[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 91 (Monday, May 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25920-25923]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-12202]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration A-821-803
Titanium Sponge from the Russian Federation: 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 requests from AVISMA Titanium-Magnesium Works
(AVISMA), Interlink Metals, Inc. and Interlink Metals & Chemicals, S.A.
(collectively, Interlink), Cometals, Inc. (Cometals), TMC Trading
International Ltd. (TMC), and Titanium Metals Corporation (TIMET, a
petitioner), the Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting
an administrative review of the antidumping finding on titanium sponge
from the Russian Federation (Russia). This notice of preliminary
results covers the period August 1, 1995 through July 31, 1996. This
review covers one manufacturer/exporter, AVISMA, and three trading
companies, Interlink, Cometals, and TMC.
We have preliminarily determined that dumping margins apply during
this review period. If these preliminary results are adopted in our
final results of administrative review, we will instruct the U.S.
Customs Service (Customs) to assess antidumping duties equal to the
difference between the United States price (USP) and the normal value
(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: May 12, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy S. Wei or James Terpstra, Office
of AD/CVD Enforcement, Office 4, Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution
[[Page 25921]]
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-4737.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 Rounds 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 an antidumping finding on titanium sponge
from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.) on August 28,
1968 (33 FR 12138). In December 1991, the U.S.S.R. divided into fifteen
independent states. To conform to these changes, the Department changed
the original antidumping finding into fifteen findings applicable to
the each of the former republics of the U.S.S.R. (57 FR 36070, August
12, 1992).
The Department published a notice of ``Opportunity To Request an
Administrative Review'' of the antidumping finding from Russia for this
review period on August 12, 1996 (61 FR 41768). On August 29, 1996,
AVISMA and Interlink requested that the Department conduct an
administrative review of the antidumping finding on titanium sponge
from Russia for one manufacturer/exporter, AVISMA, and one trading
company, Interlink, covering the period August 1, 1995 through July 31,
1996. On August 30, 1996, TIMET requested that the Department conduct
an administrative review for AVISMA, Interlink, and another trading
company, Cometals. On the same date, Cometals and TMC both requested
that the Department conduct an administrative review for each
respective company. We published a notice of initiation of the review
on September 17, 1996 (61 FR 48882).
The Department is now conducting this administrative review in
accordance with section 751 of the Act.
Scope of the Review
The product covered by this administrative review is titanium
sponge from Russia. Titanium sponge is chiefly used for aerospace
vehicles, specifically, in construction of compressor blades and
wheels, stator blades, rotors, and other parts in aircraft gas turbine
engines. Imports of titanium sponge are currently classifiable under
the harmonized tariff schedule (HTS) subheading 8108.10.50.10. The HTS
subheading is provided for convenience and U.S. Customs purposes. Our
written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive.
The period of review (POR) is August 1, 1995 through July 31, 1996.
The review covers one manufacturer/exporter, AVISMA, and three trading
companies, TMC, Interlink, and Cometals.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we verified the
information provided by TMC by using standard verification procedures,
including examination of relevant sales and financial records and
selection of original documentation containing relevant information.
Our verification results are outlined in the public versions of the
verification reports, which are on file in the public file of the
Central Records Unit (Room B-099 in the Department of Commerce).
Affiliation
TIMET, a petitioner, alleged that an affiliation existed between
TMC and AVISMA, within the context of section 771(33) of the Act. TIMET
based these allegations on newspaper and magazine articles and TMC's
submissions, which indicated that TMC and AVISMA may have been
connected through a common entity. TIMET requested that the Department
further scrutinize this relationship and ensure that TMC has fully
disclosed its corporate structure.
In response, the Department issued several supplemental
questionnaires to TMC and AVISMA regarding any relationships that may
exist between them within the context of section 771(33) of the Act.
TMC and AVISMA both responded to questions regarding control and equity
in each respective company.
After analyzing the totality of the responses, we have determined
that it is not necessary to address this affiliation issue for the
purposes of this review. We determined that regardless of whether any
affiliation between TMC and AVISMA exists, we would perform our
calculations and analysis in the same manner. The relevant transaction
for U.S. price is that of TMC to the first unaffiliated customer in the
United States. As with other third-country resellers in an NME context
where, as in this case, the producer does not know the ultimate
destination of the merchandise, we will base U.S. price on the sale
between TMC and its unaffiliated U.S. customer and normal value on the
producer's (e.g., AVISMA's) factors of production. Insofar as AVISMA
did not make any direct shipments to the United States (see below) and
did not have knowledge of the ultimate destination of the merchandise
sold through TMC, all relevant sales to the United States are captured
in our analysis without making an affiliation determination.
United States Price (USP)
AVISMA and Cometals
We determined that AVISMA's and Cometals' exports during the POR
entered the United States under temporary importation bonds (TIBs).
This entry information was provided to the Department by respondents in
their questionnaire responses and confirmed by Customs. At this time,
because merchandise entered under a TIB is not entered for consumption,
such merchandise is not subject to the antidumping finding. See
Titanium Metals Corp. v. The United States, 901 F.Supp 362 (CIT 1995).
Therefore, we determined that AVISMA and Cometals did not export
for consumption any subject merchandise to the United States during the
review period. If these preliminary results are adopted in our final
results of review, AVISMA will continue to be subject to the current
Russia-wide cash deposit rate of 83.96 percent and Cometals will
continue to be subject to its current cash deposit rate of 28.31
percent, which are the rates established in the final results of the
most recent administrative review of titanium sponge from Russia (61 FR
58525, November 15, 1996).
Interlink and TMC
Interlink and TMC are located in market-economy countries. For
purposes of this review, we are calculating a separate rate for these
resellers. In calculating USP for Interlink and TMC, we used export
price, as defined in section 772(a) of the Act. For date of sale, we
used the sales invoice date because this is the date when the price and
quantity are set. We excluded those sales made to the United States
which the respondents identified as having entered the United States
under TIBs. Respondents provided information regarding TIB entries, and
we were able to confirm this information through Customs and National
Census Bureau data.
We calculated export price based on the price to unaffiliated
purchasers in the United States. We made deductions, where appropriate,
for ocean freight,
[[Page 25922]]
warehouse expenses, insurance, brokerage and handling, inland freight,
and U.S. duty charges.
No other adjustments to USP were claimed or allowed.
Surrogate Country Selection
Section 773(c)(1) of the Act provides that the Department shall
determine the normal value on the basis of the value of the factors of
production if (1) the subject merchandise is exported from a non-market
economy (NME) country, and (2) the available information does not
permit the calculation of normal value under section 773(a) of the Act.
In previous proceedings, the Department has considered Russia an NME
country. See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Pure
Magnesium and Alloy Magnesium from the Russian Federation (Magnesium),
60 FR 16440 (March 30, 1995); Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Ferrovanadium and Nitrided Vanadium from the Russian
Federation, 60 FR 27957 (May 26, 1995). Section 771(18)(C) of the Act
states that ``any determination that a foreign country is a nonmarket
economy country shall remain in effect until revoked by the
administering authority.'' Because this NME status has not been revoked
for Russia, we are considering Russia an NME country for purposes of
this review. Therefore, because AVISMA is located in Russia, we are not
able to determine normal value on the basis of AVISMA's costs and
prices. Therefore, we have applied surrogate values to the factors of
production to determine normal value.
We calculated normal value based on factors of production provided
by AVISMA, in accordance with section 773(c)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR
353.52 of the Department's regulations. We determined that Brazil is
comparable to the Russian Federation in terms of per capita gross
national product (GNP), the growth rate in per capita GNP, and the
national distribution of labor. In addition, Brazil is a significant
producer of comparable merchandise. Therefore, in accordance with
section 773(c)(4) of the Act, we chose Brazil as a comparable surrogate
on the basis of the above criteria and have used publicly available
information relating to Brazil to value the various factors of
production. See Memorandum to Holly A. Kuga from David Mueller,
Titanium Sponge from Russia: Nonmarket Economy Status and Surrogate
Country Selection, October 28, 1996.
Normal Value
To determine the normal value, in accordance with section 773(c)(3)
of the Act, we valued the factors of production as follows (for further
discussion, see the analysis memorandum for these preliminary results,
on file in the Central Records Unit):
To value raw materials, we used Brazilian import data from
the United Nations Trade Commodity Statistics (UN Trade Statistics) for
January through December 1995. We adjusted certain factor values to
reflect the actual purity used in the production of the subject
merchandise. For those raw materials for which we were unable to obtain
public information from Brazil, we used data provided for use in the
final determination of sales at less than fair value (LTFV) for pure
magnesium and alloy magnesium from the Russian Federation (magnesium
from Russia) and in AVISMA's March 12, 1997 submission.
To value truck and railcar freight, we used the rates
reported by the National Confederation of Transport in Brazil for 1996,
as identified by the American Consular Agency in Belo Horizonte,
Brazil. These rates were provided by the distance traveled and, for
truck rates, by the quantity transported.
For energy, because there was no public information
available to value the natural gas factor during the POR, we valued the
factor using information from the UN Trade Statistics, covering the
period January through December 1994. Because the value was denominated
in U.S. dollars, we did not adjust for the effects of inflation. For
electricity, we used the ``large industry user'' rate from Brazil's
electricity tariff schedule that AVISMA would have received had it been
an electricity consumer in Brazil during the POR. This decision was
based on finding that AVISMA's level of electricity usage during the
POR was similar to the profile of ``large industrial user'' in the
final determination of sales at LTFV for magnesium from Russia. See
Magnesium at 16446. To confirm that AVISMA would have received this
rate, we divided the total number of kilowatt hours used during the POR
for titanium sponge production by the number of hours in the POR, which
demonstrated that AVISMA's kilowatt use was higher than the minimum
necessary to receive the ``large industrial user'' rate in effect in
Brazil during the POR.
For direct labor, we used the unskilled and skilled labor
rates based on information gathered by the American Consulate in Sao
Paulo, Brazil. See Memorandum to The File from Amy S. Wei regarding
Surrogate Values for Brazilian labor rates, March 6, 1997.
For factory overhead, we used expense ratios based on
elements of constructed value data reported in the antidumping duty
administrative review of silicon metal from Brazil, covering the period
July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996. In order to calculate expense
ratios for selling, general, and administrative (SG&A) expenses and
profit, we calculated simple averages of the SG&A and profit ratios
taken from the 1995 financial statements in the above-named review.
For packing materials, we used information provided in the
UN Trade Statistics from Brazil, covering the period of January through
December 1995. We included surrogate freight costs for the delivery of
packing materials to the plant reported by the National Confederation
of Transport in Brazil for 1996. We valued packing labor using the same
labor rates as used in direct labor above.
We included in normal value, where appropriate, movement
expenses incurred in bringing the subject merchandise from the Russian
plant to the resellers' warehouses. We valued these charges using
surrogate data based on Brazilian freight costs, where appropriate. See
Notice of Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review of Chrome-Plated Lug Nuts from the People's Republic of China,
August 16, 1995, 60 FR 42504, 42506.
Currency Conversion
We made currency conversions in accordance with section 773A(a) of
the Act, based on rates certified by the Federal Reserve Bank and Dow
Jones Business Information Services.
Preliminary Results
As a result of this review, we preliminarily determine that the
following weighted-average dumping margins exist:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Manufacturer/exporter Period (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interlink Metals and Chemicals, Inc..... 8/1/95-7/31/96 0.00
TMC Trading International, Ltd.......... 8/1/95-7/31/96 0.00
Cometals, Inc........................... 8/1/95-7/31/96 28.31
Russia-wide rate........................ 8/1/95-7/31/96 83.96
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 25923]]
Parties to this proceeding may request disclosure within five days
of publication of this notice and 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 working day
thereafter. Interested parties may submit case briefs and/or written
comments no later than 30 days after the date of publication. Rebuttal
briefs and rebuttals to written comments, limited to issues raised in
such briefs or comments, may be filed no later than 37 days after the
date of publication. The Department issue the final results of the
administrative review, which will include the results of its analysis
of issues raised in any such written comments or at the hearing, within
120 days from the date of publication 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 this administrative review for
all shipments of titanium sponge from Russia entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the
final results of these administrative reviews, as provided by section
751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for Interlink, TMC,
Cometals, and AVISMA will be the rates established in the final results
of this administrative review; (2) for merchandise exported by
manufacturers or exporters not covered in this review but covered in
the original LTFV investigation or a previous review and have a
separate rate, the cash deposit rate 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) for Russian manufacturers or exporters not covered in the LTFV
investigation or in this or prior administrative reviews, the cash
deposit rate will continue to be the Russia-wide rate; and (4) the cash
deposit rate for non-Russian exporters of subject merchandise from
Russia who were not covered in the LTFV investigation or in this or
prior administrative reviews will be the rate applicable to the Russian
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 serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26(b) to file a certificate regarding
the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during these review periods. 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: May 5, 1997.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 97-12202 Filed 5-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P