[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 39 (Thursday, February 27, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8925-8926]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4926]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-570-820]


Certain Compact Ductile Iron Waterworks Fittings and Glands From 
the People's Republic of China; Termination of Antidumping Duty New 
Shipper Administrative Review

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

ACTION: Notice of termination of antidumping duty new shipper 
administrative review.

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

SUMMARY: On April 26, 1996, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published in the Federal Register (61 FR 18568) the notice of 
initiation of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order 
on Certain Compact Ductile Iron Waterworks Fittings and Glands (CDIW) 
from the People's Republic of China (PRC). We are terminating this 
review based on 776(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as

[[Page 8926]]

amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (the Act) as a result of 
evidence on the record which indicates that the respondent in these 
proceedings failed to cooperate by omitting from submissions certified 
as being complete and accurate, information material to determining its 
eligibility for new shipper status.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 27, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Paul M. Stolz, Office of Antidumping/Countervailing Duty Enforcement, 
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., 
Washington D.C. 20230, telephone: (202) 482-4474.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On April 1, 1996, Beijing M Star Pipe Corporation (BMSP), an 
interested party, requested a new shipper administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on CDIW for the period August 1, 1995 through 
February 29, 1996, pursuant to 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act. Section 
751(a)(2)(B) of the Act defines new shippers as exporters and producers 
who demonstrate in their request for review that they: (1) did not 
export the subject merchandise to the United States during the POI; and 
(2) are not affiliated with any exporter or producer who did export the 
subject merchandise to the United States during that period, including 
those not examined during the investigation.
    In its request for review, BMSP certified the following as complete 
and accurate: (1) that BMSP, under its current or former name, did not 
export CDIW from the PRC to the United States during the original 
period of investigation (POI), February 1, 1992 through July 31, 1992; 
(2) that BMSP's only affiliation with another PRC company or enterprise 
is with Beijing Cheng Hong Foundry, which did not export CDIW during 
the POI; and (3) that BMSP had no affiliations with any person, 
corporation or enterprise which exported CDIW from the PRC during the 
POI. Based on these certifications, on April 26, 1996, the Department 
published in the Federal Register (61 FR 18568) the notice of 
initiation of that administrative review.
    On December 3, 1996, counsel for the domestic industry placed 
evidence on the record indicating that BMSP is affiliated with persons 
and/or entities which shipped subject merchandise to the United States 
during the period of investigation (POI) and argued that, based on this 
evidence, BMSP is not eligible for review as a new shipper. In 
particular, the domestic industry provided information showing that 
Beijing Metals and Minerals Import and Export Corporation, Beijing, 
China (BMMC) exported subject merchandise to the United States during 
the POI and that certain senior company officials are presently 
employed by both BMSP and BMMC.
    Respondent does not dispute these facts. In fact, respondent admits 
in its January 24, 1997 submission that shared management between BMSP 
and BMMC does exist. Significantly, in a footnote to its submission, 
BMSP states that ``BMSP acknowledges that it previously misstated the 
lack of shared managers or officers with any other Chinese exporter.'' 
This statement is in direct contradiction to BMSP's certified 
questionnaire response of May 28, 1996 in which it states ``[n]either 
does BMSP have any relationship with any other producers or exporters 
of the subject merchandise, including by way of sharing managers or 
officers.'' In short, BMSP has now apprised the Department of, and the 
record clearly shows, a material omission or inaccuracy in BMSP's 
earlier certified submissions.
    At issue here is BMSP's eligibility for a new shipper review. This 
is a new procedure designed to allow new shippers an opportunity for a 
review ahead of the normal review cycle. The Department is cognizant of 
the potential for abuse of this procedure and seeks to ensure that it 
is only used where appropriate. Certifications are critical to the 
Department's ability to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate 
new shipper requests. The Department must rely on the accuracy of the 
parties' representations in deciding to initiate this type of review. 
Moreover, the Department attaches great importance to receiving 
accurate and complete submissions and requires parties to certify these 
submissions to ensure accuracy and completeness.
    The domestic industry argues that the Department should apply a 
margin to BMSP based on facts available because BMSP failed to disclose 
that BMSP and BMMC share common management. Section 776 of the Act 
authorizes the department to apply facts available, inter alia, when a 
respondent withholds information which significantly impedes a 
proceeding. In this case, BMSP provided certified submissions that were 
clearly inaccurate--it stated that BMSP had no relationship with any 
PRC entity which exported CDIW during the POI, including by way of 
sharing managers of officers, when in fact BMSP had knowledge that BMSP 
shares high-level managers with BMMC. Plainly, BMSP's inaccurate 
representation and omission of highly material information regarding 
the issue of eligibility for the new shipper review calls into question 
the reliability of BMSP's total response in this proceeding and, in 
these circumstances, warrants the use of adverse facts available.
    Section 776(b) provides that when a party to the proceeding has 
failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply 
with requests for information, the Department may use an inference that 
is adverse. Given the importance of receiving accurate and complete 
information in proceedings we conduct, we have determined to apply 
adverse facts available pursuant to 775(b) by finding BMSP ineligible 
for a new shipper review.
    This notice is published in accordance with section 353.22(h)(9)(i) 
of the Department's regulations (19 CFR 353.22.(h)(9)(i)).

    Dated: February 14, 1997.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 97-4926 Filed 2-26-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M