[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 26 (Monday, February 9, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6512-6519]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-3212]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-427-801, A-428-801, A-475-801, A-588-804, A-485-801, A-559-801, A-
401-801, A-412-801]


Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) And 
Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Romania, Singapore, 
Sweden, and The United Kingdom

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of antidumping duty 
administrative reviews and partial termination of administrative 
reviews.

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

SUMMARY: In response to requests from interested parties, the 
Department of Commerce is conducting administrative reviews of the 
antidumping duty orders on antifriction bearings (other than tapered 
roller bearings) and parts thereof from France, Germany, Italy, Japan, 
Romania, Singapore, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. The classes or 
kinds of merchandise covered by these orders are ball bearings and 
parts thereof, cylindrical roller bearings and parts thereof, and 
spherical plain bearings and parts thereof. The reviews cover 20 
manufacturers/exporters. The period of review is May 1, 1996, through 
April 30, 1997.
    We are terminating the reviews for six other manufacturers/
exporters and for certain types of antifriction bearings from still 
other manufacturers/exporters because the requests for reviews of these 
firms or types of bearings were withdrawn in a timely manner.
    We have preliminarily determined that sales have been made below 
normal value by various companies subject to these reviews. If these 
preliminary results are adopted in our final results of these 
administrative reviews, we will instruct U.S. Customs to assess 
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.
    We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary 
results. Parties who submit comments in these proceedings are requested 
to submit with each argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a 
brief summary of the argument.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 9, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: The appropriate case analysts for the various 
respondent firms are listed below, at Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 
Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4733.

France
    Chip Hayes (SKF), Lisa Tomlinson (SNFA), or Richard Rimlinger.
Germany
    John Heires (Torrington Nadellager), Davina Hashmi (SKF), or Robin 
Gray.
Italy
    Chip Hayes (SKF), Mark Ross (FAG), Kristie Strecker (Somecat), 
William Zapf (Meter), Robin Gray, or Richard Rimlinger.
Japan
    J. David Dirstine (Koyo Seiko), Gregory Thompson (NTN), Hermes 
Pinilla (NPBS), Thomas Schauer (NSK Ltd.), Jay Biggs (Nachi-Fujikoshi 
Corp.), Robin Gray, or Richard Rimlinger.
Romania
    Kristie Strecker (Tehnoimportexport, S.A.) or Robin Gray.
Singapore

[[Page 6513]]

    Lyn Johnson (NMB/Pelmec) or Richard Rimlinger.
Sweden
    Mark Ross (SKF) or Richard Rimlinger.
United Kingdom
    Suzanne Flood (Barden Corporation), Diane Krawczun (NSK/RHP), 
Hermes Pinilla (FAG), Lyn Johnson (SNFA), Robin Gray, or Richard 
Rimlinger.

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 Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless 
otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are 
to 19 CFR Part 353 (April 1, 1996).

Background

    On May 15, 1989, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published in the Federal Register (54 FR 20909) the antidumping duty 
orders on ball bearings and parts thereof (BBs), cylindrical roller 
bearings and parts thereof (CRBs), and spherical plain bearings and 
parts thereof (SPBs) from France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Romania, 
Singapore, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Specifically, these orders 
cover BBs, CRBs, and SPBs from France, Germany, and Japan; BBs and CRBs 
from Italy, Sweden, and the United Kingdom; and BBs from Romania and 
Singapore. On June 17, 1997 and August 28, 1997, in accordance with 19 
CFR 353.22(c), we published notices of initiation of administrative 
reviews of these orders for the period May 1, 1996 through April 30, 
1997 (the POR) (62 FR 32754 (as corrected by 62 FR 34504 and 62 FR 
44751) and 62 FR 45621, respectively). The Department is conducting 
these administrative reviews in accordance with section 751 of the Act.
    Subsequent to the initiation of these reviews, we received timely 
withdrawals of review requests for Bruckner (Germany), FAG Kugelfisher 
Georg Schaefer AG (Germany), INA Walzlager Schaeffler KG (Germany), NTN 
Kugellagerfabrik (Deutschland) GmbH (Germany), SNR Roulements (France), 
and C.R. s.r.l. (Italy). In addition, we also received timely 
withdrawals of review requests for CRBs sold by FAG Italia S.p.A. 
(Italy), CRBs sold by Somecat S.p.A. (Italy), CRBs sold by SNFA 
Bearings Ltd. (U.K.), and CRBs and SPBs sold by Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. 
(Japan). Because there were no other requests for review of these 
companies or specified bearing types for the above-named firms, we are 
terminating the reviews with respect to these companies or types of 
bearings in accordance with 19 CFR 353.22(a)(5). Furthermore, on 
December 17, 1997, we received a withdrawal of a request by Agusta 
Aerospace Corporation (AAC) to review BBs and CRBs which were produced 
by SNFA France and exported by Agusta S.p.A. to the United States. This 
withdrawal request does not affect our review of other BBs and CRBs 
sold by SNFA France. Therefore, because SNFA France had no specific 
foreknowledge that sales it made to Agusta S.p.A. were destined for the 
United States, we will instruct the Customs Service to liquidate 
entries of all SNFA bearings imported by AAC at the rate required at 
the time of entry.
    Although we received a request to revoke the antidumping duty order 
covering BBs from Singapore with respect to NMB Singapore Ltd./Pelmec 
Industries (Pte.) Ltd. (NMB/Pelmec), we have preliminarily determined 
that NMB/Pelmec does not qualify for revocation under 19 CFR 
353.25(a)(1) because we preliminarily determine that the firm was 
dumping BBs in this review period and we determined that NMB/Pelmec 
dumped BBs in the review periods May 1, 1994 through April 30, 1995 (62 
FR 54043, October 17, 1997) and May 1, 1995 through April 30, 1996 (62 
FR 2081, January 15, 1997).

Scope of Reviews

    The products covered by these reviews are antifriction bearings 
(other than tapered roller bearings) and parts thereof (AFBs) and 
constitute the following classes or kinds of merchandise:
    1. Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof: These products include all AFBs 
that employ balls as the rolling element. Imports of these products are 
classified under the following categories: antifriction balls, ball 
bearings with integral shafts, ball bearings (including radial ball 
bearings) and parts thereof, and housed or mounted ball bearing units 
and parts thereof.
    Imports of these products are classified under the following 
Harmonized Tariff Schedules (HTS) subheadings: 3926.90.45, 4016.93.00, 
4016.93.10, 4016.93.50, 6909.19.5010, 8431.20.00, 8431.39.0010, 
8482.10.10, 8482.10.50, 8482.80.00, 8482.91.00, 8482.99.05, 
8482.99.2580, 8482.99.35, 8482.99.6560, 8482.99.6595, 8483.20.40, 
8483.20.80, 8483.50.8040, 8483.50.90, 8483.90.20, 8483.90.30, 
8483.90.70, 8708.50.50, 8708.60.50, 8708.60.80, 8708.70.6060, 
8708.70.8050, 8708.93.30, 8708.93.5000, 8708.93.6000, 8708.93.75, 
8708.99.06, 8708.99.31, 8708.99.4960, 8708.99.50, 8708.99.5800, 
8708.99.8080, 8803.10.00, 8803.20.00, 8803.30.00, 8803.90.30, and 
8803.90.90.
    2. Cylindrical Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof: These products 
include all AFBs that employ cylindrical rollers as the rolling 
element. Imports of these products are classified under the following 
categories: antifriction rollers, all cylindrical roller bearings 
(including split cylindrical roller bearings) and parts thereof, and 
housed or mounted cylindrical roller bearing units and parts thereof.
    Imports of these products are classified under the following HTS 
subheadings: 3926.90.45, 4016.93.00, 4016.93.10, 4016.93.50, 
6909.19.5010, 8431.20.00, 8431.39.0010, 8482.40.00, 8482.50.00, 
8482.80.00, 8482.91.00, 8482.99.25, 8482.99.35, 8482.99.6530, 
8482.99.6560, 8482.99.6595, 8483.20.40, 8483.20.80, 8483.50.8040, 
8483.90.20, 8483.90.30, 8483.90.70, 8708.50.50, 8708.60.50, 
8708.93.5000, 8708.99.4000, 8708.99.4960, 8708.99.50, 8708.99.8080, 
8803.10.00, 8803.20.00, 8803.30.00, 8803.90.30, and 8803.90.90.
    3. Spherical Plain Bearings and Parts Thereof: These products 
include all spherical plain bearings that employ a spherically shaped 
sliding element.
    Imports of these products are classified under the following HTS 
subheadings: 3926.90.45, 4016.93.00, 4016.93.10, 4016.93.50, 
6909.50.10, 8483.30.80, 8483.90.30, 8485.90.00, 8708.93.5000, 
8708.99.50, 8803.10.00, 8803.20.00, 8803.30.00, 8803.90.30, and 
8803.90.90.
    The size or precision grade of a bearing does not influence whether 
the bearing is covered by the order. For a further discussion of the 
scope of the orders being reviewed, including recent scope 
determinations, see Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller 
Bearings) and Parts Thereof from France, Germany, Italy, Japan, 
Romania, Singapore, Sweden and the United Kingdom; Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 62 FR 54043 (October 17, 1997) 
(AFBs VII). The HTS item numbers are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes. The written descriptions of the scope of these 
proceedings remain dispositive.
    These reviews cover the following firms and classes or kinds of 
merchandise:

[[Page 6514]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Name of firm                        Class or kind      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 France                                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SKF France (including all relevant             BBs, SPBs                
 affiliates).                                                           
SNFA S.A. (SNFA France)......................  BBs, CRBs                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Germany                                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SKF GmbH (including all relevant affiliates)   All                      
 (SKF Germany).                                                         
Torrington Nadellager (Torrington/             BBs, CRBs                
 Kuensenbeck).                                                          
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Italy                                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAG Italia, S.p.A. (including all relevant     BBs                      
 affiliates) (FAG Italy).                                               
SKF-Industrie, S.p.A. (including all relevant  BBs                      
 affiliates) (SKF Italy).                                               
Meter, S.p.A. (Meter)........................  CRBs                     
Somecat, S.p.A. (Somecat)....................  BBs                      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Japan                                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. (Koyo)..................  BBs                      
Nachi-Fujikoshi Corp. (Nachi)................  BBs, CRBs                
Nippon Pillow Block Sales Company, Ltd.        BBs, CRBs                
 (NPBS).                                                                
NSK Ltd. (formerly Nippon Seiko K.K.)........  BBs, CRBs                
NTN Corp. (NTN Japan)........................  All                      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Romania                                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tehnoimportexport, S.A. (TIE)................  BBs                      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Singapore                               
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMB/Pelmec...................................  BBs                      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Sweden                                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SKF Sverige (including all relevant            BBs, CRBs                
 affiliates) (SKF Sweden).                                              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             United Kingdom                             
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barden Corporation...........................  BBs, CRBs                
FAG (U.K.) Ltd...............................  BBs, CRBs                
NSK Bearings Europe, Ltd./RHP Bearings Ltd.    BBs, CRBs                
 (NSK/RHP).                                                             
SNFA (U.K.) Bearings Ltd.....................  BBs                      
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a letter dated June 24, 1997, Torrington requested to be excused 
from responding to the Department's questionnaire in this review 
involving BBs from Germany. Torrington stated that, during the POR, it 
imported into the United States only ten units covered by the order on 
BBs and all units were imported and obtained by Torrington-U.S. from 
Torrington-Germany via an affiliated-party transaction solely for 
testing and/or examination.
    On August 4, 1997, Torrington notified the Department that it had 
destroyed all ten units in question and that there is no possibility of 
resale. Based on this, Torrington states that no useful purpose would 
be served by requiring it to answer the questionnaire so far as BBs are 
concerned. Given that the units in question were destroyed and there 
are no sales to review, we have not calculated dumping margins for 
these entries in this review involving BBs from Germany. See memorandum 
to Laurie Parkhill from Suzanne Flood, dated August 18, 1997. Because 
this merchandise was consumed by the affiliated importer and not resold 
in any form, we will liquidate these entries without regard to 
antidumping duties. (See, e.g., Antifriction Bearings (Other Than 
Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France, et al.: 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 
Termination of Administrative Reviews, and Partial Termination of 
Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 35713 (July 8, 1996).)

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we verified information 
provided by certain respondents using standard verification procedures, 
including on-site inspection of the manufacturers' facilities, the 
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.

Use of Facts Available

    We preliminarily determine, in accordance with section 776(a) of 
the Act, that the use of facts available as the basis for the weighted-
average dumping margin is not appropriate for any of the companies 
under the current review. However, in certain situations, we found it 
necessary to use partial facts available. Partial facts available was 
applied in cases where we were unable to use some portion of a response 
in calculating the dumping margin. For partial facts available, we 
extrapolated information from the company's response and used that 
information in our calculations. For SKF (Germany), NPBS, NTN, 
Torrington, and NSK-RHP (UK), average credit days were calculated for 
missing payment dates. For TIE (Romania), we had no factor value on the 
record to value steel tube. Therefore, we used the value of steel bar

[[Page 6515]]

as the factor value for this input. For Torrington, we used facts 
available to construct the value of merchandise where no comparable 
home market information existed. For further information, please see 
the analysis memoranda on file for all of these firms.

Export Price and Constructed Export Price--Market-Economy Countries

    For the price to the United States, we used export price (EP) or 
constructed export price (CEP) as defined in sections 772(a) and 772(b) 
of the Act, as appropriate. Due to the extremely large volume of 
transactions that occurred during the POR and the resulting 
administrative burden involved in calculating individual margins for 
all of these transactions, we sampled CEP sales in accordance with 
section 777A of the Act. When a firm made more than 2,000 CEP sales 
transactions to the United States for a particular class or kind of 
merchandise, we reviewed CEP sales that occurred during sample weeks. 
We selected one week from each two-month period in the review period, 
for a total of six weeks, and analyzed each transaction made in those 
six weeks. The sample weeks were June 2-8, 1996; August 11-17, 1996; 
October 13-19, 1996; November 3-9, 1996; February 2-8, 1997; and April 
13-19, 1997. We reviewed all EP sales transactions during the POR.
    We calculated EP and CEP based on the packed f.o.b., c.i.f., or 
delivered price to unaffiliated purchasers in, or for exportation to, 
the United States. We made deductions, as appropriate, for discounts 
and rebates. We also made deductions for any movement expenses in 
accordance with section 772(c)(2)(A) of the Act.
    In accordance with section 772(d)(1) of the Act and the Statement 
of Administrative Action (SAA) (at 823-824) to the URAA, we calculated 
the CEP by deducting selling expenses associated with economic 
activities occurring in the United States, including commissions, 
direct selling expenses, indirect selling expenses, and repacking 
expenses in the United States. Where appropriate, in accordance with 
section 772(d)(2) of the Act, we also deducted the cost of any further 
manufacture or assembly, except where the special rule provided in 
section 772(e) of the Act was applied (see below). Finally, we made an 
adjustment for profit allocated to these expenses in accordance with 
section 772(d)(3) of the Act.
    With respect to subject merchandise to which value was added in the 
United States prior to sale to unaffiliated U.S. customers, i.e., parts 
of bearings that were imported by U.S. affiliates of foreign exporters 
and then further processed into other products which were then sold to 
unaffiliated parties, we determined that the special rule for 
merchandise with value added after importation under section 772(e) of 
the Act applied to all firms that added value in the United States, 
with the exception of NSK/RHP and NPBS.
    Section 772(e) of the Act provides that, where the subject 
merchandise is imported by an affiliated person and the value added in 
the United States by the affiliated person is likely to exceed 
substantially the value of the subject merchandise, we shall determine 
the CEP for such merchandise using the price of identical or other 
subject merchandise if there is a sufficient quantity of sales to 
provide a reasonable basis for comparison and we determine that the use 
of such sales is appropriate. If there is not a sufficient quantity of 
such sales or if we determine that using the price of identical or 
other subject merchandise is not appropriate, we may use any other 
reasonable basis to determine the CEP.
    To determine whether the value added is likely to exceed 
substantially the value of the subject merchandise, we estimated the 
value added based on the difference between the averages of the prices 
charged to the first unaffiliated purchaser for the merchandise as sold 
in the United States and the averages of the prices paid for the 
subject merchandise by the affiliated person. Based on this analysis, 
we determined that the estimated value added in the United States by 
all firms, with the exception of NSK/RHP and NPBS, accounted for at 
least 65 percent of the price charged to the first unaffiliated 
customer for the merchandise as sold in the United States. (See 19 CFR 
351.402 for an explanation of our practice on this issue.) Therefore, 
we determined that the value added is likely to exceed substantially 
the value of the subject merchandise. Also, for the companies in 
question, we determined that there was a sufficient quantity of sales 
remaining to provide a reasonable basis for comparison and that the use 
of such sales is appropriate. Accordingly, for purposes of determining 
dumping margins for these sales, we have used the weighted-average 
dumping margins calculated on sales of identical or other subject 
merchandise sold to unaffiliated persons. No other adjustments to EP or 
CEP were claimed or allowed.

Normal Value--Market-Economy Countries

    Based on a comparison of the aggregate quantity of home market and 
U.S. sales, and absent any information that a particular market 
situation in the exporting country did not permit a proper comparison, 
we determined that the quantity of foreign like product sold by most 
respondents in the exporting country was sufficient to permit a proper 
comparison with the sales of the subject merchandise to the United 
States pursuant to section 773(a) of the Act. With the exception of 
Meter, each company's quantity of sales in its home market was greater 
than five percent of its sales to the U.S. market. Therefore, in 
accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we based normal 
value (NV) on the prices at which the foreign like products were first 
sold for consumption in the exporting country.
    For Meter, we used third-country sales to Germany to establish NV 
because Meter had no sales of the foreign like product in Italy. SNFA 
France's home market was viable in accordance with section 773(a)(1) of 
the Act. However, because there were no contemporaneous sales of 
merchandise comparable to the U.S. sales such that we found no matches, 
we used constructed value as the basis of NV.
    Due to the extremely large number of transactions that occurred 
during the POR and the resulting administrative burden involved in 
examining all of these transactions, we sampled sales to calculate NV 
in accordance with section 777A of the Act. When a firm had more than 
2,000 home market sales transactions for a particular class or kind of 
merchandise, we used sales in sample months that corresponded to the 
sample weeks we selected for U.S. sales sampling plus one 
contemporaneous month prior to the POR and one following the POR. The 
sample months were March, June, August, October, and November of 1996; 
and February, April, and June of 1997.
    We used sales to affiliated customers only where we determined such 
sales were made at arm's-length prices, i.e., at prices comparable to 
prices at which the firm sold identical merchandise to unaffiliated 
customers.
    Because the Department disregarded sales that failed the cost test 
under section 773(b) of the Act in the last completed review with 
respect to FAG Italy, SKF France, SKF Germany, SKF Italy, SKF Sweden, 
Koyo, Nachi, NPBS, NSK, NTN Japan, NMB Singapore/Pelmec Ind., Barden 
U.K., and NSK/RHP and the classes or kinds of merchandise under review, 
we had reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the 
foreign like product under consideration for the determination of NV in 
these reviews

[[Page 6516]]

may have been made at prices below the cost of production (COP) as 
provided by section 773(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act. Therefore, pursuant to 
section 773(b)(1) of the Act, we initiated COP investigations of sales 
by these firms in the home market.
    In accordance with section 773(b)(3) of the Act, we calculated the 
COP based on the sum of the costs of materials and fabrication employed 
in producing the foreign like product plus selling, general and 
administrative (SG&A) expenses and all costs and expenses incidental to 
placing the foreign like product in condition packed ready for 
shipment. In our COP analysis, we used the home market sales and COP 
information provided by each respondent in its questionnaire responses. 
We did not conduct a COP analysis regarding a class or kind of 
merchandise for a respondent that reported no U.S. sales or shipments 
of that class or kind.
    After calculating the COP, in accordance with section 773(b)(1) of 
the Act we tested whether home market sales of AFBs were made at prices 
below the COP within an extended period of time in substantial 
quantities and whether such prices permitted the recovery of all costs 
within a reasonable period of time. We compared model-specific COPs to 
the reported home market prices less any applicable movement charges, 
discounts, and rebates.
    Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(C) of the Act, where less than 20 
percent of a respondent's sales of a given product were at prices less 
than the COP, we did not disregard any below-cost sales of that product 
because the below-cost sales were not made in substantial quantities 
within an extended period of time. Where 20 percent or more of a 
respondent's sales of a given product during the POR were at prices 
less than the COP, we disregarded the below-cost sales because they 
were made in substantial quantities within an extended period of time 
pursuant to sections 773(b)(2) (B) and (C) of the Act and because, 
based on comparisons of prices to weighted-average COPs for the POR, we 
also determined that these sales were at prices which would not permit 
recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time in accordance 
with section 773(b)(2)(D) of the Act. Based on this test, we 
disregarded below-cost sales with respect to all of the above companies 
and classes or kinds of merchandise except where there were no sales or 
shipments subject to review.
    We compared U.S. sales with sales of the foreign like product in 
the home market or a third country, as noted above. We considered all 
non-identical products within a bearing family to be equally similar. 
As defined in the questionnaire, a bearing family consists of all 
bearings within a class or kind of merchandise that are the same in the 
following physical characteristics: load direction, bearing design, 
number of rows of rolling elements, precision rating, dynamic load 
rating, outer diameter, inner diameter, and width.
    Home market or third-country prices were based on the packed, ex-
factory or delivered prices to affiliated or unaffiliated purchasers. 
Where applicable, we made adjustments for differences in packing and 
for movement expenses in accordance with sections 773(a)(6) (A) and (B) 
of the Act. We also made adjustments for differences in cost 
attributable to differences in physical characteristics of the 
merchandise pursuant to section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act and for 
differences in circumstances of sale (COS) in accordance with section 
773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR 353.56. For comparisons to EP, 
we made COS adjustments by deducting home market direct selling 
expenses and adding U.S. direct selling expenses. For comparisons to 
CEP, we made COS adjustments by deducting home market direct selling 
expenses from NV. We also made adjustments, where applicable, for home 
market indirect selling expenses to offset U.S. commissions in EP and 
CEP calculations.
    In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, to the 
extent practicable, we based NV on sales at the same level of trade as 
the EP or CEP. If NV was calculated at a different level of trade, we 
made an adjustment, if appropriate and if possible, in accordance with 
section 773(a)(7) of the Act. (See Level of Trade below.)
    On January 8, 1998, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 
issued a decision in Cemex v. United States, 1998 WL 3626 (Fed. Cir.). 
In that case, based on the pre-URAA version of the Act, the Court 
discussed the appropriateness of using CV as the basis for foreign 
market value when the Department finds home market sales to be outside 
the ordinary course of trade. This issue was not raised by any party in 
these 96/97 reviews. However, the URAA amended the definition of sales 
outside the ``ordinary course of trade'' to include sales below cost. 
See section 771(15) of the Act. Because the Court's decision was issued 
so close to the deadline for completing these preliminary results, we 
have not had sufficient time to evaluate and apply (if appropriate and 
if there are adequate facts on the record) the decision to the facts of 
these post-URAA reviews. For these reasons, we have determined to 
continue to apply our policy regarding the use of CV when we have 
disregarded below-cost sales from the calculation of NV; however, we 
invite interested parties to comment, in their case briefs, on the 
applicability of the Cemex decision to these reviews.
    In accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the Act, we used CV as the 
basis for NV when there were no usable sales of the foreign like 
product in the comparison market. We calculated CV in accordance with 
section 773(e) of the Act. We included the cost of materials and 
fabrication, SG&A expenses, and profit. In accordance with section 
773(e)(2)(A) of the Act, we based SG&A expenses and profit on the 
amounts incurred and realized by the respondent in connection with the 
production and sale of the foreign like product in the ordinary course 
of trade for consumption in the home market. For selling expenses, we 
used the weighted-average home market selling expenses. To the extent 
possible, we calculated CV by level of trade, using the selling 
expenses and profit determined for each level of trade in the 
comparison market.
    Where appropriate, we made adjustments to CV in accordance with 
section 773(a)(8) of the Act and 19 CFR 353.56 for COS differences and 
level-of-trade differences. For comparisons to EP, we made COS 
adjustments by deducting home market direct selling expenses and adding 
U.S. direct selling expenses. For comparisons to CEP, we made COS 
adjustments by deducting home market direct selling expenses. We also 
made adjustments, where applicable, for home market indirect selling 
expenses to offset U.S. commissions in EP and CEP comparisons.
    Where possible, we calculated CV at the same level of trade as the 
EP or CEP. If CV was calculated at a different level of trade, we made 
an adjustment, if appropriate and if possible, in accordance with 
sections 773(a)(7) and 773(a)(8) of the Act. (See Level of Trade 
below.)

Level of Trade

    To the extent practicable, we determined NV for sales at the same 
level of trade as the U.S. sales (either EP or CEP). When there were no 
sales at the same level of trade, we compared U.S. sales to home market 
(or, if appropriate, third-country) sales at a different level of 
trade. The NV level of trade is that of the starting-price sales in the 
home market. When NV is based on CV, the

[[Page 6517]]

level of trade is that of the sales from which we derived SG&A and 
profit.
    To determine whether home market sales are at a different level of 
trade than U.S. sales, we examined stages in the marketing process and 
selling functions along the chain of distribution between the producer 
and the unaffiliated customer. If the comparison-market sales were at a 
different level of trade and the differences affected price 
comparability, as manifested in a pattern of consistent price 
differences between the sales on which NV is based and comparison-
market sales at the level of trade of the export transaction, we made a 
level-of-trade adjustment under section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act. See 
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain 
Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from South Africa, 62 FR 61731 
(November 19, 1997).
    For a company-specific description of our level-of-trade analysis 
for these preliminary results, see Memorandum to Laurie Parkhill, Level 
of Trade, January 26, 1998, on file in Import Administration's Central 
Records Unit (Room B-099 of the main Commerce building (hereafter, B-
099).)

Methodology for Romania

Separate Rates

    It is the Department's policy to assign all exporters of subject 
merchandise subject to review in a non-market-economy (NME) country a 
single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is sufficiently 
independent to be entitled to a separate rate. For purposes of this 
``separate rates'' inquiry, the Department analyzes each exporting 
entity under the test established in the 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 in 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 test, exporters in NME countries are entitled to 
separate, company-specific margins when they can demonstrate an absence 
of government control over exports, both in law (de jure) and in fact 
(de facto).
    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 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 criteria: (1) Whether the export prices are set by or 
subject to 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 autonomy in making decisions regarding 
the selection of management; and (4) whether each exporter has the 
authority to negotiate and sign contracts. (See Silicon Carbide at 
22587).
    We have determined that the evidence of record demonstrates an 
absence of government control, both in law and in fact, with respect to 
exports by TIE according to the criteria identified in Sparklers and 
Silicon Carbide. For a discussion of the Department's preliminary 
determination that TIE is entitled to a separate rate, see Memorandum 
from Kristie Strecker to Laurie Parkhill, dated January 26, 1998, 
``Assignment of Separate Rate for Tehnoimportexport: 1995-96 
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Antifriction 
Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From 
Romania'' (Separate Rate Memo), which is a public document on file in 
B-099. Since TIE is preliminarily entitled to a separate rate and is 
the only Romanian firm for which an administrative review has been 
requested, it is not necessary for us to review any other Romanian 
exporters of subject merchandise.

Export Price--Romania

    For sales made by TIE we based our margin calculation on EP as 
defined in section 772(a) of the Act because the subject merchandise 
was first sold before the date of importation by the exporter of the 
subject merchandise outside of the United States (TIE) to unaffiliated 
purchasers in the United States.
    We calculated EP based on the packed price to unaffiliated 
purchasers in the United States. We made deductions from the price used 
to establish EP, where appropriate, for foreign inland freight, bank 
charges and international freight (air and ocean). To value foreign 
inland freight we used the freight rates from the public version of the 
Factors of Production Memorandum from Disposable Lighters from the 
People's Republic of China (A-570-834) (Lighters from the PRC) (April 
27, 1995), which is on file in B-099 (for this expense, as well as any 
other adjustments or factors in our calculations for which we relied on 
pre-POR statistics discussed below, we adjusted those statistics by 
annual rates of inflation). We used the actual reported expenses for 
international freight and bank charges because the expenses were paid 
to market-economy suppliers and incurred in market-economy currencies. 
No other adjustments were claimed or allowed.

Normal Value--Romania

    For merchandise exported from a NME country, section 773(c)(1) of 
the Act provides that the Department shall determine NV using a 
factors-of-production methodology if available information does not 
permit the calculation of NV using home-market or third-country prices 
under section 773(a) of the Act. In every investigation or review 
conducted by the Department involving Romania, we have treated Romania 
as a NME country. None of the parties to this proceeding has contested 
such treatment in this review and, therefore, we have maintained our 
treatment of Romania as a NME for these preliminary results.
    Accordingly, we calculated NV in accordance with section 773(c) of 
the Act and 19 CFR 353.52. In accordance with section 773(c)(3) of the 
Act, the factors of production used in producing AFBs include, but are 
not limited to, hours of labor required, quantities of raw materials 
employed, amounts of energy and other utilities consumed, and 
representative capital cost, including depreciation.
    In accordance with section 773(c)(4) of the Act, the Department 
valued the factors of production, to the extent possible, using the 
prices or costs of factors of production in market-economy countries 
which are at a level of economic development comparable to that of 
Romania and which are significant producers of comparable merchandise. 
We determined that Indonesia is at a level of economic development 
comparable to that of Romania. We also found that Indonesia is a 
producer of bearings. Therefore, we have selected Indonesia as the 
primary surrogate country. For a further discussion of the Department's 
selection of surrogate countries, see Memorandum from Kristie Strecker 
to Laurie Parkhill, dated January 26, 1998, ``Surrogate-Country 
Selection: 1996-97 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order 
on Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts 
Thereof from Romania'' (Surrogate Memo), which is a public document on 
file in B-099.

[[Page 6518]]

    For purposes of calculating NV, we valued the Romanian factors of 
production as follows:
     Where direct materials used to produce AFBs were imported 
by the producers from market-economy countries, we used the import 
price to value the material input. To value all other direct materials 
used in the production of AFBs, i.e., those which were sourced from 
within Romania, we used the import value per metric ton of these 
materials into Indonesia as published in the Indonesian Foreign Trade 
Statistical Bulletin--Imports, which includes data on months during the 
POR. We made adjustments to include freight costs incurred between the 
domestic suppliers and the AFB factories, using freight rates obtained 
from the public version of the April 27, 1995 calculation memorandum of 
Lighters from the PRC, which is on file in B-099. We also reduced the 
steel input factors to account for the scrap steel that was sold by the 
producers of the relevant bearings.
     For direct labor, we used the Indonesian average daily 
wage and hours worked per week for the iron and steel basic industries 
reported in the 1994 Special Supplement to the Bulletin of Labour 
Statistics, published by the International Labour Office. We added 
amounts to labor rates to account for benefits. We used information 
from the Foreign Labor Trends, as used in Lighters from the PRC, which 
shows supplementary benefits to be thirty-three percent of 
manufacturing earnings.
     For factory overhead, SG&A expenses, and profit, we could 
not find values for the bearings industry in Indonesia. Therefore, 
consistent with AFBsVII, we used the percentages calculated from the 
financial statements of the Indonesia company, P.T. Jaya Pari Steel 
Ltd. Corporation. We determined that amounts for energy usage for 
electricity and natural gas were included in the overhead calculations 
in these financial statements.
     To value packing materials, where materials used to 
package AFBs were imported into Romania from market-economy countries, 
we used the import price. To value all other packing materials, i.e., 
those sourced from within Romania, we used the import value per metric 
ton of these materials (adjusted with the wholesale-price-index 
inflator to place these values on an equivalent basis) as published in 
the Indonesian Foreign Trade Statistical Bulletin--Imports. We adjusted 
these values to include freight costs incurred between the domestic 
suppliers and the AFB factories. To value freight costs, we used 
freight rates obtained from the public version of the calculation 
memorandum in Lighters from the PRC, cited above.

Preliminary Results of Reviews

    As a result of our reviews, we preliminarily determine the 
weighted-average dumping margins (in percent) for the period May 1, 
1996, through April 30, 1997 to be as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Company                       BBs      CRBs     SPBs 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 France                                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SKF..........................................     7.40    (\3\)    76.57
SNFA.........................................     0.55     1.78    (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Germany                                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SKF..........................................     2.27     7.33     5.24
Torrington NAD...............................    (\2\)    11.38    (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Italy                                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAG..........................................     1.18    (\3\)         
SKF..........................................     3.22    (\3\)         
Meter........................................    (\3\)    10.65         
Somecat......................................     0.00    (\3\)         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Japan                                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Koyo Seiko...................................     6.29    (\3\)    (\3\)
Nachi........................................     6.83     8.53    (\3\)
NPBS.........................................     2.33    (\2\)    (\3\)
NSK Ltd......................................     5.87     2.27    (\3\)
NTN..........................................     6.16    12.50    10.39
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Romania                                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TIE..........................................     0.90                  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Singapore                               
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMB Singapore/Pelmec Ind.....................     4.49                  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Sweden                                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SKF..........................................    11.73    (\2\)         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              United Kingdom                            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSK/RHP......................................    16.66    21.08         
FAG (U.K.)...................................    (\2\)    (\2\)         
Barden.......................................     8.02    (\1\)         
SNFA.........................................    58.20   (\3\)          
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ No shipments or sales subject to this review. The firm has an       
  individual rate from the last relevant segment of the proceeding in   
  which the firm had shipments/sales.                                   
\2\ No shipments or sales subject to this review. The firm has no       
  individual rate from any segment of this proceeding.                  
\3\ No review requested.                                                

Parties to this 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 the date of publication of this notice. A 
general issues hearing, if requested, and any hearings regarding issues 
related solely to specific countries, if requested, will be held in 
accordance with the following schedule and at the indicated locations 
in the main Commerce Department building:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Case                             Date                            Time                  Room No. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Issues.....................  March 18, 1998.............  8:30 a.m.........................         1412
Sweden.............................  March 19, 1998.............  8:30 a.m.........................         1412
Romania............................  March 19, 1998.............  2:00 p.m.........................         1412
Germany............................  March 20, 1998.............  8:30 a.m.........................         1412
Italy..............................  March 23, 1998.............  8:30 a.m.........................         1412
Singapore..........................  March 23, 1998.............  2:00 p.m.........................         1412
United Kingdom.....................  March 24, 1998.............  8:30 a.m.........................         1412
France.............................  March 24, 1998.............  2:00 p.m.........................         1412
Japan..............................  March 25, 1998.............  8:30 a.m.........................         1412
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issues raised in hearings will be limited to those raised in the 
respective case and rebuttal briefs. Case briefs from interested 
parties and rebuttal briefs, limited to the issues raised in the 
respective case briefs, may be submitted not later than the dates shown 
below for general issues and the respective country-specific cases. 
Parties who submit case or rebuttal briefs in these proceedings are 
requested to submit with each argument (1) a statement of the issue, 
and (2) a brief summary of the argument.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Case                    Briefs due         Rebuttals due   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Issues................  March 9, 1998......  March 16, 1998.    
Sweden........................  March 10, 1998.....  March 17, 1998.    
Romania.......................  March 10, 1998.....  March 17, 1998.    

[[Page 6519]]

                                                                        
Germany.......................  March 11, 1998.....  March 18, 1998.    
Italy.........................  March 12, 1998.....  March 19, 1998.    
Singapore.....................  March 12, 1998.....  March 19, 1998.    
United Kingdom................  March 13, 1998.....  March 20, 1998.    
France........................  March 13, 1998.....  March 20, 1998.    
Japan.........................  March 16, 1998.....  March 23, 1998     
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department will publish the final results of these 
administrative reviews, including the results of its analysis of issues 
raised in any such written briefs or hearings. The Department will 
issue final results of these reviews 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. Because sampling 
and the inability to link sales with specific entries prevents 
calculation of duties on an entry-by-entry basis, we have calculated 
importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates for each class or 
kind of merchandise based on the ratio of the total amount of 
antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales made during the 
POR to the total customs value of the sales used to calculate those 
duties. This rate will be assessed uniformly on all entries of that 
particular importer made during the POR. (This is equivalent to 
dividing the total amount of antidumping duties, which are calculated 
by taking the difference between statutory NV and statutory EP or CEP, 
by the total statutory EP or CEP value of the sales compared and 
adjusting the result by the average difference between EP or CEP and 
customs value for all merchandise examined during the POR).
    In some cases, such as EP situations, the respondent does not know 
the entered value of the merchandise. For these situations, we have 
either calculated an approximate entered value or an average unit 
dollar amount of antidumping duty based on all sales examined during 
the POR. (See Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller 
Bearings) and Parts Thereof from the Federal Republic of Germany; Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 56 FR 31694 (July 
11, 1991).) The Department will issue appropriate appraisement 
instructions directly to the Customs Service upon completion of these 
reviews.
    Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective 
for all shipments of the subject merchandise 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 the reviewed 
companies will be those rates established in the final results of these 
reviews (except that no deposit will be required for firms with zero or 
de minimis margins, i.e., margins less than 0.5 percent); (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 (LTFV) 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) the cash deposit rate for all 
other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be the ``all others'' 
rate made effective by the final results of the 1991-92 administrative 
reviews of these orders (See Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered 
Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France, et al.: Final Results 
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Revocation in Part of an 
Antidumping Duty Order, 58 FR 39729 (July 26, 1993), and Antifriction 
Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From 
France, et al.; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Reviews and Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 66472 
(December 17, 1996)). As noted in those previous final results, these 
rates are the ``all others'' rates from the relevant LTFV 
investigations. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain 
in effect until publication of the final results of the next 
administrative reviews.
    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.
    These administrative reviews 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(c)(5).

    Dated: February 2, 1998.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-3212 Filed 2-6-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P