[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 42 (Friday, March 1, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8034-8039]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-4730]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 8035]]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-428-821]
Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value and Postponement of Final Determination: Large Newspaper Printing
Presses and Components Thereof, Whether Assembled or Unassembled, From
Germany
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Darzenta or William Crow, Office
of Antidumping Investigations, Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202)
482-6320 or (202) 482-0116.
The Applicable Statute
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act) are references to the provisions effective
January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to the Act
by the Uruguay Rounds Agreements Act.
Preliminary Determination
As explained in the memoranda from the Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration dated November 22, 1995, and January 11, 1996,
the Department of Commerce (the Department) has exercised its
discretion to toll all deadlines for the duration of the partial
shutdowns of the Federal Government from November 15 through November
21, 1995, and December 16, 1995, through January 6, 1996. Thus, all
deadlines in this investigation have been extended by 28 days, i.e.,
one day for each day (or partial day) the Department was closed. The
revised deadline for this preliminary determination is February 23,
1996.
We preliminarily determine that large newspaper printing presses
and components thereof (``LNPPs'') from Germany are being, or are
likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value
(``LTFV''), as provided in section 733 of the Act. The estimated
margins of sales at LTFV are shown in the ``Suspension of Liquidation''
section of this notice.
Case History
Since the initiation of this investigation on July 20, 1995 (Notice
of Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Large Newspaper
Printing Presses and Components Thereof, Whether Assembled or
Disassembled, 60 FR 38546 (July 27, 1995)(Initiation Notice)), the
following events have occurred:
On August 14, 1995, the United States International Trade
Commission (``ITC'') notified the Department of Commerce (the
Department) of its affirmative preliminary determination (see ITC
Investigation No. 731-TA-736 and 737).
On August 28, 1995, we presented Section A of the Department's
questionnaire 1 to MAN Roland Druckmaschinen AG and its U.S.
affiliate MAN Roland Inc. (collectively ``MAN Roland''), and Koenig &
Bauer-Albert AG and its U.S. affiliate KBA-Motter Corp. (collectively,
``KBA''). See the ``Respondent Selection'' section of this notice. MAN
Roland's responses to Section A were received on September 27, 1995 (as
amended on September 29, 1995), October 4, 1995, and October 10, 1995.
On September 25, 1995, KBA informed the Department that it would not be
responding to the Department's questionnaire.
\1\ Section A requests data concerning corporate organization,
accounting practices, markets and merchandise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 20, 1995, at the request of Rockwell International
Corporation (the petitioner), we postponed the preliminary
determination to January 26, 1996. (See Notice of Postponement of
Preliminary Determinations: Antidumping Investigation of Large
Newspaper Printing Presses and Components Thereof, Whether Assembled or
Unassembled From Japan, 60 FR 54841, October 26, 1995.)
On October 24, 1995, the petitioner alleged that there are
reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that MAN Roland made below-
cost sales of the subject merchandise in Germany, and that these below-
cost sales must be excluded from the Department's calculation of profit
for constructed value (``CV''). Because we determined the appropriate
basis for normal value (``NV'') to be CV, we did not address
petitioner's below-cost allegation. We did, however, solicit contract
price and production cost data for MAN Roland's home market sales of
subject merchandise in order to compute selling, general and
administrative (SG&A) expenses, and profit for CV in accordance with
section 773(e)(2)(A) of the Act. (See ``Product Comparisons'' section
of this notice.)
The Department issued Sections C, D and E of its questionnaire \2\
to MAN Roland on October 27, 1995. Responses to these sections of the
questionnaire were received on December 13, 1995. A supplemental
questionnaire was not issued to MAN Roland on January 18, 1996. On
January 30, 1996, MAN Roland submitted corrections to clerical errors
contained in its December 13, 1995, Section D response. MAN Roland's
responses to the Department's supplemental questionnaire were received
on January 31, and February 1, 1996. A revised U.S. sales listing was
submitted on February 2, 1996.
\2\ Section C requests data on sales to the United States.
Section D requests data on the cost of production and constructed
value. Section E requests data on the cost of further manufacturing
or assembly performed in the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the period July 28, 1995 through January 23, 1996, the
petitioner, MAN Roland and KBA filed comments requesting clarification
of the scope of this investigation with respect to elements (i.e.,
parts or subcomponents) of covered components, and spare and
replacement parts. Respondents in the concurrent investigation of LNPPs
from Japan, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. and Tokyo Kikai
Seisakusho, also submitted comments concerning scope. On January 23,
1996, the petitioner clarified the scope to exclude used presses. See
``Scope of Investigation'' section of this notice. At the Department's
request, on February 8, 1996, the parties filed comments on suspension
of liquidation instructions.
On February 2 and 9, 1996, the petitioner filed comments on issues
to be resolved and methodologies to be employed in the preliminary
determination. KBA and MAN Roland filed such comments on February 8 and
12, 1996, respectively.
Facts Available
KBA failed to respond to the Department's questionnaire. Section
776(a)(2) of the Act provides that if an interested party (1) withholds
information that has been requested by the Department, (2) fails to
provide such information in a timely manner or in the form or manner
requested, (3) significantly impedes a determination under the
antidumping statute, or (4) provides such information but the
information cannot be verified, the Department shall use facts
otherwise available in reaching the applicable determination. Because
KBA failed to respond to the Department's questionnaire, we must use
facts otherwise available with regard to KBA.
Section 776(b) provides that adverse inferences may be used against
a party that has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its
ability to comply with requests for information. See also Statement of
Administrative Action, at 870. KBA's failure to reply to the
Department's questionnaire demonstrates that KBA has failed to
cooperate to the best of its ability in this
[[Page 8036]]
investigation. Thus, the Department has determined that, in selecting
among the facts otherwise available to KBA, an adverse inference is
warranted. As facts otherwise available, we are assigning to KBA the
margin stated in the notice of initiation, 46.40 percent.
Section 776(c) provides that when the Department relies on
secondary information (such as the petition) in using the facts
otherwise available it must, to the extent practicable, corroborate
that information from independent sources that are reasonably at its
disposal. When analyzing the petition, the Department reviewed all of
the data the petitioner had in calculating the estimated dumping
margin. This estimated dumping margin was based on a comparison of the
bid price for a sale of a LNPP system made by MAN Roland to an
unrelated U.S. customer and the CV of that LNPP system. As a result of
that analysis, the Department modified the CV methodology that the
petitioner relied upon in calculating the estimated margin. On the
basis of those modifications, the Department recalculated the estimated
dumping margin and found it to be 46.40 percent. See Initiation Notice.
The Department corroborated all of the secondary information from which
the margin was calculated during our pre-initiation analysis of the
petition, to the extent appropriate information was available for this
purpose at that time. For purposes of the preliminary determination,
the Department reexamined the price information provided in the
petition in light of information developed during the investigation,
and found that it continues to be of probative value.
Respondent Selection
The producers named in the petition were MAN Roland and KBA. On
August 4, 1995, we contacted the U.S. Embassy in Bonn, Germany,
requesting the identification of German producers and exporters of
LNPPs to the United States, and the volume and value of subject
merchandise they sold to the United States during the period January 1,
1991 through May 31, 1995. On August 24, 1995, we received a reply
cable with information concerning the U.S. sales activities of MAN
Roland and KBA. The cable did not indicate that there were other German
exporters of subject merchandise to the United States. In addition to
this cable, we received a separate cable from the U.S. Embassy replying
to the ITC's request for information on German manufacturers of subject
merchandise. While this cable identified eight additional German
manufacturers of various press technologies, it did not specify whether
they were producers/exporters of the subject merchandise.
Based on the petition and the information received from the U.S.
Embassy, we issued questionnaires to MAN Roland and KBA. We did not
send any additional questionnaires, as no evidence on the record
suggested that any other German manufacturer sold LNPPs in the United
States during the specified period. (See Memorandum to The File Re:
Questionnaire Recipients, dated August 28, 1995.)
Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional
Measures
Pursuant to section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act, on February 23, 1996,
MAN Roland, requested that, in the event of an affirmative preliminary
determination in this investigation, the Department postpone its final
determination until 60 days after the date of the scheduled final
determination, which is equivalent to 135 days after the publication of
an affirmative preliminary determination in the Federal Register. In
accordance with 19 CFR 353.20(b)(1995), because our preliminary
determination is affirmative, the respondent accounts for a significant
proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, and no compelling
reasons for denial exist, we are granting respondent's request and
postponing the final determination.
Section 733(d) of the Act provides that provisional measures may
not remain in effect for more than four months. However, that provision
of the Act also states that the Department may extend that period to
six months at the request of exporters representing a significant
proportion of exports of the subject merchandise. No such explicit
request was made in this case. However, we interpret the request of MAN
Roland to extend the final determination in this investigation to
contain an implied request to extend provisional measures in accordance
with Section 733(d) of the Act. Accordingly, we have extended the
period for provisional measures to six months.
Scope of Investigation
As specified below, we have revised the scope since our notice of
initiation to exclude used presses, in accordance with the petitioner's
January 23, 1996, clarification. Furthermore, we have clarified the
scope to include ``elements'' (otherwise referred to as ``parts'' or
``subcomponents'') of an LNPP system, addition or component, which
taken as a whole, constitute a subject LNPP system, addition or
component used to fulfill an LNPP contract. See ``Scope Issues''
section of this notice concerning the treatment of elements in the
scope. In addition, we have stipulated that spare or replacement parts,
which are imported pursuant to an LNPP contract and are separately
identified and valued in that contract, whether or not shipped in
combination with covered merchandise, are excluded from the scope of
the investigation. See February 23, 1996, Decision Memorandum to
Richard Moreland from The Team Re: Scope Issues.
The products covered by these investigations are large newspaper
printing presses, including press systems, press additions and press
components, whether assembled or unassembled, that are capable of
printing or otherwise manipulating a roll of paper more than two pages
across. A page is defined as a newspaper broadsheet page in which the
lines of type are printed perpendicular to the running of the direction
of the paper or a newspaper tabloid page with lines of type parallel to
the running of the direction of the paper.
In addition to complete systems, the scope of these investigations
includes the five press system components. They are:
(1) A printing unit, which is any component that prints in
monocolor, spot color and/or process (full) color, or a printing-unit
cylinder;
(2) A reel tension paster (RTP), which is any component that feeds
a roll of paper more than two newspaper broadsheet pages in width into
a subject printing unit;
(3) A folder, which is a module or combination of modules capable
of cutting, folding, and/or delivering the paper from a roll or rolls
of newspaper broadsheet paper more than two pages in width into a
newspaper format;
(4) Conveyance and access apparatus capable of manipulating a roll
of paper more than two newspaper broadsheet pages across through the
production process and which provides structural support and access;
and
(5) A computerized control system, which is any computer equipment
and/or software designed specifically to control, monitor, adjust, and
coordinate the functions and operations of large newspaper printing
presses or press components.
A press addition is comprised of a union of one or more of the
press components defined above and the equipment necessary to integrate
such components into an existing press system.
[[Page 8037]]
Because of their size, large newspaper printing press systems,
press additions, and press components are typically shipped either
partially assembled or unassembled. Any of the five components, or
collection of components, the use of which is to fulfill a contract for
large newspaper printing press systems, press additions, or press
components, regardless of degree of assembly and/or degree of
combination with non-subject elements before or after importation, is
included in the scope of this investigation. Also included in the scope
are elements of an LNPP system, addition or component, which taken as a
whole, constitute a subject LNPP system, addition or component used to
fulfill an LNPP contract.
This scope does not cover spare or replacement parts. Spare or
replacement parts imported pursuant to an LNPP contract, which are not
integral to the original start-up and operation of the LNPP, and are
separately identified and valued in an LNPP contract, whether or not
shipped in combination with covered merchandise, are excluded from the
scope of this investigation. Used presses are also not subject to this
scope. Used presses are those that have been previously sold in an
arm's length transaction to a purchaser that used them to produce
newspapers in the ordinary course of business.
Further, these investigations cover all current and future printing
technologies capable of printing newspapers, including, but not limited
to lithographic (offset or direct), flexographic, and letterpress
systems.
The products covered by these investigations are imported into the
United States under subheadings 8443.11.10, 8443.11.50, 8443.30.00,
8443.59.50, 8443.60.00, and 8443.90.50 of the HTSUS. Large newspaper
printing presses may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 8443.21.00 and
8443.40.00. Large newspaper printing press computerized control systems
may enter under HTSUS subheadings 8471.49.10, 8471.49.21, 8471.49.26,
8471.50.40, 8471.50.80, 8524.51.30, 8524.52.20, 8524.53.20, 8524.91.00,
8524.99.00 and 8537.10.90. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided
for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the
scope of these investigations is dispositive.
Scope Issues
Since our initiation, we received numerous comments from interested
parties in this investigation and the concurrent investigation
involving Japan, requesting that the Department clarify the treatment
of ``elements'' in the scope of the investigation.
In general, respondents believe that if the imported elements do
not constitute a complete, albeit unassembled, component, or are
missing ``essential'' elements to function as one of the five
components named in the scope, they would not be subject to the scope
of this investigation and the concurrent investigation involving Japan.
The petitioner believes that, because an imported LNPP press, addition
or component will almost always contain elements, which, by themselves,
are not subject to the scope, it is not practical to exclude these
elements from the scope of the investigation in so far as they comprise
an incomplete subject component. For a complete discussion of these
comments, see February 23, 1996 Memorandum to Richard W. Moreland from
The Team Re: Scope Issues.
As stated in the ``Scope of Investigations'' section above, we
interpret the scope to include those elements or collection of elements
imported from a subject country in so far as they constitute any one of
the five covered components which are, in turn, used to fulfill a
contract for a LNPP press system, press addition or press component.
Individual parts per se are not covered by the scope of these
investigations unless taken as a whole they constitute a subject
component used to fulfill an LNPP contract. This interpretation,
however, raises a question: at what point do the elements imported from
a subject country rise to the level of an LNPP component, addition or
system subject to the scope of these investigations?
The Department must decide on a reasonable and practicable approach
in determining what constitutes a subject LNPP component, addition or
system, and in so doing, establish the basis on which we will include
elements in the scope. We are considering two alternative approaches
for analyzing what governs the inclusion of parts or subcomponents,
other than spare or replacement parts, within the scope of these
investigations. One approach would consider, on a case-by-case basis,
whether the imported parts or subcomponents when taken together are
essentially an LNPP system, addition or component. This so-called
``essence'' approach is of necessity subjective and turns on the
question of how near the sum of the imported parts comes to comprising
a complete LNPP system, addition or component. A second approach would
consider the value of the imported parts or subcomponents relative to
the total value of the finished LNPP component, addition or system in
the United States. That is, we would determine that the imported parts
or subcomponents would be within the scope if they comprised a certain
minimum percentage of the value of the parts of a finished LNPP system,
addition or component.
Both of these approaches raise threshold questions. Because certain
sales reported by respondents in both the German and Japanese
investigations consist of imported elements from Germany or Japan,
rather than a complete LNPP component, addition or system, acceptance
of either of the two approaches will have implications as to which of
the respondents' sales the Department will consider in its final
determination. Therefore, we are presently soliciting comments from
interested parties as to the merits of these approaches and/or others
that may be relevant for use in the final determination. Interested
party comments on this topic are due no later than May 1, 1996.
Period of Investigation (POI)
The petitioner and MAN Roland filed comments during the period
October 19 through 26, 1995, concerning the appropriate POI. On October
27, 1995, we established the appropriate POI for MAN Roland to be July
1, 1993 through June 30, 1995.
As a result of changes to section 773(b)(2)(B) of the Act, which
codified the normal period within which sales made below the cost of
production are to be analyzed, the Department modified the standard POI
to cover a one year period. In this investigation, however, in order to
capture sufficient and representative sales, the Department extended
the POI to two years, instead of the normal one-year period, because of
the nature of the LNPP industry, characterized by custom order sales
and long term sales contracts. (See October 27, 1995 Memorandum to
Richard W. Moreland from The Team Re: Establishing the Period of
Investigation.)
Product Comparisons
Although the home market was viable, in accordance with section 773
of the Act, we based NV on CV because we determined that the particular
market situation, which requires that the subject merchandise be built
to each customer's specifications, does not permit proper price-to-
price comparisons. (See November 9, 1995, Memorandum to Richard W.
Moreland from The Team Re: Determining the Appropriate Basis for Normal
Value.)
[[Page 8038]]
Fair Value Comparisons
To determine whether MAN Roland's sales of LNPPs to the United
States were made at less than fair value, we compared Constructed
Export Price (``CEP'') to the NV, as described in the ``Constructed
Export Price'' and ``Normal Value'' sections of this notice. In
accordance with section 777A(d)(1)(A)(ii), we calculated transaction-
specific CEPs (which in this case were synonymous with model-specific
CEPs) for comparison to transaction-specific NVs because of the limited
number of sales and the custom-made merchandise.
Constructed Export Price
In accordance with subsections 772(b) and (d) of the Act, we
calculated CEP for sales to the first unaffiliated purchaser by a
seller affiliated with the producer/exporter that took place before
importation and involved further manufacturing in the United States.
We calculated CEP sales based on packed, delivered and/or installed
prices to unaffiliated customers in the United States. We made
deductions from the starting price (gross unit price), where
appropriate, for the following charges: inland freight to port in
Germany, foreign inland insurance, foreign brokerage and handling,
international freight, marine insurance, U.S. brokerage and handling,
U.S. Customs duty and U.S. inland freight. We made corrections to
respondent's data where the data reported in the U.S. sales listing
conflicted with the data contained in support documentation submitted
in its questionnaire responses.
We also made deductions for post-sale warehousing, commissions,
imputed credit, training, warranty and product liability. In
calculating imputed credit, we took into account the unique nature and
magnitude of the LNPP projects under investigation. These projects
require substantial capital expenditures over an extended time period
because of their size and their lengthy production process. Moreover,
the projects generally call for the purchaser to provide scheduled
progress payments prior to the completion of a given project. In
consideration of these factors, we computed credit by applying an
interest rate to the net balance of production costs incurred and
progress payments made during the construction period. We imputed
credit expenses for U.S. sales using the weighted-average U.S. short-
term interest rate reported for the POI because these sales were
denominated in U.S. dollars.
We also deducted those indirect selling expenses that related to
economic activity in the United States. We recalculated these expenses
based on sales revenues, rather than sales orders. We disallowed an
adjustment for the warehousing income claimed for one sale because of
insufficient evidence on the record to support respondent's claim that
such an adjustment was warranted.
We also deducted the value of spare and replacement parts, which
are excluded from the scope of the investigation, where the value of
these spare and replacement parts was separately identified in the
contractual documentation governing the sale. In addition, for one
sale, we deducted the value of the used equipment portion of the LNPP
which is excluded from the scope of the investigation.
We classified installation expenses, as well as special testing and
start-up costs associated with the installation process, as part of
further manufacturing in the United States because the U.S.
installation process involves extensive technical activities on the
part of engineers and installation supervisors, and the integration of
subject and non-subject merchandise necessary for the operation of
LNPPs. We also classified as part of further manufacturing costs, the
cost of certain non-German items either shipped directly to the United
States without further processing in Germany, or sourced in the United
States, for integration into the overall LNPP during the installation
process.
Furthermore, we deducted the cost of any further manufacturing or
assembly (including additional material and labor, installation,
special testing and start-up costs). We recomputed the U.S. further
manufacturer's reported general and administrative (``G&A'') expense
rate using the cost of sales amount reported in its financial
statements; and for one U.S. sale, we reduced the further manufacturing
costs by the reported cost of used equipment. Finally, we made an
adjustment for CEP profit in accordance with section 772(d)(3) of the
Act.
Normal Value/Constructed Value
For the reasons outlined in the ``Product Comparisons'' section of
this notice, we based NV on CV.
In accordance with section 773(e)(1) of the Act, we calculated CV
based on the sum of the respondent's cost of materials, fabrication,
SG&A and U.S. packing costs as reported in the U.S. sales database. In
accordance with section 773(e)(2)(A), we based SG&A and profit on the
amounts incurred and realized by the respondent in connection with the
production and sale of the foreign like product in the ordinary course
of trade, for consumption in the foreign country.
We relied on the respondent's CV amounts, except in the following
specific instances wherein the reported costs were improperly valued:
1. We excluded respondent's reported negative interest expense
amounts for all sales;
2. We excluded the multiple facility adjustment reported in cost of
manufacturing (``COM'');
3. For each uncompleted press, we applied to the submitted standard
overhead costs the variance experienced by MAN Roland for the most
recently completed fiscal year (July 1, 1994 through June 30, 1995);
4. We recalculated the time variance for manufacturing overhead
costs based on the adjusted costs as computed in item 3 above;
5. We recalculated product line research and development costs, and
G&A expenses based on the full cost of each U.S. contract;
6. In calculating the CV profit rate and selling expense rates, we
adjusted the reported home market cost data for items 1 through 3 noted
above;
We also included in CV the costs of spare and replacement parts for
those U.S. sales where the value of these parts could not be separately
identified in the contractual documentation and therefore could not be
excluded from CEP.
For selling expenses, we used the average home market selling
expense rate, calculated based on the selling expenses reported for
home market sales made in the ordinary course of trade, and applied
this rate to the U.S. COM. We recalculated home market indirect selling
expenses based on sales revenues, rather than sales orders.
We calculated imputed credit for CV purposes in accordance with the
methodology explained in the ``Constructed Export Price'' section of
this notice. We imputed credit expenses for CV using the weighted-
average home market short-term interest rate reported for the POI since
these sales were denominated in deutschemarks.
In accordance with section 773(a)(6)(B), we added U.S. packing
costs to a CV net of packing.
Price to CV Comparisons
For CEP to CV comparisons, we deducted from CV the average home
market direct selling expenses pursuant to section 773(a)(8) of the
Act.
Currency Conversion
Section 773A(a) of the Act directs the Department to convert
foreign
[[Page 8039]]
currencies based on the dollar exchange rate in effect on the date of
sale of the subject merchandise, except if it is established that a
currency transaction on forward markets is directly linked to an export
sale. When a company demonstrates that a sale on forward markets is
directly linked to a particular export sale in order to minimize its
exposure to exchange rate losses, the Department will use the rate of
exchange in the forward currency sale agreement. In this case, although
MAN Roland reported that forward currency exchange contracts applied to
certain U.S. sales, the record information was not sufficient to
conclude that these contracts were directly linked to the particular
sales in question. Therefore, for the purpose of the preliminary
determination, we made currency conversions based on the official
exchange rates in effect on the dates of the U.S. sales as certified by
the Federal Reserve Bank.
Section 773A(a) directs the Department to use a daily exchange rate
in order to convert foreign currencies into U.S. dollars, unless the
daily rate involves a ``fluctuation.'' For this preliminary
determination, we have determined that a fluctuation exists when the
daily exchange rate differs from the benchmark rate by 2.25 percent.
The benchmark is defined as the rolling average of rates for the past
40 business days. When we determined a fluctuation existed, we
substituted the benchmark for the daily rate.
Further, section 773A(b) directs the Department to allow a 60-day
adjustment period when a currency has undergone a sustained movement.
Such an adjustment period is required only when a foreign currency is
appreciating against the U.S. dollar. No adjustment period is warranted
in this case, because the deutschemark generally remained constant
against the U.S. dollar during the POI.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we will verify all
information used in making our final determination.
Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 733(d) of the Act, we are directing the
Customs Service to suspend liquidation of all entries of LNPP systems,
additions and components, whether assembled or unassembled, from
Germany, that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption,
on or after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal
Register. Furthermore, because we are still in the process of
clarifying the definition of a subject LNPP system, addition or
component, as explained in the ``Scope Issues'' section of this notice,
we are also directing the Customs Service to suspend liquidation of
entries of elements (parts or subcomponents) of components imported to
fulfill a contract for an LNPP system, addition, or component, from
Germany, that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption,
on or after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal
Register.
In addition, in order to ensure that our suspension of liquidation
instructions are not so broad as to cover merchandise imported for non-
subject uses, foreign producers/exporters and U.S. importers in the
LNPP industry shall be required to provide certification that the
imported merchandise would not be used to fulfill an LNPP contract. We
will also request that these parties register with the Customs Service
the LNPP contract numbers pursuant to which subject merchandise is
imported. With respect to entries of LNPP spare and replacement parts,
and used presses, from Germany, which are expressly excluded from the
scope of the investigation, we will instruct the Customs Service not to
suspend liquidation of these entries if they are separately identified
and valued in the LNPP contract pursuant to which they are imported.
The Customs Service will require a cash deposit or posting of a bond
equal to the estimated amount by which the normal value exceeds the
export price as shown below. These suspension of liquidation
instructions will remain in effect until further notice.
The weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter/Manufacturer margin
percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MAN Roland Druckmaschinen AG............................... 17.70
Koenig & Bauer-Albert AG................................... 46.40
All Others................................................. 17.70
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department has excluded the margin for KBA, which is based on
adverse facts available, from the calculation of the All Others rate.
The All Others rate applies to all entries of subject merchandise
except for entries of merchandise produced by MAN Roland and KBA.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we have notified the
ITC of our determination. If our final determination is affirmative,
the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of
this preliminary determination or 45 days after our final determination
whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material
injury to, the U.S. industry.
Public Comment
Case briefs or other written comments in at least ten copies must
be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration no
later than May 16, 1996, and rebuttal briefs, no later than May 23,
1996. A list of authorities used and an executive summary of issues
should accompany any briefs submitted to the Department. Such summary
should be limited to five pages total, including footnotes. In
accordance with section 774 of the Act, we will hold a public hearing,
if requested, to afford interested parties an opportunity to comment on
arguments raised in case or rebuttal briefs. Tentatively, the hearing
will be held on June 4, 1996, time and place to be determined, at the
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20230. Parties should confirm by telephone the time,
date, and place of the hearing 48 hours before the scheduled time.
Interested parties who wish to request a hearing, or to participate
if one is requested, must submit a written request to the Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room
B-099, within ten days of the publication of this notice. Requests
should contain: (1) The party's name, address, and telephone number;
(2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of the issues to be
discussed. Oral presentations will be limited to issues raised in the
briefs. If this investigation proceeds normally, we will make our final
determination by 135 days after the publication of this notice in the
Federal Register.
This determination is published pursuant to section 733(f) of the
Act.
Dated: February 23, 1996.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-4730 Filed 2-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
