[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 62 (Friday, March 29, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14073-14075]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7632]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-533-809]


Certain Forged Stainless Steel Flanges From India; 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: In response to a request from one respondent, the Department 
of Commerce (the Department) has conducted an administrative review of 
the antidumping duty order on certain forged stainless steel flanges 
(flanges) from India. The review covers one manufacturer/exporter of 
the subject merchandise to the United States for the period February 9, 
1994 through January 31, 1995.
    We have preliminarily determined that U.S. sales have been made 
below the normal value (NV). 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 NV. Interested parties are 
invited to comment on these preliminary results. Parties who submit 
arguments in this proceeding are requested to submit with the argument 
(1) a statement of the issue, and (2) a brief summary of the argument.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 29, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
John Kugelman, Office of Antidumping Compliance, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: 
(202) 482-5253.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On February 9, 1994, the Department published in the Federal 
Register (59

[[Page 14074]]
FR 5994) the antidumping duty order on certain forged stainless steel 
flanges from India. On January 12, 1995, the Department published in 
the Federal Register a notice of ``Opportunity to Request an 
Administrative Review'' of this antidumping duty order for the period 
of February 9, 1994 through January 31, 1995 (60 FR 6524). We received 
a timely request for review from the respondent, Akai Impex, Ltd. 
(Akai). On February 15, 1995, the Department initiated a review of Akai 
(60 FR 8629). The period of review (POR) is February 9, 1994 through 
January 31, 1995.

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.

Scope of the Review

    The products covered by this order are certain forged stainless 
steel flanges both finished and not-finished, generally manufactured to 
specification ASTM A-182, and made in alloys such as 304, 304L, 316, 
and 316L. The scope includes five general types of flanges. They are 
weld neck, used for butt-weld line connection, threaded, used for 
threaded line connections, slip-on and lap joint, used with stub-ends/
butt-weld line connections, socket weld, used to fit pipe into a 
machined recession, and blind, used to seal off a line. The sizes of 
the flanges with the scope range generally from one to six inches; 
however, all sizes of the above described merchandise are included in 
the scope. Specifically excluded from the scope of this order are cast 
stainless steel flanges. Cast stainless steel flanges generally are 
manufactured to specification ASTM-A-351. The flanges subject to this 
order are currently classifiable under subheading 7307.21.1000 and 
7307.21.5000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS). The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes. The written description of the scope of this order remains 
dispositive.
    The review covers one Indian manufacturer/exporter, Akai, and the 
period February 9, 1994 through January 31, 1995.

United States Price (USP)

    In calculating USP for Akai, the Department treated respondent's 
sales as export price (EP), as defined in section 772(a) of the Act, 
because the subject merchandise was sold to unaffiliated U.S. 
purchasers prior to the date of importation.
    We calculated EP based on packed, delivered, duty-paid prices to 
unaffiliated customers in the United States. We made deductions from 
the gross unit price, where appropriate, for inland freight-plant/
warehouse to port of exit, brokerage and handling, international 
freight, and U.S. customs duty, in accordance with section 772(c)(2)(A) 
of the Act. We added to the gross unit price packing costs for shipment 
to the United States, where applicable, pursuant to section 
772(c)(1)(A) of the Act.
    No other adjustments to USP were claimed or allowed.

Normal Value (NV)

A. Viability

    In order to determine whether there was a sufficient volume of 
sales in the home market to serve as a viable basis for calculating NV, 
we compared Akai's volume of home market sales of the foreign like 
product to the volume of U.S. sales of the subject merchandise, in 
accordance with section 773(a)(1)(C) of the Act. Because Akai's 
aggregate volume of home market sales was less than five percent of its 
aggregate volume of U.S. sales for the subject merchandise, we 
determined that the aggregate quantity of the foreign like product sold 
in the exporting country is insufficient to permit a proper comparison 
with the sales of the subject merchandise to the United States. 
Therefore, in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B), we chose Canada as 
the most appropriate third country market for comparison.

B. Model Match

    We first searched for the third country model which is identical in 
characteristics with each U.S. model. When there were no 
contemporaneous sales of identical merchandise, we searched for the 
third country model which is most like or most similar in 
characteristics with each U.S. model. To perform the model match, we 
first searched for the most similar third country model with regard to 
alloy. If there were several third country models with identical alloy, 
we then searched among the models with identical alloy for the most 
similar third country model with regard to size. We continued this 
process with regard to type and standard. If, as a result of this 
analysis, several third country models were deemed equally similar, we 
chose the third country model which, when compared to the U.S. model, 
had the lowest difference in variable cost of manufacturing (difmer), 
provided the difmer did not exceed 20 percent of the total cost of 
manufacturing of the U.S. model.
    For those U.S. models where no foreign like product was found with 
a difmer of less than 20 percent, we resorted to CV as the basis of NV, 
in accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the Act.

C. Constructed Value

    In accordance with section 773(e) of the Act, we calculated CV 
based on Akai's cost of materials and fabrication employed in producing 
the subject merchandise, selling, general and administrative expense 
(SG&A) and profit incurred and realized in connection with the 
production and sale of the foreign like product, and U.S. packing 
costs. We used the costs of materials, fabrication, and G&A as reported 
in the CV portion of Akai's questionnaire response.
    We used the U.S. packing costs as reported in the U.S. sales 
portion of Akai's questionnaire response. We based selling expenses and 
profit on the information reported in the third country sales portion 
of Akai's questionnaire response. See Certain Pasta from Italy; Notice 
of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Postponement of Final Determination, 61 FR 1344, 1349 (January 19, 
1996). For SG&A expenses and actual profit, we used the average of 
actual amounts incurred and realized by Akai, in connection with the 
production and sale of the foreign like product in the ordinary course 
of trade, for consumption in the foreign country, in accordance with 
section 773(e)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act.

D. Price-to-Price Comparisons

    For those price-to-price comparisons where we did not resort to CV, 
we based NV on the prices at which the foreign like products were first 
sold for consumption in the third country market to an unrelated party, 
in the usual commercial quantities and in the ordinary course of trade 
and, to the extent practicable, at the same level of trade as the EP, 
in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act. Akai made all 
third country and EP sales of subject merchandise to the same level of 
trade. Pursuant to section 777A(d)(2) of the Act, we compared the EPs 
of individual transactions to the monthly weighted-average price of 
sales of the foreign like product. We made adjustments, where 
applicable, for expenses incident to placing the foreign like product 
in condition packed ready

[[Page 14075]]
for shipment to the place of delivery to the purchaser, and for third 
country credit expenses, in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(B)(ii) of 
the Act. We increased third country price by U.S. packing costs in 
accordance with section 773(a)(6)(A) of the Act and reduced it by third 
country packing costs in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(B) of the 
Act. Prices were reported net of value-added taxes (VAT) and, 
therefore, no adjustment for VAT was necessary. In accordance with 
section 773(a)(6)(C) of the Act, we increased NV by adding U.S. credit 
expense. No other adjustments were claimed or allowed.

Preliminary Results of the Review.

    As a result of this review, we preliminary determine that the 
following weighted-average dumping margin exists:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Margin 
      Manufacturer/exporter                  Period            (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Akai Impex, Ltd.................  2/09/94-1/31/95............     11.04 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parties to the proceeding may request disclosure within five 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 date of publication, or the 
first workday thereafter. Case briefs and/or written comments from 
interested parties may be submitted not later than 30 days after the 
date of publication. Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals to written comments, 
limited to issues raised in the case briefs and comments, may be filed 
not later than 37 days after the date of publication. Parties who 
submit argument in this proceeding are requested to submit with the 
argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a brief summary of the 
argument. The Department will issue the final results of the 
administrative review, including the results of its analysis of issues 
in any such written comments or at hearing, within 180 days of issuance 
of these preliminary results.
    The Department shall determine, and Customs shall assess, 
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Individual differences 
between USP and NV may vary from the percentages stated above. The 
Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to Customs. 
The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment 
of antidumping dumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the 
determination and for future deposits of estimated duties.
    Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective 
upon completion of the final results of these administrative reviews 
for all shipments of Flanges from India entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the 
final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 
751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for Akai will be the 
rate established in the final results of administrative review; (2) for 
merchandise exported by manufacturers or exporters not covered in these 
reviews but covered in the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) 
investigation or a previous review, the cash deposit will continue to 
be the most recent rate published in the final determination or final 
results for which the manufacturer or exporter received a company-
specific rate; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in these 
reviews, or the original investigation, but the manufacturer is, the 
cash deposit rate will be that established for the manufacturer of the 
merchandise in the final results of these reviews, or the LTFV 
investigation; and (4) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is 
a firm covered in these or any previous reviews, the cash deposit rate 
will be 162.14 percent, the ``all others'' rate established in the LTFV 
investigation (59 FR 5994, February 9, 1994).
    This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 353.34(d). 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 sanctionable violation.
    This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their 
responsibility 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)).

    Dated: March 21, 1996.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-7632 Filed 3-28-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M