[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 46 (Thursday, March 8, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13903-13907]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-5622]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-560-802]


Certain Preserved Mushrooms From Indonesia: 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 a request by three manufacturers/exporters of 
the subject merchandise: PT Dieng Djaya and PT Surya Jaya Abadi 
Perkasa,\1\ PT Indo Evergreen Agro Business Corp., and PT Zeta Agro 
Corporation, and by The Pillsbury Company, an importer of the 
merchandise under review, the Department of Commerce is conducting an 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain 
preserved mushrooms from Indonesia. The periods of reviews are August 
5, 1998, through January 31, 2000, for PT Indo Evergreen Agro Business 
Corp. and PT Zeta Agro Corporation, and December 31, 1998 through 
January 31, 2000, for PT Dieng Djaya and PT Surya Jaya Abadi Perkasa 
\2\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In accordance with 19 CFR 351.401(f), PT Dieng Djaya and PT 
Surya Jaya Abadi Perkasa were determined to be affiliated companies 
in the original less-than-fair-value investigation, and therefore 
the two companies submitted a combined review request and 
questionnaire response.
    \2\ See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Preserved 
Mushroom from Indonesia, 64 FR 8310 (February 19, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We preliminarily determine that sales have been made below normal 
value. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary 
results. If these preliminary results are adopted in our final results 
of administrative review, we will instruct the Customs Service to 
assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 8, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David J. Goldberger or Sophie E. 
Castro, Office 2, AD/CVD Enforcement Group I, Import Administration-
Room B-099, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 
20230; telephone: (202) 482-4136 or (202) 482-0588, 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 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 U.S. Department of Commerce's 
(the Department's) regulations are to 19 CFR part 351 (2000).

Background

    On December 31, 1998, the Department published in the Federal 
Register (63 FR 72268), the final affirmative antidumping duty 
determination of sales at less than fair value (LTFV) on certain 
preserved mushrooms from Indonesia. We published an antidumping duty 
order on February 19, 1999 (64 FR 8310).
    On February 14, 2000, the Department published in the Federal 
Register a notice advising of the opportunity to

[[Page 13904]]

request an administrative review of this order for the period August 5, 
1998, through January 31, 2000 (65 FR 7348). On February 29, 2000, in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), three manufacturers/exporters of the 
subject merchandise, PT Dieng Djaya and PT Surya Jaya Abadi (Dieng/
Surya), PT Indo Evergreen Agro Business Corp. (Indo Evergreen) and PT 
Zeta Agro Corporation (Zeta) as well as one importer of the subject 
merchandise, The Pillsbury Company, requested that the Department 
conduct an administrative review of exports to the United States by 
Dieng/Surya, Indo Evergreen and Zeta. We published a notice of 
initiation of the review on March 30, 2000 (65 FR 16875).
    On March 29, 2000, the Department issued an antidumping 
questionnaire to Dieng/Surya, Indo Evergreen, and Zeta. We issued 
supplemental questionnaires in July, September, and October 2000, and 
in January 2001. In May and July through October 2000, we received 
timely responses to the original and supplemental questionnaires. Dieng 
responded to an additional supplemental questionnaire in February 2001.
    In June 2000, we received below-cost-sales allegations for Indo 
Evergreen and Zeta from the petitioners, the Coalition for Fair 
Preserved Mushroom Trade.\3\ In July 2000, we initiated a sales-below-
cost investigation for both Indo Evergreen and Zeta.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The petitioners are the Coalition for Fair Preserved 
Mushroom Trade which includes the American Mushroom Institute and 
the following domestic companies: L.K. Bowman, Inc., Nottingham, PA; 
Modern Mushrooms Farms, Inc., Toughkernamon, PA; Monterrey 
Mushrooms, Inc., Watsonville, CA; Mount Laurel Canning Corp., 
Temple, PA; Mushrooms Canning Company, Kennett Square, PA; Southwood 
Farms, Hockessin, DE; Sunny Dell Foods, Inc., Oxford, PA; United 
Canning Corp., North Lima, OH.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 28, 2000, due to the reasons set forth in the Notice of 
Extension of Time Limit for the Preliminary Results of Antidumping 
Administrative Review: Certain Preserved Mushrooms from Indonesia, 65 
FR 46426 (July 28, 2000), we extended the due date for the preliminary 
results. In accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, we 
extended the due date for the preliminary results by the maximum 120 
days allowable.

Scope of the Review

    The products covered by this review are certain preserved 
mushrooms, whether imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and 
pieces. The preserved mushrooms covered under this review are the 
species Agaricus bisporus and Agaricus bitorquis. ``Preserved 
mushrooms'' refer to mushrooms that have been prepared or preserved by 
cleaning, blanching, and sometimes slicing or cutting. These mushrooms 
are then packed and heated in containers including but not limited to 
cans or glass jars in a suitable liquid medium, including but not 
limited to water, brine, butter or butter sauce. Preserved mushrooms 
may be imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. Included 
within the scope of this review are ``brined'' mushrooms, which are 
presalted and packed in a heavy salt solution to provisionally preserve 
them for further processing.
    Excluded from the scope of this review are the following: (1) All 
other species of mushroom, including straw mushrooms; (2) all fresh and 
chilled mushrooms, including ``refrigerated'' or ``quick blanched 
mushrooms'; (3) dried mushrooms; (4) frozen mushrooms; and (5) 
``marinated,'' ``acidified'' or ``pickled'' mushrooms, which are 
prepared or preserved by means of vinegar or acetic acid, but may 
contain oil or other additives.
    The merchandise subject to this review is classifiable under 
subheadings 2003.10.0027, 2003.10.0031, 2003.10.0037, 2003.10.0043, 
2003.10.0047, 2003.10.0053, and 0711.90.4000 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (``HTS''). Although the HTS subheadings 
are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written 
description of the scope of this review is dispositive.

Fair Value Comparisons

    To determine whether sales to the United States of certain 
preserved mushrooms by Dieng/Surya, Indo Evergreen and Zeta were made 
at less than normal value, we compared export price to the normal 
value, as described in the ``Export Price'' and ``Normal Value'' 
sections of this notice.
    Pursuant to section 777A(d)(2) of the Act, we compared the export 
prices of individual U.S. transactions to the weighted-average normal 
value of the foreign like product where there were sales made in the 
ordinary course of trade at prices above the cost of production (COP), 
as discussed in the ``Cost of Production Analysis'' section below.

Product Comparisons

    In accordance with section 771(16) of the Act, we considered all 
products produced by Indo Evergreen and Zeta, covered by the 
description in the ``Scope of the Review'' section, above, sold by the 
respondents in the home market during the period of review (``POR''), 
to be foreign like products for purposes of determining appropriate 
product comparisons to U.S. sales. We compared U.S. sales to sales made 
in the home market within the contemporaneous window period, which 
extends from three months prior to the U.S. sale until two months after 
the sale. Where there were no sales of identical merchandise in the 
home market made in the ordinary course of trade to compare to U.S. 
sales, we compared U.S. sales to sales of the most similar foreign like 
product made in the ordinary course of trade. Where there were no sales 
of identical or similar merchandise in the home market to compare to 
U.S. sales, we compared U.S. sales to the constructed value of the 
product.
    In making the product comparisons, we matched foreign like products 
based on the physical characteristics reported by the respondents in 
the following order: preservation method, container type, mushroom 
style, weight, grade, container solution and label type.
    For Dieng/Surya, we compared U.S. sales to the constructed value of 
the product because Dieng/Surya had insufficient home market and third 
country sales during the POR. See ``Normal Value'' section below for 
further discussion.

Level of Trade

    In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to the extent 
practicable, we determine normal value based on sales in the comparison 
market at the same level of trade (LOT) as the export price or 
constructed export price (CEP) transaction. The normal value LOT is 
that of the starting-price sales in the comparison market or, when 
normal value is based on constructed value, that of the sales from 
which we derive selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses and 
profit. For export price, the U.S. LOT is also the level of the 
starting-price sale, which is usually from the exporter to an 
unaffiliated U.S. customer. For CEP, it is the level of the constructed 
sale from the exporter to an affiliated importer, after the deductions 
required under section 772(d) of the Act. To determine whether normal 
value sales are at a LOT different from export price or CEP, we examine 
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 are at a different LOT, and the difference 
affects price comparability, as manifested in a pattern of consistent 
price differences between the sales on which normal value is based and 
comparison-market sales at the LOT of the export

[[Page 13905]]

transaction, we make a LOT adjustment under section 773(a)(7)(A) of the 
Act. For CEP sales, if the normal value level is more remote from the 
factory than the CEP level, and there is no basis for determining 
whether the difference in the levels between normal value and CEP 
affects price comparability, we adjust normal value under section 
773(a)(7)(B) of the Act (the CEP offset provision). 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).
    In this review, all three respondents made only export price sales 
during the POR. In their questionnaire responses all three respondents 
reported that comparison-market and export price sales to the 
unaffiliated customers were made at the same LOT. Furthermore, the 
respondents maintain that selling activities in both markets are 
identical. Although the information pertaining to selling functions on 
the record is limited, it does not appear to warrant granting a LOT 
adjustment.

Export Price

    For all three respondents we used export price calculation 
methodology, in accordance with section 772(a) of the Act, because the 
subject merchandise was sold directly by the producer/exporter in 
Indonesia to the first unaffiliated purchaser in the United States 
prior to importation and CEP treatment was not otherwise indicated.
    We calculated export price based on the packed FOB seaport prices 
charged to the first unaffiliated customer in the United States. We 
made deductions, where appropriate, for foreign inland freight, foreign 
inland insurance, and brokerage and handling, in accordance with 
section 772(c)(2)(A) of the Act.

Normal Value

    In order to determine whether there was a sufficient volume of 
sales in the home market to serve as a viable basis for calculating 
normal value, we compared the respondents' volume of home market sales 
of the foreign like product to the volume of U.S. sales of the subject 
merchandise, in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(C) of the Act.
    Evergreen and Zeta's aggregate volume of home market sales of the 
foreign like product was greater than five percent of its aggregate 
volume of U.S. sales of the subject merchandise. Therefore, we 
determined that the home market provides a viable basis for calculating 
normal value for both Evergreen and Zeta.
    Dieng/Surya reported that its aggregate volumes of home market and 
third country market sales, respectively, were less than five percent 
of its aggregate volume of U.S. sales of the subject merchandise. 
Petitioners allege that Dieng/Surya refused to provide complete 
information concerning its home market and third country sales in a 
timely fashion and may have overstated its U.S. sales figures for 
purposes of the viability test in an effort to avoid reporting third 
country price information. While we acknowledge the petitioners' 
allegation, we note that in this case Dieng/Surya has complied with our 
request for information as stated in our antidumping questionnaire on 
page A-2. Should its home market sales not be viable for purposes of 
calculating normal value, our questionnaire directs respondents to 
provide sales to each of their three largest third country markets, 
provided each market meets the five-percent threshold. In this case, 
since none of Dieng/Surya's third country markets reaches that 
threshold, Dieng was not required to provide a section B questionnaire 
response for its third country sales. In addition, we note that Dieng/
Surya's reporting in this review is consistent with that in the LTFV 
investigation; in the LTFV investigation, the Department verified that 
Dieng/Surya did not have a viable home market or third country market 
during the period of investigation. For these reasons, we determined 
that neither the home market nor any third country market was a viable 
basis for calculating normal value for Dieng/Surya. As a result, we 
used constructed value as the basis for calculating normal value for 
Dieng/Surya, in accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the Act.

Arm's-Length Sales

    Indo Evergreen and Zeta each reported a small percentage of sales 
of the foreign like product to affiliated customers. To test whether 
these sales to affiliated customers were made at arm's length, where 
possible, we compared the prices of sales to affiliated and 
unaffiliated customers, net of all movement charges, direct selling 
expenses, discounts, and packing. Where the price to the affiliated 
party was on average 99.5 percent or more of the price to the 
unaffiliated parties, we determined that the sales made to the 
affiliated party were at arm's length. See Preamble--Department's Final 
Antidumping Regulations, 62 FR 27,355 (May 19, 1997). Consistent with 
19 CFR 351.403, we excluded from our analysis those sales where the 
price to the affiliated parties was less than 99.5 percent of the price 
to the unaffiliated parties.

Cost of Production Analysis

    In response to the petitioners sales-below-cost allegations for 
Indo Evergreen and Zeta, we reviewed their allegations and determined 
that Indo Evergreen's and Zeta's submitted data provided reasonable 
grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like product 
under consideration for determining normal value in this review may 
have been at prices below the COP, pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(A)(i) 
of the Act. See July 7, 2000, Memorandum from the Team to Louis Apple, 
Office Director, AD/CVD Enforcement Group 1, Office 2, Re: Request to 
Initiate Cost Investigation for Respondents P.T. Zeta Agro Corporation 
and PT Indo Evergreen Agrobusiness Corporation. Therefore, pursuant to 
section 773(b)(1) of the Act, we initiated a sales-below-cost 
investigation of sales made by Evergreen and Zeta.

A. Calculation of COP

    In accordance with section 773(b)(3) of the Act, we calculated COP 
based on the sum of Indo Evergreen's and Zeta's cost of materials and 
fabrication for the foreign like product, plus amounts for home-market 
SG&A, interest expenses, and the cost of all expenses incidental to 
placing the foreign like product in condition packed ready for 
shipment. We relied on the home market sales and cost of production 
information Indo Evergreen and Zeta provided in their questionnaire 
responses, except for the following adjustments:
    For Indo Evergreen, we adjusted the cost of manufacture for 
beginning and ending work-in-process. We revised Indo Evergreen's 
interest expense rate calculation by excluding foreign exchange gains 
and losses related to the non-current portion of long-term debt and 
reclassifying foreign exchange gains on accounts payable to general and 
administrative (G&A) expense. In addition, we included certain other 
foreign exchange gains and losses and other miscellaneous items in 
their G&A rate calculation. For Zeta, we adjusted the reported 
production quantities by deducting waste production quantities. This 
reduction in production quantities resulted in higher per unit cost of 
manufacture (COM) for Zeta. In addition, because Zeta did not include 
interest expense on affiliated party loans, we included an amount for 
interest expense in accordance with section 773(f)(2). We also 
reclassified foreign exchange gains on accounts payable to G&A expense. 
Lastly, we revised Zeta's G&A expense rate calculation by including 
certain other foreign exchange gains and losses and

[[Page 13906]]

other miscellaneous items. For further detail see Memoranda from Sheikh 
Hannan to Neal Halper, dated February 28, 2001, for Indo Evergreen and 
Zeta.

B. Test of Home Market Prices

    We compared the weighted-average, per-unit COP figures for the POR 
to home market sales of the foreign like product, as required by 
section 773(b) of the Act, in order to determine whether these sales 
were made at prices below the COP. In determining whether to disregard 
home market sales made at prices below the COP, we examined whether: 
(1) Within an extended period of time, such sales were made in 
substantial quantities; and (2) such sales were made at prices which 
permitted the recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time. 
On a product-specific basis, we compared the COP to the home market 
prices, less any applicable movement charges, rebates, discounts and 
direct and indirect selling expenses. Because Indo Evergreen and Zeta 
did not report home market indirect selling expenses, we have derived 
those expenses from their financial statements for purposes of 
deducting them from home market price. For further details see 
Memorandum from Sophie Castro, Financial Analyst, to Irene Darzenta 
Tzafolias, Program Manager, Office 2, AD/CVD Enforcement Group I, 
Import Administration, dated February 28, 2001.
3. Results of COP Test
    Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(C), where less than 20 percent of the 
respondents' sales of a given product were at prices less than the COP, 
we did not disregard any below-cost sales of that product because we 
determined that the below-cost sales were not made in ``substantial 
quantities.'' Where twenty percent or more of the respondents'' sales 
of a given product during the POR were at prices less than the COP, we 
disregard the below-cost sales where such sales were found to be made 
at prices which would not permit the recovery of all costs within a 
reasonable period of time (in accordance with section 773(b)(2)(D) of 
the Act).
    The results of our cost tests for Indo Evergreen and Zeta indicated 
for certain home market products that less than twenty percent of the 
sales of the model were at prices below COP. We therefore retained all 
sales of these models in our analysis and used them as the basis for 
determining normal value.
    Our cost tests also indicated, for both Indo Evergreen and Zeta, 
that for certain other home market products more than twenty percent of 
home market sales within an extended period of time were at prices 
below COP and would not permit the full recovery of all costs within a 
reasonable period of time. In accordance with section 773(b)(1) of the 
Act, we excluded these below-cost sales of these models from our 
analysis and used the remaining sales as the basis for determining 
normal value.

Price-to-Price Comparisons

    For Indo Evergreen and Zeta, we based normal value on the price at 
which the foreign like product is first sold for consumption in the 
exporting country, in the usual commercial quantities and in the 
ordinary course of trade, and at the same LOT as the export price, as 
defined by section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act.
    Home market prices were based on either ex-factory or delivered 
prices. We reduced normal value for home market movement expenses, 
where appropriate, in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(B)(ii). We also 
reduced normal value for packing costs incurred in the home market, in 
accordance with section 773(a)(6)(B)(i), and increased normal value to 
account for U.S. packing expenses in accordance with section 
773(a)(6)(A). We also made adjustments for differences in circumstances 
of sale (``COS'') in accordance with 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act and 
19 CFR 351.410, by deducting home market direct selling expenses (i.e., 
credit) and adding U.S. direct selling expenses (i.e., credit, U.S. 
warranty and bank charges), where applicable.
    Finally, we made adjustments to normal value, where appropriate, 
for differences in costs attributable to differences in the physical 
characteristics of the merchandise, pursuant to section 
773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.411.

Calculation of Constructed Value

    We calculated constructed value for Indo Evergreen, Zeta and Dieng/
Surya in accordance with section 773(e) of the Act, which indicates 
that constructed value shall be based on the sum of the respondent's 
cost of materials and fabrication for the foreign like product, plus 
amounts for SG&A, profit, and U.S. packing costs. We relied on the 
submitted constructed value information for Indo Evergreen and Zeta 
with the exception of the adjustments to COP noted above. For Dieng/
Surya, we relied on the submitted constructed value information except 
for the following adjustments:
    For Surya we revised the production quantities to be net of waste. 
This reduction in production quantities resulted in higher per unit 
COMs and packing for Surya. In addition, we disallowed Surya's cost 
offset for the sale of fresh mushrooms. See Memorandum from Sheikh 
Hannan to Neal Halper, dated February 28, 2001, for Dieng/Surya. For 
Dieng, we treated all reported grades as co-products with the same 
mushroom cost. See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 
Fair Value: Certain Preserved Mushroom from Indonesia, 63 FR 72268, 
72281 (December 31, 1998).
    We derived SG&A and profit in accordance with section 
773(e)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act and the Statement of Administrative Action 
accompanying the URAA, H.R. Doc. No. 316, 103d Cong, 2d Sess (1994), 
(SAA) at 169-171. See 19 CFR 351.405(b)(2) (clarifying that under 
section 773(e)(2)(B) of the Act, ``foreign country'' means the country 
in which the merchandise is produced), 62 FR 27296, 27412-13 (May 19, 
1997). The statute directs us to use an amount which reflects SG&A and 
profit incurred in connection with the production and sale of a foreign 
like product in the ordinary course of trade, by exporters or producers 
that are subject to the review. See section 773(e)(2)(B)(ii) of the 
Act.
    Because Indo Evergreen and Zeta both have a viable home market, and 
hence actual company-specific SG&A and profit data are available, we 
calculated Dieng/Surya's SG&A and profit as a weighted average of the 
SG&A and profit amounts experienced by Indo Evergreen and Zeta. For 
further details see Memorandum from Sheikh Hannan to Neal Halper, dated 
February 28, 2001, for Dieng/Surya.

Price-to-Constructed Value Comparisons

    For Dieng/Surya, we based normal value on constructed value, in 
accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the Act. For price-to-constructed 
value comparisons, we made adjustments to constructed value for COS 
differences, in accordance with 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act, and 19 
CFR 351.410. We made COS adjustments by deducting home market direct 
selling expenses (comprised of imputed credit) and adding U.S. direct 
selling expenses (comprised of imputed credit, warranties and bank 
charges).

Currency Conversion

    We made currency conversions in accordance with section 773A of the 
Act based on the official exchange rates in effect on the dates of the 
U.S. sales as certified by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

[[Page 13907]]

Preliminary Results of the Review

    As a result of this review, we preliminarily determine that the 
weighted-average dumping margins for the respective PORs are as 
follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Manufacture/exporter                     Period                         Margin (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PT Dieng Djaya and PT Surya Jaya Abadi       12/31/1998-01/31/2000  0.18 (de minimis).
 Perkasa.
PT Indo Evergreen Agro Business Corp...      08/05/1998-01/31/2000  5.15
PT Zeta Agro Corporation...............      08/05/1998-01/31/2000  0.02 (de minimis).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We will disclose calculations used in our analysis to parties to 
this proceeding within five days of the publication date of this 
notice. See 19 CFR 351.224(b). Any interested party may request a 
hearing within 30 days of publication. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). If 
requested, a hearing will be held 44 days after the date of publication 
of this notice, or the first work day thereafter.
    Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the 
respective case briefs 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 30 days and 37 
days, respectively, from the date of publication of these preliminary 
results. See 19 CFR 351.309(c) and (d). Parties who submit case briefs 
or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are requested to submit with each 
argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a brief summary of the 
argument. Parties are also encouraged to provide a summary of the 
arguments not to exceed five pages and a table of statutes, 
regulations, and cases cited.
    The Department will issue the final results of this administrative 
review, including the results of its analysis of issues raised in any 
written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication 
of this notice.
    Interested parties who wish to request a hearing or to participate 
if one is requested, must submit a written request to the Assistant 
Secretary for Import Administration, Room B-099, within 30 days of the 
date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) The 
party's name, address and telephone number; (2) the number of 
participants; and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. See 19 CFR 
351.310(c).

Assessment Rates

    The Department shall determine, and the Customs Service shall 
assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department 
will issue appropriate appraisement instructions directly to the 
Customs Service upon completion of this review. The final results of 
this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties 
on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review 
and for future deposits of estimated duties. We will instruct the 
Customs Service to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries 
covered by this review if any importer-specific assessment rate 
calculated in the final results of this review is above de minimis (See 
19 CFR 351.106(c)(1)). For assessment purposes, we intend to calculate 
importer-specific assessment rates for the subject merchandise by 
aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S. sales examined 
and dividing this amount by the total entered value of the sales 
examined. In order to estimate the entered value, we will subtract 
applicable movement expenses from the gross sales value.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash 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 this administrative review, as provided by section 
751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for the reviewed 
companies will be those established in the final results of this 
review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent, and therefore, de 
minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(C)(1), in which case the 
cash deposit rate will be zero; (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 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 11.26 percent, the ``All Others'' rate made effective by the LTFV 
investigation. These requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect 
until publication of the final results of the next administrative 
review.

Notification to Importers

    This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of 
their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 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.
    This administrative review and notice are published in accordance 
with sections 751(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221. Effective 
January 20, 2001, Bernard T. Carreau, is fulfilling the duties of the 
Assistant Secretary of Import Administration.

    Dated: February 28, 2001.
Bernard T. Carreau,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 01-5622 Filed 3-7-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P