[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 68 (Friday, April 8, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-8491]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: April 8, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-824]

 

Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances; 
Silicon Carbide From the People's Republic of China

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Commerce.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 8, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edward Easton or Steve Alley, Office 
of Antidumping Investigations, Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
1777 or (202) 482-5288, respectively.

PRELIMINARY CRITICAL CIRCUMSTANCES DETERMINATION: The Department of 
Commerce (DOC) published its preliminary determination of sales at less 
than fair value in this investigation on December 8, 1993 (58 FR 
64549). On March 1, 1994, petitioner in this investigation alleged that 
critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of silicon carbide 
from the People's Republic of China (PRC).
    Since this allegation regarding critical circumstances was filed 
later than 20 days before the scheduled date of the preliminary 
determination, 19 CFR 353.16(b)(2)(ii) requires that we issue our 
preliminary critical circumstances determination not later than 30 days 
after the allegation was filed.
    Section 733(e)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 
``Act''), provides that the Department will determine that there is a 
reasonable basis to believe or suspect that critical circumstances 
exist if:
    (A) (i) There is a history of dumping in the United States or 
elsewhere of the class or kind of merchandise which is the subject of 
the investigation, or
    (ii) The person by whom, or for whose account, the merchandise was 
imported knew or should have known that the exporter was selling the 
merchandise which is the subject of the investigation at less than its 
fair value, and
    (B) There have been massive imports of the class or kind of 
merchandise which is the subject of the investigation over a relatively 
short period.

History of Dumping

    In this investigation, the first criterion of analysis is addressed 
in Petitioner's March 1, 1994 submission. Petitioner established that 
there is a history of dumping of silicon carbide by the PRC by 
providing documentation concerning both a 1986 finding of dumping and a 
1993 review of antidumping measures in the European Community. (See 
Exhibits 1-3 of petitioner's March 1, 1994 submission).
    Inasmuch as we have determined that there is a history of dumping 
of the subject merchandise, the Department does not need to determine 
whether the importers of this merchandise knew, or should have known, 
that the merchandise was being sold at less than fair value.

Massive Imports

    Having preliminarily found that there is a history of dumping of 
the subject merchandise, we need to consider whether the imports of the 
merchandise have been massive.
    Pursuant to 19 CFR 353.16(f) and 353.16(g), the Department 
considers the following when determining whether imports have been 
massive over a relatively short period of time:
    (1) Volume and value of the imports;
    (2) Seasonal trends (if applicable); and
    (3) The share of domestic consumption accounted for by the imports.
    When examining volume and value data, the Department typically 
compares the export volume for equal periods immediately preceding and 
following the filing of the petition (the ``pre-filing period'' and the 
``post-filing period''). Under 19 CFR 353.16(f)(2), unless the imports 
in the comparison period have increased by at least 15 percent over the 
imports during the base period, the imports will not be considered to 
be ``massive.''
    To determine whether there have been massive imports over a 
relatively short period of time, the Department examines shipment 
information submitted by the respondent or import statistics, when 
respondent-specific shipment information is not available. On March 4, 
1994, the Department sent letters to respondents requesting information 
regarding shipments of silicon carbide for the period of January 1991 
to December 1993. All six participating respondents in this 
investigation submitted the requested shipment information.
    Our analysis is based on the company-specific information supplied 
by respondents. Because the timing of the allegation (after the 
completion of verification and close to the scheduled date for the 
final determination) precluded on-site verification of this 
information, the Department also referred to U.S. Customs IM-115 entry 
data to corroborate respondents' reported shipment information, 
pursuant to section 771(18)(E) of the Act.
    To determine whether there have been massive imports of silicon 
carbide, we compared export volumes for the five months subsequent to 
the filing of the petition (July through November 1993) to the five 
months prior to the filing of the petition (February through June 
1993). This period of review was selected on the basis of the 
Department's practice of using the longest period for which information 
is available up until the effective date of the preliminary 
determination (which in this investigation was December 8, 1993). We 
were unable to consider changes in import penetration, pursuant to 19 
CFR 353.16(f)(1)(iii), because the available data did not permit an 
analysis of the post-filing period. Nevertheless, based on respondents' 
shipment information and U.S. Customs entry data, we find that imports 
of silicon carbide from the PRC have been massive over a relatively 
short period for two of the respondents in this investigation--Shaanxi 
Minmetals (Shaanxi) and Xiamen Abrasives Company (Xiamen). Our finding 
is based on determining that imports from Shaanxi and Xiamen increased 
more than 15% during the five month post-filing period. The other four 
respondents in this investigation--Seventh Grinding Wheel Factory 
Import and Export Corporation, Import/Export Trading Corporation of 
Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, Qinghai Metals and Minerals Import 
and Export Corporation, and Hainan Feitian Electrontech Company, 
Limited--were not responsible for massive imports. (For a summary of 
our calculations, see memo to the file of March 28, 1994). For the 
Chinese exporters that did not respond to the Department's 
questionnaire, we find that imports of silicon carbide from the PRC 
were massive, based on the best information otherwise available (BIA).
    In conclusion, given that (1) there has been a history of dumping, 
and (2) imports from certain respondents have been massive, we 
preliminarily find that critical circumstances exist for two 
respondents in this investigation--Shaanxi and Xiamen. We also 
preliminarily find that critical circumstances exist for all exporters 
who did not participate in this investigation.

FINAL CRITICAL CIRCUMSTANCES DETERMINATION: We will make a final 
determination concerning critical circumstances when we make our final 
determination in this investigation, i.e., by April 22, 1994.

ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we have notified the 
ITC of our determination.

Public Comment

    Since this preliminary critical circumstances determination is 
being made after the due date for case briefs in this investigation, we 
will accept written comments on this preliminary determination of 
critical circumstances until April 4, 1994; rebuttal comments must be 
submitted no later than April 5, 1994.
    This determination is published pursuant to section 733(f) of the 
Act.

    Dated: March 31, 1994.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 94-8491 Filed 4-7-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P