[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 93 (Wednesday, May 14, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25861-25863]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-12031]



[[Page 25861]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-846]


Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Final Results 
and Partial Rescission of the Fifth Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review and Final Results of the Seventh New Shipper Review

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

ACTION: Notice of final results and partial rescission of the fifth 
antidumping duty administrative review and final results of the seventh 
new shipper review.

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

SUMMARY: On January 8, 2003, the Department of Commerce published the 
preliminary results and preliminary partial rescission of the fifth 
antidumping duty administrative review and preliminary results of the 
seventh new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on brake 
rotors from the People's Republic of China. See Brake Rotors from the 
People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results and Preliminary Partial 
Rescission of the Fifth Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and 
Preliminary Results of the Seventh New Shipper Review, 68 FR 1031 
(January 8, 2003) (``Preliminary Results''). These reviews examined 18 
exporters \1\ (``the respondents''), five of which are exporters 
included in three exporter/producer combinations and two of which are 
new shippers. The period of review is April 1, 2001, through March 31, 
2002 (``POR''). We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on 
our preliminary results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The names of the respondents in the fifth administrative 
review are as follows: (1) China National Industrial Machinery 
Import & Export Corporation (``CNIM''); (2) Laizhou Automobile Brake 
Equipment Company, Ltd. (``LABEC''); (3) Longkou Haimeng Machinery 
Co., Ltd. (``Haimeng''); (4) Laizhou Hongda Auto Replacement Parts 
Co., Ltd. (``Hongda''); (5) Hongfa Machinery (Dalian) Co., Ltd. 
(``Hongfa''); (6) Qingdao Gren (Group) Co. (``GREN''); (7) Qingdao 
Meita Automotive Industry Company, Ltd. (``Meita''); (8) Shandong 
Huanri (Group) General Company (``Huanri General''); (9) Yantai 
Winhere Auto-Part Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (``Winhere''); and (10) 
Zibo Luzhou Automobile Parts Co., Ltd. (``ZLAP''); (11) Beijing 
Concord Auto Technology Inc. (``Beijing Concord''); (12) China 
National Machinery and Equipment Import & Export (Xinjiang) 
Corporation (``Xinjiang''); (13) China National Automotive Industry 
Import & Export Corporation (``CAIEC''); (14) Laizhou CAPCO 
Machinery Co., Ltd. (``Laizhou CAPCO''); (15) Laizhou Luyuan 
Automobile Fittings Co. (``Laizhou Luyuan''); and (16) Shenyang 
Honbase Machinery Co., Ltd. (``Shenyang''). (The exporter/producer 
combinations excluded from the antidumping duty order are: Xinjiang/
Zibo Botai Manufacturing Co. Ltd (``Zibo''); CAIEC or Laizhou CAPCO/
Laizhou CAPCO; and Laizhou Luyuan or Shenyang/Laizhou Luyuan or 
Shenyang). The names of the respondents in the seventh new shipper 
review are as follows: (17) Shanxi Fengkun Metallurgical Ltd. Co. 
(``Shanxi Fengkun''); and (18) Zibo Golden Harvest Machinery Limited 
Company (``Golden Harvest'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the additional publicly available information used in 
these final results and the comments received from the interested 
parties, we have made changes in the margin calculations for the 
respondents in these reviews. The final weighted-average dumping 
margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled 
``Final Results of Reviews.''

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 14, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terre Keaton or Brian Smith, Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1280, or (202) 
482-1766, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On January 8, 2003, the Department published in the Federal 
Register the Preliminary Results (see 68 FR 1031).
    On January 28, 2003, we placed on the record information obtained 
from the U.S. Customs Service (now the U.S. Bureau of Customs and 
Border Protection (``BCBP'')) then known as the, for the six 
outstanding entries noted in the December 31, 2002, memorandum titled, 
``Results of Request for Assistance from the U.S. Customs Service to 
Further Examine U.S. Entries Made by the Exporter/Producer 
Combinations-Preliminary Results'' (see--``Partial Rescission of 
Administrative Review'' section below for further discussion). Also on 
January 28, 2003, and in accordance with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(ii), the 
respondents submitted additional publicly available information for 
consideration in the final results.
    On February 5, 2003, the Department published in the Federal 
Register an amended preliminary results of the seventh new shipper 
review of the antidumping duty order on brake rotors from the People's 
Republic of China (``PRC'') to reflect its intention to assign 
exporter/producer combination cash deposit rates to the new shipper 
companies in the final results. See Brake Rotors from the People's 
Republic of China: Amended Preliminary Results of the Seventh New 
Shipper Review, 68 FR 5867. On February 21, 2003, the petitioner \2\ 
and the respondents submitted case briefs, and on February 28, 2003, 
they submitted rebuttal briefs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The petitioner is the Coalition for the Preservation of 
American Brake Drum and Rotor Aftermarket Manufacturers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 4, and 25, 2003, we placed on the record additional 
publicly available information on electricity, pallet wood and 
brokerage and handling for consideration in the final results. On March 
7, 2003, the petitioner submitted comments on the publicly available 
information we had placed on the record on February 25, 2003.

Scope of Order

    The products covered by this order are brake rotors made of gray 
cast iron, whether finished, semifinished, or unfinished, ranging in 
diameter from 8 to 16 inches (20.32 to 40.64 centimeters) and in weight 
from 8 to 45 pounds (3.63 to 20.41 kilograms). The size parameters 
(weight and dimension) of the brake rotors limit their use to the 
following types of motor vehicles: automobiles, all-terrain vehicles, 
vans and recreational vehicles under ``one ton and a half,'' and light 
trucks designated as ``one ton and a half.''
    Finished brake rotors are those that are ready for sale and 
installation without any further operations. Semi-finished rotors are 
those on which the surface is not entirely smooth, and have undergone 
some drilling. Unfinished rotors are those which have undergone some 
grinding or turning.
    These brake rotors are for motor vehicles, and do not contain in 
the casting a logo of an original equipment manufacturer (``OEM'') 
which produces vehicles sold in the United States (e.g., General 
Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, Volvo). Brake rotors covered in 
this order are not certified by OEM producers of vehicles sold in the 
United States. The scope also includes composite brake rotors that are 
made of gray cast iron, which contain a steel plate, but otherwise meet 
the above criteria. Excluded from the scope of this order are brake 
rotors made of gray cast iron, whether finished, semifinished, or 
unfinished, with a diameter less than 8 inches or greater than 16 
inches (less than 20.32 centimeters or greater than 40.64 centimeters) 
and a weight less than 8 pounds or greater than 45 pounds (less than 
3.63 kilograms or greater than 20.41 kilograms).
    Brake rotors are classifiable under subheading 8708.39.5010 of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). Although 
the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, 
our written description of the scope of this order is dispositive.

[[Page 25862]]

Partial Rescission of Administrative Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we have determined that, during 
the POR, the exporters which are part of the three exporter/producer 
combinations which received zero rates in the less-than-fair-value 
(``LTFV'') investigation did not make shipments of subject merchandise 
to the United States during the POR. Specifically, we have determined 
that during the POR, (1) neither CAIEC nor Laizhou CAPCO exported brake 
rotors to the United States that were manufactured by producers other 
than Laizhou CAPCO; (2) neither Shenyang Honbase nor Laizhou Luyuan 
exported brake rotors to the United States that were manufactured by 
producers other than Shenyang Honbase or Laizhou Luyuan; and (3) 
Xinjiang did not export brake rotors to the United States that were 
manufactured by producers other than Zibo.
    In order to make this determination, we first examined POR subject 
merchandise shipment data furnished by the Customs Service by 
performing a data query. Because the data from our initial query was 
voluminous, we randomly selected 31 entries from the data query results 
for further examination by the Customs Service (see Memorandum dated 
October 3, 2002, from Davina Hashmi, Senior Analyst, to the File, 
titled, ``Request for Assistance: Shipments of Brake Rotors from the 
People's Republic of China Which Were Manufactured and/or Exported by 
Five PRC Companies during the Period April 1, 2001, Through March 31, 
2002'').
    Specifically, we requested the Customs Service to examine further 
the documentation filed at the U.S. port for each of those selected 
entries made by the exporters at issue to determine the manufacturer of 
the merchandise. In response to our request for information, the 
Customs Service was only able to provide us with information on 25 
entries made by these respondents. After a review of the data we 
received from the Customs Service in response to our data query, we 
found no evidence that any of the exporter/producer combinations 
subject to this administrative review made shipments of the subject 
merchandise during the POR (see Memoranda dated December 31, 2002, from 
Davina Hashmi, Senior Analyst, and January 28, 2003, from Terre Keaton, 
Analyst, to the File, both titled, ``Results of Request for Assistance 
from the U.S. Customs Service to Further Examine U.S. Entries Made By 
Exporter/Producer Combinations''). Therefore, we are rescinding this 
review with respect to CAIEC, Laizhou CAPCO, Shenyang Honbase, Laizhou 
Luyuan, and Xinjiang. See Issues and Decision Memorandum (``Decision 
Memo'') from Jeffrey May, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 
Administration, to Joseph A. Spetrini, Acting Assistant Secretary for 
Import Administration at Comment 1 for further discussion.

Facts Available

    In the Preliminary Results, 68 FR at 1033, the Department 
determined that the use of facts available was warranted in accordance 
with section 776(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act'') 
to calculate the dumping margin for Beijing Concord. Because Beijing 
Concord failed to provide requested information and did not properly 
notify the Department of its difficulty in meeting our requirements in 
accordance with section 782(copyright)) of the Act, we determined that 
Beijing Concord did not cooperate to the best of its ability. Since the 
preliminary results nothing has changed to reverse our preliminary 
decision regarding Beijing Concord. Therefore, for the final results of 
this review we continue to find that Beijing Concord is not eligible to 
receive a separate rate and thus it continues to be part of the PRC 
non-market economy (``NME'') entity, subject to the PRC-wide rate.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case briefs are addressed in the Decision 
Memo, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues 
raised, all of which are in the Decision Memo, is attached to this 
notice as an Appendix. Parties can find a complete discussion of all 
issues raised in the briefs and the corresponding recommendations in 
this public memorandum which is on file in the Central Records Unit, 
room B-099 of the main Department building. In addition, a complete 
version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at 
http://ia.ita.doc.gov. The paper copy and electronic version of the 
Decision Memo are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on the use of additional publicly available information and 
the comments received from the interested parties, we have made changes 
in the margin calculation for each respondent. For a discussion of 
these changes, see the ``Margin Calculations'' section of the Decision 
Memo.
    For the final results, we calculated average surrogate percentages 
for factory overhead, selling, general and administrative expenses, and 
profit using the 2000-2001 financial data of Kalyani Brakes Limited 
(``Kalyani''), Mando Brake Systems India Limited (``Mando''), and Rico 
Auto Industries Limited (``Rico''). See Decision Memo at Comment 3.
    To value direct, indirect, and packing labor, we used the updated 
value from the International Trade Administration Web site at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/wages/index.html.
    To value electricity, we used the 2000-2001 ``revised estimate'' 
average rate for industrial consumption as published in the Annual 
Report (2001-02) on the Working of State Electricity Boards & 
Electricity Departments by the Government of India's Planning 
Commission (Power & Energy Division).
    To value pallet wood, we used the April 2000-March 2001 average 
import values from Monthly Statistics of the Foreign Trade of India 
(``Monthly Statistics'').
    For those respondents which reported in their responses that they 
used non-alloy pig iron to produce the subject merchandise, we used the 
April 2001-December 2001 average import values for the appropriate non-
alloy pig iron HTS subcategory from Monthly Statistics to value this 
input. See Decision Memo at Comment 2.
    To value foreign brokerage and handling expenses, we relied on 
public information reported in the 1998-1999 antidumping duty 
administrative and new shipper reviews of stainless steel bar from 
India.
    We corrected a calculation error which affected the surrogate value 
used for marine insurance.
    We deducted an amount for foreign brokerage and handling expenses 
from the U.S. starting prices reported by Golden Harvest which we 
inadvertently did not do in the preliminary results.
    We corrected a programming error which affected the direct labor 
per-unit amounts for certain brake rotor models reported by Golden 
Harvest.
    We corrected a programming error which affected the marine 
insurance calculation for U.S. sales with C.I.F. terms of sale reported 
by LABEC. In addition, based on data contained in LABEC's response, we 
subtracted an amount for marine insurance for certain sales which LABEC 
had indicated it incurred this expense which we inadvertently did not 
do in the preliminary results.
    We corrected a programming error by adding an amount for loading 
fees to Huanri General's coal freight cost instead of its carton 
freight cost.
    We corrected a calculation error which affected the entered values 
derived for GREN.

[[Page 25863]]

Final Results of Reviews

    We determine that the following weighted-average margin percentages 
exist for the following companies during the period April 1, 2001, 
through March 31, 2002:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
               Manufacturer/producer/exporter                  percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC NME entity (which includes Beijing Concord)............        43.32
China National Industrial Machinery Import & Export               * 0.08
 Corporation...............................................
Hongfa Machinery (Dalian) Co., Ltd.........................         0.00
Laizhou Automobile Brake Equipment Company, Ltd............       * 0.22
Longkou Haimeng Machinery Co., Ltd.........................       * 0.05
Laizhou Hongda Auto Replacement Parts Co., Ltd.............         0.00
Qingdao Gren (Group) Co....................................       * 0.06
Qingdao Meita Automotive Industry Company, Ltd.............       * 0.09
Shanxi Fengkun Metallurgical Ltd. Co.......................         0.00
Shandong Huanri (Group) General Company....................         0.00
Yantai Winhere Auto-Part Manufacturing Co., Ltd............         0.00
Zibo Golden Harvest Machinery Limited Company..............         0.00
Zibo Luzhou Automobile Parts Co., Ltd......................      * 0.14
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* De minimis.

Assessment Rates

    The Department shall determine, and the BCBP shall assess, 
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.212(b)(1), we calculated importer-specific ad valorem duty 
assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of the dumping 
margins calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of 
those same sales. In order to estimate the entered value for those 
sales where this information was unavailable, we subtracted applicable 
movement expenses from the gross sales value. In accordance with 19 CFR 
351.106(c)(2), we will instruct the BCBP to liquidate without regard to 
antidumping duties all entries of subject merchandise during the POR 
for which the importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis 
(i.e., less than 0.50 percent). The Department will issue appropriate 
assessment instructions directly to the BCBP within 15 days of 
publication of these final results of review. For entries of the 
subject merchandise during the POR from companies not subject to this 
review, we will instruct the BCBP to liquidate them at the cash deposit 
rate in effect at the time of entry.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    Bonding will no longer be permitted to fulfill security 
requirements for shipments from Golden Harvest or Shanxi Fengkun of 
brake rotors from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of 
the new shipper review.
    The following deposit rates shall be required for merchandise 
subject to the order entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after the publication date of these final results, as 
provided by section 751(a)(1) and (a)(2)(B) of the Act: (1) The cash 
deposit rate for CNIM, GREN, Haimeng, Hongda, Hongfa, Huanri General, 
LABEC, Meita, Winhere, ZLAP, Golden Harvest (i.e., for subject 
merchandise manufactured and exported by Golden Harvest) and Shanxi 
Fengkun (i.e., for subject merchandise manufactured and exported by 
Shanxi Fengkun) will be the rate indicated above; (2) the cash deposit 
rate for PRC exporters who received a separate rate in a prior segment 
of the proceeding will continue to be the rate assigned in that segment 
of the proceeding; (3) the cash deposit rate for the PRC NME entity 
(including Beijing Concord) and for subject merchandise exported by 
either Golden Harvest or Shanxi Fengkun but not manufactured by them 
will continue to be the PRC-wide rate (i.e., 43.32 percent); and (4) 
the cash deposit rate for non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise from 
the PRC will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied 
that exporter. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until 
publication of the final results of the next administrative review.
    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) 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 doubled antidumping duties.
    This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (``APO'') of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written 
notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion 
to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply 
with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is 
subject to sanction.
    We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1), 751(a)(2)(B), and 777(i) of the Act 
and 19 CFR 351.213 and 351.214.

    Dated: May 8, 2003.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix--Issues in Decision Memo

Comments

1. Whether to Reverse the Preliminary Results With Respect to the 
Exporter/Producer Combinations
2. Whether We Should Have Requested a Respondent to Submit Revised 
Databases Based on Our Verification Findings
3. Whether to Use Data Contained in the Financial Statements 
Submitted for Two Additional Indian Producers of Subject and/or 
Comparable Merchandise
4. Surrogate Value Selection for Pig Iron
5. Whether the Respondents' Case Brief Complies With the 
Department's Filing and Service Requirements

[FR Doc. 03-12031 Filed 5-13-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P