78792 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 

1See Uncovered Innerspring Units from the 

People’s Republic of China: Notice of Antidumping 

Duty Order, 74 FR 7661 (February 19, 2009) 

(‘‘Order’’). 

2The petition also included imports of uncovered 

innerspring units from South Africa and the 

Socialist Republic of Vietnam. See Uncovered 

Innerspring Units from the People’s Republic of 

China, South Africa, and the Socialist Republic of 

Vietnam: Initiation of Antidumping Duty 

Investigations, 73 FR 4817 (January 28, 2008). 

3Order, 74 FR at 7662. 

4The fourth administrative review covered the 

period of review (‘‘POR’’) February 1, 2012, through 

64. Tax Refunds for Enterprises Located in 

the ZHTDZ 

65. Provision of Electricity for LTAR to 

FIEs Located in the Nanhai District of 

Foshan City 

66. Nanhai District Grants to HNTEs 

67. Government Provision of Land-Use 

Rights to Enterprises Located in the 

Yongji Circular Economic Park for LTAR 

68. Support for Disabled Persons 

69. Awards of Nanning Municipality for 

Advancement of Science and 

Technology 

70. Award of Nanning Municipality for 

Industrial Enterprises Completing Energy 

Saving Tasks 

71. Membership Fee Refunds for Members 

of Rescue Sub-team of Guangxi 

Emergency and Rescue Association for 

Production Safety 

72. Funds for Demonstration Bases of 

Introducing Foreign Intellectual Property 

73. Funds of Nanning Municipality for 

Project Preliminary Works 

74. Special Funds of Nanning Municipality 

for Key Planning Project of Professionals 

Cultivation 

75. Funds of Guangxi Autonomous Region 

for Energy Saving and Emission 

Reduction 

76. Awards of Nanning High-tech Zone for 

Annual top Tax Payers of Industrial 

Enterprises 

77. Awarding Funds of Guangxi 

Autonomous Region for Renovation of 

Energy-Saving Technologies 

78. National Special Funds for Emission of 

Main Pollutants (Assistance for 

Construction of Automatic Surveillance 

of Key Pollutant Sources) 

79. Support for the Tax Refund Difference 

Program 

80. Export Credit Subsidy Program: Export 

Seller’s Credits 

81. Export Credit Subsidy Program: Export 

Buyer’s Credits 

82. Government Purchase of Aluminum 

Extrusions for More Than Adequate 

Remuneration 

83. 2009 Special Fund 

84. Special Fund Subsidy for ExportOriented Economy 

85. Bonus for 2009 Excellent Sewage 

Treatment Management Companies 

86. Special Fund Subsidy for Industrial 

Development 

87. Special Fund for 2010 Provincial-Level 

Foreign Economy and Foreign Trade 

Development 

88. Special Fund for Environment 

Protection 

89. Special Guiding Fund 

90. Special Fund for Foreign Trade 

91. Special Fund for Industrial 

Development 

92. Special Guiding Fund for Key 

Industries 

93. Social Insurance Subsidy 

94. Migrant Workers Training Subsidy 

95. Technical Reform Subsidy for 

Changzhou City 

96. Income Tax Rewards for Key 

Enterprises 

97. Returns for Land-Transferring Fee 

98. State Key Technology Renovation 

Project Fund 

99. Supporting Funds for Trade with the 

Minority Nationalities and Production of 

Goods Specially Needs by Minority 

Nationalities 

100. Provision of Steam Coal for LTAR 

G. Ad Valorem Rate For Non-Selected 

Companies Under Review 

H. Ad Valorem Rate For Non-Cooperative 

Companies Under Review 

I. Analysis Of Comments 

General Subsidy Issues 

Comment 1: Application of the CVD Law to 

the PRC 

Comment 2: Countervailing Subsidies 

Received Prior to January 1, 2005 

Program-Specific Issues 

Comment 3: Whether There Is a Link 

Between Policy Lending and Respondents’ 

Bank Loans 

Comment 4: Whether PRC Commercial Banks 

Are Government Authorities 

Comment 5: Computation of Benchmark 

Loan Interest Rate 

Comment 6 Whether State Ownership Makes 

an Entity a Government Authority 

Comment 7: Whether Chinese Communist 

Party (CCP) Affiliations/Activities by 

Company Officials Makes the Company a 

Government Authority 

Comment 8: Whether the GOC Responded to 

the Best of Its Ability Regarding Ownership 

and CCP Affiliation for Primary Aluminum 

Producers and Provided Sufficient 

Evidence to Find that Some Producers 

Were Not Government Authorities 

Comment 9: Benchmark Price for Primary 

Aluminum 

Comment 10: Prices Must Be Properly 

Weight-averaged 

Comment 11: Whether the Provision of 

Primary Aluminum Is Specific 

Comment 12: Use of a Tier-One Price for the 

Provision of Primary Aluminum 

Comment 13: Whether Certain Programs 

Were Limited to an Enterprise or Industry 

Comment 14: Whether the Department’s 

Investigation of Uninitiated Programs is 

Unlawful 

Company-Specific Issues 

Comment 15: Attribution of Subsides 

Received by the Alnan Companies 

Comment 16: Allocation of Grant Program for 

Alnan Aluminum 

Comment 17: Benefits Received by Alnan 

Aluminum Prior to 2012 

Comment 18: Whether Alnan Foil Is an Input 

Producer and Subsidies Received by Alnan 

Foil Should Be Attributed to Alnan 

Aluminum 

Comment 19: Whether Grants Received by 

Shanglin Industry Should be Attributed to 

Alnan Aluminum 

Comment 20: Errors in Alnan Aluminum’s 

Trade Financing Calculation 

Other Issues 

Comment 21: Whether to Collect Duties or to 

Lift Any Suspension and Liquidate 

Without Regard to Duties for Permasteelisa, 

Jangho, and Streamlight 

Comment 22: Correct Spelling of Company 

Name 

J. Conclusion 

[FR Doc. 2014–30659 Filed 12–30–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–928] 

Uncovered Innerspring Units From the 

People’s Republic of China: Initiation 

of Anticircumvention Inquiry on 

Antidumping Duty Order 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: In response to a request from 

Leggett & Platt Incorporated 

(‘‘Petitioner’’), the Department of 

Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) is 

initiating an anticircumvention inquiry 

pursuant to section 781(b) of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), to 

determine whether certain imports are 

circumventing the antidumping duty 

order on uncovered innerspring units 

(‘‘innerspring units’’) from the People’s 

Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’).1

DATES: Effective Date: December 31, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Hampton, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–0116. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On December 31, 2007, Petitioner 

filed a petition seeking imposition of 

antidumping duties on imports of 

uncovered innerspring units from, 

among other countries, the PRC.2

Following completion of an 

investigation by the Department and the 

U.S. International Trade Commission 

(‘‘the Commission’’), the Department 

imposed an antidumping duty order on 

subject merchandise.3

In the fourth administrative review of 

the Order,4 Petitioner requested that the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 78793 

January 31, 2013. See Initiation of Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews 

and Request for Revocation in Part, 78 FR 19197 

(March 29, 2013) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’). 

5The Department notes that Petitioner requested 

an administrative review and anticircumvention 

inquiry of ‘‘Goldon Bedding Manufacturing Sdn 

Bhd.’’ However, during the 2012–2013 

administrative review, Goldon provided its 

business license which indicated that the 

company’s official name is ‘‘Goldon Bedding 

Manufacturing (M) Sdn Bhd.’’ See Uncovered 

Innerspring Units from the People’s Republic of 

China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; 2012–2013, 79 FR 56338, 

56339 (September 19, 2014) and accompanying 

Issues and Decision Memorandum (‘‘Final 

Results’’), at 1. 

6See Initiation Notice, 78 FR at 19208. 

7See Uncovered Innerspring Units from China: 

Request for a Circumvention Inquiry, dated 

November 7, 2014, at 3 (‘‘Circumvention Request’’). 

8See Final Results, 79 FR at 56339. 

9See generally Circumvention Request. 

10 Id., at 3. 

11 Id., at 7–8. 

12 Id., at 8; and Exhibit 1, at 2. 

13See Circumvention Request at 8. The 

Commission also noted that innerspring coils and 

border rods are major components of an innerspring 

unit. See Uncovered Innerspring Units from South 

Africa and Vietnam, USITC Pub. 4051, Inv. Nos. 

731–TA–1141–1142 at I–11 (December 2008) 

(hereinafter, ‘‘USITC Uncovered Innersprings 

Report’’). In its final determination regarding 

imports of uncovered innersprings from the PRC, 

the Commission adopted the findings and analyses 

in its determinations and views regarding subject 

imports from South Africa and Vietnam with 

respect to the domestic like product, the domestic 

industry, cumulation, and material injury. 

Uncovered Innerspring Units from China, USITC 

Pub. 4061, Inv. No. 731–TA–1140 at 3 and I–1 

(February 2009). 

14See Circumvention Request, at 9; and Exhibit 

2, at Attachment 2. 

15 Id., at 9, 15 and Exhibit 2, at Attachment 2. 

Department review Goldon Bedding 

Manufacturing (M) Sdn. Bhd 

(‘‘Goldon’’).5 The Department initiated 

the review on March 29, 2013 6 and sent 

questionnaires to the named 

respondents, including Goldon. On 

August 19, 2013, in response to the 

Department’s supplemental 

questionnaire, Goldon acknowledged 

that it imports innerspring unit 

components from the PRC for use in the 

production of innerspring units in 

Malaysia.7 On September 19, 2014, the 

Department applied adverse facts 

available to all of Goldon’s PRC-origin 

subject merchandise upon determining 

that Goldon did not cooperate to the 

best of its ability in the review.8

On November 7, 2014, pursuant to 

section 781(b) of the Act and section 

351.225(h) of the Department’s 

regulations, Petitioner submitted a 

request for the Department to initiate an 

anticircumvention inquiry of Goldon to 

determine whether Goldon’s 

innerspring units completed and 

assembled in Malaysia from PRC-origin 

components constitute circumvention of 

the Order.9 In its request, Petitioner 

contends that Goldon, by its own 

admission, imports innerspring unit 

components from the PRC to Malaysia, 

further assembles these components 

into uncovered innerspring units, and 

exports the assembled innerspring units 

to the United States in the form of 

subject merchandise.10 Petitioner argues 

that Goldon’s operations constitute 

minor further assembly in a third 

country, i.e., Malaysia. 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise subject to the order 

is uncovered innerspring units 

composed of a series of individual metal 

springs joined together in sizes 

corresponding to the sizes of adult 

mattresses (e.g., twin, twin long, full, 

full long, queen, California king, and 

king) and units used in smaller 

constructions, such as crib and youth 

mattresses. All uncovered innerspring 

units are included in the scope 

regardless of width and length. Included 

within this definition are innersprings 

typically ranging from 30.5 inches to 76 

inches in width and 68 inches to 84 

inches in length. Innersprings for crib 

mattresses typically range from 25 

inches to 27 inches in width and 50 

inches to 52 inches in length. 

Uncovered innerspring units are 

suitable for use as the innerspring 

component in the manufacture of 

innerspring mattresses, including 

mattresses that incorporate a foam 

encasement around the innerspring. 

Pocketed and non-pocketed innerspring 

units are included in this definition. 

Non-pocketed innersprings are typically 

joined together with helical wire and 

border rods. Non-pocketed innersprings 

are included in this definition 

regardless of whether they have border 

rods attached to the perimeter of the 

innerspring. Pocketed innersprings are 

individual coils covered by a ‘‘pocket’’ 

or ‘‘sock’’ of a nonwoven synthetic 

material or woven material and then 

glued together in a linear fashion. 

Uncovered innersprings are classified 

under subheading 9404.29.9010 and 

have also been classified under 

subheadings 9404.10.0000, 

7326.20.0070, 7320.20.5010, or 

7320.90.5010 of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States 

(‘‘HTSUS’’). The HTSUS subheadings 

are provided for convenience and 

customs purposes only; the written 

description of the scope of the order is 

dispositive. 

Initiation of Circumvention Proceeding 

Section 781(b)(1) of the Act provides 

that the Department may find 

circumvention of an antidumping duty 

order when merchandise of the same 

class or kind subject to the order is 

completed or assembled in a foreign 

country other than the country to which 

the order applies. In conducting 

circumvention inquiries, under section 

781(b)(1) of the Act, the Department will 

also evaluate whether: (1) The process 

of assembly or completion in the other 

foreign country is minor or 

insignificant; (2) the value of the 

merchandise produced in the foreign 

country to which the antidumping duty 

order applies is a significant portion of 

the total value of the merchandise 

exported to the United States; and (3) 

action is appropriate to prevent evasion 

of such an order or finding. As 

discussed below, Petitioner has 

provided evidence with respect to these 

criteria. 

A. Merchandise of the Same Class or 

Kind 

Petitioner argues that the innerspring 

units that Goldon completes or 

assembles in Malaysia and subsequently 

ships to the United States are of the 

same class or kind as that subject to the 

Order. Petitioner contends that there is 

no question that the uncovered 

innerspring units that Goldon exports to 

the United States meet the physical 

characteristics that define the scope of 

the order.11 Goldon acknowledged this 

fact in the fourth administrative review 

when it stated: ‘‘{y}es, merchandise as 

stated in the database are the subject 

merchandise that {sic} comprised from 

locally source {sic} material and 

imported material from PRC.’’ 12

B. Completion of Merchandise in a 

Foreign Country 

Petitioner observes that the Order 

clearly indicates that innerspring units 

are assembled from three key 

components: Steel wire coils, helical 

wires, and in certain cases border 

rods.13 Petitioner argues that Goldon 

admitted that it imports the key inputs 

used in the production of innerspring 

units and provided invoices describing 

the components as ‘‘spring mattress 

coils,’’ ‘‘wire,’’ ‘‘steel frame,’’ and ‘‘steel 

strips.’’ 14 Furthermore, Petitioner 

contends that Goldon indicated that 70 

percent of its materials used in the 

production of innerspring units are 

sourced from the PRC, the country with 

respect to which the Order applies, and 

that it ‘‘shipped the completed 

merchandise into the U.S.’’ 15

C. Minor or Insignificant Process 

Under section 781(b)(2) of the Act, the 

Department is required to consider five 

factors to determine whether the process 

of assembly or completion of 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

78794 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 

16See Circumvention Request, at 10. 

17Bonnell coils, the most commonly used type of 

coils in innerspring units, have an hour-glass shape 

which tapers inward from top to center and then 

outward from the center to bottom. Bonnell coils 

are generally the lowest priced units and the type 

of coil generally used in imported innerspring 

units. Continuous coils have entire rows of 

continuous coils formed from a single piece of wire. 

For a more detailed description of the types of 

innerspring coils, see USITC Uncovered 

Innersprings Report at I–8 to I–10. 

18See Circumvention Request, at 10. A somewhat 

more advanced assembly operation may involve 

manual assembly using a wooden or steel jig in 

which the coils are hand-set, and a lacing machine 

is used to feed the helical to join the rows, and then 

the borders are manually clipped to the unit. Id. 

19 Id. 

20 Id. 

21 Id., at 11. 

22 Id. 

23 Id. 

24See Circumvention Request, at 11; see also 

Uncovered Innerspring Units from the People’s 

Republic of China: Affirmative Final Determination 

of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order, 

79 FR 3345 (January 21, 2014) (‘‘Reztec Final 

Determination’’). 

25See Circumvention Inquiry, at 12. 

26 Id. 

27 Id. 

28 Id., at 13. 

29 Id. 

30 Id. There are virtually no additional energy 

costs given that the machines, if utilized, are quite 

basic. The only additional material inputs (besides 

the coils, which represent the single largest cost of 

an innerspring unit) are steel wire for lacing and 

border clips. Id. 

31 Id. 

32 Id., at 14. 

33 Id. 34 Id. 35 Id., at 14–15. 36Petitioner did not analyze or submit evidence 

concerning affiliation under section 781(b)(3)(B) of 

the Act. 

37 Id., at 15. 

38 Id. 

39See Circumvention Inquiry, at 15–16. Petitioner 

states that until 2011, U.S. imports of uncovered 

innerspring units were properly classified and 

entered the United States under harmonized tariff 

schedule (‘‘HTS’’) 9404.29.9010 (‘‘uncovered 

innerspring units’’). In 2011, the HTS classification 

for uncovered innerspring units was refined and 

further broken out to provide a separate ten-digit 

classification for innerspring units used in cribs and 

toddler beds. Thus, HTS 9409.29.9010 was 

eliminated and replaced with 9404.29.9005 

(Uncovered innerspring units: For use in a crib or 

toddler bed) and 9404.29.9011 (Uncovered 

innerspring units: Other). 

merchandise in a foreign country is 

minor or insignificant. Petitioner 

believes that an examination of these 

factors indicates that Goldon’s process 

of assembly and completion of 

innerspring units in Malaysia is not 

significant. 

(1) Level of Investment 

Petitioner states that the process 

employed to assemble innerspring 

components into innerspring units is 

relatively simple and requires only 

limited investment and labor, and that 

the start-up investment costs and the 

barriers to entry into this type of 

assembly operation (i.e., manual or 

semi-automated) are low.16 Petitioner 

asserts that in the most basic, fullymanual operation, coils are assembled 

manually using a wooden or steel jig in 

which the coils (continuous or 

bonnell) 17 are hand-loaded, then handlaced with helical wire and finished by 

clipping the border rods to the unit.18

Petitioner posits that the cost of a new 

wooden (or steel) jig is approximately 

$200–$400.19 Petitioner argues that the 

level of investment would also be low 

if Goldon relies on a semi-automated 

assembly operation where a machine is 

used to assemble the rows of coils.20

(2) Level of Research and Development 

Petitioner is not aware that Goldon 

performs any research and development 

related to the assembly and/or 

production of innerspring units.21

Moreover, Petitioner states that it would 

not expect Goldon to incur any research 

and development expenses related to its 

innerspring assembly operations.22

(3) Nature of the Production Process 

According to Petitioner, the 

manufacturing process for assembling 

innerspring units from imported 

components is relatively simple and 

does not require significant start-up 

costs, sophisticated machinery and 

inputs, or substantial labor.23 This 

process, as described by Goldon, is very 

similar to the process found to be 

insignificant by the Department in the 

prior circumvention inquiry on this 

Order. 24

(4) Extent of Production in the Malaysia 

Petitioner states that Goldon only has 

one facility for the production of 

innerspring units.25 Goldon indicated 

that six to seven workers are involved 

in the assembly of innerspring units, 

with another one or two workers 

devoted to packing.26 Petitioner 

contends that this indicates that the 

portion of Goldon’s production facility 

attributable to assembly operations is 

small.27

(5) Value of Processing in Malaysia as 

Compared to Uncovered Innerspring 

Units Imported Into the United States 

Petitioner asserts that the value of 

assembly processing performed in 

Malaysia represents a small portion of 

the total value of the innerspring units 

imported into the United States.28

Petitioner believes Goldon’s assembly 

operations likely rely on relatively 

unskilled, low wage employees.29 Thus, 

these assembly operations involve 

minimal additional labor costs.30

Petitioner asserts that, by any standard, 

the assembly operations represent an 

insignificant portion of the total value.31

D. Value of Merchandise Produced in 

PRC 

Petitioner argues that the value of the 

components that Goldon imports from 

the PRC for further assembly in 

Malaysia into subject merchandise is a 

significant portion of the total value of 

the innerspring units exported to the 

United States.32 As Petitioner noted 

previously, innerspring coils, helical 

wires, and border rods are the key 

components of an innerspring unit. 

Petitioner explains that they also 

constitute a significant portion of the 

overall costs of an innerspring unit.33

Petitioner does not have access to other 

PRC innerspring unit producer/exporter 

costs. Therefore, it conducted an 

analysis related to the production costs 

of various innerspring unit models at its 

own facility in Guangzhou, PRC. 

Petitioner believes that its operation 

(and costs) in the PRC are representative 

of the operations (and costs) of other 

PRC innerspring unit producers/

exporters, as it is the largest producer of 

innersprings in the PRC.34 According to 

Petitioner’s analysis of its own 

production costs in the PRC, the total 

value of these innerspring components 

compose a significant portion of the 

total value of an innerspring unit.35

E. Additional Factors for Consideration 

Section 781(b)(3) of the Act directs 

the Department to consider additional 

factors in determining whether to 

include merchandise assembled or 

completed in a foreign country within 

the scope of the Order. Petitioner 

believes that an examination of these 

factors supports finding that Goldon’s 

Malaysian exports of innerspring units 

should be within the scope of the 

Order.36

(1) Pattern of Trade 

Goldon has stated that while it was 

originally set up to supply the domestic 

market, in 2011 it changed its business 

strategy to serve the United States.37 As 

described by Goldon, this strategy 

consists of assembling innersprings 

from 70 percent PRC-origin components 

and 30 percent Malaysian components, 

and exporting the assembled 

innerspring units to the United States.38

Based on official U.S. import data, 

Petitioner contends that imports of 

uncovered innerspring units from 

Malaysia have increased dramatically 

since the Order was imposed.39

Petitioner provided a chart that 

illustrated the U.S. annual imports from 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 78795 

40 Id., at 17. 41 Id., at 16. 42 Id., at 17. 43 Id. 

44 Id. 

45 Id. 

46 Id. Petitioner also provided a description of 

Malaysia’s relevant HTS numbers. Id., at Exhibit 7. 

47 Id.; see also Reztec Final Determination, 79 FR 

3345 and accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. Petitioner did not submit any 

Malaysian import statistics regarding imports of 

helical wires and border rods from the PRC. 

48 Id. 49 Id., at 7–17. 

1See Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Cased 

Pencils From the People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 

66909 (December 28, 1994). 

Malaysia under the relevant HTSUS 

subheadings.40 Petitioner states that 

prior to 2009, there were virtually no 

imports of uncovered innerspring units 

from Malaysia to the United States.41

However, according to the chart, subject 

imports from Malaysia to the United 

States have steadily increased: 185,917 

pieces were imported in 2009; 312,317 

pieces were imported in 2010; 344,388 

pieces were imported in 2011; 132,017 

pieces were imported in 2012; and 

52,051 pieces were imported in 2013.42

Petitioner claims that the lower overall 

entry quantities over the last two years 

are due to the previous 

anticircumvention inquiry filed by 

Petitioner in 2012.43 Petitioner notes 

that quantities of imports after 2012, 

while not as high as the immediately 

preceding years, are still significant 

compared to before the Order was in 

place.44

Furthermore, Petitioner contends that 

Malaysia’s official import statistics 

indicated that imports from the PRC of 

one of the key components in 

innerspring units (i.e., coils) have 

increased substantially since the Order 

was imposed.45 Petitioner provided a 

chart of import data related to 

Malaysia’s imports of coils from the PRC 

over the last several years, as well as the 

current year under HTS 7320.99.000 

(other springs and leaves for springs, of 

iron/steel, kilograms (‘‘kgs’’)). This chart 

shows an increase of imported coils 

from 2,995,519 kgs in 2007 to 

11,972,478 kgs in 2011, and a gradual 

decrease to 5,218,789 kgs for the current 

year.46 Again, Petitioner notes that 

imports have somewhat declined 

starting in 2012, which may be due to 

the Department’s determination in the 

previous anticircumvention inquiry 

filed by Petitioner.47 Nevertheless, 

Petitioner contends that imports of coils 

from the PRC remain higher than before 

the Order was in place.48

(2) Increase of Subject Imports From the 

PRC to Malaysia After the Investigation 

Initiation 

Petitioner did not provide any 

evidence regarding an increase in 

subject imports (i.e., completed 

uncovered innerspring units) from the 

PRC to Malaysia after the initiation of 

the investigation. However, as noted 

above, Petitioner provided information 

that imports of one of the key 

components of innerspring units from 

PRC to Malaysia increased significantly 

during this time. 

F. Whether Action Is Appropriate To 

Prevent Evasion of the Order 

Based on the information provided by 

Petitioner, and for the reasons provided 

in the analysis below, the Department 

determines that initiating an 

anticircumvention inquiry is 

appropriate to identify any potential 

evasion of the Order. 

Analysis of the Request 

Based on our analysis of Petitioner’s 

circumvention inquiry request, the 

Department determines that Petitioner 

has satisfied the criteria under section 

781(b)(1) of the Act to warrant an 

initiation of a formal circumvention 

inquiry.49 In accordance with section 

351.225(e) of the Department’s 

regulations, the Department finds that 

the issue of whether a product is 

included within the scope of an order 

cannot be determined based solely upon 

the application and the descriptions of 

the merchandise. Accordingly, the 

Department will notify by mail all 

parties on the Department’s scope 

service list of the initiation of a 

circumvention inquiry. 

In accordance with section 

351.225(l)(2) of the Department’s 

regulations, if the Department issues a 

preliminary affirmative determination, 

we will then instruct U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection to suspend 

liquidation and require a cash deposit of 

estimated duties on the merchandise. 

This circumvention inquiry covers 

Goldon. If, within sufficient time, the 

Department receives a formal request 

from an interested party regarding 

potential circumvention of the Order by 

other Malaysian companies, we will 

consider conducting additional 

inquiries concurrently. 

The Department will establish a 

schedule for questionnaires and 

comments on the issues. In accordance 

with section 351.225(f)(5) of the 

Department’s regulations, the 

Department intends to issue its final 

determination within 300 days of the 

date of publication of this initiation, in 

accordance with section 781(f) of the 

Act. This notice is published in 

accordance with section 351.225(f) of 

the Department’s regulations. 

Dated: December 22, 2014. 

Christian Marsh, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2014–30658 Filed 12–30–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–827] 

Certain Cased Pencils From the 

People’s Republic of China: 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review and Partial 

Rescission; 2012–2013 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Department) is conducting an 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on certain 

cased pencils (pencils) from the 

People’s Republic of China (PRC).1 The 

period of review (POR) is December 1, 

2012, through November 30, 2013. This 

review covers two exporters of subject 

merchandise, Shandong Rongxin Import 

& Export Co., Ltd. (Rongxin) and 

Shanghai Foreign Trade Co., Ltd. 

(SFTC). 

We preliminarily determine that 

Rongxin is not eligible for a separate 

rate, and, thus, remains part of the PRCwide entity. In addition, we are 

rescinding the review with respect to 

SFTC. If these preliminary results are 

adopted in our final results of review, 

we will instruct U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) to assess 

antidumping duties on all appropriate 

entries of subject merchandise during 

the POR. Interested parties are invited to 

comment on these preliminary results. 

DATES: Effective Date: December 31, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mary Kolberg, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce, 14th Street 

and Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–1785. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise subject to the order 

includes certain cased pencils from the 

PRC. The subject merchandise is 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES