[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 132 (Monday, July 12, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37498-37500]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-17645]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-007]
Barium Chloride From the People's Republic of China; 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 of barium chloride from the People's Republic of
China.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On November 30, 1998, the Department of Commerce (``the
Department'') published a notice of initiation of administrative review
of the antidumping duty order on barium chloride from the People's
Republic of China (PRC) covering the period October 1, 1997 through
September 30, 1998.
For all companies named in this review, we are basing our
preliminary results on ``facts available'' (FA). 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 on entries during the period.
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary
results. Parties who submit arguments are requested to submit with each
argument (1) a statement of the issue; and (2) a brief summary of the
argument.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 12, 1999.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nova J. Daly or Thomas Futtner, AD/CVD
Enforcement, Group II, Office Four, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and
[[Page 37499]]
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-
0989, and 482-3814, respectively.
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 as of
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 the regulations at 19 CFR Part 351 (April 1998).
Period of Review
The period of review (POR) is October 1, 1997 through September 30,
1998.
Scope of the Review
The imports covered by this review are shipments of barium
chloride, a chemical compound having the formulas BaCl2 or BaCl2-2H2O,
currently classifiable under item number 2827.38.00 of the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule (HTS). Although the HTS item numbers are provided for
convenience and for Customs purposes, the written description remains
dispositive.
Background
On October 17, 1984, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
published in the Federal Register (49 FR 40635) the antidumping duty
order on barium chloride from the PRC. On October 9, 1998, the
Department published in the Federal Register (63 FR 54440) a notice of
opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty
order. In response to our notice of opportunity to request
administrative review for this POR, the petitioner, Chemical Products
Corporation (``CPC''), requested, by letter dated October 22, 1998,
that the Department conduct an administrative review of the following
Chinese manufacturers/exporters of the subject merchandise: Hebei Xinji
Chemical Plant (Hebei); Hengnan Chemical Factory (Hengnan); Kunghan
Chemical Factory (Kunghan); Linshu Chemical Factory (Linshu); Qingdao
Red Star Chemical Group Co. (Red Star); Sichuan Emeishan Salt Chemical
Industry Group Company, Ltd. (Sichuan); Sinochem (U.S.A.)(Sinochem);
Tangshan Chemical Factory (Tangshan); Tianjin Chemical Industry
Corporation (Tianjin); Tianjin Bohai Chemical United Import/Export
Company (Tianjin Bohai); and Zhangjiaba Salt Chemical Plant
(Zhangjiaba). (See Letter from CPC to the Department, October 22,
1998). One of these companies, Sinochem, was previously determined by
the Department to be entitled to a separate rate.
On November 30, 1998, the Department published a notice of
initiation of an administrative review on the producers/exporters named
by the petitioner in its review request (63 FR 65748).
The Department sent questionnaires to all of the companies for
which we had addresses on January 28, 1999. Also on January 28, 1999,
we sent a letter to Mr. Zhang Yuqing of the Ministry of Foreign Trade
and Economic Cooperation (MOFTEC), enclosing copies of the
questionnaire.
Separate Rates
Although Sinochem had been granted separate rate status in a prior
administrative review, in this review, like the other named companies,
Sinochem failed to respond or show that it remained entitled to a
separate rate. Consequently, we have considered Sinochem to be part of
the PRC-wide entity for purposes of this administrative review. In
addition, the other companies named in the request for review also did
not request a separate rate. Exporters which have not established they
are entitled to a separate rate are presumed to be under common
government control and, therefore, should receive a single PRC-wide
rate. Because none of the companies for which an administrative review
has been requested for this POR has demonstrated that it is entitled to
a separate rate, all are deemed to be included in the PRC-wide entity,
and will receive a common margin in this review.
Facts Available
Section 776(a)(1) of the Act mandates that the Department use FA if
necessary information is not available on the record of an antidumping
proceeding. In addition, section 776(a)(2) of the Act mandates that the
Department use FA where an interested party or any other person: (A)
Withholds information requested by the Department; (B) fails to provide
requested information by the requested date or in the form and manner
requested; (C) significantly impedes an antidumping proceeding; or (D)
provides information that cannot be verified. In this case, none of the
named respondents responded to the Department's questionnaire. Where
the Department must base the entire dumping margin for a respondent in
an administrative review on FA because that respondent failed to
cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability, section 776(b)(2)
authorizes the Department to use an inference adverse to the interests
of that respondent in choosing FA. Section 776(b)(2) also authorizes
the Department to use as adverse FA information derived from the
petition, the final determination in the investigation, a previous
administrative review, or other information placed on the record.
In this administrative review, none of the companies responded to
our questionnaire. Therefore, we lack information with which to
calculate a margin and, consequently, have determined we must base the
margin for the PRC-wide entity on FA.
As noted above, none of the companies named in the notice of
initiation in this review responded. Therefore, we find that the PRC-
wide entity failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its
ability to comply with the Department's requests for information.
Consequently, we have preliminarily decided to use adverse FA with
respect to the PRC-wide entity in accordance with section 776(b) of the
Act.
For the preliminary results of this review, we determine that it is
appropriate to use, as adverse FA for the PRC-wide rate, the highest
rate from this or previous segments of the proceeding. In this case, we
have used Sinochem's rate of 60.84 percent from Barium Chloride From
the People's Republic of China; Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 57 FR 29467 (July 2, 1992) (1990-91 Final
Results).
Information from prior segments of a proceeding constitutes
secondary information. Section 776(c) of the Act provides that the
Department shall, to the extent practicable, corroborate secondary
information from independent sources reasonably at its disposal. The
Statement of Administrative Action, H.R. Doc. 103-316, Vol. 1
(1994)(SAA), provides that ``corroborate'' means simply that the
Department will satisfy itself that the secondary information to be
used has probative value. See SAA at 870.
To corroborate secondary information, the Department will, to the
extent practicable, examine the reliability and relevance of the
information to be used. However, unlike other types of information,
such as input costs or selling expenses, there are no independent
sources for calculated dumping margins. The only source for calculated
margins is an administrative determination. Thus, in an administrative
review, if the Department chooses as adverse FA a calculated
[[Page 37500]]
dumping margin from a prior segment of the proceeding, it is not
necessary to question the reliability of the margin for that time
period. With respect to the relevance aspect of corroboration, however,
the Department will consider information reasonably at its disposal as
to whether there are circumstances that would render a margin not
relevant. Where circumstances indicate that the selected margin is not
appropriate as adverse FA, the Department will disregard the margin and
determine an appropriate margin. See, e.g., Fresh Cut Flowers from
Mexico; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,
60 FR 49567, 49568 (September 26, 1995) (the Department disregarded the
highest margin as best information available because that margin was
based on an extraordinarily high business expense resulting from
uncharacteristic investment activities, which resulted in the high
margin).
In the absence of information on the administrative record that
application of this 60.84 percent rate would be inappropriate, that the
margin is not relevant, or that leads us to re-examine this rate as
adverse FA in the instant review, we find the margin reliable and
relevant. Therefore, we have satisfied the corroboration requirements
under section 776(c) of the Act and have applied, as FA, the 60.84
percent margin from the 1990-91 Final Results.
Accordingly, we are applying a single dumping rate--the highest
rate established in any segment of this proceeding--to all exporters in
the PRC. The weighted-average dumping margin is as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Manufacturer/producer/exporter margin
percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-wide rate.............................................. 60.84
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department will disclose to parties to the proceeding any
calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results
within 5 days of the date of publication of this notice. See section
351.224(b) of the Department's regulations. Any interested party may
request a hearing within 30 days of publication of this notice. Any
hearing, if requested, will be held 44 days after the publication date
of this notice, or the first workday thereafter. Interested parties may
submit case briefs within 30 days of the date of publication of this
notice. Rebuttal briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in the
case briefs, may be filed not later than 35 days after the date of
publication. See sections 351.309 and 351.310 of the Department's
regulations. The Department will publish a notice of final results of
this administrative review, which will include the results of its
analysis of issues raised in any such comments, not later than 120 days
after the date of publication of these preliminary results.
Duty Assessment Rates
Upon completion of the final results in this administrative review,
the Department shall determine, and the Customs Service shall assess,
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. We intend to issue
assessment instructions to Customs based on the dumping rate stated
above. The Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to
Customs.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all
shipments of barium chloride from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as
provided for by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate
for all Chinese exporters will be the rate established in the final
results of this review; and (2) for non-PRC exporters of subject
merchandise from the PRC, the cash deposit rate will be the rate
applicable to their PRC suppliers. These deposit requirements, 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 section 351.402(f) of the Department's regulations
to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties
prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. 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. section 1675(a)(1)), section
777(i) of the Act (19 U.S.C. section 1677f(i)), and 19 CFR 351.221.
Dated: July 2, 1999.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 99-17645 Filed 7-9-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P