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,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an

administrative review of the antidumping duty order on granular

polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin from Italy for the period August

1, 1991 through July 31, 1992. The review covers one manufacturer/

exporter of this merchandise to the United States, Ausimont S.p.A.

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.

We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary

results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 21, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Copyak or Richard Herring, Office of Countervailing Compliance,

Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.

Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, DC; telephone: (202) 482-2786.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On August 12, 1992, the Department published in the Federal

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

(57 FR 36063) of the antidumping order on PTFE resin from Italy (53 FR

33163; August 30, 1988). On August 31, 1992, Ausimont S.p.A. and

Ausimont U.S.A. requested an administrative review of the order for the

period August 1, 1991 through July 31, 1992. We initiated the review on

September 28, 1992 (57 FR 44551). Verifications were conducted in

Milan, Italy, September 13-16, 1993, and in Morristown, New Jersey,

November 22-23, 1993. The Department is conducting this administrative

review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as

amended (the Act).

Scope of the Review

Imports covered by this review are shipments of PTFE resin which is

classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) item number

3904.61.00. PTFE 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

order on PTFE resin from Italy 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; April 30, 1993).

However, because the Department issued its preliminary affirmative

determination of circumvention and ordered the suspension of

liquidation of wet raw polymer entries after the review period, entries

of PTFE wet raw polymer are not subject to this particular review (see

Memorandum to Joseph A. Spetrini, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration, dated September 10, 1993; The Third Administrative

Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Granular

Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Italy, which is on file in the

Central Records Unit (room B099 of the Main Commerce Building)).

The review covers one manufacturer/exporter of Italian PTFE resin

to the United States, Ausimont S.p.A., and the review period is August

1, 1991 through July 31, 1992.

United States Price (USP)

The Department based 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 made deductions, where appropriate, for foreign inland freight,

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

duty, and U.S. inland freight in accordance with section 772(d)(2)(A)

of the Act. We made further deductions, where appropriate, for rebates,

credit expenses, warranties, technical services, and indirect selling

expenses pursuant to section 772(e)(2) of the Act.

We also adjusted USP for taxes (i.e., value-added taxes) in

accordance with our practice as outlined in Silicon Manganese from

Venezuela, Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value

(59 FR 31204, June 17, 1994).

Foreign Market Value (FMV)

The Department calculated FMV using home market prices, as defined

in section 773(a) of the Act, since sufficient quantities of such or

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

comparison. When 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

selected the contemporaneous home market sale or sales of the product

that was the most similar to the merchandise involved in the U.S. sale.

See 19 U.S.C. 1667(16). We then compared the U.S. sale to the selected

sale or sales and, if appropriate, made adjustments for differences in

merchandise.

To achieve the most appropriate comparisons, home market sales were

matched with U.S. sales according to the amounts and types of fillers

in the products sold and the percentages of those fillers. See

Memorandum To File dated August 2, 1994; Changes in the Model Match

Methodology for Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Italy,

which is on file in the Central Records Unit (room B099 of the Main

Commerce Building).

FMV was based on packed, delivered prices to unrelated customers in

Italy, with appropriate deductions from the home market price for

inland freight and insurance, credit expenses, and home market packing.

We added U.S. packing to the home market price in accordance with

section 773(a)(1) of the Act. We then made adjustments to the home

market price for indirect selling expenses, which we limited to the

amount of indirect selling expenses incurred in the United States, in

accordance with 19 CFR 353.56(b)(2). In addition, we included in FMV

the amount of value-added taxes collected in the home market in

accordance with our practice as outlined in Silicon Manganese from

Venezuela, Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value

(59 FR 31204, June 17, 1994).

Preliminary Results of the Review

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

determine that the following weighted-average dumping margin existed

during the period August 1, 1991 through July 31, 1992:

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

Margin

Manufacturer/Exporter Period (percent)

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

Ausimont S.p.A.................................. 08/01/91-

07/31/92 13.31

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

The Department shall determine and the Customs Service shall assess

antidumpting 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 warehouses, for consumption on or after the publication of the

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

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

company will be the rate established in the final results in 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)

for merchandise exported by all other manufacturers and exporters who

are nor covered by this or any previous administrative review conducted

by the Department, the cash deposit rate will be the ``all-others''

rate established in the LTFV investigation.

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 these decisions,

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.

Public Comment

Parties to the proceeding may request disclosure within 5 days of

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

written request for 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 briefs, limited to arguments raised in case briefs, may be

submitted 7 days after the time limit for filing the case briefs. Any

hearing, if requested, will be held 7 days after the scheduled date for

submission of rebuttal briefs. Copies of case briefs and 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.

This administrative review and notice are in accordance with

section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)(B)) and 19 CFR

353.22(c)(5).

Dated: December 8, 1994.

Paul L. Joffe,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 94-31357 Filed 12-20-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M