[Federal Register: November 14, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 220)]
[Notices]
[Page 68990-68993]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14no02-21]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-601]
Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and
Unfinished, from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 2000-
2001 Administrative Review, Partial Rescission of Review, and
Determination to Revoke Order, in Part
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of final results of 2000-2001 administrative review,
partial rescission of the review, and determination to revoke the order
in part.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We have determined that sales of tapered roller bearings and
parts thereof, finished and unfinished, from the People's Republic of
China, were made below normal value during the period June 1, 2000,
through May 31, 2001. We are also rescinding the review, in part, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3).
Based on our review of comments received and a reexamination of
surrogate value data, we have made certain changes in the margin
calculations of all of the reviewed companies. Consequently, the final
results differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average
dumping margins for these firms are listed below in the section
entitled ``Final Results of the Review.'' Based on these final results
of review, we will instruct the Customs Service to assess antidumping
duties based on the difference between the export price and normal
value on all appropriate entries.
Tianshui Hailin Import and Export Corporation and Hailin Bearing
Factory, Wanxiang Group Corporation, and Zhejiang Machinery Import &
Export Corp. have requested revocation of the antidumping duty order in
part. Based on record evidence, we find that only Tianshui Hailin
Import and Export Corporation and Hailin Bearing Factory qualifies for
revocation. Accordingly, we are revoking the order with respect to the
subject merchandise produced and exported by Tianshui Hailin Import and
Export Corporation and Hailin Bearing Factory.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 14, 2002.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melani Miller, S. Anthony Grasso,
Andrew Smith, or Daniel J. Alexy, Group 1, Office I, Antidumping/
Countervailing Duty Enforcement, Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-0116,
(202) 482-0189, (202) 482-3853, (202) 482-1174, and (202) 482-1540,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 Round Agreements Act. In addition, unless
otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department of Commerce's
(``the Department'') regulations are to 19 CFR Part 351 (April 2001).
Background
On July 9, 2002, the Department published the preliminary results
of this review of tapered roller bearings and parts thereof, finished
and unfinished (``TRBs'') from the People's Republic of China
(``PRC''). See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and
Unfinished, From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of
2000-2001 Administrative Review, Partial Rescission of Review, and
Notice of Intent to Revoke Order in Part, 67 FR 45451 (July 9, 2002)
(``Preliminary Results''). The period of review (``POR'') is June 1,
2000, through May 31, 2001. This review covers the following producers
or exporters (referred to collectively as ``the respondents''):
Zhejiang Machinery Import &Export Corp. (``ZMC''), Wanxiang Group
Corporation (``Wanxiang''), China National Machinery Import & Export
Corporation (``CMC''), Tianshui Hailin Import and Export Corporation
and Hailin Bearing Factory (``Hailin''), Luoyang Bearing Corporation
(Group) (``Luoyang''), and Weihai Machinery Holding (Group) Co., Ltd.
(``Weihai''), Chin Jun Industrial Ltd. (``Chin Jun'').
We invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. On
September 9, 2002, we received case briefs from the Timken Company
(``the petitioner''), ZMC, and a combined case brief from CMC, Luoyang,
Wanxiang, and Hailin. On September 17, 2002, each of these parties
submitted rebuttal briefs.
The Department has conducted this administrative review in
accordance with section 751 of the Act.
Scope of Review
Merchandise covered by this review is TRBs from the PRC; flange,
take up cartridge, and hanger units incorporating tapered roller
bearings; and tapered roller housings (except pillow blocks)
incorporating tapered rollers, with or without spindles, whether or not
for automotive use. This merchandise is currently classifiable under
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') item
numbers 8482.20.00, 8482.91.00.50, 8482.99.30, 8483.20.40, 8483.20.80,
8483.30.80, 8483.90.20, 8483.90.30, 8483.90.80, 8708.99.80.15, and
8708.99.80.80. Although the HTSUS item numbers are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope
of the order and this review is dispositive.
Rescission of Review in Part
As noted in the Preliminary Results, on April 4, 2002, Weihai
withdrew its request for a review. The petitioner did not request a
review for Weihai. While Weihai's rescission request was made more than
90 days after initiation, 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1) provides that the
Department may extend this deadline, and it is the Department's
practice to do so where it poses no undue burden on the parties or on
the Department. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), we
have accepted Weihai's request and we are rescinding the review with
respect to Weihai. For a complete discussion of this decision see the
Memorandum from Team to Susan Kuhbach, ``Partial Rescission of
Review,'' dated May 20, 2002, which is on file in the Department's
Central Records Unit located in the main Commerce building in Room B-
099 (``CRU'').
With respect to Chin Jun, as stated in the Preliminary Results,
Chin Jun reported no shipments of subject merchandise to the United
States during the POR. Entry data provided by the Customs Service
confirms that there were no POR entries from Chin Jun of TRBs.
Therefore, consistent with the Department's regulations and practice,
[[Page 68991]]
we are rescinding this review with respect to Chin Jun. (See 19 CFR
351.213(d)(3); see, also, Silicon Metal from Brazil; Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 61 FR 46763 (September 5,
1996).)
Determination To Revoke the Order, In Part
The Department ``may revoke, in whole or in part'' an antidumping
duty order upon completion of a review under section 751 of the Act.
While Congress has not specified the procedures that the Department
must follow in revoking an order, the Department has developed a
procedure for revocation that is described in 19 CFR 351.222. This
regulation requires, inter alia, that a company requesting revocation
must submit the following: (1) A certification that the company has
sold the subject merchandise at not less than NV in the current review
period and that the company will not sell at less than NV in the
future; (2) a certification that the company sold the subject
merchandise in each of the three years forming the basis of the request
in commercial quantities; and (3) an agreement to reinstatement of the
order if the Department concludes that the company, subsequent to the
revocation, sold subject merchandise at less than NV. See 19 CFR
351.222(e)(1).
As noted in the Preliminary Results, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.222(e)(1), Hailin, Wanxiang, and ZMC requested revocation of the
antidumping duty order as it pertains to them. Weihai also requested
revocation of the antidumping duty order, in part, on this same basis.
However, as we are rescinding this review with respect to Weihai, as
discussed above, no further analysis is required with respect to
partial revocation of the antidumping duty order as it pertains to
Weihai.
According to 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2), upon receipt of such a request,
the Department may revoke an order, in part, if it concludes that (1)
the company in question has sold subject merchandise at not less than
NV for a period of at least three consecutive years; (2) the continued
application of the antidumping duty order is not otherwise necessary to
offset dumping; and (3) the company has agreed to its immediate
reinstatement in the order if the Department concludes that the
company, subsequent to the revocation, sold subject merchandise at less
than NV.
With respect to ZMC, we find that a dumping margin exists for ZMC
in the instant review. Moreover, in Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From the People's Republic of China;
Final Results of 1998-1999 Administrative Review, Partial Rescission of
Review, and Determination Not to Revoke Order in Part, 66 FR 1953
(January 10, 2001) and Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof,
Finished and Unfinished, From the People's Republic of China; Amended
Final Results of 1998-1999 Administrative Review and Determination to
Revoke Order in Part, 66 FR 11562 (February 26, 2001) (collectively,
``TRBs XII''), ZMC was found to have made sales below NV. Because ZMC
does not have three consecutive years of sales at not less than NV, we
find that ZMC does not qualify for revocation of the order on TRBs
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b).
As for Wanxiang, in TRBs XII and Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From the People's Republic of China;
Final Results of 1999-2000 Administrative Review, Partial Rescission of
Review, and Determination Not to Revoke Order in Part, 66 FR 57420
(November 15, 2001), we determined that Wanxiang did not qualify for
revocation because it did not sell the subject merchandise in the
United States in commercial quantities in each of the three years
underlying its request for revocation. In the instant review, based on
our previous determination that Wanxiang did not make sales in
commercial quantities during at least one of the three years forming
the basis of the revocation request, i.e., TRBs XII, we do not need to
examine whether Wanxiang made sales in commercial quantities in either
of the other two years underlying Wanxiang's request for revocation.
Thus, because Wanxiang did not make sales in commercial quantities in
each of the three years cited by the company to support its revocation
request, we find that Wanxiang does not qualify for revocation of the
order on TRBs pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b).
Finally, with respect to Hailin, Hailin sold the subject
merchandise at not less than NV for a period of at least three
consecutive years. Hailin has also agreed in writing to the immediate
reinstatement in the order, as long as any exporter or producer is
subject to the order, if the Department concludes that Hailin,
subsequent to the revocation, sold the subject merchandise at less than
NV. Finally, based on our examination of the sales data submitted by
Hailin (see Hailin's July 1, 2002, preliminary results calculation
memorandum, which is on file in the Department's CRU, for our
commercial quantities analysis with respect to this data), we determine
that Hailin sold the subject merchandise in the United States in
commercial quantities in each of the three years cited by Hailin to
support its request for revocation. Therefore, based on the above
facts, and absent evidence on the record that the continued application
of the antidumping order is otherwise necessary to offset dumping from
Hailin, we determine that Hailin qualifies for revocation of the order
on TRBs pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2). Accordingly, we are revoking
the order with respect to merchandise produced and exported by Hailin.
Use of Facts Otherwise Available
As discussed in detail in the Preliminary Results, we have
determined that companieswhich did not respond to the Department's
questionnaire in this proceeding should not receive separate rates and,
thus, are viewed as part of the PRC-wide entity. Moreover, as noted in
the Preliminary Results, we determine that, in accordance with sections
776(a) and (b) of the Act, the use of adverse facts available is
appropriate for companies that did not respond to our requests for
information. No party in this proceeding has commented on these issues
since the publication of the Preliminary Results. Thus, for these final
results, we have continued to assign the PRC-wide rate of 33.18 percent
to companies that are part of the PRC-entity.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to
this investigation are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision
Memorandum'' from Richard W. Moreland, Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Import Administration, to Faryar Shirzad, Assistant Secretary, Import
Administration, dated November 6, 2002 (``Decision Memorandum''), which
is hereby adopted by this notice. Attached to this notice as an
Appendix is a list of the issues that parties have raised and to which
we have responded in the Decision Memorandum. Parties can find a
complete discussion of all issues raised in this investigation and the
corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which is on
file in the CRU. In addition, a complete version of the Decision
Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/ under the heading ``China PRC.'' The paper copy and
electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our review of comments received and a reexamination of
[[Page 68992]]
surrogate value data, we have made certain changes to the calculations
for the final results. These changes are discussed in the following
Comments in the Decision Memorandum or in the referenced final
calculation memoranda for particular companies:
All Companies
[sbull] Cup and Cone Steel Valuation
Decision Memorandum Comment 2
[sbull] Roller and Cage Steel and Scrap Valuations
Decision Memorandum Comment 4
[sbull] Profit Ratio
Decision Memorandum Comment 5
Assessment Rates
In the Preliminary Results, we miscalculated the per-unit
assessment rates of Luoyang, Hailin, and ZMC by incorrectly multiplying
the importer-specific per-unit duty by 100. This error has been
corrected in these final results. Also, for all respondents, we have
added programming language to determine whether the importer-specific
duty assessment rates were de mimimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent).
Wanxiang
We excluded domestic brokerage and handling costs from Wanxiang's
reported SG&A labor factor and deducted these expenses as a movement
expense in Wanxiang's U.S. price calculation. See Comment 12 in the
Decision Memorandum.
ZMC
We revised ZMC's final results calculations to take into account a
minor reporting error noted by ZMC in its case briefs. See Memorandum
from Case Analyst to File, ``Final Results Calculation Memorandum for
Zhejiang Machinery Import and Export Corporation,'' dated November 6,
2002, which is on file in the Department's CRU.
Final Results of Review
We determine that the following dumping margins exist for the
period June 1, 2000, through May 31, 2001:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-average margin
Exporter/manufacturer percentage.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
China National Machinery Import & Export 0.71
Corporation..............................
Wanxiang Group Corporation................ 0.00
Tianshui Hailin Import and Export 0.00
Corporation and Hailin Bearing Factory...
Luoyang Bearing Corporation (Group)....... 0.06 (de minimis)
Zhejiang Machinery Import & Export Corp... 0.81
PRC-wide rate............................. 33.18
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated
importer (or customer)-specific assessment rates for the merchandise
subject to this review. To determine whether the duty assessment rates
were de minimis, in accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR
351.106(c)(2), we calculated importer (or customer)-specific ad valorem
rates by aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S. sales
to that importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by the total
value of the sales to that importer (or customer). Where an importer
(or customer)-specific ad valorem rate was greater than de minimis, we
calculated a per unit assessment rate by aggregating the dumping
margins calculated for all U.S. sales to that importer (or customer)
and dividing this amount by the total quantity sold to that importer
(or customer). All entries subject to the PRC-wide rate will be
assessed duties at the PRC-wide rate listed above.
All other entries of the subject merchandise during the POR will be
liquidated at the antidumping duty rate in place at the time of entry.
The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions
directly to the Customs Service within 15 days of publication of these
final results of review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the finalresults of this administrative review for all
shipments of the subject merchandise 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 the PRC companies
named above, the cash deposit rates will be the rates for these firms
shown above, except that, for exporters with de minimis rates (i.e.,
less than 0.5 percent) no deposit will be required; (2) for previously-
reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters with separate rates, the cash
deposit rate will be the company-specific rate established for the most
recent period for which they were reviewed; (3) for all other PRC
exporters, the rate will be the PRC country-wide rate, which is 33.18
percent; and (4) for all other 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 requirements, when
imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results
of the next administrative review.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 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 doubled antidumping duties.
Notification Regarding APOs
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues
to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the
proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of
APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO
is a violation which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in
accordance with sections section 751(a)(1) and 771(i) of the Act.
[[Page 68993]]
Dated: November 6, 2002.
Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
APPENDIX
List of Comments and Issues in the Decision Memorandum
Comment 1: Steel Data Used for Valuing Cups and Cones is Aberrational
Comment 2: Excluding Certain Data from the Cups and Cones Valuation
Comment 3: Steel Data Used for Valuing Rollers and Cages is
Aberrational
Comment 4: Excluding Certain Data Used in Steel and Scrap Surrogate
Values
Comment 5: Overhead, Selling, General, and Administrative Expense
(``SG&A''), and Profit Ratios
Comment 6: Marine Insurance
Comment 7: Energy Factors
Comment 8: Seals Allegedly Used in the Manufacture of TRBs
Comment 9: Treatment of Sales Above Normal Value (``NV'')
Comment 10: Revocations
Comment 11: Wanxiang Group Corporation (``Wanxiang'') Constructed
Export Price (``CEP'') vs. Export Price (``EP'') Sales
Comment 12: Wanxiang Domestic Brokerage and Handling
Comment 13: Wanxiang Credit Expenses
Comment 14: Zhejiang Machinery Import & Export Corp.'s (``ZMC'') Market
Economy Steel
Comment 15: ZMC Ocean Freight
Comment 16: Valuation of ZMC's Ocean Freight Costs on a Packed Weight
Basis
Comment 17: ZMC Labor Hours
Comment 18: China National Machinery Import & Export Corporation
(``CMC'') Cage Steel
Comment 19: Valuation of CMC's U.S. Inland Freight Costs on a Packed
Weight Basis
[FR Doc. 02-28924 Filed 11-13-02; 8:45 am]