[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 436-438]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-161]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-570-834]


Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances: Disposable 
Pocket Lighters From the People's Republic of China

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 4, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Anne Osgood or Cynthia 
Thirumalai, Office of Countervailing Investigations, Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20230; telephone (202) 482-0167 or 482-4087, respectively.

Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances

    On December 5, 1994, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
preliminarily determined that disposable pocket lighters from the 
People's Republic of China (PRC) are [[Page 437]] being, or are likely 
to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (59 FR 64191, 
December 13, 1994). On November 23, 1994, petitioner alleged that there 
is a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that critical circumstances 
exist with respect to imports of subject merchandise. In accordance 
with 19 CFR 353.16(b)(2)(ii), since this allegation was filed later 
than 20 days before the scheduled date of the preliminary 
determination, we must issue our preliminary critical circumstances 
determination not later than 30 days after the allegation was 
submitted.
    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 May 9, 1994, submission. Exhibit 30 to the petition 
provides documentation indicating that the European Community imposed 
antidumping duties on such or similar merchandise produced and exported 
from the PRC in November 1991. Therefore, petitioner has established 
that there is a history of dumping elsewhere of such lighters by PRC 
producers/exporters.

Importer Knowledge

    With respect to the alternative first criterion, we have 
consistently determined that preliminary antidumping duty margins in 
excess of 25 percent on U.S. purchase price sales are sufficient to 
impute importer knowledge of sales at less than fair value. See, Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Metal from 
China (56 FR 18570, April 23, 1991) and Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value: Extruded Rubber Thread from Malaysia (57 FR 
38465, August 25, 1992). In this investigation, China National Overseas 
Trading Corporation (Ningbo)(``COTCO''), Guangdong Light Industrial 
Products Import & Export Corporation (``GLIP''), PolyCity Industrial 
Ltd. (``PolyCity''), and all non-responding companies received 
preliminary antidumping duty margins in excess of 25 percent. 
Therefore, we preliminarily determine that importers either knew or 
should have known that such exporters were selling disposable pocket 
lighters at less than fair value.

Massive Imports

    Because we have preliminarily found that the first statutory 
criterion is met for finding critical circumstances in that there is a 
history of dumping of the subject merchandise and, alternatively, there 
is actual or imputed importer knowledge of sales at less than fair 
value for certain companies, we must consider the second statutory 
criterion: whether imports of the merchandise have been massive over a 
relatively short period.
    According to 19 CFR 353.16(f) and 353.16(g), we consider the 
following to determine 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. 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, we will not consider 
the imports to have been ``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 December 9, 1994, the Department sent respondents requests for 
information regarding shipments of disposable pocket lighters for the 
period January 1992 to December 1994. We received the requested 
information filed in proper form on December 19, 1994, for COTCO, GLIP, 
Gao Yao (HK) Hua Fa Industrial Co., Ltd. (``Gao Yao''), and PolyCity. 
For these responding companies, we used company-specific shipment data 
in this investigation and the related analysis. Cli-Claque Company, 
Ltd. (``Cli-Claque'') did not submit information for this preliminary 
critical circumstances determination.
    To determine whether or not imports of disposable pocket lighters 
have been massive over a relatively short period, we compared each 
respondent's export volume for the seven months subsequent to the 
filing of the petition (May through November 1994) to that during the 
seven months prior to the filing of the petition (October 1993 through 
April 1994). This period was selected based on the Department's 
practice of using the longest period for which information is available 
from the month that the petition was submitted through the effective 
date of the preliminary determination of sales at less than fair value, 
which in this investigation was December 5, 1994. See Preliminary 
Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances; Silicon Carbide 
From the People's Republic of China (59 FR 16795, April 8, 1994). We 
were unable to consider the share of domestic consumption accounted for 
by the imports, pursuant to 353.16(f)(1)(iii), because the available 
data did not permit such a post-filing analysis. In addition, we found 
no evidence of seasonality, pursuant to 19 CFR 353.16(f)(i)(ii), with 
respect to PRC exports of disposable pocket lighters to the United 
States.
    Respondents have argued that any increases in PRC lighter imports 
after the filing of the petition were in anticipation of the Consumer 
Product Safety Commission child-proof lighter requirements due to 
become effective on July 12, 1994. (See Safety Standard for Cigarette 
Lighters (58 FR 37557, July 12, 1993).) The evidence on the record at 
this time is insufficient to support the legal and factual bases for 
this argument. We will address this argument further in our final 
determination.
    Based on the responding companies' shipment information, we 
preliminarily find that imports of disposable pocket lighters from the 
PRC have been massive over a relatively short period for COTCO. We 
preliminarily find that imports were not massive with respect to Gao 
Yao, GLIP, and PolyCity. (See business proprietary memorandum from team 
to file, dated December 23, 1994.)
    Therefore, because there is a history of dumping of such or similar 
merchandise, and, alternatively, importers knew or should have known 
that the exporter was selling the merchandise at less than its fair 
value, and imports of disposable pocket lighters have been massive over 
a relatively short period of time, we preliminarily determine that 
there is a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that critical 
circumstances exist with respect to imports of disposable pocket 
lighters from COTCO. Because imports from Gao Yao, GLIP and PolyCity 
have not been massive, we preliminarily [[Page 438]] determine that 
there is not a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that critical 
circumstances exist with respect to imports of disposable pocket 
lighters from these three companies. In addition, with respect to Cli-
Claque, and all non-responding producers/exporters of disposable pocket 
lighters from the PRC, we preliminarily determine, as best information 
available, that critical circumstances exist.
    We will make a final determination concerning critical 
circumstances when we make our final determination of sales at less 
than fair value in this investigation.
    This determination is published pursuant to section 733(f) of the 
Act and 19 CFR 353.15(a)(4).

    Dated: December 23, 1994.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 95-161 Filed 1-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P