** ***

Total U.S. shipments 12,226 10,880 8,634

Export shipments 403 458 453

Total shipments (Taiwan subject) 12,629 11,338 9,087

Value (1,000 dollars) 

U.S. shipments: 

Commercial U.S. shipments *** *** ***

Internal consumption *** *** ***

Total U.S. shipments 33,210 33,762 28,301

Export shipments 959 1,420 1,414

Total shipments (Taiwan subject) 34,169 35,182 29,715

Unit value (dollars per square yard) 

U.S. shipments: 

Commercial U.S. shipments *** *** ***

Internal consumption *** *** ***

Total U.S. shipments 2.72 3.10 3.28

Export shipments 2.38 3.10 3.12

Total shipments (Taiwan subject) 2.71 3.10 3.27

Share of quantity (percent) 

U.S. shipments: 

Commercial U.S. shipments *** *** ***

Internal consumption *** *** ***

Total U.S. shipments 96.8 96.0 95.0

Export shipments 3.2 4.0 5.0

Total shipments (Taiwan subject) 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires.

Table IV-6 presents data on U.S. importers’ shipments of nonsubject imports (i.e., U.S. 

importers’ shipments of nonsubject imports from Taiwan and imports from all other countries except 

China) over the period examined. 

Table IV-6 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. importers’ shipments of imports from nonsubject sources, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

Figure IV-2 presents information on the quantity of importers’ U.S. shipments of narrow woven 

ribbons and associated average unit values, by source. 
IV-6 

Figure IV-2 

Narrow woven ribbons: Quantity of U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments and associated average unit 

values, by source, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

U.S. Importers’ U.S. Shipments by Channel of Distribution 

Table IV-7 presents value data on U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments by channel of distribution.15 

Table IV-7 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments by channel, by source, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

CUMULATION CONSIDERATIONS 

In assessing whether subject imports are likely to compete with each other and with the domestic 

like product with respect to cumulation, the Commission generally has considered the following four 

factors: (1) the degree of fungibility, including specific customer requirements and other quality-related 

questions; (2) presence of sales or offers to sell in the same geographic markets; (3) common channels of 

distribution; and (4) simultaneous presence in the market. Channels of distribution and fungibility 

(interchangeability) are discussed in Part II of this report. Additional information concerning fungibility, 

geographical markets, and simultaneous presence in the market is presented below.16

Fungibility 

Table IV-8 presents data on the share of the value of U.S. shipments of narrow woven ribbons by 

sources and primary fiber content in 2009. Most narrow woven ribbons are made primarily of polyester 

fibers regardless of the source (domestically produced or imported). However, imported narrow woven 

ribbons from both subject and nonsubject sources each have greater shares of predominately nylon 

content than do domestically-produced narrow woven ribbons. While narrow woven ribbons made of 

metallic fibers command a price premium in the market, the overall share of such merchandise is 

relatively small, regardless of the source. 

Table IV-8 

Narrow woven ribbons: Share of the value of U.S. shipments by source and primary fiber content, 

2009 

* * * * * * * 

 15 Channel data were gathered by value in Commission questionnaires. 

16 In the preliminary phase of these investigations, the Commission exercised its discretion to cumulate subject 

imports from China and Taiwan for purposes of determining whether there was a reasonable indication of a threat of 

material injury by reason of subject imports from China and Taiwan. Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge 

from China and Taiwan, Investigation Nos. 701-TA-467 and 731-TA-1164-1165, USITC Publication 4099, August 

2009, p. 18. 
IV-7 

Geographic Overlap 

Table IV-9 presents data on the presence of U.S. producers’ and U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments 

of narrow woven ribbons in the 2007-09 period. Domestically produced and imported narrow woven 

ribbons are sold throughout the United States. 

Table IV-9 

Narrow woven ribbons: Presence of U.S. producers’ and U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments, January 

2007 to December 2009 aggregated 

Item 

U.S. 

producers

Subject Nonsubject 

China Taiwan Taiwan 

All other 

sources 

Firm coverage for entire United States1

(number) *** *** 28 14 ***

Total firms with U.S. shipments over 

the period (number) *** *** 33 20 ***

Share of U.S. shipments2 (percent) *** *** 95.4 79.1 ***

Firm coverage for continental United 

States3 (number) 4 *** 27 14 ***

Total firms with U.S. shipments over 

the period (number) 4 *** 33 20 ***

Share of U.S. shipments2 (percent) 100.0 *** 95.3 79.1 *** 1

 Includes Hawaii, Alaska, and territories. 

2

 This number indicates the share of U.S. shipments out of the total shipped throughout the indicated 

geographical area by source. For example, the data in this table indicate that *** percent of all U.S. shipments of 

imports from China in the 2007-09 period are sold by firms with shipments made to all geographical areas in the 

United States, or inversely only *** percent of U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of imports from China in the 2007-09 

period are made to limited geographic areas within the United States. 3

 Excludes Hawaii, Alaska, and territories. 

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. 

Presence in the Market and Seasonality 

Part V of this report presents information on the presence of specific pricing products on a 

quarterly basis over the period examined. Table IV-10 presents data on the presence of monthly imports, 

by source, in 2008 and 2009. Subject U.S. imports from Taiwan and China were present in each month 

over the 2008-09 period. Figure IV-3 presents data on monthly imports from subject sources over the 

2008-09 period. As demonstrated in figure IV-3, subject U.S. imports are largely seasonal with 

approximately one-third of the imports occurring in the first half of the year and two-thirds of the imports 

occurring in the second half of the year.17

 17 In 2008, *** percent of subject imports entered the United States during the first half of the year, and the 

remaining *** percent entered in the second half of the year. In 2009, *** percent of subject imports entered the 

United States during the first half of the year, and the remaining *** percent entered in the second half of the year. 
IV-8 

Table IV-10 

Narrow woven ribbons: Monthly presence of U.S. imports, by source, 2008-09 

* * * * * * * 

Figure IV-3 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. imports from subject sources, by month, 2008-09 

* * * * * * * 

APPARENT U.S. CONSUMPTION AND U.S. MARKET SHARES 

Table IV-11 presents data on apparent U.S. consumption and U.S. market shares for narrow 

woven ribbons over the period examined. 

Table IV-11 

Narrow woven ribbons: Apparent U.S. consumption and U.S. market shares, 2007-09 

Source 

Calendar year 

2007 2008 2009 

Quantity (1,000 square yards) 

U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments *** *** ***

U.S. shipments of imports from-- 

China *** *** ***

Taiwan, subject 12,226 10,880 8,634

Subtotal, subject *** *** ***

Taiwan, nonsubject *** *** ***

All other sources *** *** ***

Subtotal, nonsubject *** *** ***

Total shipments of imports 28,655 29,083 21,994

Apparent U.S. consumption *** *** ***

Value (1,000 dollars) 

U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments *** *** ***

U.S. shipments of imports from-- 

China *** *** ***

Taiwan, subject 33,210 33,762 28,301

Subtotal, subject *** *** ***

Taiwan, nonsubject *** *** ***

All other sources *** *** ***

Subtotal, nonsubject *** *** ***

Total shipments of imports 99,706 96,125 70,266

Apparent U.S. consumption *** *** ***

Table continued on next page. 
IV-9 

Table IV-11--Continued

Narrow woven ribbons: Apparent U.S. consumption and U.S. market shares, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

Figure IV-4 presents information on U.S. market shares, by source, over the period examined. 

Figure IV-4 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. market shares, by source, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

Apparent U.S. Consumption and Market Shares by Channel of Distribution 

Table IV-12 presents data on apparent U.S. consumption and U.S. market shares for narrow 

woven ribbons during 2007-09 in the wholesale/distributor and industrial end user channels combined. 

Over the period examined, the value of apparent U.S. consumption in these channels declined by *** 

percent. U.S. producers accounted for *** percent of this market, while subject imports accounted for 

*** percent. The wholesale/distributor and industrial end user channels accounted for *** percent of 

overall consumption of narrow woven ribbons in 2007 and *** percent in 2009, reflecting a slightly 

sharper decline on a percentage basis in consumption in these channels over the period examined than in 

the retailer/final consumer channels as measured by the value of U.S. shipments. 

Table IV-12 

Narrow woven ribbons: Apparent U.S. consumption and U.S. market shares for the 

wholesale/distributor and industrial end users channels, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

Table IV-13 presents data on apparent U.S. consumption and U.S. market shares for narrow 

woven ribbons during 2007-09 in the retailer and final consumer channels combined. Over the period 

examined, the value of apparent U.S. consumption in these channels declined by *** percent. U.S. 

producers’ U.S. shipments increased as a share of this market from *** to *** percent over the period 

examined, while U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of subject imports decreased as a share of this market 

from *** to *** percent.18 The retailer and final end user channels accounted for *** percent of overall 

consumption of narrow woven ribbons in 2007 and *** percent in 2009, reflecting a slightly lesser 

decline on a percentage basis in consumption in these channels over the period examined than in the 

wholesale/distributor and industrial end user channels as measured by the value of U.S. shipments. 

Table IV-13 

Narrow woven ribbons: Apparent U.S. consumption and U.S. market shares for the retailer and 

final end user channels, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 

 18 Most of the decline in subject import market share occurred between 2008 and 2009. Retailers testified that 

they decreased their overall holiday orders for narrow woven ribbons for 2009 based on a dismal holiday season in 

2008. 
IV-10 

RATIO OF IMPORTS TO U.S. PRODUCTION 

Table IV-14 presents data on the ratios of U.S. imports to U.S. production. 

Table IV-14 

Narrow woven ribbons: Ratios of U.S. imports to U.S. production, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 
0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

2008 2009 2010

Price index (January 2008=100)

PART V: PRICING AND RELATED INFORMATION

FACTORS AFFECTING PRICES

Raw Material Costs

U.S. producers of narrow woven ribbons reported that polyester nylon, acetate, and rayon yarns

are the principal raw materials used in producing narrow woven ribbons, with *** reporting that polyester

yarn in particular accounts for *** percent of its total raw material costs. Other raw materials cited

included dyes (reportedly accounting for *** percent of total raw material costs), corrugated packaging,

and paper and plastic spools. U.S. producers reported that their raw material costs accounted for ***

percent of COGS in 2007, *** percent in 2008, and *** percent in 2009. *** reported that the price of

polyester yarn increased *** in 2007, remained stable in 2008 and 2009, increased *** in the first quarter

of 2010 and is now expected ***.1

 U.S. producer *** reported that the prices of raw materials have

increased since 2007 and it expects them to continue to increase.2

 Figure V-1 shows a monthly price

index of a weighted basket of synthetic fibers (including acrylic, nylon, polyester, and polypropylene) in

the United States since 2008. Figure V-2 shows a monthly price index of polyethylene, which is used to

make polyester yarn, from 2007 to February 2010.

Figure V-1

Narrow woven ribbons: Monthly price index of synthetic fibers in the United States, by month,

January 2008-June 2010

Source: PCI Fibres. http://pcifibres.com/id4.html.

 1 ***’s U.S. producers’ questionnaire response, at question IV-19. It also reported increases in the price of

corrugated packaging, dyes, nylon yarn, and metallic yarn in 2007 and 2008. *** reported that it had ***. It also

reported that the prices of corrugated packaging, plastic, and paper have increased in the first quarter of 2010.

 2

 ***’s U.S. producers’ questionnaire response, at question IV-19.

V-1
0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

180.0

2007 2008 2009 2010

Price index (January 2007=100)

Figure V-2

Narrow woven ribbons: Average monthly U.S. price index of polyethylene, by month, January

2007-February 2010

Source: Compiled from data published in Plastics News (as presented in USITC Publication 4160).

U.S. Inland Transportation Costs

U.S. producers reported that U.S. inland transportation costs of narrow woven ribbons range from

*** to *** percent of the delivered price. Importers reported that U.S. inland transportation costs of

narrow woven ribbons range from 1 to 10 percent of the delivered price, with the majority of importers

reporting U.S. inland transportation costs of 5 percent or less. 

U.S. inland shipping distances for U.S.-produced narrow woven ribbons and narrow woven

ribbons produced in China and Taiwan were requested from both U.S. producers and U.S. importers. For

the U.S. producers, *** percent of their U.S. sales in 2009 occurred within distances of 100 miles from

their facilities, *** percent occurred within distances of 101 to 1,000 miles, and *** percent occurred at

distances over 1,000 miles from their facilities. For importers of narrow woven ribbons from China, 14.2

percent of their U.S. commercial shipments in 2009 occurred within 100 miles of their storage facilities,

34.3 percent of sales occurred within 101 to 1,000 miles, and 51.4 percent occurred at distances over

1,000 miles. For importers of narrow woven ribbons from Taiwan, 10.1 percent of their U.S. commercial

shipments in 2009 occurred within 100 miles of their storage facilities, 47.8 percent of sales occurred

within 101 to 1,000 miles, and 42.1 percent occurred at distances over 1,000 miles.

PRICING PRACTICES

Pricing Methods

When questionnaire respondents were asked how they determined the prices that they charge for

narrow woven ribbon, *** reported ***. *** reported the use of ***. Among importers of narrow

woven ribbons from China and Taiwan, the majority reported the use of price lists, while the remainder

reported the use of transaction-by-transaction negotiations or a combination of the two. Three of 31

responding importers reported the use of contracts for multiple shipments.

V-2
Prices of narrow woven ribbons are generally quoted on an f.o.b. rather than a delivered basis, for

both U.S. producers and importers. 

Contracts vs. Spot Sales

U.S. producers and importers of narrow woven ribbons from China and Taiwan were asked what

shares of their sales were on a (1) long-term contract basis (multiple deliveries for more than 12 months),

(2) short-term contract basis (up to and including 12 months), and (3) spot sales basis (for a single

delivery) during 2009. *** reported that *** percent of their sales are on a short-term contract basis, with

the remainder being spot sales. *** reported that *** percent of its sales are a short-term contract basis

and *** percent are spot sales. *** reported that *** of its sales are on a short-term contract basis. ***’s

contracts typically ***. ***’ short-term contracts ***.

Among the importers that reported sales of imports from China and Taiwan, the majority reported

that all or nearly all of their sales are on a spot basis. Specifically, 13 of 22 responding importers of

narrow woven ribbons from China and 17 of 23 responding importers of narrow woven ribbons from

Taiwan reported that all or nearly all of their sales are on a spot basis. Importers’ short-term contracts last

from 3 to 12 months, generally fix both price and quantity, and may or may not contain meet-or-release

provisions, with deliveries occurring daily, weekly, monthly, or as needed.

Sales Terms and Discounts

*** offer some form of discount, with ***. ***.3

 Twenty-two of the 33 responding importers

reported the use of discounts, mostly citing discounts based on annual volume.

PRICE DATA

The Commission requested U.S. producers and importers of narrow woven ribbons from subject

sources in China and Taiwan4

 to provide quarterly data for the total quantity and f.o.b. value of selected

products that were shipped to unrelated customers in the U.S. market.5

 *** was also requested to provide

sales price data of the six pricing products for which it facilitated the importation for its top five

customers, but reported ***.6

 As shown in appendix E, Berwick Offray also provided ***.7 Data were

 3 Petitioner’s postconference brief, exh. 1, p. 12.

 4

 Firms were also asked to report pricing data on sales of products imported from nonsubject sources in Taiwan

and Mexico. Appendix D presents these nonsubject pricing data.

 5

 Firms were asked to report pricing data in square yards, linear yards, spools, and kilograms in order to

maximize the likelihood of obtaining reliable weighted-average prices in comparable units of measure. The pricing

data presented here include weighted-average prices based on square yards, as staff deemed these data to be most

reliable because virtually all of the firms were able to report the data in square yards.

 6

 ***. Staff telephone notes with ***. ***. These data are presented in appendix E. 

 7

 The average unit values of Berwick Offray’s facilitated imports from *** were *** the average unit values of

shipments of its domestic product and *** the average unit values of shipments of its imports from ***. The average

unit values of Berwick Offray’s facilitated imports from *** were *** the average unit values of shipments of its

domestic product and *** the average unit values of shipments of its imports from ***. See appendix E.

V-3
requested for the period January 2007-December 2009. The products for which pricing data were

requested are as follows:8

Product 1.—Single faced satin of solid color, without woven or applied embellishments,9 with a

woven selvedge with no wire, with a width of 3/8”.

Product 2.— Single faced satin of non-solid color, with or without woven or applied

embellishments, with a woven selvedge with no wire, with a width of 7/8”.

Product 3.—Double faced satin of solid color, without woven or applied embellishments, with a

woven selvedge with no wire, with a width of 3/8”.

Product 4.—Sheers of solid color, without woven or applied embellishments, with a woven

selvedge with wire, with a width of 11⁄2”.

Product 5.—Sheers of non-solid color, with or without woven or applied embellishments, with a

woven selvedge, with wire, with a width of 7/8”.

Product 6.—Grosgrain of non-solid color, with or without applied embellishments, with a woven 

selvedge, with no wire, with a width of 7/8”.

*** U.S. producers (***10), 16 importers of product imported from China (***), and 15 

importers of product imported from Taiwan (***) provided pricing data for sales of the requested

products, although not all firms reported pricing for all products for all quarters.11 Pricing data reported

by these firms accounted for approximately *** percent of the value of U.S. producers’ U.S. commercial

shipments of narrow woven ribbons during January 2007-December 2009, *** percent of U.S. shipments

of imports from China over the same period, and *** percent of U.S. commercial shipments of imports

from Taiwan.12

 8 Petitioner contends that it had requested the Commission to collect data on 15 pricing products and that the 6

pricing products on the Commission questionnaires are too broadly defined and therefore contain product mixes that

may affect the quality of the pricing data comparisons. Hearing transcript, pp. 145-146 (Kaplan). Staff notes that

petitioner submitted 6 pricing products in the petition that closely match the pricing product descriptions for which

the Commission collected data and that petitioner did not comment on the 6 pricing product descriptions presented

here as proposed by staff in the draft questionnaires. See Petition, p. 65 and Petitioner’s Comments on Draft

Questionnaires. See also fn. 12 on page V-7 for more discussion.

 9

 Woven or applied embellishments include, but are not limited to: woven embellishments using a jacquard

mechanism, narrow woven ribbons made from differently colored yarns (yarns dyed before weaving), screen printed

embellishments, flexography printed embellishments, transfer printed embellishments, and foil stamped

embellishments.

 10 ***.

 11 Importers *** submitted unusable pricing data on sales of their products imported from China and Taiwan and

are unable to revise them. 

 12 Staff notes that the pricing data accounted for relatively small shares of U.S. shipments, primarily because there

is a vast number of specific product types covered by the scope of these investigations. The pricing product

definitions presented here reflect the original six pricing product definitions that petitioner proposed in the petition,

including some slight modifications. Specifically, in consultation with petitioner, staff narrowed the definitions of

the pricing products in the final phase of these investigations in order to obtain more precise and accurate unit values

(continued...)

V-4
Price Trends

Weighted-average f.o.b. prices reported for U.S. producers and importers are presented in tables

V-1 through V-6 and in figures V-3 through V-8 on a quarterly basis during January 2007-December

2009. For sales reported by U.S. producers, ***. For sales of products imported from China, ***. For

sales of products imported from Taiwan, ***.

Table V-1

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b. prices and quantities of domestic and imported

product 1 and margins of underselling/(overselling), by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Table V-2

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b. prices and quantities of domestic and imported

product 2 and margins of underselling/(overselling), by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Table V-3

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b. prices and quantities of domestic and imported

product 3 and margins of underselling/(overselling), by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Table V-4

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b. prices and quantities of domestic and imported

product 4 and margins of underselling/(overselling), by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Table V-5

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b. prices and quantities of domestic and imported

product 5 and margins of underselling/(overselling), by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Table V-6

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b. prices and quantities of domestic and imported

product 6 and margins of underselling/(overselling), by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

 12 (...continued)

from responding firms than were received in the preliminary phase of these investigations.

 Staff also notes that the purchase prices paid by certain retailers that import directly are not included in the data

presented here. ***. Staff requested that Berwick Offray report pricing data on an aggregate of all of its narrow

woven ribbons products sold via facilitated imports to its largest customers in order to obtain some coverage of these

retailers’ import purchases. These data are presented in appendix E.

V-5
Figure V-3

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b prices and quantities of domestic and imported

product 1, by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Figure V-4

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b prices and quantities of domestic and imported

product 2, by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Figure V-5

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b prices and quantities of domestic and imported

product 3, by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Figure V-6

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b prices and quantities of domestic and imported

product 4, by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Figure V-7

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b prices and quantities of domestic and imported

product 5, by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Figure V-8

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b prices and quantities of domestic and imported

product 6, by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Table V-7

Narrow woven ribbons: Summary of weighted-average f.o.b. prices for products 1-6 from the

United States and China and Taiwan

* * * * * * *

U.S. weighted-average sales prices of pricing products fluctuated but generally increased, with

the exceptions of the prices of products 3 and 4, which decreased *** overall. The prices of products 

imported from China fluctuated, with the prices of products 1 and 3 decreasing overall; the prices of

products 4 and 6 increasing overall; and the prices of products 2 and 5 remaining stable or decreasing ***

overall.13 The prices of products imported from Taiwan fluctuated and generally decreased, with the

exception of product 6, which increased ***. Some producers and importers reported that the narrow

 13 As explained in table V-7, one importer, ***, *** decreased its sales price of product 3 imported from China in

***. The change in price of product 3 imported from China from the ***.

V-6
woven ribbons industry is seasonal, with sales reportedly peaking in the second half of the year.14 Percent

changes in the seasonally adjusted sales prices over the entire period are presented in table V-7; these data

follow the same overall trend of the non-seasonally adjusted prices.15

The weighted-average sales prices of U.S.-produced product 1 increased steadily by *** percent

from the first quarter of 2007 to the last quarter of 2009. The weighted-average sales prices of product 1

imported from China fluctuated and decreased by *** percent over the same period. The weightedaverage sales prices of product 1 imported from Taiwan fluctuated and decreased by *** percent from the

first quarter of 2007 to the last quarter of 2009. 

The weighted-average sales prices of U.S.-produced product 2 fluctuated and increased by ***

percent from the first quarter of 2007 to the last quarter of 2009. The weighted-average sales prices of

product 2 imported from China fluctuated and decreased by *** percent over the same period. The

weighted-average sales prices of product 2 imported from Taiwan fluctuated and decreased by ***

percent from the first quarter of 2007 to the last quarter of 2009.16

The weighted-average sales prices of U.S.-produced product 3 fluctuated ***, decreasing *** by

*** percent from the first quarter of 2007 to the last quarter of 2009. The weighted-average sales prices

of product 3 imported from China fluctuated, decreasing by *** percent from the first quarter of 2007 to

***, after which it decreased by *** percent ***.17 The weighted-average sales prices of product 3

imported from Taiwan fluctuated and decreased by *** percent over the entire period, with most of the

decrease occurring ***.

The weighted-average sales prices of U.S.-produced product 4 remained relatively flat from the

first quarter of 2007 to the fourth quarter of 2009, decreasing *** percent over the entire period. The

weighted-average sales prices of product 4 imported from China fluctuated but generally increased by

*** percent over the same period.18 The weighted-average sales prices of product 4 imported from

Taiwan fluctuated throughout the entire period, decreasing overall by *** percent from the first quarter of

2007 to the fourth quarter of 2009.19

The weighted-average sales prices of U.S.-produced product 5 fluctuated *** and increased

overall by *** percent from the first quarter of 2007 to the last quarter of 2009. The weighted-average

sales prices of product 5 imported from China fluctuated and decreased overall by *** percent from the

 14 See the section entitled “Demand” in Part II. Petitioner has reported that there is some seasonality in the

quantities sold during specific holiday seasons, but that there is no seasonal effect on prices. Hearing transcript, pp.

148-150 (Pajic, Sorenson).

 15 See table V-7 for seasonally adjusted price increases over the period. Staff seasonally adjusted the pricing data

by first detrending the series based on a linear regression, then deriving an average seasonal factor (or deviation from

the detrended series) for each quarter of the year, and finally subtracting the quarterly seasonal factors from the

original non-seasonally adjusted pricing data for each quarter.

 16 U.S. producer ***’s reported sales of pricing product 2 imported from Taiwan accounted for *** percent of the

total sales quantity of product 2 imported from Taiwan reported by importers. The weighted-average sales prices of

product 2 imported from Taiwan are ***, due primarily to data reported by importer ***, which reported that its

product 2 is a ***, which fits within the product 2 definition. Also, ***’s reported pricing data appear internally

consistent with the shipment data it reported on its Importers’ questionnaire.

 17 As explained in table V-7, one importer, ***, *** decreased its sales price of product 3 imported from China

***. 

 18 U.S. producer ***’s reported sales of pricing product 4 imported from China accounted for *** percent of the

total sales quantity of product 4 imported from China reported by importers. Staff excluded *** of sales prices of

product 4 imported from China reported by importer *** because staff deemed them to be outliers. 

 19 U.S. producer ***’s reported sales of pricing product 4 imported from Taiwan accounted for *** percent of the

total sales quantity of product 4 imported from Taiwan reported by importers. 

V-7
first quarter of 2007 to the *** quarter of 2009, the last period for which data were reported.20 The

weighted-average sales prices of product 5 imported from Taiwan fluctuated and decreased by ***

percent from the first quarter of 2007 to the last quarter of 2009, remaining relatively flat from the *** to

the ***.

The weighted-average sales prices of U.S.-produced product 6 fluctuated and increased by ***

percent from the first quarter of 2007 to the last quarter of 2009. The weighted-average sales prices of

product 6 imported from China fluctuated but generally increased overall by *** percent over the same

period.21 The weighted-average sales prices of product 6 imported from Taiwan fluctuated *** and

increased by *** percent from the first quarter of 2007 to the last quarter of 2009.22

Price Comparisons

Margins of underselling and overselling for the period are presented by product category in 

table V-8 below. The data show that prices of imports from China were lower than the U.S. producers’

prices in 65 out of 69 quarterly comparisons, by margins ranging from 1.7 percent to 83.3 percent, with

an average margin of 49.2 percent. The prices of imports from China were higher than U.S. producers’

prices in four quarterly comparisons, by margins ranging from 0.05 to 17.9 percent, with an average 

margin of 10.4 percent. The data show that prices of imports from Taiwan were lower than the U.S.

producers’ prices in 53 out of 72 quarterly comparisons, by margins ranging from 2.4 percent to 81.0

percent, and with an average margin of 42.5 percent. The prices of imports from Taiwan oversold 

U.S. producers’ prices in 19 quarterly comparisons, by margins ranging from 4.0 to 132.7 percent, with 

an average margin of 43.2 percent. 

Table V-8

Narrow woven ribbons: Instances of underselling/overselling and the range and average of

margins for products 1-6, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

LOST SALES AND LOST REVENUES

The Commission requested that U.S. producers report any instances of lost sales or revenues that

they experienced due to competition from imports of narrow woven ribbons from China and Taiwan. 

U.S. producers provided *** lost sales allegations totaling $*** and *** lost revenues allegations totaling

$***.23 Staff contacted the *** purchasers cited in the allegations; *** responded. *** purchasers

confirmed lost sales allegations totaling $*** and *** purchasers confirmed lost revenues allegations

totaling $***. *** purchasers disagreed with lost sales allegations totaling $*** and *** purchasers

 20 Staff excluded sales prices of product 5 imported from China reported by importer *** because they were over

*** percent higher than the weighted-average sales prices of the other importers’ sales prices of product 5 and staff

deemed them to be outliers. Staff also excluded *** of sales prices of product 5 imported from China reported by

importer *** because staff deemed it to be an outlier.

 21 U.S. producer ***’s reported sales of pricing product 6 imported from China accounted for *** percent of the

total sales quantity of product 6 imported from China reported by importers. Importer ***. Staff excluded *** of

sales prices of product 6 imported from China and reported by importer *** because staff deemed it to be an outlier.

 22 Importer ***.

 23 Petitioner submitted additional documentation regarding price concessions that were requested by purchasers

*** in 2008, 2009, and 2010. Petitioner’s posthearing brief, exh. 3. It is unclear if the transactions cited in this

additional documentation are already included in the lost sales and lost revenues allegations that petitioner

previously submitted.

V-8
disagreed with lost revenues allegations totaling $***.24 The results are summarized in tables V-9 and V10 and are discussed below.

Table V-9

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers’ lost sales allegations

* * * * * * *

Table V-10

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. producers’ lost revenue

* * * * * * *

*** was named in a lost revenues allegation valued at $***. It disagreed with the allegation,

stating that ***. It further reported that it has not switched from purchasing narrow woven ribbons from

U.S. producers to suppliers of imports and that it is unaware of U.S. producers reducing their prices to

compete with imports.

*** was named in a lost sales allegation valued at $***. It disagreed with the allegation, stating

that it only purchases from U.S. suppliers. 

*** was named in a lost sales allegation valued at $***. It disagreed with the allegation, stating

that it has not purchased narrow woven ribbons from China or Taiwan.

*** was named in a lost sales allegation valued at $***. It reported that it could not respond to

the specific allegation, but stated that ***, nor is it aware of U.S. producers reducing their prices in order

to compete with imports.

*** was named in ***. It disagreed with ***, stating that it ***. ***.25

*** was named in a ***. It agreed with the ***, as the U.S. supplier had lowered its price from

$*** to $*** per piece to compete with a price quote of $*** per piece offered by the supplier of imports

from China.

*** was named in a lost sales allegation valued at $***. It disagreed with the allegation, stating

that ***. Furthermore, it reported that ***.

*** was named in *** allegations valued at $***. It disagreed with the allegations, stating that

***. It also reported that ***. It also reported that ***. Furthermore, ***. ***. In addition, it reported

that ***. It also reported that the *** involving ***. ***.26

*** was named in a lost sales allegation valued at $***. It agreed with the allegation, stating it

received *** price quotes from import suppliers that were higher than the competing U.S. producer’s

price, and *** price quotes from import suppliers that were lower than the U.S. producer’s price. It

further noted that while an import supplier was awarded the bid, it cannot say definitively that the U.S.

producer was at a price disadvantage.

*** was named in ***. It ***.

*** was named in a lost sales allegation valued at $***. It ***.

*** was named in a lost sales allegation valued at $***. It ***.

*** was named in ***. It reported that ***.

*** was named in a lost sales allegation valued at $***. It reported that it never purchased

narrow woven ribbons.

 24 *** other purchasers responded and were unable to confirm or deny the specific allegation cited. See text for

further information.

 25 ***.

 26 ***.

V-9

PART VI: FINANCIAL EXPERIENCE OF THE U.S. PRODUCERS

INTRODUCTION

Four U.S. firms provided usable financial data on their operations on narrow woven ribbons.1

These data are believed to account for the vast majority of U.S. operations on narrow woven ribbons in

2009. No firms reported toll production, and reported non-commercial sales were quite limited (and thus

are not separately presented in this chapter).2

 Berwick Offray reported a fiscal year end of March 31,

***, and the other two firms reported a fiscal year end of December 31. 

OPERATIONS ON NARROW WOVEN RIBBONS

Income-and-loss data for U.S. firms on their operations on narrow woven ribbons are presented in

table VI-1, while selected financial data, by firm, are presented in table VI-2. The domestic producers

collectively experienced a ***-percent decline in operating income from 2007 to 2009. Total net sales

quantity declined irregularly during this time, and was *** lower in 2009 as compared to 2007, while

total net sales value consistently declined, and was *** percent lower in 2009 as compared to 2007. The 

firms’ operating costs – cost of goods sold (“COGS”) and selling, general, and administrative (“SG&A”)

expenses, combined – decreased by *** percent from 2007 to 2009; however, revenue declined by a

somewhat greater amount in terms of both absolute and per-unit values, and thus resulted in a reduction in

operating income in both 2008 and 2009. Along with a decline in raw material costs, the domestic

producers collectively reported a decline in non-raw material operating costs. These costs (direct labor,

other factory costs, and SG&A expenses) decreased from $*** per square yard in 2007 to $*** per

square yard in 2009, and helped moderate the decline in operating profits.

Table VI-1

Narrow woven ribbons: Results of operations of U.S. producers, 2007-09

* * * * * * *

Table VI-2

Narrow woven ribbons: Results of operations of U.S. producers, by firm, 2007-09

* * * * * * * 

 1 The four firms are Berwick Offray, L.A. Najarian, Schiff, and Trimtex. Throughout the period for which data

were requested, *** accounted for *** percent of total reported net sales (both quantity and value). In 2009,

Berwick Offray accounted for *** percent of total net sales value, Schiff accounted for *** percent, L.A. Najarian

accounted for *** percent, and Trimtex accounted for *** percent. 

 2

 ***.

VI-1
While the four producers combined reported fairly stable operating margins from 2007 to 2009,

the four firms reported *** financial data, with *** reporting *** financial results than *** during the

period for which data were collected.3 4

 While *** reported *** per-unit COGS, the firm’s reported perunit SG&A expenses were *** than such expenses as reported by ***, and resulted in ***.5

 ***, which

accounted for *** percent of overall sales value in 2007-09, reported the largest *** as a ratio to sales of

the reporting firms. ***.6

VARIANCE ANALYSIS

A variance analysis for narrow woven ribbons is presented in table VI-3. The analysis shows that

the decline in operating income from 2007 to 2009 is primarily due to the higher unfavorable price

variance despite a favorable net cost/expense variance (that is, prices declined more than costs/expenses).7

Table VI-3

Narrow woven ribbons: Variance analysis on operations of U.S. producers, 2007-09

* * * * * * *

 3 Throughout the period for which data were requested, *** accounted for *** percent of total reported net sales

(both quantity and value). In 2009, Berwick Offray accounted for *** percent of total net sales value, Schiff

accounted for *** percent, L.A. Najarian accounted for *** percent, and Trimtex accounted for *** percent. Thus,

the financial data reported by ***. 

 4

 A comparison of Berwick Offray’s reported operating costs to the overall financial results for its parent

company, CSS Industries, reveals that the data reported to the Commission are *** with CSS Industries’ overall

financial data for the last three fiscal years. Ratio-to-sales measures for COGS and SG&A expenses in the last three

fiscal years generally *** between CSS Industries’ audited financial data and Berwick Offray’s reported financial

data. CSS Industries’ operating margins for the last three fiscal years, excluding all reported costs and expenses

other than COGS and SG&A expenses, were 8.2, 6.1, and 3.3 percent, respectively. Narrow woven ribbons account

for approximately *** percent of CSS Industries’ overall sales in each reporting period. See CSS Industries’ Form

10-K, June 1, 2010, p. 25. Berwick Offray stated that the primary components of its reported selling expenses were

***. Together, these costs accounted for approximately *** percent of reported selling expenses in 2009. In

addition, the primary components of Berwick Offray’s reported G&A expenses were ***. Together, these costs

accounted for approximately *** percent of reported G&A expenses in 2009. E-mail correspondence from *** ,

June 21, 2010.

 5 ***. Fax and telephone correspondence from ***, July 30, 2009, and June 10, 2010. Differences in per-unit

SG&A expenses between *** may to some extent reflect ***. Telephone correspondence from ***, August 12,

2009. ***. 

 6 See Trimtex’s U.S. producer questionnaire response, pp. 4 and 18.

 7

 A variance analysis is calculated in three parts, sales variance, cost of sales variance, and SG&A expense

variance. Each part consists of a price variance (in the case of the sales variance) or a cost variance (in the case of

the cost of sales and SG&A expense variance) and a volume variance. The sales or cost variance is calculated as the

change in unit price times the new volume, while the volume variance is calculated as the change in volume times

the old unit price. Summarized at the bottom of the table, the price variance is from sales; the cost/expense variance

is the sum of those items from COGS and SG&A variances, respectively; and the volume variance is the sum of the

lines under price and cost/expense variance. The net volume component is generally smaller than the price variance

and the net cost/expense variance.

VI-2
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES

The responding firms’ aggregate data on capital expenditures are shown in table VI-4. Three

firms provided capital expenditure data. Capital expenditures for narrow woven ribbons decreased from

2007 to 2009. *** accounted for *** percent of total capital expenditures in each requested period. 

According to ***, capital expenditures primarily reflect ***.8

 

Table VI-4

Narrow woven ribbons: Capital expenditures of U.S. producers, 2007-09

* * * * * * *

ASSETS AND RETURN ON INVESTMENT

The Commission’s questionnaire requested data on assets used in the production, warehousing,

and sale of narrow woven ribbons to compute return on investment (“ROI”). Data on the U.S. producers’

total assets and their ROI are presented in table VI-5. From 2007 to 2009, the total assets for narrow

woven ribbons decreased from $*** in 2007 to $*** in 2009, and the ROI declined from *** percent in

2007 to *** percent in 2009. 

Table VI-5

Narrow woven ribbons: Asset values and return on investment of U.S. producers, 2007-09

* * * * * * *

CAPITAL AND INVESTMENT

The Commission requested U.S. producers of narrow woven ribbons to describe any actual or

potential negative effects since January 1, 2007, on their return on investment, growth, investment, ability

to raise capital, existing development and production efforts, or the scale of capital investments as a result

of imports of narrow woven ribbons from China and/or Taiwan. Their responses are as follows:

Actual Negative Effects

* * * * * * *

Anticipated Negative Effects

* * * * * * *

 8 Petitioner’s postconference brief, exh. 1, p. 14, and exh. 14, and e-mail correspondence from *** , August 7,

2009, and June 21, 2010. 

VI-3

VII-1 

PART VII: THREAT CONSIDERATIONS AND INFORMATION ON 

NONSUBJECT COUNTRIES 

Section 771(7)(F)(i) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(i)) provides that-- 

In determining whether an industry in the United States is threatened with 

material injury by reason of imports (or sales for importation) of the 

subject merchandise, the Commission shall consider, among other relevant 

economic factors1

-- 

(I) if a countervailable subsidy is involved, such information as may be 

presented to it by the administering authority as to the nature of the subsidy 

(particularly as to whether the countervailable subsidy is a subsidy 

described in Article 3 or 6.1 of the Subsidies Agreement), and whether 

imports of the subject merchandise are likely to increase, 

(II) any existing unused production capacity or imminent, substantial 

increase in production capacity in the exporting country indicating the 

likelihood of substantially increased imports of the subject merchandise 

into the United States, taking into account the availability of other export 

markets to absorb any additional exports, 

(III) a significant rate of increase of the volume or market penetration of 

imports of the subject merchandise indicating the likelihood of 

substantially increased imports, 

(IV) whether imports of the subject merchandise are entering at prices that 

are likely to have a significant depressing or suppressing effect on 

domestic prices, and are likely to increase demand for further imports, 

(V) inventories of the subject merchandise, 

(VI) the potential for product-shifting if production facilities in the foreign 

country, which can be used to produce the subject merchandise, are 

currently being used to produce other products, 

(VII) in any investigation under this title which involves imports of both a 

raw agricultural product (within the meaning of paragraph (4)(E)(iv)) and 

any product processed from such raw agricultural product, the likelihood 

that there will be increased imports, by reason of product shifting, if there 

is an affirmative determination by the Commission under section 705(b)(1) 

or 735(b)(1) with respect to either the raw agricultural product or the 

processed agricultural product (but not both), 

 1

 Section 771(7)(F)(ii) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(ii)) provides that “The Commission shall consider 

{these factors} . . . as a whole in making a determination of whether further dumped or subsidized imports are 

imminent and whether material injury by reason of imports would occur unless an order is issued or a suspension 

agreement is accepted under this title. The presence or absence of any factor which the Commission is required to 

consider . . . shall not necessarily give decisive guidance with respect to the determination. Such a determination 

may not be made on the basis of mere conjecture or supposition.” 
VII-2 

(VIII) the actual and potential negative effects on the existing development 

and production efforts of the domestic industry, including efforts to 

develop a derivative or more advanced version of the domestic like 

product, and 

(IX) any other demonstrable adverse trends that indicate the probability 

that there is likely to be material injury by reason of imports (or sale for 

importation) of the subject merchandise (whether or not it is actually being 

imported at the time).2

Information in relation to subsidies in China is presented in Part I; information on the volume and 

pricing of imports of the subject merchandise is presented in Parts IV and V; and information on the 

effects of imports of the subject merchandise on U.S. producers’ existing development and production 

efforts is presented in Part VI. Information on inventories of the subject merchandise; foreign producers’ 

operations, including the potential for “product-shifting;” any other threat indicators, if applicable; and 

any dumping in third-country markets, follows. Also presented in this section of the report is information 

obtained for consideration by the Commission on nonsubject countries and the global market. 

BILATERAL AND MULTILATERAL TRADE RESTRICTIONS 

The framework for global trade in textiles and apparel, in general, was liberalized on January 1, 

2005, when the United States, the EU, and Canada agreed to gradually eliminate their remaining quotas 

on imports from WTO countries, as required by the Uruguay Round Agreement on Textiles and Clothing 

(ATC).3

 Trade in the basket HTS category historically covering narrow woven ribbons4 was liberalized 

in the second round of quota phase-outs under the ATC during 1998-2002.5

 Upon accession to the WTO, 

both China and Taiwan were eligible for quota-free exports of narrow woven ribbon to the United States.6

On November 8, 2005, the United States and China signed a Memorandum of Understanding 

(MOU) that established quotas on U.S. imports of selected textile and apparel products, including narrow 

woven ribbons, from China.7

 The MOU went into effect on January 1, 2006, and extended through 

December 31, 2008, at which time the right of the United States to invoke safeguards under the textile 

provision of China's WTO Membership Accession Agreement expired.8

 Narrow woven ribbons were 

 2

 Section 771(7)(F)(iii) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(iii)) further provides that, in antidumping 

investigations, “. . . the Commission shall consider whether dumping in the markets of foreign countries (as 

evidenced by dumping findings or antidumping remedies in other WTO member markets against the same class or 

kind of merchandise manufactured or exported by the same party as under investigation) suggests a threat of 

material injury to the domestic industry.” 3

 The ATC entered into force with the WTO agreements in 1995. It called for the gradual elimination of quotas 

established under the Multifiber Arrangement, an arrangement negotiated under the General Agreement on Tariffs 

and Trade (GATT) that had governed world textile and apparel trade since 1974. The ATC required countries both 

to increase the rate at which all quotas grow and to “integrate” textile and apparel articles into the GATT regime 

over a 10-year transition period, which ended on January 1, 2005; the articles were brought under GATT discipline 

and subject to the same rules as products of other sectors. 4

 Addressed under tariff coverage in Part I of this report. 

5 http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/16-tex_e.htm. 6

 China joined the WTO on December 11, 2001; Taiwan joined on January 1, 2002. 

7

 USTR, “Memorandum of Understanding Between the Governments of the United States of America and the 

People's Republic of China.” 8

 Under China's Accession Agreement to the WTO, the United States and other WTO countries could impose 

temporary safeguards (or quotas) on imports of Chinese textiles and apparel under certain conditions. The textile 

safeguard provision permitted WTO countries that concluded that imports of Chinese textiles and apparel were, 

owing to market disruption, threatening to impede the orderly development of trade in these goods, to request 
VII-3 

included in category 229.9

 The quota fill rates for this from 2006-08 were 31.0, 26.3, and 39.0 percent, 

respectively. These fill rates were relatively low, and did not approach binding levels (typically 80 

percent or greater). Unlike with China, no quantitative restrictions were placed on U.S. textile imports 

from Taiwan after the 2005 expiration of the ATC. 

THE INDUSTRY IN CHINA 

The petition identified 95 potential producers of narrow woven ribbons in China. Five firms 

provided the Commission with useable data in response to the foreign producers’/exporters’ 

questionnaire: ***.10 Table VII-1 presents information on the narrow woven ribbons operations for the 

responding producers in China. 11 

Table VII-1 

Narrow woven ribbons: Data for responding producers in China, 2007-09 and projections for 

2010-11 

Items 

Actual experience Projections 

Calendar year 

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 

Quantity (1,000 square yards) 

Capacity 9,856 10,687 9,103 9,099 9,099

Production 6,771 8,156 6,333 5,270 5,624

End-of-period inventories 4,399 4,267 4,245 3,855 3,591

Shipments: 

Internal consumption/ 

transfers 532 627 442 695 898

Home market 528 803 723 966 1,101

Exports to: 

United States 3,322 3,388 1,709 409 237

All other markets 2,806 3,469 3,506 3,565 3,653

Total exports 6,128 6,858 5,215 3,974 3,890

Total shipments 7,188 8,288 6,380 5,635 5,889

Table continued on next page. 

 

consultations with China “with a view to easing or avoiding such market disruption.” No safeguards on narrow 

woven ribbons were enacted or petitioned for in the period between the final quota phase-out and the 

implementation of the MOU. 9

 Category 229, which is special purpose fabric, covers a broad range of products of which narrow woven 

products are one component. http://otexa.ita.doc.gov/correlat/cor229.htm. 10 ***. These revisions are reflected in the data compiled in table VII-1. 11 Reported exports of subject merchandise in table VII-1 appear to cover between *** and *** percent of U.S. 

importers’ U.S. imports from China when compared to table IV-2. 
VII-4 

Table VII-1 --Continued

Narrow woven ribbons: Data for responding producers in China, 2007-09 and projections for 

2010-11 

Items 

Actual experience Projections 

Calendar year 

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 

Ratios and shares (percent) 

Capacity utilization 68.7 76.3 69.6 57.9 61.8

Inventories/production 65.0 52.3 67.0 73.2 63.9

Inventories/shipments 61.2 51.5 66.5 68.4 61.0

Share of total shipments: 

Internal consumption/ 

transfers 7.4 7.6 6.9 12.3 15.2

Home market 7.3 9.7 11.3 17.1 18.7

Exports to: 

United States 46.2 40.9 26.8 7.3 4.0

All other markets 39.0 41.9 55.0 63.3 62.0

Total exports 85.3 82.7 81.7 70.5 66.1

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires.

***.12 ***.13 ***.14 ***.15

THE INDUSTRY IN TAIWAN 

The petition identified 39 potential producers of narrow woven ribbons in Taiwan. Seven firms 

provided the Commission with useable data in response to the foreign producers’/exporters’ 

questionnaire: ***. Table VII-2 presents information on the narrow woven ribbons operations for the 

responding producers in Taiwan.16 17 18

***.19 *** reported changes in their narrow woven ribbons operations. 

 12 ***’s foreign producers’ questionnaire response, question II-2. 

13 ***’s foreign producers’ questionnaire response, question II-2. 

14 ***’s foreign producers’ questionnaire response, question II-2. 

15 ***’s foreign producers’ questionnaire response, question II-3. 

16 Data in table VII-2 do not include the data provided by Shienq Huong Enterprise Co., Ltd. due to Commerce’s 

finding that that firm did not sell narrow woven ribbons in the U.S. market at LTFV (see Part I of this report) . 17 *** is just a trading company and not a producer of narrow woven ribbons. It only reported shipment data of 

the subject merchandise. 18 Reported exports in table VII-2 appear to cover between 47 and 55 percent of U.S. importers’ subject U.S. 

imports from Taiwan when compared to table IV-2. 

19 Revision to ***’s foreign producers’ questionnaire response, question II-2. 
VII-5 

Table VII-2 

Narrow woven ribbons: Data for responding producers in Taiwan, 2007-09 and projections for 

2010-11 

Items 

Actual experience Projections 

Calendar year 

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 

Quantity (1,000 square yards) 

Capacity1 12,139 11,447 11,231 11,231 11,231

Production 11,493 10,032 8,485 8,305 8,295

End-of-period inventories 490 300 378 363 345

Shipments: 

Internal consumption/ 

transfers 99 74 71 82 82

Home market 811 936 879 994 1,002

Exports to: 

United States 6,012 5,589 4,892 4,694 4,669

All other markets 4,635 3,883 3,271 3,131 3,141

Total exports 10,647 9,472 8,163 7,825 7,810

Total shipments 11,557 10,482 9,112 8,900 8,893

Ratios and shares (percent) 

Capacity utilization2 93.1 85.3 72.3 71.1 71.3

Inventories/production 4.3 3.0 4.5 4.4 4.2

Inventories/shipments 4.2 2.9 4.1 4.1 3.9

Share of total shipments: 

Internal consumption/ 

transfers 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.9

Home market 7.0 8.9 9.6 11.2 11.3

Exports to: 

United States 52.0 53.3 53.7 52.7 52.5

All other markets 40.1 37.0 35.9 35.2 35.3

Total exports 92.1 90.4 89.6 87.9 87.8

1

 *** did not provide useable capacity data, so reported capacity is understated. 

2

 This calculation excludes the production reported by *** because that firm did not provide useable capacity 

data. 

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires.

U.S. INVENTORIES OF IMPORTED MERCHANDISE 

Table VII-3 presents data on U.S. importers’ reported inventories of narrow woven ribbons. 

Table VII-3 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. importers’ inventories, 2007-09 

* * * * * * * 
VII-6 

U.S. IMPORTERS’ OUTSTANDING ORDERS 

Table VII-4 presents data on imports arranged for importation after December 31, 2009, by 

quarter. 

Table VII-4 

Narrow woven ribbons: U.S. importers’ arranged imports after December 31, 2009, by quarter 

* * * * * * * 

ANTIDUMPING OR COUNTERVAILING DUTY ORDERS IN THIRD-COUNTRY MARKETS 

There are no known antidumping or countervailing duty orders on narrow woven ribbons in thirdcountry markets. 

INFORMATION ON NONSUBJECT SOURCES 

The largest source of nonsubject imports in the U.S. market consisted of imports from ***.20 The 

second-largest nonsubject source of narrow woven ribbons according to proprietary Customs data is ***; 

however, U.S. imports from *** are primarily ***.21 Nonsubject U.S. imports from *** account for the 

*** of imports of nonsubject narrow woven ribbons in the U.S. market.22 

Published information regarding worldwide production and sales of narrow woven ribbons is 

scarce. Table VII-5 presents data from Global Trade Atlas on the largest exporters of narrow woven 

fabrics of man-made fibers. 23 China and Hong Kong combined were the world’s largest exporters in 

2009, accounting for more than 25 percent of the world’s total exports in this basket category. In 2009, 

Germany was the second-largest exporter, accounting for approximately 10 percent of global exports.24 

The United States was the world’s third-largest exporter in 2009 with just under 10 percent of global 

exports, and Taiwan was fourth with roughly 8 percent of global exports of narrow woven fabrics of manmade fibers. 

 20 Imports from *** accounted for *** percent of all nonsubject imports by quantity in 2009, reported in table 

IV-2. A calculation based on the value of imports of subject merchandise from nonsubject sources in proprietary 

Customs data confirms the predominance of *** as the most significant supplier of narrow woven ribbons from 

nonsubject sources at *** percent in the 2008-09 period. 21 *** U.S. imports from *** are reported as ***. 

22 Data on the average unit values of such imports are reported in Part IV of this report, while App. D presents 

pricing data from these sources. 23 The global balance trade data presented are derived from Global Trade Atlas, HS 5806.32. The products 

covered under this HS classification include all narrow woven fabrics of man-made fiber (which is significantly 

broader than subject merchandise). As a point of comparison, ribbons of narrow woven fabric of man-made fibers 

(itself a basket category that covers cut-edge ribbon and subject merchandise) accounted for 27.9 percent of the 

broader HS 5806.32 category exported by the United States in 2009. 24 The top 10 export markets for Germany in 2009 were 9 European Union countries and Switzerland. Less than 

3 percent of Germany’s total exports of narrow woven fabrics of man-made fibers went to the United States in 2009. 
VII-7 

Table VII-5 

Narrow woven ribbons and other narrow woven fabrics of man-made fibers: World exports, by 

country, 2007-09 

Exporter 

Calendar year 

2007 2008 2009 

Value (1,000 dollars) 

China 198,990 267,110 260,818

Germany 173,930 199,177 139,109

United States 194,200 156,987 132,154

Taiwan 130,577 134,575 113,471

Hong Kong 102,292 91,651 81,422

France 80,196 76,229 58,444

Japan 72,065 73,498 58,227

Belgium 60,000 65,859 56,289

Italy 55,263 53,999 44,355

All other exporting nations 598,511 554,309 415,430

Total 1,666,025 1,673,394 1,359,722

Source: Compiled from Global Trade Atlas, HS 5806.32 (narrow woven fabrics of man-made fibers), accessed June 

16, 2010.

A-1 

 

APPENDIX A 

FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES

11908 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 48 / Friday, March 12, 2010 / Notices 

1For purposes of these investigations, the 

Department of Commerce has defined the subject 

merchandise as ‘‘* * * narrow woven ribbons with 

woven selvedge, in any length, but with a width 

(measured at the narrowest span of the ribbon) less 

than or equal to 12 centimeters, composed of, in 

whole or in part, manmade fibers (whether artificial 

or synthetic, including but not limited to nylon, 

polyester, rayon, polypropylene, and polyethylene 

teraphthalate), metal threads and/or metalized 

yarns, or any combination thereof.’’ A full 

description and discussion of the merchandise 

subject to these investigations and of excluded 

products can be found in the Department of 

Commerce Federal Register notices 75 FR 7236 and 

75 FR 7244 published February 18, 2010, and in 

materials posted on the U.S. International Trade 

Commission Web site, http://www.usitc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information contact the 

Cottonwood Field Office, telephone 

(208) 962–3245; address 1 Butte Drive, 

Cottonwood, Idaho 83522. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Cottonwood RMP was developed with 

broad public participation through a 

four-year collaborative planning process 

in accordance with the Federal Land 

Policy and Management Act of 1976, as 

amended, and the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as 

amended. This RMP addresses 

management on approximately 130,000 

acres of public land in the Cottonwood 

Field Office. The Cottonwood RMP is 

designed to achieve or maintain desired 

future conditions developed through the 

planning process. It includes a series of 

management actions to meet the desired 

resource conditions for forest, upland, 

and riparian vegetation; wildlife 

habitats; cultural and visual resources; 

and recreation. 

The BLM received five protest letters 

on the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. The 

BLM Director granted only those protest 

issues related to domestic sheep grazing 

within bighorn sheep habitat and 

remanded this specific portion of the 

RMP back to the BLM Idaho State Office 

for further analysis. No inconsistencies 

with State or local plans, policies, or 

programs were identified during the 

Governor’s consistency review of the 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS. As a result, 

with the exception of decisions 

regarding domestic sheep and goat 

grazing, the approved Cottonwood RMP 

is essentially the same as Alternative B 

in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS 

published in June 2008, and only minor 

editorial modifications were made in 

preparing the ROD and Approved RMP. 

By this Notice, the BLM, Cottonwood 

Field Office is announcing its intent to 

prepare a Draft Supplemental EIS to 

analyze the impacts of domestic sheep 

and goat grazing in four allotments that 

overlap or occur in the vicinity of 

bighorn sheep habitat along the Salmon 

River east of Riggins, Idaho. The area 

has been grazed historically by domestic 

sheep and goats and overlaps with 

bighorn sheep habitat. The BLM will be 

inviting other government entities 

(Federal, State, Tribal and local), with 

special expertise or jurisdiction, to be 

cooperators during preparation of the 

Supplemental EIS. Upon completion, 

this Draft Supplemental EIS will be 

released for public review and 

comment. 

Thomas H. Dyer, 

Idaho State Director. 

Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6, 1502.9, and 

1508.22. 

[FR Doc. 2010–5258 Filed 3–11–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–GG–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigations Nos. 701–TA–467 (Final) and 

731–TA–1164–1165 (Final)] 

Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven 

Selvedge From China and Taiwan 

AGENCY: United States International 

Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Scheduling of the final phase of 

countervailing duty and antidumping 

investigations. 

SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives 

notice of the scheduling of the final 

phase of countervailing duty 

investigation No. 701–TA–467 (Final) 

under section 705(b) of the Tariff Act of 

1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b)) (the Act) and 

the final phase of antidumping 

investigation Nos. 731–TA–1164–1165 

(Final) under section 735(b) of the Act 

(19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)) to determine 

whether an industry in the United 

States is materially injured or 

threatened with material injury, or the 

establishment of an industry in the 

United States is materially retarded, by 

reason of subsidized and less-than-fairvalue imports from China and by lessthan-fair-value imports from Taiwan of 

narrow woven ribbons with woven 

selvedge (‘‘narrow woven ribbons’’), 

provided for in subheading 5806.32 of 

the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States.1

For further information concerning 

the conduct of this phase of the 

investigations, hearing procedures, and 

rules of general application, consult the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, part 201, subparts A through 

E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, 

subparts A and C (19 CFR part 207). 

DATES: Effective Date: February 17, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Russell Duncan (202–708–4727, 

russell.duncan@usitc.gov), Office of 

Investigations, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436. Hearingimpaired persons can obtain 

information on this matter by contacting 

the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 

205–1810. Persons with mobility 

impairments who will need special 

assistance in gaining access to the 

Commission should contact the Office 

of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. 

General information concerning the 

Commission may also be obtained by 

accessing its internet server (http:// 

www.usitc.gov). The public record for 

these investigations may be viewed on 

the Commission’s electronic docket 

(EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background. The final phase of these 

investigations is being scheduled as a 

result of affirmative preliminary 

determinations by the Department of 

Commerce that certain benefits which 

constitute subsidies within the meaning 

of section 703 of the Act (19 U.S.C. 

1671b) are being provided to 

manufacturers, producers, or exporters 

in China of narrow woven ribbons, and 

that such products from China and 

Taiwan are being sold in the United 

States at less than fair value within the 

meaning of section 733 of the Act (19 

U.S.C. 1673b). The investigations were 

requested in a petition filed on July 9, 

2009, by Berwick Offray LLC and its 

wholly-owned subsidiary Lion Ribbon 

Company, Inc., Berwick, PA. 

Participation in the investigations and 

public service list. Persons, including 

industrial users of the subject 

merchandise and, if the merchandise is 

sold at the retail level, representative 

consumer organizations, wishing to 

participate in the final phase of these 

investigations as parties must file an 

entry of appearance with the Secretary 

to the Commission, as provided in 

section 201.11 of the Commission’s 

rules, no later than 21 days prior to the 

hearing date specified in this notice. A 

party that filed a notice of appearance 

during the preliminary phase of the 

investigations need not file an 

additional notice of appearance during 

this final phase. The Secretary will 

maintain a public service list containing 

the names and addresses of all persons, 

or their representatives, who are parties 

to the investigations. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 48 / Friday, March 12, 2010 / Notices 11909 

Limited disclosure of business 

proprietary information (BPI) under an 

administrative protective order (APO) 

and BPI service list. Pursuant to section 

207.7(a) of the Commission’s rules, the 

Secretary will make BPI gathered in the 

final phase of these investigations 

available to authorized applicants under 

the APO issued in the investigations, 

provided that the application is made 

no later than 21 days prior to the 

hearing date specified in this notice. 

Authorized applicants must represent 

interested parties, as defined by 19 

U.S.C. 1677(9), who are parties to the 

investigations. A party granted access to 

BPI in the preliminary phase of the 

investigations need not reapply for such 

access. A separate service list will be 

maintained by the Secretary for those 

parties authorized to receive BPI under 

the APO. 

Staff report. The prehearing staff 

report in the final phase of these 

investigations will be placed in the 

nonpublic record on June 25, 2010, and 

a public version will be issued 

thereafter, pursuant to section 207.22 of 

the Commission’s rules. 

Hearing. The Commission will hold a 

hearing in connection with the final 

phase of these investigations beginning 

at 9:30 a.m. on July 15, 2010, at the U.S. 

International Trade Commission 

Building. Requests to appear at the 

hearing should be filed in writing with 

the Secretary to the Commission on or 

before July 8, 2010. A nonparty who has 

testimony that may aid the 

Commission’s deliberations may request 

permission to present a short statement 

at the hearing. All parties and 

nonparties desiring to appear at the 

hearing and make oral presentations 

should attend a prehearing conference 

to be held at 9:30 a.m. on July 9, 2010, 

at the U.S. International Trade 

Commission Building. Oral testimony 

and written materials to be submitted at 

the public hearing are governed by 

sections 201.6(b)(2), 201.13(f), and 

207.24 of the Commission’s rules. 

Parties must submit any request to 

present a portion of their hearing 

testimony in camera no later than 7 

business days prior to the date of the 

hearing. 

Written submissions. Each party who 

is an interested party shall submit a 

prehearing brief to the Commission. 

Prehearing briefs must conform with the 

provisions of section 207.23 of the 

Commission’s rules; the deadline for 

filing is July 7, 2010. Parties may also 

file written testimony in connection 

with their presentation at the hearing, as 

provided in section 207.24 of the 

Commission’s rules, and posthearing 

briefs, which must conform with the 

provisions of section 207.25 of the 

Commission’s rules. The deadline for 

filing posthearing briefs is July 22, 2010; 

witness testimony must be filed no later 

than three days before the hearing. In 

addition, any person who has not 

entered an appearance as a party to the 

investigations may submit a written 

statement of information pertinent to 

the subject of the investigations, 

including statements of support or 

opposition to the petition, on or before 

July 22, 2010. On August 6, 2010, the 

Commission will make available to 

parties all information on which they 

have not had an opportunity to 

comment. Parties may submit final 

comments on this information on or 

before August 10, 2010, but such final 

comments must not contain new factual 

information and must otherwise comply 

with section 207.30 of the Commission’s 

rules. All written submissions must 

conform with the provisions of section 

201.8 of the Commission’s rules; any 

submissions that contain BPI must also 

conform with the requirements of 

sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the 

Commission’s rules. The Commission’s 

rules do not authorize filing of 

submissions with the Secretary by 

facsimile or electronic means, except to 

the extent permitted by section 201.8 of 

the Commission’s rules, as amended, 67 

FR 68036 (November 8, 2002). Even 

where electronic filing of a document is 

permitted, certain documents must also 

be filed in paper form, as specified in 

II(C) of the Commission’s Handbook on 

Electronic Filing Procedures, 67 FR 

68168, 68173 (November 8, 2002). 

Additional written submissions to the 

Commission, including requests 

pursuant to section 201.12 of the 

Commission’s rules, shall not be 

accepted unless good cause is shown for 

accepting such submissions, or unless 

the submission is pursuant to a specific 

request by a Commissioner or 

Commission staff. 

In accordance with sections 201.16(c) 

and 207.3 of the Commission’s rules, 

each document filed by a party to the 

investigations must be served on all 

other parties to the investigations (as 

identified by either the public or BPI 

service list), and a certificate of service 

must be timely filed. The Secretary will 

not accept a document for filing without 

a certificate of service. 

Authority: These investigations are being 

conducted under authority of title VII of the 

Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published 

pursuant to section 207.21 of the 

Commission’s rules. 

Issued: March 8, 2010. 

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–5416 Filed 3–11–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–664] 

In the Matter of: Certain Flash Memory 

Chips and Products Containing Same; 

Notice of Commission Determination 

Not To Review an Initial Determination 

Granting Complainants’ Unopposed 

Motion To Amend the Complaint and 

Notice of Investigation 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has determined not to 

review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) 

(Order No. 35) of the presiding 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) 

granting complainants’ unopposed 

motion to amend the complaint and 

notice of investigation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Panyin A. Hughes, Esq., Office of the 

General Counsel, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–3042. Copies of non-confidential 

documents filed in connection with this 

investigation are or will be available for 

inspection during official business 

hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the 

Office of the Secretary, U.S. 

International Trade Commission, 500 E 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, 

telephone (202) 205–2000. General 

information concerning the Commission 

may also be obtained by accessing its 

Internet server at http://www.usitc.gov. 

The public record for this investigation 

may be viewed on the Commission’s 

electronic docket (EDIS) at http:// 

edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired 

persons are advised that information on 

this matter can be obtained by 

contacting the Commission’s TDD 

terminal on (202) 205–1810. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Commission instituted this investigation 

on December 18, 2008, based on a 

complaint filed by Spansion, Inc. of 

Sunnyvale, California and Spansion 

LLC of Sunnyvale, California 

(collectively, ‘‘Spansion’’). The 

complaint alleges violations of section 

337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 

1337) in the importation into the United 

States, the sale for importation, and the 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices 41801 

Dated: July 13, 2010. 

Christopher Cassel, 

Director, Subsidies Enforcement Office, 

Import Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2010–17535 Filed 7–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Foreign-Trade Zones Board 

[Order No. 1692] 

Expansion of Foreign-Trade Zone 163, 

Ponce, Puerto Rico, Area 

Pursuant to its authority under the ForeignTrade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as 

amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), the ForeignTrade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the 

following Order: 

Whereas, CODEZOL, C.D., grantee of 

Foreign-Trade Zone 163, submitted an 

application to the Board for authority to 

expand existing Site 1 to include 

additional acreage and to expand the 

zone to include a site at the ProCaribe 

Industrial Park (Site 11) in Penuelas, 

Puerto Rico, adjacent to the Ponce 

Customs and Border Protection port of 

entry (FTZ Docket 53–2009, filed 

11/23/09); 

Whereas, notice inviting public 

comment was given in the Federal 

Register (74 FR 62747, 12/1/09) and the 

application has been processed 

pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board’s 

regulations; and, 

Whereas, the Board adopts the 

findings and recommendation of the 

examiner’s report, and finds that the 

requirements of the FTZ Act and 

Board’s regulations are satisfied, and 

that the proposal is in the public 

interest; 

Now, therefore, the Board hereby 

orders: 

The application to expand FTZ 163 is 

approved, subject to the FTZ Act and 

the Board’s regulations, including 

Section 400.28, and subject to a sunset 

provision that would terminate 

authority on June 30, 2015, for Site 11 

if no activity has occurred under FTZ 

procedures before that date. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 8 day of 

July 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, Alternate Chairman, ForeignTrade Zones Board. 

Attest: 

Andrew McGilvray, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–17542 Filed 7–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Foreign-Trade Zones Board 

[Order No. 1693] 

Expansion of Foreign-Trade Zone 163 

Ponce, Puerto Rico, Area 

Pursuant to its authority under the ForeignTrade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as 

amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), the ForeignTrade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the 

following Order: 

Whereas, CODEZOL, C.D., grantee of 

Foreign-Trade Zone 163, submitted an 

application to the Board for authority to 

expand its zone to include a site at the 

Yaucono Industrial Park (Site 12) in 

Ponce, Puerto Rico, within the Ponce 

Customs and Border Protection port of 

entry (FTZ Docket 17–2010, filed 3/8/ 

10); 

Whereas, notice inviting public 

comment was given in the Federal 

Register (75 FR 12730–12731, 3/17/10) 

and the application has been processed 

pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board’s 

regulations; and, 

Whereas, the Board adopts the 

findings and recommendation of the 

examiner’s report (including the 

renumbering of Rio Piedras Distribution 

Center located within existing Site 3 as 

Site 13), and finds that the requirements 

of the FTZ Act and Board’s regulations 

are satisfied, and that the proposal is in 

the public interest; 

Now, therefore, the Board hereby 

orders: 

The application to expand FTZ 163 is 

approved, subject to the FTZ Act and 

the Board’s regulations, including 

§ 400.28, and subject to a sunset 

provision that would terminate 

authority on June 30, 2015, for Site 12 

if no activity has occurred under FTZ 

procedures before that date. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 8 day of 

July 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, Alternate Chairman, ForeignTrade Zones Board. 

Attest: 

Andrew McGilvray, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–17540 Filed 7–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

(C–570–953) 

Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven 

Selvedge from the People’s Republic 

of China: Final Affirmative 

Countervailing Duty Determination 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the ‘‘Department’’) has determined that 

countervailable subsidies are being 

provided to producers and exporters of 

narrow woven ribbons with woven 

selvedge from the People’s Republic of 

China (‘‘PRC’’). For information on the 

estimated countervailing duty rates, 

please see the ‘‘Suspension of 

Liquidation’’ section, below. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 19, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Scott Holland and Anna Flaaten, 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) 482–1279 and (202) 

482–5156, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Period of Investigation 

The period for which we are 

measuring subsidies, or period of 

investigation, is January 1, 2008, 

through December 31, 2008. 

Case History 

The following events have occurred 

since the publication of the preliminary 

determination in the Federal Register 

on December 14, 2009. See Narrow 

Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge 

from the People’s Republic of China: 

Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing 

Duty Determination and Alignment of 

Final Countervailing Duty 

Determination with Final Antidumping 

Duty Determination, 74 FR 66090 

(December 14, 2009) (‘‘Preliminary 

Determination’’). 

On December 16, 2009, the 

Department issued a supplemental 

questionnaire to the Government of 

China (‘‘GOC’’) which responded on 

January 6, 2010. From January 18, 2010, 

to January 20, 2010, the Department 

conducted verification of the 

questionnaire responses submitted by 

the GOC and mandatory respondent 

Yama Ribbons and Bows Co., Ltd. 

(‘‘Yama’’). See Memoranda from Scott 

Holland and Anna Flaaten, International 

Trade Analysts, to Susan H. Kuhbach, 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
41802 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices 

Office Director, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 1, ‘‘Verification Report of the 

Xiamen Municipal Government of the 

People’s Republic of China’’ (March 17, 

2010) and ‘‘Verification Report: Yama 

Ribbons and Bows Co., Ltd.’’ (March 17, 

2010). On January 20, 2010, the 

Department issued a post–preliminary 

analysis regarding additional subsidy 

programs. See Memorandum from Scott 

Holland and Anna Flaaten, International 

Trade Analysts, to Ronald Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, ‘‘Post–Preliminary 

Findings for Additional Subsidy 

Programs’’ (January 20, 2010). On 

February 18, 2010, the Department 

extended the due date for the final 

determination by 60 days in accordance 

with its alignment of the final 

countervailing duty (CVD) 

determination with the final 

determination in the companion 

antidumping duty investigation of 

narrow woven ribbon with woven 

selvedge from the PRC. See Preliminary 

Determination, 74 FR at 66092; Narrow 

Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge 

from the People’s Republic of China: 

Preliminary Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value and Postponement 

of Final Determination, 75 FR 7244, 

7245–46 (February 18, 2010). 

As explained in the memorandum 

from the Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Import Administration, the Department 

exercised its discretion to toll deadlines 

for the duration of the closure of the 

Federal Government from February 5, 

2010, through February 12, 2010. Thus, 

all deadlines in this segment of the 

proceeding were extended by seven 

days. The revised deadline for the final 

determination of this investigation was 

thus extended to July 10, 2010. See 

Memorandum to the Record from 

Ronald Lorentzen, DAS for Import 

Administration, regarding ‘‘Tolling of 

Administrative Deadlines As a Result of 

the Government Closure During the 

Recent Snowstorms,’’ dated February 12, 

2010. However, July 10, 2010, falls on 

a Saturday, and it is the Department’s 

long–standing practice to issue a 

determination the next business day 

when the statutory deadline falls on a 

weekend, federal holiday, or any other 

day when the Department is closed. See 

Notice of Clarification: Application of 

‘‘Next Business Day’’ Rule for 

Administrative Determination Deadlines 

Pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, As 

Amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005). 

Accordingly, the deadline for 

completion of the final determination 

became July 12, 2010. 

On March 18, 2010, the Department 

postponed the briefing schedule as 

described in the Preliminary 

Determination until further notice to 

allow the Department to consider an 

issue which may have required a post– 

preliminary analysis. On May 17, 2010, 

the Department set the Briefing and 

Hearing Schedule and invited interested 

parties to comment on the denominator 

used in the Department’s calculation in 

the Preliminary Determination of this 

case. 

The Department received case briefs 

from the GOC, Yama, and Bestpak Gifts 

& Crafts Co. Ltd., a Chinese producer 

and exporter of the subject merchandise, 

on June 1, 2010, and a rebuttal brief 

from the petitioner, Berwick Offray, LLC 

and its wholly–owned subsidiary Lion 

Ribbons Company, Inc. (collectively, 

‘‘Petitioner’’), on June 7, 2010. A public 

hearing was held on June 14, 2010, 

where the same parties presented their 

arguments. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The merchandise subject to the 

investigation is narrow woven ribbons 

with woven selvedge, in any length, but 

with a width (measured at the narrowest 

span of the ribbon) less than or equal to 

12 centimeters, composed of, in whole 

or in part, man–made fibers (whether 

artificial or synthetic, including but not 

limited to nylon, polyester, rayon, 

polypropylene, and polyethylene 

teraphthalate), metal threads and/or 

metalized yarns, or any combination 

thereof. Narrow woven ribbons subject 

to the investigation may: 

• also include natural or other non– 

man-made fibers; 

• be of any color, style, pattern, or 

weave construction, including but 

not limited to single–faced satin, 

double–faced satin, grosgrain, 

sheer, taffeta, twill, jacquard, or a 

combination of two or more colors, 

styles, patterns, and/or weave 

constructions; 

• have been subjected to, or composed 

of materials that have been 

subjected to, various treatments, 

including but not limited to dyeing, 

printing, foil stamping, embossing, 

flocking, coating, and/or sizing; 

• have embellishments, including but 

not limited to applique ́, fringes, 

embroidery, buttons, glitter, 

sequins, laminates, and/or adhesive 

backing; 

• have wire and/or monofilament in, 

on, or along the longitudinal edges 

of the ribbon; 

• have ends of any shape or 

dimension, including but not 

limited to straight ends that are 

perpendicular to the longitudinal 

edges of the ribbon, tapered ends, 

flared ends or shaped ends, and the 

ends of such woven ribbons may or 

may not be hemmed; 

• have longitudinal edges that are 

straight or of any shape, and the 

longitudinal edges of such woven 

ribbon may or may not be parallel 

to each other; 

• consist of such ribbons affixed to 

like ribbon and/or cut–edge woven 

ribbon, a configuration also known 

as an ‘‘ornamental trimming;’’ 

• be wound on spools; attached to a 

card; hanked (i.e., coiled or 

bundled); packaged in boxes, trays 

or bags; or configured as skeins, 

balls, bateaus or folds; and/or 

• be included within a kit or set such 

as when packaged with other 

products, including but not limited 

to gift bags, gift boxes and/or other 

types of ribbon. 

Narrow woven ribbons subject to the 

investigation include all narrow woven 

fabrics, tapes, and labels that fall within 

this written description of the scope of 

this investigation. 

Excluded from the scope of the 

investigation are the following: 

(1) formed bows composed of narrow 

woven ribbons with woven 

selvedge; 

(2) ‘‘pull–bows’’ (i.e., an assemblage of 

ribbons connected to one another, 

folded flat and equipped with a 

means to form such ribbons into the 

shape of a bow by pulling on a 

length of material affixed to such 

assemblage) composed of narrow 

woven ribbons; 

(3) narrow woven ribbons comprised 

at least 20 percent by weight of 

elastomeric yarn (i.e., filament yarn, 

including monofilament, of 

synthetic textile material, other 

than textured yarn, which does not 

break on being extended to three 

times its original length and which 

returns, after being extended to 

twice its original length, within a 

period of five minutes, to a length 

not greater than one and a half 

times its original length as defined 

in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 

of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’), 

Section XI, Note 13) or rubber 

thread; 

(4) narrow woven ribbons of a kind 

used for the manufacture of 

typewriter or printer ribbons; 

(5) narrow woven labels and apparel 

tapes, cut–to-length or cut–toshape, having a length (when 

measured across the longest edge– 

to-edge span) not exceeding eight 

centimeters; 

(6) narrow woven ribbons with woven 

selvedge attached to and forming 

the handle of a gift bag; 

(7) cut–edge narrow woven ribbons 

formed by cutting broad woven 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices 41803 

fabric into strips of ribbon, with or 

without treatments to prevent the 

longitudinal edges of the ribbon 

from fraying (such as by merrowing, 

lamination, sono–bonding, fusing, 

gumming or waxing), and with or 

without wire running lengthwise 

along the longitudinal edges of the 

ribbon; 

(8) narrow woven ribbons comprised 

at least 85 percent by weight of 

threads having a denier of 225 or 

higher; 

(9) narrow woven ribbons constructed 

from pile fabrics (i.e., fabrics with a 

surface effect formed by tufts or 

loops of yarn that stand up from the 

body of the fabric); 

(10) narrow woven ribbon affixed 

(including by tying) as a decorative 

detail to non–subject merchandise, 

such as a gift bag, gift box, gift tin, 

greeting card or plush toy, or 

affixed (including by tying) as a 

decorative detail to packaging 

containing non–subject 

merchandise; 

(11) narrow woven ribbon that is (a) 

affixed to non–subject merchandise 

as a working component of such 

non–subject merchandise, such as 

where narrow woven ribbon 

comprises an apparel trimming, 

book marker, bag cinch, or part of 

an identity card holder, or (b) 

affixed (including by tying) to non– 

subject merchandise as a working 

component that holds or packages 

such non–subject merchandise or 

attaches packaging or labeling to 

such non–subject merchandise, 

such as a ‘‘belly band’’ around a pair 

of pajamas, a pair of socks or a 

blanket; 

(12) narrow woven ribbon(s) 

comprising a belt attached to and 

imported with an item of wearing 

apparel, whether or not such belt is 

removable from such item of 

wearing apparel; and 

(13) narrow woven ribbon(s) included 

with non–subject merchandise in 

kits, such as a holiday ornament 

craft kit or a scrapbook kit, in which 

the individual lengths of narrow 

woven ribbon(s) included in the kit 

are each no greater than eight 

inches, the aggregate amount of 

marrow woven ribbon(s) included 

in the kit does not exceed 48 linear 

inches, none of the narrow woven 

ribbon(s) included in the kit is on 

a spool, and the narrow woven 

ribbon(s) is only one of multiple 

items included in the kit. 

The merchandise subject to this 

investigation is classifiable under the 

HTSUS statistical categories 

5806.32.1020; 5806.32.1030; 

5806.32.1050 and 5806.32.1060. Subject 

merchandise also may enter under 

subheadings 5806.31.00; 5806.32.20; 

5806.39.20; 5806.39.30; 5808.90.00; 

5810.91.00; 5810.99.90; 5903.90.10; 

5903.90.25; 5907.00.60; and 5907.00.80 

and under statistical categories 

5806.32.1080; 5810.92.9080; 

5903.90.3090; and 6307.90.9889. The 

HTSUS statistical categories and 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes; 

however, the written description of the 

merchandise under investigation is 

dispositive. 

Scope Comments 

Prior to the Preliminary 

Determination in this case, we received 

a request from certain retailers of 

narrow woven ribbons that the 

Department modify the scope of the 

investigation to exclude narrow woven 

ribbons included in kits or sets in ‘‘de 

minimis’’ amounts. Because of concerns 

over whether the proposed scope 

exclusion language would be 

administrable, we declined to modify 

the scope in the companion 

antidumping duty preliminary 

determinations, and we did not use the 

language suggested by these retailers or 

the alternative language proposed by 

Petitioner. See Narrow Woven Ribbons 

with Woven Selvedge from Taiwan: 

Preliminary Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value and Postponement 

of Final Determination, 75 FR 7236, 

7240 (February 18, 2010) and Narrow 

Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge 

from the People’s Republic of China: 

Preliminary Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value and Postponement 

of Final Determination, 75 FR 7244, 

7246 (February 18, 2010). 

Following the preliminary 

determinations, on March 24, 2010, and 

June 3, 2010, Petitioner submitted 

additional language for this scope 

exclusion. Having determined that the 

language contained in Petitioner’s June 

3, 2010, submission is administrable, we 

have incorporated this language in 

exclusion 13. See the ‘‘Scope of 

Investigation’’ section, above. 

Injury Test 

Because the PRC is a ‘‘Subsidies 

Agreement Country’’ within the meaning 

of section 701(b) of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (the ‘‘Act’’), section 

701(a)(2) of the Act applies to this 

investigation. Accordingly, the U.S. 

International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’) 

must determine whether imports of the 

subject merchandise from the PRC 

materially injure, or threaten material 

injury to a U.S. industry. On September 

8, 2009, the ITC issued its affirmative 

preliminary determination that there is 

a reasonable indication that an industry 

in the United States is materially 

injured by reason of allegedly 

subsidized imports of narrow woven 

ribbons with woven selvedge from the 

PRC. See Narrow Woven Ribbons With 

Woven Selvedge From China and 

Taiwan, 74 FR 46224 (September 8, 

2009) and Narrow Woven Ribbons with 

Woven Selvedge from China and 

Taiwan, Investigation Nos. 701–TA–467 

and 731–TA–1165, USITC Pub. 4099 

(August 2009). 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties to this 

investigation are addressed in the 

Memorandum from Edward C. Yang, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, entitled ‘‘Issues and 

Decision Memorandum for the Final 

Determination in the Countervailing 

Duty Investigation of Certain Narrow 

Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge 

from the People’s Republic of China’’ 

(July 12, 2010) (hereafter ‘‘Decision 

Memorandum’’), which is hereby 

adopted by this notice. Attached to this 

notice as an Appendix is a list of the 

issues that parties have raised and to 

which we have responded in the 

Decision Memorandum. Parties can find 

a complete discussion of all issues 

raised in this investigation and the 

corresponding recommendations in this 

public memorandum, which is on file in 

the Central Records Unit, room 1117 in 

the main building of the Commerce 

Department. In addition, a complete 

version of the Decision Memorandum 

can be accessed directly on the Internet 

at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The paper 

copy and electronic version of the 

Decision Memorandum are identical in 

content. 

Use of Adverse Facts Available 

For purposes of this final 

determination, we have continued to 

rely on facts available and have 

continued to use adverse inferences in 

accordance with sections 776(a) and (b) 

of the Act to determine the 

countervailable subsidy rates for 

Changtai Rongshu Co., Ltd. (‘‘Changtai 

Rongshu’’), which is one of the two 

companies selected to respond to our 

questionnaires. In addition, consistent 

with our findings in the post– 

preliminary analysis regarding 

additional subsidy programs, we have 

continued to rely on facts available and 

have continued to use adverse 

inferences in accordance with sections 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
41804 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices 

776(a) and (b) of the Act to find a grant 

to Yama under the Xiamen Municipal 

Science and Technology Program to be 

specific under section 771(5A)(D)(iii) of 

the Act. A full discussion of our 

decision to apply adverse facts available 

is presented in the Decision 

Memorandum in the section ‘‘Use of 

Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse 

Facts Available.’’ 

Suspension of Liquidation 

In accordance with section 

705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) of the Act, we have 

calculated individual rates for Yama 

and Changtai Rongshu. Section 

705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act states that for 

companies not investigated, we will 

determine an ‘‘all others’’ rate equal to 

the weighted–average countervailable 

subsidy rates established for exporters 

and producers individually 

investigated, excluding any zero and de 

minimis countervailable subsidy rates, 

and any rates determined entirely under 

section 776 of the Act. In this case, the 

all others rate is based on Yama’s 

calculated rate. 

Exporter/manufacturer Net subsidy rate 

Yama Ribbons and 

Bows Co., Ltd. .......... 1.56 

Changtai Rongshu Textile Co., Ltd. ............... 117.95 

All Others ...................... 1.56 

Also, in accordance with section 

703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection to 

discontinue the suspension of 

liquidation for countervailing duty 

purposes for subject merchandise 

entered on or after April 13, 2010, but 

to continue the suspension of 

liquidation of entries made from 

December 14, 2010, through April 12, 

2010. 

We will issue a countervailing duty 

order if the ITC issues a final affirmative 

injury determination, and will require a 

cash deposit of estimated countervailing 

duties for such entries of merchandise 

in the amounts indicated above. If the 

ITC determines that material injury, or 

threat of material injury, does not exist, 

this proceeding will be terminated and 

all estimated deposits or securities 

posted as a result of the suspension of 

liquidation will be refunded or 

canceled. 

ITC Notification 

In accordance with section 705(d) of 

the Act, we will notify the ITC of our 

final determination. In addition, we are 

making available to the ITC all non– 

privileged and non–proprietary 

information related to this investigation. 

We will allow the ITC access to all 

privileged and business proprietary 

information in our files, provided the 

ITC confirms that it will not disclose 

such information, either publicly or 

under an Administrative Protective 

Order (‘‘APO’’), without the written 

consent of the Assistant Secretary for 

Import Administration. 

Return or Destruction of Proprietary 

Information 

In the event that the ITC issues a final 

negative injury determination, this 

notice will serve as the only reminder 

to parties subject to an APO of their 

responsibility concerning the 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). 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. 

This determination is published 

pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of 

the Act. 

Dated: July 12, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

APPENDIX 

List of Comments and Issues in the 

Decision Memorandum 

General Issues 

Comment 1: Double Counting/ 

Overlapping Remedies 

Company–Specific Issues 

Comment 2: Xiamen Municipal Science 

and Technology Grant Program - 

Specificity 

Comment 3: International Market 

Developing Fund Grants for SMEs - 

Specificity 

Comment 4: Calculation of Yama’s Sales 

Denominator 

AFA 

Comment 5: Inclusion of Terminated 

Programs in the AFA Rate Calculation 

All–Others Rate 

Comment 6: All–Others Rate 

Calculation 

[FR Doc. 2010–17541 Filed 7–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

A–583–844 

Notice of Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value: Narrow 

Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge 

from Taiwan 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: We determine that imports of 

narrow woven ribbons with woven 

selvedge (NWR) 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). 

Based on our analysis of the 

comments received, we have made 

changes in the margin calculations. 

Therefore, the final determination 

differs from the preliminary 

determination. The final weighted– 

average dumping margins for the 

investigated companies are listed below 

in the section entitled ‘‘Final 

Determination Margins.’’ 

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 19, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Hector Rodriguez or Holly Phelps, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 2, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–0629 and (202) 

482–0656, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On February 18, 2010, the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

preliminary determination of sales at 

LTFV in the antidumping duty 

investigation of NWR from Taiwan. See 

Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven 

Selvedge from Taiwan: Preliminary 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value and Postponement of Final 

Determination, 75 FR 7236 (Feb. 18, 

2010) (Preliminary Determination). 

Since the preliminary determination, 

the following events have occurred. 

In February 2010, the Department 

selected certain unaffiliated companies 

which supplied ribbon to Dear Year 

Brothers Mfg. Co., Ltd. (Dear Year) and 

Shienq Houng Group (i.e., Hsien Chan 

Enterprise Co., Ltd., Novelty Handicrafts 

Co., Ltd., and Shienq Huong Enterprise 

Co., Ltd. (collectively ‘‘Shienq Huong’’)), 

and we requested that these unaffiliated 

suppliers respond to section D of the 

questionnaire (i.e., the section relating 

to cost of production (COP) and 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices 41805 

1The petitioner in this investigation is Berwick 

Offray LLC and its wholly-owned subsidiary Lion 

Ribbon Company, Inc. 

constructed value) with respect to the 

merchandise supplied to Dear Year and 

Shienq Huong. In February and March 

2010, Dear Year’s unaffiliated supplier 

informed the Department that it did not 

produce NWR but merely purchased 

and resold it, while Shienq Houng’s 

unaffiliated ribbon suppliers provided 

responses to section D of the 

questionnaire. 

In March 2010, we verified the 

questionnaire responses of three 

respondents in this case, Dear Year, 

Roung Shu Industry Corporation (Roung 

Shu), and Shienq Houng, in accordance 

with section 782(i) of the Act. Also in 

this month, we received additional 

comments on the scope of this 

investigation from the petitioner.1

Finally in March 2010, we issued 

supplemental questionnaires to Shienq 

Huong’s unaffiliated suppliers, and we 

received responses to these 

supplemental questionnaires in April 

2010. 

Also in April 2010, Dear Year, Roung 

Shu, and the petitioner submitted their 

main case briefs (i.e., related to all 

issues except those associated with the 

responses received from the unaffiliated 

suppliers noted above). We also 

received rebuttal briefs in April 2010 

from the petitioner and the three 

respondents. In April 2010, we issued 

additional supplemental questionnaires 

to Shienq Huong’s unaffiliated 

suppliers. We received responses to 

these supplemental questionnaires in 

April and May 2010. 

In May and June 2010, the petitioner, 

Dear Year, and Shienq Huong submitted 

supplemental case and rebuttal briefs 

specifically raising issues with regards 

Dear Year’s and Shienq Huong’s 

unaffiliated suppliers of NWR. 

In June 2010, the petitioner provided 

revised scope exclusion language 

relating to NWR included in kits. For 

further discussion, see the ‘‘Scope 

Comments’’ section, below. Also in June 

2010, the Department held a public 

hearing at the request of the petitioner, 

Dear Year, and Shienq Huong. 

Period of Investigation 

The period of investigation (POI) is 

July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009. 

Scope of Investigation 

The merchandise subject to the 

investigation is narrow woven ribbons 

with woven selvedge, in any length, but 

with a width (measured at the narrowest 

span of the ribbon) less than or equal to 

12 centimeters, composed of, in whole 

or in part, man–made fibers (whether 

artificial or synthetic, including but not 

limited to nylon, polyester, rayon, 

polypropylene, and polyethylene 

teraphthalate), metal threads and/or 

metalized yarns, or any combination 

thereof. Narrow woven ribbons subject 

to the investigation may: 

• also include natural or other non– 

man-made fibers; 

• be of any color, style, pattern, or 

weave construction, including but 

not limited to single–faced satin, 

double–faced satin, grosgrain, 

sheer, taffeta, twill, jacquard, or a 

combination of two or more colors, 

styles, patterns, and/or weave 

constructions; 

• have been subjected to, or composed 

of materials that have been 

subjected to, various treatments, 

including but not limited to dyeing, 

printing, foil stamping, embossing, 

flocking, coating, and/or sizing; 

• have embellishments, including but 

not limited to applique ́, fringes, 

embroidery, buttons, glitter, 

sequins, laminates, and/or adhesive 

backing; 

• have wire and/or monofilament in, 

on, or along the longitudinal edges 

of the ribbon; 

• have ends of any shape or 

dimension, including but not 

limited to straight ends that are 

perpendicular to the longitudinal 

edges of the ribbon, tapered ends, 

flared ends or shaped ends, and the 

ends of such woven ribbons may or 

may not be hemmed; 

• have longitudinal edges that are 

straight or of any shape, and the 

longitudinal edges of such woven 

ribbon may or may not be parallel 

to each other; 

• consist of such ribbons affixed to 

like ribbon and/or cut–edge woven 

ribbon, a configuration also known 

as an ‘‘ornamental trimming;’’ 

• be wound on spools; attached to a 

card; hanked (i.e., coiled or 

bundled); packaged in boxes, trays 

or bags; or configured as skeins, 

balls, bateaus or folds; and/or 

• be included within a kit or set such 

as when packaged with other 

products, including but not limited 

to gift bags, gift boxes and/or other 

types of ribbon. 

Narrow woven ribbons subject to the 

investigation include all narrow woven 

fabrics, tapes, and labels that fall within 

this written description of the scope of 

this investigation. 

Excluded from the scope of the 

investigation are the following: 

(1) formed bows composed of narrow 

woven ribbons with woven 

selvedge; 

(2) ‘‘pull–bows’’ (i.e., an assemblage of 

ribbons connected to one another, 

folded flat and equipped with a 

means to form such ribbons into the 

shape of a bow by pulling on a 

length of material affixed to such 

assemblage) composed of narrow 

woven ribbons; 

(3) narrow woven ribbons comprised 

at least 20 percent by weight of 

elastomeric yarn (i.e., filament yarn, 

including monofilament, of 

synthetic textile material, other 

than textured yarn, which does not 

break on being extended to three 

times its original length and which 

returns, after being extended to 

twice its original length, within a 

period of five minutes, to a length 

not greater than one and a half 

times its original length as defined 

in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 

of the United States (HTSUS), 

Section XI, Note 13) or rubber 

thread; 

(4) narrow woven ribbons of a kind 

used for the manufacture of 

typewriter or printer ribbons; 

(5) narrow woven labels and apparel 

tapes, cut–to-length or cut–toshape, having a length (when 

measured across the longest edge– 

to-edge span) not exceeding 8 

centimeters; 

(6) narrow woven ribbons with woven 

selvedge attached to and forming 

the handle of a gift bag; 

(7) cut–edge narrow woven ribbons 

formed by cutting broad woven 

fabric into strips of ribbon, with or 

without treatments to prevent the 

longitudinal edges of the ribbon 

from fraying (such as by merrowing, 

lamination, sono–bonding, fusing, 

gumming or waxing), and with or 

without wire running lengthwise 

along the longitudinal edges of the 

ribbon; 

(8) narrow woven ribbons comprised 

at least 85 percent by weight of 

threads having a denier of 225 or 

higher; 

(9) narrow woven ribbons constructed 

from pile fabrics (i.e., fabrics with a 

surface effect formed by tufts or 

loops of yarn that stand up from the 

body of the fabric) ; 

(10) narrow woven ribbon affixed 

(including by tying) as a decorative 

detail to non–subject merchandise, 

such as a gift bag, gift box, gift tin, 

greeting card or plush toy, or 

affixed (including by tying) as a 

decorative detail to packaging 

containing non–subject 

merchandise; 

(11) narrow woven ribbon that is (a) 

affixed to non–subject merchandise 

as a working component of such 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
41806 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices 

non–subject merchandise, such as 

where narrow woven ribbon 

comprises an apparel trimming, 

book marker, bag cinch, or part of 

an identity card holder, or (b) 

affixed (including by tying) to non– 

subject merchandise as a working 

component that holds or packages 

such non–subject merchandise or 

attaches packaging or labeling to 

such non–subject merchandise, 

such as a ‘‘belly band’’ around a pair 

of pajamas, a pair of socks or a 

blanket; 

(12) narrow woven ribbon(s) 

comprising a belt attached to and 

imported with an item of wearing 

apparel, whether or not such belt is 

removable from such item of 

wearing apparel; and 

(13) narrow woven ribbon(s) included 

with non–subject merchandise in 

kits, such as a holiday ornament 

craft kit or a scrapbook kit, in which 

the individual lengths of narrow 

woven ribbon(s) included in the kit 

are each no greater than eight 

inches, the aggregate amount of 

marrow woven ribbon(s) included 

in the kit does not exceed 48 linear 

inches, none of the narrow woven 

ribbon(s) included in the kit is on 

a spool, and the narrow woven 

ribbon(s) is only one of multiple 

items included in the kit. 

The merchandise subject to this 

investigation is classifiable under the 

HTSUS statistical categories 

5806.32.1020; 5806.32.1030; 

5806.32.1050 and 5806.32.1060. Subject 

merchandise also may enter under 

subheadings 5806.31.00; 5806.32.20; 

5806.39.20; 5806.39.30; 5808.90.00; 

5810.91.00; 5810.99.90; 5903.90.10; 

5903.90.25; 5907.00.60; and 5907.00.80 

and under statistical categories 

5806.32.1080; 5810.92.9080; 

5903.90.3090; and 6307.90.9889. The 

HTSUS statistical categories and 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes; 

however, the written description of the 

merchandise under investigation is 

dispositive. 

Scope Comments 

Prior to the preliminary determination 

in this case, we received a request from 

certain retailers of NWR that the 

Department modify the scope of the 

investigation to exclude NWR included 

in kits or sets in ‘‘de minimis’’ amounts. 

Because of concerns over whether the 

proposed scope exclusion language 

would be administrable, we declined to 

modify the scope in the Preliminary 

Determination, and we did not use the 

language suggested by these retailers or 

the alternative language proposed by the 

petitioner. See Preliminary 

Determination, 75 FR at 7240. 

Following the preliminary 

determination, on March 24, 2010, and 

June 3, 2010, the petitioner submitted 

additional language for this scope 

exclusion. Having determined that the 

language contained in the petitioner’s 

June 3, 2010, submission is 

administrable, we have incorporated 

this language in exclusion 13. See the 

‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ section, above. 

Unaffiliated Supplier Costs 

In our Preliminary Determination, we 

determined that the companies weaving 

the ribbon are the producers of the NWR 

subject to this investigation. See 

Preliminary Determination, 75 FR at 

7242. After analyzing the information 

on the record with respect to this issue, 

as well as the comments received from 

interested parties, we continue to find 

that the weaver is the producer of NWR. 

See the ‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum’’ (Decision Memorandum) 

from Edward C. Yang, Acting Deputy 

Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

Import Administration, to Ronald K. 

Lorentzen, Deputy Secretary for Import 

Administration, dated July 12, 2010, at 

Comments 19 and 20 for further 

discussion regarding this determination. 

As noted above, from February 

through May 2010, we received 

responses to our requests for cost 

information from certain of Dear Year 

and Shienq Huong’s unaffiliated 

suppliers of purchased ribbon. With 

respect to Dear Year, the response from 

Dear Year’s supplier revealed that the 

supplier did not weave the merchandise 

under consideration, but rather it 

merely purchased the ribbon from 

another company and then resold it to 

Dear Year. Because insufficient time 

existed to request additional 

information from the upstream supplier 

prior to the final determination, as facts 

available for purposes of the final 

determination, we are relying on Dear 

Year’s costs of acquisition for the 

purchased NWR in lieu of actual 

production costs from the weavers as 

such information is not contained in the 

record of this proceeding. For further 

discussion, see Comment 19 in the 

Decision Memorandum. 

With respect to Shienq Huong’s 

unaffiliated suppliers, these companies 

provided certain cost information but 

informed the Department that they did 

not maintain records at a sufficient level 

of detail to provide POI product– 

specific costs. Because the submitted 

costs are not POI product–specific costs, 

we are unable to use them in our 

analysis for the final determination. 

Therefore, as with Dear Year, as facts 

available for purposes of the final 

determination, we are relying on Shienq 

Huong’s costs of acquisition for the 

purchased NWR ribbon costs in lieu of 

actual costs of production from the 

weaver, as the weaver is unable to 

provide such costs on a sufficiently 

specific basis for use in the 

Department’s calculations. For further 

discussion, see Comment 20 in the 

Decision Memorandum. 

Section 776(a) of the Act provides that 

the Department shall apply ‘‘facts 

otherwise available’’ if (1) necessary 

information is not on the record, or (2) 

an interested party or any other person 

(A) withholds information that has been 

requested, (B) fails to provide 

information within the deadlines 

established, or in the form and manner 

requested by the Department, subject to 

subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782 

of the Act, (C) significantly impedes a 

proceeding, or (D) provides information 

that cannot be verified as provided by 

section 782(i) of the Act. Here, we lack 

information necessary to determine the 

unaffiliated suppliers’ actual costs and 

must, therefore, rely upon facts 

available. Although we appropriately 

requested the unaffiliated suppliers’ 

costs, the suppliers did not maintain 

records at a sufficient level of detail to 

provide such costs in a manner 

sufficiently detailed for use in the 

Department’s margin calculations; 

therefore, we are relying on the 

acquisition prices for purchased ribbon 

as facts available because they are 

product–specific and constitute the only 

useable data available with respect to 

purchased ribbon. However, if an 

antidumping duty order is issued in this 

proceeding, we will require product– 

specific costs from unaffiliated 

suppliers, if requested. This constitutes 

notice to the weavers of NWR that 

information must be maintained to 

allow the reporting of costs on a 

product–specific basis. 

Cost of Production 

As discussed in the preliminary 

determination, we conducted an 

investigation to determine whether the 

respondents made comparison market 

sales of the foreign like product during 

the POI at prices below their COP 

within the meaning of section 773(b) of 

the Act. See Preliminary Determination, 

75 FR 7236 (Feb. 18, 2010). For this 

final determination, we performed the 

cost test following the same 

methodology as in the Preliminary 

Determination. 

We found that 20 percent or more of 

each respondent’s sales of a given 

product during the POI were at prices 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices 41807 

less than the weighted–average COP for 

this period. Thus, we determined that 

these below–cost sales were made in 

‘‘substantial quantities’’ within an 

extended period of time and at prices 

which did not permit the recovery of all 

costs within a reasonable period of time 

in the normal course of trade. See 

sections 773(b)(1)-(2) of the Act. 

Therefore, for purposes of this final 

determination, we found that each 

respondent made below–cost sales not 

in the ordinary course of trade. 

Consequently, we disregarded these 

sales and used the remaining sales as 

the basis for determining normal value 

for each respondent pursuant to section 

773(b)(1) of the Act. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties in this 

investigation are addressed in the 

Decision Memorandum, which is 

adopted by this notice. Parties can find 

a complete discussion of the issues 

raised in this investigation and the 

corresponding recommendations in this 

public memorandum, which is on file in 

the Central Records Unit, room 1117 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 

Determination 

Based on our analysis of the 

comments received and our findings at 

verification, we have made certain 

changes to the margin calculations. For 

a discussion of these changes, see the 

‘‘Margin Calculations’’ section of the 

Decision Memorandum. 

Verification 

As provided in section 782(i) of the 

Act, we verified the sales and cost 

information submitted by the 

respondents for use in our final 

determination. We used standard 

verification procedures including an 

examination of relevant accounting and 

production records, and original source 

documents provided by the 

respondents. 

Continuation of Suspension of 

Liquidation 

Pursuant to 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 subject 

merchandise from Taiwan, entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption on or after February 18, 

2010, the date of publication of the 

preliminary determination in the 

Federal Register. CBP shall require a 

cash deposit or the posting of a bond 

equal to the estimated amount by which 

the normal value exceeds the U.S. price 

as shown below. These instructions 

suspending liquidation will remain in 

effect until further notice. For Dear Year 

and Shienq Huong, because their 

estimated weighted–average final 

dumping margins are zero, we are not 

directing CBP to suspend liquidation of 

entries of NWR produced and exported 

by these companies. 

Finally, we note that neither Dear 

Year nor Shienq Huong has disclosed 

for the public record the names of their 

unaffiliated suppliers. Therefore, upon 

public disclosure of this information to 

the Department, we will notify CBP that 

Dear Year’s and Shienq Huong’s exports 

of merchandise produced by these 

unaffiliated suppliers have LTFV 

investigation margins of zero and thus 

are excluded from any order resulting 

from this investigation. Until and unless 

such public disclosure is made, we will 

notify CBP that all entries of 

merchandise produced by Dear Year’s 

and Shienq Huong’s unaffiliated 

suppliers will be subject to the ‘‘all 

others’’ rate established in this 

proceeding. 

Final Determination Margins 

The weighted–average dumping 

margins are as follows: 

Manufacturer/Exporter Weighted–Average 

Margin (percent) 

Dear Year Brothers 

Mfg. Co., Ltd. ............ 0.00 

Roung Shu Industry 

Corporation ............... 4.37 

Shienq Huong Enterprise Co., Ltd./Hsien 

Chan Enterprise Co., 

Ltd./Novelty Handicrafts Co., Ltd. .......... 0.00 

All Others ...................... 4.37 

‘‘All Others’’ Rate 

In accordance with section 

735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, we have based 

the ‘‘All Others’’ rate on the weighted 

average of the dumping margins 

calculated for the exporters/ 

manufacturers investigated in this 

proceeding. The ‘‘All Others’’ rate is 

calculated exclusive of all de minimis 

margins and margins based entirely on 

AFA. 

Disclosure 

We will 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). 

ITC 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, the ITC 

will determine within 45 days whether 

imports of the subject merchandise are 

causing material injury, or threat of 

material injury, to an industry in the 

United States. If the ITC determines that 

material injury or threat of injury does 

not exist, the proceeding will be 

terminated and all securities posted will 

be refunded or canceled. 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. 

Return or Destruction of Proprietary 

Information 

This notice will serve as the only 

reminder to parties subject to 

administrative protective order (APO) of 

their responsibility concerning the 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 

written 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. 

We are issuing and publishing this 

determination and notice in accordance 

with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the 

Act. 

Dated: July 12, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix Issues in Decision 

Memorandum 

General Issues 

1. Targeted Dumping 

2. The Appropriate Unit of Measure On 

Which to Base Sales and Cost Data 

3. How to Define the Product 

Characteristic ‘‘Color’’ 

4. Display Unit Costs 

Company–Specific Issues 

5. Date of Shipment for Dear Year 

6. Dear Year’s Sales of Traded Goods 

7. The Treatment of a Relabeling Billing 

Adjustment for Dear Year 

8. The Treatment of Dear Year’s 

‘‘Combination’’ Ribbons 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
41808 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices 

1See Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven 

Selvedge from the People’s Republic of China: 

Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value and Postponement of Final 

Determination, 75 FR 7244 (February 18, 2010) 

(‘‘Preliminary Determination’’). 

2See Preliminary Determination. 

3See Memorandum to the Record from Ronald 

Lorentzen, DAS for Import Administration, 

regarding ‘‘Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As 

a Result of the Government Closure During the 

Recent Snowstorm,’’ dated February 12, 2010. 

4See the ‘‘Verification’’ section below for 

additional information. 

5See Memorandum to The File, Antidumping 

Investigation of Narrow Woven Ribbons with 

Woven Selvedge from the People’s Republic of 

China: Surrogate Value for Scrap Yarn and Scrap 

Ribbon, dated June 14, 2010. 

6See Memorandum to The File, Antidumping 

Duty Investigation of Narrow Woven Ribbons with 

Woven Selvedge from the People’ Republic of 

China: Export Data, dated June 14, 2010. 7See Memorandum to The File, Antidumping 

Duty Investigation of Narrow Woven Ribbons with 

Woven Selvedge from the People’ Republic of 

China: Additional Export Data, dated June 15, 2010. 8See Memorandum to The File, Antidumping 

Duty Investigation of Narrow Woven Ribbons with 

Woven Selvedge from the People’ Republic of 

China: Additional Export Data, dated June 22, 2010. 9See Memorandum to The File, Antidumping 

Duty Investigation of Narrow Woven Ribbons with 

Woven Selvedge from the People’ Republic of 

China: Data on Labor Wage, dated July 1, 2010. 

9. Clerical Error in Dear Year’s 

Preliminary Dumping Margin 

10. Dear Year’s Sample Sales 

11. Reallocation of Variable Overhead 

for Dear Year 

12. Variables Names in Dear Year’s Cost 

Database 

13. The Treatment of the Product 

Characteristic ‘‘Width’’ for Roung Shu 

14. Warranty Expenses for Roung Shu 

15. Roung Shu’s Reporting of the Costs 

Associated with Different Colors of 

NWR 

16. Financial Expenses for Roung Shu 

17. Financial Expenses for Shienq 

Huong 

18. Depreciation Expense for Shienq 

Huong 

Issues Related to Unaffiliated Suppliers 

19. Dear Year’s Unaffiliated Suppliers’ 

Cost of Production (COP) 

20. Shienq Huong’s Unaffiliated 

Suppliers’ COP 

21. Assigning Combination Rates to 

Dear Year and Shienq Huong 

[FR Doc. 2010–17538 Filed 7–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–952] 

Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven 

Selvedge From the People’s Republic 

of China: Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: July 19, 2010. 

SUMMARY: On February 18, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

‘‘Department’’) published its preliminary 

determination of sales at less than fair 

value (‘‘LTFV’’) in the antidumping duty 

investigation of narrow woven ribbons 

with woven selvedge (‘‘narrow woven 

ribbons’’) from the People’s Republic of 

China (‘‘PRC’’).1 We invited interested 

parties to comment on our Preliminary 

Determination. Based on our analysis of 

the comments we received, we have 

made changes from the Preliminary 

Determination. We determine that 

narrow woven ribbons from the PRC are 

being, or are likely to be, sold in the 

United States at LTFV as provided in 

section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (‘‘Act’’). The final dumping 

margins for this investigation are listed 

in the ‘‘Final Determination Margins’’ 

section below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Zhulieta Willbrand or Karine Gziryan, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–3147 and (202) 

482–4081, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Case History 

The period of investigation is January 

1, 2009, through June 30, 2009. The 

Department published its preliminary 

determination of sales at LTFV and 

postponement of the final determination 

on February 18, 2010.2 As explained in 

the memorandum from the Deputy 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, the Department has 

exercised its discretion to toll deadlines 

for the duration of the closure of the 

Federal Government from February 5, 

through February 12, 2010. Thus, all 

deadlines in this segment of the 

proceeding have been extended by 

seven days. The revised deadline for the 

final determination of this investigation 

is now July 12, 2010.3

Between March 8, 2010 and March 12, 

2010, the Department conducted 

verification of mandatory respondent 

Yama Ribbons and Bows Co., Ltd. 

(‘‘Yama’’).4

On April 20, 2010, the Department 

received case briefs from: Berwick 

Offray LLC and its wholly owned 

subsidiary Lion Ribbon Company, Inc. 

(‘‘Petitioner’’); Yama; and Yangzhou 

Bestpak Gifts & Crafts Co., Ltd. 

(‘‘Bestpak’’). On April 26, 2010, the 

Department received rebuttal briefs from 

Petitioner, Yama, and Bestpak. 

On June 14, 2010, the Department 

issued a memorandum to all interested 

parties requesting comment on two 

possible Harmonized Tariff Schedule 

(‘‘HTS’’) numbers (i.e., 6310.10.90 and 

6310.90.90) that could be used as the 

surrogate value for scrap ribbon and 

scrap yarn.5 On June 18, 2010, we 

received comments from Yama and 

Petitioner. 

On June 14, 2010, in response to the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal 

Circuit’s decision in Dorbest Limited et 

al. v. United States, 2009–1257, –1266 

(May 14, 2010) (‘‘Dorbest’’), the 

Department issued a memorandum to 

inform all interested parties that the 

Department would reconsider its 

valuation of the labor wage rate, and to 

permit parties to comment on this 

issue.6 On June 21, 2010, we received 

comments from Yama and Petitioner. 

Additionally, on June 15 and 22, 2010, 

the Department issued a memorandum 

adding additional export data to the 

record related to the Department’s 

determination of the surrogate value for 

labor.7 On June 21, 2010, Petitioner and 

Yama submitted comments regarding 

the wage rate issue. Further, on June 22, 

2010, the Department issued another 

memorandum adding additional export 

data to the record related to the 

Department’s determination of the 

surrogate value for labor.8 We received 

no additional comments. On July 1, 

2010, the Department placed further 

data on the record regarding the wage 

rate issue.9 No party submitted 

comments. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties to this 

investigation, as well as comments 

received pursuant to the Department’s 

requests, are addressed in the ‘‘Narrow 

Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge 

from the People’s Republic of China: 

Issues and Decision Memorandum for 

the Final Determination’’ (‘‘Issues and 

Decision Memorandum’’), dated 

concurrently with this notice and which 

is hereby adopted by this notice. A list 

of the issues which parties raised and to 

which we respond in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum is attached to 

this notice as Appendix I. The Issues 

and Decision Memorandum is a public 

document and is on file in the Central 

Records Unit, Room 1117 of the main 

Commerce building, and is accessible 

on the World Wide Web at http:// 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices 41809 

10See Final Analysis Memorandum for Yama 

Ribbons and Bows Co. Ltd., dated July 12, 2010 

(‘‘Yama’s Analysis Memo’’). 

11See Yama’s Analysis Memo. 

12See Yama’s Analysis Memo. 

13See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 8. 

trade.gov/ia/index.asp. The paper copy 

and electronic version of the 

memorandum are identical in content. 

Changes Since the Preliminary 

Determination 

1. For the final determination, we 

have included a freight expense to 

transport liquid petroleum gas from the 

supplier to Yama’s factory.10

2. In the Preliminary Determination, 

75 FR at 7249–50, we stated that for 

certain misreported packing materials’ 

factors of production (‘‘FOPs’’) as facts 

available, we applied a simple average 

consumption rate for certain packing 

materials. At verification, we examined 

these packing materials. For the final 

determination, we have determined to 

use Yama’s reported consumption rates 

for all its packing materials.11

3. We have recalculated the surrogate 

value for scrap using World Trade Atlas 

data for HTS number 6310.90.90.12

4. Pursuant to a recent decision by the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal 

Circuit, we have calculated a revised 

hourly wage rate to use in valuing 

Yama’s reported labor input by 

averaging earnings and/or wages in 

countries that are economically 

comparable to the PRC and that are 

significant producers of comparable 

merchandise.13

5. For the final determination, we 

have included a new exclusion (i.e., 

exclusion 13) in the scope of 

investigation. See ‘‘Scope of 

Investigation’’ section, below. 

Scope of Investigation 

The merchandise subject to the 

investigation is narrow woven ribbons 

with woven selvedge, in any length, but 

with a width (measured at the narrowest 

span of the ribbon) less than or equal to 

12 centimeters, composed of, in whole 

or in part, man-made fibers (whether 

artificial or synthetic, including but not 

limited to nylon, polyester, rayon, 

polypropylene, and polyethylene 

teraphthalate), metal threads and/or 

metalized yarns, or any combination 

thereof. Narrow woven ribbons subject 

to the investigation may: 

• Also include natural or other nonman-made fibers; 

• Be of any color, style, pattern, or 

weave construction, including but not 

limited to single-faced satin, doublefaced satin, grosgrain, sheer, taffeta, 

twill, jacquard, or a combination of two 

or more colors, styles, patterns, and/or 

weave constructions; 

• Have been subjected to, or 

composed of materials that have been 

subjected to, various treatments, 

including but not limited to dyeing, 

printing, foil stamping, embossing, 

flocking, coating, and/or sizing; 

• Have embellishments, including but 

not limited to applique ́, fringes, 

embroidery, buttons, glitter, sequins, 

laminates, and/or adhesive backing; 

• Have wire and/or monofilament in, 

on, or along the longitudinal edges of 

the ribbon; 

• Have ends of any shape or 

dimension, including but not limited to 

straight ends that are perpendicular to 

the longitudinal edges of the ribbon, 

tapered ends, flared ends or shaped 

ends, and the ends of such woven 

ribbons may or may not be hemmed; 

• Have longitudinal edges that are 

straight or of any shape, and the 

longitudinal edges of such woven 

ribbon may or may not be parallel to 

each other; 

• Consist of such ribbons affixed to 

like ribbon and/or cut-edge woven 

ribbon, a configuration also known as an 

‘‘ornamental trimming;’’ 

• Be wound on spools; attached to a 

card; hanked (i.e., coiled or bundled); 

packaged in boxes, trays or bags; or 

configured as skeins, balls, bateaus or 

folds; and/or 

• Be included within a kit or set such 

as when packaged with other products, 

including but not limited to gift bags, 

gift boxes and/or other types of ribbon. 

Narrow woven ribbons subject to the 

investigation include all narrow woven 

fabrics, tapes, and labels that fall within 

this written description of the scope of 

this investigation. 

Excluded from the scope of the 

investigation are the following: 

(1) Formed bows composed of narrow 

woven ribbons with woven selvedge; 

(2) ‘‘Pull-bows’’ (i.e., an assemblage of 

ribbons connected to one another, 

folded flat and equipped with a means 

to form such ribbons into the shape of 

a bow by pulling on a length of material 

affixed to such assemblage) composed of 

narrow woven ribbons; 

(3) Narrow woven ribbons comprised 

at least 20 percent by weight of 

elastomeric yarn (i.e., filament yarn, 

including monofilament, of synthetic 

textile material, other than textured 

yarn, which does not break on being 

extended to three times its original 

length and which returns, after being 

extended to twice its original length, 

within a period of five minutes, to a 

length not greater than one and a half 

times its original length as defined in 

the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (‘‘HTSUS’’), Section XI, 

Note 13) or rubber thread; 

(4) Narrow woven ribbons of a kind 

used for the manufacture of typewriter 

or printer ribbons; 

(5) Narrow woven labels and apparel 

tapes, cut-to-length or cut-to-shape, 

having a length (when measured across 

the longest edge-to-edge span) not 

exceeding eight centimeters; 

(6) Narrow woven ribbons with 

woven selvedge attached to and forming 

the handle of a gift bag; 

(7) Cut-edge narrow woven ribbons 

formed by cutting broad woven fabric 

into strips of ribbon, with or without 

treatments to prevent the longitudinal 

edges of the ribbon from fraying (such 

as by merrowing, lamination, sonobonding, fusing, gumming or waxing), 

and with or without wire running 

lengthwise along the longitudinal edges 

of the ribbon; 

(8) Narrow woven ribbons comprised 

at least 85 percent by weight of threads 

having a denier of 225 or higher; 

(9) Narrow woven ribbons constructed 

from pile fabrics (i.e., fabrics with a 

surface effect formed by tufts or loops of 

yarn that stand up from the body of the 

fabric); 

(10) Narrow woven ribbon affixed 

(including by tying) as a decorative 

detail to non-subject merchandise, such 

as a gift bag, gift box, gift tin, greeting 

card or plush toy, or affixed (including 

by tying) as a decorative detail to 

packaging containing non-subject 

merchandise; 

(11) Narrow woven ribbon that is (a) 

affixed to non-subject merchandise as a 

working component of such non-subject 

merchandise, such as where narrow 

woven ribbon comprises an apparel 

trimming, book marker, bag cinch, or 

part of an identity card holder, or (b) 

affixed (including by tying) to nonsubject merchandise as a working 

component that holds or packages such 

non-subject merchandise or attaches 

packaging or labeling to such nonsubject merchandise, such as a ‘‘belly 

band’’ around a pair of pajamas, a pair 

of socks or a blanket; 

(12) Narrow woven ribbon(s) 

comprising a belt attached to and 

imported with an item of wearing 

apparel, whether or not such belt is 

removable from such item of wearing 

apparel; and 

(13) Narrow woven ribbon(s) included 

with non-subject merchandise in kits, 

such as a holiday ornament craft kit or 

a scrapbook kit, in which the individual 

lengths of narrow woven ribbon(s) 

included in the kit are each no greater 

than eight inches, the aggregate amount 

of narrow woven ribbon(s) included in 

the kit does not exceed 48 linear inches, 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
41810 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices 

14See ‘‘the Scope of Investigation’’ section, above. 

15See April 13, 2010 Memorandum to the File 

from Karine Gziryan and Zhulieta Willbrand, 

International Trade Compliance Specialists, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 4, ‘‘Verification of the Sales 

and Factors Responses of Yama Ribbons and Bows 

Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Investigation of 

Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from 

the People’s Republic of China’’ at 34 and Exhibit 

22. 

16See Preliminary Determination. 

17See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Sparklers from the People’s Republic of 

China, 56 FR 20588 (May 6, 1991), as amplified by 

Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the People’s 

Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994), and 

19 CFR 351.107(d). 

18See section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act. 

19See section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act. 

20See Notice of Preliminary Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement 

of Final Determination; Light-Walled Rectangular 

Pipe and Tube From the Republic of Korea, 73 FR 

5794, 5800 (January 31, 2008), unchanged in Notice 

of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 

Value: Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube 

from the Republic of Korea, 73 FR 35655 (June 24, 

2008); see also ‘‘Corroboration’’ section below. 

21See Preliminary Determination, 75 FR at 7250. 

22See id. 

23See id. 

none of the narrow woven ribbon(s) 

included in the kit is on a spool, and the 

narrow woven ribbon(s) is only one of 

multiple items included in the kit. 

The merchandise subject to this 

investigation is classifiable under the 

HTSUS categories 5806.32.1020; 

5806.32.1030; 5806.32.1050 and 

5806.32.1060. Subject merchandise also 

may enter under subheadings 

5806.31.00; 5806.32.20; 5806.39.20; 

5806.39.30; 5808.90.00; 5810.91.00; 

5810.99.90; 5903.90.10; 5903.90.25; 

5907.00.60; and 5907.00.80 and under 

statistical categories 5806.32.1080; 

5810.92.9080; 5903.90.3090; and 

6307.90.9889. The HTSUS categories 

and subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes; 

however, the written description of the 

merchandise under investigation is 

dispositive. 

Scope Comments 

Prior to the preliminary determination 

in this case, we received a request from 

certain retailers of narrow woven 

ribbons that the Department modify the 

scope of the investigation to exclude 

narrow woven ribbons included in kits 

or sets in ‘‘de minimis’’ amounts. 

Because of concerns over whether the 

proposed scope exclusion language 

would be administrable, we declined to 

modify the scope in the Preliminary 

Determination, and we did not use the 

language suggested by these retailers or 

the alternative language proposed by the 

petitioner. See Preliminary 

Determination, 75 FR at 7240. 

Following the preliminary 

determination, on March 24, 2010, and 

June 3, 2010, the petitioner submitted 

additional language for this scope 

exclusion. Having determined that the 

language contained in the petitioner’s 

June 3, 2010, submission is 

administrable, we have incorporated 

this language in exclusion 13.14

Verification 

As provided in section 782(i) of the 

Act, we verified the information 

submitted by Yama for use in our final 

determination. We used standard 

verification procedures including 

examination of relevant accounting and 

production records, and original source 

documents provided by the 

respondent.15

Surrogate Country 

In the Preliminary Determination, we 

stated that we selected India as the 

appropriate surrogate country to use in 

this investigation for the following 

reasons: (1) It is a significant producer 

of comparable merchandise; (2) it is at 

a similar level of economic development 

pursuant to section 773(c)(4) of the Act; 

and (3) we have reliable data from India 

that we can use to value the FOPs.16 We 

received no comments on this issue 

after the Preliminary Determination, and 

we have made no changes to our 

findings with respect to the selection of 

a surrogate country for the final 

determination. 

Separate Rates 

In proceedings involving non-market 

economy (‘‘NME’’) countries, the 

Department begins with a rebuttable 

presumption that all companies within 

the country are subject to government 

control and, thus, should be assigned a 

single antidumping duty deposit rate. It 

is the Department’s policy to assign all 

exporters of merchandise subject to an 

investigation in an NME country this 

single rate unless an exporter can 

demonstrate that it is sufficiently 

independent so as to be entitled to a 

separate rate.17

In the Preliminary Determination, we 

found that the following companies 

demonstrated eligibility for separate-rate 

status: Beauty Horn Investment Limited; 

Fujian Rongshu Industry Co., Ltd.; 

Guangzhou Complacent Weaving Co., 

Ltd.; Ningbo MH Industry Co., Ltd.; 

Ningbo V.K. Industry & Trading Co., 

Ltd.; Stribbons (Guangzhou) Ltd.; Sun 

Rich (Asia) Limited; Tianjin Sun Ribbon 

Co., Ltd.; Weifang Dongfang Ribbon 

Weaving Co., Ltd.; Weifang Yu Yuan 

Textile Co., Ltd.; Xiamen Yi He Textile 

Co., Ltd; and Bestpak (collectively, the 

‘‘Separate Rate Applicants’’). Since the 

publication of the Preliminary 

Determination, no party has commented 

on the eligibility of the Separate Rate 

Applicants for separate-rate status. For 

the final determination, we continue to 

find that the evidence placed on the 

record of this investigation by the 

Separate Rate Applicants demonstrates 

both de jure and de facto absence of 

government control with respect to each 

company’s respective exports of the 

merchandise under investigation. Thus, 

we continue to find that the Separate 

Rate Applicants are eligible for separaterate status. 

Normally the separate rate is 

determined based on the estimated 

weighted-average dumping margins 

established for exporters and producers 

individually investigated, excluding 

zero and de minimis margins or margins 

based entirely on adverse facts available 

(‘‘AFA’’).18 In this case, because there are 

no rates other than de minimis or those 

based on AFA, we have determined to 

take a simple average of the AFA rate 

assigned to the PRC-wide entity and the 

de minimis rate calculated for Yama as 

a reasonable method for purposes of 

determining the rate assigned to the 

Separate Rate Applicants.19 We note 

that this methodology is consistent with 

the Department’s past practice.20

The PRC-Wide Rate 

In the Preliminary Determination, we 

found that certain PRC exporters/ 

producers did not demonstrate that they 

operate free of government control over 

their export activities and did not 

respond to the Department’s request for 

information.21 Thus, we treated these 

PRC exporters/producers as part of the 

PRC-wide entity and found that the 

PRC-wide entity did not respond to our 

requests for information.22 No 

additional information was placed on 

the record with respect to any of these 

companies after the Preliminary 

Determination. Additionally, in the 

Preliminary Determination, we 

determined that because Ningbo Jintian 

Import & Export Co., Ltd. (‘‘Ningbo 

Jintian’’) (i.e., a mandatory respondent) 

failed to submit responses to the 

Department’s questionnaires, the 

Department has no basis upon which to 

grant Ningbo Jintian a separate rate. 

Accordingly, in the Preliminary 

Determination, we determined to treat 

Ningbo Jintian as part of the PRC-wide 

entity.23 We received no comments on 

this determination. 

Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides 

that, if an interested party (A) 

Withholds information requested by the 

Department, (B) fails to provide such 

information by the deadline, or in the 

form or manner requested, (C) 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices 41811 

24See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, 

Finished or Unfinished, from the People’s Republic 

of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and Notice of Rescission in 

Part and Intent to Rescind in Part, 72 FR 14078, 

14079 (March 26, 2007), unchanged in Tapered 

Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished or 

Unfinished, from the People’s Republic of China: 

Final Results of 2005–2006 Administrative Review 

and Partial Rescission of Review, 72 FR 56724 

(October 4, 2007) and Tapered Roller Bearings and 

Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From the 

People’s Republic of China: Amended Final Results 

of 2005–2006 Administrative Review, 72 FR 70302 

(December 11, 2007). See also Statement of 

Administrative Action accompanying the Uruguay 

Round Agreements Act (‘‘SAA’’), H.R. Doc. No. 103– 

316, Vol. 1 (1994), at 870. 

25See, e.g., Synthetic Indigo From the People’s 

Republic of China; Notice of Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 65 FR 25706 (May 

3, 2000). 

26See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Sodium Hexametaphosphate From the 

People’s Republic of China, 73 FR 6479, 6481 

(February 4, 2008), quoting SAA at 870. 27See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, 

Finished and Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered 

Roller Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside 

Diameter, and Components Thereof, From Japan; 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Reviews and Partial Termination of 

Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 57391, 57392 

(November 6, 1996), unchanged in Tapered Roller 

Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and 

Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered Roller 

Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, 

and Components Thereof, From Japan; Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Reviews and Termination in Part, 62 FR 11825 

(March 13, 1997). 

28See Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven 

Selvedge from the People’s Republic of China and 

Taiwan: Initiation of Antidumping Duty 

Investigations, 74 FR 39291 (August 6, 2009) 

(‘‘Initiation Notice’’) 

29See Preliminary Determination, 75 FR at 7251. 

30See Yama’s Analysis Memo. 

31See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 12; see also July 12, 2010 Memorandum 

to the File from Karine Gziryan, International Trade 

Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, 

‘‘Antidumping Investigation of Narrow Woven 

Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from the People’s 

Republic of China: Proprietary Memorandum 

regarding Corroboration’’. 

32See Initiation Notice, 74 FR at 39297. 

significantly impedes a proceeding, or 

(D) provides information that cannot be 

verified, the Department shall use, 

subject to section 782(d) of the Act, facts 

otherwise available in reaching the 

applicable determination. Since the 

PRC-wide entity did not provide the 

Department with requested information, 

pursuant to section 776(a)(2)(A) of the 

Act, we continue to find it appropriate 

to base the PRC-wide rate on facts 

available. Therefore, pursuant to section 

776(a)(2)(A) of the Act, the Department 

continues to find that the use of facts 

available is appropriate to determine the 

PRC-wide rate. 

Section 776(b) of the Act provides 

that, in selecting from among the facts 

otherwise available, the Department 

may employ an adverse inference if an 

interested party fails to cooperate by not 

acting to the best of its ability to comply 

with requests for information.24 We 

determine that, because the PRC-wide 

entity did not respond to our requests 

for information, the PRC-wide entity has 

failed to cooperate to the best of its 

ability. Therefore, the Department finds 

that, in selecting from among the facts 

otherwise available, an adverse 

inference is appropriate for the PRCwide entity. 

Because we begin with the 

presumption that all companies within 

an NME country are subject to 

government control, and because only 

Separate Rate Applicants have 

overcome that presumption, we are 

applying a single antidumping rate (i.e., 

the PRC-wide entity rate) to all other 

exporters of subject merchandise from 

the PRC. Such companies did not 

demonstrate entitlement to a separate 

rate.25 The PRC-wide entity rate applies 

to all entries of subject merchandise 

except for entries from Yama and the 

Separate Rate Applicants. 

Corroboration 

Section 776(c) of the Act provides 

that, when the Department relies on 

secondary information rather than on 

information obtained in the course of an 

investigation as facts available, it must, 

to the extent practicable, corroborate 

that information from independent 

sources reasonably at its disposal. 

Secondary information is described as 

‘‘information derived from the petition 

that gave rise to the investigation or 

review, the final determination 

concerning merchandise subject to this 

investigation, or any previous review 

under section 751 concerning the 

merchandise subject to this 

investigation.’’ 26 To ‘‘corroborate’’ 

means that the Department will satisfy 

itself that the secondary information to 

be used has probative value. 

Independent sources used to corroborate 

may include, for example, published 

price lists, official import statistics and 

customs data, and information obtained 

from interested parties during the 

particular investigation. To corroborate 

secondary information, the Department 

will, to the extent practicable, examine 

the reliability and relevance of the 

information used.27

The AFA rate that the Department 

used is drawn from the petition, as 

adjusted to reflect the CAFC’s decision 

in Dorbest. See Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at Comment 1. 

Petitioner’s methodology for calculating 

the United States price and normal 

value (‘‘NV’’) in the petition is discussed 

in the Initiation Notice.28 In the 

Preliminary Determination, we assigned 

to the PRC-wide entity the margin 

alleged in the petition, i.e., 247.65 

percent.29 For the final determination, 

we have continued to assign to the PRCwide entity the rate of 247.65 percent. 

To corroborate the AFA margin that we 

have selected, we compared it to the 

model-specific margins we found for the 

participating mandatory respondent, 

Yama. We found that the margin of 

247.65 percent has probative value 

because it is in the range of Yama’s 

model-specific margins.30 Accordingly, 

we find that the rate of 247.65 percent 

is corroborated within the meaning of 

section 776(c) of the Act.31

Combination Rates 

In the Initiation Notice, the 

Department stated that it would 

calculate combination rates for 

respondents that are eligible for a 

separate rate in this investigation.32 This 

practice is described in Policy Bulletin 

05.1, available at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/. 

{w}hile continuing the practice of 

assigning separate rates only to exporters, all 

separate rates that the Department will now 

assign in its NME investigations will be 

specific to those producers that supplied the 

exporter during the period of investigation. 

Note, however, that one rate is calculated for 

the exporter and all of the producers which 

supplied subject merchandise to it during the 

period of investigation. This practice applies 

both to mandatory respondents receiving an 

individually calculated separate rate as well 

as the pool of non-investigated firms 

receiving the weighted-average of the 

individually calculated rates. This practice is 

referred to as the application of ‘‘combination 

rates’’ because such rates apply to specific 

combinations of exporters and one or more 

producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to 

an exporter will apply only to merchandise 

both exported by the firm in question and 

produced by a firm that supplied the exporter 

during the period of investigation. (Emphasis 

in original). 

Final Determination Margins 

The Department determines that the 

following dumping margins exist for the 

period January 1, 2009, through June 30, 

2009: 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
41812 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices 

Exporter Producer Weighted-average 

percent margin 

Yama Ribbons and Bows Co., Ltd .......................................... Yama Ribbons and Bows Co., Ltd .......................................... 0 

Beauty Horn Investment Limited ............................................. Tianjin Sun Ribbon Co., Ltd .................................................... 123 .83 

Fujian Rongshu Industry Co., Ltd ........................................... Fujian Rongshu Industry Co., Ltd ........................................... 123 .83 

Guangzhou Complacent Weaving Co., Ltd Guangzhou Complacent Weaving Co., Ltd 123 .83 

Ningbo MH Industry Co., Ltd ................................................... Hangzhou City Linghu Jiacheng Silk Ribbon Co., Ltd 123 .83 

Ningbo V.K. Industry & Trading Co., Ltd Ningbo Yinzhou Jinfeng Knitting Factory 123 .83 

Stribbons (Guangzhou) Ltd ..................................................... Stribbons (Guangzhou) Ltd ..................................................... 123 .83 

Stribbons (Guangzhou) Ltd ..................................................... Stribbons (Nanyang) MNC Ltd ................................................ 123 .83 

Sun Rich (Asia) Limited ........................................................... Dongguan Yi Sheng Decoration Co., Ltd 123 .83 

Tianjin Sun Ribbon Co., Ltd .................................................... Tianjin Sun Ribbon Co., Ltd .................................................... 123 .83 

Weifang Dongfang Ribbon Weaving Co., Ltd Weifang Dongfang Ribbon Weaving Co., Ltd 123 .83 

Weifang Yu Yuan Textile Co., Ltd ........................................... Weifang Yu Yuan Textile Co., Ltd ........................................... 123 .83 

Xiamen Yi He Textile Co., Ltd ................................................. Xiamen Yi He Textile Co., Ltd ................................................. 123 .83 

Yangzhou Bestpak Gifts & Crafts Co., Ltd Yangzhou Bestpak Gifts & Crafts Co., Ltd 123 .83 

PRC-wide Entity* ..................................................................... .................................................................................................. 247 .65 

* (Including Ningbo Jintian Import & Export Co., Ltd.). 

Continuation of Suspension of 

Liquidation 

In accordance with section 

735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department 

will instruct U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to continue to 

suspend liquidation of all entries of 

narrow woven ribbons from the PRC, as 

described in the ‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ 

section, above, entered, or withdrawn 

from warehouse, for consumption on or 

after February 18, 2010, the date of 

publication of the Preliminary 

Determination in the Federal Register. 

The Department will instruct CBP to 

require a cash deposit or the posting of 

a bond equal to the weighted-average 

dumping margin amount by which the 

NV exceeds U.S. price, as follows: (1) 

The rate for the exporter/producer 

combinations listed in the chart above 

will be the rate the Department has 

determined in this final determination; 

(2) for all PRC exporters of subject 

merchandise which have not received 

their own rate, the cash-deposit rate will 

be the PRC-wide entity rate; and (3) for 

all non-PRC exporters of subject 

merchandise which have not received 

their own rate, the cash-deposit rate will 

be the rate applicable to the PRC 

exporter/producer combination that 

supplied that non-PRC exporter. 

Additionally, as the Department has 

determined in its companion 

countervailing duty (‘‘CVD’’) final 

determination of narrow woven ribbons 

from the PRC (dated concurrently with 

this notice) that the product under 

investigation, exported and produced by 

Yama, benefitted from an export 

subsidy, we will instruct CBP to require 

an antidumping cash deposit or posting 

of a bond equal to the weighted-average 

amount by which the NV exceeds the 

export price, as indicated above, minus 

the amount determined to constitute an 

export subsidy. See, e.g., Notice of Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 

From India, 69 FR 67306, 67307 

(November 17, 2004). Therefore, for the 

separate rate respondents, we will 

instruct CBP to require an antidumping 

duty cash deposit or the posting of a 

bond for each entry equal to the 

weighted-average margin indicated 

above adjusted for the export subsidy 

rate determined in the CVD final 

determination (i.e., International Market 

Development Fund Grants for Small and 

Medium Enterprises). The adjusted cash 

deposit rate for the separate rate 

respondents (as listed above in the 

‘‘Final Determination Margins’’ section, 

above) is 123.44 percent. These 

suspension-of-liquidation instructions 

will remain in effect until further notice. 

International Trade Commission 

Notification 

In accordance with section 735(d) of 

the Act, the Department notified the 

U.S. International Trade Commission 

(‘‘ITC’’) of its final determination of sales 

at LTFV. As the Department’s final 

determination is affirmative, in 

accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the 

Act, within 45 days the ITC will 

determine 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 material 

injury or threat of material injury does 

not exist, the proceeding will be 

terminated and all securities posted will 

be refunded or canceled. If the ITC 

determines that such injury does exist, 

the Department will issue an 

antidumping duty order directing CBP 

to assess, upon further instruction by 

the Department, 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 the 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 return or 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 in accordance with sections 

735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: July 12, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I 

Issues for Final Determination 

Comment 1: Whether the Department should 

recalculate the petition margin with the 

preliminary surrogate value for labor 

Comment 2: Whether to apply a scrap offset 

in deriving Yama’s normal value 

Comment 3: Whether to set additional 

processing revenue to zero for all sales 

and cap freight revenue 

Comment 4: Whether to include freight 

expenses for the input Liquid Petroleum 

Gas (‘‘LPG’’) 

Comment 5: Whether to deduct Yama’s bank 

charges from U.S. price 

Comment 6: Whether to apply Adverse Facts 

Available for some of Yama’s sales 

Comment 7: Whether to apply Facts 

Available to estimate commissions on 

Yama’s U.S. Sales 

Comment 8: Whether the Department should 

revise its labor rate calculation 

Comment 9: Whether to assign Bestpak the 

calculated margin assigned to Yama as 

its separate rate 

Comment 10: Whether to select an additional 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices 41813 

1Collapsed entities are treated as one producer/ 

exporter. 

2The Liberty Group consists of the following 

companies: Devi Marine Food Exports Private 

Limited, Kader Exports Private Limited, Kader 

Investment and Trading Company Private Limited, 

Liberty Frozen Foods Private Limited, Liberty Oil 

Mills Ltd., Premier Marine Products, and Universal 

Cold Storage Private Limited (collectively, ‘‘the 

Liberty Group’’). 

3 ‘‘Tails’’ in this context means the tail fan, which 

includes the telson and the uropods. 

respondent 

Comment 11: Whether to calculate Bestpak’s 

separate rate using its quantity and value 

information 

Comment 12: Whether the AFA rate was 

sufficiently corroborated 

[FR Doc. 2010–17568 Filed 7–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–533–840] 

Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp 

From India: Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review, Partial Rescission of Review, 

and Notice of Revocation of Order in 

Part 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On March 15, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published the preliminary 

results of the administrative review of 

the antidumping duty order on certain 

frozen warmwater shrimp (shrimp) from 

India. This review covers 159 

producers/exporters 1 of the subject 

merchandise to the United States. The 

period of review (POR) is February 1, 

2008, through January 31, 2009. 

After analyzing the comments 

received, we have made no changes in 

the margin calculations. Therefore, 

these final results do not differ from the 

preliminary results. The final weightedaverage dumping margins for the 

reviewed firms are listed below in the 

section entitled ‘‘Final Results of 

Review.’’ 

Finally, we have determined to revoke 

the antidumping duty order with 

respect to shrimp from India produced 

and exported by Devi Sea Foods Limited 

(Devi) and to rescind the review with 

respect to 41 firms. 

DATES: Effective Date: July 19, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elizabeth Eastwood or Henry Almond, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone (202) 482–3874 or (202) 482– 

0049, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

This review covers 159 producers/ 

exporters. The respondents which the 

Department selected for individual 

examination are Devi, Falcon Marine 

Exports Limited (Falcon), and the 

Liberty Group.2 The respondents which 

were not selected for individual review 

are listed in the ‘‘Final Results of 

Review’’ section of this notice. 

On March 15, 2010, the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

preliminary results of administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on shrimp from India. See Certain 

Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from India: 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review, Partial 

Rescission of Review, Notice of Intent to 

Rescind Review in Part, and Notice of 

Intent to Revoke Order in Part, 75 FR 

12175 (Mar. 15, 2010) (Preliminary 

Results). 

We invited parties to comment on the 

Preliminary Results of review. In April 

2009, we received case and rebuttal 

briefs from the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade 

Action Committee (the Petitioner) and 

the American Shrimp Processors 

Association (ASPA)/the Louisiana 

Shrimp Association (LSA). We also 

received a case brief from the Liberty 

Group and a rebuttal brief from Devi. 

The Department has conducted this 

administrative review in accordance 

with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (the Act). 

Scope of the Order 

The scope of this order includes 

certain frozen warmwater shrimp and 

prawns, whether wild-caught (ocean 

harvested) or farm-raised (produced by 

aquaculture), head-on or head-off, shellon or peeled, tail-on or tail-off,3

deveined or not deveined, cooked or 

raw, or otherwise processed in frozen 

form. 

The frozen warmwater shrimp and 

prawn products included in the scope of 

this order, regardless of definitions in 

the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS), are products 

which are processed from warmwater 

shrimp and prawns through freezing 

and which are sold in any count size. 

The products described above may be 

processed from any species of 

warmwater shrimp and prawns. 

Warmwater shrimp and prawns are 

generally classified in, but are not 

limited to, the Penaeidae family. Some 

examples of the farmed and wild-caught 

warmwater species include, but are not 

limited to, whiteleg shrimp (Penaeus 

vannemei), banana prawn (Penaeus 

merguiensis), fleshy prawn (Penaeus 

chinensis), giant river prawn 

(Macrobrachium rosenbergii), giant tiger 

prawn (Penaeus monodon), redspotted 

shrimp (Penaeus brasiliensis), southern 

brown shrimp (Penaeus subtilis), 

southern pink shrimp (Penaeus 

notialis), southern rough shrimp 

(Trachypenaeus curvirostris), southern 

white shrimp (Penaeus schmitti), blue 

shrimp (Penaeus stylirostris), western 

white shrimp (Penaeus occidentalis), 

and Indian white prawn (Penaeus 

indicus). 

Frozen shrimp and prawns that are 

packed with marinade, spices or sauce 

are included in the scope of this order. 

In addition, food preparations, which 

are not ‘‘prepared meals,’’ that contain 

more than 20 percent by weight of 

shrimp or prawn are also included in 

the scope of this order. 

Excluded from the scope are: (1) 

Breaded shrimp and prawns (HTSUS 

subheading 1605.20.10.20); (2) shrimp 

and prawns generally classified in the 

Pandalidae family and commonly 

referred to as coldwater shrimp, in any 

state of processing; (3) fresh shrimp and 

prawns whether shell-on or peeled 

(HTSUS subheadings 0306.23.00.20 and 

0306.23.00.40); (4) shrimp and prawns 

in prepared meals (HTSUS subheading 

1605.20.05.10); (5) dried shrimp and 

prawns; (6) canned warmwater shrimp 

and prawns (HTSUS subheading 

1605.20.10.40); (7) certain dusted 

shrimp; and (8) certain battered shrimp. 

Dusted shrimp is a shrimp-based 

product: (1) That is produced from fresh 

(or thawed-from-frozen) and peeled 

shrimp; (2) to which a ‘‘dusting’’ layer of 

rice or wheat flour of at least 95 percent 

purity has been applied; (3) with the 

entire surface of the shrimp flesh 

thoroughly and evenly coated with the 

flour; (4) with the non-shrimp content of 

the end product constituting between 

four and ten percent of the product’s 

total weight after being dusted, but prior 

to being frozen; and (5) that is subjected 

to IQF freezing immediately after 

application of the dusting layer. 

Battered shrimp is a shrimp-based 

product that, when dusted in 

accordance with the definition of 

dusting above, is coated with a wet 

viscous layer containing egg and/or 

milk, and par-fried. 

The products covered by this order 

are currently classified under the 

following HTSUS subheadings: 

0306.13.00.03, 0306.13.00.06, 

0306.13.00.09, 0306.13.00.12, 

0306.13.00.15, 0306.13.00.18, 

0306.13.00.21, 0306.13.00.24, 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES

B-1 

APPENDIX B 

HEARING WITNESSES

CALENDAR OF PUBLIC HEARING

Those listed below appeared as wit nesses at the United States International Trade Com mission’s

hearing:

Subject: Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from China and

Taiwan

Inv. Nos.: 701-TA-467 and 731-TA-1164-1165 (Final)

Date and Time: July 15, 2010 - 9:30 a.m.

Sessions were held in connection with these investigations in the Main Hearing Room (room 101),

500 E Street, SW, Washington, DC.

OPENING REMARKS:

Petitioner (Gregory C. Dorris, Pepper Hamilton LLP)

Respondents (James R. Cannon, Jr., Williams Mullen)

In Support of the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders:

Pepper Hamilton LLP

Washington, DC

on behalf of

Berwick Offray LLC

Julie Pajic, Senior Vice President, Sales and Marketing, Berwick Offray LLC

Owen Deese, Senior Industrial Engineer, Berwick Offray LLC 

Richard Lee, Hagerstown Plant Manager, Berwick Offray LLC

Christian A. Sorensen, Executive Vice President and General Manager,

BOC Design

Dr. Seth T. Kaplan, Principal, The Brattle Group

Gregory C. Dorris -- OF COUNSEL

B-3
In Opposition to the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders:

Williams Mullen

Washington, DC

on behalf of

Ribbon Importers

Joseph Duffey, CEO, Compass Designs, LLC

Charles Vaughn, President, MNC Stribbons, Inc.

Thomas Lodge, President, Liberty Ribbon & Packaging

Vinci Wong, President, Papillon Ribbon & Bow Inc.

 

James R. Cannon, Jr. )

) – OF COUNSEL

J. Forbes Thompson )

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Washington, DC

on behalf of

Taiwan Silk & Filament Weaving Industrial Association and its individual members:

King Young Enterprise Co., Ltd.

Roung Shu Industry Corporation

Shienq Huong Enterprise Co., Ltd.

Yu Pi-Lan, President, King Young Enterprise Co., Ltd.

Liao Chia-Chi, Sales Manager, King Young Enterprise Co., Ltd.

Doris Lin, Counsel, Lee & Li

J. David Park )

Jarrod M. Goldfeder ) – OF COUNSEL

Sally S. Laing )

B-4
In Opposition to the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders:–Continued

Sidley Austin LLP

Washington, DC

on behalf of

Costco Wholesale Corporation

Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

Jo-Ann Stores, Inc.

Michaels Stores, Inc

Target Corporation

Shelly Bucklin, Assistant General Merchandise, Costco Wholesale Corporation

John L. Graham, Assistant General Counsel, Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

Melissa Freebern, Soft Lines Merchandise Manager, Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

Robert D. Icsman, Senior Legal Counsel, Jo-Ann Stores, Inc.

Garth Pauley, Director, Product Development, Jo-Ann Stores, Inc.

Heather Morschauser, Associate General Counsel, Michaels Stores, Inc.

David Mitchell, Business Unit Divisional Manager – Celebrations, Michaels Stores, Inc.

Toni Dembski-Brandl, Senior Counsel, Target Corporation

 

Brenda A. Jacobs )

) – OF COUNSEL

Neil R. Ellis )

REBUTTAL/CLOSING REMARKS:

Petitioners (Gregory C. Dorris, Pepper Hamilton LLP and

Dr. Seth T. Kaplan, The Brattle Group)

Respondents (Brenda A. Jacobs, Sidley Austin LLP)

B-5

C-1 

APPENDIX C 

SUMMARY TABLE

C-3 

Table C-1 

Narrow woven ribbons: Summary data concerning the U.S. market, 2007-09 

Item 

Reported data1

 Period changes2

2007 2008 2009 2007-09 2007-08 2008-09 

U.S. consumption quantity 

Amount (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Market shares by quantity 

(percent) 

U.S. producers’ share *** *** *** *** *** ***

U.S. importers’ share 

China *** *** *** *** *** ***

Taiwan, subject *** *** *** *** *** ***

Subtotal, subject *** *** *** *** *** ***

Taiwan, nonsubject *** *** *** *** *** ***

All other sources *** *** *** *** *** ***

Subtotal, nonsubject *** *** *** *** *** ***

Total imports *** *** *** *** *** ***

U.S. consumption value 

Amount (1,000 dollars) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Market shares by value 

 (percent) 

U.S. producers’ share *** *** *** *** *** ***

U.S. importers’ share 

China *** *** *** *** *** ***

Taiwan, subject *** *** *** *** *** ***

Subtotal, subject *** *** *** *** *** ***

Taiwan, nonsubject *** *** *** *** *** ***

All other sources *** *** *** *** *** ***

Subtotal, nonsubject *** *** *** *** *** ***

Total imports *** *** *** *** *** ***

 

U.S. shipments of imports from-- 

China 

Quantity (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Value (1,000 dollars) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Unit value (per sq. yard) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Inventory (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Table continued on next page. 
C-4 

Table C-1--Continued

Narrow woven ribbons: Summary data concerning the U.S. market, 2007-09 

Item 

Reported data1

 Period changes2

2007 2008 2009 2007-09 2007-08 2008-09 

U.S. shipments of imports from-- 

Taiwan, subject 

Quantity (1,000 sq. yards) 12,226 10,880 8,634 -29.4 -11.0 -20.6

Value (1,000 dollars) 33,210 33,762 28,301 -14.8 1.7 -16.2

Unit value (per sq. yard) $2.72 $3.10 $3.28 20.7 14.2 5.6

Inventory (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Subtotal, subject 

Quantity (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Value (1,000 dollars) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Unit value (per sq. yard) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Inventory (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Taiwan, nonsubject 

Quantity (1,000 sq. yrds) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Value (1,000 dollars) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Unit value (per sq. yard) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Inventory (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

All other sources 

Quantity (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Value (1,000 dollars) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Unit value (per sq. yard) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Inventory (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Subtotal, nonsubject 

Quantity (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Value (1,000 dollars) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Unit value (per sq. yard) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Inventory (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Total import shipments 

Quantity (1,000 sq. yards) 28,655 29,083 21,994 -23.2 1.5 -24.4

Value (1,000 dollars) 99,706 96,125 70,266 -29.5 -3.6 -26.9

Unit value (per sq. yard) $3.48 $3.31 $3.19 -8.2 -5.0 -3.3

Inventory (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Table continued on next page. 
C-5 

Table C-1--Continued

Narrow woven ribbons: Summary data concerning the U.S. market, 2007-09 

Item 

Reported data1

 Period changes2

2007 2008 2009 2007-09 2007-08 2008-09 

U.S. producers’: 

Total hypothetical capacity (1,000 

sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Production (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Capacity utilization (percent) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Average production capacity 

(1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Production (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Capacity utilization (percent) *** *** *** *** *** ***

U.S. shipments: 

Quantity (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Value (1,000 dollars) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Unit value (per sq. yard) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Export shipments: 

Quantity (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Value (1,000 dollars) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Unit value (per sq. yard) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Ending inventory (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Inventories/total shipments 

(percent) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Production workers (number) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Hours worked (1,000s) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Wages paid (1,000 dollars) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Hourly wages *** *** *** *** *** ***

Productivity (yards per hour) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Unit labor costs (per sq. yard) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Table continued on next page. 
C-6 

Table C-1--Continued

Narrow woven ribbons: Summary data concerning the U.S. market, 2007-09 

Item 

Reported data1

 Period changes2

2007 2008 2009 2007-09 2007-08 2008-09 

U.S. producers’: 

Net sales: 

Quantity (1,000 sq. yards) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Value (1,000 dollars) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Unit value (per sq. yard) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Cost of goods sold (COGS) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Gross profit or (loss) *** *** *** *** *** ***

SG&A expenses *** *** *** *** *** ***

Operating income or (loss) *** *** *** *** *** ***

Capital expenditures *** *** *** *** *** ***

Unit COGS *** *** *** *** *** ***

Unit SG&A expenses *** *** *** *** *** ***

Unit operating income or (loss) *** *** *** *** *** ***

COGS/Sales *** *** *** *** *** ***

Operating income or (loss)/sales *** *** *** *** *** ***

1 Reported data are as follows (unless otherwise indicated): quantity data in 1,000 square yards; value data in 1,000 

dollars; unit data in “per square yard” measures, share and ratio data in percent with specificity of one decimal point. 2 Period change data in percent or in percentage points off of share and ratio data. 

Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires.
APPENDIX D

NONSUBJECT PRICING DATA

D-1

Weighted-average sales prices of products imported from nonsubject sources in Taiwan

undersold the U.S. producers in all 33 quarterly comparisons. Prices of imports from nonsubject sources

in Taiwan oversold imports from China in 24 of 33 quarterly comparisons and undersold imports from

China in the remaining 9 quarterly instances. Prices of imports from nonsubject sources in Taiwan

undersold imports from subject sources in Taiwan in 17 of 33 quarterly comparisons and oversold them in

the remaining 16 instances.

Weighted-average sales prices of products imported from nonsubject sources in Mexico

undersold the U.S. producers in both quarterly comparisons. Prices of imports from nonsubject sources in

Mexico undersold imports from China in one quarterly comparison and oversold them in the other. Prices

of imports from nonsubject sources in Mexico undersold imports from subject sources in Taiwan in both

quarterly comparisons.

D-3
Figure D-1

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b prices and quantities of domestic and subject and

nonsubject imported product 1, by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Figure D-2

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b prices and quantities of domestic and subject and

nonsubject imported product 2, by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Figure D-3

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b prices and quantities of domestic and subject and

nonsubject imported product 3, by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Figure D-4

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b prices and quantities of domestic and subject and

nonsubject imported product 4, by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Figure D-5

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b prices and quantities of domestic and subject and

nonsubject imported product 5, by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

Figure D-6

Narrow woven ribbons: Weighted-average f.o.b prices and quantities of domestic and subject and

nonsubject imported product 6, by quarters, January 2007-December 2009

* * * * * * *

D-4
APPENDIX E

DATA ON FACILITATED IMPORTS REPORTED BY BERWICK OFFRAY,

BY TOP CUSTOMERS

E-1

***.1

 ***.2

***.

***.3

Table E-1

Narrow woven ribbons: Quantities and average unit values (AUVs) of commercial shipments of

Berwick Offray’s domestic product, imports from ***, and facilitated imports from ***, to its top

customers, 2007-09

* * * * * * *

Table E-2

Narrow woven ribbons: Quantities and average unit values (AUVs) of commercial shipments of

Berwick Offray’s domestic product, imports from ***, and facilitated imports from ***, to its top

customers, 2007-09

* * * * * * *

Table E-3

Narrow woven ribbons: Quantities and average unit values (AUVs) of commercial shipments of

Berwick Offray’s domestic product, imports from ***, and facilitated imports from ***, to its top

customers, 2007-09

* * * * * * *

 1 See section entitled “Price Data” and fn. 7 in Part V.

 2

 Supplemental data submission from ***, e-mail to staff, June 29, 2010.

 3

 ***.

E-3