Racing Plates (Aluminum Horseshoes) From Canada; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

[A-122-050]

Racing Plates (Aluminum Horseshoes) From Canada; 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 a respondent, the Department of

Commerce has conducted an administrative review of the antidumping

finding on racing plates from Canada. The review covers one firm and

the period February 1, 1993, through January 31, 1994.

We have preliminarily 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.

Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary

results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 19, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Todd Peterson or Thomas Futtner, Office of Antidumping Compliance,

Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.

Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-4195 or 482-3814,

respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On February 27, 1974 (39 FR 7579), the Department of Treasury

published the antidumping finding of racing plates (aluminum

horseshoes) from Canada. The Department of Commerce (the Department)

published a notice of ``Opportunity to Request Administrative Review''

on February 4, 1994 (59 FR 5390). The respondent, Equine Forgings

Limited, requested that we conduct an administrative review for the

period February 1, 1993, through January 31, 1994. We published a

notice of ``Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty

Administrative Review'' on March 14, 1994 (59 FR 11769) for Equine

Forgings Limited.

The Department has now conducted the administrative review in

accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the

Tariff Act).

Scope of the Review

Imports covered by the review are shipments of racing plates

(horseshoes) that are made of aluminum, may have cleats or caulks, and

come in a variety of sizes. They are used on race horses, polo,

jumping, hunting, and other performing horses, as differentiated from

pleasure and work horses. During the review period such merchandise was

classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) item number

7616.90.00. This HTS item number is provided for convenience and

customs purposes. The written description remains dispositive.

United States Price

In calculating USP, the Department used purchased price, as defined

in section 772 of the Tariff Act, since sales to the first unrelated

purchaser were made prior to the date of importation. Purchase price

was based on the packed f.o.b. price to unrelated purchasers in the

United States. We made deductions, where appropriate, for inland

freight, U.S. duty, and brokerage/handling charges. We adjusted USP for

taxes in accordance with our practice as outlined in Silicomanganse

from Venezuela, Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair

Value (59 FR 31204, June 17, 1994). No other adjustments were claimed

or allowed.

Foreign Market Value

In calculating FMV, we used home market price, as defined in

section 773 of the Tariff Act, since sufficient quantities of such or

similar merchandise were sold in the home market to provide a basis for

comparison.

Home market price was based upon the packed f.o.b. price to

unrelated purchasers in Canada, with appropriate deductions for

rebates. We adjusted for Canadian value-added tax in accordance with

our decision Silicomanganese from Venezuela, Preliminary Determination

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

In accordance with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's

decision in The Ad Hoc Committee of AZ-NM-TX-FL Producers of Grey

Portland Cement v. United States, No. 93-1239, (January 5, 1994), we no

longer deduct home market movement expenses from FMV pursuant to the

Department's inherent power to fill in gaps in the antidumping statute.

Accordingly, we now adjust for such expenses under the circumstance-of-

sale provision of 19 CFR 352.56 and the ESP offset provision of 19 CFR

353.56(b)(1)(2), as appropriate. As a result, we have not adjusted for

Equine Forging's reported home market inland freight as movement

expenses. Rather, we have treated Equine Forging's reported post-sale

inland freight as a direct selling expense, which we have deducted from

FMV.

Preliminary Results of Review

We have preliminarily determined that the following margin exists

for the period February 1, 1993, through January 31, 1994:

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

Margin

Manufacturer/Exporter (percent)

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

Equine Forgings Limited...................................... 0.01

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

The Department shall determine, and the Customs Service shall

assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Upon completion

of this review, the Department will issue appraisement instructions

directly to the U.S. 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 publication date of the

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

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

firm will be that firm's rate established in the final results of this

administrative review. If the rate in the final results of review for

Equine Forgings Limited is de minimis, there will be no cash deposits

required on shipments from this firm. (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

previous 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.

On May 25, 1993, the Court of International Trade, in Floral Trade

Council v. United States, Slip Op. 93-79, and Federal-Mogul Corporation

and the Torrington Company v. United States, Slip Op. 93-83, 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 these decisions, it is

appropriate to apply 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 for the purposes of establishing cash deposits

in all current and future administrative reviews. In proceedings

governed by antidumping findings, unless we are able to ascertain the

``all others'' rate from the Treasury 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 amended for correction

of clerical errors or as a result of litigation) as the ``all others''

rate for the purpose of establishing cash deposits in all current and

future administrative reviews.

Because this proceeding is governed by an antidumping finding and

we are unable to ascertain the ``all others'' rate from the Treasury

LTFV investigation, the ``all others'' rate for purposes of this review

will be 6.77 percent, the ``new shipper'' rate established in the final

results of administrative review published by the Department (47 FR

51779, November 17, 1982).

These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect

until publication of the final results of the next administrative

review.

Interested parties may request disclosure within 5 days of the date

of publication of this notice, and a hearing within 10 days of the date

of publication. Any hearing requested will be held as early as

convenient for parties but no later than 44 days after the date of

publication, or the first workday thereafter. Case briefs, or other

written comments, from interested parties may be submitted not later

than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal

briefs and rebuttal comments, limited to issues raised in the case

briefs, may be filed not later than 37 days after the date of

publication. The Department will publish the final results of review,

including its results of its analysis of issues raised in any such

written comments or at a hearing.

This notice 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 Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR

353.22.

Dated: December 7, 1994.

Susan G. Esserman,

Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 94-31139 Filed 12-16-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M