[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 27 (Thursday, February 8, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4763-4765]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2692]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-428-801]
Ball Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts
Thereof, From Germany; Preliminary Results of New Shipper Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Preliminary Results of New Shipper Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In response to a request by Roulements Miniatures SA (RMB),
Biel, Switzerland, and its wholly owned subsidiary Miniaturkugellager
GmbH (MKL), Germany, the Department of Commerce (the Department) is
conducting a new shipper administrative review of the antidumping duty
order on ball bearings (other than tapered roller bearings) and parts
thereof (ball bearings) from Germany. This review covers MKL, a German
manufacturer of ball bearings and exporter of this merchandise to the
United States. The period of review (POR) is December 1, 1994 through
May 31, 1995. We have preliminarily
[[Page 4764]]
determined that MKL sold subject merchandise at not less than normal
value (NV) during the POR. Interested parties are invited to comment on
these preliminary results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 8, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas O. Barlow or Michael Rill,
Office of Antidumping Compliance, Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
4733.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The 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
On May 31, 1995, the Department received a request from RMB and MKL
for 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.
Section 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act and section 353.22(h) of the
Department's regulations govern determinations of antidumping duties
for new shippers. These provisions state that, if the Department
receives a request for review from an exporter or producer of the
subject merchandise stating that it did not export the merchandise to
the United States during the period of investigation (POI) and that
such exporter or producer is not affiliated with any exporter or
producer who exported the subject merchandise during that period, the
Department shall conduct a new shipper review to establish an
individual weighted-average dumping margin for such exporter or
producer, if the Department has not previously established such a
margin for the exporter or producer. To establish these facts, the
exporter or producer must include with its request, with appropriate
certifications: (i) 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; (ii) a list of
the firms with which it is affiliated; and (iii) a statement from such
exporter or producer, and from each affiliated firm, that it did not,
under its current or a former name, export the merchandise during the
POI.
MKL's request was accompanied by information and certifications
establishing the date on which MKL first shipped and entered subject
merchandise, the names of MKL's affiliated parties, and statements from
MKL and its affiliated parties that they did not, under any name,
export the merchandise during the POI. Based on the above information,
on June 14, 1995, the Department initiated this new shipper review of
MKL (60 FR 32503). The Department is now conducting this review in
accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act and section 353.22 of its
regulations.
Scope of the Review
Imports covered by this review are shipments of 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.
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 order 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.
The review covers one producer/exporter. The POR is December 1,
1994 through May 31, 1995.
Constructed Export Price (CEP)
The Department based its margin calculation on constructed export
price (CEP) as defined in section 772(b) of the Tariff Act because the
subject merchandise was first sold in the United States to a person not
affiliated with MKL after importation, by RMB Ringwood Inc. (Ringwood),
a seller affiliated with MKL.
We based CEP on packed, ex-factory prices to unaffiliated
purchasers in the United States. The Department made the following
adjustments to the prices used to establish CEP, pursuant to section
772(c) of the Tariff Act. The price was increased for packing and
handling revenues pursuant to section 772(c)(1) and reduced for
movement expenses (international freight, brokerage, U.S. duties,
domestic inland freight and insurance) pursuant to section 772(c)(2).
The price used to establish CEP was also reduced by an amount for the
following expenses incurred in selling the subject merchandise in the
United States pursuant to section 772(d)(1): commissions, credit, and
inventory carrying costs and other indirect selling expenses incurred
in the United States. Pursuant to section 772(d)(3), the price was
further reduced by an amount for profit to arrive at the CEP.
Normal Value (NV)
Based on a comparison of the aggregate quantity of home market and
U.S. sales, and absent any information that a particular market
situation in the exporting country does not permit a proper comparison,
we determined that the quantity of foreign like product sold in the
exporting country was sufficient to permit a proper comparison with the
sales of the subject merchandise to the United States, pursuant to
section 773(a)(1)(C) of the Tariff Act. Therefore, in accordance with
section 773(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act, we based NV on the price at
which the foreign like product was first sold for consumption in the
exporting country.
Pursuant to section 777A(d)(2), we compared the CEPs of individual
transactions to the monthly weighted-average price of sales of the
foreign like product. We compared CEP sales to sales in the home market
of identical merchandise.
We based NV on packed, ex-factory prices to unaffiliated purchasers
in the home market. We made adjustments,
[[Page 4765]]
where applicable, in accordance with section 773(a)(6) of the Tariff
Act. In order to adjust for differences in packing between the two
markets, we increased home market price by U.S. packing costs and
reduced it by home market packing costs. Prices were reported net of
value added taxes (VAT) and, therefore, no deduction for VAT was
necessary. Where applicable, we made adjustments to home market price
for early payment discounts. To adjust for differences in circumstances
of sale between the home market and the United States, we reduced home
market price by an amount for home market credit and royalty expenses
and increased it by an amount for royalties on U.S. sales paid by MKL.
No other adjustments were made.
Preliminary Results of the Review
As a result of our comparison of CEP and NV, we preliminarily
determine that the following weighted-average dumping margin exists:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer/Exporter Period Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MKL.................................... 12/01/94-5/31/95 0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 and/or written comments from
interested parties may be submitted not later than 20 days after the
date of publication. Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals to written comments,
limited to issues raised in the case briefs and comments, 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 review, including the results of its analysis of
issues raised in any such written comments or at a hearing, within 90
days of issuance of these preliminary results.
Upon completion of this new shipper review, the Department will
issue appraisement instructions directly to the Customs Service. The
results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of
antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the
determination and for future deposits of estimated duties.
Furthermore, upon completion of this review, the posting of a bond
or security in lieu of a cash deposit, pursuant to section
751(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the Tariff Act and section 353.22(h)(4) of the
Department's 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
this new shipper antidumping duty administrative review for all
shipments of ball bearings from Germany, entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as
provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act: (1) the cash deposit
rate for the reviewed company will be that established in the final
results of this new shipper administrative review; (2) for exporters
not covered in this review, 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 this
review, 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 68.89 percent, the ``All Others'' rate made effective by
the final results of review published on July 26, 1993 (see Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Revocation in
Part of an Antidumping Duty Order, 58 FR 39729 (July 26, 1993)). This
rate is the ``All Others'' rate from the LTFV investigation.
These requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until
publication of the final results of the next administrative review.
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.
This new shipper administrative review and notice are in accordance
with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(2)(B))
and 19 CFR 353.22(h).
Dated: January 31, 1996.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-2692 Filed 2-7-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
