[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