[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42519-42521]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-20212]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
A-570-822
Certain Helical Spring Lock Washers From the People's Republic of
China; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of the antidumping duty
administrative review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain helical
spring lock washers (HSLWs) from the People's Republic of China (PRC)
in response to a request by the respondent, Zhejiang Wanxin Group Co.,
Ltd, (ZWG). This review covers shipments of this merchandise to the
United States during the period October 15, 1993, through September 30,
1994.
We have preliminarily determined that sales have been made below
foreign market value (FMV). If these preliminary results are adopted in
our final results, we will instruct U.S. Customs to assess antidumping
duties equal to the difference between United States price (USP) and
FMV.
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary
results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 16, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Little or Maureen Flannery,
Office of Antidumping Compliance, Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington D.C. 20230; telephone (202) 482-
4733.
Background
The Department published in the Federal Register the antidumping
duty order on HSLWs from the PRC on October 19, 1993 (58 FR 53914). On
October 7, 1994, the Department published in the Federal Register (59
FR 51166) a notice of opportunity to request administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on HSLWs from the PRC covering the period
October 15, 1993, through September 30, 1994.
In accordance with 19 CFR 353.22(a)(1994), the respondent, ZWG,
requested that we conduct an administrative review. We published a
notice of initiation of this antidumping duty administrative review on
November 14, 1994 (59 FR 56459). The Department is conducting this
administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act).
Applicable Statute and Regulations
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute and the
Department's regulations are in reference to the provisions as they
existed on December 31, 1994.
Scope of Review
The products covered by this review are HSLWs of carbon steel, of
carbon alloy steel, or of stainless steel, heat- treated or non heat-
treated, plated or non-plated, with ends that are off-line. HSLWs are
designed to: (1) function as a spring to compensate for developed
looseness between the component parts of a fastened assembly; (2)
distribute the load over a larger area for screws or bolts; and (3)
provide a hardened bearing surface. The scope does not include internal
or external tooth washers, nor does it include spring lock washers made
of other metals, such as copper.
HSLWs subject to this review are currently classifiable under
subheading
[[Page 42520]]
7318.21.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTS). Although the HTS subheading is provided for convenience and
Customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this
proceeding is dispositive.
This review covers one exporter of HSLWs from the PRC, ZWG, and the
period October 15, 1993, through September 30, 1994.
Separate Rates
To establish whether a company operating in a state-controlled
economy is sufficiently independent to be entitled to a separate rate,
the Department analyzes each exporting entity under the test
established in the Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value: Sparklers from the People's Republic of China (56 FR 20588, May
6, 1991) (Sparklers), as amplified by the Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the People's Republic of
China (59 FR 22585, May 2, 1994) (Silicon Carbide). Under this policy,
exporters in non-market economies (NMEs) are entitled to separate,
company-specific margins when they can demonstrate an absence of
government control, both in law and in fact, with respect to exports.
Evidence supporting, though not requiring, a finding of de jure absence
of government control over export activities includes: 1) an absence of
restrictive stipulations associated with an individual exporter's
business and export licenses; 2) any legislative enactments
decentralizing control of companies; and 3) any other formal measures
by the government decentralizing control of companies. De facto absence
of government control over exports is based on four factors: 1) whether
each exporter sets its own export prices independently of the
government and without the approval of a government authority; 2)
whether each exporter retains the proceeds from its sales and makes
independent decisions regarding the disposition of profits or financing
of losses; 3) whether each exporter has the authority to negotiate and
sign contracts and other agreements; and 4) whether each exporter has
autonomy from the government regarding the selection of management.
During the less than fair value (LTFV) investigation of this case,
the Department determined that ZWG, then known as Hangzhou Spring
Washer Plant, warranted a company-specific dumping margin according to
the criteria identified in Sparklers. (See Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Helical Spring Lock Washers From the
People's Republic of China, 58 FR 48833 (September 20, 1993) (Lock
Washers).) We have found that the evidence on the record of this review
also demonstrates an absence of government control, both in law and in
fact, with respect to ZWG's exports according to the criteria
identified in Sparklers, and an absence of government control with
respect to the additional criteria identified in Silicon Carbide. For
further discussion of the Department's preliminary determination that
ZWG is entitled to a separate rate, see Decision Memorandum to Holly A.
Kuga, Director, Office of Antidumping Compliance, dated July 21, 1995,
``Separate Rates in the First Administrative Review of Certain Helical
Spring Lock Washers from the People's Republic of China,'' which is on
file in the Central Records Unit (room B099 of the Main Commerce
Building).
United States Price
For sales made by ZWG, we based USP on purchase price, in
accordance with section 772(b) of the Act, because the subject
merchandise was sold to unrelated purchasers in the United States prior
to importation into the United States.
We calculated purchase price based on the FOB, CNF, and CIF price
to unrelated purchasers. We made deductions, where appropriate, for
brokerage and handling, foreign inland freight, ocean freight, and
marine insurance. We valued brokerage and handling, foreign inland
freight, and marine insurance deductions using surrogate data based on
Indian costs. ZWG reported amounts for ocean freight based, in part, on
services provided by shipping companies based in the PRC. For the
portion of the shipment expenses from the PRC port to Hong Kong
provided by PRC-owned transportation, we calculated a separate charge
using surrogate data based on Indian costs. We selected India as the
surrogate country for the reasons explained in the ``Foreign Market
Value'' section of this notice.
Foreign Market Value
For all companies located in NME countries, section 773(c)(1) of
the Act provides that the Department shall determine FMV using a
factors-of-production methodology if (1) the merchandise is exported
from an NME country, and (2) the information does not permit the
calculation of FMV using home market prices, third country prices, or
constructed value (CV) under section 773(a) of the Act.
In every case conducted by the Department involving the PRC, the
PRC has been treated as an NME country. None of the parties to this
proceeding has contested such treatment in this review. Accordingly, we
calculated FMV based on factors of production in accordance with
section 773(c) of the Act and section 353.52 of the Department's
regulations. We determined that India is comparable to the PRC in terms
of per capita gross national product (GNP), the growth rate in per
capita GNP, and the national distribution of labor, and is a
significant producer of comparable merchandise. For this review, we
chose India as the most comparable surrogate on the basis of the above
criteria, and have used publicly available information relating to
India to value the various factors of production. (See Memorandum from
Director, Office of Policy to Division Director, Office of Antidumping
Compliance, dated June 9, 1995, ``Lock Washers from the People's
Republic of China (PRC): Nonmarket Economy Status and Surrogate Country
Selection,'' and the memorandum from the analyst to the file, dated
July 20, 1995, ``India: Significant Production of Comparable
Merchandise,'' which are on file in the Central Records Unit (room B099
of the Main Commerce Building).
We valued the factors of production as follows:
For steel wire rods, we used a per kilogram value obtained
from the Monthly Statistics of Foreign Trade of India for the period
April 1993 through March 1994. Using wholesale price indices (WPI)
obtained from the International Financial Statistics, published by the
International Monetary Fund (IMF). We adjusted these values to reflect
inflation through the period of review (POR). We made further
adjustments to include freight costs incurred between the supplier and
ZWG.
For chemicals used in the production and plating of HSLWs,
we used per kilogram values obtained from the Monthly Statistics of
Foreign Trade of India. We adjusted these rates to reflect inflation
through the POR using WPI published by the IMF. We made further
adjustments to include freight costs incurred between the supplier and
ZWG.
For hydrochloric acid, we based the value on an Indian
price quote used in the Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value: Coumarin from the People's Republic of China (59 FR 66895,
December 28, 1994) (Coumarin), because the Indian Import Statistics for
hydrochloric acid were found to be
[[Page 42521]]
aberrational. We adjusted the value used in Coumarin to reflect
inflation through the POR using WPI published by the IMF.
For direct labor, we used the labor rates reported in the
Business International Corporation report IL&T India, released November
1993. This source breaks out labor rates between skilled, unskilled,
and semi-skilled labor for 1993 and provides information on the number
of labor hours worked per week. We adjusted these rates to reflect
inflation through the POR using WPI published by the IMF.
For factory overhead, we used information reported in the
September 1994 Reserve Bank of India Bulletin. From this information,
we were able to determine factory overhead as a percentage of the total
surrogate cost of manufacture.
For selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses,
we used information obtained from the September 1994 Reserve Bank of
India Bulletin. We calculated an SG&A rate by dividing SG&A expenses by
the cost of manufacture. Since the calculated SG&A expense rate is less
than 10 percent of the surrogate cost of manufacture, we used the
statutory minimum of 10 percent.
To calculate a profit rate, we used information obtained
from the September 1994 Reserve Bank of India Bulletin. We calculated a
profit rate by dividing the before-tax profit by the cost of
manufacturing plus SG&A. Since the calculated profit rate is less than
8 percent, we used the statutory minimum of 8 percent to calculate
profit.
To value the packing materials, including paper cartons,
pallets, wood brackets, steel straps, plastic bags, and adhesive tape,
we used import statistics for India obtained from the Indian Import
Statistics. We adjusted these rates to reflect inflation through the
POR using WPI published by the IMF. We adjusted these values to include
freight costs incurred between the suppliers and ZWG.
To value coal, we used per kilogram value obtained from
the Monthly Statistics of Foreign Trade of India. We adjusted these
rates to reflect inflation through the POR using WPI published by the
IMF.
To value electricity, we used the price of electricity for
1993 reported in the Confederation of Indian Industries Handbook of
Statistics. We adjusted the value of electricity to reflect inflation
through the POR using WPI published by the IMF.
To value water, we used the Asian Development Bank's Water
Utilities Data Book for the Asian and Pacific Region, November 1993. We
adjusted the value of water to reflect inflation through the POR using
WPI published by the IMF.
To value truck and shipping freight, we used the rates
reported in an August 1993 cable from the U.S. Consulate in India
submitted for Lock Washers. We adjusted the value to reflect inflation
through the POR using WPI published by the IMF.
To value rail freight, we used the price reported in a
December 1989 cable from the U.S. Embassy in India submitted for the
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Shop Towels of
Cotton from the People's Republic of China (56 FR 4040, February 1,
1991). We adjusted the rail freight rates to reflect inflation through
the POR using WPI published by the IMF.
Currency Conversion
We made currency conversions in accordance with 19 CFR 353.60(a).
Currency conversions were made at the rates certified by the Federal
Reserve Bank.
Preliminary Results of the Review
We preliminarily determine that the following dumping margin
exists:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Manufacturer/exporter Time period (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zhejiang Wanxin Group Co., Ltd.......... 10/15/93-09/30/94 22.81
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parties to the 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 publication. Any hearing, if
requested, will be held 44 days after the publication of this notice,
or the first workday thereafter. Interested parties may submit case
briefs within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice.
Rebuttal briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in the case
briefs, may be filed not later than 37 days after the date of
publication. The Department will publish a notice of final results of
this administrative review, which will include the results of its
analysis of issues raised in any such comments.
The Department shall determine, and the Customs Service shall
assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Individual
differences between USP and FMV may vary from the percentage stated
above. The Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to
the Customs Service.
Furthermore, the following deposit rates will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all
shipments of HSLWs from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by
section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) for ZWG, which has a separate rate,
the cash deposit rate will be the company-specific rate established in
the final results of this review; (2) for all other PRC exporters, the
cash deposit rate will be 128.63 percent, the rate established in the
LTFV investigation of this case, the PRC rate; and (3) for non-PRC
exporters of subject merchandise from the PRC, the cash deposit rate
will be the rate applicable to the PRC supplier of that exporter.
These deposit rates, when imposed, shall remain in effect until
publication of the final results of the next administrative review.
This notice also 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 administrative review and notice are in accordance with
section 751(a)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR 353.22.
Dated: August 8, 1995.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 95-20212 Filed 8-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P