[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 66 (Thursday, April 4, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15037-15039]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-8219]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-570-501]


Natural Bristle Paint Brushes and Brush Heads From The People's 
Republic of China; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review

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

ACTION: Notice of Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review of Natural Bristle Paint Brushes and Brush Heads 
from the People's Republic of China.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on natural bristle 
paint brushes and brush heads (paint brushes) from the People's 
Republic of China (PRC) in response to requests by importers, Great 
American Marketing, Inc. and Brenner Associates, Ltd., and by a 
domestic interested party, EZ Paintr Corporation (EZ Paintr). This 
review covers shipments of this merchandise to the United States during 
the period February 1, 1994, through January 31, 1995.
    We have preliminarily determined that sales have been made below 
normal value (NV). If these preliminary results are adopted in our 
final results, we will instruct U.S. Customs to assess antidumping 
duties equal to the difference between the export price and NV.
    Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary 
results. Parties who submit argument are requested to submit with each 
argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a brief summary of the 
argument.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 4, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elisabeth Urfer or Maureen Flannery, 
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) 482-4733.

Applicable Statute

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are 
references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective 
date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the 
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless otherwise 
indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are to the 
current regulations, as amended by the interim regulations published in 
the Federal Register on May 11, 1995 (60 FR 25130).

Background

    The Department published in the Federal Register an antidumping 
duty order on paint brushes from the PRC on February 14, 1986 (51 FR 
5580). On February 2, 1995, the Department published in the Federal 
Register (60 FR 6524) a notice of opportunity to request an 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on paint brushes 
from the PRC covering the period February 1, 1994, through January 31, 
1995.
    In accordance with 19 CFR 353.22(a), Great American Marketing, 
Inc., requested that we conduct an administrative review of Yixing 
Sanai Brush Making Co., Ltd. (Yixing), and Eastar B.F. (Thailand) 
Company Ltd. (Eastar); Brenner Associates requested that we conduct an 
administrative review of Hebei Animal By-Products I/E Corp. (HACO), 
China National Metals & Minerals I/E Corp, Zhenjiang Trading Corp. 
(Zhenjiang Trading), and Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region Light 
Industrial Products I/E Corp.; and EZ Paintr requested that we conduct 
an administrative review of China National Native Produce and Animal 
By-Products Import-Export Corporation, HACO, Zhenjiang Trading, and the 
Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region Light Industrial Products I/E. We 
published a notice of initiation of this antidumping duty 
administrative review on March 15, 1995 (60 FR 13955). The Department 
is conducting this administrative review in accordance with section 751 
of the Act.

Scope of Review

    Imports covered by this review are shipments of natural bristle 
paint brushes and brush heads from the PRC. The merchandise under 
review is currently classifiable under item 9603.40.40.40 of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the 
HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the 
written description of the merchandise is dispositive.
    This review covers the period February 1, 1994, through January 31, 
1995, and covers six producers/exporters of Chinese paint brushes.

Separate Rates

    To establish whether a company operating in a state-controlled 
economy is sufficiently independent to be entitled to a separate rate, 
the Department analyzes each exporting entity under the test 
established in Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Sparklers from the People's Republic of China (56 FR 20588, May 6, 
1991) (Sparklers), as amplified by the Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the People's Republic of 
China (59 FR 22585, May 2, 1994) (Silicon Carbide). Under this policy, 
exporters in non-market economies (NMEs) are entitled to separate, 
company-specific margins when they can demonstrate an absence of 
government control, both in law and in fact, with respect to exports. 
Evidence supporting, though not requiring, a finding of de jure absence 
of government control includes: (1) An absence of restrictive 
stipulations associated with an individual exporter's

[[Page 15038]]
business and export licenses; (2) any legislative enactments 
decentralizing control of companies; and (3) any other formal measures 
by the government decentralizing control of companies. De facto absence 
of government control with respect to exports is based on four factors: 
(1) Whether each exporter sets its own export prices independently of 
the government and without the approval of a government authority; (2) 
whether each exporter retains the proceeds from its sales and makes 
independent decisions regarding the disposition of profits or financing 
of losses; (3) whether each exporter has the authority to negotiate and 
sign contracts and other agreements; and (4) whether each exporter has 
autonomy from the government regarding the selection of management.
    HACO was the only exporter that responded to the Department's 
request for information; therefore, HACO was the only firm for which we 
made a determination as to whether it should receive a separate rate. 
The determination as to whether HACO should receive a separate rate is 
made under the policy set forth in Silicon Carbide and Sparklers.
    The evidence on the record demonstrates that HACO meets the de jure 
and three of the four de facto criteria, which are that it sets its own 
export prices independently, that it retains proceeds from its sales, 
and that it has the authority to negotiate and sign contracts and other 
agreements, but that it may not have autonomy in making decisions 
regarding the selection of its management. According to the information 
on the record, the Hebei Foreign Trade & Economic Cooperation 
Department, a provincial government entity, appoints the general 
manager of HACO. Consequently, we have preliminarily found that there 
is de facto government control with respect to HACO's exports according 
to the criteria identified in Sparklers and Silicon Carbide.
    However, because the implication of the provincial government's 
role in selection of HACO's management is not clear from the record, 
given that HACO meets three of the four de facto criteria, we are 
giving HACO an opportunity to clarify its response. We will request 
additional information from HACO, and consider such information in 
determining whether to assign HACO a separate rate for the final 
results of this review. For further discussion of the Department's 
preliminary determination that HACO is not entitled to a separate rate, 
see Decision Memorandum to the Director, Office of Antidumping 
Compliance, dated March 27, 1996: ``Separate rate analysis for Hebei 
Animal By-Products I/E Corp. in the administrative review of natural 
bristle paint brushes and brush heads from the People's Republic of 
China,'' which is on file in the Central Records Unit (room B099 of the 
Main Commerce Building).

Facts Available

    We preliminarily determine that the use of the facts available is 
appropriate for Yixing, Eastar, Zhenjiang Trading, China National 
Native Produce and Animal By-Products Import-Export Corporation, and 
Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region Light Industrial Products I/E Corp. 
because these firms did not respond to the Department's antidumping 
questionnaire. Because necessary information is not available on the 
record with regard to sales by these firms, as a result of their 
withholding the requested information, we must make our preliminary 
determination based on facts otherwise available pursuant to section 
776(a) of the Act.
    The Department finds that, in not responding to the questionnaire, 
these five firms failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of their 
ability to comply with requests for information from the Department.
    We also preliminarily determine, in accordance with section 776(a) 
of the Act, that the use of the facts available is appropriate for 
HACO. While HACO cooperated with our requests for information, HACO has 
not overcome the presumption of government control. Furthermore, there 
is another producer/exporter of paint brushes in Hebei province that 
did not respond to our request for information. We also sent the 
provincial government a questionnaire, but did not receive a response. 
As a result, we have determined to use facts available with respect to 
sales made by HACO and the other Hebei exporter/producer of paint 
brushes.
    Where the Department must base the entire dumping margin for a 
respondent in an administrative review on the facts available because 
that respondent failed to cooperate, section 776(b) authorizes the 
Department to use an inference adverse to the interests of that 
respondent in choosing the facts available. Section 776(b) also 
authorizes the Department to use as adverse facts available information 
derived from the petition, the final determination, a previous 
administrative review, or other information placed on the record. 
Because information from prior proceedings constitutes secondary 
information, section 776(c) provides that the Department shall, to the 
extent practicable, corroborate that secondary information from 
independent sources reasonably at its disposal. The Statement of 
Administrative Action (SAA) provides that ``corroborate'' means simply 
that the Department will satisfy itself that the secondary information 
to be used has probative value.
    To corroborate secondary information, the Department will, to the 
extent practicable, examine the reliability and relevance of the 
information to be used. However, unlike other types of information, 
such as input costs or selling expenses, there are no independent 
sources for calculated dumping margins. The only source for margins is 
administrative determinations. Thus, in an administrative review, if 
the Department chooses as total adverse facts available a calculated 
dumping margin from a prior segment of the proceeding, it is not 
necessary to question the reliability of the margin for that time 
period. With respect to the relevance aspect of corroboration, however, 
the Department will consider information reasonably at its disposal as 
to whether there are circumstances that would render a margin not 
relevant. Where circumstances indicate that the selected margin is not 
appropriate as adverse facts available, the Department will disregard 
the margin and determine an appropriate margin (see, e.g., Fresh Cut 
Flowers from Mexico; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review (60 FR 49567), where the Department disregarded 
the highest margin in that case as adverse BIA because the margin was 
based on another company's uncharacteristic business expense resulting 
in an unusually high margin). In this case, we have used the highest 
rate from any prior segment of the proceeding, 127.07 percent rate.

Preliminary Results of the Review

    We preliminarily determine that the following dumping margins 
exist:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin  
    Manufacturer/exporter              Time period            (percent) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yixing Sanai Brush Making     2/1/94-1/31/95...............   \1\ 127.07
 Co. Ltd.                                                               

[[Page 15039]]
                                                                        
Eastar B.F. (Thailand)        2/1/94-1/31/95...............   \1\ 127.07
 Company Ltd.                                                           
Hebei Animal By-Products I/E  2/1/94-1/31/95...............   \1\ 127.07
 Corp. and another firm                                                 
 controlled by the                                                      
 provincial government, the                                             
 name of which is                                                       
 proprietary.                                                           
China National Metals &       2/1/94-1/31/95...............   \1\ 127.07
 Minerals I/E Corp,                                                     
 Zhenjiang Trading Corp.                                                
Inner Mongolia Autonomous     2/1/94-1/31/95...............   \1\ 127.07
 Region Light Industrial                                                
 Products I/E Corp.                                                     
China National Native         2/1/94-1/31/95...............  \1\ 127.07 
 Produce and Animal By-                                                 
 Products Import-Export                                                 
 Corporation.                                                           
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This rate does not represent a separate rate determination.         


    Parties to the proceeding may request disclosure within 5 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 publication of this notice, 
or the first workday thereafter. Interested parties may submit case 
briefs within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. 
Rebuttal briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in the case 
briefs, may be filed not later than 37 days after the date of 
publication. The Department will publish a notice of final results of 
this administrative review, which will include the results of its 
analysis of issues raised in any such comments.
    The Department shall determine, and the Customs Service shall 
assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department 
will issue appraisement instructions directly to the Customs Service.
    Furthermore, the following deposit rates will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all 
shipments of paint brushes from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as 
provided for by section 751(a)(2)(c) of the Act: (1) for the companies 
named above which were not found to have separate rates, as well as for 
all other PRC exporters, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide 
rate established in the final results of this review; (2) for any 
company found to merit a separate rate for the final results of this 
review, the rate will be the company-specific rate for that company 
established in the final results of this review; (3) for previously 
reviewed non-PRC exporters, the cash deposit rate will be the rate 
established in the most recent segment of the proceeding; 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 rates, 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.
    This administrative review and notice are in accordance with 
section 751(a)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR 353.22.

    Dated: March 27, 1996.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-8219 Filed 4-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P