Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin From Italy; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

[A-475-703]

Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin From Italy; Preliminary

Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review.

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

SUMMARY: In response to requests by petitioner, respondents, and a

domestic interested party, the Department of Commerce (the Department)

is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on

granular polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin from Italy. The review

period is August 1, 1992, through July 31, 1993. The review covers one

manufacturer/exporter of this merchandise to the United States,

Ausimont S.p.A. As a result of this review, the Department preliminary

has determined that dumping margins exist for this firm.

We preliminarily have determined that sales have been made below

the foreign market value (FMV). If these preliminary results are

adopted in our final results of administrative review, we will instruct

U.S. Customs to assess antidumping duties equal to the difference

between the United States price (USP) and the FMV.

We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary

results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 7, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Riggle or Michael Rill, Office

of Antidumping Compliance, Import Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and

Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C., telephone: (202) 482-4733.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On August 3, 1993, the Department published in the Federal Register

a notice of ``Opportunity to Request Administrative Review'' (58 FR

41239) of the antidumping duty order on granular PTFE resin from Italy

(53 FR 33163; August 30, 1988). On August 27, 1993, E.I. DuPont de

Nemours & Company, petitioner in this case, requested an administrative

review of this order in accordance with 19 CFR 353.22(a)(1993). On

August 31, 1993, Ausimont S.p.A. and Ausimont U.S.A., respondents in

this review, and ICI Americas Inc., a domestic interested party, also

requested an administrative review of this order. On September 30,

1993, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of

initiation of this review (58 FR 51053), which covers the period August

1, 1992, through July 31, 1993. The Department is conducting this

administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act

of 1930, as amended (the Act). The final results of the last

administrative review of this order were published in the Federal

Register on November 15, 1991 (56 FR 58031).

Scope of the Review

Imports covered by the order under review are shipments of granular

PTFE resin. This order also covers PTFE wet raw polymer exported from

Italy to the United States (see Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin

from Italy; Final Determination of Circumvention of Antidumping Duty

Order (58 FR 26100). This merchandise is classifiable under item number

3904.61.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS).

Polytetrafluoroethylene dispersions in water and fine powders are not

covered by this order. The HTS item number is provided for convenience

and Customs purposes. The written description remains dispositive.

The review covers one manufacturer/exporter of Italian granular

PTFE resin to the United States, Ausimont S.p.A. The review period is

August 1, 1992, through July 31, 1993.

United States Price

The Department based United States price (USP) on exporter's sales

price (ESP), in accordance with section 772(c) of the Act, because all

sales to unrelated parties were made after importation of the subject

merchandise into the United States. We calculated ESP based on the

packed, delivered prices to unrelated purchasers in the United States.

We adjusted these prices for billing adjustments and rebates. We made

deductions, where appropriate, for foreign inland freight and ocean

freight, marine insurance, brokerage and handling charges, U.S. duty,

U.S. inland freight from port to warehouse, and U.S. inland freight to

customers, in accordance with section 772(d)(2)(A) of the Act. We made

further deductions, where appropriate, for credit expenses, warranties,

technical services, and indirect selling expenses pursuant to section

772(e)(2) of the Act. For sales of granular PTFE resin finished in the

United States from PTFE wet raw polymer imported from Italy, we also

deducted, pursuant to section 772(e)(3) of the Act, the value added in

the United States, which consisted of the costs of further processing

in the United States and that portion of the profit on sales of further

processed merchandise attributable to the additional processing.

When comparisons were made to home market sales to which a value-

added tax (VAT) was added or in which a VAT was included, we made an

addition to USP for the VAT not collected or rebated on export in

accordance with section 772(d)(1)(C) of the Act and our practice as set

forth in Silicomanganese from Venezuela; Preliminary Determination of

Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 59 FR 31204 (June 17, 1994)

(Silicomanganese).

Foreign Market Value

Based on a comparison of the volume of home market and third-

country sales, we determined that the home market was viable.

Therefore, in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(A) of the Act, we based

foreign market value (FMV) on the packed, delivered prices to unrelated

customers in Italy or, where appropriate, on constructed value (CV).

We calculated FMV on a monthly, weighted-average basis. Where

possible, we compared sales of identical merchandise in the two

markets. For each instance in which identical merchandise was not sold

in Italy during the relevant contemporaneous period, we used as FMV

contemporaneous home market sales of the product that was the most

similar to the merchandise involved in the U.S. sale, in accordance

with section 771(16) of the Act. Because filled and unfilled resins

generally are not similar in terms of their physical characteristics,

we compared, whenever possible, home market sales of filled resins to

U.S. sales of filled resins, and home market sales of unfilled resins

to U.S. sales of unfilled resins. We matched filled resins in the U.S.

and home markets according to the amounts and types of fillers in the

products sold and the percentages of those fillers. See Antidumping

Duty Order on Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Italy--

Analysis Memorandum for Preliminary Results of Fifth Review, August 5,

1994.

We made adjustments to home market prices for rebates. To adjust

for differences in circumstances of sale between the home market and

the United States in accordance with 19 CFR 353.56(a), we deducted

post-sale inland freight, inland insurance, and credit expenses from

FMV. Where applicable, we made adjustments for differences in the

physical characteristics of the merchandise. We also deducted from FMV

indirect selling expenses, in an amount not exceeding the amount of

indirect selling expenses incurred in the United States, in accordance

with 19 CFR 353.56(b)(2).

In order to adjust for differences in packing between the two

markets, we deducted home market packing from FMV and added U.S.

packing to FMV. We also adjusted the amount of the Italian VAT included

in FMV in accordance with our decision in Silicomanganese. No other

adjustments were claimed or allowed.

In accordance with section 773(a)(2) of the Act, we used CV as the

basis for FMV when there were no usable sales of such or similar

merchandise in the home market.

We calculated CV in accordance with section 773(e) of the Act. We

included the cost of materials, fabrication, general expenses, profit,

and packing. To calculate CV we used: (1) actual general expenses, or

the statutory minimum of 10 percent of materials and fabrication,

whichever was greater; (2) actual profit or the statutory minimum of 8

percent of materials, fabrication, and general expenses, whichever was

greater; and (3) packing costs for merchandise exported to the United

States. Where appropriate, we made adjustments to CV, in accordance

with 19 CFR 353.56, for differences in circumstances of sale. We

deducted home market direct selling expenses, and home market indirect

selling expenses not exceeding the amount of U.S. indirect selling

expenses in accordance with 19 CFR 353.56(b)(2).

Preliminary Results of the Review

As a result of our comparison of USP with FMV, we preliminarily

determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist:

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

Margin

Manufacturer/exporter Period (percent)

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

Ausimont S.p.A.......................... 08/01/92-07/31/93 2.26

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

Parties to the proceeding may request disclosure within five days

of the date of publication of this notice. Interested parties may

submit a written request for a hearing not later than 10 days after

publication of this notice. In accordance with 19 CFR 353.38(c)(1)(ii),

interested parties may submit written comments or arguments in case

briefs on these preliminary results within 30 days of the date of

publication. Rebuttal comments, or rebuttal briefs, limited to

arguments raised in written comments or case briefs, may be submitted

not later than 37 days after the date of publication. Any hearing, if

requested, will be held approximately 44 days after the date of

publication. Copies of written comments (case briefs) and rebuttal

comments (rebuttal briefs) must be served on interested parties in

accordance with 19 CFR 353.38(e).

The Department will publish the final results of this

administrative review including the results of its analysis of issues

raised in any case or rebuttal brief or at a hearing.

The Department shall determine, and the Customs Service shall

assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Individual

differences between USP and FMV may vary from the percentage stated

above. Upon completion of this review, the Department will issue

appraisement instructions directly to the Customs Service.

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 date of publication of the

final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section

751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for the reviewed

company will be the rate established in the final results of this

administrative review; (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)

if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this

or any previous review conducted by the Department, the cash deposit

rate will be the ``all others'' rate, as set forth below.

On March 25, 1993, the Court of International Trade (CIT), in

Floral Trade Council v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 766 (CIT 1993), and

Federal-Mogul Corporation v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 782 (CIT

1993), decided that once an ``all others'' rate is established for a

company, it can only be changed through an administrative review. The

Department has determined that in order to implement this decision, it

is appropriate to reinstate the original ``all others'' rate from the

LTFV investigation (or that rate as amended for correction of clerical

errors or as a result of litigation) in proceedings governed by

antidumping duty orders. In proceedings governed by antidumping

findings, unless we are able to ascertain the ``all others'' rate from

the original LTFV investigation, the Department has determined that it

is appropriate to adopt the ``new shipper'' rate established in the

first final results of administrative review published by the

Department (or that rate as amended for correction of clerical errors

or as a result of litigation) as the ``all others'' rate for the

purposes of establishing cash deposits in all current and future

administrative reviews. Because this proceeding is governed by an

antidumping duty order, the ``all others'' rate for the purposes of

this review will be 46.46 percent, the ``all others'' rate established

in the LTFV investigation (50 FR 26019; June 24, 1985).

These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect

until publication of the final results of the next administrative

review.

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.

This administrative review 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.

Dated: September 12, 1994.

Paul L. Joffe,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 94-24937 Filed 10-6-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P