[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 235 (Thursday, December 7, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62816-62823]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-29889]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 62817]]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-427-801, A-428-801, A-588-804, A-559-801, A-401-801, A-549-801, A-
412-801]
Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and
Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Japan, Singapore, Sweden, Thailand,
and the United Kingdom; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews, Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews,
and Notice of Intent to Revoke Order
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of antidumping duty
administrative reviews, partial termination of administrative reviews,
and notice of intent to revoke order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In response to requests from interested parties, the
Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting administrative
reviews of the antidumping duty orders on antifriction bearings (other
than tapered roller bearings) and parts thereof from France, Germany,
Japan, Singapore, Sweden, Thailand, and the United Kingdom. The classes
or kinds of merchandise covered by these orders are ball bearings,
cylindrical roller bearings, and spherical plain bearings. The reviews
cover 64 manufacturers/exporters. The period of review (the POR) is May
1, 1993, through April 30, 1994. Although we initiated reviews for four
other manufacturers/exporters, we are terminating the reviews because
the requests for these reviews were withdrawn in a timely manner. We
intend to terminate the reviews for five other exporters because the
Department has preliminarily determined that these exporters are not an
appropriate subject of review, as discussed below. We also intend to
revoke the order with respect to ball bearings from Thailand based on
our preliminary determination that the only known producer of ball
bearings, NMB/Pelmec, has had a three-year period of no sales at less
than foreign market value (FMV).
Finally, we have preliminarily determined that sales have been made
below FMV by various companies subject to these reviews. If these
preliminary results are adopted in our final results of the
administrative review, we will instruct U.S. Customs to assess
antidumping duties equal to the difference between the United States
price (USP) and the FMV. We invite interested parties to comment on
these preliminary results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 7, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The appropriate case analyst, for the
various respondent firms listed below, at the Office of Antidumping
Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4733.
France
Andrea Chu (AVIAC, SNFA, SNR), Davina Hashmi (INA), Hermes Pinilla
(Technofan), Matthew Rosenbaum (Franke & Heydrich, Hoesch Rothe Erde,
Rollix Defontaine, SKF), or Michael Rill.
Germany
Kris Campbell (Cross-Trade, Delta, EXTA Aussenhandel), Chip Hayes
(NTN Kugellagerfabrik), Andrea Chu (SNR), Davina Hashmi (INA), Hermes
Pinilla (Hepa Walzlager, Schaumloffel), Matthew Rosenbaum (Fichtel &
Sachs, Franke & Heydrich, Hoesch Rothe Erde, Rollix Defontaine, SKF),
Thomas Schauer (FAG), Michael Rill, or Richard Rimlinger.
Japan
J. David Dirstine (Koyo, NSK, ITOCHU, Godo Kogyo, Santest Co.),
Joseph Fargo (Naniwa Kogyo, Nankai Seiko, TOK Bearing Co.), Chip Hayes
(Mitsubishi, Nachi, NTN), Lyn Johnson (Takeshita, Marubeni, I&OC, Kongo
Colmet, Sanken Trading, Taikoyo Sangyo), Michael Panfeld (IKS, Nissho-
Iwai, NPBS, Origin Electric), Michael Rausher (Mihasi, Inc., Sanko Co.,
Tomen), Mark Ross (Asahi Seiko, Minamiguchi, Nichimen, Nichinan Sangyo,
Nihon K.J., Shima Trading, Sumitomo, Toei Buhin), Thomas Schauer
(Matsuo Bearing Co., Nippon Thompson Co., Phoenix International, THK
Co., Tsubakimoto PP), or Richard Rimlinger.
Singapore
Michael Rausher (NMB/Pelmec) or Richard Rimlinger.
Sweden
Matthew Rosenbaum (SKF) or Michael Rill.
Thailand
Michael Rausher (NMB/Pelmec) or Richard Rimlinger.
United Kingdom
Hermes Pinilla (Barden/FAG, Normalair-Garrett, NSK/RHP), or Michael
Rill.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Applicable Statute and Regulations
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute and to the
Department's regulations are references to the provisions as they
existed on December 31, 1994.
Background
On May 15, 1989, the Department published in the Federal Register
(54 FR 20909) the antidumping duty orders on ball bearings (BBs),
cylindrical roller bearings (CRBs), and spherical plain bearings (SPBs)
and parts thereof from France, Germany, Japan, Singapore, Sweden,
Thailand, and the United Kingdom. Specifically, these orders cover BBs,
CRBs, and SPBs from France, Germany, and Japan; BBs and CRBs from
Sweden and the U.K.; and BBs from Singapore and Thailand. On June 22,
1994, and July 15, 1994, in accordance with 19 C.F.R. 353.22(c), we
initiated administrative reviews of those orders for the period May 1,
1993, through April 30, 1994 (59 FR 32180 and 59 FR 36160). The
Department is now conducting these administrative reviews in accordance
with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Tariff
Act).
Scope of Reviews
The products covered by these reviews are antifriction bearings
(other than tapered roller bearings) and parts thereof (AFBs), and
constitute the following classes or kinds of merchandise:
1. Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof: These products include all
antifriction bearings that employ balls as the rolling element. Imports
of these products are classified under the following categories:
antifriction balls, ball bearings with integral shafts, ball bearings
(including radial ball bearings) and parts thereof, and housed or
mounted ball bearing units and parts thereof.
Imports of these products are classified under the following
Harmonized Tariff Schedules (HTS) subheadings: 3926.90.45, 4016.93.00,
4016.93.10, 4016.93.50, 6909.19.5010, 8431.20.00, 8431.39.0010,
8482.10.10, 8482.10.50, 8482.80.00, 8482.91.00, 8482.99.05, 8482.99.10,
8482.99.35, 8482.99.6590, 8482.99.70, 8483.20.40, 8483.20.80,
8483.50.8040, 8483.50.90, 8483.90.20, 8483.90.30, 8483.90.70,
8708.50.50, 8708.60.50, 8708.60.80, 8708.70.6060, 8708.70.8050,
8708.93.30, 8708.93.5000, 8708.93.6000, 8708.93.75, 8708.99.06,
8708.99.31, 8708.99.4960, 8708.99.50, 8708.99.5800, 8708.99.8080,
8803.10.00, 8803.20.00, 8803.30.00, 8803.90.30, 8803.90.90.
2. Cylindrical Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof: These products
include all AFBs that employ cylindrical rollers as the rolling
element. Imports of these
[[Page 62818]]
products are classified under the following categories: antifriction
rollers, all cylindrical roller bearings (including split cylindrical
roller bearings) and parts thereof, and housed or mounted cylindrical
roller bearing units and parts thereof.
Imports of these products are classified under the following HTS
subheadings: 3926.90.45, 4016.93.00, 4016.93.10, 4016.93.50,
6909.19.5010, 8431.20.00, 8431.39.0010, 8482.40.00, 8482.50.00,
8482.80.00, 8482.91.00, 8482.99.25, 8482.99.35, 8482.99.6530,
8482.99.6560, 8482.99.6590, 8482.99.70, 8483.20.40, 8483.20.80,
8483.50.8040, 8483.90.20, 8483.90.30, 8483.90.70, 8708.50.50,
8708.60.50, 8708.93.5000, 8708.99.4000, 8708.99.4960, 8708.99.50,
8708.99.8080, 8803.10.00, 8803.20.00, 8803.30.00, 8803.90.30,
8803.90.90.
3. Spherical Plain Bearings and Parts Thereof: These products
include all spherical plain bearings that employ a spherically shaped
sliding element.
Imports of these products are classified under the following HTS
subheadings: 3926.90.45, 4016.93.00, 4016.93.10, 4016.93.50,
6909.50.10, 8483.30.80, 8483.90.30, 8485.90.00, 8708.93.5000,
8708.99.50, 8803.10.00, 8803.20.00, 8803.30.00, 8803.90.30, 8803.90.90.
The size or precision grade of a bearing does not influence whether
the bearing is covered by the order. For a further discussion of the
scope of the orders being reviewed, including recent scope
determinations, see Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller
Bearings) and Parts Thereof from France, et al.; Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Partial Termination of
Administrative Reviews, and Revocation in Part of Antidumping Duty
Orders, 60 FR 10900 (February 28, 1995). The HTS item numbers are
provided for convenience and Customs purposes. The written descriptions
remain dispositive.
These reviews cover the following firms and classes or kinds of
merchandise:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of firm Class or kind
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRANCE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AVIAC.................................... All.
Franke & Heydrich KG..................... BBs.
Hoesch Rothe Erde AG..................... BBs.
INA Roulements S.A....................... All.
Rollix Defontaine, S.A................... BBs.
SKF (including all relevant affiliates).. All.
SNFA..................................... BBs, CRBs.
Societe Nouvelle Roulements (SNR)........ BBs, CRBs.
TECNOFAN................................. All.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GERMANY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross-Trade GmbH......................... All.
Delta Export GmbH........................ All.
EXTA Aussenhandel GmbH................... All.
FAG Kugelfischer Georg Schaefer KGaA All.
(FAG).
Fichtel & Sachs AG....................... BBs.
Franke & Heydrich KG..................... BBs.
Hepa Walzlager GmbH...................... All.
Hoesch Rothe Erde AG..................... BBs.
INA Walzlager Schaeffler KG (INA)........ All.
NTN Kugellagerfabrik (Deutschland) GmbH BBs.
(NTN).
Rollix & Defontaine, S.A................. BBs.
Schaumloffel Technia GmbH................ All.
SKF GmbH................................. All.
SNR Roulements........................... BBs, CRBs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAPAN
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asahi Seiko.............................. All.
Godo Kogyo Co. Ltd....................... All.
I & OC of Japan Co. Ltd.................. All.
ITOCHU................................... All.
Izumoto Seiko Co., Ltd................... All.
Kongo Colmet Mfg. Co., Ltd............... All.
Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd...................... All.
Marubeni................................. All.
Matsuo Bearing Co., Ltd.................. All.
Mihasi, Inc.............................. All.
Minamiguchi Bearing Mfg. Co.............. All.
Nachi-Fujikoshi Corp..................... BBs, CRBs.
Naniwa Kogyo Co., Ltd.................... All.
Nankai Seiko Co., Ltd.................... All.
Nichinan Sangyo Co., Ltd................. All.
Nichimen................................. All.
Nihon K.J................................ All.
Nippon Pillow Block Sales Company, Ltd BBs.
(NPBS).
NSK Ltd (formerly Nippon Seiko K.K.)..... All.
Nippon Thompson Co., Ltd................. All.
Nissho-Iwai.............................. All.
NTN Corp................................. All.
Origin Electric Co., Ltd................. All.
Sanken Trading Co., Ltd.................. All.
Sanko Co., Ltd........................... All.
Santest Co., Ltd......................... All.
Taikoyo Sangyo Co., Ltd.................. All.
Takeshita Seiko Co., Ltd................. BBs.
THK Co., Ltd............................. All.
Toei Buhin Co., Ltd...................... All.
TOK Bearing Co., Ltd..................... All.
Tomen.................................... All.
Tsubakimoto Precision Products Co., Ltd. BBs.
(Tsubakimoto).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SINGAPORE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMB Singapore Ltd./Pelmec Ind. (Pte.) BBs.
Ltd. (NMB/Pelmec).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SWEEDEN
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SKF Sverige BBs,......................... CRBs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
THAILAND
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMB Thai Ltd./Pelmec Thai Ltd. (NMB/ BBs.
Pelmec).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNITED KINGDOM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barden Corp.............................. BBs, CRBs.
FAG (U.K.) Ltd........................... BBs, CRBs.
NSK Bearings Europe, Ltd./RHP Bearings... BBs, CRBs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsequent to the publication of our initiation notice, we received
timely withdrawals of all review requests for ABG-SEMCA (France), BMW
(Germany), Fujino Iron Works (Japan) and Normalair-Garrett (U.K.), and
for Tsubakimoto Precision Products Co., Ltd. (Japan) with respect to
CRBs and SPBs only. Because there were no other requests for review of
these companies from any other interested parties, we are terminating
the reviews with respect to these companies in accordance with 19 CFR
353.22(a)(5).
In addition, we initiated reviews for Mitsubishi, Mitsui, Phoenix
International, Shima Trading and Sumitomo with respect to subject
merchandise from Japan. Subsequent to initiation, however, all five
firms informed us that although they are resellers of Japanese-made
bearings, all of their suppliers had knowledge at the time of sale that
the merchandise was destined for the United States. Consequently, these
firms are not resellers as defined in 19 CFR 353.2(s) because their
sales cannot be used to calculate the U.S. price. Therefore, we are
preliminarily terminating the reviews with respect to Mitsubishi,
Mitsui, Phoenix International, Shima Trading and Sumitomo.
Best Information Available
In accordance with section 776(c) of the Tariff Act, we have
preliminarily determined that the use of the best information available
(BIA) is appropriate for certain firms. Section 353.37(b) of our
regulations provides that we may take into account whether a party
refuses to provide information in determining what is the best
information available. For purposes of these reviews and in accordance
with our practice, we have used the most adverse BIA--generally the
highest rate for any company for the class or kind of merchandise from
the same country from this or any prior segment of the proceeding,
including the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation--whenever a
company refused to cooperate with the Department or otherwise
significantly impeded the proceeding. When a
[[Page 62819]]
company substantially cooperated with our requests for information, but
failed to provide all information requested in a timely manner or in
the form requested, we used as BIA the higher of (1) the highest rate
(including the ``all others'' rate) ever applicable to the firm for the
same class or kind of merchandise from the same country from either the
LTFV investigation or a prior administrative review; or (2) the highest
calculated rate in this review for any firm for the class or kind of
merchandise from the same country (see Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Reviews and Revocation in Part of an Antidumping
Duty Order, 58 FR 39728 (July 26, 1993), and Empresa Nacional
Siderurgica v. United States, Slip Op. 95-33 (CIT March 6, 1995)).
Cross-Trade GmbH, INA France, Naniwa Kogyo, Nichimen, Nissho Iwai,
Origin Electric, Sanken Trading, SNFA, Taikoyo Sangyo, THK Co., TOK
Bearing Co., and Tomen failed to respond to the Department's
questionnaire. Therefore, we have applied first-tier BIA, which is the
highest rate ever found for each relevant class or kind of merchandise
and country of origin.
Furthermore, Asahi Seiko provided only invoices with respect to
SPBs and Nippon Thompson failed to provide information on its sales of
CRBs. Therefore, both firms received the highest rate ever found for
these classes or kinds of merchandise from Japan.
Minamiguchi provided a response to Section A of the Department's
questionnaire. However, the company was notified through a deficiency
letter that the questionnaire response was improperly filed. In
response, Minamiguchi requested Japanese translations of all documents
that the Department served it. That request was rejected and the
company did not make any further attempts to respond to the
Department's deficiency letter, nor did the company respond to any
other sections of the Department's questionnaire. Therefore, we
determined them to be uncooperative and have applied first-tier BIA,
which is the highest rate ever found for each relevant class or kind of
merchandise from Japan (for more information on the use of BIA for
Japanese companies, see the November 29, 1995, Decision memo).
Finally, NPBS and INA Germany cooperated fully with our requests
for information and agreed to undergo verification. However, at
verification, we discovered that both firms had failed to report
relevant sales and expense data or could not adequately substantiate
important information.
With respect to NPBS, the Department was not satisfied with the
completeness of the home market database. Specifically, NPBS failed to
report certain sales in its home market sales database, including sales
to its largest customer for a 12-month period. Also, NPBS failed to
properly report quantity adjustments for selected sales. Moreover, the
Department was not satisfied with the completeness of the U.S.
database. Specifically, NPBS failed to explain why it did not include
certain sales in its U.S. sales database. There were additional
discrepancies regarding adjustments to sales price. Specifically, NPBS
failed to include all loans in its calculation of short-term interest
rate in the home market. Finally, NPBS failed to report several
categories of freight expenses related to sales in the United States
(Verification reports on NPBS, March 22, 1995, and March 24, 1995).
With respect to INA, the Department was not satisfied that INA had
reported completely and accurately all of its U.S. sales. At
verification, INA was not able to reconcile its financial statements to
the response, nor was INA able to support the accuracy of sales of
subject merchandise reported during the POR (Verification Report on INA
Bearing Company, June 15, 1995). Furthermore, INA could not explain why
a sale of subject merchandise was not reported in its response. While
the Department was not able to verify that INA reported all of its
sales of subject merchandise, INA did cooperate with the Department's
requests for information and agreed to undergo verification. As a
result, the Department is assigning a second-tier BIA rate to INA (Use
of Best Information Available memo, May 22, 1995).
Since both firms attempted to cooperate, we have applied second-
tier BIA, which is their highest previous rates, in this case the ``all
others'' rate from the LTFV investigation for NPBS (BBs) and INA
Germany (CRBs). For BBs for INA Germany, the highest rate ever
calculated was for the second review (see Antifriction Bearings (Other
Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France, et al.;
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 57 FR 28360
(June 24, 1992)).
Intent To Revoke
NMB/Pelmec submitted a request, in accordance with 19 C.F.R.
353.25(b), to revoke the order covering ball bearings from Thailand
with respect to NMB/Pelmec's sales of this merchandise.
In accordance with 19 C.F.R. 353.25(a)(2)(iii), this request was
accompanied by certifications from the firm that it had not sold the
relevant class or kind of merchandise at less than FMV for a three-year
period including this review period, and would not do so in the future.
NMB/Pelmec also agreed to its immediate reinstatement in the relevant
antidumping order, as long as any firm is subject to this order, if the
Department concludes under 19 C.F.R. 353.22(f) that, subsequent to
revocation, it sold the subject merchandise at less than FMV.
In the two prior reviews of this order, we determined that NMB/
Pelmec did not sell BBs from Thailand at less than FMV. The Department
conducted a verification of NMB/Pelmec's response for this period of
review. In this review, we preliminarily determine that NMB/Pelmec has
not sold BBs at less than FMV, which will satisfy the three-year period
of no sales at less than FMV. Therefore, we intend to revoke the order
with respect BBs from Thailand, based on our preliminary determination
that NMB/Pelmec is the only known producer of BBs, if these preliminary
findings are affirmed in our final results.
United States Price
In calculating United States price (USP), the Department used
purchase price (PP) or exporter's sales price (ESP), as defined in
section 772 of the Tariff Act, as appropriate.
Due to the extremely large number of transactions that occurred
during the POR and the resulting administrative burden involved in
calculating individual margins for all of these transactions, we
sampled sales to calculate USP, in accordance with section 777A of the
Tariff Act. When a firm made more than 2,000 ESP sales transactions to
the United States for a particular class or kind of merchandise, we
reviewed ESP sales which occurred during sample weeks. We selected one
week from each two-month period in the review period, for a total of
six weeks, and analyzed each transaction made in those six weeks. The
sample weeks included June 27-July 3, 1993, July 4-10, 1993, October
10-16, 1993, November 7-13, 1993, February 13-19, 1994, and April 24-
30, 1994. We reviewed all PP sales transactions during the POR because
there were few PP sales.
USP was based on the packed f.o.b., c.i.f., or delivered price to
unrelated purchasers in, or for exportation to, the United States. We
made deductions, as appropriate, from PP and ESP for movement expenses,
discounts, and rebates.
We made additional deductions from ESP for direct selling expenses,
indirect selling expenses, and repacking in the United States.
[[Page 62820]]
In light of the Federal Circuit's decision in Federal Mogul v.
United States, CAFC No. 94-1097, the Department has changed its
treatment of home market consumption taxes. Where merchandise exported
to the United States is exempt from the consumption tax, the Department
will add to the U.S. price the absolute amount of such taxes charged on
the comparison sales in the home market. This is the same methodology
that the Department adopted following the decision of the Federal
Circuit in Zenith v. United States, 988 F. 2d 1573, 1582 (1993), and
which was suggested by that court in footnote 4 of its decision. The
Court of International Trade (CIT) overturned this methodology in
Federal Mogul v. United States, 834 F. Supp. 1391 (1993), and the
Department acquiesced in the CIT's decision. The Department then
followed the CIT's preferred methodology, which was to calculate the
tax to be added to U.S. price by multiplying the adjusted U.S. price by
the foreign market tax rate; the Department made adjustments to this
amount so that the tax adjustment would not alter a ``zero'' pre-tax
dumping assessment.
The foreign exporters in the Federal Mogul case, however, appealed
that decision to the Federal Circuit, which reversed the CIT and held
that the statute did not preclude the Department from using the
``Zenith footnote 4'' methodology to calculate tax-neutral dumping
assessments (i.e., assessments that are unaffected by the existence or
amount of home market consumption taxes). Moreover, the Federal Circuit
recognized that certain international agreements of the United States,
in particular the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the
Tokyo Round Antidumping Code, required the calculation of tax-neutral
dumping assessments. The Federal Circuit remanded the case to the CIT
with instructions to direct the Department to determine which tax
methodology it will employ.
The Department has determined that the ``Zenith footnote 4''
methodology should be used. First, as the Department has explained in
numerous administrative determinations and court filings over the past
decade, and as the Federal Circuit has now recognized, Article VI of
the GATT and Article 2 of the Tokyo Round Antidumping Code required
that dumping assessments be tax-neutral. This requirement continues
under the new Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Second, the Uruguay Round Agreements
Act (URAA) explicitly amended the antidumping law to remove consumption
taxes from the home market price and to eliminate the addition of taxes
to U.S. price, so that no consumption tax is included in the price in
either market. The Statement of Administrative Action (p. 159)
explicitly states that this change was intended to result in tax
neutrality.
While the ``Zenith footnote 4'' methodology is slightly different
from the URAA methodology, in that section 772(d)(1)(C) of the pre-URAA
law required that the tax be added to U.S. price rather than subtracted
from home market price, it does result in tax-neutral duty assessments.
In sum, the Department has elected to treat consumption taxes in a
manner consistent with its longstanding policy of tax-neutrality and
with the GATT.
With respect to subject merchandise to which value was added in the
United States prior to sale to unrelated U.S. customers, e.g., parts of
bearings that were imported and further processed into finished
bearings by U.S. affiliates of foreign exporters, we deducted any
increased value in accordance with section 772(e)(3) of the Tariff Act.
Those bearings which are otherwise subject to the order that are
imported into the United States and incorporated into nonbearing
products by or for the exporter, and which collectively comprise less
than one percent of the value of the finished products sold to
unrelated customers in the United States are not subject to the
assessment of antidumping duties (see Antifriction Bearings (Other Than
Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof from the Federal Republic of
Germany; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 56 FR
31694 (July 11, 1991) (AFBs I)). In Roller Chain, Other Than Bicycle,
from Japan 48 FR 51801 (November 14, 1983), roller chain, which was
subject to an antidumping duty finding, was imported by a related party
and incorporated into finished motorcycles. The finished motorcycles
were the first products sold by the exporter to unrelated purchasers in
the United States. Because the roller chain did not constitute a
significant percentage of the value of the completed product, the
Department found that a USP could not reasonably be determined for the
roller chain. The Department, therefore, did not assess antidumping
duties on these transactions. We have applied this same principle to
these reviews.
Foreign Market Value
The home markets were viable for all companies and all classes or
kinds of merchandise pursuant to 19 C.F.R. 353.48. The Department used
home market prices or constructed value (CV), as defined in section 773
of the Tariff Act, as appropriate, to calculate foreign market value
(FMV).
Due to the extremely large number of transactions that occurred
during the POR and the resulting administrative burden involved in
examining all of these transactions, we sampled sales to calculate FMV,
in accordance with section 777A of the Tariff Act. When a firm had more
than 2,000 home market sales transactions for a particular class or
kind of merchandise, we used sales from sample months that corresponded
to the sample weeks selected for U.S. sales sampling plus one
contemporaneous month prior to the POR and one following the POR. The
sample months included April, June, July, October, and November of
1993, and February, April, and May of 1994.
In general, the Department relies on monthly weighted-average
prices in the calculation of FMV in administrative reviews. Because of
the significant volume of home market sales involved in these reviews,
we examined whether it was appropriate to average, in accordance with
section 777A of the Tariff Act, all of each respondent's home market
sales on an annual basis. In this case, the use of POR weighted-average
prices results in significant time and resource savings for the
Department. To determine whether a POR weighted-average price was
representative of the transactions under consideration, we performed a
three-step test.
We first compared each monthly weighted-average home market price
for each model with the weighted-average POR price of that model. We
calculated the proportion of each model's sales whose POR weighted-
average price did not vary meaningfully (i.e., was within plus or minus
10 percent) from the monthly weighted-average prices. We did this for
each model within each class or kind of merchandise. We then compared
the volume of sales of all models within each class or kind of
merchandise whose POR weighted-average price did not vary meaningfully
from the monthly weighted-average price with the total volume of sales
of that class or kind of merchandise. If the POR weighted-average price
of at least 90 percent of sales in each class or kind of merchandise
did not vary meaningfully from the monthly weighted-average price, we
considered the POR weighted-average prices to be representative of the
transactions under consideration. Finally, we tested whether there was
any correlation between fluctuations in price and time
[[Page 62821]]
for the home market sales. Where the absolute value of the correlation
coefficient was less than 0.05 (where a coefficient approaching 1.0
means a direct relation between price and time, i.e., that prices
consistently rise from month to month, and a coefficient approaching
zero means no relation between prices and time), we concluded that
there was no significant relation between price and time. We calculated
a weighted-average POR FMV only for those classes or kinds that
satisfied our three-step test for the factors of price, volume, and
time.
We compared U.S. sales with sales of such or similar merchandise in
the home market. We considered all non-identical products within a
bearing family to be equally similar. As defined in the questionnaire,
a bearing family consists of all bearings within a class or kind of
merchandise that are the same in the following physical
characteristics: load direction, bearing design, number of rows of
rolling elements, precision rating, dynamic load rating, outer
diameter, inner diameter, and width.
Home market prices were based on the packed, ex-factory or
delivered prices to related or unrelated purchasers in the home market.
Where applicable, we made adjustments for movement expenses,
differences in cost attributable to differences in physical
characteristics of the merchandise pursuant to 773(a)(4)(C) of the
Tariff Act, and differences in packing. We also made adjustments for
differences in circumstances of sale in accordance with 19 CFR 353.56.
For comparisons to PP sales, we deducted home market direct selling
expenses and added U.S. direct selling expenses. For comparisons to ESP
sales, we deducted home market direct selling expenses. We also made
adjustments, where applicable, for home market indirect selling
expenses to offset U.S. commissions in PP and ESP calculations and to
offset U.S. indirect selling expenses deducted in ESP calculations, but
not exceeding the amount of the indirect U.S. expenses. For comparisons
to both ESP and PP sales, we adjusted FMV for taxes consistent with our
change in practice as stated above.
We used sales to related customers only where we determined such
sales were made at arm's-length prices, i.e., at prices comparable to
prices at which the firm sold identical merchandise to unrelated
customers.
Where we found home market sales below the cost of production in
prior administrative reviews, we concluded that reasonable grounds
exist to believe or suspect that home market sales during the POR were
made at prices below the cost of production, and we initiated cost
investigations.
In accordance with section 773(b) of the Tariff Act, in determining
whether to disregard home market sales made at prices below the cost of
production, we examined whether such sales were made in substantial
quantities over an extended period of time. When less than 10 percent
of the home market sales of a particular model were at prices below the
cost of production, we found that there were not substantial quantities
of that model sold below cost and did not disregard any sales of that
model. When 10 percent or more, but not more than 90 percent, of the
home market sales of a particular model were determined to be below
cost, we determined that substantial quantities of that model were sold
below cost and excluded the below-cost home market sales from our
calculation of FMV, provided that these below-cost sales were made over
an extended period of time. When more than 90 percent of the home
market sales of a particular model were made below cost over an
extended period of time, we disregarded all home market sales of that
model from our calculation of FMV and used CV (see Polyethylene
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from Korea, 56 FR 16306 (1991)).
To determine if sales below cost had been made over an extended
period of time, we compared the number of months in which sales below
cost had occurred for a particular model to the number of months in
which the model was sold. If the model was sold in three or fewer
months, we did not find that below-cost sales were made over an
extended period of time unless there were sales below cost of that
model in each month. If a model was sold in more than three months, we
did not find that below-cost sales were made over an extended period of
time unless there were sales below cost in at least three of the months
in which the model was sold (see Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews; 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,
58 FR 64729 (December 9, 1993)).
Since none of the respondents has submitted information indicating
that any of its sales below cost were at prices which would have
permitted ``recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time in
the normal course of trade'' within the meaning of section 773(b)(2) of
the Tariff Act, we were unable to conclude that the costs of production
of such sales were recovered within a reasonable period of time. As a
result, we disregarded below-cost sales when the conditions described
above were met.
In accordance with sections 773(a)(1) and 773(b)(2) of the Tariff
Act, we used CV as the basis for FMV when there were no usable sales of
such or similar merchandise for comparison.
We calculated CV in accordance with section 773(e) of the Tariff
Act. We included the cost of materials, fabrication, general expenses,
profit, and packing. To calculate CV we used: (1) Actual general
expenses or the statutory minimum of 10 percent of materials and
fabrication, whichever was greater; (2) actual profit or the statutory
minimum of 8 percent of materials, fabrication costs and general
expenses, whichever was greater; and (3) packing costs for merchandise
exported to the United States. Where appropriate, we made adjustments
to CV in accordance with 19 C.F.R. 353.56 for differences in
circumstances of sale. For comparisons to PP sales, we deducted home
market direct selling expenses and added U.S. direct selling expenses.
For comparisons to ESP sales, we deducted home market direct selling
expenses. We also made adjustments, where applicable, for home market
indirect selling expenses to offset U.S. commissions in PP and ESP
calculations. For comparisons involving ESP transactions, we made
further deductions from CV for indirect selling expenses in the home
market, capped by the indirect selling expenses incurred on ESP sales
in accordance with 19 C.F.R. 353.56(b)(2).
Preliminary Results of Reviews
As a result of our reviews, we preliminarily determine the
weighted-average dumping margins (in percent) for the period May 1,
1993, through April 30, 1994 to be:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Company BBs CRBs SPBs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRANCE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AVIAC....................................... 5.18 (\2\) (\2\)
Franke & Heydrich........................... \1\66.42 (\3\) (\3\)
Hoesch Rothe Erde........................... (\2\) (\3\) (\3\)
INA......................................... 66.42 18.37 42.79
Rollix Defontaine........................... (\2\) (\3\) (\3\)
SKF......................................... 3.77 (\2\) 19.33
SNFA........................................ 66.42 18.37 (\3\)
SNR......................................... 0.73 2.08 (\3\)
TECNOFAN.................................... 14.59 (\2\) (\2\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GERMANY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross-Trade GmbH............................ 132.25 76.27 118.98
Delta Export GmbH........................... (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
[[Page 62822]]
EXTA Aussenhandel GmbH...................... 68.89 55.65 114.52
FAG......................................... 12.47 10.79 2.09
Fichtel & Sachs............................. 19.60 (\3\) (\3\)
Franke & Heydrich........................... \1\132.2
5 (\3\) (\3\)
Hepa Walzlager GmbH......................... (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
Hoesch Rothe Erde........................... (\2\) (\3\) (\3\)
INA......................................... 31.29 52.43 (\2\)
NTN......................................... 12.57 (\3\) (\3\)
Rollix & Defontaine......................... (\2\) (\3\) (\3\)
Schaumloffel Technik GmbH................... (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
SKF......................................... 38.18 16.61 16.03
SNR......................................... 4.44 6.05 (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAPAN
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asahi Seiko................................. 1.60 (\2\) 92.00
Godo Kogyo.................................. (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
I & OC...................................... (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
ITOCHU...................................... (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
Izumoto Seiko............................... 2.28 (\2\) (\2\)
Kongo Colmet................................ (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
Koyo Seiko.................................. 14.89 6.53 \1\0.00
Marubeni.................................... (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
Matsuo Bearing.............................. (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
Mihasi...................................... (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
Minamiguchi Bearing......................... 106.61 51.82 92.00
Nachi-Fujikoshi............................. 13.79 9.72 (\3\)
Naniwa Kogyo................................ 106.61 51.82 92.00
Nankai Seiko................................ 18.46 (\2\) (\2\)
Nichinan Sangyo............................. (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
Nichimen.................................... 106.61 51.82 92.00
Nihon K.J................................... (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
NPBS........................................ 45.83 (\3\) (\3\)
NSK Ltd..................................... 20.39 16.27 (\2\)
Nippon Thompson............................. 10.16 51.82 59.63
Nissho-Iwai................................. 106.61 51.82 92.00
NTN......................................... 13.69 12.78 35.43
Origin Electric............................. 106.61 51.82 92.00
Sanken Trading.............................. 106.61 51.82 92.00
Sanko....................................... (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
Santest..................................... (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
Taikoyo Sangyo.............................. 106.61 51.82 92.00
Takeshita Seiko............................. 0.89 (\3\) (\3\)
THK......................................... 106.61 51.82 92.00
Toei Buhin.................................. (\2\) (\2\) (\2\)
TOK Bearing................................. 106.61 51.82 92.00
Tomen....................................... 106.61 51.82 92.00
Tsubakimoto................................. 7.77 (\3\) (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SINGAPORE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMB/Pelmec.................................. 4.32 (\3\) (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SWEDEN
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SKF......................................... 33.74 24.51 (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
THAILAND
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMB/Pelmec.................................. 0.18 (\3\) (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNITED KINGDOM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barden/FAG.................................. 1.49 \1\8.22 (\3\)
NSK/RHP..................................... 17.26 19.36 (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\No shipments or sales subject to this review. Rate is from the last
relevant segment of the proceeding in which the firm had shipments/
sales.
\2\No shipments or sales subject to this review. The firm has no
individual rate from any segment of this proceeding.
\3\No review requested.
Parties to this proceeding may request disclosure within 5 days of
the date of publication of this notice. Any interested party may
request a hearing within 10 days of the date of publication of this
notice. A general issues hearing, if requested, and any hearings
regarding issues related solely to specific countries, if requested,
will be held in accordance with the following schedule and at the
indicated locations in the main Commerce building:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Time Room No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General issues................ Jan. 22, 1996.... 10 a.m..... 1412
Thailand...................... Jan. 23, 1996.... 10 a.m..... 1412
Singapore..................... Jan. 23, 1996.... 10 a.m..... 1412
Germany....................... Jan. 23, 1996.... 1 p.m...... 1412
Japan......................... Jan. 24, 1996.... 10 a.m..... 1412
United Kingdom................ Jan. 24, 1996.... 1 p.m...... 1412
France........................ Jan. 25 1996..... 10 a.m..... 1412
Sweden........................ Jan. 25, 1996.... 1 p.m...... 1412
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issues raised in hearings will be limited to those raised in the
respective briefs or written comments, and rebuttal briefs or rebuttals
to written comments. Briefs or written comments from interested
parties, and rebuttal briefs or rebuttals to written comments, limited
to the issues raised in the respective case briefs and comments, may be
submitted not later than the dates shown below for general issues and
the respective country-specific cases. The Department will subsequently
publish the final results of these administrative reviews, including
the results of its analysis of issues raised in any such written
comments or hearings.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Briefs/comments
Case due Rebuttals due
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Issues.................. Jan. 8, 1996...... Jan. 15, 1996.
Thailand........................ Jan. 9, 1996...... Jan. 17, 1996.
Singapore....................... Jan. 9, 1996...... Jan. 17, 1996.
Germany......................... Jan. 9, 1996...... Jan. 17, 1996.
Japan........................... Jan. 10, 1996..... Jan. 18, 1996.
U.K............................. Jan. 10, 1996..... Jan. 18, 1996.
France.......................... Jan. 11, 1996..... Jan. 19, 1996.
Sweden.......................... Jan. 11, 1996..... Jan. 19, 1996.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department shall determine, and the Customs Service shall
assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Because sampling
prevents calculation of duties on an entry-by-entry basis, we will
calculate an importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rate for each
class or kind of merchandise based on the ratio of the total value of
antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales made during the
POR to the total customs value of the sales used to calculate those
duties. This rate will be assessed uniformly on all entries of that
particular importer made during the POR. (This is equivalent to
dividing the total value of antidumping duties, which are calculated by
taking the difference between statutory FMV and statutory USP, by the
total statutory USP value of the sales compared, and adjusting the
result by the average difference between USP and customs value for all
merchandise examined during the POR.)
In some cases, such as PP situations, the respondent does not know
the entered value of the merchandise. Then, we will either calculate an
approximate entered value or we will calculate an average per-unit
dollar amount of antidumping duty based on all sales examined during
the POR. See AFBs I at 31694. The Department will issue appropriate
appraisement instructions directly to the Customs Service upon
completion of these reviews.
Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective
for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the
final results of these administrative reviews, as provided by section
751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for the
reviewed companies will be those rates established in the final results
of these reviews (except that no deposit will be required for firms
with zero or de minimis margins, i.e., margins less than 0.5 percent);
(2) for previously
[[Page 62823]]
reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit
rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the
most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this
review, a prior review, or the original LTFV investigation, but the
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for
the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4)
the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will
continue to be the ``all others'' rate made effective by the final
results of the LTFV. As noted in those previous final results, these
rates are the ``all others'' rates from the relevant LTFV
investigations. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain
in effect until publication of the final results of the next
administrative reviews.
This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 C.F.R. 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 administrative reviews and notice are in accordance with
section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19
C.F.R. 353.22(c)(5).
Dated: November 29, 1995.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 95-29889 Filed 12-6-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
