[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 228 (Monday, November 25, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59861-59863]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-30044]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-533-809]
Certain Forged Stainless Steel Flanges From India; Preliminary
Results of New Shipper Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of new shipper antidumping duty
administrative reviews.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In response to requests by two manufacturer/exporters, Isibars
Ltd. (Isibars) and Patheja Forgings and Auto Parts Ltd. (Patheja), the
Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting new shipper
administrative reviews of the antidumping duty order on certain forged
stainless steel flanges (flanges) from India. The review covers sales
during the period September 1, 1995 through February 29, 1996. We have
preliminarily determined that Isibars sold subject merchandise at not
less than normal value (NV) during the period of review (POR), and that
Patheja has a dumping margin of 4.80%. Interested parties are invited
to comment on these preliminary results. Parties who submit argument in
this proceeding are requested to submit with the argument (1) a
statement of the issue and (2) a brief summary of the argument.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 25, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Killiam or John Kugelman,
Office of AD/CVD Enforcement, Group III, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482-2704 or 482-0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Applicable Statute and Regulations
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are
references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective
date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless otherwise
indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are to the
current regulations, as amended by the interim regulations published in
the Federal Register on May 11, 1995 (60 FR 25130).
Background
Isibars, by letters dated February 29, April 12, and April 22,
1996, and Patheja, by a letter dated February 28, 1996, each requested
a new shipper review pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and
section 353.22(h) of the Department's interim regulations, which govern
determinations of antidumping duties for new shippers. These provisions
state that, among other requirements, a producer or exporter requesting
a new shipper review must include with its request the date on which
the merchandise was first entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption, or, if it cannot certify as to the date of first entry,
the date on which it first shipped the merchandise for export to the
United States (interim regulations, section 353.22(h)(2)(i)).
Neither respondent was able to provide the shipment date at the
time of their requests for review because the shipments had not yet
occurred. However, both companies did certify that the shipments were
imminent. Based on the information which the respondents provided in
their requests we determined that the requirements cited above were
adequately fulfilled. The respondents later provided the shipment dates
in their questionnaire responses.
On May 6, 1996, the Department published a notice of initiation
these new shipper reviews of Isibars and Patheja (61 FR 20223). The
Department is now conducting these reviews in accordance with section
751 of the Act and section 353.22 of its interim regulations.
Scope of the Reviews
The products covered by this order are certain forged stainless
steel flanges both finished and not finished, generally manufactured to
specification ASTM A-182, and made in alloys such as 304, 304L, 316,
and 316L. The scope includes five general types of flanges. They are
weld neck, used for butt-weld line connection; threaded, used for
threaded line connections; slip-on and lap joint, used with stub-ends/
butt-weld line connections; socket weld, used to fit pipe into a
machined recession; and blind, used to seal off a line. The sizes of
the flanges within the scope range generally from one to six inches;
however, all sizes of the above-described merchandise are included in
the scope. Specifically excluded from the scope of this order are cast
stainless steel flanges. Cast stainless steel flanges generally are
manufactured to specification ASTM A-351. The flanges subject to this
order are currently classifiable under subheadings 7307.21.1000 and
7307.21.5000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS). The HTSUS
[[Page 59862]]
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The
written description of the scope of this order remains dispositive.
The reviews cover two Indian manufacturers/exporters, Isibars and
Patheja, and the period September 1, 1995 through February 29, 1996.
Export Price (EP)
We used EP, in accordance with section 772(a) of the Act, based on
the price from the respondents because the sales were made prior to
importation into the United States, and constructed export price was
not otherwise indicated.
We based date of sale on the date of the purchase order, because
respondents have provided clear evidence that sale terms were agreed to
in writing in the purchase order. Moreover, because respondents
produced the subject merchandise to order, renegotiation of material
terms was unlikely.
In accordance with section 772(c)(2) of the Act, we made
deductions, where appropriate, for movement expenses, which were
comprised of customs brokerage and handling expenses, home market
inland freight, international freight, and insurance. No other
adjustments were claimed or allowed.
Normal Value (NV)
A. Viability
For Isibars, in order to determine whether there was a sufficient
volume of sales in the home market to serve as a viable basis for
calculating NV, we compared Isibars--volume of home market sales of the
foreign like product to the volume of U.S. sales of the subject
merchandise, in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(C) of the Act.
Because Isibars--aggregate volume of home market sales of the foreign
like product was greater than five percent of its aggregate volume of
U.S. sales of the subject merchandise, we determined that the home
market provides a viable basis for calculating NV.
Patheja had no domestic or third country sales of flanges during
the POR. Therefore, in accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the Act, we
used constructed value for comparison with EP.
B. Level of Trade
As set forth in section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act and in the
Statement of Administrative Action (SAA) accompanying the Uruguay Round
Agreements Act, at 829-831, to the extent practicable, the Department
will calculate NV based on sales at the same level of trade (LOT) as
the U.S. sales. Isibars did not request an adjustment for LOT. To
ensure that no such adjustment was necessary, we requested and examined
information on the selling activities associated with each phase of
marketing in each of Isibars's markets; since there were no differences
in such selling activities in either market, and since all sales in
both markets were at a single LOT, we compared sales at this sole LOT.
C. Constructed Value (CV)
For Patheja, in accordance with section 773(e) of the Act, we
calculated CV based on Patheja's cost of materials and fabrication
employed in producing the subject merchandise, selling, general and
administrative expenses (SG&A) incurred in connection with the
production and sale of the foreign like product, credit expenses on
U.S. sales, and U.S. packing costs. We used the costs of materials,
fabrication, SG&A, and profit as reported in the CV portion of
Patheja's questionnaire response. We based Patheja's profits on the
amounts it realized in connection with the production and sale in India
of merchandise in the same general category of products as the subject
merchandise, in accordance with Section 773(e)(1)(B) of the Act. Since
payment had not been made, in calculating credit expenses on Patheja's
U.S. sale, we used the number of days between shipment from the factory
and the date of the supplemental questionnaire response, the latest
date for which we have information on the record concerning the sale in
question. We used the U.S. packing costs reported in the U.S. sales
portion of Patheja's questionnaire response.
D. Price-to-Price Comparisons
For Isibars, for price-to-price comparisons, we based NV on the
prices at which the foreign like products were first sold for
consumption in the home market to an unaffiliated party, in the usual
commercial quantities, in the ordinary course of trade, and at the same
level of trade as the EP, in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B) of
the Act. Isibars made all home market and EP sales of subject
merchandise at the same level of trade.
Pursuant to section 777A(d)(2) of the Act, for Isibars we compared
the EPs of individual U.S. transactions to the average prices of
contemporaneous sales of the foreign like product. We calculated NV
based on FOB factory as reported. There were no packing costs on home
market sales. Prices were reported net of value-added taxes (VAT) and,
therefore, no adjustment for VAT was necessary. We made circumstance-
of-sale adjustments, where appropriate, for differences in credit
expenses. We added U.S. packing expenses to Isibars' home market
prices. No other adjustments were claimed or allowed.
Preliminary Results of the Reviews
As a result of our comparison of EP to NV, we preliminarily
determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Manufacturer/exporter Period percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isibars.................................... 9/1/95-2/29/96 0.00
Patheja.................................... 9/1/95-2/29/96 4.80
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parties to the proceeding may request disclosure within five days
of the date of publication of this notice. Any interested party may
request a hearing within 10 days of publication. Any hearing, if
requested, will be held 34 days after the date of publication, or the
first workday thereafter. Case briefs from interested parties may be
submitted not later than 20 days after the date of publication.
Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be
filed not later than 27 days after the date of publication. Parties who
submit argument in this proceeding are requested to submit with the
argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a brief summary of the
argument. The Department will issue the final results of the new
shipper administrative reviews, including the results of its analysis
of issues raised in any case or rebuttal briefs, within 90 days of
issuance of these preliminary results.
Upon completion of these new shipper reviews, the Department will
issue appraisement instructions directly to the Customs Service. The
results of these reviews shall be the basis for the assessment of
antidumping duties on entries of merchandise sold during the POR and
covered by the determination and for future deposits of estimated
duties.
Furthermore, upon completion of these reviews, the posting of a
bond or security in lieu of a cash deposit, pursuant to section
751(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act and section 353.22(h)(4) of the
Department's interim regulations, will no longer be permitted and,
should the final results yield a margin of dumping, a cash deposit will
be required for each entry of the merchandise. The following deposit
requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of
these new shipper antidumping duty administrative reviews for all
shipments of flanges from India manufactured by Isibars or Patheja,
entered, or withdrawn
[[Page 59863]]
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as
provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for
the reviewed companies will be those established in the final results
of these new shipper administrative reviews; (2) for exporters not
covered in these reviews, but covered in previous reviews or the
original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, the cash deposit
rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the
most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in these
reviews, previous reviews, or the original LTFV investigation, but the
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be that established for the
most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the
cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will
continue to be 162.14 percent, the all others rate established in the
LTFV investigation (59 FR 5994, February 9, 1994).
These requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until
publication of the final results of the next administrative reviews.
This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 to file a certificate regarding the
reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
These new shipper administrative reviews and this notice are in
accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C.
1675(a)(2)(B)) and 19 CFR 353.22(h).
Dated: November 1, 1996.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-30044 Filed 11-22-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
