[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 238 (Tuesday, December 10, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65025-65027]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-31357]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-538-802]


Shop Towels From Bangladesh; 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 the petitioner, Milliken & 
Company (Milliken), the Department of Commerce (the Department) is 
conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on 
shop towels from Bangladesh. The period of review (POR) is March 1, 
1995, through February 29, 1996. This review covers four manufacturers/
exporters. The preliminary results of this review indicate the 
existence of dumping margins during the period.
    Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary 
results. Parties who submit arguments are requested to submit with each 
argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a brief summary of the 
argument.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 10, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Rosenbaum, Kristie Strecker or 
Kris Campbell, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone (202) 482-4733.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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).

Background

    On March 4, 1996, the Department published a notice of 
``Opportunity to Request an Administrative Review'' (61 FR 8238) of the 
antidumping duty order on shop towels from Bangladesh (57 FR 9688, 
March 20, 1992) for the period March 1, 1995, through February 29, 
1996. On March 27, 1996, the petitioner, Milliken, requested an 
administrative review of four manufacturers/exporters: Greyfab 
(Bangladesh) Ltd. (Greyfab); Hashem International (Hashem); Khaled 
Textile Mills Ltd. (Khaled); and Shabnam Textiles (Shabnam). We 
published a notice of initiation of the review on May 24, 1996 (61 FR 
26158). The Department is now conducting a review of these respondents 
pursuant to section 751 of the Act.

[[Page 65026]]

Scope of the Review

    The products covered by this administrative review are shop towels. 
Shop towels are absorbent industrial wiping cloths made from a loosely 
woven fabric. The fabric may be either 100-percent cotton or a blend of 
materials. Shop towels are currently classifiable under item numbers 
6307.10.2005 and 6307.10.2015 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedules (HTS). 
Although HTS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes, our written description of the scope of this proceeding 
remains dispositive.

Export Price

    The Department used export price (EP), as defined in section 772(a) 
of the Act, for Greyfab, Hashem, Khaled, and Shabnam because the 
subject merchandise was sold by the manufacturer, prior to importation, 
to unaffiliated purchasers in the United States and the constructed 
export price was not otherwise warranted based on the facts of record. 
For each of the companies, we calculated EP based on packed C&F or FOB 
prices. We made deductions, where appropriate, for forwarding charges, 
insurance expenses, and ocean freight in accordance with section 
772(c)(2) of the Act.

Normal Value

    In accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the Act, we used 
constructed value (CV) as normal value (NV) for Hashem, Kahled, and 
Shabnam, because none of these companies sold the foreign like product 
in the home market or in any third-country market during the POR.
    For Greyfab, we used sales to a third country as NV where such 
sales were appropriate matches to the U.S. sales under review. Where we 
did not have appropriate third-country matches, we used CV as NV.
    We calculated CV, in accordance with section 773(e) of the Act, as 
the sum of the cost of manufacturing (COM) of the product sold in the 
United States, selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses, 
profit, and U.S. packing expenses. The COM of the product sold in the 
United States is the sum of direct material, direct labor, and variable 
and fixed factory overhead expenses.
    For these preliminary results, the administrative record contains 
no information reflecting overall SG&A levels in Bangladesh that the 
Department could use to calculate CV. For each of the four responding 
companies, the only facts available for these preliminary results were 
the amounts for SG&A incurred and realized by the respondent as shown 
in the company's financial statements. Therefore, in accordance with 
section 773(e)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act, we determined SG&A from the 
financial statements of the respondents.
    We calculated profit for CV under section 773(e)(2)(B)(iii) of the 
Act. We used this method because we had no information on actual profit 
amounts earned by the exporters in connection with the production and 
sale of the merchandise for consumption in the home market or any 
information that would permit us to use any of the other alternatives 
for calculating profit under section 773(e)(2) of the Act. Instead, we 
applied another reasonable method under 773(e)(2)(B)(iii). We received 
a submission containing factual information regarding profit from two 
respondents (Greyfab and Hashem) on November 6, 1996. For these 
preliminary results, we have used, as the profit amount for all 
respondents, the actual profits of textile mills that sold the same 
general category of products as the subject merchandise in the home 
market during the POR.
    We have calculated amounts for scrap/wastage using the facts 
available (FA). In both the original and supplemental questionnaires we 
requested, for each company, information concerning actual wastage and 
scrap percentages that occur in production. None of the respondents 
were able to provide data indicating the actual amount of wastage 
incurred. Therefore, the record contains no information for a figure 
reflecting actual wastage which we can reasonably use for our 
calculations. Section 776 of the Act authorizes the Department's use of 
FA in certain situations, including situations in which necessary 
information is not on the record or an interested party fails to 
provide necessary information in the form and the manner requested. In 
this case, data which the Department needs in order to calculate scrap/
wastage is not on the record and responses to the Department's requests 
for such data were not provided in the form and the manner requested. 
Furthermore, data provided by respondents was so incomplete that it 
could not serve as a reliable basis for calculating scrap/wastage. 
Thus, in accordance with Section 776 of the Act, we have decided to 
resort to FA in order to calculate scrap/wastage. As FA, we calculated 
an amount for wastage using the five-percent figure petitioner 
submitted in its October 16, 1996 comments on respondents' supplemental 
questionnaire responses. This figure assumes that five percent of yarn 
used for production becomes wastage.
    For Greyfab's third-country sales, we based NV on C&F prices to 
unrelated customers in comparable channels of distribution as the U.S. 
customer. For third-country price-to-price comparisons, we made 
deductions, where appropriate, for foreign-country forwarding charges 
(i.e., ocean freight, cost of lading, and cost of export Bill-of-Lading 
stamp) and inspection fees. We deducted third-country packing costs 
from and added U.S. packing costs to NV in accordance with section 
773(a)(6) (A) and (B) of the Act.

Preliminary Results of Review

    We preliminarily determine that the following dumping margins 
exist:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Margin 
                    Manufacturer/exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greyfab (Bangladesh), Ltd....................................      0.00 
Hashem International.........................................      0.00 
Khaled Textile Mills, Ltd....................................      0.00 
Shabnam Textiles.............................................      0.00 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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. 
Parties who submit argument in this proceeding are requested to submit 
with each argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a brief summary 
of the argument. 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, within 120 days 
of publication of these preliminary results.
    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. 
The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment 
of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the 
determination and for future deposits of estimated duties. For duty 
assessment purposes, we calculated an importer-specific assessment rate 
by aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S. sales to 
each importer and dividing

[[Page 65027]]

this amount by the total quantity of subject merchandise sold to each 
of the respective importers. This specific rate calculated for each 
importer will be used for the assessment of antidumping duties on the 
relevant entries of subject merchandise during the POR.
    Furthermore, the following deposit rates will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all 
shipments of shop towels from Bangladesh 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) The cash deposit 
rates for reviewed companies will be the rates established in the final 
results of this 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 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 all 
other producers and/or exporters of this merchandise, the cash deposit 
rate shall be the rate established in the investigation of sales at 
less than fair value, which is 4.60 percent.
    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: December 2, 1996.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-31357 Filed 12-9-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P