[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 244 (Wednesday, December 21, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-31357]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: December 21, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-475-703]

 

Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin From Italy; Preliminary 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on granular 
polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin from Italy for the period August 
1, 1991 through July 31, 1992. The review covers one manufacturer/
exporter of this merchandise to the United States, Ausimont S.p.A.
    We have preliminarily determined that sales have been made below 
the foreign market value (FMV). If these preliminary results are 
adopted in our final results of administrative review, we will instruct 
U.S. Customs to assess antidumping duties equal to the difference 
between the United States price (USP) and the FMV.
    We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary 
results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 21, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Copyak or Richard Herring, Office of Countervailing Compliance, 
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., 
Washington, DC; telephone: (202) 482-2786.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 12, 1992, the Department published in the Federal 
Register a notice of ``Opportunity to Request Administrative Review'' 
(57 FR 36063) of the antidumping order on PTFE resin from Italy (53 FR 
33163; August 30, 1988). On August 31, 1992, Ausimont S.p.A. and 
Ausimont U.S.A. requested an administrative review of the order for the 
period August 1, 1991 through July 31, 1992. We initiated the review on 
September 28, 1992 (57 FR 44551). Verifications were conducted in 
Milan, Italy, September 13-16, 1993, and in Morristown, New Jersey, 
November 22-23, 1993. The Department is conducting this administrative 
review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act).

Scope of the Review

    Imports covered by this review are shipments of PTFE resin which is 
classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) item number 
3904.61.00. PTFE dispersions in water and fine powders are not covered 
by this order. The HTS item number is provided for convenience and 
Customs purposes. The written description remains dispositive. The 
order on PTFE resin from Italy also covers PTFE wet raw polymer 
exported from Italy to the United States (see Granular 
Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Italy; Final Determination of 
Circumvention of Antidumping Duty Order (58 FR 26100; April 30, 1993). 
However, because the Department issued its preliminary affirmative 
determination of circumvention and ordered the suspension of 
liquidation of wet raw polymer entries after the review period, entries 
of PTFE wet raw polymer are not subject to this particular review (see 
Memorandum to Joseph A. Spetrini, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 
Administration, dated September 10, 1993; The Third Administrative 
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Granular 
Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Italy, which is on file in the 
Central Records Unit (room B099 of the Main Commerce Building)).
    The review covers one manufacturer/exporter of Italian PTFE resin 
to the United States, Ausimont S.p.A., and the review period is August 
1, 1991 through July 31, 1992.

United States Price (USP)

    The Department based USP on exporter's sales price (ESP), in 
accordance with section 772(c) of the Act, because all sales to 
unrelated parties were made after importation of the subject 
merchandise into the United States. We calculated ESP based on the 
packed, delivered prices to unrelated purchasers in the United States. 
We made deductions, where appropriate, for foreign inland freight, 
ocean freight, marine insurance, brokerage and handling charges, U.S. 
duty, and U.S. inland freight in accordance with section 772(d)(2)(A) 
of the Act. We made further deductions, where appropriate, for rebates, 
credit expenses, warranties, technical services, and indirect selling 
expenses pursuant to section 772(e)(2) of the Act.
    We also adjusted USP for taxes (i.e., value-added taxes) in 
accordance with our practice as outlined in Silicon Manganese from 
Venezuela, Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value 
(59 FR 31204, June 17, 1994).

Foreign Market Value (FMV)

    The Department calculated FMV using home market prices, as defined 
in section 773(a) of the Act, since sufficient quantities of such or 
similar merchandise were sold in the home market to provide a basis of 
comparison. When possible, we compared sales of identical merchandise 
in the two markets. For each instance in which identical merchandise 
was not sold in Italy during the relevant contemporaneous period, we 
selected the contemporaneous home market sale or sales of the product 
that was the most similar to the merchandise involved in the U.S. sale. 
See 19 U.S.C. 1667(16). We then compared the U.S. sale to the selected 
sale or sales and, if appropriate, made adjustments for differences in 
merchandise.
    To achieve the most appropriate comparisons, home market sales were 
matched with U.S. sales according to the amounts and types of fillers 
in the products sold and the percentages of those fillers. See 
Memorandum To File dated August 2, 1994; Changes in the Model Match 
Methodology for Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Italy, 
which is on file in the Central Records Unit (room B099 of the Main 
Commerce Building).
    FMV was based on packed, delivered prices to unrelated customers in 
Italy, with appropriate deductions from the home market price for 
inland freight and insurance, credit expenses, and home market packing. 
We added U.S. packing to the home market price in accordance with 
section 773(a)(1) of the Act. We then made adjustments to the home 
market price for indirect selling expenses, which we limited to the 
amount of indirect selling expenses incurred in the United States, in 
accordance with 19 CFR 353.56(b)(2). In addition, we included in FMV 
the amount of value-added taxes collected in the home market in 
accordance with our practice as outlined in Silicon Manganese from 
Venezuela, Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value 
(59 FR 31204, June 17, 1994).

Preliminary Results of the Review

    As a result of our comparison of USP with FMV, we preliminarily 
determine that the following weighted-average dumping margin existed 
during the period August 1, 1991 through July 31, 1992:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Margin 
              Manufacturer/Exporter                  Period    (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ausimont S.p.A..................................    08/01/91-           
                                                     07/31/92     13.31 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department shall determine and the Customs Service shall assess 
antidumpting duties on all appropriate entries. Individual differences 
between USP and FMV may vary from the percentage stated above. Upon 
completion of this review, the Department will issue appraisement 
instructions directly to the Customs Service.
    Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective 
for all shipments of the subject merchandise, entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouses, for consumption on or after the publication of the 
final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section 
751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for the reviewed 
company will be the rate established in the final results in this 
administrative review; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated 
companies not listed above, 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, a prior review, or 
the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the 
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for 
the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) 
for merchandise exported by all other manufacturers and exporters who 
are nor covered by this or any previous administrative review conducted 
by the Department, the cash deposit rate will be the ``all-others'' 
rate established in the LTFV investigation.
    On March 25, 1993, the Court of International Trade (CIT), in 
Floral Trade Council v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 766 (CIT 1993), and 
Federal-Mogul Corporation v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 782 (CIT 
1993), decided that once an ``all others'' rate is established for a 
company, it can only be changed through an administrative review. The 
Department has determined that in order to implement these decisions, 
it is appropriate to reinstate the original ``all others'' rate from 
the LTFV investigation (or that rate as amended for correction of 
clerical errors or as a result of litigation) in proceedings governed 
by antidumping duty orders. In proceedings governed by antidumping 
findings, unless we are able to ascertain the ``all others'' rate from 
the original LTFV investigation, the Department has determined that it 
is appropriate to adopt the ``new shipper'' rate established in the 
first final results of administrative review published by the 
Department (or that rate as amended for correction of clerical errors 
or as a result of litigation) as the ``all others'' rate for the 
purposes of establishing cash deposits in all current and future 
administrative reviews.
    Because this proceeding is governed by an antidumping duty order, 
the ``all others'' rate for the purposes of this review will be 46.46 
percent--the ``all others'' rate established in the LTFV investigation 
(50 FR 26019; June 24, 1985).
    These deposit requirements, 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.

Public Comment

    Parties to the proceeding may request disclosure within 5 days of 
the date of publication of this notice. Interested parties may submit a 
written request for hearing not later than 10 days after publication of 
this notice. In accordance with 19 CFR 353.38(c)(1)(ii), interested 
parties may submit written comments or arguments in case briefs on 
these preliminary results within 30 days of the date of publication. 
Rebuttal briefs, limited to arguments raised in case briefs, may be 
submitted 7 days after the time limit for filing the case briefs. Any 
hearing, if requested, will be held 7 days after the scheduled date for 
submission of rebuttal briefs. Copies of case briefs and rebuttal 
briefs must be served on interested parties in accordance with 19 CFR 
353.38(e).
    The Department will publish the final results of this 
administrative review, including the results of its analysis of issues 
raised in any case or rebuttal brief or at a hearing.
    This administrative review and notice are in accordance with 
section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)(B)) and 19 CFR 
353.22(c)(5).

    Dated: December 8, 1994.
Paul L. Joffe,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 94-31357 Filed 12-20-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M