[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 74 (Monday, April 19, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19123-19125]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-9760]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-533-815]


Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value 
and Final Affirmative Finding of Critical Circumstances: Elastic Rubber 
Tape From India

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 19, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alysia Wilson or Cynthia Thirumalai, 
Office of AD/CVD Enforcement 1, Group I, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; 
telephone: (202) 482-0108 or (202) 482-4087, respectively.

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 of Commerce 
(``Department'') regulations are to the regulations at 19 CFR Part 351 
(April 1998).

Final Determination

    We determine that elastic rubber tape (``ERT'') from India is being 
sold in the United States at less than fair value (``LTFV''), as 
provided in section 735 of the Act. The estimated margins are shown in 
the ``Suspension of Liquidation'' section of this notice.

Case History

    On February 5, 1999, after the publication of our preliminary 
determination in this investigation (see Notice of Preliminary 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Preliminary Negative 
Critical Circumstances Determination: Elastic Rubber Tape from India, 
64 FR 5025 (February 2, 1999) (Preliminary Determination)), Garware 
Elastomerics Limited (``GEL'') withdrew from the remainder of the 
proceeding. No interested parties provided comments on the Preliminary 
Determination and no request for a hearing was received by the 
Department.

Scope of the Investigation

    For purposes of this investigation, the product covered is elastic 
rubber tape. Elastic rubber tape is defined as vulcanized, non-cellular 
rubber strips, of either natural or synthetic rubber, 0.006 inches to 
0.100 inches (0.15 mm to 2.54 mm) in thickness and \1/8\ inches to 1\5/
8\ inches (3 mm to 42 mm) in width. Such product is generally used in 
swim wear and underwear.
    The merchandise subject to this investigation is classified in the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') at 
subheading 4008.21.00. Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the 
merchandise under investigation is dispositive.

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (``POI'') is July 1, 1997, through June 
30, 1998.

Adverse Facts Available

    Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides that if an interested party 
or any other person (A) withholds information that has been requested 
by the administering authority; (B) fails to provide such information 
by the deadlines for the submission of the information or in the form 
and manner requested, subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 
782 of the Act; (C) significantly impedes a proceeding under the 
antidumping statute; or (D) provides such information but the 
information cannot be verified as provided in section 782(i) of the 
Act, the administering authority shall, subject to section 782(d) of 
the Act, use the facts otherwise available in reaching the applicable 
determination.
    GEL failed to respond to the Department's requests for information; 
namely, GEL withdrew from the investigation. Accordingly, since GEL has 
withheld necessary information and withdrawn from the proceeding, which 
prevented the Department from verifying any of GEL's responses and 
impeded the Department from further investigation, we have determined, 
under sections 776(a)(2)(A), (C) & (D) of the Act, that we must base 
our determination for that company on the facts available.
    Section 776(b) of the Act further provides that adverse inferences 
may be used for a party that has failed to cooperate by not acting to 
the best of its ability to comply with a request for information (see 
also the Statement of Administrative Action (``SAA''), accompanying the 
URAA, H. Doc. No. 316, 103rd Cong., 2d Sess. 870). Given GEL's refusal 
to comply with the

[[Page 19124]]

Department's request for information and its withdrawal from 
participation in the investigation, the Department has determined that 
GEL has failed to cooperate to the best of its ability in this 
investigation. Therefore, the Department has determined that an adverse 
inference is warranted with respect to GEL.
    As adverse facts available, the Department is assigning GEL a 
margin based on the highest margin in the petition. The Department 
finds that the highest petition margin is appropriate and indicative of 
GEL's selling practices because if GEL could have submitted information 
demonstrating the appropriateness of a lower margin, it would have done 
so. See, Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Steel Wire Rod from Venezuela, 63 FR 8946 (February 23, 1998). 
The court has upheld the Department's assumption that the petition 
information is probative of a respondent's experience when a respondent 
failed to submit information in a proceeding. See, Koenig and Bauer-
Albert AG v. United States, 15 F. Supp 2d 834, 858 (Court of 
International Trade (CIT) 1998) (stating that ``Commerce had a right to 
assume that the petition information was more probative of 
[respondent's] experience because if [respondent] could have submitted 
information demonstrating that it ought to receive a lower margin, it 
would have done so.'').
    Therefore, the final rate for GEL is 66.51 percent, which is based 
on the highest margin alleged in the petition. We used this same 
petition margin as partial adverse facts available in the Preliminary 
Determination, and as discussed there, the Department has, to the 
extent practicable, corroborated that margin as required by Section 
776(c) of the Act. See also, Memorandum to Susan Kuhbach regarding 
``Corroboration of Secondary Information, Use of Adverse Facts 
Available'' dated January 26, 1999. Furthermore, no record evidence or 
argument has been submitted that would cause the Department to call 
into question the accuracy of the data in the petition. Therefore, we 
determine that the use of this margin as facts available for GEL is 
appropriate.

Critical Circumstances

    Section 733(e)(1) of the Act provides that, if a petitioner alleges 
critical circumstances, the Department will determine whether there is 
a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that (A)(i) there is a history 
of dumping and material injury by reason of dumped imports in the 
United States or elsewhere of the subject merchandise, or (ii) the 
person by whom, or for whose account, the merchandise was imported knew 
or should have known that the exporter was selling the subject 
merchandise at less than its fair value and that there was likely to be 
material injury by reason of such sales, and (B) there have been 
massive imports of the subject merchandise over a relatively short 
period.
    As discussed above in the ``Facts Available'' section, GEL has not 
cooperated to the best of its ability in this investigation and 
application of adverse facts available is appropriate. Since there is 
no verified information on the record with respect to GEL's volume of 
imports, and U.S. import statistics are unavailable because ERT is 
entered under an HTSUS basket category which includes a variety of 
other products, we have no choice but to apply the adverse inference 
that GEL has made massive imports of the subject merchandise over a 
relatively short period of time. Therefore, we find that the second 
criterion for determining whether critical circumstances exist with 
respect to GEL's exports of subject merchandise has been met. See, 
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain 
Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings From Malaysia, 60 FR 10550, 10551 
(February 27, 1995) where the Department determined critical 
circumstances existed since it was unable to verify the accuracy of 
this data.
    In determining whether an importer knew or should have known that 
the exporter was selling the subject merchandise at less than its fair 
value and thereby causing material injury, the Department normally 
considers margins over 15 percent for CEP sales and 25 percent for EP 
sales to impute knowledge of dumping and of resultant material injury. 
See, Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from the Russian 
Federation, 62 FR 61787, 61793 (November 19, 1997). In this 
investigation, we have determined, pursuant to an application of 
adverse facts available, the margin to be 66.51 percent. As this margin 
indicates dumping over the 15 and 25 percent thresholds for all of 
GEL's sales, we determine that the first criterion for ascertaining 
whether critical circumstances exist has also been satisfied. 
Therefore, since both criteria for finding critical circumstances under 
section 733(e)(1) of the Act have been met, we determine that critical 
circumstances exist with respect to exports of ERT from India by GEL.

The All Others Rate

    The foreign manufacturer/exporter in this investigation is being 
assigned a dumping margin entirely on the basis of facts otherwise 
available. Section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act provides that, where the 
dumping margins established for all exporters and producers 
individually investigated are determined entirely under section 776 of 
the Act, the Department may use any reasonable method to establish the 
estimated ``All Others'' rate for exporters and producers not 
individually investigated, including averaging the estimated weighted-
average dumping margins determined for the exporters and producers 
individually investigated. Further, the SAA at 873 provides that where 
the data do not permit weight-averaging, the Department may use other 
reasonable methods. In this case, the margin assigned to the only 
company investigated is based on adverse facts available. Therefore, 
consistent with the SAA at 873, we are using an alternative method. As 
our alternative, we are basing the ``All Others'' rate on a simple 
average of the margins in the petition, based both on price-to-price 
comparisons and constructed value. As a result, the ``All Others'' rate 
is 45.55 percent.

Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(1) and 735(c)(4)(A) of the Act, 
we are directing the U.S. Customs Service (``Customs'') to continue to 
suspend liquidation of all entries of ERT from India, that are entered, 
or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after February 2, 
1999 the date of publication of our preliminary determination in the 
Federal Register. In addition, as a result of our critical 
circumstances determination in our final determination, we will 
instruct Customs to suspend liquidation of GEL's entries of ERT from 
India between November 4, 1999, and February 1, 1999 (i.e., 90 days 
prior to the date of publication of our preliminary determination in 
the Federal Register). We will instruct Customs to require a cash 
deposit or the posting of a bond equal to the percentage margins, as 
indicated in the chart below. These suspension-of-liquidation 
instructions will remain in effect until further notice. The dumping 
margins are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Margin
                   Exporter/Manufacturer                     percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Garware Elastomerics Limited (GEL)........................         66.51

[[Page 19125]]

 
All Others................................................         45.55
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ``All Others'' rate, which we derived from the average of the 
margins calculated in the petition, applies to all entries of subject 
merchandise other than those manufactured or exported by the named 
respondent.

ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the 
International Trade Commission (ITC) of our determination. As our final 
determination is affirmative, the ITC will, within 45 days, determine 
whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material 
injury to, the U.S. industry. If the ITC determines that material 
injury, or threat of material injury, does not exist the proceeding 
will be terminated and all securities posted will be refunded or 
canceled. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the 
Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing Customs 
officials to assess antidumping duties on all imports of the subject 
merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or 
after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation.
    In accordance with section 735(c)(3) of the Act, if the ITC makes a 
final negative finding of critical circumstances, the Department will 
instruct Customs to terminate the retroactive suspension of liquidation 
of GEL's entries from the period beginning November 4, 1998, through 
February 1, 1999 (i.e., the 90 day period prior to publication of the 
preliminary determination). The Department will also instruct Customs 
to release any bond or other security and refund any cash deposit 
collected on subject merchandise retroactively suspended during this 
90-day period.
    This determination is issued and published in accordance with 
sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: April 12, 1999.
Richard W. Moreland,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 99-9760 Filed 4-16-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P